TRANSMITTAL Tighe&Bond

47 West Market Street, Suite 2 • Rhinebeck, NY 12572 • Tel 845.516.5800

Services in New York provided by T&B Engineering and Landscape Architecture, P.C.

www.tighebond.com

Project No.: 20.0094.004A Date: May 14, 2021

Re: City of Kingston Wastewater Treatment Plant Outfall Modifications

To: NYS Department of State Office of Planning and Development Suite 1010 One Commerce Plaza, 99 Washington Ave Albany, NY 12231-0001

Copy:

FOR SIGNATURE FOR FILE AS REQUESTED FOR REVIEW PLEASE REPLY

NO. COPIES DESCRIPTION

Electronic: 1 1 1 1 1 1

Cover Letter NYSDOS Federal Consistency Assessment Form (FCAF) Joint Application Form Site Location Map Site Photos and Photo Location Map Full Size Plan Set New York State Environmental Quality Review Act (SEQRA) Full Form and Supplemental Materials

1 Essential Fish Habitat (EFH) Assessment Worksheet and Report

Please see the provided materials for the modification to the existing City of Kingston Wastewater Treatment Plant Outfall. Thank you.

Very truly yours,

T&B Engineering and Landscape Architecture, P.C.

Arica McCarthy

Planner

47 West Market Street, Suite 2 • Rhinebeck, NY 12572 • Tel 845.516.5800

Services in New York provided by T&B Engineering & Landscape Architecture, P.C.

www.tighebond.com

20.0094.004A May 14, 2021

Victoria A. Lawrence, Environmental Analyst NYS Department of Conservation (DEC) Region 3 Division of Environmental Permits 21 South Putt Corners Road New Paltz, NY 12561 US Army Corps of Engineers (ACOE) New York District Regulatory Branch, Room 1937 26 Federal Plaza New York, New York 10278-0090 NYS Department of State (DOS) Office of Planning and Development Suite 1010 One Commerce Plaza, 99 Washington Ave Albany, NY 12231-0001 NYS Office of General Services (OGS) Bureau of Land Management 39th Floor, Corning Tower Empire State Plaza Albany, NY 12242-0001

Re: City of Kingston Wastewater Treatment Plant Outfall Modifications

Dear NYSDEC, US ACOE, NYSDOS, and NYSOGS:

The City of Kingston received a renewed Individual State Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (SPDES) permit [NY0029351] in October 2016 for their wastewater treatment plant (WWTP), which became effective December 1, 2016. The new SPDES permit limits included an effluent ammonia nitrogen (NH3-N) summer concentration limit of 5.9 mg/l, and a winter concentration limit of 9.0 mg/l, requiring that the City treat wastewater to a much higher level of quality. The SPDES permit also included an interim ammonia (as N) effluent limit of 25 mg/l, which was in effect while the City evaluated and upgraded the treatment system to meet the ammonia limit. The original compliance schedule was June 1, 2018 with final plans and specification due within 12 months of NYSDEC approval of the Engineering Report. The New York State Department of Conservation (NYSDEC) offered an interim extension period to implement the upgrade, and construction is scheduled to be in 2022. The WWTP alternatives were evaluated by Tighe & Bond, whose services in New York are provided by T&B Engineering & Landscape Architecture, PC (Tighe & Bond). The Main-Stream Seasonal Treatment alternative had the best outcome for meeting limit levels and cost. This alternative evaluates seasonal ammonia removal in mainstream flows to meet the revised ammonia limits with a minimum of twenty feet of water above the outfall terminus. The proposed ammonia limits are 18 mg/L from June 1 to October 31, and 29 mg/L from November 1 to May 31. The limits are to be met with a modification to the existing outfall of the plant from a discharge at surface of the Rondout Creek to new outfall located in a minimum twenty foot depth of water, triggering the need for a number of permits. This letter provides the applications and supporting design information to allow permits to be issued for the construction of the modified outfall for the City of Kingston WWTP.

- 2 -

The following permits are required for the project, as referenced on the Joint Application Form (Appendix A): NYSDEC Article 15 and Section 401 Water Quality Certification; US Army Corps of Engineers (ACOE) Nationwide Permit 7 Section 404 Clean Water Act; NYS Office of General Services (OGS) State Owned Lands Under Water; New York State Department of State (DOS) Coastal Consistency Concurrence form. Included as part of this application are the following:

• Joint Application Form (Appendix A) • NYSDOS Federal Consistency Assessment Form (FCAF) (Appendix B) • Site Location Map (Appendix C) • Site Photos and Photo Location Map (Appendix D) • ACOE Site Plans (Appendix E) • NYSDEC Site Plans (Appendix F) • New York State Environmental Quality Review Act (SEQRA) Full Form and

Supplemental Materials (Appendix G) • Essential Fish Habitat (EFH) Assessment Worksheet and Report (Appendix H)

Existing Conditions

The site is located at 124-134 East Strand Street, Kingston, NY 12401. Existing conditions consist of a headwall structure with side-wings and a concrete apron base, rip rap, and square timber piles held in place with rounded timber piles as the bulkhead. The existing outfall system consists of dual 20-inch PVC outfalls installed through a headwall that also includes an 18-inch diameter stormwater outfall; the outfall system consists of “Low” and “High” outfalls based on discharge elevation at the WWTP. The outfall discharges into the Rondout Creek at the mean highwater mark (MHWM). The WWTP is north of the headwall structure and Rondout Creek. The existing conditions are also relayed in Appendix A Question 6 project descriptions. Please refer to Appendix C for a location map of the site and Appendix D for photos of the existing outfall and a photo location map. Appendices E and F provide plan-view drawings of the existing conditions of the site (Appendix E sheet SK-01 and Appendix F sheet C-101).

The headwall has side-wings and a concrete apron base. See the following figures of the headwall structure taken during the installation in 2001: Figure A and Figure B.

Figure A: Outfall structure pre-installation

- 3 -

Figure B: Outfall structure installed

Proposed Work

The proposed work consists of installation of the water-side portion of the outfall extension. Please refer to Appendices E and F for the ACOE and NYSDEC site plans. Per Figure C below, the proposed outfall is divided into two segments. Segment 1 extends from the existing headwall to approximately 19 feet into the Creek to the proposed cofferdam/bulkhead. Segment 2 extends from the Segment 1 proposed cofferdam/bulkhead to the proposed discharge point, which extends 62 feet 3 inches into the Creek. The proposed conditions and installation are also relayed and elaborated on in Appendix A Question 6 project descriptions.

Figure C: Outfall Pipe Segments for Load Application (taken from Appendix E sheet SK-05)

- 4 -

Installation & Construction Sequence

The proposed work will begin with mobilizing to the site and conducting vibration monitoring using geotechnical instrumentation with smart phones. Erosion and sedimentation controls will then be installed, including a weighted chain turbidity curtain in water and perimeter controls on land.

The pipes are proposed to extend 62 feet 3 inches into Rondout Creek from the proposed bulkhead structure and the turbidity curtain will encompass this area. Perimeter controls will be installed at the limits of the work and include construction entrance, silt fence, and hay bales. Other erosion and sediment controls such as wheel wash stations and concrete truck washout stations will be located away from resource areas and will be installed with the perimeter controls. Sediment stockpiles will be contained on site in the upland area, and off-site stockpile areas will be used to store dewatered materials. Appendix F sheet C-501 depicts perimeter details.

An existing car body sits on the streambed at the location of the proposed pipes and marine mattress. This car is proposed to be removed with the use of a crane. In addition, an existing headwall is on-site for the WWTP. The proposed outfall will be built waterward from the existing headwall structure. A barge will be used to bring the sheet pile, HP12 piles, and twin pipes to the project site.

Segment 1

The installation of Segment 1 will consist of a PZ13 Sheet Pile installed just landward of the existing timber bulkhead by vibrating it in with a crane on a floating barge. The sheet pile will serve as a cofferdam during construction. Following the installation of the sheet cofferdam, the area will be dewatered and 108 cubic feet, will be dredged. Material will be side casted within a twelve-foot by nine-foot area at a height of 1 foot maximum. Geotextile and 18-inches of gravel borrow will be placed as subbase for the pipe extension. HP12 piles will be installed on the landward side of the cofferdam followed by the two 28-inch pipes and stormwater pipe installation using a floating barge to assist in installation. The pile connections will then be made for the three pipes using bolted connections on the landside of the sheet cofferdam. Concrete encasement will be poured over the gravel borrow and the two sewer pipes. The concrete encasement will be topped with granular fill with 6-inches of loam on top once the three pipe extensions are retrofitted to the sheet pile. After the steel frame and wood fender system are installed (per Segment 2 installation), the sheet pile cofferdam will be cut at MLW level (-1.50 NAVD88) to serve as a permanent bulkhead structure.

Segment 2

The HP12 piles on the waterside of the sheet cofferdam will be installed at the same time as the landward HP12 piles as mentioned in the Segment 1 installation. Please refer to Appendix F sheet S-102 for the proposed pile and pile cap plan. After the pipes are installed on the landward side of the cofferdam, approximately 72 cubic feet of localized dredging will be completed to accommodate the bend of the sewer pipes. The dredged material will be side casted on the streambed at a height of no more than 1 foot. The area of casting will be nine by eight feet. The two sewer pipes will then be installed on the waterside of the cofferdam and the pipe connection will be completed at the cofferdam using assistance from divers as needed. The stormwater pipe extension terminates at the sheet cofferdam. A protective steel frame and wood fender system will be installed. The protective steel frame and wooden fender system will have portions prefabricated/welded to the pile caps. The rest of the frame

- 5 -

will be installed over the water. Approximately 22 feet of marine mattress will be laid over the two sewer pipes by crane from the discharge point landward.

For Segment 1 and Segment 2, there will be a total of 692.45 SF of permanent disturbance proposed to the current regulated area. Please refer to Appendix E, sheets SK-04 and SK-05, and Appendix F, sheets C-105 and S-101.

After the outfall is installed and the disturbed streambed material has settled, the turbidity curtain will be removed, and the site’s upland surface restored to pre-construction condition. Dewatering water will be disposed of in accordance with local, state and federal regulations. The contractor will demobilize from the site. The duration of the construction work is expected to be eight weeks.

Proposed Impacts

The water-side portion of the outfall extension will be installed at a location to allow discharge of the WWTP effluent into the Rondout Creek in an area with a minimum twenty feet of water above it. The Nationwide Rivers Inventory (NRI) identifies the Rondout Creek as a listed NRI segment. The proposed action was triggered to improve the water quality of the segment because the existing outfall effluent ammonia limits exceed the new SPDES permit allowances. The outfall has been designed to create the least amount of streambed and streambank impacts as feasible. Please refer to the Joint Application (Appendix A; Question 6, items c-e) for a more detailed project description.

As indicated in Table 1 below, approximately 1.45 square feet (SF) of permanent streambank impacts are required for the placement of 51 linear feet of new bulkhead using a PZ13 sheet pile. Installation of sheet pile will allow the area to be isolated during construction. The sheet pile will also remain in place post-construction to serve as a bulkhead and provide stabilization. As indicated in Table 2 below, approximately 725 SF of permanent streambed impacts are associated with the installation of two parallel 28-inch diameter steel pipes and twenty-four HP12 piles, a stormwater pipe, marine mattresses and associated dredging. The dredging will involve 108 cubic feet of streambed disturbance on the landward side of the PZ13 cofferdam and 72 cubic feet of streambed disturbance on the waterward side of the PZ13 cofferdam. In addition, approximately 34 SF of impacts are associated with removal of an existing car body, which sits where the pipes are proposed to be located. As a result of the car body removal, the total permanent streambed disturbance decreases from 725 SF to 691 SF. The outfall of the two pipes is 23 feet 6 inches below the MHWM.

The pipes were determined to have a diameter of 28-inches to provide a capacity of 12 million gallons per day (MGD) during a 100-year flood event with Rondout Creek at elevation 8.2. The existing timber pile bulkhead will remain in place. Installation of a sheet pile for a new bulkhead would be accommodated by using flanged piping that could be disassembled and removed in the area of sheeting installation. Land based piles and earth fill for uplift restraint will also be installed. The granular fill material proposed on the landward side of the PZ13 cofferdam is proposed to be 1,296 cubic feet (48 cubic yards).

Table 1 Streambank Disturbance

Permanent Impacts Area of Impacts

PZ13 Sheet Pile Cofferdam 1.45 SF (51 LF)

TOTAL 1.45 SF (0.00003-acres)

- 6 -

Table 2

Streambed Disturbance

Permanent Impacts Area of Impact

(2) 28” Sewer Pipes, (1) Stormwater Pipe, Dredging, (24) HP12 Piles, and Marine Mattress

725 SF (180 CF of Dredging)

Car Removal -34 SF

TOTAL 691 SF (0.015-acres)

Environmental Impacts: Natural and Cultural Resources

The proposed outfall construction minimizes impacts to natural and cultural resources to the extent practicable; however, the construction of the outfall must, by its nature, occur in water. In addition to the Joint Application for Permit and NYSDOS Federal Consistency Assessment Form (FCAF), a SEQR full environmental assessment form and supplemental materials (maps, reports and letters) are provided in Appendix G.

The City of Kingston Local Waterfront Revitalization Program (LWRP) has prepared a comprehensive land and water use plan for the City’s natural, public, and developed waterfront resources along the Hudson River and Rondout Creek. The proposed work is in Rondout Creek, a tributary to the Hudson River, and is considered a scenic and/or aesthetic resource. Please note that the outfall will primarily be installed underwater and will not alter the general aesthetics of the Creek and River post-construction.

Work will occur near NYS Freshwater Tidal Wetland KE-11, which is 61.8-acres; however, the proposed work does not encroach into the wetland or regulated adjacent area. The Federal Consistency Assessment Form (Appendix B) identifies the impacts the proposed action will have on the policies called out in the Coastal Management Plan (CMP). Section D of Appendix B outlines which policies of the CMP are affected by the proposed activity and assesses each.

Based on a review of the New York State Environmental Resource Mapper, potential habitats of five endangered or threatened species are within the area of the proposed work. The listed species involve both terrestrial and aquatic species. There is no tree clearing proposed as the work is within the Creek. Therefore, the Indiana Bat and Northern Long-eared Bat will not be affected by the work. The U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service Information for Planning and Consultation (IPaC) Review also identified the two bats; again, the species are not expected to be impacted. No submerged aquatic vegetation is located near the work area; therefore, the Least Bittern is not expected to be affected by the work. While the project will require in-water work, the Essential Fish Habitat (EFH) report further described below and in Appendix H concludes that the project site does not represent preferred habitat for marine EFH-designated species, and project-related impacts upon these life stages are considered unlikely. No NYS rare or special concern species are within the project area. Remediation sites have been identified either on or adjacent to the site as well as the Rondout Brownfield Opportunity Area (BOA). Spills were identified with the NYSDEC Environmental Site Remediation database. Although BOA and spill sites have been identified in the project area, the proposed work includes placement of fill, removal of sediment, and installation of outlet pipes on the streambed of the Rondout Creek and will not impact any remedial sites.

The site was deemed as either containing or substantially contiguous to a historic building or district as well as being on or adjacent to a sensitive NY State Historic Preservation Office (SHPO) archaeological site. The properties included: Cornell Shops Building, Cornell

- 7 -

Steamboat Co Boiler Shop, Catawissa (Coastal Tugboat), Cornell Company Machine Shop Building, and Brooklyn & Queens Transit Trolley No. 1000. The Office of Parks, Recreation, and Historic Preservation (OPRHP) provided a letter on October 9, 2020 stating that no properties, including archaeological and/or historic resources, listed in or eligible for the New York State and National Registers of Historic Places will be impacted by the proposed work. The proposed project area is adjacent to a potential Environmental Justice Area as identified through the NYSDEC Stormwater Interactive Map.

A principal aquifer was identified to overlap with the project site, as auto-populated on the SEQR form. Using the Upstate New York Aquifer Viewer, a stratified-drift aquifer is identified. A FEMA map is also included as the site is identified in a jurisdictional floodway and the SEQR form identifies the site to be within the 100-year floodplain.

It is expected that there will be an increase in ambient noise levels during the construction period from general weekday construction noise. The outfall will not create noise in excess of the existing outfall structure along the Creek shoreline during its operation.

Essential Fish Habitat Study

The Nationwide Permit (NWP) 7 has general and special requirements for “Outfall Structures and Associated Intake Structures” that will apply to the proposed work. A review of the proposed site utilizing the DEC Environmental Resource Mapper identified certain rare plant and animal species categorized by the federal government or New York State as endangered or threatened, including the Atlantic and Shortnose Sturgeon, Spongy Arrowhead, Frank’s Sedge, and Least Bittern that may be impacted by the proposed work. Additionally, the Indiana and Northern Long-eared Bats were also identified, but due to the nature of the work will not be impacted. Due to these species’ presence, as specified under the general and special NWP 7 requirements, an EFH inquiry was conducted by ASA Analysis & Communication, Inc. (Appendix H).

The EFH study determined that although the EFH-designated fish species can be found in waters with a range of salinities, all are considered marine fish, typically found in higher salinities. Salinity at the project site is seldom if ever greater than the oligohaline (5 - 0.5 ppt) boundary. Salinity data from the HRBMP water quality study demonstrate that the mesohaline-oligohaline boundary was typically well downstream of the project site. Combined with the biological sampling data of the HRBMP, which demonstrates only rare occurrences of EFH species in the vicinity, the project site does not represent preferred habitat for these marine EFH-designated species, and project-related impacts upon these life stages are considered unlikely.

Diadromous fishes included alewife (Alosa pseudoharengus), blueback herring (Alosa

aestivalis), and American eel (Anguilla rostrata) which have been found to utilize habitat in and near the lower sections of the Rondout Creek (NEFMC 1998), but presumably not in the project area. Diadromous fishes would migrate upstream and downstream past the project area and the small footprint of the project area would not impact fish passage.

- 8 -

We look forward to discussing the proposed improvements. If there are any questions or if you would prefer that a conference call be set up to further discuss the letter and enclosures, please contact me at BNelson@tighebond.com or (518) 965-5786. Thank you.

Very truly yours,

T&B Engineering & Landscape Architecture, P.C.

Brandee Nelson, PE, LEED AP

Vice President

Enclosures Appendix A: Joint Application Form Appendix B: NYSDOS Federal Consistency Assessment Form (FCAF) Appendix C: Site Location Map Appendix D: Site Photos and Photo Location Map Appendix E: ACOE Site Plans Appendix F: NYSDEC Site Plans Appendix G: New York State Environmental Quality Review Act (SEQRA) Full Form and Supplemental Materials Appendix H: Essential Fish Habitat (EFH) Assessment Worksheet and Report Copy: John Schultheis, City of Kingston Engineer J:\K\K0094 Kingston, NY\04 - WWTP Upgrades\Task 4 - Permit Compliance Pre Model\Permitting\Joint Application\Final Applications\Kingston Outfall Permitting Letter.docx

APPENDIX A

flEw IYONK I{ . STATE I\l-

I

DepartmentofEnvlronmental€sns€rvetlon

Offlce offreneral Servlces

Oeoartmentof State EI

USAmyGorprol Englrtmr

Jornr ApplrclrroN FoRMFor Permits for activities activities affecting streams, waterways, waterbodies, wetlands, coastal areas, sources of water,and endangered and threatened species.

You must separately apply for and obtain Permits from each involved agency before starting work. Please readall instructions.

1. Applications To:>NYS Department of Environmental Conservation Check here to confirm you sent this form to NYSDEC.

I rioatwettands

Wild, Scenic andRecreational Rivers

lncidentalTake ofEndangered /Threatened Species

Check all permits that apply:

f-l Stream Disturbance

Excavation and Fill inNavigable Waters

Docks, Moorings orPlatforms

Dams and lmpound-ment Structures

401 Water QualityCertification

f l Freshwater Wetlands

WaterWithdrawal

Long lsland Well{

Coastal ErosionManagement

{

{

>US Army Corps of Engineers

Check all permits that apply:

ls the project Federally funded? f-l Yes F ruo

lf yes, name of Federal Agency

General Permit Type(s), if known:

Preconstruction Notification: F Yes I tto

Check here to confirm you sent this form to USACE.

Section 404 Clean Water Act fl Section 10 Rivers and Harbors Act

{{

Nationwide Permit 7

>NYS Office of General Seruices

Check all permits that apply:

Check here to confirm you sent this form to NYSOGS.

Y] State Owned Lands Under Water

E Utitity Easement (pipelines, conduits, cables, etc.) fl oocfs, Moorings or Platforms

>NYS Department of State Check here to confirm you sent this form to NYSDOS.

