ENVIRONMENTAL AND COASTAL LAND USE ANALYSIS: A PLAN TO REMEDIATE BACTERIAL POLLUTION IN RHODE ISLAND'S GREENWICH BAY

In December of 1992, the Rhode Island Department of Environmental Management temporarily closed Greenwich Bay to shellfishing after finding dangerously high levels of fecal coliform. The closure of the Bay to shellfishing has resulted in an estimated loss of $4 million to the City of Warwick, annually. Furthermore, pollution in Greenwich Bay has begun to threaten tourism, recreational activities, environmental quality, and public health. A comprehensive environmental/land use analysis is conducted to identify potential sources of bacterial pollution and to estimate the impacts these sources are having on the Bay's water quality. Sources of bacterial contamination include: failing septic systems and sewers, stormwater runoff, sewage discharge from boats, and wild and domesticated animals. A list of stakeholders is provided to identify key governmental agencies and private organizations who have a responsibility or interest in improving Greenwich Bay's water quality. A description of each agency's function and responsibilities as a stakeholder is discussed. The study concludes with a comprehensive and detailed list of recommendations to remediate the Bay's pollution. The recommendations are broken into several categories including: establishment of a Greenwich Bay Task Force; public education and outreach; additional research; land use management; coastal zone management; wastewater management; and stormwater management.

Chepiwanoxet and Arnold's Neck to its west; Warwick Neck to its east; and Potowomut and the Town of East Greenwich to its south.
In December 1992, the Rhode Island Department of Environmental Management (RIDEM) temporarily closed Greenwich Bay to shellfishing due to high levels of fecal coliform 1 • Fecal coliform is used as an indicator for measuring the presence of disease-causing bacteria which in elevated levels can cause health problems ranging from mild gastrointestinal distress, severe gastroenteritis, to hepatitis, cholera, and typhoid fever.
Although the closure of the Bay was necessary to protect the health, safety, and welfare of the public , it has also had an adverse effect on the local economy. The shellfishing industry, in Greenwich Bay alone, contributed an estimated $4 million in annual revenue to the City of Warwick (Ganz 1993). The closure has already caused serious economic repercussions in Warwick including the loss of jobs to shellfishermen and a loss of revenue to local commercial activities; especially marine-related businesses.
Furthermore, primary recreational activities such as swimming have been restricted in 'Appendix A provides feca l coli form and toial coliform levels from an April 1994 Food and Drug Administration study of Greenwi ch Bay. the Warwick and Apponaug Coves and secondary contact activities including boating could conceivably be prohibited if water quality continues to decline. Finally, there is significant concern regarding the future vitality of Greenwich Bay's coastal/marine ecosystem if pollution levels continue to increase.
Recognizing the urgency of this dilemma, the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) and RIDEM have undertaken and are near completion of a wet and dry weather water quality study of fecal coliform levels in Greenwich Bay. The testing began in spring of 1993 in an attempt to determine whether the state should permanently close Greenwich Bay to shellfishing.

Objectives of the Study
Given the impacts permanent closure could have on the City of Warwick, it is important to conduct a study that determines possible sources of pollution and identifies initiatives to mitigate the pollution problem in Greenwich Bay. Although it has been acknowledged that a number of sources contribute pollutants to the Bay, this study will focus primarily on bacterial contamination from improper wastewater treatment and disposal (both on-shore and off-shore) and stormwater runoff from Warwick's coastal neighborhoods.
Research for this study was conducted during a year-long internship with the City of Warwick Planning Department. Hired as an environmental planner, my sole responsibility was the development of a plan to remediate the bacterial contamination of Greenwich Bay. This study will examine the problem from a broader perspective, provide a more technical approach, offer additional support for previous conclusions, and propose several new recommendations.
The objectives of this study are: 1.
To provide an accurate assessment of the physical conditions existing in and around the Bay; 2. To evaluate the impacts of these physical conditions on the Bay's water quality; 3. To determine the approximate location of "hot spots"those areas within Warwick contributing most to the pollutant loading of the Bay and neighboring water bodies; 4. To identify the various governmental agencies and private organizations who can and should play a role in the reclamation of Greenwich Bay; and 5. To recommend short and long-term remediation initiatives which may be efficiently carried out in a cooperative, coordinated manner by the most appropriate authorities.

Significance of the Study
This study will provide several recommendations to facilitate the restoration and preservation of Warwick's most valuable natural resource. A timely and wellcoordinated response to the present dilemma facing Greenwich Bay will help to ensure a future of unrestricted use and will inevitably save the City millions of dollars in future remediation costs, lost jobs, and lost revenues from commercial activities and tourism.
Moreover, a well planned collaborative effort to ameliorate the existing adverse conditions will help to protect the health, safety, and welfare of the public, restore and preserve the Bay's water quality for all recreational uses, and ensure suitable habitats for terrestrial and marine organisms alike. It is my contention that the recommendations of this study, if properly administered, will be successful at meeting the goal of attenuating local pollution levels and rejuvenating the vitality of this precious resource.
Furthermore, with increasing environmental awareness and a new understanding of the value of coastal resources, this study could conceivably be used to foster the development and implementation of remediation initiatives in other similarly impacted coastal communities.

Methodology
Literature will be reviewed to compile information for the analysis of physical/environmental conditions in and around the Bay, identify potential pollution sources, and evaluate the impacts of these sources on Greenwich Bay's water quality.
To more effectively examine the physical conditions, the Greenwich Bay coastal region is divided into twenty-three subareas or "Critical Coastal Areas". The subareas are defined based on their proximity to Greenwich Bay and its various coves, as well as physical and man-made features such as major roads, wetlands, streams, and neighborhood boundaries.  An assessment of the existing physical conditions within the Greenwich Bay Study Area will then be conducted focusing on key characteristics such as geology , soils, topography/slopes, and hydrology. These characteristics are then discussed in terms of their influence on wastewater and stormwater pollutants. Population growth and development trends within the Bay's coastal areas will be examined, including a comparison of each subarea's population and housing densities to those of the City and State in 1990. This analysis will facilitate an understanding of the impacts population growth and development has had on the degradation of the Bay. The study will also examine marine activities in coastal areas including a description of water quality and boat density.
Physical/environmental conditions will be examined and synthesized using the map overlay technique. This technique will be used to estimate the relative impacts of each subarea on the levels of pollution within the Bay. From this analysis, "areas of concern" will be delineated. The following maps will be created: Greenwich Bay Study Area Delineation, Surficial Geology, Water Features (coves, streams, ponds, wetlands, drainage basins, direction of runoff and stream flow, etc.), Depth to Seasonal High Water of Concern. Finally, the characteristics within each subarea will be considered individually and collectively for their potential influence on bacterial pollution to the Bay.

