Excerpt from the
FLOATABLES ACTION PLAN ASSESSMENT REPORT
by U.S. ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

Eastern New Jersey, New York City and southern Long Island beaches have experienced an average of one beach closing per year since 1988 when the Floatables Action Plan was introduced. Previously, it had been 9 per year. The interagency implementation of the Floatables Action Plan (“FAP”) was a major contributor to maintaining this improved beach status.

The FAP is designed to accomplish the following objectives:

- Minimization of the amount of floatable debris escaping the Harbor Complex;
- Maintaining an effective communication network to coordinate floatable debris removal activities and to respond to the spotting of slicks;
- Ensuring timely notification of beach operators of potential wash-ups of floatable debris; and
- Minimization of beach closures due to floatable debris.

The FAP has proven to be very successful in minimizing the escape of floatable debris from the Harbor Complex. The principal means of collecting floating debris slicks has been through the utilization of USACOE skimmer vessels. These vessels collected 1106 tons of floatable debris during 2003.

The New York City Department of Environmental Protection (“NYCDEP”) has supplemented the work of the USACOE with an open water skimmer vessel of its own as well as four (4) self-propelled smaller trash skimmers, TrashCats™ from United Marine International, and a booming and skimming program at major City CSO outfall locations. 

The Passaic Valley Sewerage Commissioners (PVSC) also supplemented the USACOE open water skimming operations by operating two skimmer vessels (also TrashCats™ from United Marine International)  in the Passaic River and Newark Bay, collecting a total of 221 tons of floatable debris in 2003. PVSC’s shoreline debris removal program collected an additional 621 tons of debris in 2003.

The maintaining of an effective communication network has remained a key element of the implementation of the FAP. EPA has remained the hub of the communication network, with its Floatables Coordinator as the link with the USACOE, the United States Coast Guard (“USCG”), the NYCDEP, the NJDEP, the NYSDEC, the NYCDOS, the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (“NOAA”) and the public. Appropriate actions include the reporting of the slick information to the USACOE or the USCG (for oil slicks), based on EPA helicopter flyover reports. 

The States of New York and New Jersey continue to work with Harbor dischargers to control floatable debris in the long-term. New Jersey is seeking to have floatables control measures sufficient to meet the State-wide permit mandated 0.5 inch floatable size standard, implemented by 2003. To date, approximately 93 CSO New Jersey outfalls have floatable debris controls installed and operating. New York continues to work with New York City to see the implementation of long-term measures to build upon and perhaps replace existing floatable debris control measures being carried out by the City.

I. Summary and Statement of Purpose

Eastern New Jersey, New York City and southern Long Island beaches experienced no incidents resulting in beach closings due to floatable debris in 2001 and 2002, and in 2003. The interagency implementation of the Floatables Action Plan (“FAP”) was a major contributor to maintaining this improved beach status.

Formal United States Environmental Protection Agency (“EPA”) Region II assessment reports of the FAP were prepared for the following time frames:

a) 1989
b) 1990
c) 1991
d) 1992
e) 1993 - 1994
f)  1995 - 1997
g) 1998
h) 1999
i)  2000
j)  2001
k) 2002
l)  2003

This assessment report will assess the effectiveness of the short-term FAP in accomplishing the following objectives:

- Minimization of the amount of floatable debris escaping the Harbor Complex;
- Maintaining an effective communication network to coordinate floatable debris removal activities and to respond to the spotting of slicks;
- Ensuring timely notification of beach operators of potential wash-ups of floatable debris; and
- Minimization of beach closures due to floatable debris.

This assessment report will also discuss the required long-term implementation measures to permanently address floatable debris and provide the current status of long-term implementation measures, providing a clear understanding of what is still needed to effectively control floatable debris in the Harbor Complex.

II. Background

a) What is floatable debris?
Floatable debris is waterborne waste material that is buoyant. Examples include:
- wood
- beach litter
- aquatic vegetation
- street litter: e.g., cans, bottles, Styrofoam cups, plastics, straws, and paper products - sewage-related wastes: e.g., condoms, sanitary napkins, tampon applicators, diaper liners, grease balls, tar balls, and fecal material 
- fishing gear: e.g., nets, floats, lines and traps - medical wastes: e.g., hypodermic needles, syringes, bandages, red bags and enema bottles

b) What are the sources that generate floatable debris?
The principal sources of floatable debris to the New York / New Jersey Harbor (“Harbor”) and the New York Bight are the following:
- Combined Sewer Overflow (“CSO”) Discharges: There are approximately 737 combined sewer overflow (CSO) points discharging to the open waters of the NY/NJ Harbor or to its tributaries:

442 from New York City
29 from Westchester County
248 from New Jersey
719 in total

There are no CSO points discharging to the Bight or to the Back Bays.

- Storm Water Discharges: New York City, while predominantly a combined sewered City, has 280 outfalls from its municipal separate sewer system. 

Hundreds of more storm sewer outfalls in New York and New Jersey impact the Harbor Complex from industrial activity, construction activity and highway drainage.