Check if this applies: Y Coastal Consistency Concurrence

{

Steve Noble, Mayor for the of Ki2. Name of licant T ID is NOT an indivi

Maili Address Post Office / C State Zi

NY

Telephone 845-334-3967 Email

Applicant Must be (check all that apply): M O*n"t f 'l

Operator E Lessee

Kingston 12401

ki

3. Name of Owner if different than

Mai Address State Zi

Telephone Email

Post Office / C

JorrrAppr-rcATroN FoRM 08/16 Page I of4

Agency Application Number:For Aqencv Use Onlv

Jorm Appr-rcAnoN FoRM - Continued. Submit this completed page as part of your Application

Brandee Nelson, PE, LEED AP4. Name of Gontact / t

Maili Address Post Office / C State

NY

Telephone 845-51 6-5803 Email bnelso hebond.com

47 West Market Street, Suite 2Rhinebeck 12572

Wastewater Treatment Plant OutfallKi5.P I Fac Name Tax Ma Section / Block / Lot Number:

Street Add ifa icable Post Office / State Zi

NY

Provide directions and distances to roads bri es and bodies of water

l*l Town I- vi V'c Name

Project Location Coordinates: Enter Latitude and de in degrees minutes seconds:

Latitude 41 o 55 Longitude: 73 o 58 41

56.43-6-6

124-134 East Strand StreetKingston 12401

Existing headwall is along the Rondout Creek. The headwall is about 90 feet southeast from East Strand Street.

Ulster Rondout Creek

6. Project Description: Provide the following information about your project. Continue each response and provide

any additional information on other pages. Attach plans on separate paqes.

a.P of the ect:

b. on of current site conditions:

c. site

d. Type of structures and fill materials to be installed, and quantity of materials to be used (e.9., square feet ofcubic of fill material structures below ordin ean hi water etc.

e. Area of excavation or d volume of material to be removed location of material

f. ls tree cutting or clearing proposed? [-l Y"r tf Yes betow. 17 ruo

Timing of the proposed cutting or clearing (month/year)

Number of trees to be cut:

see attached pages for responses to question 6, ns a-e

Acreage of trees to be cleared

Jorr.rtApplrcmon Fonm 08/16 Page2 of 4

Jorrr Appr-rcAToN FoRM - Continued. Submit this completed page as part of your Application

Work methods and of to be used

h. Describe the ence of activities

i. Pollution control methods and other actions to environmental

Erosion and silt control methods that will be used to water tm

k. Alternatives considered to avoid regulated areas. lf no feasible alternatives exist, explain how the project willmtntmtze tm

l. Proposed use: f l Private Public f lCommercial

m. Proposed Start Date August 2022 Estimated Completion Date October 2022

n. Has work non l*l y"r tf in below. |7 ruo

o. Will Federal State or Mu I Land? IZ Y", tf Yes betow. [-: ruo

List U OGS or DOS Permit / n numbers for activities at this location:

q. Will this project require additional Federal, State, or Local authorizations, including zoning changes?

l*l Y"" tf list below

Lands Under Water - New York State owned land

lndividual SPDES permit - NY0029351

17ruo

JoINTAPPLIGATIoN FoRM O8/16 Page 3 of4

Jorrr ApplrcAloN FoRM - Continued. Submit this completed page as part of your Application.

7. Signatures.Applicant and Owner (lf different) must sign the application.Append additional pages of this Signature section if there are multiple Applicants, Owners or ContacUAgents.

I hereby affirm that information provided on this form and all attachments submitted herewith is true to the best ofmy knowledge and belief.

Permission to lnspect - I hereby consent to Agency inspection of the project site and adjacent property areas.Agency staff may enter the property without notice between 7:00 am and 7:00 pm, Monday - Friday. lnspectionmay occur without the owner, applicant or agent present. lf the property is posted with "keep out" signs or fencedwith an unlocked gate, Agency staff may still enter the property. Agency staff may take measurements, analyzesite physical characteristics, take soil and vegetation samples, sketch and photograph the site. I understand thatfailure to give this consent may result in denial of the permit(s) sought by this application.

False statements made herein are punishable as a Class A misdemeanor pursuant to Section 210.45 of the NYSPenal Law. Further, the applicant accepts full responsibility for all damage, direct or indirect, of whatever nature,and by whomever suffered, arising out of the project described herein and agrees to indemnify and save harmlessthe State from suits, actions, damages and costs of every name and description resulting from said project. lnaddition, Federal Law, 18 U.S.C., Section 1001 provides for a fine of not more than $10,000 or imprisonment fornot more than 5 years, or both where an applicant knowingly and willingly falsifies, conceals, or covers up amaterial fact; or knowingly makes or uses a false, fictitious or fraudulent statement.

si nature of licant Date

3 /)6/a.,1Applicant Must be (check allthat apply):

Printed Name

Owner operator f lLessee

Title

Steve Noble City of Kingston Mayor

re of Owner different than Date

Printed Name Title

s nature of Contact / Date

Printed Name Title

Brande Nelson, PE, LEED AP Vice President

For Aqencv Use Onlv DETERMINATION OF NO PERMIT REQUIRED

Agency Application Number(Agency Name) has determined that No Permit is

required from this Agency for the project described in this application

AgencyPrintedName

Signature

Title

Date

JorrrAppr-rcAToN FoRM 08/16 Page 4 of 4

Responses to Question 6 Project Descriptions, questions a-e and g-k

a. Purpose of the proposed project: The existing wastewater treatment plant outfall will be modified to meet new permitting requirements for discharge limits from the wastewater plant. The City of Kingston plans to upgrade their existing Wastewater Treatment Plant (WWTP), with modifications to their outfall structure. The City received a renewed Individual SPDES permit [NY0029351] in October 2016, which became effective December 1, 2016. The new SPDES permit limits included an effluent ammonia nitrogen (NH3-N) summer concentration limit of 5.9 mg/l, and a winter concentration limit of 9.0 mg/l, requiring that the City treat wastewater to a much higher level of quality. The SPDES permit also included an interim ammonia (as N) effluent limit of 25 mg/l, which was in effect while the City evaluated and upgraded the treatment system to meet the ammonia limit. The original compliance schedule for the evaluation in the form of an Engineering Report was June 1, 2018 with final plans and specification due within 12 months of NYSDEC approval of the Engineering Report. The NYSDEC offered an interim extension period to implement the upgrade, and construction is scheduled to be in 2022. The NYSDEC limits the outfall discharge into the Rondout Creek to an area with a minimum of twenty feet of water above the outfall terminus. WWTP alternatives were evaluated and the Main-Stream Seasonal Treatment alternative had the best outcome for the City meeting limit levels and cost. This alternative evaluates seasonal ammonia removal in mainstream flows to meet the revised ammonia limits with a 20-foot outfall depth below the mean low water (MLW) mark. The proposed ammonia limits are 18 mg/L from June 1 to October 31, and 29 mg/L from November 1 to May 31.

b. Description of current site conditions: The existing outfall site has a headwall structure with side-wings and a concrete apron base, rip rap, and square timber piles held in place with rounded timber piles as the bulkhead. The outfall discharges into Rondout Creek at the mean highwater mark (MHW). The WWTP is across the street (north) from the headwall structure and Rondout Creek. The existing outfall system consists of dual 20-inch PVC outfalls installed through a headwall which also includes an 18-inch diameter stormwater outfall situated above the dual outfalls; the outfall system consists of “Low” and “High” outfalls based on discharge elevation at the WWTP. The outfalls were installed approximately 20 years ago.

c. Proposed site changes: The project will install the water-side portion of the outfall extension at a location to allow discharge of the WWTP effluent into Rondout Creek in an area with a minimum of twenty feet of water above it. To accommodate this, the outfall will be reconfigured from the existing outfall and discharge piping, with restraint and protective structural systems, will be installed. The permanent streambank impacts include the placement of 51 linear feet of new bulkhead using a PZ13 sheet pile at a disturbance of 1.45 square feet (SF). The sheet pile will be installed to allow for the construction area to be isolated and will remain in place post-construction to serve as a bulkhead and provide stabilization. Permanent streambed impacts include two 28-inch diameter steel pipes installed

parallel to each other, twenty-four HP12 piles, dredging, a stormwater pipe, and marine mattresses for a total impact of 725 SF. In addition, the removal of an existing car body on the streambed is also proposed, as the car currently sits where the pipes are proposed to be located. The car is a disturbance removal of 34 SF. As a result of the removal, the permanent streambed disturbance total decreases from 725 SF to 691 SF.

STREAMBANK IMPACT AREAS PERMANENT PZ13 SHEET PILE COFFERDAM

1.45 SF (51 LF)

TOTAL 1.45 SF (0.00003 acres)

STREAMBED IMPACT AREAS PERMANENT (2) 28” SEWER PIPES, (1) STORMWATER PIPE, (24) HP12 PILES, DREDGING, MARINE MATTRESS

725 SF (180 CF of dredging)

CAR REMOVAL -34 SF

TOTAL 691 SF (0.015 acres)

The outfall of the two pipes sit at an elevation of 23 feet 6 inches below the mean highwater mark and extends 62 feet (FT) and 3 inches from the existing bulkhead. The outfall structure is not located within the navigable channel. The pipes will have a diameter of 28-inches to provide a capacity of 12 million gallons per day (MGD), the peak design discharge. The existing timber pile bulkhead will remain in place.

d. Type of structures and fill materials to be installed, and quantity of

materials to be used (e.g., square feet of coverage, cubic yards of fill

material, structures below ordinary/mean high water, etc.): Please refer to question 6.C. for more information on the types of structures, quantity of disturbance for each structure and proposed materials. The project proposes 1296 cubic feet (48 cubic yards) granular fill material on the landward side of the PZ13 sheet cofferdam to grade over the proposed concrete encasement. The two outfall pipes are proposed to be inserted into the existing headwall structure that will extend 62 feet 3 inches into Rondout Creek from the headwall openings to the discharge points. The outfall pipes will be supported by the piles just above the streambed and will be covered by a marine mattress starting at about 22 FT out in-water from the cofferdam to the outfall discharge point, which sits at an elevation of 23 feet 6 inches below the MHW mark. The marine mattress will bear mainly on the pipes with only the two ends bearing on the streambed. The deflection on each pipe, when assuming the pipe is empty with a pipe wall thickness of 0.5-inches, is very negligible at 0.003-inches. It is expected there will be a long-term settlement of one- to two-inches of the mattress ends on the streambed. With the deflection added of the two pipes to the settlement of the mattress, less than 0.006-inches is expected to additionally occur to the one- to two-inches of settlement.

Total permanent streambed disturbance is 691 SF, including the removal of disturbance from the 34 SF car. Total permanent disturbance to the streambank is 51 LF for the PZ13 sheet pile installation. No temporary streambank or streambed impacts are proposed.

e. Area of excavation or dredging, volume of material to be removed, location

of dredged material placement: The dredging will involve 108 cubic feet of streambed disturbance on the landward side of the PZ13 cofferdam and 72 cubic feet of streambed disturbance on the waterward side of the PZ13 cofferdam. The material will be side casted at a height of no more than 1 foot. For the 108 cubic feet of dredging, material will be side casted within a twelve-foot by nine-foot area. For the 72 cubic feet of dredging, material will be side casted within an eight-foot by nine-foot area.

f. --

g. Work methods and type of equipment to be used:

WORK METHODS ELEMENTS EQUIPMENT Vibration Monitoring To use geotechnical instrumentation

with phones Turbidity Curtain Install weighted chain turbidity curtain

in the Rondout Creek around the project area

Remove Car Body Use a crane to remove the existing car body from the streambed

PZ13 Sheet Pile Cofferdam Install as temporary cofferdam and then as permanent bulkhead; to be vibrated in by crane on a floating barge

Dredging for 18-inches of Gravel Borrow and Geotextile

Conduct for 18-inches of gravel borrow under the concrete encased pipe; Dewater the landside of cofferdam and remove approximately 108 cubic feet (4 cubic yards) of streambed material with a watertight clamshell bucket using cranes and side cast the material

(24) HP12 Piles Install on landside and waterside of PZ13 cofferdam; to be driven by a crane on a floating barge with hammer attachment to refusal (a depth between 50 to 75 FT). Piles will be attached to plate in dry cofferdam area

Localized Dredging Conduct for localized dredging for last bend of the sewer pipes on waterside of PZ13 cofferdam; remove approximately 72 cubic feet (2.7 cubic yards) of streambed material with a watertight clamshell bucket using cranes on a floating barge and side cast

(2) 28” Sewer Pipes Install landside of cofferdam with crane and perform connection to existing headwall structure; Install pipe support and pipe on waterside of cofferdam; Perform pipe connection with assistance from divers as necessary

(1) Stormwater Pipe Install landside of cofferdam after the steel pipes’ installation with crane and perform connection to existing headwall structure; Extend stormwater pipe and perform pipe connection with assistance from divers as necessary

Concrete Encasement Form sewer pipe concrete encasement; Pour and cure concrete on landward side of the PZ13 sheet pile

Granular Fill Fill landward side of sheet cofferdam with earth fill to existing grade

Protective Steel frame and Wood Fender System

Prefabricate/weld portions of the frame to pile caps; install rest of frame over the water once piping is set in place; Cut cofferdam sheet pile to grade

Marine Mattress Mattress is to come in 3 sections; to be lowered by crane on a floating barge onto twin pipes along streambed

Surface Restoration/Cleanup and Demobilization

Remove turbidity curtain; restore disturbed surface; dispose of excess dewatering water in accordance with local, state and federal regulations; demobilize

h. Describe the planned sequence of activities: Currently no phasing is recommended for this project. The sequence of activities is as follows:

• Mobilize to the site • Install perimeter controls • Install turbidity curtain • Remove car body • Perform headwall By-Pass • Install sheet pile to create cofferdam • Dewater Work Area • Perform dredging as necessary (approximately 108 cubic feet) on landward

side of cofferdam to install the 18-inches of gravel borrow and geotextile • Install piles on landside and waterside of cofferdam • Grade and prepare subgrade in front of existing headwall concrete structure • Install outfall sewer pipes then stormwater pipe on landside of cofferdam and

perform connection to existing headwall structure • Perform localized dredging as necessary (approximately 72 cubic feet) on

waterside of cofferdam to install last bend of the twin pipes • Install sewer pipes’ support and sewer pipes on the waterside of cofferdam

(exclude stormwater pipe, only to be extended on landside of cofferdam)

• Perform pipe connection (for sewer and stormwater pipes) o Install sewer pipe supports and sewer pipes using assistance from

divers as necessary • Form pipe concrete encasement over sewer pipes on landward side of

cofferdam • Granular fill area over the concrete encasement on landward side of

cofferdam to grade • Install protective steel frame and wood fender system. Cut sheet pile to grade

as necessary • Install marine mattress • Remove turbidity curtain • Surface restoration and cleanup • Dispose of excess dewatering water in accordance with local, state and

federal regulations • Demobilize

i. Pollution control methods and other actions proposed to mitigate

environmental impacts: Best Management Practices for marine construction will be utilized to minimize the potential for adverse impacts, including the use of a turbidity curtain which will be placed around the project area to reduce impacts caused by construction activity. It is anticipated that the regulatory permit conditions may include time of year restrictions and/or underwater pile driving noise monitoring.

j. Erosion and silt control methods that will be used to prevent water quality

impacts: Best Management Practices for marine construction will be utilized to minimize the potential for adverse impacts, including the use of a turbidity curtain from the portion of the bulkhead below the MHW to the upland area of the project, which will be placed around the project area to reduce impacts to water quality. The driving of piles and placing of the pipes may create some temporary turbidity due to the depth of waters. The turbid waters will be contained within a turbidity curtain and allowed to settle. Third party construction observation will be provided to address any contractor operations that cause turbidity. The site will also include a construction entrance, silt fence, and hay bales adjacent to work areas for perimeter protection. Wheel wash stations and concrete truck washout stations will be located away from resource areas and will be constructed with perimeter controls. Sediment stockpiles will be contained on-site, and off-site stockpile areas will be used after materials are dewatered.

k. Alternatives considered to avoid regulated areas. If no feasible alternatives

exist, explain how the project will minimize impacts: The proposed work is driven by a need to meet new permit limits set by the 2016 SPDES update for ammonia limits. One alternative is to do nothing; however, this is not an option as the City’s treatment plant would be out of compliance. Aside from the proposed outfall modification, the only other feasible alternative would be to install a new treatment process for the City’s WWTP, which is economically prohibitive. If the agencies determine that the treatment process alternatives would better help inform them, we can provide this information.

APPENDIX B

NEW YORK STATE DEPARTMENT OF STATECOASTAL MANAGEMENT PROGRAM

Federal Consistency Assessment Form

An applicant, seeking a permit, license, waiver, certification or similar type of approval from a federal agency which

is subject to the New York State Coastal Management Program (CMP), shall complete this assessment form for any

proposed activity that will occur within and/or directly affect the State's Coastal Area. This form is intended to

assist an applicant in certiffing that the proposed activity is consistent with New York State's CMP as required by

U.S. Department of Commerce regulations (15 CFR 930.57). It should be completed at the time when the federal

application is prepared. The Department of State will use the completed form and accompanying information in itsreview of the applicant's certifi cation of consistency.

A. APPLICANT (please print)

1. Name: of Kin n

2. Address:

3. Telephone: AreaCode( )

B. PROPOSED ACTIVITY:

1. Brief description of activity:

Upgrades to existing headwall for the City of Kingston WWTP outfall, includinginstallation of cofferdam using a PZ13 sheet pile, marlne mattress, two zE-lnchDIA pipes, and 24 HP12 plle Installatlon

2. Purpose of activity:

NYSDEC is requiring the City upgrade their WWTP per the 2016 SPDES permit

3. Location of activity:

Ulster Kingston East Strand Street

845

County City, Town, or Village Street or Site Description

4. Type of federal permit/license required Section 404 Clean Water Act

5. Federal application number, if known

6. Ifa state permit/license was issued or is required for the proposed activity, identify the state agency and

provide the application or permit number, if known:

DEC 401 Water Quality Certification; Article 15 DEC Excavation and Fill;

OGS State Owned Lands Under Water

C. COASTAL ASSESSMENT Check either "YES" or "NO" for each of these questions. The numbers following

each question refer to the policies described in the CMP document (see footnote on page 2) which may be affected

by the proposed activity.

l. Will the proposed activity result in any of the following: YES/I.{O

a. Large physical change to a site within the coastal area which will require the preparation of an

environmental impact statement? (1 l, 22, 25, 32, 37, 38, 41, 43)

b. Physical alteration of more than two acres of land along the shoreline, land under water or

coastal waters? (2, 17, 12, 20, 28, 35, 44)

c. Revitalization/redevelopment of a deteriorated or underutilized waterfront site? (1)

d. Reductionofexistingorpotentialpublicaccesstooralongcoastalwaters? ('19,20)

e. Adverse effect upon the commercial or recreational use ofcoastal fish resources? (9,10)

f. Siting ofa facility essential to the exploration, development and production ofenergy

resources in coastal waters or on the Outer Continental Shelfl (29)

C. Siting ofa facility essential to the generation or transmission ofenergy? (27)

h. Mining, excavation, or dredging activities, or the placement of dredged or fill material in

coastal waters? (15, 35)

i. Discharge oftoxics, hazardous substances or other pollutants into coastal waters? (8, 15, 35)

j. Draining of stormwater runoff or sewer overflows into coastal waters? (33)

k. Transport, storage, treatment, or disposal of solid wastes or hazardous materials? (36, 39)

l. Adverse effect upon land or water uses within the State's small harbors? (4)

2. Will the proposed activity affect or be located ino on, or adjacent to any of the following:

a. State designated freshwater or tidal wetland? (44)

b. Federally designated flood and/or state designated erosion hazardarea? (11,12,17)

c. State designated significant fish and/or wildlife habitat? (7)

d. State designated significant scenic resource or area? (24)

e. State designated important agricultural lands? (26)

f. Beach, dune or Barrier Island? (12)

g. Major ports of Albany, Buffalo, Ogdensburg, Oswego or New York? (3)

h. State, county, or local park? (19,20)i. Historic resource listed on the National or State Register of Historic Places? (23)

3. Will the proposed activity require any of the following:

a. Waterfront site? (2,21,22)b. Provision ofnew public services or infrastructure in undeveloped or sparsely populated

sections ofthe coastal area? (5)

c. Construction or reconstruction ofa flood or erosion control structure? (13,14, 16)

d. State water quality permit or certification? (30, 38, 40)

e. State air quality permit or certification? (41, 43)

4. Will the proposed activity occur within and/or affect an area covered by a State-approved local

waterfront revitalization program, or State-approved regional coastal management program?

(see policies in program document*)

EE-EE

NE-nE

_EE

YESAIO

EE

YESA{O

EE

D. ADDITIONAL STEPS

1. If all of the questions in Section C are answered "NO", then the applicant or agency shall complete Section E and

submit the documentation required by Section F.

2. lf any of the questions in Section C are answered "YES", then the applicant or agent is advised to consult the

CMP, or where appropriate, the local waterfront revitalization program document*. The proposed activity must be

analyzed in more detail with respect to the applicable state or local coastal policies, On a separate page(s), the

applicant or agent shall: (a) identify, by their policy numbers, which coastal policies are affected by the activity, (b)

briefly assess the effects ofthe activity upon the policy; and, (c) state how the activity is consistent with each policy.

Following the completion of this written assessment, the applicant or agency shall complete Section E and submit

the documentation required by Section F.

E. CERTIFICATION

The applicant or agent must certifu that the proposed activity is consistent with the State's CMP or the approved

local waterfront revitalization program, as appropriate. If this certification cannot be made, the proposed activify

shall not be undertaken. If this certification can be made, complete this Section.