7
A method of quantifying the potential pollution impacts of each subarea will be devised to identify specific areas of concern. Excluding the presence of sewers, storm drains, and permeability classifications, each physical/environmental characteristic will be given a score between one and three based on the degree to which it is believed to influence the likelihood of wastewater and stormwater contamination to the Bay. A score of one (1) indicates little or no influence. A score of two (2) indicates moderate influence, while a score of three (3) indicates a severe influence on the derivation, mobility and treatment of wastewater and stormwater contaminants.
The sewer and permeability categories will be handled differently due to the complexity of each. Within the sewers category, subareas will be given a score based on the presence or absence of sewers. A score of one indicates that no sewers exist in the area, while a score of zero indicates the presence of sewers.
Permeabilities will be rated in a similar manner. Those subareas with either excessively high or excessively low permeabilities will be given a score of one (1), as both conditions are known to have an adverse effect on wastewater treatment. Areas with moderate permeabilities will be given a score of zero. Storm drain information will not be quantified . However, major storm drain outfalls will be considered as potential "pollution points", and therefore important places for further water quality monitoring. 8 Finally, the total score for each subarea will be calculated. Two classifications will be developed based on a "critical threshold number" derived from qualitative data and professional judgement. Subareas falling above the critical threshold number will be classified as principle "areas of concern", while subareas falling below this number will be considered to be of secondary importance. This method will be useful in identifying critical "areas of concern" and examine the relative condition of each subarea.
However, it is recommended that additional site-specific analyses be conducted to confirm the actual status of these areas of concern and further isolate the primary sources of contamination.
The evaluation of existing conditions will be followed by a summary and conclusions section. A synopsis of key findings for each subarea and general recommendations for corrective and preventative action will be provided based on the analysis of the information obtained from the physical/environmental assessment.
Next , a stakeholder analysis will be conducted to identify the key agencies, organizations , and citizen ' s groups which could most effectively carry-out the essential remediation strategies recommended to meet the objectives of the study. Possible funding sources and a tentative phasing plan will also be developed. Clearly, the success of this study will be contingent upon the coordination and cooperation between these institutional stakeholders, many of which have legal mandate authority and/or a strong interest in protecting the Bay's water quality and its increasingly fragile ecosystem.
Finally , a direct and comprehensive list of recommendations will be developed.
These recommendations explain the purpose for each initiative, identifies available funding sources, defines specific stakeholder responsibilities for implementing and overseeing particular actions, and offers a tentative schedule for the completion of specific tasks. General recommendation topics include: establishment of a Greenwich Bay Task Force, public education and outreach, additional research, and improved land use management, coastal zone management, stormwater management and wastewater management.

Sources of Data
A myriad of sources will be examined to secure information for this study. Shell fishermen ' s Association , and the Rhode Island Marine Trades Association provide important information for the study. Plans, reports, surveys, maps, books , interviews and on-site visits will be used to collect the needed data for this study.

Organization of the Study
The study will be divided into 6 chapters. Chapter 1 discusses the research problem , the objectives and significance of the study , methodology , literature review , and the organization of the study. Chapter 2 provides the reader with a description of pertinent physical, environmental and man-made characteristics within the Greenwich Bay Study Area and an explanation of how these characteristics may directly or indirectly contribute to the Bay ' s degraded water quality. Chapter 3 provides a comprehensive analysis of the physical/environmental conditions within each of the Greenwich Bay subareas. Chapter 4 consists of a site-specific summary of the conditions within each subarea, how they affect the Bay , and finally , offers general recommendations for addressing these conditions. Chapter 5 identifies key stakeholders , explains their mission , assigns appropriate tasks to each , and discusses possible funding sources.
Major emphasis will be placed on cooperation between key players and a thoughtful approach toward the coordination and implementation of the study.

11
The final chapter focuses on a variety of specific recommendations such as: establishment of a Greenwich Bay Task Force; increased public education; additional research; improved land use management; coastal zone management; wastewater management; and stormwater management. A tentative schedule for meeting the recommendations of the initiative will also be provided.

CHAPTER TWO PHYSICAL CHARACTERISTICS AND LAND USE
Prior to defining specific pollution sources, a critical examination of physical and environmental characteristics was conducted to evaluate the possible effects these characteristics have on the generation, movement, and treatment of wastewater and storm water. These characteristics include geology , soils , topography, hydrology (groundwater, surface water, wetlands , drainage basins), wastewater treatment (existence or non-existence of sewers , and septic system design and age), stormwater treatment, population/land use , and boat density.

Geology
Local geology was examined to gain a better understanding of the sub-surface conditions in which Warwick's septic systems function. Regions of glacial outwash, glacial till , and /or bedrock outcrops were defined (see Map 2). Glacial outwash is composed of well sorted , stratified, sand and gravel deposited by glacial meltwater.
These areas are generally well drained , have rapid percolation rates, and permit quick diffusion of septic effluent. Outwash is generally well-suited for storing and providing groundwater. However , the potential for groundwater contamination from wastewater systems increases where percolation rates are excessively rapid and water tables are high.  'i.
)> Glacial till is composed of unsorted, nonstratified, boulders, gravel, sand, silt and clay. These areas often have bedrock beneath the surface at shallow depths and sometimes contain a layer of compacted and/or cemented fined grained sediment called "hardpan". Hardpan is nearly impenetrable to liquids and therefore may inhibit water from percolating through to the substratum. This condition, combined with the typically slow percolation rates of tills themselves, may cause groundwater to accumulate above the hardpan resulting in the development of a "perched water table". A perched water table can severely limit proper treatment and disposal of septage by causing the surfacing of wastewater or seepage along the edges of slopes (called lateral seepage), particularly after heavy rains. Tiny pores within glacial tills are also known to "clog" when overwhelmed with sewage solids, or when bacterial mats form around septic system distribution lines. This also can result in septic system failure and surfacing of septage.
Furthermore, glacial till is composed of boulders and cobbles which can significantly decrease the volume of soil required for adequate purification within a septic system absorption field.
Bedrock, at or close to the surface can cause serious problems for septic systems by reducing the amount of space available to purify wastewater between the absorption field and groundwater surface. Also, wastewater dispersed over bedrock can enter fractures and be discharged directly into water bodies with little, if any, purification whatsoever.

Soils
The effects of physical soil characteristics on the dispersal and purification of wastewater are among some of the most important information to examine in regard to septic system failure (see Map 3). Furthermore, soil properties are known to have an enormous influence on stormwater treatment , infiltration, and overland runoff. The principal soil characteristics examined for this study include soil texture , soil structure, compaction , permeability, drainage class, stoniness, slope, potential for flooding, and the physical characteristics of the parent material.

Topography /Slopes
A topography/slopes map was created to define areas having steep slopes. Steeply sloping areas (greater than 15 % slope) are poorly suited for the proper installation and operation of septic systems and can lead to lateral seepage, erosion and sedimentation, and facilitate runoff and pollutant transport from urban , residential , and agricultural land uses (see Map 4). Slopes adjacent to Greenwich Bay and its coves are of particular concern especially when combined with other physical constraints such as high water tables, shallow depths to impervious or restrictive soil horizons , and slow percolation rates.     Warwick ' s Wastewater Faciliry Plan (Maguire 1978). This information proved valuable in identifying high water tables , (ie. , areas of poor drainage, slow percolation rates, hardpan). As described previously, poor drainage, hardpan etc. , can inhibit purification of septage, cause lateral seepage or surfacing , and subsequent runoff of untreated wastewater. In addition to threatening surface water quality, a high water table increases the likelihood that groundwater contamination will occur by reducing the distance between the bottom of the soil absorption field and the groundwater surface; thus , restricting sufficient physical, biological, and chemical purification of wastewater contaminants. Peterson and Ward (1989) found that "enteric bacteria will be transported beyond 120 cm (4 ft) of suitable soil depth [beneath the absorption field] in coarse grained soils". Contaminated groundwater can also contribute to the degradation of water quality in the Bay if groundwater enters streams, or resurfaces and runs off into the Bay.

