The Aspetuck Valley Country Club and Sewage

The Aspetuck Valley Country Club in Weston has requested a permit to dump approximately 7,000 gallons per day of what they call "clean" below ground sewage into the Aspetuck River. They have requested a permit for this from the DEP. The DEP believes that the below ground sewage will meet the clean water standards and I was told by a DEP representative that they (the DEP) would not even make the notice public if they did not deam the water to be safe enough to be put into the river. The water would be filtered through dirt and the sewage tank which should make the sewage water clean enough to pass into the river and have no major impact on the river or the river's inhabitants. Read the public notice here.

Future change to the Farmington River.

-Greg Miller

The Farmington River has come a long way in the last 35 years. It has grown from a small trout, put and take fishery to one of the best streams in the northeast. Some changes are being considered in the management of the TMA. These changes are intended, at least in part, to continue the steady improvement in wild trout in the river. I have put a brief survey together to learn how other fishermen feel about some of the issues involved. I have shared this with Neal Hagstrom from the Fisheries Dept and he is enthusiastic to see everyone's feedback as well. I hope to get as much involvement as possible. - To take the survey and make an impact click here.

New Stream Flow Regulation Proposal

Read or save a statement on the streamflow regs written in collabxoration by eleven environmental organizations including T.U. It is a good, brief overview of where we are at present and what we are striving for.
Please review it to become familiar with the bills present status.

For more information on how you can help please contact Ron Merly at president@nutmegtu.org or Mike at webmaster@numtegtu.org.

One of the most URGENT proposals seen in years. Here is a chance to keep our local rivers and streams from drying up during the slow water months. Please read the these regulatory numbers and attend these meetings. We have nearly four weeks until stream flow regulations are etched in stone. To view the PDF click here. If you can not view the documents please download the latest version of acrobat reader.

There will not be another time to make sure that enough water is flower through the Mill River or the Saugatuck. Both of these rivers tend to run shallow and hot during the slow rain months of summer and early fall. It is incredibly important that we act NOW to insure that there is enough cold water flowing from the dams of the water companies. It is terrific that companies such as Aqarion and the DEP are interested in our thoughts on the new regulations. I urge you to review them and come to the meetings. For more information, please read below.

Streamflow Regulation Presented to the Public

Since 1971,  the state has tried to develop effective ways to protect natural flows in our streams.  Nothing has worked.  Every dry season, too many brooks and small rivers slow to an unnatural trickle or even dry up.  Several large rivers are also affected, with waters that are lower, warmer, and more polluted than they should be.  The total number of CT watercourses impaired or threatened by low flows is approximately 60. 
 
Now, after almost 40 years of of faltering policy and expensive litigation, the state has developed a regulation to protect the natural flow pattern in streams.  This is very likely the best chance we will have for many decades to keep water flowing in our state water courses.   
 
The proposed regulation was written pursuant to Public Act 05-142, which required the DEP to develop an ecologically protective flow regulation, while taking into account societal needs for water for household use, industry, and so forth.  Many of you participated in the vigorous campaign to pass this law.  DEP then met with stakeholders for some three years before releasing the present proposed regulation. 
 
For the sake of our water future, we need environmental leaders to provide comment on the regulation and to speak out for streams and rivers and all the creatures that depend upon them (including us).   Water utilities have launched extremely active opposition in CT and Massachusetts against flow regulation.  (In Massachusetts, a law is pending similar to the law we passed here).  Flow regulation limits utilities '  diversion of water and requires them to make an investment in water preservation, not just in water extraction and sale.  Naturally, this is not popular.  There are many in the industry, however, who recognize that the longterm health and prosperity of water utilities, as well as the health and prosperity of the larger community, depend on preserving the total water infrastructure:  not just pipes, pumps, and reservoirs, but the entire system of natural wetlands, streams, lakes, and rivers --  and the web of life they sustain.    
 
At Rivers Alliance we would be pleased to answer questions and to provide any materials that you need to understand the issue.  The basis of the regulation is a classification of rivers according to quality of flows, with highest protection for the most pristine streams.  The flow standards are keyed to the natural hydrograph.  There are numerous exemptions, protections for supply in times of drought, and emergency variances.
 