"The proposed activity complies with New York State's approved Coastal Management Program, or with the

applicable approved local waterfront revitalization program, and will be conducted in a manner consistent with such

program."

Applicant/Agent's Name:Steve Noble, City Mayor

Address: 420 Broadway, Kingston, NY 12401

845-334-3967Telephone: Area Code ( )

Applicant/Agent's Signature: Date:

F. SUBMISSION REOUIREMENTS

1. The applicant or agent shall submit the following documents to the New York State Department of State,

Office of Planning and Development, Attn: Consistency Review Unito One Commerce Plaza-Suite 10100

99 Washington Avenue, Albany' New York 12231.

a. Copy of original signed form.

b. Copy ofthe completed federal agency application.

c. Other available information which would support the certification of consistency

2. The applicant or agent shall also submit a copy of this completed form along with his/her application to the

federal agency.

3. If there are any questions regarding the submission of this form, contact the Department of State at

(518) 474-6000.

*These state and local documents are available for inspection at the offices of many federal agencies, Department ofenvironmental Conservation and Departrnent of State regional offices, and the appropriate regional and county planning agencies.

Local program documents are also available for inspection at the offices ofthe appropriate local government.

Federal Consistency Assessment Additional Information Section D.2

(A) Identify, by their policy numbers, which coastal policies are affected by the activity.

1.a. 11, 22, 25, 32, 37, 38, 41, 43

1.c. 1

1.h. 15, 35

2.c. 7

2.d. 24

2.i. 23

3.a. 2, 21, 22

3.d. 30, 38, 40

(B) Briefly assess the effects of the activity upon the policy.

1.a.

• 11 – No erosion and/or flooding are expected to occur due to nature of the proposed activity.

• 22 – Landside area of Parcel in question is 0.28 acres and is owned by Historic Kingston Waterfront Development, LLC. Construction does not propose to change any existing and/or future recreational access.

• 25 – The upgrade involves improving general water quality and reducing ammonia levels currently being emitted into the Creek as they exceed the 2016 Individual SPDES Permit limits. As a result of the proposed activity, overall scenic quality to the coastal area should be enhanced.

• 32 – The City of Kingston is a larger, denser municipality where alternative small systems would not be cost beneficial for households and commercial users. The sewer plant upgrade proposed will be the most cost-effective approach for the City for the foreseeable future, especially with the time constraints given by the NYSDEC.

• 37 – No on-land work is proposed for this project that would result in erosion into the Creek. In-Creek work will involve the use of a cofferdam to minimize disturbance outside the project area.

• 38 – The proposed work improves surface water quality by reducing the ammonia levels the WWTP currently emits.

• 41 – No air quality standards will be violated per the proposed use. • 43 – No acid rain precursors will be generated by the proposed work.

1.c.

• 1 – Proposed action is enhancing the City’s WWTP by upgrading the WWTP to meet water quality levels and 2016 ammonia limits outlined in the updated Individual SPDES Permit.

1.h.

• 15 – Dredging for pile caps and supports will result in a temporary impact. Cofferdam will be used to limit spread of turbidity caused by dredging.

• 35 – Dredging for pile caps and supports will result in a temporary impact. Cofferdam will be used to limit spread of turbidity caused by dredging.

2.c.

• 7 – The WWTP update proposes to have temporary and permanent streambed and permanent streambank disturbances. The essential fish habitat study indicates that impacts to essential fish habitat are anticipated to be temporary and that the project site does not present preferred habitat for fish species in the area.

2.d.

• 24 – Proposed work is a modification to an existing headwall structure; scenic quality of the shoreline should not be affected by the upgrade as the majority of work is under water.

2.i.

• 23 – The site is substantially contiguous to a building, archaeological site, or district which is listed on the National or State Register of Historic Places, or that has been determined by the Commissioner of the NYS Office of Parks, Recreation and Historic Preservation to be eligible for listing on the State Register of Historic Places. The project is a modification of the existing outfall. The NYS SHPO office was contacted and a letter of no impact was received for the project.

3.a.

• 2 –The proposed work is a water dependent and requires the outfall pipe connection be made to the existing headwall structure.

• 21 – Proposed fill will facilitate the area to service a future waterfront development such as a walking path. The outfall improvements will improve water quality thereby enhancing the water-based recreation.

• 22 – Proposed fill along the bank will facilitate the area to service a future waterfront recreation development such as a walking path; however, the project itself is not intended to provide for recreation on shore. The project proposes to improve the City’s WWTP outfall, therefore the work will be primarily in-water, and the proposed fill is to better support the proposed pipes, but it does offer the potential to utilize the area for future water-based recreational development.

3.d.

• 30 – Proposed work is to improve water quality by reducing ammonia discharge at WWTP and will not result in additional discharge of pollutants.

• 38 – Surface water will be improved by reducing ammonia discharge into Rondout Creek. • 40 – Project will not result in effluent discharge from major electric generating and industrial

facilities therefore no effects expected.

(C) State how the activity is consistent with each policy.

1.a.

• 11 – Upgrade consistent as proposed work utilizes existing structures by connecting the proposed outfall pipes to the existing headwall and filling the area between the proposed bulkhead and headwall to grade with earth fill. Since the area will be closed off by the new bulkhead and the work will be primarily underground/in-water, damage from flooding and erosion should be minimized.

• 22 – Upgrade consistent as proposed work was requested by the NYSDEC for the City to reduce the ammonia discharge currently flowing into Rondout Creek through the in-water work to modify/upgrade an existing public use. Not expected to preclude any potential water-based recreation at the site.

• 25 – Upgrade consistent in that the manmade structure will improve the Creek’s water quality and proposed activity is substantially located in-water.

• 32 – The policy is directed to small, less dense communities, unlike the City of Kingston. • 37 – Consistent in that non-point discharge should not occur as the proposed work is in-

water. • 38 – Upgrade consistent as proposed work is to improve surface water quality. • 41 – Consistent in that proposed work is in-water work, no air quality standards should be

affected. • 43 – Consistent in that proposed work is in-water work, no generation of significant

amounts of acid rain precursors are anticipated to occur.

1.c.

• 1 – Consistent as proposed action is revitalizing and redeveloping a waterfront and City use to meet water quality levels outlined in the Individual SPDES Permit.

1.h.

• 15 – Update is consistent as the dredging impact is temporary. Significant impacts to beach materials adjacent to land should not be affected and will not result in an increase in erosion of such land.

• 35 – Update is consistent as the dredging impact is temporary. Impacts will meet State designated permit requirements, and protect any significant fish and wildlife habitats, scenic resources, natural proactive features, and nearby wetlands. No agricultural lands are adjacent to project site.

2.c.

• 7 – The WWTP update is consistent as it intends to improve water quality offering better water quality for coastal fish habitat in the area. An existing car located on the streambed will be removed as mitigation for the project. An essential fish habitat study was conducted for the site to understand total impacts. Diadromous fishes included alewife (Alosa pseudoharengus), blueback herring (Alosa aestivalis), and American eel (Anguilla rostrata) which have been found to utilize habitat in and near the lower sections of the Rondout

Creek (NEFMC 1998), but presumably not in the project area. Diadromous fishes would migrate upstream and downstream past the project area and the small footprint of the project area would not impact fish passage. Overall, the project area is not representing a preferred habitat for any EFH designated fish species.

2.d.

• 24 – Upgrade is consistent as it does not create unsightly, inappropriate additions to the site, as the improved work is primarily under water. Earth fill is minimal and limited to landward side of the project to support future waterfront development.

2.i.

• 23 – The NYS SHPO office was contacted and a letter of no impact was received for the project. No archaeological or historic site(s) or resources been identified on the project site.

3.a.

• 2 – Upgrade consistent as it is an upgrade to an existing headwall discharge point for the WWTP, a water dependent use.

• 21 – Upgrade consistent as it enhances water quality for any adjacent and future water recreational activities.

• 22 – Upgrade location is on a small privately-owned parcel and would not provide ideal public water-related recreation activities aside from a potential walking path, which the earth fill could help facilitate. Upgrade is compatible with primary purpose of development.

3.d.

• 30 – The municipal discharge point’s proposed work is consistent by improving coastal water quality in conformance with the State and National standards.

• 38 – Proposed work is consistent by improving current surface water quality conditions. • 40 – Proposed improvement should not increase thermal discharges to water quality and

aquatic organisms. The discharge will remain consistent aside from reducing ammonia limits.

APPENDIX C

Based on USGS Topographic Map forKingston East, NY [Site Quad] and Kingston West, NYCircles indicate 500-foot and half-mile radii

0 1,000 2,000

Feet

1:24,000

V:\Projects\K\K0094\KingstonWTPoutfall_KingstonNY\KingstonWTPoutfall_KingstonNY_Topo.mxd

FIGURE 1SITE LOCATIONKingston Wastewater TreatmentPlant OutfallRondout CreekKingston, New York

May 2021

K-0094

_̂

¹

È

SITE LOCATIONLat: 41°55’13” N Long: 73°58’41” W

Tighe&Bond

APPENDIX D

Photo A: Taken on January 29, 2020 at 10:30 AM

Photo B: Taken on January 29, 2020 at 10:30 AM

Photo C: Taken on January 29, 2020 at 10:30 AM

-

2

2

-22

-23

-

2

3

-2

3

-2

3

-2

4

-2

4

-2

4

-

2

4

-24

-

2

4

-23

-23

-

2

3

-

2

3

-

2

3

-2

3

-22

-21

-2

2

-22

-

2

1

-21

-

2

2

-2

2

-22

-21

-2

1

-21

-2

1

-20

-

1

9

-19

-

1

9

-

1

9

-

1

9

-

1

8

-

1

8

-2

0

-

2

0

-

2

0

-

1

9

-

1

9

-1

9

-

1

8

-1

8

-18

-18

-

1

8

-18

-

1

7

-

1

7

-17

-

1

7

-17

-

1

7

-17

-15

-16

-

1

6

-16

-

1

6

-16

-13

-

1

5

-

1

3

-12

-10

-9

-1

5

-

1

5

-16

-1

5

-1

5

-

1

2

-1

3

-

1

3

-12

-11

-

1

0

-

1

2

-1

4

-

1

4

-14

-

1

4

-12

-

1

1

-

2

-

1

-1

-

1

-

2

-13

-21

-1

-24.5

-23.5

-

2

3

.

5

-2

3

.5

-2.5

-17.5

-19.5

-

2

0

.

5

-

2

2

.

5

-

2

1

.

5

-20.5

-

0

.

5

-1

.5

-18.5

-

1

6

.5

-2.7

0+00

0+25

0+500+

751+

00

MHW

MLW

KINGSTON WWTP OUTFALLMODIFICATIONS; KINGSTON, NY

SCALE:

DATE:

FIGURE:

Tigh

e &

Bon

d, I

nc.

\\tig

hebo

nd.c

om\d

ata\

Dat

a\Pr

ojec

ts\K

\K00

94 K

ings

ton,

NY\

04 -

WW

TP U

pgra

des\

Task

4A P

erm

it Com

plia

nce

Des

ign\

Out

fall\

Dra

win

gs_F

igur

es\A

utoC

AD

\She

et\K

0094

- W

WTP

Out

fall

SK.d

wg

Mar

09,

202

1-12

:44p

m P

lott

ed B

y: J

AKal

lmer

ten

11/20/2020

AS SHOWN

00 20' 40'

SCALE: 1" = 20'

N

WWTP OUTFALL STRUCTUREMODIFICATIONS

EXISTING CONDITIONS PLAN

SK-01

APPROXIMATE LOCATION OFSUNKEN REMAINS OF CAR TO BEREMOVED AND DISPOSED USINGA CRANE, WATER TIGHT CLAMPSHELL & DIVERS

NOTES:1. BACKGROUND MAPPING REFERENCES LAND SURVEY

TITLED "TOPOGRAPHIC MAP OF THE SANITARYWASTEWATER EFFLUENT OUTFLOW SITE AT THE CITY OFKINGSTON WASTEWATER TREATMENT PLANT", PREPAREDBY BRINNER & LARIOS, P.C., DATED MARCH 2020 ANDREFERENCES HYDROGRAPHIC SURVEY TITLED"HYDROGRAPHIC SURVEY WWTP OUTFALL ROUNDOUTCREEK", PREPARED BY HYDRO DATA, INC., DATEDFEBRUARY 2020.

2. THE NAVIGABLE CHANNEL TAKEN FROM ACOE SURVEYTITLED "HYDROGRAPHIC CONDITIONS SURVEY ROUNDOUTCREEK FEDERAL NAVIGATION CHANNEL REACH 1-5"DATED JUNE 29- JULY2, 2019.

3. MHW = 2.25' NAVD884. MLW = -1.50' NAVD88

TOP OF HEADWALL TBRAND DISPOSED

EXISTINGBOAT TO BERELOCATED(BY OTHERS)

20' CONSTRUCTIONEASEMENT SETBACK

APPENDIX E

APPENDIX F

Plot

ted

On:

Mar

16,

202

1-10

:14a

m B

y: J

AKal

lmer

ten

Last

Sav

ed:3

/4/2

021

Tigh

e &

Bon

d:\\

tighe

bond

.com

\dat

a\D

ata\

Proj

ects

\K\K

0094

Kin

gsto

n, N

Y\04

- W

WTP

Upg

rade

s\Ta

sk 4

A P

erm

it Com

plia

nce

Des

ign\

Out

fall\

Dra

win

gs_F

igur

es\A

utoC

AD

\She

et\K

0094

-004

A-G

-001

.dw

g

PREPARED BY:

KINGSTON WWTP

COMPLETE SET 16 SHEETS

LOCATION MAPSCALE: 1" = 200'

KINGSTON, NEW YORK KINGSTON WWTP OUTFALL MODIFICATIONS

FOR REVIEW: NYS DEC SUBMITTALMARCH 16, 2021

MILES MOFFATT, PE ERIN K. MOORE, PE

EAST STRAND ST

BROADWAY

LIST OF DRAWINGSSHEET NO. DRAWING NO. DRAWING TITLE

GENERAL1 G-001 COVER SHEET

2 G-002 GENERAL NOTES, LEGEND, AND ABBREVIATIONS

3 G-003 HYDRAULIC PROFILE

CIVIL

4 C-101 EXISTING CONDITIONS & DEMOLITION PLAN

5 C-102 TEMPORARY ROUTING PLAN

6 C-103 PROPOSED SITE PLAN

7 C-104 PROPOSED GRADING PLAN

8 C-105 RESOURCE AREA IMPACT PLAN

9 C-501 DETAILS

STRUCTURAL

10 S-001 STRUCTURAL NOTES & LEGEND

11 S-101 PROPOSED PLAN & PROFILE

12 S-102 PROPOSED PILE & PILE CAP PLAN

13 S-103 HIGH OUTFALL FLOW DIVERSION

14 S-501 DETAILS

15 S-502 DETAILS

16 S-503 DETAILS

PREPARED FOR:

CITY OF KINGSTONSTEVE NOBLE, MAYORJOHN M. SCHULTHEIS, PE, CITY ENGINEERALLEN WINCHELL, WWTP CHIEF OPERATOR

COMMON COUNCILANDREA SHAUT, ALDERMAN AT LARGEJEFFREY VENTURA MORELL, FIRST WARDDOUGLAS KOOP, SECOND WARDREYNOLDS SCOTT-CHILDRESS, THIRD WARDRITA WORTHINGTON, FOURTH WARDDONALD TALLERMAN, FIFTH WARDTONY DAVIS, SIXTH WARDPATRICK O'REILLY, SEVENTH WARDSTEVEN SCHABOT, EIGHTH WARDMICHELE HIRSCH, NINTH WARD

CHECKED BY:

DRAWN BY:

FILE:

APPROVED BY:

Kingston, New York

WWTP OUTFALL

MODIFICATIONS

City of Kingston

DATE:

PROJECT NO:

Plot

ted

On:

Mar

16,

202

1-10

:07a

m B

y: J

AKal

lmer

ten

Last

Sav

ed:3

/4/2

021

Tigh

e &

Bon

d:\\

tighe

bond

.com

\dat

a\D

ata\

Proj

ects

\K\K

0094

Kin

gsto

n, N

Y\04

- W

WTP

Upg

rade

s\Ta

sk 4

A P

erm

it Com

plia

nce

Des

ign\

Out

fall\

Dra

win

gs_F

igur

es\A

utoC

AD

\She

et\K

0094

-004

A-G

-001

.dw

g

MARK DATE DESCRIPTION

A 10/15/2020 30% DESIGN

B 1/7/2021 60% DESIGN

C 3/16/2021 NYS DEC SUBMITTAL

K0094-004A-G-001.dwg

01/07/2021

K0094-004

SCALE:

47 West Market StreetRhinebeck, NY 12572

(845) 516-5800

SERVICES PROVIDED IN NEW YORKBY T&B ENGINEERING ANDLANDSCAPE ARCHITECTURE, P.C.UNAUTHORIZED ALTERNATIONS TO THIS DOCUMENT IS A VIOLATIONOF SECTION 7209 OF THE NEW YORK STATE EDUCATION LAW.

JAK

CG

EKM/MM

NYS DEC

SUBMITTAL

G-002

GENERAL NOTES, LEGEND,AND ABBREVIATIONS

SHEET 2 OF 16

EXISTING PROPOSEDDESCRIPTION

ABBREVIATIONS

ABDN('D) ABANDON(ED)ACOE ARMY CORE OF ENGINEERSAC ASBESTOS CEMENT PIPEBC BITUMINOUS CURBBFP BACK FLOW PREVENTORBIT BITUMINOUSBL BASELINEBLDG BUILDINGBND BOUNDBOC BOTTOM OF CURBBOT BOTTOMBS BOTTOM OF STEPBW BOTTOM OF WALLCATV CABLE TELEVISIONCB CATCH BASINCEM CEMENTCI CAST IRON PIPECL CENTERLINECLF CHAIN LINK FENCECO CLEAN OUTCONC CONCRETECPP CORRUGATED

POLYETHYLENE PIPECY CUBIC YARDDH DRILL HOLEDI DUCTILE IRON PIPEDIA DIAMETERDMH DRAIN MANHOLEE EASTEF EACH FACEEG EXISTING GRADEEL/ELEV ELEVATIONELEC ELECTRICEMH ELECTRIC MANHOLEEOP EDGE OF PAVEMENTEW EACH WAYEXIST EXISTINGFES FLARED END SECTIONFF FINISH FLOORFM FORCE MAING GASGG GAS GATEGRAN GRANITEHC HANDICAPHDPE HIGH DENSITY

POLYETHYLENEHMA HOT MIX ASPHALTHYD HYDRANTIN INCHESINV INVERTIP IRON PINL LENGTH OF CURBLP LIGHT POLELT LEFTMAX MAXIMUMMH MANHOLEMIN MINIMUMMISC MISCELLANEOUSMON MONUMENTMJ MECHANICAL JOINTMLW MEAN LOW WATERMHW MEAN HIGH WATER

PROPERTY LINE

RIGHT-OF-WAY LINE

EASEMENT LINE

LIMITS OF WORK

INTERMEDIATE CONTOURS

INDEX CONTOURS

SPOT GRADE

MAGNITUDE & DIRECTION OF SLOPE

STORM DRAIN

STORM UNDERDRAIN

SANITARY SEWER OUTFALL

SANITARY SEWER FORCE MAIN

SANITARY SEWER LOW PRESSURE

SANITARY SEWER COMBINED

WATER SERVICE

POTABLE WATER

FIRE SERVICE

HIGH PRESSURE FIRE SERVICE

UNDERGROUND ELECTRIC

PRIMARY ELECTRIC SERVICE

SECONDARY ELECTRIC

OVERHEAD ELECTRIC

TELEPHONE SERVICE

TEL-DATA SERVICE

COMMUNICATIONS SERVICE

CABLE TV SERVICE

GAS SERVICE

OVERHEAD UTILITY (UNSPECIFIED)

CURB

EDGE OF PAVEMENT

DIRT ROAD

SIDEWALK

RETAINING WALL

STONE WALL

FENCE - UNSPECIFIED

FENCE - CHAIN LINK

FENCE - WOOD POST

GUARDRAIL

METAL BEAM RAIL

TRAIN TRACKS

STORM DRAIN STRUCTURES

SANITARY SEWER MANHOLE

WATER SERVICE STRUCTURES

GAS SERVICE STRUCTURES

ELECTRIC SERVICE STRUCTURES

TELECOMMUNICATIONS MANHOLE

TREELINE

TREE

GV

WV

DY

H

SD

SS SS

UD

SFM

SSLP

COMB

W W

PW PW

F F

F-HP F-HP

E E

PE PE

SE SE

OE OE

DATA DATA

CTV CTV

G G

X X X

X 141.2

0.0%

AREADRAINMANHOLE CATCH

BASIND

S

HYDRANT MANHOLE VALVEHY D

WV

T

W

MANHOLE VALVEG

UTILITY C0.POLE #

MANHOLE E LIGHT

EVERGREEN DECIDUOUS

LEGEND

RESOURCE AREAS

VEGETATED WETLAND LIMIT

TOP OF BANK

MEAN HIGH WATER

MEAN LOW WATER

100-FOOT BUFFER ZONE200-FOOT RIVERFRONT AREA

LOCAL RESOURCE AREA

LOCAL BUFFER ZONE - 1

LOCAL BUFFER ZONE - 2

WETLANDS WATER COURSE

WETLAND FLAG

ABBREVIATIONS CONT'D

N NORTHNITC NOT IN THIS CONTRACTNTS NOT TO SCALEN/A NOT APPLICABLEN/F NOW OR FORMERLYOC ON CENTEROCS OUTLET CONTROL STRUCTUREOH OVERHEADPB PLANT BEDPC POINT OF CURVATUREPCC POINT OF COMPOUND

CURVATUREPCPP PERFORATED CORRUGATED

POLYETHYLENE PIPEPERF PERFORATEDPI POINT OF INTERSECTIONPRC POINT OF REVERSE CURVATUREPSF POUNDS PER SQUARE FOOTPSI POUNDS PER SQUARE INCHPT POINT OF TANGENCYPVC POLYVINYLCHLORIDEPVMT PAVEMENTR RADIUSRCP REINFORCED CONCRETE PIPERD ROOF DRAINREV REVISIONROW RIGHT OF WAYRT RIGHTR&D REMOVE AND DISPOSER&R REMOVE AND RESETR&S REMOVE AND STACKS SOUTHSAN SANITARYSCH SCHEDULESF SQUARE FOOTSMH SEWER MANHOLESS STAINLESS STEELSTA STATIONSTL STEELSTRM STORMT TANGENT LENGTHTC TOP OF CURBTEL TEL-DATATP TEST PITTS TOP OF STEPTW TOP OF WALLTYP TYPICALUP UTILITY POLEW WATERWG WATER GATEWV WATER VALVEWWTP WASTE WATER TREATMENT PLANTXFMR TRANSFORMER

DEMOLITION / GEOTECHNICAL

EROSION & SEDIMENT CONTROL

TURBIDITY CURTAIN

UTILITY TO BE ABANDONED

UTILITY TO BE DEMOLISHED

ITEM TO BE DEMOLISHED

TEST PIT

MONITORING WELL

SOIL SAMPLE

BORING

LEGEND

LEGEND

32.0

25

D

T T

EROSION CONTROL AND RESOURCE AREA PROTECTION NOTES

1. PROVIDE ALL EROSION CONTROL MEASURES SHOWN, SPECIFIED, REQUIRED BY PERMIT, AND/OR REQUIRED BY THE ENGINEER PRIOR TO ANY CONSTRUCTION ORIMMEDIATELY UPON REQUEST. MAINTAIN SUCH CONTROL MEASURES UNTIL FINAL SURFACE TREATMENTS ARE IN PLACE AND/OR UNTIL PERMANENT VEGETATIONIS ESTABLISHED. INSPECT AFTER EACH RAINSTORM AND DURING MAJOR STORM EVENTS TO CONFIRM THAT ALL SEDIMENTATION AND EROSION CONTROLMEASURES REQUIRED ARE IN PLACE AND EFFECTIVE.