Floodplains, Wetlands, Streams, and Ponds
Floodplains and wetlands provide flood storage, natural pollutant attenuation , aquifer recharge and are considered ecological havens for many species of fish and wildlife. However, these areas are often "sinks" for a variety of pollutants including bacteria, metals , organic compounds, nutrients and sediment.  Warwick residents living in unsewered areas of the City. The purpose of the questionnaire was to gain a better understanding of the conditions and rate of failure among local ISDS systems. Questions were formulated to address such matters as septic system size, age, and condition, water consumption, and user habits. Septic systems were considered to be failing if an affirmative response was given to one or more of the following questions: 1) Does the home owner ever have to restrict water use due to system backup?
2) Has the septic system ever been repaired, replaced or altered m the past 10 years?
3) Does the septic system have to be pumped on a regular basis (6 months or less)?
Based on these criteria, the total number of residential problems reported within Poor treatment and rapid diffusion of wastewater are common characteristics of excessively permeable soils which ultimately threaten local water quality. Finally, it should be noted that the information provided by this questionnaire is based on homeowners' opinions and best estimates. This should not be considered a scientific survey, and therefore is subject to some degree of error.

Stormwater Runoff
Urban stormwater runoff appears to have contributed significantly to the degradation of Greenwich Bay's water quality. A myriad of pollutants have been introduced to the Bay throughout the years including: bacterial and pathogenic contaminants, heavy metals , organic compounds, nutrients , salt, trash and sediment.
These pollutants come from a variety of sources including roads, highways, parking lots, and intensively developed industrial, commercial, and residential land. Each pollutant has a unique effect on the Bay's water quality depending on its concentration and physical, chemical, and microbiological characteristics.
Impervious and unvegetated surfaces, steep slopes, and slowly percolating/poorly drained soils are conducive to high rates of runoff. Urban areas with high traffic flow, and dense industrial and commercial development are notorious for generating large quantities of polluted stormwater runoff. Although the focus of this study is on bacterial contaminants, it is imperative to discuss all pollutant types. A brief summary of the types , origins and effects of major "runoff pollutants" are provided below.

Organic Pollutants
"Organics" include many pollutants such as petroleum products, pesticides, solvents, cleaning agents, PCB's and many other chemical compounds. These pollutants enter the Bay from storm drains or direct overland flow and originate primarily from roads, parking lots, and commercial and industrial activities. Organic compounds can persist in benthic sediments for decades until being resuspended by the turbulence of storms, dredging, or other disruptive activities. Some of these pollutants have been found to cause cancer and other health effects in fish, shellfish, and humans and are known to be toxic to fresh and saltwater organisms.

Heavy Metals
Heavy metals such as copper, lead, zinc, chromium, and cadmium, are common in urban runoff. Sewage from failed septic systems and wastewater treatment facilities; runoff from highways and parking lots; and, industrial activities, contribute heavy metals to Greenwich Bay. Heavy metals present a variety of health risks if ingested by humans and are hazardous to fresh and saltwater organisms.

Bacteria/Pathogens
The discharge of bacterial contaminants from stormwater runoff has had a dramatic impact on the water quality and use of Greenwich Bay. Sources of bacterial contaminants include failed septic systems, broken sewer lines, illegal sewage "tie-ins" to storm drains, stormwater runoff, and animal feces. Bacterial contaminants are primarily responsible for health restrictions on shellfish harvesting and primary contact recreational activities within the Bay.

Nutrients
Phosphorus and nitrogen are nutrients common in stormwater runoff. Nutrients from anthropogenic (man-induced) sources may result in the accelerated growth of plants and algae called "cultural eutrophication". The natural "break-down" of dead plant matter by bacteria depletes the amount of dissolved oxygen in water. When oxygen levels become significantly low the water body is said to be in a state of "hypoxia".
Hypoxic and conditions are considered to be detrimental to the propagation of aquatic life. Nitrogen is the "limiting nutrient" in salt waters and is therefore primarily responsible for eutrophication in marine environments. According to the Coastal Resources Council (1985), "eutrophication affects the abundance and distribution of fish and shellfish species". The eutrophication of marine environments is also believed to be a factor in the development of toxic algal blooms which can kill shellfish or cause illness in humans who consume shellfish. Primary sources of nitrogen in runoff include atmospheric deposition, fertilizers (especially lawn fertilizers applied to sandy soils), wild and domesticated animal waste and sewage.

Salt
High levels of salt (sodium chloride) are undoubtedly discharged to the Bay each year. Salt is commonly used as a snow removal or de-icing agent on local roads, highways, and parking lots. Elevated levels of salt can be detrimental to freshwater and saltwater organisms, especially in wetlands or poorly flushed water bodies.

Sediment and Suspended Solids
Erosion, as well as runoff from roads, large construction sites, and agricultural activities, can result in the deposition of large volumes of sediment into a water body.  Coordination (1988) classified Apponaug Cove as having a "high magnitude" of nonpoint pollution especially in terms of nutrients, solids/silt, and dissolved oxygen. The use support classification for this area was considered to be "nonsupport". The Greenwich Bay-Chepiwanoxet area was classified as having a "moderate to high magnitude" of runoff pollution due to high levels of pathogens. A use support classification of "partial support" was given for this area. The high levels of pathogens contributed by urban stormwater and the East Greenwich Wastewater Facilities warranted the use support classification; "threatened".

31
The

Land Use/Density Patterns
Land use and density patterns were considered very important factors in this analysis. When combined with adverse physical and environmental conditions, high density residential districts can contribute more contamination than low density developments (see Map 9). Bicki and Brown (1991) found a "highly significant correlation between bacterial levels in surface water and increasing density of ISDSs".

Population and Housing Densities
Based on the 1990 U.S . Census of Population and Housing, the City of Warwick had a population density of 3. 8 persons per acre. This figure is more than twice that of the State of Rhode Island's average (the second most densely populated state in the union), which was 1.49 persons per acre in 1990. The City ' s housing density was also higher than that of the State (Table 2) .

43
In addition to these seemingly high boat counts, none of the mannas within Greenwich Bay or its coves are equipped with manne sewage pump-out facilities (RIDEM Division of Water Resources 1991). The direct discharge of untreated sewage into the Bay is the primary means of eliminating wastewater by local boaters.
The Coastal Resources Center (1983) devised a "waters" classification scheme to categorize coastal lands based on their suitability for particular uses. Six classifications were developed, including: Type l -Natural/Undisturbed Conservation Area Type 2 -Low Intensity/Residential Type 3 -Commercial Activities/Marinas and Boatyards Type 4 -Multi-Purpose/Fishing , Boating, and Commerce Type 5 -Recreation and Commercial Ports Type 6 -Industrial and Commercial Activities These classifications not only provide a basis from which to regulate future coastal development, but actually depict the present land use along Greenwich Bay's shoreline.

ANALYSIS OF EXISTING CONDITIONS
The following is an evaluation of each subarea based on the previously described physical and land use characteristics.