- Non-point source discharges: including littering, landfill practices, and marine transfer practices;

- Decaying shoreline structures and sunken vessels; and

- Vessel discharges.

c) What are the impacts of floatable debris?

Discharges of floatable debris cause beach closures, have an adverse impact on recreational and commercial boating and cause harm to coastal marine species.

Large amounts of marine debris washed up on southern Long Island ocean beaches and on New Jersey ocean beaches in 1987 and 1988. In 1987, floatable washups were responsible for the closing of 25 miles of New Jersey beaches in May and 50 miles of New Jersey beaches in August. In 1988, floatable washups were responsible for the closing of 60 miles of New York beaches.

These beach closings in New Jersey and New York lasted for varying time periods from several hours to several days and had significant economic and social impacts. The State University of New York Waste Management Institute estimated an economic loss of between $900 million and $4 billion in New Jersey and between $950 million and $2 billion in New York in the 1987 - 1988 time frame.

Medical syringes, while only a tiny portion of the washups, caused a great deal of concern, prompting the passage of the Medical Waste Tracking Act by Congress in 1988.

Floatable debris, particularly driftwood, poses a hazard to shipping and recreational boating in the Harbor / Bight. The United States Army Corps of Engineers (“USACOE”) conducts two programs to address floatable debris: 1) collection of debris already floating and 2) dismantling deteriorating structures before they become drift. Drift materials include timbers, pilings, plastics, rubber tires, fiberglass boats, Styrofoam, rafts, floating drums, docks, sheds, and other shore structures. 

Birds, mammals and sea turtles are found seasonally throughout the Bight and portions of the Harbor. These species are vulnerable to entrapment and entanglement in plastic waste including six pack rings, fishing line, and nets. Turtles and mammals (seals and whales) are vulnerable to ingestion of plastic items, such as bags, that are mistaken for squid, jellyfish, or other prey. This ingestion often leads to suffocation or intestinal blockage and death.

III. How effective has the FAP been in minimizing the escape of floatable debris from the Harbor Complex?

The FAP has proven to be very successful in minimizing the escape of floatable debris from the Harbor Complex. The principal means of collecting floating debris slicks has been through the utilization of USACOE skimmer vessels. The New York City Department of Environmental Protection (“NYCDEP”) has supplemented the work of the USACOE with an open water skimmer vessel of its own as well as a booming and skimming program at major City CSO outfall locations. Other means have also been utilized to minimize the escape of floating debris from the Harbor Complex. The following summary of these various measures is for 2001 but also includes historical data, where appropriate, for the purpose of comparison.

a) What are the vessels that the USACOE uses to support FAP implementation?

The USACOE uses three vessels to support FAP implementation in the Harbor and these vessels are described in the following table:

b) How much floatable debris has the USACOE collected in support of the FAP?

The Water Resources Development Act (“WRDA”) of 1974 was modified by WRDA 90 Section 102 (V) (Public Law 99-662) to authorize the collection of floatable debris whenever the USACOE is collecting and removing debris which is an obstruction to navigation. The USACOE estimates that 90 per cent (by volume) of its collection total consists of wood debris. Tires, plastic waste, cardboard, seaweed, sewage-related materials and street runoff-related materials constitute the remaining 10 per cent (by volume).

The USACOE reports its annual (on a fiscal year (October - September) basis) drift collection total in terms of cubic feet. The following table lists these fiscal year totals, converts them to cubic yards (for purposes of comparing with the NYCDEP skimmer vessel collection totals), and, based on discussions with the USACOE estimates a total tonnage value based on an approximate conversion factor of 100 cubic feet per ton:

The accuracy of this graph hinges on the conversion factor used of “100 cubic feet per ton.” This may very well be a conservative estimate (in other words, the collection total in tons is NOT overstated) and the following should be considered: 

1. If a parcel of water measuring 100 cubic feet were collected by the USACOE skimmer vessels, it would weigh (using 0.01602 cubic feet per pound of water) 3.12 tons. This may be considered as the upper limit of any collected parcel of material measuring 100 cubic feet.

2. Since the USACOE skimmer vessels are drift collection vessels, items are collected which are buoyant in water. In general then, any parcel of collected material measuring 100 cubic feet will weigh less than 3.12 tons.

3. The USACOE already routinely estimates that 90% (by volume) of its drift collection is comprised of wood. Although the wood is waterlogged and heavy, each 100 cubic feet of wood will weigh less than 3.12 tons since it was buoyant.

4. When floatable debris is collected by the USACOE skimmer vessels, the total volume includes significant “void spaces” which do not add weight. This further adds to the fact that parcels of material measuring 100 cubic feet will weigh less than 3.12 tons.

The use of the conversion factor of 100 cubic feet per ton is therefore a conservative one and is derived from the actual weighing of nets on scheduled “floatable days.”

How has the NYCDEP supplemented the USACOE in removing floatable debris from the Harbor? 