2. INSTALL SILT SACKS OR OTHER APPROVED SEDIMENTATION BARRIERS IN/AT ALL CATCH BASINS IN THE PROJECT AREA.

3. COMPACT, STABILIZE, AND LOAM AND SEED SIDE SLOPES, SHOULDER AREAS AND DISTURBED VEGETATED AREAS IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE CONTRACTDOCUMENTS AND AS REQUIRED BY PERMITS. GRADE SIDE SLOPES, SHOULDER AREAS AND DISTURBED VEGETATED AREAS TO A MAXIMUM SLOPE OF 3HORIZONTAL TO 1 VERTICAL (3H:1V), WHERE POSSIBLE. PROVIDE BIODEGRADABLE EROSION CONTROL BLANKETS TO PREVENT EROSION WHERE SLOPES ARESTEEPER THAN 3H:1V.

4. SETTLE OR FILTER ALL SILT-LADEN WATER FROM DEWATERING ACTIVITIES IN A SEDIMENTATION OR FILTER BAG TO REMOVE SEDIMENTS PRIOR TO RELEASEUSING A SEDIMENTATION OR FILTER BAG LOCATED DOWN-GRADIENT OF THE DEWATERED AREA.

5. REMOVE AND PROPERLY DISPOSE OF SILT TRAPPED AT BARRIERS IN UPLAND AREAS OUTSIDE BUFFER ZONES. REMOVE MATERIALS DEPOSITED IN ANY TEMPORARYSETTLING BASINS AT THE COMPLETION OF THE PROJECT. RESTORE ALL DISTURBED AREAS TO THEIR PRECONSTRUCTION CONDITION.

6. SWEEP, COLLECT, REMOVE AND DISPOSE OF ANY SEDIMENT TRACKED ONTO PUBLIC RIGHT-OF-WAYS AT THE END OF EACH DAY.

7. LOAM AND SEED ALL DISTURBED VEGETATED AREAS TO ESTABLISH COVER AND STABILIZATION AS SOON AS POSSIBLE FOLLOWING DISTURBANCE.

8. MAINTAIN AN ADDITIONAL SUPPLY OF EROSION CONTROL MEASURES ON-SITE FOR EMERGENCY REPAIRS.

9. STORE FUEL, OIL, PAINT, OR OTHER HAZARDOUS MATERIALS IN A SECONDARY CONTAINER AND REMOVE TO A SECURE LOCKED AND COVERED AREA DURINGNON-WORK HOURS.

10. PROVIDE A SUPPLY OF ABSORBENT SPILL RESPONSE MATERIALS SUCH AS BOOMS, BLANKETS, AND OIL ABSORBENT MATERIALS AT THE CONSTRUCTION SITE ATALL TIMES TO CLEAN UP POTENTIAL SPILLS OF HAZARDOUS MATERIALS. IMMEDIATELY REPORT SPILLS OF HAZARDOUS MATERIALS TO THE STATEENVIRONMENTAL AGENCY AND THE MUNICIPALITY WHERE THE WORK IS OCCURRING.

GENERAL NOTES

1. CONTRACTOR SHALL NOTIFY `DIG SAFELY NEW YORK' AT 1-800-962-7962 TO ARRANGE FOR MARKING OUT EXISTING UNDERGROUND UTILITIES AT LEAST 72HOURS IN ADVANCE OF EXCAVATION AT ANY GIVEN LOCATION. UNDER NO CIRCUMSTANCES SHALL THE CONTRACTOR BE ALLOWED TO START ANY KIND OFEXCAVATION WORK PRIOR TO OBTAINING ALL THE NECESSARY INFORMATION REGARDING THE LOCATION OF UNDERGROUND UTILITIES AT THE SITES.

2. LOCATIONS OF EXISTING UTILITIES ARE APPROXIMATE. IN ADDITION, SOME UTILITIES MAY NOT BE SHOWN. DETERMINE THE EXACT LOCATION OF UTILITIES BYTEST PIT OR OTHER METHODS, AS NECESSARY TO PREVENT DAMAGE TO UTILITIES AND/OR INTERRUPTIONS IN UTILITY SERVICE. PERFORM TEST PITEXCAVATIONS AND OTHER INVESTIGATIONS TO LOCATE UTILITIES, AND PROVIDE THIS INFORMATION TO THE ENGINEER, PRIOR TO CONSTRUCTING THEPROPOSED IMPROVEMENTS. LOCATE ALL EXISTING UTILITIES TO BE CROSSED BY HAND EXCAVATION.

3. BOLD TEXT AND LINES INDICATE PROPOSED WORK. LIGHT TEXT AND LINES INDICATE APPROXIMATE EXISTING CONDITIONS.

4. TIGHE & BOND ASSUMES NO RESPONSIBILITY FOR ANY ISSUES, LEGAL OR OTHERWISE, RESULTING FROM CHANGES MADE TO THESE DRAWINGS WITHOUTWRITTEN AUTHORIZATION FROM TIGHE & BOND.

5. EXCAVATE ADDITIONAL TEST PITS TO LOCATE EXISTING UTILITIES AS DIRECTED OR APPROVED BY THE ENGINEER.

6. NOTIFY THE ENGINEER OF ANY UTILITIES IDENTIFIED DURING CONSTRUCTION THAT ARE NOT SHOWN ON THE DRAWINGS OR THAT DIFFER IN SIZE OR MATERIAL.

7. THE CONTRACTOR IS RESPONSIBLE FOR SITE SAFETY; COORDINATION WITH THE OWNER, ALL SUBCONTRACTORS, AND WITH OTHER CONTRACTORS WORKINGWITHIN THE LIMITS OF WORK, THE MEANS AND METHODS OF CONSTRUCTING THE PROPOSED WORK.

8. OBTAIN, PAY FOR AND COMPLY WITH PERMITS, NOTICES AND FEES NECESSARY TO COMPLETE THE WORK. ARRANGE AND PAY FOR NECESSARY INSPECTIONS ANDAPPROVALS FROM THE JURISDICTIONAL AUTHORITIES.

9. SHORE UTILITY TRENCHES WHERE FIELD CONDITIONS DICTATE AND/OR WHERE REQUIRED BY LOCAL, STATE AND FEDERAL HEALTH AND SAFETY CODES.

10. FIELD VERIFY ALL EXISTING CONDITIONS PRIOR TO CONSTRUCTION. IF FIELD CONDITIONS ARE OBSERVED THAT VARY SIGNIFICANTLY FROM THOSE SHOWN ONTHE DRAWINGS, IMMEDIATELY NOTIFY THE ENGINEER IN WRITING FOR RESOLUTION OF THE CONFLICTING INFORMATION.

11. PROTECT AND MAINTAIN ALL UTILITIES IN THE AREAS UNDER CONSTRUCTION DURING THE WORK. LEAVE ALL PIPES AND STRUCTURES WITHIN THE LIMITS OFTHE CONTRACT IN A CLEAN AND OPERABLE CONDITION AT THE COMPLETION OF THE WORK. TAKE ALL NECESSARY PRECAUTIONS TO PREVENT SAND AND SILTFROM DISTURBED AREAS FROM ENTERING THE DRAINAGE SYSTEM.

12. NOTIFY THE ENGINEER IN WRITING OF ANY CONFLICT, ERROR, AMBIGUITY, OR DISCREPANCY WITH THE PLANS OR BETWEEN THE PLANS AND ANY APPLICABLELAW, REGULATION, CODE, STANDARD SPECIFICATION, OR MANUFACTURER'S INSTRUCTIONS.

13. THE CONTRACTOR IS RESPONSIBLE FOR SUPPORT OF EXISTING UTILITIES AND REPAIR OR REPLACEMENT COSTS OF UTILITIES DAMAGED DURING CONSTRUCTION,WHETHER ABOVE OR BELOW GRADE. REPLACE DAMAGED UTILITIES IMMEDIATELY AT NO ADDITIONAL COST TO THE OWNER AND AT NO COST TO THE PROPERTYOWNER.

14. TAKE NECESSARY MEASURES AND PROVIDE CONTINUOUS BARRIERS OF SUFFICIENT TYPE, SIZE, AND STRENGTH TO PREVENT ACCESS TO ALL WORK AND STAGINGAREAS AT THE COMPLETION OF EACH DAYS WORK.

15. NO OPEN TRENCHES WILL BE ALLOWED OVER NIGHT. THE USE OF ROAD PLATES TO PROTECT THE EXCAVATION WILL BE CONSIDERED UPON REQUEST, BUTBACKFILLING IS PREFERRED.

16. MAINTAIN EMERGENCY ACCESS TO ALL PROPERTIES WITHIN THE PROJECT AREA AT ALL TIMES DURING CONSTRUCTION.

17. WHEN WORKING IN THE ROAD, PROVIDE THE OWNER AND LOCAL FIRE/POLICE/SCHOOL AUTHORITIES A DETAILED PLAN OF APPROACH INDICATING METHODS OFPROPOSED TRAFFIC ROUTING ON A DAILY BASIS. PROVIDE COORDINATION TO ENSURE COMMUNICATION AND COORDINATION BETWEEN THE OWNER,CONTRACTOR AND LOCAL FIRE/POLICE/SCHOOL AUTHORITIES THROUGHOUT THE CONSTRUCTION PERIOD.

18. REMOVE AND DISPOSE OF ALL CONSTRUCTION-RELATED WASTE MATERIALS AND DEBRIS IN STRICT ACCORDANCE WITH ALL APPLICABLE LOCAL, STATE, ANDFEDERAL LAWS.

19. THE TERM "DEMOLISH" USED ON THE DRAWINGS MEANS TO REMOVE AND DISPOSE OF IN ACCORDANCE WITH LOCAL, STATE, AND FEDERAL REQUIREMENTS.

20. THE TERM "ABANDON" USED ON THE DRAWINGS MEANS TO LEAVE IN PLACE AND TAKE APPROPRIATE MEASURES TO DECOMMISSION AS SPECIFIED OR NOTED ONTHE DRAWINGS.

21. ALL PROPOSED WORK MAY BE ADJUSTED IN THE FIELD BY THE OWNER'S PROJECT REPRESENTATIVE TO MEET EXISTING CONDITIONS.

BASE PLAN NOTES

1. THE EXISTING CONDITIONS INFORMATION SHOWN ON THE DRAWINGS IS BASED ON THE FOLLOWING:

· SURVEY DRAWINGS PROVIDED BY BRINNER & LARIOS, PC TITLED "TOPOGRAPHIS MAP OF THE SANITARY WASTEWATER TREATMENT PLANT AND DATEDMARCH 2020, AND PROVIDED BY HYDRO DATA, INC TITLED "HYDROGRAPHIC SURVEY WWTP OUTFALL ROUNDOUT CREEK" DATED FEBRUARY 2020.

· THE NAVIGABLE CHANNEL TAKEN FROM ACOE SURVEY TITLED "HYDROGRAPHIC CONDITIONS SURVEY ROUNDOUT CREEK FEDERAL NAVIGATION CHANNELREACH 1-5" DATED JUNE 29 - JULY 2, 2019.

2. UTILITY LOCATIONS SHOWN WERE PLOTTED FROM INFORMATION SUPPLIED BY RESPECTIVE UTILITY COMPANIES AND DATA OBTAINED FROM FIELD SURVEYSAND AS BUILT DRAWINGS. THE ACCURACY AND COMPLETENESS OF SUBSURFACE INFORMATION SHOWN ON THESE DRAWINGS IS NOT GUARANTEED.DETERMINE THE LOCATIONS AND ELEVATIONS OF ALL UTILITIES WHICH MAY AFFECT CONSTRUCTION OPERATIONS.

3. HORIZONTAL CONTROL OF SOUNDINGS WERE BY RTK GPS AND REFERENCED TO THE NEW YORK EAST STATE PLAN COORDINATE SYSTEM, NAD1983.

4. THE DRAWINGS ARE BASED ON VERTICAL NAVD88

· MHW = 1.93'· MLW = -1.58'

4. THE EXISTING CONDITIONS SHOWN ARE APPROXIMATE. FIELD VERIFY EXISTING CONDITIONS.

UD

SURVEY NOTES

1. CONTOURS ARE IN FEET AND ARE REFERENCED TO THE NORTH AMERICANVERTICAL DATUM OF 1988 (NAVD 88) BASED ON RTK GPS ELEVATIONS CROSSCHECKED WITH THREE LOCAL BENCHMARKS. WATER SURFACE ELEVATIONSWERE RECORDED BY RTK GPS

2. LOCAL CONTROL IS AS FOLLOWS: TOP OF HYDRANT #6-22=6.57'. TOP OFHYDRANT #6-23=7.99' AND RR SPIKE IN POLE #122857=5.71'

NOTE: HYDRANT LOCATED ACROSS THE STREET AND IS NOT SHOWN ON PLANS

3. HORIZONTAL CONTROL OF SOUNDINGS WERE BY RTK GPS AND REFERENCED TOTHE NEW YORK STATE PLANE COORDINATE SYSTEM, NAD 1983

4. THE INFORMATION PRESENTED REPRESENTS THE RESULTS OF AHYDROGRAPHIC SURVEY PERFORMED ON 2 FEBRUARY 2020 AND CAN ONLYREPRESENT THE CONDITIONS AT THAT TIME.

25

20

15

10

5

0

-5

25

20

15

10

5

0

-5

-10 -10

25

20

15

10

5

0

-5

25

20

15

10

5

0

-5

-10 -10

-15 -15

-20 -20

100 YR FLOODEL 8.20

100 YR FLOOD +3 FTEL 11.20

MEAN LOW WATER LEVELEL -1.58

MEAN HIGH WATER LEVELEL 1.93

100 YR FLOODEL 8.20

100 YR FLOOD +3 FTEL 11.20

MEAN LOW WATER LEVELEL -1.58

MEAN HIGH WATER LEVELEL 1.93

24"x20"ECCENTRIC

REDUCER

INVERT EL -21.00 ATSUNKEN OUTFALL(BOTH PIPES)

28" UPPER OUTFALL TORONDOUT CREEK

28" LOWER OUTFALLTO RONDOUT CREEK

UPPER & LOWER OUTFALLS TOECCENTRIC REDUCER

28"x24"ECCENTRIC

REDUCER

28"Ø

NEW HEADWALL

VENT PIPE

CHECKED BY:

DRAWN BY:

FILE:

APPROVED BY:

G-003

DATE:

PROJECT NO:

HYDRAULIC PROFILE

MARK DATE DESCRIPTION

K0094-004A-G-003 HYD PROF.dwg

SHEET 3 OF 16

AS SHOWN

CHECKED BY:

DRAWN BY:

FILE:

APPROVED BY:

Kingston, New York

WWTP OUTFALL

MODIFICATIONS

City of Kingston

DATE:

PROJECT NO:

Plot

ted

On:

Mar

15,

202

1-10

:30a

m B

y: J

AKal

lmer

ten

Last

Sav

ed:3

/11/

2021

Tigh

e &

Bon

d:\\

tighe

bond

.com

\dat

a\D

ata\

Proj

ects

\K\K

0094

Kin

gsto

n, N

Y\04

- W

WTP

Upg

rade

s\Ta

sk 4

A P

erm

it Com

plia

nce

Des

ign\

Out

fall\

Dra

win

gs_F

igur

es\A

utoC

AD

\She

et\K

0094

-004

A-G

-003

HYD

PRO

F.dw

g

MARK DATE DESCRIPTION

A 10/15/2020 30% DESIGN

B 1/7/2021 60% DESIGN

C 3/16/2021 NYS DEC SUBMITTAL

K0094-004A-G-003 HYD PROF.dwg

01/07/2021

K0094-004

SCALE:

47 West Market StreetRhinebeck, NY 12572

(845) 516-5800

SERVICES PROVIDED IN NEW YORKBY T&B ENGINEERING ANDLANDSCAPE ARCHITECTURE, P.C.UNAUTHORIZED ALTERNATIONS TO THIS DOCUMENT IS A VIOLATIONOF SECTION 7209 OF THE NEW YORK STATE EDUCATION LAW.

JAK

CG

EKM/MM

NYS DEC

SUBMITTAL

PROPOSED HYDRAULIC PROFILE

SCALE: HORIZ: NONE VERT: 34"=5'-0"

EXISTING HYDRAULIC PROFILE

SCALE: HORIZ: NONE VERT: 34"=5'-0"

LEGEND5.25DESIGN PEAK HOUR 10.5

2.55CURRENT AVERAGE DAY 5.10

3.40PERMITTED FLOW 6.80

BASIS OF PROPOSED HYDRAULIC PROFILE

FLOW CONDITION INFLUENT FLOW (MGD) RAS FLOW (MGD) UNITS IN SERVICE

(1) BAR SCREEN(4) PRIMARY CLARIFIERS(3) AERATION TANKS(4) SECONDARY CLARIFIERS(2) UV CHANNELS

1.

2. ALL OTHER WATER LEVELS CALCULATED FROM STARTING WATER SURFACE EL 1.93 (MHW) IN RONDOUT CREEK.3. PROFILE COMPUTED ALONG PATH OF GREATEST HEAD LOSS OR LONGEST PATH.4. NUMBER OF UNITS FOR EACH PROCESS SHOWN IN PROFILE (#).

AN * INDICATES THE RESPECTIVE WATER LEVEL AT THE RESPECTIVE FLOW IS CALCULATED FROM STARTING WATER SURFACEEL 8.20 (100 YR FLOOD) IN RONDOUT CREEK. IF * WL IS NOT INDICATED, THE WATER LEVEL IS THE SAME AS THE WATERLEVEL CALCULATED FROM STARTING WATER SURFACE EL 1.93 (MHW) IN RONDOUT CREEK.

5. SEE TABLE FOR NUMBER OF UNITS IN SERVICE PER FLOW SCENARIO.6. THE VERTICAL DATUM REFERENCES NAVD88.

7. WITH THE FOLLOWING PROCESS UNITS OUT OF SERVICE THEMAXIMUM PLANT FLOW IS 9.3 MGD WITH 5.25 MGD RAS ATNORMAL RONDOUT CREEK ELEVATION 1.93 (MHW) WITHOUTOVERTOPPING.