Arnold's Neck/Cowesett Hills Apartments
Subarea lA is a small but moderately populated district bordered by Apponaug Cove to the east and Thatch Cove and its contiguous salt marsh to the west. This neighborhood consists of single family homes, as well as waterfront business located along its eastern boundary.
Arnold's Neck is situated on a small, steeply sloping (greater than 15 % ) knoll composed of unconsolidated and stratified coarse sand and gravel which is moderate to poorly suited for septic system use (United States Department of Agriculture 1981).
These excessively permeable, non-compacted soils result in percolation rates which are among the most rapid within the Greenwich Bay Study Area. These rates often exceed 30 inches per hour (RIDEM ISDS Division 1975. A high percolation rate such as this provides little in the way of physical, chemical and biological purification of septic system effluent which may ultimately result in groundwater degradation and the eventual contamination of the Bay.
Despite this limitation , this area is very well drained. Depth to water table has been found to be in excess of 24 feet at times (RIDEM ISDS Division 1975.
Although the local water table appears to be relatively deep, the fluctuation of daily tides may cause the groundwater surface to rise. As a result, the distance between the water table and wastewater system may be considerably less. As the tide goes out and the water table lowers, contaminants may percolate through the soil substratum and travel along the slope of the water table discharging directly into the coves and nearby wetlands. After the contaminants enter the coastal wetlands they are then drawn out with the ebb of the tide. Further investigation is needed in this area in regard to possible contamination from high percolation rates and the process previously explained.
While periodic flooding may occur along the low-lying areas of Arnold's Neck, flooding does not appear to be a major cause of septic system failure. Most homes are situated above frequently flooded areas.
Another probable source of bacterial pollution is the many boats berthed in Apponaug Cove. According to the Rhode Island Marine Trade Association (1990) the number of vessels berthed in the Cove is 460. Because there are no marine pump-out stations located in Apponaug Cove, boats not equipped with functional marine sanitation devices (MSDs) discharge raw, untreated sewage into the Bay, a practice which contributes to increased fecal coliform counts.
Subareas lC and lB are extensively developed with homes, businesses, and industry, and have historically been a hub of activity in Warwick. Stormwater runoff from this area appears to be a major contributor to the degradation of water quality in Greenwich Bay . Nutrients, heavy metals , synthetic organic chemicals, salt, as well as virus-carrying bacteria are often typically found in common urban runoff. Impervious surfaces such as streets, parking lots and buildings inhibit infiltration of precipitation and meltwater causing excess water to rapidly runoff. The resulting runoff accumulates pollutants and eventually makes its way to local streams, ponds, and wetlands before entering Apponaug Cove and Greenwich Bay. Wetlands are often instrumental in storing excess water and "absorbing" pollutants. However, prolonged accumulation and exposure to contaminants such as has been exhibited in these subareas, can reduce the wetland's ability to absorb additional pollutants. There are no documented storm drains in study area 1 with the exception of one outfall located off the southern most tip of

CHAPfER FOUR GENERAL RECOMMENDATIONS FOR CRITICAL SUBAREAS
The preceding analysis has identified several causes and critical source areas from which local bacterial pollution appears to originate. Based on careful examination of environmental conditions in and around the Bay and local land use patterns, it is apparent that primary sources of bacterial contamination include: septic system and cesspool failures, broken or cracked sewer lines, stormwater runoff, and sewage discharge from boats.
A quantitative method of analysis was designed to identify areas of greatest concern. This method assigned numerical values to the physical conditions which are most often responsible for promoting or contributing to bacterial pollution in surface water and groundwater. After each subarea was examined , a total for each category was computed. Subareas with the highest numbers (17 and over) were considered areas of concern , while subareas with lower totals were considered to pose less of a threat. The purpose of this technique was to get a general "feel" for the overall conditions of the various districts within the study area -not to establish an absolute scientifically-based hierarchial classification . The analysis , therefore, should be considered in light of this rationale.
Districts defined as areas of concern included: lA, lC, lD The following is a summary of the conditions and general recommendations for the above areas. Subareas with similar characteristics will be discussed collectively. Subarea 8 (Potowomut) is the final locality classified as an area of concern. This district is characterized by close proximity to environmentally sensitive areas, impervious subsurfaces, and a moderately dense population.
Inspection, maintenance, repair, and upgrade of on-site septic systems, wastewater management, consideration of future communal septic sewage treatment and higher standards for land development are recommended for this area. At least two (2) marine pump-out facilities should be installed in Greenwich Cove to lower the level of contamination contributed by vessels berthed in this Cove. Also, cooperation from the Town of East Greenwich and continued compliance of its wastewater treatment facility is essential to monitoring and controlling bacterial contamination in Greenwich Cove.
Finally, an outreach and education program should be established for the purpose of informing the citizens of Warwick about issues relating to the water quality degradation of Greenwich Bay. Further research in all subareas should be conducted.
The analysis of data in this study has been analogous to the piecing together of a puzzle. Each bit of data , like a puzzle piece may appear to be of little importance by itself, yet when considered collectively begin to create a coherent "picture" of the problem at hand. Although time, costs, technological and human limitations constrain the absolute diagnosis of the problems associated with a project of this magnitude, an enormous amount of information has been collected and interpreted which shows consistent patterns from which logical inferences have been made. As data was compiled , considerable cross-checking occurred which continued to support the findings.
Further site-specific analyses such as water quality monitoring, ISDS inspections, additional research , and ongoing plan evaluation is recommended to help in providing further information to address the variety of problems at hand.
recommendations for each subarea are summarized in Table 4.

66
General   Based on this, it is apparent that the Sewer Authority is an agency with substantial institutional standing. Gaining consensus and cooperation from the Sewer Authority , therefore, will be a critical step in achieving success. Existing programs and resources should be expanded and supplemented in assisting a Greenwich Bay remediation initiative.

Warwick Depa11ment of Public Works
DPW is responsible for the maintenance and upgrade of the municipal street drainage system. The city-wide street drainage map is currently in the process of being digitized on RIGIS. In coastal areas prone to septic system failures, homeowners have been known to discharge their systems into the street drainage. DPW may become instrumental in the identification of such violations. The Water Department, a division of DPW, also has the authority to administer a water conservation program which would be very helpful in reducing the total volume of municipal wastewater discharge. Initiative to further protect the City's coastal waters.

Warwick Building Department
The

Town of North Kingstown
North Kingstown is a community located along Warwick ' s southern border.

ISDS has indicated an interest in a Greenwich Bay remediation initiative and has pledged
to perform 1500 ISDS inspections in the coastal areas surrounding the Bay beginning in 1994. These inspections will provide necessary information regarding relative (subarea to subarea) ISDS failure rates, identify the types and condition of systems installed in areas of concern, and generate additional site-specific physical/environmental information. The Division has also received a $50,000 grant from EPA to hire a coordinator for the proposed Greenwich Bay Initiative public education and outreach program (Greenwich Bay Task Force Meeting January 1993 (3) to ensure that groundwater will not be polluted; (4) to preserve and enhance the diversity and abundance of fish and shellfish; (5) to restore barrier beaches, salt marshes, and fish and wildlife habitats damaged by past construction or present use; (6) to prepare a post-hurricane restoration plan; (7) to maintain Point Judith harbor as a commercial fishing port and provide for expansion of port facilities; and (8) to create a decision-making process appropriate to the management of the region as an ecosystem.

79
The Greenwich Bay Study Area should be considered as a candidate for SAM plan in the future.
Finally, CRMC has authority and responsibility to ensure proper stormwater design, installation, and maintenance in accordance with the Coastal Zone Act Reauthorization Amendments (CZARA), Section 6217, of 1990. These nonpoint source controls will be fundamental in providing adequate water quality protection to Greenwich Bay and its freshwater tributaries.