We have a DEP powerpoint presentation available electronically, and many other materials.    Here is a link to the regulation itself on the DEP website. http://www.ct.gov/dep/lib/dep/water/watershed_management/flowstandards/proposedstreamflowstandardsregulations_2009oct13.pdf    * 
 
The Nature Conservancy helped to develop the flow standards and is championing flow protection in both CT and MA.  They, too, are ready to answer questions and provide information.  Their representative is David Sutherland, dsutherland@tnc.org   tel. 203-568-6297
 
The DEP would be pleased to send out people to make a presentation on the regulation to any group that would welcome such an exposition.  If your watershed group, land trust, conservation commission, garden club, regional planning agency, fishing association, council of governments, or other local entity would like to learn more, please get in touch with the DEP or with Rivers Alliance or with The Nature Conservancy.   (If your group has already received a presentation from the the utility representatives, we would appreciate the opportunity to respond.)  The water bureau number at DEP is 830-424-3704.   The number here at RA is 860-361-9349.  Our email is rivers@riversalliance.org
 
There will be an informational meeting at DEP, December 21, 2009, 1:30 p.m. - 4:00 p.m., Phoenix Auditorium, 5th Floor, 79 Elm Street.
 
The official public hearing begins at the same place, January 21, 2010, 9:00 a.m. – until all comments have been heard.
 
We can help with car-pooling.  We can help with preparing comments.  
 
Thanks.
 
Margaret
 
PS  If link does not work.  Here are narrative directions:  Google CT DEP.  Click on Laws & Regulations (look left).  Click on 1st Notice of Intent under Proposed Regulations.  At the bottom of that page page a link called:  Draft Regulations.  That will take you to the flow regulation
 
Or I can send you a copy electronically.  M
 
   
Rivers Alliance of Connecticut
7 West Street, POB 1797
Litchfield, CT 06759
Tel: 860-361-9349
Fax: 860-361-9341
Cell:  203-788-5161
Http://www.riversalliance.org
 
Contacts:
Margaret Miner
Rose Guimaraes
Amanda Branson

Stream Flow Regulation latest news:

View the current flow on the Saugatuck River by the USGS here.

As many of you know, the DEP has announced a new streamflow regulation, as required under Public Act 05-142. Rivers Alliance, The Nature Conservancy, The Housatonic Valley Association, and many other groups are preparing comments on the proposed regulation. We will circulate comments for your information. The regulation itself and a summary are available on the DEP website, and we would be happy to forward electronic copies to you. The public hearing opens on January 21.

The purpose of this message is to announce three opportunities to attend presentations on the regulation. Two have been arranged by the Farmington River Watershed Association, and one by the Thames River Basin Partnership. If none of these suit your schedule, we will try to find or arrange a more convenient opportunity. You can email us at rivers@riversalliance.org or call at 860-361-9349.

onservation District, Thames River Basin Partnership, 189 Pomfret Street, Pomfret Center, CT 06259, (860)928-4948 x 605

Mill River

The Mill River is fragile and must be treasured. What makes it so unique is its population of wild (born and raised in the stream, not in a hatchery) brown and (a few) rainbow trout, and wild & native brook charr -- all of this in one of the most urbanized parts of the U.S. In fact, it is the only stream in Connecticut where all three salmonids spawn. Furthermore, there is a small remnant population of sea-run brown trout.

The State of Connecticut, recognizing its value, designed sections of the Mill River in Easton as one of its first "Class 1" Wild Trout Management Areas (WTMA.) WTMAs have special regulations designed to minimize the impact anglers have on wild trout (for example, all trout must be immediately returned unharmed to the stream.) Trout are like the canary in the coal mine. The presence of these wild coldwater fish indicates just how healthy the entire ecosystem is. Although WTMAs protect trout, they do little to protect the clean, cold, unsilted, highly oxygenated water the trout themselves and the other animal and plant species need to survive.

Perhaps the greatest threat to wild trout in the Mill River (and throughout Connecticut) is the incessant, seemingly unstoppable "development" of their watersheds. The Nutmeg Chapter of Trout Unlimited is providing information to all the interested parties about how to lessen the inevitable impact of the proposed developments on the environment of this little gem and advocates for restoration whenever possible.