(1) PRIMARY CLARIFIER(1) AERATION TANK(1) SECONDARY CLARIFIER(1) UV CHANNEL

NOTES:

-

2

2

-22

-2

2

-23

-23

-23

-

2

3

-2

3

-2

3

-2

3

-

2

4

-2

4

-2

4

-2

4

-

2

4

-2

4

-

2

4

-

2

3

-

2

3

-23

-2

3

-

2

3

-

2

3

-

2

3

-2

3

-

2

2

-23

-22

-22

-21

-

2

2

-22

-

2

1

-21

-

2

2

-2

2

-22

-2

2

-21

-21

-

2

1

-21

-2

1

-20

-2

1

-20

-19

-

1

9

-

1

9

-19

-

1

9

-

1

9

-

1

9

-

1

8

-

1

8

-2

0

-

2

0

-

2

0

-

2

0

-

2

0

-19

-

1

9

-

1

9

-1

9

-

1

8

-1

8

-

1

7

-1

8

-18

-18

-

1

8

-18

-

1

8

-18

-

1

7

-1

7

-

1

7

-

1

7

-17

-

1

7

-17

-

1

7

-17

-

1

6

-

1

6

-

1

5

-15

-

1

4

-

1

3

-1

3

-

1

4

-15

-16

-

1

6

-16

-

1

6

-16

-

1

6

-

1

5

-

1

4

-

1

3

-

1

2

-15

-13

-13

-

1

5

-

1

3

-12

-10

-9

-1

5

-

1

5

-16

-1

5

-1

5

-

1

2

-1

3

-

1

3

-12

-11

-

1

0

-

1

2

-1

4

-

1

4

-14

-

1

4

-12

-

1

1

-

2

-

1

-1

-

1

-

2

-13

-21

-1

-24.5

-23.5

-23.5

-

2

3

.

5

-

2

3

.

5

-2

2

.5

-22.5

-2

3

.5

-

2

2

.

5

-2.5

-17.5

-19.5

-

2

0

.

5

-

2

2

.

5

-

2

1

.

5

-2

1

.5

-20.5

-

0

.

5

-1

.5

-18.5

-

1

6

.5

-20.5

-2.7

0+00

0+25

0+50

0+75

1+00

MHW

MLW

4.7

4.8 4.8

4.9 4.9

00 10' 20'

SCALE: 1" = 10'

APPROXIMATE LOCATIONOF EDGE OF NAVIGABLECHANNEL

WWTP OUTFALL HEADWALL AND RONDOUT CREEK PLAN

1" = 10'

N

CHECKED BY:

DRAWN BY:

FILE:

APPROVED BY:

Kingston, New York

WWTP OUTFALL

MODIFICATIONS

City of Kingston

DATE:

PROJECT NO:

Plot

ted

On:

Mar

15,

202

1-10

:56a

m B

y: J

AKal

lmer

ten

Last

Sav

ed:3

/15/

2021

Tigh

e &

Bon

d:\\

tighe

bond

.com

\dat

a\D

ata\

Proj

ects

\K\K

0094

Kin

gsto

n, N

Y\04

- W

WTP

Upg

rade

s\Ta

sk 4

A P

erm

it Com

plia

nce

Des

ign\

Out

fall\

Dra

win

gs_F

igur

es\A

utoC

AD

\She

et\K

0094

- W

WTP

Out

fall

SK.d

wg

MARK DATE DESCRIPTION

A 10/15/2020 30% DESIGN

B 1/7/2021 60% DESIGN

C 3/16/2021 NYS DEC SUBMITTAL

K0094 - WWTP Outfall SK.dwg

01/07/2021

K0094-004

SCALE:

47 West Market StreetRhinebeck, NY 12572

(845) 516-5800

SERVICES PROVIDED IN NEW YORKBY T&B ENGINEERING ANDLANDSCAPE ARCHITECTURE, P.C.UNAUTHORIZED ALTERNATIONS TO THIS DOCUMENT IS A VIOLATIONOF SECTION 7209 OF THE NEW YORK STATE EDUCATION LAW.

JAK

CG

EKM/MM

NYS DEC

SUBMITTAL

C-101

EXISTING CONDITIONS& DEMOLITION PLAN

SHEET 4 OF 16

CONTRACTOR SHALL REMOVEAND DISPOSE SUNKEN REMAINSOF CAR USING A CRANE, WATERTIGHT CLAMP SHELL & DIVERS

20' CONSTRUCTIONEASEMENT SETBACK

-

2

2

-22

-2

2

-23

-23

-23

-

2

3

-2

3

-2

3

-2

3

-2

3

-2

4

-

2

4

-2

4

-2

4

-2

4

-

2

4

-2

4

-

2

4

-

2

3

-

2

3

-23

-2

3

-

2

3

-

2

3

-

2

3

-2

3

-

2

3

-

2

2

-23

-22

-22

-21

-

2

2

-22

-

2

1

-21

-

2

2

-2

2

-22

-2

2

-21

-21

-

2

1

-21

-2

1

-20

-2

1

-20

-19

-

1

9

-

1

9

-19

-

1

9

-

1

9

-

1

9

-

1

8

-

1

8

-2

0

-

2

0

-

2

0

-

2

0

-

2

0

-19

-

1

9

-

1

9

-1

9

-

1

8

-1

8

-

1

7

-1

8

-18

-18

-

1

8

-18

-

1

8

-18

-

1

7

-1

7

-

1

7

-

1

7

-17

-

1

7

-17

-

1

7

-17

-

1

6

-

1

6

-

1

5

-15

-

1

4

-

1

3

-1

3

-

1

4

-15

-16

-

1

6

-16

-

1

6

-16

-

1

6

-

1

5

-

1

4

-

1

3

-

1

2

-15

-13

-13

-

1

5

-

1

3

-12

-10

-9

-1

5

-

1

5

-16

-1

5

-1

5

-

1

2

-1

3

-

1

3

-12

-11

-

1

0

-

1

2

-1

4

-

1

4

-14

-

1

4

-12

-

1

1

-

2

-

1

-1

-

1

-

2

-13

-21

-1

-24.5

-23.5

-23.5

-

2

3

.

5

-

2

3

.

5

-2

2

.5

-22.5

-2

3

.5

-

2

2

.

5

-2.5

-17.5

-19.5

-

2

0

.

5

-

2

2

.

5

-

2

1

.

5

-2

1

.5

-20.5

-

0

.

5

-1

.5

-18.5

-

1

6

.5

-20.5

-2.7

0+00

0+25

0+50

0+75

1+00

SS

SS

SS

SS

PROVIDE SEALED OPENINGTHROUGH SHEETING ASREQUIRED

00 10' 20'

SCALE: 1" = 10'

APPROXIMATE LOCATIONOF NAVIGABLE CHANNEL

WWTP OUTFALL HEADWALL AND RONDOUT CREEK PLAN

1" = 10'

N

CHECKED BY:

DRAWN BY:

FILE:

APPROVED BY:

Kingston, New York

WWTP OUTFALL

MODIFICATIONS

City of Kingston

DATE:

PROJECT NO:

Plot

ted

On:

Mar

15,

202

1-3:

04pm

By:

JAKal

lmer

ten

Last

Sav

ed:3

/15/

2021

Tigh

e &

Bon

d:\\

tighe

bond

.com

\dat

a\D

ata\

Proj

ects

\K\K

0094

Kin

gsto

n, N

Y\04

- W

WTP

Upg

rade

s\Ta

sk 4

A P

erm

it Com

plia

nce

Des

ign\

Out

fall\

Dra

win

gs_F

igur

es\A

utoC

AD

\She

et\K

0094

- W

WTP

Out

fall

SK.d

wg

MARK DATE DESCRIPTION

A 10/15/2020 30% DESIGN

B 1/7/2021 60% DESIGN

C 3/16/2021 NYS DEC SUBMITTAL

K0094 - WWTP Outfall SK.dwg

01/07/2021

K0094-004

SCALE:

47 West Market StreetRhinebeck, NY 12572

(845) 516-5800

SERVICES PROVIDED IN NEW YORKBY T&B ENGINEERING ANDLANDSCAPE ARCHITECTURE, P.C.UNAUTHORIZED ALTERNATIONS TO THIS DOCUMENT IS A VIOLATIONOF SECTION 7209 OF THE NEW YORK STATE EDUCATION LAW.

JAK

CG

EKM/MM

NYS DEC

SUBMITTAL

C-102

TEMPORARY ROUTING PLAN

TEMPORARY 20-INCHOUTFALL PIPING

45 DEGREE BEND

SHEET 5 OF 16

CONTRACTOR SHALL REMOVEAND DISPOSE SUNKEN REMAINSOF CAR USING A CRANE, WATERTIGHT CLAMP SHELL & DIVERS

20' CONSTRUCTIONEASEMENT SETBACK

PROPOSED LOCATION OFBOATS BY OTHERS,LOCATION APPROXIMATE

SHEETPILECONNECTOR ORCORNER PILE

-

2

2

-22

-22

-23

-23

-23

-

2

3

-2

3

-2

3

-2

3

-2

3

-2

4

-

2

4

-2

4

-2

4

-2

4

-

2

4

-24

-

2

4

-

2

3

-

2

3

-23

-2

3

-

2

3

-

2

3

-

2

3

-2

3

-

2

3

-

2

2

-23

-22

-22

-21

-2

2

-22

-

2

1

-21

-

2

2

-2

2

-22

-2

2

-21

-21

-

2

1

-21

-2

1

-20

-2

1

-20

-19

-

1

9

-

1

9

-19

-

1

9

-

1

9

-

1

9

-

1

8

-

1

8

-2

0

-

2

0

-

2

0

-

2

0

-

2

0

-19

-

1

9

-

1

9

-1

9

-

1

8

-1

8

-

1

7

-1

8

-18

-18

-

1

8

-18

-

1

8

-18

-

1

7

-1

7

-

1

7

-

1

7

-17

-

1

7

-17

-

1

7

-17

-

1

6

-

1

6

-

1

5

-15

-

1

4

-

1

3

-1

3

-

1

4

-15

-16

-

1

6

-16

-

1

6

-16

-

1

6

-

1

5

-

1

4

-

1

3

-

1

2

-15

-13

-13

-

1

5

-

1

3

-12

-10

-9

-1

5

-

1

5

-16

-1

5

-1

5

-

1

2

-1

3

-

1

3

-12

-11

-

1

0

-

1

2

-1

4

-

1

4

-14

-

1

4

-12

-

1

1

-

2

-

1

-1

-

1

-

2

-13

-21

-1

-24.5

-23.5

-23.5

-

2

3

.

5

-

2

3

.

5

-2

2

.5

-22.5

-2

3

.5

-

2

2

.

5

-2.5

-17.5

-19.5

-

2

0

.

5

-

2

2

.

5

-

2

1

.

5

-2

1

.5

-20.5

-

0

.

5

-1

.5

-18.5

-

1

6

.5

-20.5

-2.7

0+00

0+25

0+50

0+75

1+00

SSSS

SSSS

SS

SSSS

SSSS

SS

MHW

MLW

3.99"

SD

SD

4.26"

C-103

PROPOSED SITE PLAN

00 10' 20'

SCALE: 1" = 10'

APPROXIMATE LOCATIONOF NAVIGABLE CHANNEL

PROPOSED 28"OD OUTFALL PIPEAND SUPPORTS (TYP OF 2), SEE

PROFILE ON SHEET S-101

WWTP OUTFALL HEADWALL AND RONDOUT CREEK PLAN

1" = 10'

N

CHECKED BY:

DRAWN BY:

FILE:

APPROVED BY:

Kingston, New York

WWTP OUTFALL

MODIFICATIONS

City of Kingston

DATE:

PROJECT NO:

Plot

ted

On:

Mar

15,

202

1-3:

07pm

By:

JAKal

lmer

ten

Last

Sav

ed:3

/15/

2021

Tigh

e &

Bon

d:\\

tighe

bond

.com

\dat

a\D

ata\

Proj

ects

\K\K

0094

Kin

gsto

n, N

Y\04

- W

WTP

Upg

rade

s\Ta

sk 4

A P

erm

it Com

plia

nce

Des

ign\

Out

fall\

Dra

win

gs_F

igur

es\A

utoC

AD

\She

et\K

0094

- W

WTP

Out

fall

SK.d

wg

MARK DATE DESCRIPTION

A 10/15/2020 30% DESIGN

B 1/7/2021 60% DESIGN

C 3/16/2021 NYS DEC SUBMITTAL

K0094 - WWTP Outfall SK.dwg

01/07/2021

K0094-004

SCALE:

47 West Market StreetRhinebeck, NY 12572

(845) 516-5800

SERVICES PROVIDED IN NEW YORKBY T&B ENGINEERING ANDLANDSCAPE ARCHITECTURE, P.C.UNAUTHORIZED ALTERNATIONS TO THIS DOCUMENT IS A VIOLATIONOF SECTION 7209 OF THE NEW YORK STATE EDUCATION LAW.

JAK

CG

EKM/MM

NYS DEC

SUBMITTAL

PROPOSED MARINEMATTRESS

COFFERDAM TO BECUT AT ELEVATION 5AND LEFT IN PLACE

TURBIDITY CURTAIN

SHEET 6 OF 16

20' TEMPORARYCONSTRUCTION

ACCESS SETBACK

CONCRETEENCASEMENT

3

S-501

PROPOSED 18" ODSTORM DRAIN

PROPOSED LOCATION OFBOATS BY OTHERS,LOCATION APPROXIMATE

2

S-501 SHEETPILECONNECTOR ORCORNER PILE

-

2

2

-22

-22

-23

-23

-23

-

2

3

-2

3

-2

3

-2

3

-2

3

-2

4

-

2

4

-2

4

-2

4

-2

4

-

2

4

-2

4

-

2

4

-

2

3

-

2

3

-23

-2

3

-

2

3

-

2

3

-

2

3

-2

3

-

2

3

-

2

2

-23

-22

-22

-21

-

2

2

-22

-

2

1

-21

-

2

2

-2

2

-22

-2

2

-21

-21

-

2

1

-21

-2

1

-20

-2

1

-20

-19

-

1

9

-

1

9

-19

-

1

9

-

1

9

-

1

9

-

1

8

-

1

8

-2

0

-

2

0

-

2

0

-

2

0

-

2

0

-19

-

1

9

-

1

9

-1

9

-

1

8

-1

8

-

1

7

-1

8

-18

-18

-

1

8

-18

-

1

8

-18

-

1

7

-1

7

-

1

7

-

1

7

-17

-

1

7

-17

-

1

7

-17

-

1

6

-

1

6

-

1

5

-15

-

1

4

-

1

3

-1

3

-

1

4

-15

-16

-

1

6

-16

-

1

6

-16

-

1

6

-

1

5

-

1

4

-

1

3

-

1

2

-15

-13

-13

-

1

5

-

1

3

-12

-10

-9

-1

5

-

1

5

-16

-1

5

-1

5

-

1

2

-1

3

-

1

3

-12

-11

-

1

0

-

1

2

-1

4

-

1

4

-14

-

1

4

-12

-

1

1

-

2

-

1

-1

-

1

-

2

-13

-21

-1

-24.5

-23.5

-23.5

-

2

3

.

5

-

2

3

.

5

-2

2

.5

-22.5

-2

3

.5

-

2

2

.

5

-2.5

-17.5

-19.5

-

2

0

.

5

-

2

2

.

5

-

2

1

.

5

-2

1

.5

-20.5

-

0

.

5

-1

.5

-18.5

-

1

6

.5

-20.5

-2.7

0+00

0+25

0+50

0+75

1+00

MHW

MLW

3.99"

5 54.26"

4.7

4.8 4.8

4.9 4.9

4

4

C-104

PROPOSED GRADINGPLAN

00 10' 20'

SCALE: 1" = 10'

APPROXIMATE LOCATIONOF NAVIGABLE CHANNEL

WWTP OUTFALL HEADWALL AND RONDOUT CREEK PLAN

1" = 10'

N

APPROXIMATE LOCATIONOF COFFERDAM TO BE CUTAT ELEVATION 5' NAVD88COFFERDAM SHALL EXTENDTO EXISTING GRADE ATELEVATION 5

CHECKED BY:

DRAWN BY:

FILE:

APPROVED BY:

Kingston, New York

WWTP OUTFALL

MODIFICATIONS

City of Kingston

DATE:

PROJECT NO:

Plot

ted

On:

Mar

15,

202

1-3:

14pm

By:

JAKal

lmer

ten

Last

Sav

ed:3

/15/

2021

Tigh

e &

Bon

d:\\

tighe

bond

.com

\dat

a\D

ata\

Proj

ects

\K\K

0094

Kin

gsto

n, N

Y\04

- W

WTP

Upg

rade

s\Ta

sk 4

A P

erm

it Com

plia

nce

Des

ign\

Out

fall\

Dra

win

gs_F

igur

es\A

utoC

AD

\She

et\K

0094

- W

WTP

Out

fall

SK.d

wg

MARK DATE DESCRIPTION

A 10/15/2020 30% DESIGN

B 1/7/2021 60% DESIGN

C 3/16/2021 NYS DEC SUBMITTAL

K0094 - WWTP Outfall SK.dwg

01/07/2021

K0094-004

SCALE:

47 West Market StreetRhinebeck, NY 12572

(845) 516-5800

SERVICES PROVIDED IN NEW YORKBY T&B ENGINEERING ANDLANDSCAPE ARCHITECTURE, P.C.UNAUTHORIZED ALTERNATIONS TO THIS DOCUMENT IS A VIOLATIONOF SECTION 7209 OF THE NEW YORK STATE EDUCATION LAW.

JAK

CG

EKM/MM

NYS DEC

SUBMITTAL

TURBIDITY CURTAIN

SHEET 7 OF 16

20' TEMPORARYCONSTRUCTION

ACCESS SETBACK

-

2

2

-22

-22

-23

-23

-23

-

2

3

-2

3

-2

3

-2

3

-2

3

-2

4

-

2

4

-2

4

-2

4

-2

4

-

2

4

-2

4

-

2

4

-

2

3

-

2

3

-23

-2

3

-

2

3

-

2

3

-

2

3

-2

3

-

2

3

-

2

2

-23

-22

-22

-21

-

2

2

-22

-

2

1

-21

-

2

2

-2

2

-22

-2

2

-21

-21

-

2

1

-21

-2

1

-20

-2

1

-20

-19

-

1

9

-

1

9

-19

-

1

9

-

1

9

-

1

9

-

1

8

-

1

8

-2

0

-

2

0

-

2

0

-

2

0

-

2

0

-19

-

1

9

-

1

9

-1

9

-

1

8

-1

8

-

1

7

-1

8

-18

-18

-

1

8

-18

-

1

8

-18

-

1

7

-1

7

-

1

7

-

1

7

-17

-

1

7

-17

-

1

7

-17

-

1

6

-

1

6

-

1

5

-15

-

1

4

-

1

3

-1

3

-

1

4

-15

-16

-

1

6

-16

-

1

6

-16

-

1

6

-

1

5

-

1

4

-

1

3

-

1

2

-15

-13

-13

-

1

5

-

1

3

-12

-10

-9

-1

5

-

1

5

-16

-1

5

-1

5

-

1

2

-1

3

-

1

3

-12

-11

-

1

0

-

1

2

-1

4

-

1

4

-14

-

1

4

-12

-

1

1

-

2

-

1

-1

-

1

-

2

-13

-21

-1

-24.5

-23.5

-23.5

-

2

3

.

5

-

2

3

.

5

-2

2

.5

-22.5

-2

3

.5

-

2

2

.

5

-2.5

-17.5

-19.5

-

2

0

.

5

-

2

2

.

5

-

2

1

.

5

-2

1

.5

-20.5

-

0

.

5

-1

.5

-18.5

-

1

6

.5

-20.5

-2.7

0+00

0+25

0+50

0+75

1+00

SSSS

SSSS

SS

SSSS

SSSS

SS

MHW

MLW

3.99"

SD

SD

4.26"

STREAM BED IMPACT AREAS

PERMANENT(2)28" DIA PIPES, MARINE MATTRESS, HP

PILES, DREDGING725 SF

CAR REMOVAL -34 SFTOTAL 691 SF (0.015 acres)

STREAM BANK IMPACT AREAS

PERMANENTSHEET PILE COFFERDAM 1.45 SF (51 LF)

TOTAL 1.45 SF (0.00003 acres)

C-105

RESOURCE AREAIMPACT PLAN

00 10' 20'

SCALE: 1" = 10'

APPROXIMATE LOCATIONOF EDGE OF NAVIGABLECHANNEL

WWTP OUTFALL HEADWALL AND RONDOUT CREEK PLAN

1" = 10'

APPROXIMATE LOCATIONOF REMAINS OF CAR

N

APPROXIMATELOCATION OFCOFFERDAM

CHECKED BY:

DRAWN BY:

FILE:

APPROVED BY:

Kingston, New York

WWTP OUTFALL

MODIFICATIONS

City of Kingston

DATE:

PROJECT NO:

Plot

ted

On:

Mar

15,

202

1-3:

18pm

By:

JAKal

lmer

ten

Last

Sav

ed:3

/15/

2021

Tigh

e &

Bon

d:\\

tighe

bond

.com

\dat

a\D

ata\

Proj

ects

\K\K

0094

Kin

gsto

n, N

Y\04

- W

WTP

Upg

rade

s\Ta

sk 4

A P

erm

it Com

plia

nce

Des

ign\

Out

fall\

Dra

win

gs_F

igur

es\A

utoC

AD

\She

et\K

0094

- W

WTP

Out

fall

SK.d

wg

MARK DATE DESCRIPTION

A 10/15/2020 30% DESIGN

B 1/7/2021 60% DESIGN

C 3/16/2021 NYS DEC SUBMITTAL

K0094 - WWTP Outfall SK.dwg

01/07/2021

K0094-004

SCALE:

47 West Market StreetRhinebeck, NY 12572

(845) 516-5800

SERVICES PROVIDED IN NEW YORKBY T&B ENGINEERING ANDLANDSCAPE ARCHITECTURE, P.C.UNAUTHORIZED ALTERNATIONS TO THIS DOCUMENT IS A VIOLATIONOF SECTION 7209 OF THE NEW YORK STATE EDUCATION LAW.