Department of Transportation
The Policy Statement of 1990 provides the framework for RIDOT to ensure that the environment is given full consideration along with engineering, social, and economic factors in its decision-making (Palumbo 1994 percent of the costs incurred if the project was attempted alone (Schaeffer 1994). The cost assessed to each homeowner for a sewer hook-up would therefore be $4,000 rather than $8,000 (Schaeffer 1994).
RIDOT projects may pose significant threats to Greenwich Bay's water quality if sound pollution mitigation actions are not seriously considered and implemented in the future.

Food and Drug Administration
FDA is responsible for monitoring and regulating food quality including the quality of Rhode Island's shellfish harvest. FDA has a research lab in Davisville, R.I.
which has been conducting a major water quality study in Greenwich Bay since the temporary closure of the Bay to shellfishing was first instituted in December of 1992.
A decision as to whether the Bay should be permanently closed is pending the results of the FDA's study.

Army Corps of Engineers
The

Rhode Island Shellfishermen's Association
The Rhode Island Shellfishermen ' s Association 1s an alliance of individuals sharing an interest in the preservation of Rhode Island's shell fishing resources with the primary intention of sustaining commercial growth. This organization has been especially impacted by the closing of the Bay to shellfishing and has indicated a willingness to become involved in a remediation plan for the Bay .

Rhode Island Marine Trades Association
The Rhode Island Marine Trades Association 1s an organization comprised of local marine businesses. The Association attempts to ensure the passage of beneficial coastal legislation and supports the use of best management practices, special area management plans, establishment of marine pump-out facilities, and other environmental protection practices and policies.

Local Citizens
Gaining consensus from local residents will be one of the most important, and perhaps difficult, challenge the city will face in implementing a reclamation plan.
Citizens need to be adequately informed about the problems and solutions , as well as the costs and benefits of implementing a plan to address the current pollution problem in the Bay. Without the support of local citizens , the plan will almost certainly fail. Citizens from Warwick , East Greenwich , and North Kingstown should be included in a remediation plan and their diverse concerns and needs fully considered. Newspaper articles, advertisements, and public information pamphlets distributed by mail are inexpensive ways of educating and informing large numbers of people within a relatively small geographic area such as the Greenwich Bay study area. Table 5 provides a summary of the stakeholder analysis.  (1991,1993), as well as any number of quality State and Federal publications available.

Bay, RIDEM, local citizen's monitoring groups, and neighborhood associations).
This program would educate and raise public awareness to the importance of water quality, and at the same time furnish governmental agencies with valuable information pertaining to the status of local water resources. Individuals and concerned citizens groups could be asked to volunteer in a campaign which would consist of periodic water sampling of coastal water bodies 6 • Save the Bay, RID EM Water Resources, and the NBP could provide technical assistance, and perhaps funding to these programs.

ID. LAND USE MANAGEMENT
A. The City's zoning ordinance and subdivision regulations should be amended to incorporate measures designed to address contemporary environmental concerns (Warwick Planning Department and City Council).
Stricter stormwater management controls (ie., street sweeping use of best management practices) and water quality performance standards as well as further study of stormwater pollutant loading should be incorporated into the revised subdivision regulations. Rezoning of undeveloped coastal areas would be helpful in controlling pollution associated with dense residential development. Apponaug, Nausaukett, Oakland Beach , Old Warwick, western Brush Neck, and parts of Chepiwanoxet consist primarily of residential lots, as small as 7000 square feet. Extra effort should be made to ensure that the remaining subareas are protected from future high density development. The size of buffer strips could be increased to provide maximum environmental protection.

B. Establish a Greenwich Bay Protection District overlay ordinance
Warwick The net result of cluster zoning is to provide benefits for the homeowner, the developer, and the community, alike. One advantage is a general decrease in infrastructure costs because roads, sewers, communal septic systems, stormwater management devices, and water supplies can be "clustered" limiting the expense of extending utilities great distances or to "far removed" places. This technique can facilitate the wastewater and stormwater management in these areas and provides undevelopable buffers and open space in areas of concern. This land use technique is currently used by the City of Warwick and should be more seriously considered as a viable alternative if circumstances warrant its use. East Greenwich and North Kingstown should also consider this technique for preserving special areas of concern.

D. Planned Unit Development
Planned Unit Developments (PUDs) advocate the clustering of buildings, permits a mixture of land uses on a large common parcel rather than on a "lot-by-lot" basis, and

Department, Warwick Water, citizens).
This action would reduce wastewater flows to the municipal sewage treatment plant thereby allowing more service without exceeding current treatment capacity.
Furthermore, water conservation efforts would reduce household loadings to on-site sewage disposal systems, thereby reducing the potential pollutant loadings to underlying groundwater which may ultimately discharge into Greenwich Bay. The City should implement a City-wide water conservation effort modeled after the Kent County Water Authority (KCWA) project which recently realized a 12 percent reduction in water consumption over one year in Kent County , R.I. (Brown 1993).
The KCW A project, conducted an aggressive public education campaign and installed water saving devices for toilets , sinks , and shower heads in 726 homes. This resulted in a reduction of 8,470 gallons of water annually (Brown , 1993). The potential water savings , given an entire service-wide water conservation program , is estimated to be 211 , 750,000 gallons annually with an even larger potential for water-use reduction in Warwick Water's service area (Brown 1993) . A similar demonstration project should be initiated by the Warwick Water Department in critical coastal areas. The subsequent savings in water consumption translated into monetary savings could be used as a tool for promoting voluntary installation of water saving devices. Reductions in water usage will lower black and gray water discharges to both on-site septic systems and publicly owned treatment facilities. Save the Bay (1990) found: Over 95 percent of waste entering a septic system is water , and reducing the flow of water into the septic tank is one of the easiest and least expensive ways to extend the life of a septic system. Excess water flowing into the tank hampers solids and grease from settling out of the wastewater. The bacteria in the septic tank work on a gradual basis, and the longer the wastewater remains in the tank , the better it is cleansed.
Three water conservation tips for homeowners might include: repair leaking faucets and toilets , use water conservatively , and install faucet aerators, toilet flush dams, water-conserving toilets , and low-flow showerheads to reduce the volume of water used.
E. Increase the ratio of sewer tie-ins in Oakland Beach and Apponaug/Cowesett Hills by phasing-in a policy of mandatory hook-ups in sewered areas while providing financial incentives for low-income homeowners (Warwick Sewer Authority, RIDEM/EPA, Warwick Planning Department).
All homes and commercial enterprises located in Critical Areas which are on a sewer line should be required to tie-in to the municipal sewer system. Currently, in Oakland Beach , as many as 42 percent (approximately 375 households) who have access to a sewer line are not connected to the municipal system. A mandatory tie-in program should have an immediate beneficial effect on local water quality and could be attained at relatively low cost.
To help achieve this objective, the Warwick Sewer Authority has agreed to administer a program over a three-year period which will provide grants of up to 75 percent to eligible residents to tie-in to the municipal sewer system. Residents identified by Federal Housing and Urban Development (HUD) standards as having low to moderate income would be eligible for a 75 percent grant and a 25 percent loan. Units which are owner-occupied and fall above the low-to-moderate income level would be eligible for a 50 percent matching grant (Warwick Planning Department 1994). Commercial property, marinas, and rental units would not be eligible for a grant award. However, connection would be required within a reasonable time period (ie., eighteen months).
All units, regardless of land use, which carry a sewer assessment should be required to connect to the municipal sewer system within a three year frame. H. RIDEM should consider conditionally permitting some innovative-designed septic system retrofits in Critical Areas as part of a test project (RIDEM ISDS, University of Rhode Island).
RIDEM ISDS Division could facilitate the testing of innovative septic system designs in this manner, and possibly accelerate the permitting process if such systems prove successful under restrictive conditions. Initial studies have shown that many innovative ISDS designs are effective at reducing levels of biological oxygen demand (BOD), nitrogen, and to a lesser extent, bacteria. Some alternative systems such as the sand filter model have been thoroughly tested and are now officially approved for use in other states. The greater flexibility provided by innovative systems may prove to be an invaluable tool in a Greenwich Bay protection strategy, especially in low and medium density areas with environmental constraints such as shallow depth to bedrock, stoniness, poor drainage, excessively rapid or extremely slow percolating soils, and on severe slopes. In addition, more stringent standards and enforcement pertaining to minimum depth to groundwater, size of absorption field, design, installation, and maintenance of ISDSs would be of critical importance toward ensuring appropriate on-site wastewater treatment. The following is a cursory look at several currently available state-of-the-art innovative ISDS and communal wastewater treatment systems. Alternative septic systems should be used to retrofit existing systems on "grandfathered" land in environmentally sensitive areas, only. Undeveloped, environmentally sensitive land should not be developed and must be avoided to ensure environmental preservation.