Fairfield Citizen News – August 12, 2009

Progress slow in Mill River clean-up
By Anthony Karge

Another step toward the ongoing clean-up of the pollution caused by the former Exide automotive battery plant on 2190 Post Road has been completed, and the owners are now deciding exactly what path to take in cleaning the Mill River.

A study completed in July by CCA LLC, a Brookfield-based environmental surveying firm, has mapped out the amount and depth of lead-impacted sediments in the river.

Ken Money, president of Exide Group Inc., said that the report was a necessary step in cleaning the river by showing "how to do it" and "where to do it."

"Dredging is obviously the route we will probably take. It's by the far the most efficient," he said.

The report, which is 3 inches thick, is awaiting approval from the Connecticut Department of Environmental Protection, which had asked the Exide Group to remedy all environmental issues stemming from the battery plant.

Once approval is granted, the development of a plan to clean up the river can begin, which would also have to be submitted to the DEP. While Exide Group is waiting to get the OK from the DEP, Money said they have already begun determining what exactly needs to be done.

The report tested five different areas along the river, including the Mill Pond and Southport Harbor, to see how insidious and prevalent lead impacted sediments were.

The results varied depending on the location, but the Mill Pond was found to have the highest concentration from 0 to 6 inches beneath the river bottom. An average of 5,786.8 milligrams per kilogram of sediment was contaminated. For comparison, the next highest level of concentration at that depth, which was located downstream from the pond, only had an average of 557.9 milligrams.

A level of 220 milligrams per kilogram is considered a safe amount that would not affect organisms living in the river, according to the DEP. The Southport Harbor is well below this requirement, but none of the other tested areas were.

Thomas Steinke, director of the Fairfield Conservation Department, has reviewed the numerous reports submitted to the DEP even though his department isn't involved in the clean-up since it's considered a state matter. He recalls that back in the 1980s, some spots on the river showed an average of 600,000 milligrams per kilogram.

The clean-up of the damage done by the battery plant has been an ongoing process that began in 1982 -- a year after the plant closed down. It had opened in 1951. That year, 4,100 cubic yards of contaminated sediment had been removed form the Mill Pond after the plant's closure, but despite that procedure, later studies showed that there had been an increased amount of lead concentration.

"You're going back many years and it's pace I wish would be accelerated, but to be thorough it's got to move like this," said Steinke.

Since that first removal, there had been more studies and guidelines set by the DEP for cleaning up the area. The plant was demolished in 2005, and all that remains is a vacant lot.

According to Doug Zimmerman, of the DEP, the work that Exide Group had done on the land was approved on May 20.

©Fairfield Minuteman 2009

Fairfield Minuteman – June 19, 2008

Easton Budget, South Park get a 'yes'
by Jordan Fenster, Editor

Easton voters were in a positive frame of mind Tuesday night, approving two separate measures by a wide margin.

A $6.15 million plan for the town to buy the so-called South Park property was approved by a 3-1 vote Tuesday night. Easton First Selectman Tom Herrmann said he thought the deal's approval was "tremendous."

"It was a complex problem and there was a complex solution," Herrmann said.

The town will buy the property with "the intent of subsequently selling the land so as to have no impact on taxes," Herrmann said.

With voters' go-ahead in place, the town will purchase the 29.7 acre property on South Park Avenue. The vote, 1,246 for and 412 against, ensures that a developer can not build a 72-unit affordable housing complex on the site. The "structured arrangement" Herrmann said the town has come to gives the New England Prayer Center a $300,000 option to buy the plot of land within two years.

Herrmann said that the vote does not ensure that the prayer center will take ownership of the property, it merely "ensures that they have an option to buy the land."

If the prayer center does not exercise its option to buy the property, the town is then authorized to divide the land into 1-acre parcels to make back the $6.15 million it is spending.

The $300,000 option will be credited to the prayer center should it choose to buy the property - if not, the town will keep the money.
Media reports said that developer Running Brook Farm had promised to end a court case intended to overturn the town's denial of the developer's zoning change request.

The NEPC, according to its Web site, is a 501 (c) 3 organization "operating exclusively for religious, charitable and educational purposes."
Its mission, the Web site reads, is to "strengthen the faith-based community predominantly through prayer and educational offerings" held in a non-denominational setting.

Dina Massey of 4 Overview Drive, who lives across the street from South Park said, "I am in favor of the deal that the selectman has been able to negotiate."