JAK

CG

EKM/MM

NYS DEC

SUBMITTAL

PERMANENT STREAMBED IMPACTS

PERMANENT CAR REMOVAL IMPACTS

SHEET 8 OF 16

C-501

DETAILS

CHECKED BY:

DRAWN BY:

FILE:

APPROVED BY:

Kingston, New York

WWTP OUTFALL

MODIFICATIONS

City of Kingston

DATE:

PROJECT NO:

Plot

ted

On:

Mar

15,

202

1-3:

21pm

By:

JAKal

lmer

ten

Last

Sav

ed:3

/15/

2021

Tigh

e &

Bon

d:\\

tighe

bond

.com

\dat

a\D

ata\

Proj

ects

\K\K

0094

Kin

gsto

n, N

Y\04

- W

WTP

Upg

rade

s\Ta

sk 4

A P

erm

it Com

plia

nce

Des

ign\

Out

fall\

Dra

win

gs_F

igur

es\A

utoC

AD

\She

et\K

0094

- W

WTP

Out

fall

SK.d

wg

MARK DATE DESCRIPTION

A 10/15/2020 30% DESIGN

B 1/7/2021 60% DESIGN

C 3/16/2021 NYS DEC SUBMITTAL

K0094 - WWTP Outfall SK.dwg

01/07/2021

K0094-004

SCALE:

47 West Market StreetRhinebeck, NY 12572

(845) 516-5800

SERVICES PROVIDED IN NEW YORKBY T&B ENGINEERING ANDLANDSCAPE ARCHITECTURE, P.C.UNAUTHORIZED ALTERNATIONS TO THIS DOCUMENT IS A VIOLATIONOF SECTION 7209 OF THE NEW YORK STATE EDUCATION LAW.

JAK

CG

EKM/MM

NYS DEC

SUBMITTAL

SHEET 9 OF 16

WORK AREA

WATER FLOWAREA TO BE PROTECTED

WORK AREAAREA TO BE PROTECTED

STAKE ON 10'LINEAL SPACING

SILT SOCK

2" X 2" WOODEN STAKE

SILT SOCK(12" TYPICAL)

12"

MIN

.3"

NOTES:1. SILT SOCK SHALL BE SILT SOXX BY FILTREXX OR

APPROVED EQUAL.2. SILT SOCK SHALL BE FILLED WITH FILTERMEDIA BY

FILTREXX OR APPROVED EQUAL.3. WHERE TWO SILT SOCKS ARE JOINED, A MINIMUM OF 2

FEET OF OVERLAP SHALL BE MAINTAINED.4. SILT SOCKS SHALL BE INSTALLED IN ACCORDANCE WITH

MANUFACTURER'S RECOMMENDATIONS.5. CONTRACTOR TO INSTALL SILT SOCK IN J-HOOK OR

SMILE CONFIGURATION TO LIMIT CONCENTRATION OFSTORMWATER RUNOFF AT A SINGLE DISHCARGE POINT.

SILT SOCK

NO SCALE

6" M

IN.

FABRIC

6" MIN.FABRIC

A

A

SILTATION FENCE

NO SCALE

SILT FENCESEE DETAIL A

EXISTING GROUND

18"

SEE DETAIL B

GRADE

SILT FENCE

2"x2" WOODSTAKES SPACED

AT 4'-5'± O.C.

SUITABLE BACKFILL

SILT FENCE

SILT FENCE WOOD POSTS

FINISHED GRADE

4'-6

"

DETAIL A

FLO

W

WORK ZONE

FLO

W

PLAN

WORK ZONE

SECTION A-A

RUNOFF

DETAIL B

WATER BODY

UPLAND

CONSTRUCTION LIMITS

STAKES OR ANCHORS (TYP)TURBIDITY CURTAIN

FLOW

TURBIDITY CURTAIN HEAVY CHAIN OROTHER WEIGHT

WATER LEVELFLOATATION

UPLAND

FLOOR OF WATER BODY

PLAN VIEW

DETAILS

TURBIDITY CURTAIN DETAILS

NO SCALE

GENERAL

1. STRUCTURAL WORKS SHALL CONFORM TO STATE BUILDING CODE, LATEST EDITION,INCLUDING MOST RECENT ADDENDA, AND CONTRACT DOCUMENTS. IN CASE OF CONFLICT,MOST STRINGENT REQUIREMENT SHALL GOVERN.

2. CONTRACTOR SHALL VERIFY AND COORDINATE DIMENSIONS RELATED TO THIS PROJECT.

3. CONTRACTOR SHALL EXAMINE DRAWINGS FOR ALL TRADES FOR THE VERIFICATION OFLOCATION AND DIMENSIONS OF ALL CHASES, INSERTS, OPENINGS, SLEEVES AND OTHERPROJECT REQUIREMENTS NOT SHOWN ON THE STRUCTURAL DRAWINGS.

REINFORCEMENT

1. DETAILING, FABRICATION, AND ERECTION OF REINFORCEMENT, UNLESS OTHERWISENOTED, SHALL CONFORM TO ACI “BUILDING CODE REQUIREMENTS FOR REINFORCEDCONCRETE (ACI 318)” AND ACI “MANUAL OF STANDARD PRACTICE FOR DETAILING REINFORCEDCONCRETE STRUCTURES (ACI 315)”, LATEST EDITION.

2. STEEL REINFORCEMENT UNLESS OTHERWISE SHOWN SHALL CONFORM TO ASTM A615 GRADE60 MINIMUM (YIELD STRENGTH - 60,000 PSI).

3. WELDED WIRE FABRIC REINFORCEMENT SHALL CONFORM TO: ASTM A185.

4. PROVIDE AND SCHEDULE ON SHOP DRAWINGS, ALL NECESSARY ACCESSORIES TO HOLDREINFORCEMENT SECURELY IN POSITION: MINIMUM REQUIREMENTS SHALL BE: HIGHCHAIRS, 4'-0” ON CENTER, #5 SUPPORT BAR FOR HIGH CHAIRS, SLAB BOLSTERS, 3'-6” ONCENTER, ALL WIRE CHAIRS AND BOLSTERS TO BE PLASTIC TIPPED.

5. THE CONCRETE PROTECTIVE COVERING FOR REINFORCEMENT SHALL BE AS FOLLOWS, UNLESSOTHERWISE SHOWN:

A. CAST-IN-PLACE CONCRETE.EXPOSED TO EARTH, WATER OR WEATHER

(a) SLAB ON GRADE 3 INCHES

(b) SLAB/WALL #3 TO #5 INCL'S 1 1/2 INCHES

(c) SLAB/WALL #6 TO #11 INCL'S 2 INCHES

(d) NOTE:MAXIMUM DEVIATION FROM THESE REQUIREMENTS SHALL BE +1/4” FORSECTIONS TEN (10) INCHES OR LESS, AND +1/2” FOR SECTIONS OVERTEN (10) INCHES THICK.

B. IN NO CASE SHALL THE COVER BE LESS THAN THE BAR DIAMETER.C. WHERE CONTINUOUS BARS ARE CALLED FOR THEY SHALL BE RUN CONTINUOUSLY AROUND

CORNERS AND LAPPED AT NECESSARY SPLICES OR HOOKED AT DISCONTINUOUS ENDS.6. WHERE REINFORCEMENT IS NOT SHOWN ON DRAWINGS, PROVIDE REINFORCEMENT IN

ACCORDANCE WITH APPLICABLE TYPICAL DETAILS OR SIMILAR TO THAT SHOWN FOR MOSTNEARLY SITUATIONS, AS DETERMINED BY THE ENGINEER. IN NO CASE SHALL REINFORCEMENTBE LESS THAN MINIMUM REINFORCEMENT PERMITTED BY THE APPLICABLE CODES, NOR LESSTHAN THE FOLLOWING:

A. BEAM STIRRUPS - #3 @ 12” OCB. BEAM STIRRUP SUPPORTS - 1-#5 @ EACH STIRRUP BENDC. FACE REINFORCEMENT IN BEAMS OR PORTIONS OF BEAMS - #4 @ 12” EFD. STRUCTURAL SLABS - .0028 GROSS CONCRETE AREA IN EACH DIRECTIONE. STRUCTURAL WALLS - .0028 GROSS CONCRETE AREA IN EACH DIRECTION

8. WHERE REINFORCEMENT IS CALLED FOR IN SECTION, REINFORCEMENT IS CONSIDEREDTYPICAL WHEREVER THE SECTION APPLIES.

9. REINFORCEMENT SHALL BE CONTINUOUS THROUGH ALL CONSTRUCTION JOINTS UNLESSOTHERWISE INDICATED ON THE DRAWINGS.

10. WELDED WIRE FABRICS SHALL LAP 12” OR TWO SPACES, WHICHEVER IS LARGER, AND SHALLBE WIRED TOGETHER.

11. REINFORCEMENT COUPLER SPLICES SHALL BE MECHANICAL DEVICES CAPABLE OFTRANSMITTING THE ULTIMATE TENSILE AND COMPRESSIVE STRENGTH OF THE BAR.

12. INSTALLATION OF REINFORCEMENT SHALL BE COMPLETE AT LEAST 24 HOURS PRIOR TOSCHEDULED CONCRETE PLACEMENT. NOTIFY ENGINEER OF COMPLETION AT LEAST 24 HOURSPRIOR TO SCHEDULED COMPLETION OF REINFORCEMENT PLACEMENT.

13. REINFORCEMENT SHALL BE SET BEFORE PLACING CONCRETE. SETTING ANY REINFORCEMENTINTO WET CONCRETE IS PROHIBITED.

CONCRETE

1. CONCRETE WORK SHALL CONFORM TO THE LATEST EDITIONS OF THE BUILDING CODEREQUIREMENTS FOR REINFORCED CONCRETE (ACI 318), AND SPECIFICATIONS FORSTRUCTURAL CONCRETE FOR BUILDING (ACI 301).

2. CONCRETE SHALL BE CONTROLLED CONCRETE, PROPORTIONED, MIXED, AND PLACED UNDERTHE SUPERVISION OF AN APPROVED CONCRETE TESTING AGENCY OR THE ENGINEER.

3. CONCRETE SHALL BE NORMAL WEIGHT CONCRETE AND SHALL HAVE A COMPRESSIVE STRENGTHOF 5000 PSI AT 28 DAYS, UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED AND SHALL BE AIR ENTRAINED (SEESPECS).

4. THE USE OF CONSTRUCTION JOINTS WHERE SHOWN ON THE DRAWINGS IS MANDATORY.OMISSIONS, ADDITIONS OR CHANGES SHALL NOT BE MADE EXCEPT WITH THE SUBMISSION OFA WRITTEN REQUEST TOGETHER WITH DRAWINGS OF THE PROPOSED JOINT LOCATIONS FORAPPROVAL OF THE STRUCTURAL ENGINEER.

5. WHERE CONSTRUCTION JOINTS ARE NOT SHOWN, DRAWINGS SHOWING LOCATION OFCONSTRUCTION JOINTS AND CONCRETE PLACING SEQUENCE SHALL BE SUBMITTED TO THEENGINEER FOR APPROVAL PRIOR TO PREPARATION OF THE REINFORCEMENT SHOP DRAWINGS.

6. CONCRETE SLABS SHALL BE CAST SO THAT THE SLAB THICKNESS IS AT NO POINT LESS THANTHAT INDICATED ON THE DRAWINGS.

7. CONCRETE SLABS AND WALLS SHALL BE CAST ALTERNATELY OR IN A CHECKERBOARD FASHIONSO THAT ADJACENT SECTIONS ARE PLACED NO SOONER THAN THREE DAYS APART. AT LEASTTWO DAYS MUST ELAPSE AFTER PLACING CONCRETE IN WALLS BEFORE PLACING FLOORSYSTEM SUPPORTED THEREON.

8. CONCRETE SHALL BE PLACED WITHOUT HORIZONTAL CONSTRUCTION JOINTS EXCEPT WHERESHOWN OR NOTED.

9. EXPOSED EDGES OF CONCRETE ELEMENTS SHALL HAVE CHAMFERED CORNERS

10. ONLY CRITICAL CONSTRUCTION JOINTS ARE SHOWN. SEE SPECIFICATIONS FOR REQUIREDMAXIMUM SPACING OF CONSTRUCTION JOINTS.

FOUNDATIONS

1. NO CONCRETE SHALL BE PLACED IN WATER OR ON FROZEN GROUND.

2. BOTTOM OF FOUNDATION ELEVATIONS GIVEN ON DRAWINGS ARE TO BE CONSIDEREDMINIMUM DEPTHS. CONTRACTOR SHALL HAVE FURTHER EXCAVATION AS REQUIRED TO REACHGOOD BEARING.

3. ALL EXCAVATIONS FOR FOOTINGS SHALL BE FINISHED BY HAND FOR THE LAST 6”.

4. ALL FINISHED EXCAVATIONS SHALL BE INSPECTED BY THE ENGINEER BEFORE ANY CONCRETEIS PLACED.

5. ALL BACKFILL UNDER OR ADJACENT TO ANY PORTION OF THE STRUCTURES SHALL BECOMPACTED IN 6” LIFTS. SEE SPECIFICATIONS.

6. REMOVE UNSUITABLE FILL AND/OR IMPROVE THE SUBGRADE PER SPECIFICATIONREQUIREMENTS. BACKFILL WITH COMPACTED STRUCTURAL (GRANULAR) FILL UP TO THEUNDERSIDE OF THE BUILDING SLABS. SEE SPECIFICATIONS.

STRUCTURAL STEEL

1. ALL STRUCTURAL STEEL WORK SHALL CONFORM TO A.I.S.C. “SPECIFICATIONS FOR THEDESIGN, FABRICATION AND ERECTION OF STRUCTURAL STEEL FOR BUILDINGS”, LATESTEDITION.

2. UNLESS MODIFIED BELOW OR ON THE CONTRACT DRAWINGS, THE FABRICATION ANDERECTION OF ALL STRUCTURAL STEEL SHALL BE ACCORDING TO THE A.I.S.C. CODE OFSTANDARD PRACTICE FOR STEEL BUILDINGS AND BRIDGES, LATEST EDITION.

3. STRUCTURAL STEEL SHALL BE NEW STEEL CONFORMING TO ASTM A36 UNLESS NOTEDOTHERWISE ON DRAWINGS. TUBING SHALL CONFORM TO ASTM A5000 GRADE B (FY=46KSI).

4. ALL JOINTS SHALL BE AS SHOWN ON THE CONTRACT DRAWINGS OR SHALL BE DESIGNED ASTYPE 2 (SIMPLE) FRAMING PER THE A.I.S.C. “SPECIFICATION FOR THEDESIGN, FABRICATION, AND ERECTION OF STRUCTURAL STEEL FOR BUILDINGS”, LATESTEDITION, AND OTHERWISE SHOWN ON THE CONTRACT DRAWINGS OR SPECIFIED. ALL JOINTSINTENDED TO BE CONNECTED IN THE SHOP SHALL BE WELDED AND ALL JOINTS INTENDED TOBE CONNECTED IN THE FIELD SHALL BE BOLTED.

5. IN THE DESIGN OF THE FRAMED BEAM CONNECTIONS (BOLTED), THE FOLLOWING SHALLGOVERN, UNLESS OTHERWISE SPECIFICALLY INDICATED:

A. FASTENER DIAMETER - 3/4" MINIMUM.B. FASTENER DESIGNATION - A325.C. NUMBER OF BOLT ROWS - THE MAXIMUM NUMBER AS INDICATED IN TABLE 10-1 OF THE

A.I.S.C. “MANUAL OF STEEL CONSTRUCTION, 13TH EDITION, PART 10 - DESIGN OF SIMPLESHEAR CONNECTIONS”.

D. CONNECTION ANGLE THICKNESS - AS INDICATED IN TABLE 10-1 OR 10-2.E. MINIMUM CONNECTION PLATE THICKNESS SHALL BE 3/8”.F. WELDED CONNECTIONS - SERIES E-70 ELECTRODES. THE WELD CONNECTION CAPACITY

SHALL BE EQUAL TO OR GREATER THAN THAT FOR THE SAME BOLTED CONNECTION ASSPECIFIED HEREIN. THE MINIMUM WELD SIZE FOR ANY CONNECTION SHALL NOT BE LESSTHAN 3/16”.

G. USE HARDENED WASHERS UNDER BOLT HEAD AND NUT, CONFORMING TO ASTM F436. USENO MORE THAN 2 WASHERS.

H. BOLT INSTALLATION IN ACCORDANCE WITH TURN-OF-NUT METHOD OUTLINED INSPECIFICATIONS FOR STRUCTURAL JOINTS USING ASTM A325 OR A490 BOLTS.

6. ALL WELDING SHALL CONFORM TO A.W.S D1.1, LATEST REVISION, “STRUCTURAL WELDINGCODE”.

7. HOLES, CUTS AND OTHER MODIFICATIONS TO THE STRUCTURAL STEEL SHALL NOT BE MADE INTHE FIELD EXCEPT WITH THE SPECIFIC PERMISSION OF THE ENGINEER.

8. COUNCIL SPECIFICATIONS PREPARATION SHALL BE ACCORDING TO SSPC-SP3 FOR STEEL TO BELEFT UNPAINTED AND SSPC-SP6 FOR STEEL TO BE FINISHED. REFER TO SPECIFICATIONS.

9. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL BE RESPONSIBLE FOR FIELD TOUCH-UP PAINTING OF ALLSTRUCTURAL STEEL AFTER THE STEEL ERECTION INCLUDING ALL NUTS, BOLTS, AND WELDSAND ANY DAMAGE TO THE PRIME COAT, INCURRED DURING AND AFTER FIELD ERECTION.

10. THE STRUCTURAL STEEL CONTRACTOR SHALL INSPECT ALL FOUNDATIONS INCLUDING ANCHORBOLTS FOR ACCEPTABILITY AND PROVIDE A WRITTEN REPORT TO THE RESIDENT ENGINEER TOTHIS EFFECT PRIOR TO INITIATING WORK.

11. ANCHOR BOLTS, LEVELING PLATES, OR BEARING PLATES SHALL BE LOCATED AND BUILT INTOCONNECTING WORK, PRESET BY TEMPLATES OR SIMILAR METHODS. PLATES SHALL BE SET INFULL BEDS OF NON-SHRINK GROUT.

12. STRUCTURAL STEEL DETAILS NOT SPECIFICALLY SHOWN SHALL BE SIMILAR TO THOSE SHOWNFOR MOST NEARLY SIMILAR SITUATIONS AS DETERMINED BY THE STRUCTURAL ENGINEER.

13. STRUCTURAL STEEL FRAMING SHALL BE TRUE AND PLUMB BEFORE CONNECTIONS ARE FINALLYBOLTED OR WELDED.

14. TEMPORARY ERECTION BRACING AND SUPPORTS SHALL BE PROVIDED TO HOLD STRUCTURALSTEEL FRAMING SECURELY IN POSITION. SUCH TEMPORARY BRACING AND SUPPORTS SHALLNOT BE REMOVED UNTIL PERMANENT BRACING HAS BEEN INSTALLED AND FLOOR SLABS HAVEATTAINED 75 PERCENT OR SPECIFIED CONCRETE STRENGTH.

SECTION CUTA A

A

S-XXX

1

S-XXX

SECTION DRAWING WHERE SECTION ISSHOWN OR TAKEN

DRAWING WHERE DETAIL ISSHOWN OR TAKEN

DETAIL REFERENCE NUMBER

SECTION REFERENCE LETTER

DETAIL

GENERAL SYMBOLS

CHECKED BY:

DRAWN BY:

FILE:

APPROVED BY:

Kingston, New York

WWTP OUTFALL

MODIFICATIONS

City of Kingston

DATE:

PROJECT NO:

Plot

ted

On:

Mar

16,

202

1-10

:13a

m B

y: J

AKal

lmer

ten

Last

Sav

ed:3

/4/2

021

Tigh

e &

Bon

d:\\

tighe

bond

.com

\dat

a\D

ata\

Proj

ects

\K\K

0094

Kin

gsto

n, N

Y\04

- W

WTP

Upg

rade

s\Ta

sk 4

A P

erm

it Com

plia

nce

Des

ign\

Out

fall\

Dra

win

gs_F

igur

es\A

utoC

AD

\She

et\K

0094

-004

A-G

-001

.dw

g

MARK DATE DESCRIPTION

A 10/15/2020 30% DESIGN

B 1/7/2021 60% DESIGN

C 3/16/2021 NYS DEC SUBMITTAL

K0094-004A-G-001.dwg

01/07/2021

K0094-004

SCALE:

47 West Market StreetRhinebeck, NY 12572

(845) 516-5800

SERVICES PROVIDED IN NEW YORKBY T&B ENGINEERING ANDLANDSCAPE ARCHITECTURE, P.C.UNAUTHORIZED ALTERNATIONS TO THIS DOCUMENT IS A VIOLATIONOF SECTION 7209 OF THE NEW YORK STATE EDUCATION LAW.