Mound System
Soil is excavated and new fill brought to the site. A mound of fill is created above the surface of the ground to provide a sufficient soil media (soil texture, structure, and cross sectional area) in which to treat the sewage discharge. The septic system, installed beneath the original ground level, pumps effluent to a perforated pipe installed within the mound. The effluent is percolates down through the mound which provides sufficient distance between the bottom of the perforated pipe and the groundwater surface (three feet in Rhode Island) to ensure adequate treatment and diffusion of the effluent.
The mound system can be used in areas which have shallow depth to groundwater or bedrock, stony soils, or are poorly drained . Disadvantages of this system include the need for periodic maintenance, increased utility bills due to the operation of a pump, and the cost of purchasing and hauling extra fill to the site. There is also a possibility for lateral seepage to occur with this design.

Alternating System
Alternating systems utilize two absorption fields. When one absorption field becomes saturated, it shuts off to allow the soil within that field to dry. The other field is then employed until its field becomes saturated. This design is useful with systems which have been installed in exceptionally slow percolating or poorly drained soils.
Disadvantages of these systems are the costs incurred from the purchase, installation, and maintenance of the two absorption fields and the need for a large lot to accommodate both absorption fields .
Dosing system A dosing system intermittently discharges small volumes of effluent throughout the day and night rather than discharging large quantities at specific times of high use (after showers, or when having guests). The system , therefore can discharge sewage while a family sleeps rather than at peak daylight times when most black and grey water is generated . A holding tank stores the sewage and discharges small volumes of sewage periodically allowing the absorption field to treat the effluent and dry prior to the next "dose". Disadvantages of this system include periodic maintenance to its pump and an increased utility bill. Like all innovative systems, the cost of this design will be greater than that of a conventional system.

Aeration System
Aeration systems provide treatment primarily for the purpose of denitrification, however, they have had some success for treating bacteria. Aerobic bacteria inhabit the system and digest and treat the sewage. These systems can reduce eutrophication in seaside communities and can protect aquifers from high levels of nitrogen which are known to cause metahemoglobanemia (Blue-baby Syndrome in infants). Aeration systems are more expensive than traditional systems and require more maintenance.

Holding Tank
Holding tanks can be useful where an absorption field is not feasible or for communal systems operating within wastewater management districts. The sewage is held on-site in the holding tank and periodically pumped , collected, and transported to a wastewater treatment facility for treatment. The costs of periodically pumping the tank as well as hauling and treating the sewage can be prohibitive.
Step system This system is used on properties having steep slopes. The septic system chambers are stepped-down along the slope to follow the location's topography , therefore allowing adequate separation distance between the system and the groundwater table surface as well as the distance from the ground surface and the top of the treatment system. The purpose of this design is to provide an adequate cross-sectional area of soil for sewage treatment and to avoid lateral seepage. The sewage is pumped to the first chamber which is highest on the slope and trickles down through three consecutive chambers. The pump required to draw the effluent upslope can contribute to expenses relating to its purchase, maintenance and the electricity to operate it.

Sand Filter System
Garbage Magazine (1993) describes one sand filter design in the following way: With sand filters, the flush flows by gravity to an underground septic tank . A filter pump draws off the clearest effluent from the tank's middle section; solids are stored in the tank's bottom; automatic float switches prevent scum from clogging the filter.
The septic-tank pump doses the sand filter from four to six times daily.
Effluent collects at the bottom of the filter and is pumped through a network of pipes in the raised distribution bed. Each dose is alternately directed to one-half of the distribution bed. While the other half "rests , " its sand dries and microbes digest organic matter. Finally, treated wastewater percolates through the bottom of the bed into native soil.
Garbage Magazine ( 1993) es ti mates the cost of these systems to range between $5 ,000 and $26,000 depending on environmental conditions. The systems, if properly installed and maintained can provide the equivalent of advanced secondary treatment.

More Stringent Standards
The RIDEM Division of ISDS standards should be strictly enforced and periodically revaluated. Requiring larger absorption fields may help sewage treatment in poorly suited soils, environmentally sensitive areas, or in areas of shallow depth to impervious layer, bedrock, and watertable if the lot is of sufficient size. Also, adherence and reevaluation of specifications regarding setbacks from water bodies, and depth to watertable is essential. In conclusion , innovative septic systems are a great wastewater treatment alternative in presently developed areas which have environmental constraints.
However, the best way to ensure protection from bacterial pollution within environmentally sensitive areas is simply to restrict development. These systems must not be used to allow development in areas which are currently undeveloped.
I. An innovative communal system designed for the Sandy Point section of Potowomut should be considered as a demonstration project (RIDEM ISDS, Warwick Sewer Authority).
The cost of sewering this area is not considered an economically feasible option because of the distance to the nearest wastewater treatment facility and the scarcity of development along the way . However, collector lines could be installed, and a communal treatment system installed . The estimated cost of this project is $2 .5 million (Warwick Sewer Authority 1993). Communal treatment systems are also recommended in cluster and planned unit developments . Districts having communal sewage treatment should also be required to participate in a wastewater management program to ensure proper performance and maintenance of the system. J. The City should consider establishing wastewater management districts in areas of concern which cannot feasibly be sewered. Appendix E provides a list of municipal stormwater control tips. Table 6 provides a summary of the preceding recommendations. : ./H. : : : : J~MIF ;:~tmt.9.Ut!JJJt:::::::::::tJJJ}fJC::::;::tt::! :vim J9rmw#:Wtamm~t¢:mmu:m:t:::::::::::::::rtt:::::::::tttJ::t

Alteration
An alteration is any change in size or type of system, or installation of a replacement system.

Failed System
Any sewage disposal system that does not adequately treat and dispose of sewage so as to create a nuisance or threat to public health and/or environmental quality, as evidenced by, but not limited to, the following conditions: a. Failure of a system to accept wastewater discharge or backup of wastewater into the building sewer.

Individual Sewage Disposal System (ISDS)
An individual sewage disposal system shall be a system installed to provide sanitary sewage disposal by means other than discharge into a public sewer system.

Leachfield
A subsurface area from which septic tank effluent or waste containing little or no solids is leached into the soil.