"I hope the town goes out to support it," Massey said during an interview last week. "It's a good alternative and they have definitely tried to get the best scenario out of the situation. We are pleased with it as residents."

"I have not heard too much about the [NEPC]," Massey added. "But, I trust that the town has made the right decision. My only concern is that I have not found out much about who this church organization is. I feel we have come to the eleventh hour with the situation."

Colleen Kearney of 47 South Park Ave, who also lives across the street from the property said, "I am absolutely in favor of the current plan with the provision that the application for the sequential batch reactor is rescinded, however."

In a separate vote Tuesday night, voters approved Easton's portion of the Region 9 School District budget. It was the budget's third round of voting.

Easton and Redding vote on the district's budget collectively, as the towns share the cost. Easton voted 853-805 in favor of the budget, while residents in Redding previously voted 861-546 in favor. Easton's share of the $20 million budget comes to $9.4 million.

In its third attempt, the budget saw a net reduction of $35,000, though that offset a $150,000 increase in anticipated costs added to the appropriation between the second and third votes.

Turnout Tuesday night, "was good," Herrmann said, owing to the two important issues on the ballot. The first selectman said Wednesday morning that what such major issues ar on the table, "You draw a larger crowd."

A total of 1,658 voters came out to the polls.

Audrey Adade contributed to this report.

©Fairfield Minuteman 2008

Fairfield Minuteman – May 22, 2008

Church group to buy South Park
by Brigid Quinn, Correspondent

Determined to preserve Easton's single-family residential zoning regulations and protect the Mill River, the Board of Selectmen, Monday night announced the successful conclusion of negotiations allowing the Town of Easton to take title of a 29.7 acre piece of property, better known as 18-22 South Park Avenue and control its eventual use.

According to a press release from First Selectman Thomas Herrmann's office, the property is currently the subject of a 72 unit high density, affordable housing application scheduled for trial before Superior Court in Litchfield.

The negotiated agreements will transfer title of the property from the current owner, Running Brook Farm LLC, to the town, allowing the town to sell a purchase option to the newly organized New England Prayer Center, a non-profit Christian group. The expenses connected with acquiring the property will not affect property taxes over the next two fiscal years due to revenue generated from the sale of the option, according to the first selectman. Additionally, if after the two year lease is up and the NEPC buys the property as planned, property taxes will not be impacted by the agreement.

At the press conference Herrmann introduced Fred Zarrilli, spokesman for NEPC who described the Prayer Center as a non-profit organization operating solely for religious, charitable and educational purposes. The Center's mission is to strengthen the faith-based community predominantly through Christian workshops, pray, and educational offerings held in a non-denominational setting.

According to Zarrilli, the center will work within the existing structures on the property and during its two year lease period will not engage in any construction. When asked to comment on the number of planned meetings at the center, Zarrilli said, "It is difficult to say, there could be weekly meetings, there could be monthly meetings. The Prayer Center is not a church; it is not a Sunday morning centric facility."

The NEPC must make applications with the appropriate Town commissions and boards for the use of the property. The Selectmen's office noted that if the acquisition goes forward, the entire purchase price of $6.15 million is anticipated to be recovered by the Town from the NEPC. At the closing the Center will pay the Town $300,000 for the lease and purchase option agreement. This will allow the Center to lease the property and over the next two years purchase the land from the Town for the agreed upon price of $6.15 million less the initial $300,000.
The town will also be protected in the transaction with a series of deed restrictions, constraining any future owners from using the property in a manner inconsistent with Easton's single-family residential zoning. These agreements must be approved by the Planning and Zoning Commission, the Board of Finance and town residents by a machine vote.

The lawsuit related to this property goes back to 2005 when the current owners of Running Brook Farm applied to the Conservation Commission and the Planning and Zoning Commission for a 72 unit affordable housing development. The application was turned down by both commissions in early 2006 and the cases have been pending in a special court in New Britain assigned for affordable housing appeals. There have been many settlement conferences associated with these appeals and Monday's press release noted the town's objective has always been to negotiate a resolution, which would ensure that Easton's single-family zoning would remain intact.

Said Herrmann, "If all of the approvals are received, I am confidant that we will have preserved our local zoning and protected an important water course as well as the essential rural character of our community."

©Fairfield Minuteman 2008