The 1992 CSO Abatement Order on Consent between the NYCDEP and the New York State Department of Environmental Conservation (“NYSDEC”) required the following:

- NYCDEP was to implement a short-term booming and skimming program to address floatables pollution from approximately 50% of the City's combined sewer service area. This interim program was principally focused on the tributaries on which retention tanks will be built under the long-term CSO abatement program that the City is implementing, and will continue until that point in time. The NYCDEP was to collect and remove substantially all waterborne floatables in Bergen Basin, Thurston Basin, Paerdegat Basin, Hendrix Creek, Newtown Creek, Gowanus Canal, Coney Island Creek, and the Upper East River tributaries consisting of the Bronx River, Flushing Creek, Westchester Creek, and the Hutchinson River (if practicable). Additionally, the NYCDEP was to collect and remove substantially all waterborne floatables from 10 CSO outfalls in beach-sensitive open water areas. To accomplish this booming and skimming program, the NYCDEP was to purchase and utilize four small skimmer vessels. 

The NYCDEP was also to utilize a large open water skimmer vessel patterned after the USACOE Driftmaster skimming vessel, to patrol the waters of the Harbor. The following tables summarize the NYCDEP skimming vessels and the status of the booming and skimming locations.

The total approximate drainage area impacted by the skimming and booming (and netting) program is 58,574 acres, which represents over 50 per cent of the City’s combined sewer drainage area. 

In 2001, the NYCDEP added a new boom location in Zones II/III, the Buttermilk Channel - Flushing Tunnel inlet.

The NYCDEP maintains a contract such that a contractor manages the collected floatable debris under the skim and boom program. Materials are trucked out of state.

d) How much floatable debris has the NYCDEP SV Cormorant collected?

NYCDEP SV Cormorant collection data dates back to May 1994. Wood has made up the bulk of the collected material, with trash, plastic, rubber, and metal making up the rest. Historical collection totals and collection totals for 2001 are presented in the following table:

The weight of a net to be emptied is determined by a weight sensing device, providing a digital read-out. Visual estimates are then made for how much wood, trash, plastic, rubber and metal are in a given load.

Example for Wood:

Weight of material in net is 9 tons
Wood is estimated to be 90% of load
Weight of wood in net is 8.1 tons (9 tons x 0.9)

Since the inception of the FAP, the New York City Department of Sanitation (“NYCDOS”) had provided a barge on the Hudson River for the dumping of collected floatable debris from the USACOE on designated “floatables days” and from the NYCDEP’s “Cormorant” vessel. The NYCDOS then disposed of the dumped floatable debris at the Fresh Kills landfill.

Due to the closing of the Fresh Kills landfill, the NYCDOS notified the NYCDEP and the USACOE in mid-2000 that it would not be able to provide a barge on the Hudson River for the dumping of collected floatable debris beyond 2000. EPA met with the NYCDOS, NYCDEP and the NYCDEP in June 2000 to discuss the various options given the unavailability of the barge. These discussions produced the following plan:

a) The USACOE will use its own barge at Caven Point to dump its floatable debris;
b) The NYCDEP instituted a plan which includes an interim and long-term component:

Interim Plan: On an as needed basis, the NYCDEP obtained floatable debris disposal services through an existing NYCDEP contract for the "Cormorant” skimmer vessel. This interim plan involved the use of the USACOE's contractor and its barge at Caven Point.

Long-term Plan: NYCDEP will pay a contractor to provide a barge, maintain the barge, dock the barge and empty the barge into which collected floatable debris from the “Cormorant” vessel will be dumped.

The NYCDEP implemented the above plan and as of August 2001 ended its utilization of the USACOE barge and now empties its “Cormorant” vessel floatable debris into a contractor barge.

e) How much floatable debris has the NYCDEP Booming and Skimming‑collected? The NYCDEP booming and skimming program dates‑back to 1995. Historical collection totals and collection totals‑for 2001 are presented in the following table:

Note: Due to such factors as frozen tributaries, unfavorable (northeasterly) winds and low rainfall (with low floatable debris discharged), there are months in which no boomed floatable debris is collected in the designated zones.

f) How much debris has the NYCDEP Special Project Clean-up‑Program collected? In 1998, the NYCDEP initiated a beach cleanup program in the Gerritsen Beach area of Brooklyn, NY. This project, now termed NYCDEP’s Special Project program, was expanded in 1999 to also include Fort Hamilton High School and Coney Island Creek Beach components. These new components served to remove debris collected in the vicinity of the Verrazano Bridge. This program, in some ways analogous to the NJDEP Clean Shores Program, uses community volunteers to remove debris on beaches and shorelines. The NYCDEP provides dumpsters for debris placement and, because of the closure of the Fresh Kills landfill (officially closed in early 2001, but NYCDEP began implementing measures to compensate for the closure in 2000), is utilizing its water pollution control plant residuals management contracts to have this collected debris trucked out of state. The debris removed by this program is depicted on the following table:

Additionally, the NYCDEP conducted a shoreline dumping prevention program since 1998. NYCDEP personnel involved with ongoing monitoring activities survey the shoreline of the City for evidence of recent illegal disposal activities. Findings are reported to the New York City Department of Sanitation Environmental Police for enforcement follow-up.

g) How has the NYCDEP’s Enhanced Beach Protection Program minimized floatable debris being discharged to beach sensitive areas?