Maintenance
The inspection on a regular basis of the ISDS and as necessary the cleaning out or pumping of accumulated scum and sludge from any septic tank, building sewer, or any other component of an ISDS that can be cleaned or pumped.

Owner
Owner is any person who alone, or jointly, or severally with others (a) has a legal title to any premises, or (b) has control of any premises, such as agreement of purchase, agent, executor, executrix, administrator, administratrix, trustee, lessee or guardian of the estate of a holder of a legal title. Each such person is bound to comply with the provision of this ordinance.

2.7 Person
The term person shall include any individual, group of individuals, firm, corporation, association, partnership or private entity, including a district, city, town or other government unit or agent thereof, and in the case of corporation, any individual having active and general supervision of the properties of such a corporation.

Repair
To mend, remedy, renovate, or restore to a sound state after injury, deterioration, partial destruction or, to replace a septic tank, distribution box, leach fields, or pipes connecting any of these, with no change in type of material, location, or area of an ISDS.

Sanitary Sewage
Any human or animal excremental liquid or substance, any putrescible animal or vegetable matter, garbage and filth, including the discharge of water closets, laundry tubs, washing machines, sinks, dishwashers and the contents of septic tanks, cesspools or privies.

Septage
Septage is the solid or liquid materials which are pumped from an ISDS.

Septic System
For the purpose of this ordinance a septic system is analogous to an individual sewage disposal system. Refer to section 2.3.

Septic Tank
A septic tank is a water tight receptacle which receives the discharge of sanitary sewage and is designed and constructed to permit the deposition of settled solids, the digestion of the matter deposited, and the discharge of the liquid portion into the leaching system.

Wastewater
Wastewater is analogous to sanitary sewage. Refer to section 2.9.

Wastewater Management District
A Wastewater Management District (WWMD) is all or a portion of one or more cities or towns where the proper operation and maintenance of an ISDS will be required in accordance with the provisions of an adopted ordinance, which defines the district.

SECTION 3.0 APPLICABILITY
This ordinance shall be applicable to every owner of the premises that has an Individual Sewage Disposal System located within the designated boundaries of the Wastewater Management District.

SECTION 4.0 WASTEWATER MANAGEMENT DISTRICT BOUNDARIES
The Wastewater Management District will regulate the operation and maintenance of all ISDS within -(specify the entire municipality , portion thereof, or regional district including all or portions of two or more municipalities).

Pumping of Individual Sewage Disposal Systems
The contents of all ISDS within the WWMD shall be inspected and as necessary pumped out (within 2 years of the effective date of these regulations and every three years thereafter or as required). Such pumping shall be performed by municipal employees or private operators duly authorized by the WWMD.
Additional pumpings may be required as deemed necessary by the WWMD for the proper operation of an ISDS.

Garbage Disposals
Garbage disposal discharges to an ISDS shall be discouraged, since they add unnecessary solids to an ISDS.

7 Trees and Shrubs
The owner shall keep trees and shrubs at a minimum of 10 feet from the leaching area to keep roots from clogging or disrupting the ISDS.

Accessibility
The owner shall maintain ISDS so that it is accessible for inspection and maintenance.

SECTION 6.0 ISDS INSPECTIONS
This ordinance authorizes the passage of City , Town, or WWMD officials or their designees and septage haulers onto private property when necessary for the periodic inspection, maintenance and repair of ISDS.

Inspection Frequency
All ISDS shall be subject to an on-site inspection by the WWMD or its designee on an annual basis . More frequent inspections may be conducted if deemed necessary by the WWMD. All ISDS owners shall be sent a written notice of inspection schedules.

Inspection Records
The WWMD shall maintain a record of each ISDS inspected including: Owner's name Street address or utility pole number Telephone number ISDS location (NOTE: A rough sketch map will assist m locating the system in subsequent years) Date(s) of previous maintenance Notes on ISDS condition

Inspection Reports
A written report detailing the results of the inspection shall be kept on the file with the WWMD. If the inspection reveals a malfunctioning ISDS, the owner shall be given a written notice indicating the probable cause and recommended corrective actions.
A copy of said report shall also be sent to the DEM Division of Land Resources. The owner shall be given (30 days) to contact the DEM and apply for a permit to repair or replace the system, if necessary. A time limit to complete any needed repairs shall be established on a case by case basis.
If a system has not failed but requires pumping, the owner shall be required to show proof that the ISDS has been pumped within (30)

SECTION 8.0 EDUCATION
It shall be the responsibility of the WWMD to establish a public education program to make ISDS owners aware of the proper operation and maintenance of these systems.

Fee Structure
The WWMD shall have the authority to raise funds for the administration, operation , contractual obligations and services of the WWMD . (An annual service fee of dollars will be assessed to each owner of an ISDS based on the number of these systems owned in the WWMD).

Grant or Loan Program
The WWMD shall have the authority to issue bonds or notes of the (city or town) and received grants for the purpose of establishing a revolving fund to make low interest loans or grants available to qualified property owners for the improvement, correction, or replacement of failed ISDS. The WWMD shall establish specific criteria that shall be subject to comments from a public hearing prior to implementing a loan or grant program. (NOTE: The criteria for the DEM sewer and water failure fund program could serve as a guide).
SECTION 10.0 ENFORCEMENT

Enforcement Responsibility
The WWMD shall be responsible for enforcing the provisions of this ordinance.

Notice of Violations
Any owner of an ISDS determined to be in violation of these regulations will be issued a written notice explaining the nature of the violation, required actions, a reasonable time frame for compliance, and the possible consequences for noncompliance.

Hearing
Any owner receiving a written notice of violation shall be given an opportunity, within a reasonable time frame, for a hearing before the WWMD to state their case. If the evidence indicates that a violation has not occurred , the WWMD shall revoke the notice of violation.

Penalties
Any person neglecting or refusing to comply with a written notice of violation issued under the provisions of this ordinance shall be fined not more than $500 per violation. Each day of a continuing violation shall constitute a separate and distinct violation.
(NOTE: A WWMD could correct a serious violation of this ordinance and place a lien on the violators property to recover the costs for any necessary pumping , repairs, and/or the replacement of an ISDS determined to be in violation following the procedures of Section 10.2 and 10.3).

SECTION 11.0 SEVERABILITY
If any provision of this ordinance or any rule or determination made hereunder, or application hereof to any person , agency , or circumstances is held invalid by a court of competent jurisdiction , the remainder of this ordinance and its application to any person, agency, or circumstance shall not be affected thereby. The invalidity of any section or sections of this ordinance shall not affect the validity of the remainder of the ordinance.
Source: Department of Administration Division of Planning, 1987.

APPENDIX E Federal Laws Affecting Narragansett (Greenwich) Bay
Congress' passage of the Clean Water Act of 1972 firmly established the federal commitment to controlling pollution in coastal waters, and this legislation has controlled subsequent efforts by federal, state, and local agencies. The CZMA was amended in 1991 to include much broader state responsibility for controlling nonpoint source pollution in the coastal zone.
Other federal laws include: * National Environmental Policy Act of 1965, which requires that any project involving federal legislation, funds, or activities that could significantly alter the quality of the human environment must be the subject of an environmental impact statement.
* Coastal Barrier Resource Act of 1982, which protects barrier beaches, wetlands, and nearshore waters and provides funds for maintenance, research, and public safety. Federal Agencies that influence pollution control and resource management control and resource management issues include not only EPA and NOAA, but also FDA, which sets allowable levels of contaminants in fish and shellfish consumed by humans; U .S. ACE , which regulates dredged material disposal and the wetland permit program; the Coast Gaurd, which is responsible for response to spills; the Navy; and the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (RIDEM Water Resources 1992).