JAK

CG

EKM/MM

NYS DEC

SUBMITTAL

S-001

STRUCTURAL NOTES &LEGEND

SHEET 10 OF 16

-30

-20

-10

0

10

-30

-20

-10

0

10

-0+05 0+00 0+50 0+95

HP12X63

MARINEMATTRESS

NAVIGABLE CHANNEL(APPROXIMATE)

MHW=1.93 (NAVD88)

MLW= -1.58 (NAVD88)

CUT CONCRETE HEADWALLAT ELEVATION 5, TOP TBRAND DISPOSED

28" OD STEEL PIPE AND SUPPORTS(TYP OF 2), SEE PLAN ANDSECTIONS

NEW 18" OD STEELSTORM DRAIN

COFFERDAM TO BELEFT IN PLACE ANDCUT AT ELEVATION 5

GRANULAR FILL6" LOAM AND SEED

20" TO 24" PIPEINCREASER

24" TO28" PIPE

INCREASER

CONCRETE ENCASEMENT

GEOTEXTILE

GRAVELBORROW

LOCALIZEDDREDGING

#5 REBAR 12" OC

22'

14'

S-101

PROPOSED PLAN& PROFILE

00 5' 10'

SCALE: 1" = 5'

INV EL -21.58'

WWTP OUTFALL HEADWALL AND RONDOUT CREEK PROFILE

1" = 5'

EL -2.70'

NOTE:1. STEEL FRAME AND TIMBER FENDER NOT SHOWN

FOR CLARITY. SEE S-502 FOR DETAILS

28" STEEL PIPE (TYP)

WWTP PROPOSED OUTFALL MODIFICATIONS - PLAN

1" = 5'-0"

WALL PLATE X FLG (TYP)

PIPE SUPPORT (TYP)

STEEL FRAME WITHWOOD FENDERPROTECTION SYSTEM

28" 45°BENDS

PIPESUPPORT

28" 90°BEND

B

-

B

-

28" 45° ELBOWS (TYP)

MARINEMATTRESS

CHECKED BY:

DRAWN BY:

FILE:

APPROVED BY:

Kingston, New York

WWTP OUTFALL

MODIFICATIONS

City of Kingston

DATE:

PROJECT NO:

Plot

ted

On:

Mar

15,

202

1-3:

46pm

By:

JAKal

lmer

ten

Last

Sav

ed:3

/15/

2021

Tigh

e &

Bon

d:\\

tighe

bond

.com

\dat

a\D

ata\

Proj

ects

\K\K

0094

Kin

gsto

n, N

Y\04

- W

WTP

Upg

rade

s\Ta

sk 4

A P

erm

it Com

plia

nce

Des

ign\

Out

fall\

Dra

win

gs_F

igur

es\A

utoC

AD

\She

et\K

0094

- W

WTP

Out

fall

SK.d

wg

MARK DATE DESCRIPTION

A 10/15/2020 30% DESIGN

B 1/7/2021 60% DESIGN

C 3/16/2021 NYS DEC SUBMITTAL

K0094 - WWTP Outfall SK.dwg

01/07/2021

K0094-004

SCALE:

47 West Market StreetRhinebeck, NY 12572

(845) 516-5800

SERVICES PROVIDED IN NEW YORKBY T&B ENGINEERING ANDLANDSCAPE ARCHITECTURE, P.C.UNAUTHORIZED ALTERNATIONS TO THIS DOCUMENT IS A VIOLATIONOF SECTION 7209 OF THE NEW YORK STATE EDUCATION LAW.

JAK

CG

EKM/MM

NYS DEC

SUBMITTAL

20 TO 24" INCREASER & 24"TO 28" INCREASER (TYP)

20" OD STEEL PIPE (TYP)

CONCRETEENCASEMENT

00 5' 10'

SCALE: 1" = 5'

SHEET 11 OF 16

3

S-502

3

S-501

4

S-502

5

S-502

1

S-502

2

S-50118" STORM DRAINEXTENSION

WWTP PROPOSED STORM DRAIN - PLAN

1" = 5'-0"

00 5' 10'

SCALE: 1" = 5'

2" DIA VENT(TYP OF 2)

1

S-503

SEE PLAN VIEW FORSTORM DRAIN

CONTINUATION

TO REMAIN

TIP ELEVATION =APPROXIMATELY -69.5'FOR BENTS 1,2 AND 3

TIP ELEVATION =APPROXIMATELY -71'

FOR BENTS 4,5 AND 6

TIP ELEVATION = APPROXIMATELY-72' FOR BENTS 7,8,9 AND 10

SHEET PILEPENETRATION

2

S-503

3

S-503

4

S-503

SHEET PILEPENETRATION

2

S-503

3

S-503

4

S-503

NOTES:1. SEE SHEET S-503 FOR JOINT HARNESS/FLEXIBLE

COUPLING DETAIL2. COORDINATE LOCATIONS OF SHEETPILE

PENETRATIONS, PIPING, JOINTHARNESS/FLEXIBLE COUPLINGS, PILE LOCATIONSAND CONCRETE ENCASEMENT

STEEL FRAME WITHWOOD FENDERPROTECTION SYSTEM

3

S-502

1

S-502

SHEETPILE TIP ELEVATION= -55' NAVD88

3

S-501

0+00

0+25

0+50

0+75

MHW

MLW

STA: 0+08.0OFFSET: 2.0' RT

STA: 0+56.0OFFSET: 2.0' RT

STA: 0+48.0OFFSET: 2.0' RT

STA: 0+40.0OFFSET: 2.0' RT

STA: 0+32.0OFFSET: 2.0' RT

STA: 0+27.6OFFSET: 2.0' RT

STA: 0+24.0OFFSET: 2.0' RT

STA: 0+20.3OFFSET: 2.0' RT

STA: 0+16.0OFFSET: 2.0' RT

STA: 0+56.0OFFSET: 2.0' LT

STA: 0+48.0OFFSET: 2.0' LT

STA: 0+32.0OFFSET: 2.0' LT

STA: 0+40.0OFFSET: 2.0' LT

STA: 0+27.6OFFSET: 2.0' LT

3.99"

STA: 0+24.0OFFSET: 2.0' LT

STA: 0+20.3OFFSET: 2.0' LT

STA: 0+16.0OFFSET: 2.0' LT

STA: 0+08.0OFFSET: 2.0' LT

SD

SD

SD

SD

4.26"

STA: 0+61.6OFFSET: 2.0' RT STA: 0+61.6

OFFSET: 2.0' LT

MHW

MLW

STA: 0+08.0OFFSET: 2.0' RT

STA: 0+56.0OFFSET: 2.0' RT

STA: 0+48.0OFFSET: 2.0' RT

STA: 0+40.0OFFSET: 2.0' RT

STA: 0+32.0OFFSET: 2.0' RT

STA: 0+27.6OFFSET: 2.0' RT

STA: 0+24.0OFFSET: 2.0' RT

STA: 0+20.3OFFSET: 2.0' RT

STA: 0+16.0OFFSET: 2.0' RT

STA: 0+56.0OFFSET: 2.0' LT

STA: 0+48.0OFFSET: 2.0' LT

STA: 0+32.0OFFSET: 2.0' LT

STA: 0+40.0OFFSET: 2.0' LT

STA: 0+27.6OFFSET: 2.0' LT

3.99"

STA: 0+24.0OFFSET: 2.0' LT

STA: 0+20.3OFFSET: 2.0' LT

STA: 0+16.0OFFSET: 2.0' LT

STA: 0+08.0OFFSET: 2.0' LT

MC 13X35

8"

4.26"

STA: 0+61.6OFFSET: 2.0' RT STA: 0+61.6

OFFSET: 2.0' LT

S-102

PROPOSED PILE& PILE CAP PLAN

00 5' 10'

SCALE: 1" = 5'

N

APPROXIMATE LOCATIONOF COFFERDAM

CHECKED BY:

DRAWN BY:

FILE:

APPROVED BY:

Kingston, New York

WWTP OUTFALL

MODIFICATIONS

City of Kingston

DATE:

PROJECT NO:

Plot

ted

On:

Mar

15,

202

1-3:

53pm

By:

JAKal

lmer

ten

Last

Sav

ed:3

/15/

2021

Tigh

e &

Bon

d:\\

tighe

bond

.com

\dat

a\D

ata\

Proj

ects

\K\K

0094

Kin

gsto

n, N

Y\04

- W

WTP

Upg

rade

s\Ta

sk 4

A P

erm

it Com

plia

nce

Des

ign\

Out

fall\

Dra

win

gs_F

igur

es\A

utoC

AD

\She

et\K

0094

- W

WTP

Out

fall

SK.d

wg

MARK DATE DESCRIPTION

A 10/15/2020 30% DESIGN

B 1/7/2021 60% DESIGN

C 3/16/2021 NYS DEC SUBMITTAL

K0094 - WWTP Outfall SK.dwg

01/07/2021

K0094-004

SCALE:

47 West Market StreetRhinebeck, NY 12572

(845) 516-5800

SERVICES PROVIDED IN NEW YORKBY T&B ENGINEERING ANDLANDSCAPE ARCHITECTURE, P.C.UNAUTHORIZED ALTERNATIONS TO THIS DOCUMENT IS A VIOLATIONOF SECTION 7209 OF THE NEW YORK STATE EDUCATION LAW.

JAK

CG

EKM/MM

NYS DEC

SUBMITTAL

TURBIDITY CURTAIN

SHEET 12 OF 15

00 5' 10'

SCALE: 1" = 5'

N

NOTES:1. ALL PILES HP 12X632. ALL PILE CAPS (2) MC 13 X 353. SEE S-502 FOR PILE AND PIPE SUPPORT

DETAIL

TURBIDITY CURTAIN

4

S-501

2

S-501

SHEETPILECONNECTOR ORCORNER PILE

SHEETPILECONNECTOR ORCORNER PILE

APPROXIMATE LOCATIONOF COFFERDAM

SECTION

A

---

A

---

City of Kingston

HIGH OUTFALL FLOWDIVERSION

K0094-004A-HighOutfallFlowDiversion.dwg

PLAN VIEW

1/2" = 1'

AS SHOWN

DEMOLISH ABANDONEDSLIDE PLATE GUIDE(TYP)

SAWCUT EXISTING CONC WALL TO 6"AWAY FROM PRIMARY CLARIFIERS

EFFLUENT TROUGH WALL(SEE SECTION A THIS SHEET)

NOTES:

1. CONTRACTOR TO DESIGN PIPE SUPPORTS.

2. NOT ALL PIPE SUPPORTS SHOWN.

3. DO NOT ANCHOR PIPE SUPPORTS TO PRIMARY CLARIFIER EFFLUENT TROUGH WALL.

4. INSTALL PIPE SUPPORTS IN ACCORDANCE WITH MANUFACTURER'S REQUIREMENTS.

5. FIELD VERIFY ALL DIMENSIONS AND ELEVATIONS.

6. COORDINATE WITH OWNER TO STOP FLOW AS NEEDED FOR THE WORK. COMPLY WITH THEREQUIREMENTS OF SPECIFICATION SECTION 011400.

SS TROUGH 6"Hx6"Wx18"LPOSITION TO CAPTURE FLOW FROM OVER EFFLUENT WEIRINSTALL TROUGH INVERT 6" BELOW TOP OF WEIR

6" SS PIPESLOPE 14" PER FOOTSS PIPE SUPPORTS

AND CROSSBRACINGANCHOR TO CONCWALLS ANDCEILING ASREQUIRED(TYP)

END PIPE 2'±3" INTO HIGH OUTFALL CONC FLUME(DO NOT ANCHOR PIPE SUPPORTS WITHIN THE FLUME)

0 1' 2' 4'

SCALE: 1/2"=1'-0"

DEMOLISH MH STEPS(TYP)

SAWCUT EXISTING CONC WALL AND DEMOLISH TO 6" AWAYFROM PRIMARY CLARIFIERS EFFLUENT TROUGH WALL

0.50'

6" SS PIPESLOPE 14" PER FOOT

DEMOLISH DETERIORATED MH STEPS(TYP)

DEMOLISH DETERIORATED MH STEPS(TYP OF 2)

SAWCUT EXISTING CONC WALL TO 6" AWAY FROMPRIMARY CLARIFIERS EFFLUENT TROUGH WALL

0 1' 2' 3'

SCALE: 3/4"=1'-0"

CROSS BRACE THIS LOCATION

CHECKED BY:

DRAWN BY:

FILE:

APPROVED BY:

Kingston, New York

WWTP OUTFALL

MODIFICATIONS

City of Kingston

DATE:

PROJECT NO:

Plot

ted

On:

Mar

16,

202

1-10

:18a

m B

y: J

AKal

lmer

ten

Last

Sav

ed:3

/4/2

021

Tigh

e &

Bon

d:\\

tighe

bond

.com

\dat

a\D

ata\

Proj

ects

\K\K

0094

Kin

gsto

n, N

Y\04

- W

WTP

Upg

rade

s\Ta

sk 4

A P

erm

it Com

plia

nce

Des

ign\

Out

fall\

Dra

win

gs_F

igur

es\A

utoC

AD

\She

et\K

0094

-004

A-H

ighO

utfa

llFlo

wD

iver

sion

.dw

g

MARK DATE DESCRIPTION

A 10/15/2020 30% DESIGN

B 1/7/2021 60% DESIGN

C 3/16/2021 NYS DEC SUBMITTAL

K0094-004A-HighOutfallFlowDiversion.dwg

01/07/2021

K0094-004

SCALE:

47 West Market StreetRhinebeck, NY 12572

(845) 516-5800

SERVICES PROVIDED IN NEW YORKBY T&B ENGINEERING ANDLANDSCAPE ARCHITECTURE, P.C.UNAUTHORIZED ALTERNATIONS TO THIS DOCUMENT IS A VIOLATIONOF SECTION 7209 OF THE NEW YORK STATE EDUCATION LAW.

JAK

CG

EKM/MM

NYS DEC

SUBMITTAL

S-103SHEET 13 OF 16

STAINLESS STEELFRAME/BASKET PER

MANUFACTURERSRECOMMENDATIONS

ROCKFILL

LOCALIZED DREDGINGPROPOSED FORINSTALLATION

28"Ø28"Ø

MUD LINE

28"Ø28"Ø28"Ø

S-501

DETAILS

AS SHOWN

CONCRETE ENCASEMENT DETAIL

1/2" = 1'-0"

COFFERDAM DETAIL

3/4" = 1'-0"

NOTES:1. SHEET PILE DRIVEN DEPTH TO BE DETERMINED2. SHEET PILE TO BE CUT AND LEFT IN PLACE,

ELEVATION TO BE 5.0' NAVD883. SHEET PILE SHALL BE AZ26 OR APPROVED EQUAL4. MINIMUM SHEETPILE TIP ELEVATION = -55'

NAVD88

SECTION

B

-1" = 1'-0"

WALL PLATE X FLG (TYP)

34" INCH DIAMETER AISI 316 SS THREADED ROD

(ASTM F 593 CONDITION CW) WITH 3" X 3" X 38"SS PLATE WASHER AND SS NUT (ASTM F 594)

20" STEEL PIPE(TYP)

MARINE MATTRESS DETAIL

1" = 5'-0"

28" ODSTEELPIPES

1'

14'

CHECKED BY:

DRAWN BY:

FILE:

APPROVED BY:

Kingston, New York

WWTP OUTFALL

MODIFICATIONS

City of Kingston

DATE:

PROJECT NO:

Plot

ted

On:

Mar

15,

202

1-4:

19pm

By:

JAKal

lmer

ten

Last

Sav

ed:3

/15/

2021

Tigh

e &

Bon

d:\\

tighe

bond

.com

\dat

a\D

ata\

Proj

ects

\K\K

0094

Kin

gsto

n, N

Y\04

- W

WTP

Upg

rade

s\Ta

sk 4

A P

erm

it Com

plia

nce

Des

ign\

Out

fall\

Dra

win

gs_F

igur

es\A

utoC

AD

\She

et\K

0094

- W

WTP

Out

fall

SK.d

wg

MARK DATE DESCRIPTION

A 10/15/2020 30% DESIGN

B 1/7/2021 60% DESIGN

C 3/16/2021 NYS DEC SUBMITTAL

K0094 - WWTP Outfall SK.dwg

01/07/2021

K0094-004

SCALE:

47 West Market StreetRhinebeck, NY 12572

(845) 516-5800

SERVICES PROVIDED IN NEW YORKBY T&B ENGINEERING ANDLANDSCAPE ARCHITECTURE, P.C.UNAUTHORIZED ALTERNATIONS TO THIS DOCUMENT IS A VIOLATIONOF SECTION 7209 OF THE NEW YORK STATE EDUCATION LAW.

JAK

CG

EKM/MM

NYS DEC

SUBMITTAL

0 1' 2' 4'

SCALE: 1/2"=1'-0"

0 1' 2' 3'

SCALE: 3/4"=1'-0"

SHEET 14 OF 16

0 0.5' 1' 2'

SCALE: 1"=1'-0"

1'-6.11"

1'-3.49"

3'-3.63"

4'-8.52"

1

-

2

-

3

-

(12) #6 BARSSPACED 10.5" OC

#6 BARS @ 9" OCBOTH DIRECTION

(8) $6 DIAGONALBARS @ 12" OC

#6 BARS @12" OC,BOTH DIRECTIONS

STEEL PIPESUPPORT

1

502

5'-0.96"

3" 8"

8'-6"

3"

6"

GEOTEXTILE

GRAVEL BORROW

1'-6"

CONCRETE ENCASEMENT DETAIL

1/2" = 1'-0"0 1' 2' 4'

SCALE: 1/2"=1'-0"

4

-

PROVIDEHYDROPHILLIC

WATER STOP

NOTE: ACTUAL MARINE MATTRESS SIZE TO BE PERMANUFACTURERS RECOMMENDATIONS

FIELDSUBAQUEOUSWELDING(TYP)

2-MC 13 x 35

28"Ø∠6" X 4" X 12" X 16" LONG

LONG LEG VERTICAL(LLV) (TYP OF 4)

HEAVY DUTY PIPE SADDLEWELDED TO MC 12X35'S

(TYP)

4'± (SEE PILE PLAN ON S-102)

∠4" X 6" X 12" X 4" LONGLLV TEMPORARYSUPPORT(TYPICAL OF 4)

MC MC

HEAVY DUTY PIPESADDLE

6" X 4" X 1/2" X 4"LONG LLV

28"Ø O.D.

PIPE HOLDDOWN STRAP

MUD LINE

MUD LINE

PIPE HOLDDOWN STRAP

6" X 4" X 1/2" X16" LONG LLV

27"Ø I.D.

.515".515"

11.9"

1'-0.13" 1'-0.13"

28"Ø

8'

3"

VARIES(TYP)

COORDINATEWITH

PIPINGLAYOUT

TEFLONSEAT

HEAVY DUTY PIPESADDLE

9 12"SUBAQUEOUSWELDING(TYP)

6" SUBAQUEOUSWELDING (TYP)

9 12" SUBAQUEOUSWELDING, EACHSIDE OF HP FLANGE(TYP)

HP12X63

316

316

316

FIELD SUB-AQUEOUSWELDING(TYP)

316 2-6

2-6

4' NAVD88

MHW = 1.93' NAVD88

-1.0' NAVD88

MLW = -1.53' NAVD88

-3.0' NAVD88

2.5' NAVD88

38" (TYP)

S-502

DETAILS

AS SHOWN

CHECKED BY:

DRAWN BY:

FILE:

APPROVED BY:

Kingston, New York

WWTP OUTFALL

MODIFICATIONS

City of Kingston

DATE:

PROJECT NO:

Plot

ted

On:

Mar

15,

202

1-4:

54pm

By:

JAKal

lmer

ten

Last

Sav

ed:3

/15/

2021

Tigh

e &

Bon

d:\\

tighe

bond

.com

\dat

a\D

ata\

Proj

ects

\K\K

0094

Kin

gsto

n, N

Y\04

- W

WTP

Upg

rade

s\Ta

sk 4

A P

erm

it Com

plia

nce

Des

ign\

Out

fall\

Dra

win

gs_F

igur

es\A

utoC

AD

\She

et\K

0094

- W

WTP

Out

fall

SK.d

wg

MARK DATE DESCRIPTION

A 10/15/2020 30% DESIGN

B 1/7/2021 60% DESIGN

C 3/16/2021 NYS DEC SUBMITTAL

K0094 - WWTP Outfall SK.dwg

01/07/2021

K0094-004

SCALE:

47 West Market StreetRhinebeck, NY 12572

(845) 516-5800

SERVICES PROVIDED IN NEW YORKBY T&B ENGINEERING ANDLANDSCAPE ARCHITECTURE, P.C.UNAUTHORIZED ALTERNATIONS TO THIS DOCUMENT IS A VIOLATIONOF SECTION 7209 OF THE NEW YORK STATE EDUCATION LAW.