The NYCDEP’s Bureau of Wastewater Treatment is responsible for the operation of New York City’s collection facilities which convey the flow of sanitary and combined sewage to the fourteen Water Pollution Control Plants (WPCPs). A failure within the conveyance system during dry weather can cause the spill of sewage with floatables to the New York Harbor resulting in dry weather bypasses. As a response to the series of failures in June of 1997, the NYCDEP instituted the Enhanced Beach Protection Program (EBPP) on July 2, 1997, to minimize the chance of additional beach closures due to failure within the collection facilities through a program of increased surveillance and preventive maintenance procedures for critical pumping stations and regulators. The program was found to be successful and in 1998 it was implemented again and became a yearly program to be conducted by the NYCDEP.

The program’s goals include: the prevention of any beach closings from failures of collection system facilities and an average bypass response time of 8 hours. The NYCDEP created a list of priority pumping stations and regulators based on proximity to a beach, quantity of flow, and modeling results for beach areas. These facilities (66 sites) were monitored by telemetry at pump stations and by field crews where telemetry was not available. In addition, NYCDEP personnel increased the frequency and locations monitored through its Harbor Marine Programs. The 2001 EBPP program started on May 25, 2001 and was completed September 3, 2001 and is summarized as follows:

- No beach closures related to Collection Facilities - 3 bypasses at EBPP sites = 0.77 MG

- 8 bypasses total = 2.46 MG (less than 0.0014% of the total flow conveyed through collection facilities was bypassed during the program period.)

h) What role has the New Jersey Department of Environmental Protection (“NJDEP”) played in minimizing floatable debris from escaping the Harbor complex?

Clean Shores Program

Beginning in 1989, the NJDEP began a program called “Operation Clean Shores”, designed to collect shoreline floatable debris before it became resuspended due to tidal influences. This program has used New Jersey inmates to collect floatable debris, comprised mainly of landed drift wood, on non-recreational shorelines in order to prevent floatable debris from being refloated during extreme high tides and washing up on recreational beaches, becoming hazards to navigation and impacting marine life. The program, now called the “Clean Shores Program”, is conducted throughout the State of New Jersey, in the Hudson, Raritan and Delaware estuaries and barrier island bays. In 1993, the Clean Shores Program began to be implemented on a year-round basis whereas formerly it was only implemented during the bathing season. The Program is funded by the sale of Shore Protection license plates. Historical collection totals and collection totals for 2001 for this highly effective program are presented in the following table:

i) How much beach debris has been collected in selected counties of New York State as a result of the Ocean Conservancy’s International Coastal Clean-up?

The Ocean Conservancy (“OC”), formerly the Center for Marine Conservation, sponsors an Annual International Coastal Clean-up in September. In New York State, this volunteer effort to remove and document marine debris is coordinated by the American Littoral Society’s Northeast Chapter. The data below cover eight selected counties in New York: Suffolk, Nassau, Queens, Kings, Richmond, Manhattan, Bronx, and Westchester:

While some of this debris (i.e., the debris that is collected in eastern Westchester County and the north shore of Long Island) probably would not affect New Jersey Beaches or the south shore beaches of Long Island, it is presented for general trend analysis.

j) What has the Passaic Valley Sewerage Commissioners (“PVSC”) done to minimize floatable debris in the Harbor Complex?

In 1999, PVSC obtained a TrashCat™ skimmer vessel from United Marine International, virtually identical to the NYCDEP skimmer boats used in NYCDEP’s boom and skim program, to be used on the Passaic River and in Newark Bay.

Under a FY’99 Federal Appropriations Act Grant, PVSC is constructing a docking facility at the PVSC plant in Newark, New Jersey for the skimmer vessel. This skimmer vessel initiated its operation in 2000. Historical data and data for 2001 are presented in the following table.

Beginning in 1998, PVSC established a program to aid in removing trash along the riverbanks of the Passaic River. The program provides coordination and support to municipalities, counties, citizens, service groups, and local businesses to conduct shoreline clean-ups along the river and in their communities. This program is entitled the Passaic River/Newark Bay Restoration‑Program: Shoreline Clean-up Element.

Gloves, trash bags, trash disposal, and other supplies as requested are arranged for and provided by PVSC to the volunteers. In addition to the sponsorship of voluntary efforts, PVSC has implemented an extensive clean-up of the river’s shoreline by creating a River Restoration Department, consisting of 6 full time employees dedicated to the removal of trash and debris from the Passaic River and Newark Bay. Additionally, during the summer months, PVSC’s part time employees removed trash on a daily basis in urban parks along the River. Historical data and data for 2001 are presented in the following table:

In 2001, PVSC purchased a second, smaller trash skimmer vessel, also a TrashCat™ from United Marine International. The vessel (the SV Passaic Valley) is 35 feet in length, with a load capacity of 120 cubic feet and was placed into operation in the Spring of 2002. This smaller boat was purchased to operate in the upper reaches of the Passaic River which the larger vessel cannot reach due to shallow waters and low bridges. The smaller boat is docked at rowing club dock in Rutherford, New Jersey. The rowing club granted PVSC the use of its sea wall for the setting up of a portable pier conveyor to offload collected material. This allows the smaller boat to be offloaded up to 5-6 times per collection day, depending on tidal conditions. 