State Laws Affecting Narragansett (Greenwich) Bay
The State of Rhode Island enacted legislation as early as 1920 to "prohibit and regulate the pollution of waters of the state". RID EM , formed in 1977, now has jurisdiction over water quality policy and management. RIDEM has also produced the Other programs administered by the state include the following: * ISDS permit process, which ensures that the siting , design, and operation of septic systems is protective of public health and environmental quality.
* Freshwater wetlands permit process , which protects water quality , groundwater recharge abilities, wildlife habitat, recreational values, and unique wetland characteristics.
* Water quality classification process , which classifies Rhode Island waters and sets forth policies for their use.
* Natural Heritage Program, which identifies habitats for rare or threatened species.
* Endangered Species of Plants and Animals Act, a state law that prohibits the sale of federal endangered or threatened species.
* Erosion and sediment Control Act, which enables communities to reqmre developers to submit erosion and sediment control plans.
* Groundwater protection Act, which establishes state policies for groundwater protection.
* Wellhead Protection Program, which delineates wellhead areas in need of protection, identifies contaminant sources, develops management strategies and ordinances, guides siting of new wells, and provides contingency plans for events of well contamination.
*Underground Storage Tank Regulation, which implements a registration system and establishes design requirements, testing schedules and procedures, and measures for siting underground tanks.
* Hazardous Waste Regulation, which governs the storage, transport, treatment, and disposal of hazardous wastes.
* Hazardous Waste Management Facilities, which establishes a process for siting hazardous waste management facilities.
*Solid Waste Regulation, which authorizes prohibition of disposal of solid waste in groundwater aquifer areas .

145
* Underground Injection Control Program, which is intended to preserve the quality of the groundwaters of the state by assuring the proper location, design, construction, maintenance, and operation of injection wells and other subsurface disposal systems.
* Pesticide Control, which authorizes regulation of registration, sale, storage, transport, use, application, and disposal of pesticides.
* Public Drinking Water Protection Act, which allows public water supply authorities to impose a charge on water use.
One recent Rhode Island law affects land use issues in the watershed and consequently will affect the water quality of the Bay. The Comprehensive Planning and Land Use Regulation Act, passed in 1988, requires all cities and towns to produce a comprehensive plan to guide development. The Zoning Enabling Act, enacted in 1991, expands local authority to enforce the plans developed under the Comprehensive Planning and Land Use Regulation Act.
Because environmental regulation often produces conflicts between public and private rights and expectations, the federal and state courts also play an important role in governance of the Bay. Also, although they have no official regulatory capacity, environmental groups, trade organizations, other special interest groups and the local universities also influence resource management and pollution control policies.
Each of these groups--federal, state, and local governments, environmental groups, marine trade organizations, other special interest groups and the universities--146 have the best intentions for proper management and preservation of the Bay's resources.
However, the number of organizations and laws that affect the Bay is complex. It is difficult to coordinate all interested parties and applicable laws and programs.

Municipal Stormwater Pollution Control Tips
• Prevent the release into the storm sewer of hazardous substances such as used oil or household or yard chemicals .
• Make sure new commercial and residential developments include storm water management controls, such as reducing areas of paved surfaces to allow stormwater to seep into the ground .
• Promote practices such as street sweeping , limiting use of road salt, picking up litter, and disposing of leaves and yard wastes quickly.
• Collect samples of stormwater from industrial sites to see whether pollutants are being released . If so, identify the type and quantity of pollutants being released.
• Design and institute flood control projects in a way that does not impair water quality.
• Prevent runoff of excess pesticides, fertilizers , and herbicides by using them properly and efficiently. (Commercial, institutional, and residential landscapes can be designed to prevent pollution , conserve water, and look beautiful at the same time).
• Make sure that construction sites control the amount of soil that is washed off by rain into waterways .
• Promote citizen participation and public group activities to increase awareness and education at all levels. Encourage local collection pick-up days and recycling of household hazardous waste materials to prevent their disposal into storm drains.
Source: Environmental Protection Agency Office of Water, 1993.

APPENDIX G EDUCATION STRATEGIES
Water quality education has, in general, enjoyed little emphasis. Government agencies have gravitated toward the brochure strategy, which by itself, is no strategy at all. Effective education is a form of marketing audiences, messages, targeting, media, and saturation: these key concepts are integral to designing a program to modify people's behavior. Effective education is also an essential component of maintaining public support for water quality programs.
Education programs can and do miss the mark. The most helpful and accurate brochure will have no effect if the target audience: 1) doesn't get it, 2) doesn't read it, or 3) isn't motivated by it. An in-person training program for technical people in an industry will be a waste of time if: 1) the person presenting the information is not credible to the audience; 2) the information isn't tailored to the specific real world of the particular business; or 3) the purpose of the education is to change the policies of management, rather than to change the behavior of the people in the room. Academic programs can exacerbate fragmentation in solving water quality programs by emphasizing information and omitting learning strategies that might broaden context and assist in integration.
On the other hand, education can be extremely effective. Good information, presented at the right time in the right form, can change behavior, avoid battles, empower people, and prevent pollution. Encouraging peer-to-peer education can overcome the credibility problems invariably encountered when government tries to educate business people. Funding citizen involvement programs such as labeling storm drains can do double duty-addressing a specific water-quality problem while building a more general environmental ethic. Education can also overcome the confines of compartmentalized regulatory programs by integrating environmental responsibility and technical competence in a "real world" context.
A comprehensive water-quality education strategy would include at least the following: Technical assistance and technical training -Working through industry and technical/professional associations is especially effective in conveying technical information to targeted audiences. Regulatory programs have generally not proven to be sufficient conduits of technical training .
Technology transfer -This term refers to methods and approaches as well as to hardware and treatment or manufacturing processes. Most technology transfers occur informally but can be hastened by conferences and well-thought-out dissemination of information.
Targeted audiences -This concept starts by thinking about the audience rather than the government agency and its program. It asks, "If I owned a dry cleaning establishment or if I were a resident in this watershed or if I were a mayor in this region, what would I need to know to protect water quality or the environment more generally?
And how would I learn it? With this perspective, effective and efficient education strategies can be developed, but only if the educator is up to the challenge of cutting across bureaucratic lines.
General audience -Messages to general audiences require effective use of mass communication methods, including sufficient saturation to ensure that the messages have an impact. General awareness information (for example the value of marine ecosystems) and information applicable to virtually everyone (what to do with waste oil or paint thinner) require such methods.
Water quality education in schools -Excellent water quality and other environmental curricula exist for use in schools. They are most effective when adapted to specific local places and issues and teachers are trained in their use. Both of these needs require resources. Basic environmental water quality curricula tend to be good for this goal, given the over-arching nature of the question "what affects water quality and how can we protect the water"?
Technical and scientific training in higher education -Integration rather than compartmentalization of technical/scientific education is crucial for the next generation of environmental professionals. Academia needs to address the companion (yet often competing) objectives of producing both "big thinkers" and competent specialists.
Public involvement linked to education -"Hands-on" projects for volunteers, such as storm drain stenciling projects, beach clean-ups, restoring streams, and replanting anadromous fish, can educate while simultaneously accomplishing a direct environmental purpose. Such projects are very low cost, and will flourish with some governmental or private seed money.