8/29/24 Steering Committee Notes
Agenda:
Overview of DEP’s response to complementary solutions
IDDE Updates
Overview of UV sampling
Overview of DEP’s Response:
Ozone Disinfection
DEP feels as though EPA is unlikely to permit this technology
Substantial electricity needs
Zooplankton data is positive, but they need to see data on impact on macroinvertebrates and vertebrates
UV
Feasibility concerns but supportive of exploring further
Question about efficacy in flow with high turbidity
Potential permitting challenges
PAA no longer an option
IDDE
Still the highest priority
No feedback at this time on current efforts
Outfall not mentioned
Catchment basins - DEP recommendation to increase cleaning
LWSC subsequently committed to increase
Also asked DCR, EEA said DCR had already increased, waiting on DCR’s response as to current frequency
Committee Conversations
UV
Have gotten 4 of 6 samples that were planned (as part of plan vetted by DEP/EPA). All 4 so far have been positive. Sample with high turbidity still needed.
Kleinfelder will obtain a sample with high turbidity for UV testing; however, Kleinfelder noted the intent of the UV system is primarily to function during dry weather periods, during which UV has already been proven to be effective.
DEP cited possible permitting challenges for US EPA. In previous meetings with EPA in which permitting pathways were discussed, these concerns about the process of permitting a UV pilot were not expressed. This concern should be clarified.
Concerns from Swampscott about placement of permanent facility
Considerations for potential UV pilot
Dave (Kleinfelder) will reach out to Trojan for a photo of the pilot trailer and check for availability for 2025, start thinking more about logistics
Flow data from 2017 provided by Save the Harbor/Save the Bay is the only known flow data available to size the pilot
Would flows be combined? Or separate from each other?
Needs power, diesel generation, pumps, piping
Blocking portion of the roadway, heavy traffic area
Data perspective
The UV sampling gives all the data we need for certain water quality results
Pilot would be useful to test logistics and to open beach for summer
Possible to have the UV pilot while pursuing funding and study for outfall extension
Lynn & STHSTB applied for technical assistance for EPA Community Change grant
Outfall
Committee agrees this is a potential long term solution
Funding is a challenge (both for identified necessary planning studies and ultimate implementation)
Concern about length of implementation and permitting risks
Ozone
Chris shared that the majority of DEP feedback has already been addressed/acknowledged. Chris plans to continue to investigate open questions and understand the path to permitting used in regions 4 and 5
Escaping ozone to atmosphere is minimal, needs to be demonstrated
Spoke to Ohio State University – did not study the effects on fish, which could require additional studies
Highly unlikely the US EPA would permit something harmful to wildlife, though this is being used in environments in region 4 and 5
Rep. Moulton and Sen. Warren’s office offered to share insight and connections to EPA to support continued investigation.
Swampscott
Fisherman’s Beach – open to bid
IDDE Phase 2 – split into three phases, 2 of 3 have funding for construction work
Applied for SRF to fund construction Phase 2B
According to the Town of Swampscott, ~$400K will be allocated towards all King’s Beach-related complementary solution studies
According to the Town of Swampscott, $50K will go towards an outfall study
Lynn
IDDE CCTV / heavy cleaning program nearing completion 3 miles left of 21 miles, handful of hookups missed by CSO project identified and removed
Field-screening, dye testing, and smoke testing for identified question areas will continue once CCTV wraps
Dan (LWSC) – Proposed that we inquire about chlor/dechlor as a temporary solution if UV falls through