These marine trash skimmers are described in the table below:

IV. How effective has the FAP been in maintaining a communication network to coordinate floatable debris removal activities and to respond to the‑spotting of slicks?

The maintaining of an effective communication network has remained a key element of the implementation of the FAP. EPA has remained the hub of the communication network, with its Floatables Coordinator as the link with the USACOE, the United States Coast Guard (“USCG”), the NYCDEP, the NJDEP, the NYSDEC, the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (“NOAA”) and the public.

The two main contributors of slick sightings are the EPA helicopter which routinely patrols the Harbor, southern Long Island and the New Jersey coast and the NJDEP plane which routinely patrols the New Jersey coast. As reports of Harbor Complex slicks (floatable debris or oil) are received by the EPA Floatables Coordinator, the reports are evaluated to determine appropriate action. Appropriate actions include the reporting of the slick information to the USACOE or the USCG (for oil slicks). For cases in which a slick report identifies a slick not large enough or too disperse to warrant the deployment of a USACOE skimmer vessel, no action is taken.

V. How effective has the FAP been in ensuring timely notification of beach operators of potential wash-ups of floatable debris?

Due to the effectiveness of the FAP in 2001 in minimizing the escape of floatable debris from the Harbor Complex, it has not been necessary for the EPA Floatables Coordinator to notify beach operators of potential wash-ups of floatable debris. However, a notification system has been maintained and is in place whereby, based on the sighting of a floatable debris slick outside the Harbor Complex, the EPA Floatables Coordinator is to contact the following:

In New Jersey: NJDEP, which in turn notifies local beach operators; and

In New York: NYSDEC Region 1 (Nassau and Suffolk counties) or‑NYSDEC Region 2 (New York City), depending on the location of the spotted slick, and the New York Beach Information Network (a cooperative network of many Long Island beach operators for the obtaining of beach condition information).

Although routine clean-up operations are projected to address the significant majority of floatable debris slicks, a program is also established to address non-routine events such as the following:

- vessel accidents or illegal dumping; and
- floatable debris slicks sighted in the Bight, beyond the transect between Sandy Hook and Rockaway Point.

The EPA Floatable Coordinator, upon receipt of a Bight floatable slick sighting is to notify appropriate NJDEP and NYSDEC Floatable Coordinators. Individual State Coordinators are then responsible for notifying appropriate local authorities of an impending washup, who would in turn organize resources for clean-up. NOAA has developed a forecasting program that may be used to predict the impact area for Bight-sighted floatable debris slicks based on several input parameters (wind direction, sea conditions, etc.) This forecasting program has been used in the past, but was not used in 2001.

VI. How effective has the FAP been in minimizing beach closures?

The FAP has been very successful in minimizing beach closures as evidenced by the fact that there were no beach closure incidents in 2001 due to floatable debris.

After the floatable debris washups in New Jersey in 1987, the NJDEP’s Cooperative Coastal Monitoring Program began tracking beach closures due to floatable debris washups in terms of closures of designated bathing areas. A designated bathing area is typically a stretch of beach patrolled by a lifeguard. A closure of such an area must last for a minimum of one day in order to be counted as an official closure.

Currently, the NJDEP formally defines a beach closure as follows:

 The prohibition of primary contact activities at a regulated recreational beach and/or beaches contiguous to these beaches; the term "primary contact activities" implies a certain degree of water immersion/skin contact; regulated beaches must meet criteria detailed in Chapter 9 of the State Sanitary Code, these criteria  include the presence of lifeguards, certain safety equipment and‑water quality testing.

Nassau County does not factor the amount of time that a beach is closed into its reporting of “beach closings due to floatable debris.” Rather, based on a cooperative working relationship between the Nassau County Department of Health (NCDOH) and beach operators, beach operators notify the NCDOH when medical debris is discovered either on the beach or in the water. If the quantity of medical debris found on land is manageable, it is collected and no beach closure ensues. If medical debris is found in the water, the beach will typically be, based on an inspection by the NCDOH, closed.

Being further away from the NY/NJ Harbor, Suffolk County does not specifically associate medical waste with beach closings due to floatable debris. The Suffolk County Department of Health Services (SCDHS) works cooperatively with beach operators to close beaches in cases of “significant amounts of floatable debris” either already on the beach or in the water. Beaches remain closed until debris is removed and incoming tides no longer carry significant debris to the shoreline. Beach operators can independently close beaches and alert the SCDHS in such instances.

The following table demonstrates the success of the FAP in minimizing designated bathing area closures due to floatable debris washups in New Jersey:

New Jersey Floatable Debris-Related 
Beach Closure Data

As the table indicates, New Jersey has not had a closure of a‑designated bathing area due to floatable debris since 1990. This‑is due in large part to the implementation of the FAP.

Implementation of the FAP in New York has also been highly‑successful. After the summer of 1988, in which beaches in New York‑from Coney Island in Brooklyn to Tiana Beach in Suffolk were closed‑for varying periods of time due to floatable debris washups, the‑FAP has resulted in minimizing beach closures.

The FAP has been assessed in the past on a bi-State floatable‑debris-based beach closure “incident” basis. Using this measure‑the following table and graph indicate the success of the FAP in‑minimizing beach closures.

New York Floatable Debris-Related 
Beach Closure Data

IX. NYCDEP Long-term Floatable Debris Control

Background

On June 25, 1992 the NYSDEC and the NYCDEP entered into an Order on Consent (“CSO Abatement Order”) providing for the planning, designing and construction of a comprehensive CSO abatement program for New York City. Generally, the CSO Abatement Order requires the abatement of CSO impacts in two "Tracks." Track I consists of a series of deadlines which require the NYCDEP to plan, design, commence construction and complete construction of CSO abatement facilities designed to prevent violations of permit requirements for minimum levels of dissolved oxygen and maximum levels of coliform bacteria. End dates for these Track I facilities range from 2001 to 2006. Track II requires the NYCDEP to plan, design, and commence construction of facilities designed to abate substantially all floatable debris and settleable solids (termed the “Comprehensive Plan”) from CSO outfalls where floatable debris will not be abated by the construction projects included in Track I. Dates for the initiation of construction of Track II facilities are area specific and are generally specified to be within 18 months of the completion of Track I facilities. The NYSDEC intends to negotiate a modification to the existing Order on Consent to better reflect the current NYCDEP CSO Program. This modification will take into account the ongoing NYCDEP Use and Standards Attainment Study, a study designed to better define the scope of long-term control plans throughout the City.

Interim Floatable Debris Abatement

The 1992 CSO Abatement Order also requires that the NYCDEP undertake certain interim measures to address floatable debris control. The NYCDEP was required to purchase and operate one large open water skimmer vessel, designed to supplement U.S. Army Corps of Engineers floatables skimming actions in the New York / New Jersey Harbor. NYCDEP was also required to establish a booming and skimming program (through the purchase and operation of four skimming boats, bought from United Marine International) to collect and remove substantially all waterborne floatables in certain prescribed Jamaica Bay tributaries, inner / outer Harbor tributaries and from certain outfalls in beach-sensitive open waters around Staten Island, western Brooklyn and the upper East River. These interim  measures are discussed earlier in this assessment report.

Catch Basin Hooding

Another interim measure for floatables control mandated by the 1992 CSO Abatement Order was that the NYCDEP would complete a systematic Citywide survey of catch basins (over 136,000 throughout the City). This survey was to consist of cleaning each catch basin that requires cleaning and determining whether the catch basin had a hood in place. If the catch basin lacked a hood, the NYCDEP was to replace the hood by no later than September 1993. The rationale behind this requirement was that although catch basins were primarily equipped with hoods for odor control purposes, the presence of a functioning hood traps floatables in the catch basin, minimizing their delivery to the downstream sewer system. Based on a series of discussions between the NYSDEC and the NYCDEP, with the support of EPA, the catch basin program was modified and was incorporated into the 1996 CSO Abatement Order modification. The program was divided into two separate Phases.

Phase I is defined as those Community Districts where the booming and skimming program captures floatables from less than 50 percent of the area for which the Mayor’s Office of Operations found a street litter rating of greater than 1.4 as of July 1993. Phase II is defined as Community Districts where the booming and skimming program captures floatables from more than 50 per cent of the area or for which the Mayor’s Office of Operations found a street litter rating of 1.4 or lower in July 1993, and Community Districts where booming and skimming captures floatables from between 50 and 75 per cent of the area, and selected Community Districts not covered by the booming and skimming program. Hooding of basins is taking place in both CSO and storm sewer areas of New York City.

Phase I hood installations were completed on December 26, 1997. The Phase I inventory tallied 44,375 structures and the hooded percentage of structures was increased to 85.7% of all structures in Phase I areas.

Phase II hood installations were completed on September 24, 1998.The Phase II inventory tallied 51,443 structures and the hooded percentage of structures was increased to 85.2% of all structures in Phase II areas.

NYCDEP submitted a work plan for NYSDEC’s approval to determine an appropriate and cost-effective catch basin cleaning program‑for floatables capture and flood control in locations of various street litter characteristics throughout the City. Based on the results of the completed study (pending work plan approval by the NYSDEC), the NYCDEP proposed to incorporate the findings into the City’s Comprehensive Plan.

A draft work plan entitled, “Determining Catch Basin Cleaning Frequency for Control of Street Flooding and Floatables Discharges” was submitted to the NYSDEC for review in April 1996. The NYCDEP finalized the work plan in January 1997. This work plan called for two phases of work, the first of which was  scheduled for completion by June 1997. A draft report entitled “Catch Basin Cleaning Program for Floatables Capture and Flood Control” was completed and submitted in June 1997. The second phase of work called for in the work plan was completed in 2001 through a catch basin pilot study (information concerning this pilot study is attached to this FAP Assessment Report) which determined the following: a) Floatable debris capture starts to deteriorate in a hooded catch basins between 600 and 110 gallons per minute of runoff flow, b) Floatable debris capture in a hooded catch basin improves as material accumulates in the basin, implying that hood installation does not increase the need for basin cleaning, and c) Grit does not have a significant effect on floatables debris capture in a hooded catch basin.

NYCDEP is also extending the catch basin hooding program beyond the Phase I and II areas. These other areas are collectively termed the Phase III areas. This program was recommended in the June 1997 Plan. NYCDEP initiated the hooding of Phase III areas in December 1998 and substantially completed it by October 28, 1999. The Phase III inventory tallied 40,815 structures and nearly 18,000 catch basins were hooded in Phase III areas.

Based on specific design configuration criteria, certain catch basins are termed “currently unhoodable” by the NYCDEP. In order to place a hood into these catch basins, the catch basins must be rebuilt. NYCDEP has identified this activity as the most costly of all its Track II floatable debris control activities.

Under this ongoing catch basin hood program, the entire City is covered by a floatable debris control technology, either booming and skimming or catch basin hoods. Floatable debris control measures were also strengthened above the original CSO Abatement Order in that there is now a recurring hood inspection and replacement program (on a 2-year cycle, based on the 1996 CSO Order on Consent modification requirement) to ensure the continued effectiveness of the catch basin hoods as a floatable debris control technology. This revised phased catch basin hood program is expected to augment beach protection efforts for a number of years.

Comprehensive Plan

In June 1997, the NYCDEP submitted a Draft City-Wide CSO Floatables Plan (i.e., the Comprehensive Plan) to the NYSDEC. The Comprehensive Plan, although not fully approved by the NYSDEC, has laid the groundwork for the future negotiation of a modification to the NYCDEP Order on Consent.

The Comprehensive Plan is intended to provide CSO controls outside of the Track I program which focused on larger CSO discharge areas and the WPCPs. Since its submittal there have been changes in the Comprehensive Plan to address new concerns from the NYSDEC. One of the has been to include the investigation of settleable solids, oil and grease as a CSO issue.

The Comprehensive Plan has been evaluating CSO-control technologies. NYCDEP is seeking technologies that have a wide application such as catch basin hoods, regulator baffles and bending weirs for controlling floatables and where applicable, uses a combination of technologies to achieve the reduction goals. A recommendation for CSO-control technologies to be used in the Bowery Bay WPCP drainage area has been completed and recommended plans are being developed for other NYCDEP WPCP‑drainage areas.

Outfalls Program

The NYCDEP has a total of more than 700 permitted outfalls for the discharge of CSO and storm water. The outfalls program work includes mapping of outfalls, drainage area characterization, land use determination, structural survey, and installation of public notification signs. The NYCDEP is currently installing signs at more than 400 CSO outfalls, a program mandated by the NYSDEC. The NYCDEP evaluated potential negative aesthetic impact of the sign on high profile areas such as waterfront promenades and walkways. At these locations plaques will be installed to‑ensure that views are not obstructed. In Brooklyn, as a pilot project, the NYCDEP installed plaques and an informational public education sign at Shore Road as part of the Waterwalk Project. The signs notify the public of CSO locations and encourages the public to report dry weather discharges.

Dry Weather Bypass Reduction

The failure or improper operation of a WPCP, pump station, or sewer regulator can cause a dry weather bypass to occur. In the 1980s there were numerous continuous dry weather bypasses and failures within the collection system were common. In 1988 the NYCDEP began a shoreline survey program to identify and evaluate all CSO locations. In addition staffing of a Collection Facilities Operations (CFO) group was increased and re-organized to properly operate and maintain pump stations and sewer regulators. The program included daily inspection of pump stations which was continued until a telemetry system was installed. The NYCDEP has made major efforts to improve pump stations by installing redundant control systems and backup pumps to improve reliability. Sewer regulators were inspected on a monthly or weekly schedule based on priority. Dry weather‑bypasses from WPCPs, pump stations, and regulators have seen a reduction of 99.56% from fiscal year 1989 to fiscal year 2001. A‑total of 8.03 million gallons of sewage was bypassed in FY 2001 compared to 1,844.6 million gallons bypassed in FY 1989. Dry weather bypasses accounted for less than 0.002% of the total dry weather flow treated by the 14 NYCDEP WPCPs.

Increased Wet Weather Capture

Since 1989, the NYCDEP has instituted operational changes at many of its plants, rehabilitated tide gate structures, and made improvements to the functioning of its regulators. These changes have resulted in an increase in the capture of rainfall that enters the combined sewer system, from an estimated 18% in 1989 to 64% in 2000. Tide gate infiltration has been reduced by over 40 MGD since 1985. Water conservation has also increased capacity for CSO capture at the WPCPs.

Public Education

The NYCDEP has developed a brochure on floatables which is available to the public. This brochure describes sources of floatables debris and the programs currently in place for reduction of floatables discharge. It is distributed at conferences and public information desks. In addition the brochure is also displayed in the NYCDEP website at www.nyc.gov/html/dep/html/float.html.

X. NJDEP Long-term Floatable Debris Control

The NJDEP, under its 1995 (and reissued in 2000) general permit for combined sewer systems, requires permittees with combined sewer systems to construct solids/floatables control measures which will capture and remove solids/floatables which cannot pass through a bar screen having a bar spacing of 0.5 inches (13.0 mm)‑from all CSO's, unless the permittee can demonstrate, to the satisfaction of the NJDEP, that an alternative control measure is ‑more appropriate for a CSO point.

In general, once the NJDEP approves the long-term solids/floatables plan submitted by a permittee, a 30-month time frame is initiated as follows:

a) Permittee is to submit a treatment works approval (“TWA”) application for NJDEP approval (within 12 months of plan approval)

b) NJDEP is to approve permittee’s submitted TWA application (within 3 months of receiving the TWA application)

c) Permittee is to construct final solids/floatables control measures (within 15 months of TWA)

The NJDEP has taken and will continue to take enforcement actions in cases of permittee non-compliance with these time frames to gain enforceable implementation time schedules.

Attached to this FAP Report is a summary of the floatables abatement program (focusing on the long-term floatables plans) for each New Jersey combined sewer system permittee, the majority of which discharge to the NY/NJ Harbor complex. As of December 31, 2001, solids/floatables facilities have been constructed and are operating for 93 of New Jersey’s CSO points. Another 17 CSO points have been eliminated. The NJDEP estimates that for each CSO Point with a solids/floatables control facility, an average of 3 tons per year of floatable debris is captured and disposed‑of. Using this estimate, it is projected that approximately 650 to 750 tons per year of floatable debris will ultimately be captured. Future FAP Assessment Reports will provide information on annual collection totals from these solids/floatables control facilities. Such control facilities include installation of net units, screening devices, bar racks and sewer separation.

XII. References

New York City Department of Environmental Protection, 1993. “City-Wide Floatables Study: Sources, Fate and Control of Floatable Materials in New York Harbor”, Final Report, prepared by Hydroqual Environmental Engineers and Scientists, December 1993. 

New York City Department of Environmental Protection, 1995. “City-Wide Floatable Study: Floatables Pilot Program (Evaluation of Non-Structural Methods to Control Combined‑and Storm Sewer Floatable Materials)”, Final Report, prepared by Hydroqual Environmental Engineers and Scientists, January 1995.

New York City Department of Environmental Protection, 1998. “City-Wide Floatables Operation and Maintenance Plan”, prepared by Maritime Alliance Group, Inc. and S & D Environmental Services, Inc. July 1998.

New York City Department of Environmental Protection, 1997. “Work Plan for Determining Catch Basin Cleaning Frequency‑for Control of Street Flooding and Floatables Discharges”, prepared by Hydroqual Environmental Engineers and Scientists, January 1997.

New York City Department of Environmental Protection, 1997. “Draft City-Wide CSO Floatable Plan”, prepared by Hydroqual‑Environmental Engineers and Scientists, June 1997.

New York City Department of Environmental Protection, 1997. “Catch Basin Cleaning Program for Floatables Capture and  Flood Control”, Draft Report, prepared by Hydroqual‑Environmental Engineers and Scientists, July 1997.

New York City Department of Environmental Protection, 1999. “Status Report on the New York City Combined Sewer Overflow‑Program”, February 1999.

New York City Department of Environmental Protection, Monthly‑Reports. “Citywide Floatable Recovery Project Contract 1000-‑MV-826980", prepared by Maritime Alliance Group, Inc. and S & D Environmental Services, Inc., monthly.

Newman, Richard L., 1993. “Operation Clean Shores”, Water‑Bulletin, New York State Department of Environmental Conservation Quarterly Report, March 1993.

Public Works, 1998. “Catch Basins Reduce Floatables”, Public Works, October 1998.

U. S. Environmental Protection Agency, 1989. “Short-term Action Plan for Addressing Floatable Debris in the New York Bight”, prepared by Batelle Ocean Services, Contract No. 68-‑03-3319, Work Assignment No. 2-147, March 1989.

U. S. Environmental Protection Agency, 1996. “Comprehensive Conservation and Management Plan and Bight Restoration Plan”, Final Report, prepared by Policy Committee of the New York / New Jersey Harbor Estuary Program Management Conference, March 1996.

U. S. Environmental Protection Agency, 1989-2000. “Floatable Action Plan Assessment Report”, periodic reports, summers‑1989 - 2000. Region II, Water Management Division and Division of Enforcement and Compliance Assistance, New York, New York.

U. S. Environmental Protection Agency, 1995. “New York Water Quality”, summer of 1995. Region II, Surveillance and Monitoring Branch, Edison, New Jersey.

For more information, contact:
E-mail:  info@lwtpithog.com
Phone:  800-243-1406 US only, or 715-246-2888
Fax:      715-246-2573