JAK

CG

EKM/MM

NYS DEC

SUBMITTAL

SHEET 15 OF 16

PIPE SUPPORT DETAIL

3/4" = 1'-0"0 1' 2' 3'

SCALE: 3/4"=1'-0"

HP 12X63 DETAIL

1/4" = 1'-0"

0 2' 4' 8'

SCALE: 1/4"=1'-0"

1'-0.1"

11.9"

0.52"

0.52"

90 DEGREE BEND DETAIL

3/4" = 1'-0"0 1' 2' 3'

SCALE: 3/4"=1'-0"

4" 4"

4"

45 DEGREE BEND DETAIL

3/4" = 1'-0"0 1' 2' 3'

SCALE: 3/4"=1'-0"

2'-4" 2'-3"

0.5"

0.5"

9.57"

1'-3.14"

9.57"

4"

4"

0.5"

2'-4" 2'-3"

0.5"

1'-3.14"

1'-3.14"

1'-3.14"

9.57"

9.57"

A

A

B

B

FENDER DETAIL- PLAN VIEW

3/4" = 1'-0"0 1' 2' 3'

SCALE: 3/4"=1'-0"

FENDER DETAIL- SECTION B-B

3/4" = 1'-0"0 1' 2' 3'

SCALE: 3/4"=1'-0"

4" TYP

HP 12X63 WALE (TYP)

9'-6.61"

8'

12X12 TIMBER PLANKING (TYP)

HP 12X63 PILE (TYP)

HP 12X63 PILE (TYP)

HP 12X63 WALE12X12 TIMBER PLANKING

HP 12X63 WALE

SECTION A-A

3/4" = 1'-0"

1

-

2

-

3

-

4

-

5

-

90°

45°

12" LONG WT8X50CONNECTOR (TYP)

B

B

B

B

34" OD A325 BOLT

WITH HEX NUT (TYP)

34" OD RECESSED THRU BOLT

WITH WASHER AND HEX NUT

1" RECESSEDFROM SIDE

ELEV. 11.2' NAVD88

ELEV. 9.2' NAVD88

ELEV. 5' NAVD88

28" ODOUTFALL PIPE

4" DIA. OPENING24" X 24" X 6"CONCRETE COLLAR

2" STEEL POPE GOOSENECK VENT WIT #25

MESH INSECT SCREEN

2" STEEL NPTCOUPLING, 18" BELOWFINAL GRADE

2" PVC NPT TRUEUNION

LINK SEAL

S-503

DETAILS

AS SHOWN

CHECKED BY:

DRAWN BY:

FILE:

APPROVED BY:

Kingston, New York

WWTP OUTFALL

MODIFICATIONS

City of Kingston

DATE:

PROJECT NO:

Plot

ted

On:

Mar

16,

202

1-9:

57am

By:

JAKal

lmer

ten

Last

Sav

ed:3

/16/

2021

Tigh

e &

Bon

d:\\

tighe

bond

.com

\dat

a\D

ata\

Proj

ects

\K\K

0094

Kin

gsto

n, N

Y\04

- W

WTP

Upg

rade

s\Ta

sk 4

A P

erm

it Com

plia

nce

Des

ign\

Out

fall\

Dra

win

gs_F

igur

es\A

utoC

AD

\She

et\K

0094

- W

WTP

Out

fall

SK.d

wg

MARK DATE DESCRIPTION

A 10/15/2020 30% DESIGN

B 1/7/2021 60% DESIGN

C 3/16/2021 NYS DEC SUBMITTAL

K0094 - WWTP Outfall SK.dwg

01/07/2021

K0094-004

SCALE:

47 West Market StreetRhinebeck, NY 12572

(845) 516-5800

SERVICES PROVIDED IN NEW YORKBY T&B ENGINEERING ANDLANDSCAPE ARCHITECTURE, P.C.UNAUTHORIZED ALTERNATIONS TO THIS DOCUMENT IS A VIOLATIONOF SECTION 7209 OF THE NEW YORK STATE EDUCATION LAW.

JAK

CG

EKM/MM

NYS DEC

SUBMITTAL

SHEET 16 OF 16

2" VENT DETAIL DETAIL

3/4" = 1'-0"0 1' 2' 3'

SCALE: 3/4"=1'-0"

1

-

NOTES:1. FINAL VENT PIPE LOCATIONS SHALL BE ABOVE GRADE AT LOCATIONS AS DIRECTED

BY THE ENGINEER. LOCATIONS WILL BE WITHIN 25 FEET OF FLANGEDCONNECTIONS.

2. ABOVE GRADE VENT PIPE SHALL BE PROTECTED FROM VANDALISM, CREEK FLOWSAND DEBRIS UTILIZING A CONTRACTOR DESIGNED SYSTEM. DESIGN SHALL BESUBJECT TO REVIEW AND APPROVAL OF THE OWNER. CONCRETE COLLAR SHALLNOT BE USED AS A SOLE MEANS OF SUPPORT.

3. VENTS SHALL BE LOCATED A MINIMUM OF 5 FEET FROM CATHODIC PROTECTIONSYSTEM COMPONENTS.

SHEET PILE PENETRATION DETAIL: PLAN VIEW

3/4" = 1'-0"0 1' 2' 3'

SCALE: 3/4"=1'-0"

2

-

SHEET PILE PENETRATION: ELEVATION VIEW

3/4" = 1'-0"0 1' 2' 3'

SCALE: 3/4"=1'-0"

3

-

SHEET PILE PENNETRATION DETAIL: SECTION VIEW

3/4" = 1'-0"0 1' 2' 3'

SCALE: 3/4"=1'-0"

4

-

CONCRETE COLLAR WITHHYDROPHYLLIC WATERSTOP

WALL PLATE AND PIPE SLEEVEWELDED TO SHEET PILE

28" OD PIPE

SHEETING OPENING

SHEET PILES

STEEL PIPE IN-THE-WETINSTALLATION

INITIAL TREMIE CONCRETEPOUR AS REQUIRED

HYDROPHYLLIC WATERSTOP (TYP)

9"

2'

SHEET PILES

WALL PLATE ANDPIPE SLEEVE

28" OD STEEL PIPE

JOINT HARNESS/ FLEXIBLE COUPLING DETAIL

3/4" = 1'-0"0 1' 2' 3'

SCALE: 3/4"=1'-0"

5

-

CONCRETE ENCASED PIPE (TYP)FOR REINFORCEMENT SEE DETAIL2 ON S-501

FLEXIBLE COUPLINGTEEKAY AXIFLEX ORAPPROVED EQUAL

AWWA M11 JOINT HARNESSRATED AT 25 PSI

PIPINGEXTENDINGTHROUGHSHEET PILES(TYP)

TOP OF SHEET PILE CUT OFFELEVATION = 5' NAVD88

LINK SEAL

2" FLANGED CONNECTION

THRUST RESTRAINTTIE ROD (TYP)

#5 EW (TYP)

24" OD PIPE 24" OD PIPE

20" OD PIPE

6'-4"

3'

6'-4"7'-11.21"

10'-8"

12'-3.21"

WALL PLATE

PIPE SLEEVE

#5 REBAR

4" X 34" DIA SHEAR STUD W/ 2"DIA WASHER 34" THICK

SHEAR STUD

20" OD PIPE

20" STORM DRAIN TOEND AFTER SHEET PILE

APPENDIX G

Page 1 of 13

Full Environmental Assessment Form Part 1 - Project and Setting

Instructions for Completing Part 1

Part 1 is to be completed by the applicant or project sponsor. Responses become part of the application for approval or funding, are subject to public review, and may be subject to further verification.

Complete Part 1 based on information currently available. If additional research or investigation would be needed to fully respond to any item, please answer as thoroughly as possible based on current information; indicate whether missing information does not exist, or is not reasonably available to the sponsor; and, when possible, generally describe work or studies which would be necessary to update or fully develop that information.

Applicants/sponsors must complete all items in Sections A & B. In Sections C, D & E, most items contain an initial question that must be answered either “Yes” or “No”. If the answer to the initial question is “Yes”, complete the sub-questions that follow. If the answer to the initial question is “No”, proceed to the next question. Section F allows the project sponsor to identify and attach any additional information. Section G requires the name and signature of the applicant or project sponsor to verify that the information contained in Part 1is accurate and complete.

A. Project and Applicant/Sponsor Information.

Name of Action or Project:

Project Location (describe, and attach a general location map):

Brief Description of Proposed Action (include purpose or need):

Name of Applicant/Sponsor: Telephone:

E-Mail:

Address:

City/PO: State: Zip Code:

Project Contact (if not same as sponsor; give name and title/role): Telephone:

E-Mail:

Address:

City/PO: State: Zip Code:

Property Owner (if not same as sponsor): Telephone: E-Mail:

Address:

City/PO: State: Zip Code:

Page 2 of 13

B. Government Approvals

B. Government Approvals, Funding, or Sponsorship. (“Funding” includes grants, loans, tax relief, and any other forms of financialassistance.)

Government Entity If Yes: Identify Agency and Approval(s) Required

Application Date (Actual or projected)

a. City Counsel, Town Board, �˝ Yes �˝ Noor Village Board of Trustees

b. City, Town or Village �˝ Yes �˝ No Planning Board or Commission

c. City, Town or �˝ Yes �˝ No Village Zoning Board of Appeals

d. Other local agencies �˝ Yes �˝ No

e. County agencies �˝ Yes �˝ No

f. Regional agencies �˝ Yes �˝ No

g. State agencies �˝ Yes �˝ No

h. Federal agencies �˝ Yes �˝ No

i. Coastal Resources.i. Is the project site within a Coastal Area, or the waterfront area of a Designated Inland Waterway? �˝ Yes �˝ No

ii. Is the project site located in a community with an approved Local Waterfront Revitalization Program? �˝ Yes �˝ No iii. Is the project site within a Coastal Erosion Hazard Area? �˝ Yes �˝ No

C. Planning and Zoning

C.1. Planning and zoning actions.Will administrative or legislative adoption, or amendment of a plan, local law, ordinance, rule or regulation be the �˝ Yes �˝ No only approval(s) which must be granted to enable the proposed action to proceed?

• If Yes, complete sections C, F and G.• If No, proceed to question C.2 and complete all remaining sections and questions in Part 1

C.2. Adopted land use plans.

a. Do any municipally- adopted (city, town, village or county) comprehensive land use plan(s) include the site �˝ Yes �˝ No where the proposed action would be located?

If Yes, does the comprehensive plan include specific recommendations for the site where the proposed action �˝ Yes �˝ No would be located? b. Is the site of the proposed action within any local or regional special planning district (for example: Greenway; �˝ Yes �˝ No

Brownfield Opportunity Area (BOA); designated State or Federal heritage area; watershed management plan;or other?)

If Yes, identify the plan(s): _______________________________________________________________________________________________________

________________________________________________________________________________________________________ ________________________________________________________________________________________________________

c. Is the proposed action located wholly or partially within an area listed in an adopted municipal open space plan, �˝ Yes �˝ Noor an adopted municipal farmland protection plan?

If Yes, identify the plan(s): ________________________________________________________________________________________________________ ________________________________________________________________________________________________________ ________________________________________________________________________________________________________

Page 3 of 13

C.3. Zoning

a. Is the site of the proposed action located in a municipality with an adopted zoning law or ordinance. �˝ Yes �˝ NoIf Yes, what is the zoning classification(s) including any applicable overlay district?

__________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

b. Is the use permitted or allowed by a special or conditional use permit? �˝ Yes �˝ No

c. Is a zoning change requested as part of the proposed action? �˝ Yes �˝ No If Yes,

i. What is the proposed new zoning for the site? ___________________________________________________________________

C.4. Existing community services.

a. In what school district is the project site located? ________________________________________________________________

b. What police or other public protection forces serve the project site? _________________________________________________________________________________________________________

c. Which fire protection and emergency medical services serve the project site?__________________________________________________________________________________________________________

d. What parks serve the project site?____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

D. Project Details

D.1. Proposed and Potential Development

a. What is the general nature of the proposed action (e.g., residential, industrial, commercial, recreational; if mixed, include allcomponents)?_________________________________________________________________________________________________________

b. a. Total acreage of the site of the proposed action? _____________ acres b. Total acreage to be physically disturbed? _____________ acres c. Total acreage (project site and any contiguous properties) owned

or controlled by the applicant or project sponsor? _____________ acres

c. Is the proposed action an expansion of an existing project or use? �˝ Yes �˝ No i. If Yes, what is the approximate percentage of the proposed expansion and identify the units (e.g., acres, miles, housing units,

square feet)? % ____________________ Units: ____________________d. Is the proposed action a subdivision, or does it include a subdivision? �˝ Yes �˝ No If Yes,

i. Purpose or type of subdivision? (e.g., residential, industrial, commercial; if mixed, specify types)________________________________________________________________________________________________________

ii. Is a cluster/conservation layout proposed? �˝ Yes �˝ No iii. Number of lots proposed? ________iv. Minimum and maximum proposed lot sizes? Minimum __________ Maximum __________

�˝ Yes �˝ No _____ months

_____ _____ month _____ year

e. Will the proposed action be constructed in multiple phases?i. If No, anticipated period of construction:

ii. If Yes:• Total number of phases anticipated• Anticipated commencement date of phase 1 (including demolition)• Anticipated completion date of final phase _____ month _____year • Generally describe connections or relationships among phases, including any contingencies where progress of one phase may

determine timing or duration of future phases: _______________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

Page 4 of 13

f. Does the project include new residential uses? �˝ Yes �˝ No If Yes, show numbers of units proposed.

One Family Two Family Three Family Multiple Family (four or more)

Initial Phase ___________ ___________ ____________ ________________________ At completion of all phases ___________ ___________ ____________ ________________________

g. Does the proposed action include new non-residential construction (including expansions)? �˝ Yes �˝ No If Yes,

i. Total number of structures ___________ii. Dimensions (in feet) of largest proposed structure: ________height; ________width; and _______ length

iii. Approximate extent of building space to be heated or cooled: ______________________ square feet

h. Does the proposed action include construction or other activities that will result in the impoundment of any �˝ Yes �˝ No liquids, such as creation of a water supply, reservoir, pond, lake, waste lagoon or other storage?

If Yes, i. Purpose of the impoundment: ________________________________________________________________________________

ii. If a water impoundment, the principal source of the water: �˝ Ground water �˝ Surface water streams �˝ Other specify:_________________________________________________________________________________________________________

iii. If other than water, identify the type of impounded/contained liquids and their source._________________________________________________________________________________________________________

iv. Approximate size of the proposed impoundment. Volume: ____________ million gallons; surface area: ____________ acres v. Dimensions of the proposed dam or impounding structure: ________ height; _______ length

vi. Construction method/materials for the proposed dam or impounding structure (e.g., earth fill, rock, wood, concrete):________________________________________________________________________________________________________

D.2. Project Operationsa. Does the proposed action include any excavation, mining, or dredging, during construction, operations, or both? �˝ Yes �˝ No

(Not including general site preparation, grading or installation of utilities or foundations where all excavatedmaterials will remain onsite)

If Yes: i .What is the purpose of the excavation or dredging? _______________________________________________________________ ii. How much material (including rock, earth, sediments, etc.) is proposed to be removed from the site?

• Volume (specify tons or cubic yards): ____________________________________________• Over what duration of time? ____________________________________________________

iii. Describe nature and characteristics of materials to be excavated or dredged, and plans to use, manage or dispose of them.________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

iv. Will there be onsite dewatering or processing of excavated materials? �˝ Yes �˝ NoIf yes, describe. ___________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

v. What is the total area to be dredged or excavated? _____________________________________acresvi. What is the maximum area to be worked at any one time? _______________________________ acres

vii. What would be the maximum depth of excavation or dredging? __________________________ feetviii. Will the excavation require blasting? �˝ Yes �˝ No ix. Summarize site reclamation goals and plan: _____________________________________________________________________

________________________________________________________________________________________________________ ________________________________________________________________________________________________________

b. Would the proposed action cause or result in alteration of, increase or decrease in size of, or encroachment �˝ Yes �˝ No into any existing wetland, waterbody, shoreline, beach or adjacent area?

If Yes: i. Identify the wetland or waterbody which would be affected (by name, water index number, wetland map number or geographic

description): _______________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

Page 5 of 13

ii.

iii.

Describe how the proposed action would affect that waterbody or wetland, e.g. excavation, fill, placement of structures, or alteration of channels, banks and shorelines. Indicate extent of activities, alterations and additions in square feet or acres: _________________________________________________________________________________________________________ _________________________________________________________________________________________________________ _________________________________________________________________________________________________________ _________________________________________________________________________________________________________ Will the proposed action cause or result in disturbance to bottom sediments? Yes �˝ No If Yes, describe: __________________________________________________________________________________________

iv. Will the proposed action cause or result in the destruction or removal of aquatic vegetation? �˝ Yes �˝ No If Yes:• acres of aquatic vegetation proposed to be removed: ___________________________________________________________• expected acreage of aquatic vegetation remaining after project completion:________________________________________• purpose of proposed removal (e.g. beach clearing, invasive species control, boat access): ____________________________

____________________________________________________________________________________________________• proposed method of plant removal: ________________________________________________________________________• if chemical/herbicide treatment will be used, specify product(s): _________________________________________________

v. Describe any proposed reclamation/mitigation following disturbance: __________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

c. Will the proposed action use, or create a new demand for water? �˝ Yes �˝ No If Yes:

i. Total anticipated water usage/demand per day: __________________________ gallons/dayii. Will the proposed action obtain water from an existing public water supply? �˝ Yes �˝ No

If Yes: • Name of district or service area: _________________________________________________________________________• Does the existing public water supply have capacity to serve the proposal? �˝ Yes �˝ No • Is the project site in the existing district? �˝ Yes �˝ No • Is expansion of the district needed? �˝ Yes �˝ No • Do existing lines serve the project site? �˝ Yes �˝ No

iii. Will line extension within an existing district be necessary to supply the project? �˝ Yes �˝ No If Yes:

• Describe extensions or capacity expansions proposed to serve this project: ____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

• Source(s) of supply for the district: ________________________________________________________________________iv. Is a new water supply district or service area proposed to be formed to serve the project site? �˝ Yes �˝ No

If, Yes: • Applicant/sponsor for new district: ________________________________________________________________________• Date application submitted or anticipated: __________________________________________________________________• Proposed source(s) of supply for new district: _______________________________________________________________

v. If a public water supply will not be used, describe plans to provide water supply for the project: ____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

vi. If water supply will be from wells (public or private), what is the maximum pumping capacity: _______ gallons/minute.

d. Will the proposed action generate liquid wastes? �˝ Yes �˝ No If Yes:

i. Total anticipated liquid waste generation per day: _______________ gallons/dayii. Nature of liquid wastes to be generated (e.g., sanitary wastewater, industrial; if combination, describe all components and

approximate volumes or proportions of each): ____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

iii. Will the proposed action use any existing public wastewater treatment facilities? �˝ Yes �˝ NoIf Yes:• Name of wastewater treatment plant to be used: _____________________________________________________________• Name of district: ______________________________________________________________________________________• Does the existing wastewater treatment plant have capacity to serve the project? �˝ Yes �˝ No • Is the project site in the existing district? �˝ Yes �˝ No • Is expansion of the district needed? �˝ Yes �˝ No

Page 6 of 13

�˝ Yes �˝ No • Do existing sewer lines serve the project site?• Will a line extension within an existing district be necessary to serve the project? �˝ Yes �˝ No

If Yes: • Describe extensions or capacity expansions proposed to serve this project: ____________________________________

________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

iv. Will a new wastewater (sewage) treatment district be formed to serve the project site? �˝ Yes �˝ No If Yes:• Applicant/sponsor for new district: ____________________________________________________________________• Date application submitted or anticipated: _______________________________________________________________• What is the receiving water for the wastewater discharge? __________________________________________________

v. If public facilities will not be used, describe plans to provide wastewater treatment for the project, including specifying proposedreceiving water (name and classification if surface discharge or describe subsurface disposal plans):

________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

vi. Describe any plans or designs to capture, recycle or reuse liquid waste: _______________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

________________________________________________________________________________________________________

e. Will the proposed action disturb more than one acre and create stormwater runoff, either from new point �˝ Yes �˝ No sources (i.e. ditches, pipes, swales, curbs, gutters or other concentrated flows of stormwater) or non-pointsource (i.e. sheet flow) during construction or post construction?

If Yes: i. How much impervious surface will the project create in relation to total size of project parcel?

_____ Square feet or _____ acres (impervious surface) _____ Square feet or _____ acres (parcel size)

ii. Describe types of new point sources. ___________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

iii. Where will the stormwater runoff be directed (i.e. on-site stormwater management facility/structures, adjacent properties,groundwater, on-site surface water or off-site surface waters)?________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________• If to surface waters, identify receiving water bodies or wetlands: ________________________________________________

________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

• Will stormwater runoff flow to adjacent properties? �˝ Yes �˝ No iv. Does the proposed plan minimize impervious surfaces, use pervious materials or collect and re-use stormwater? �˝ Yes �˝ Nof. Does the proposed action include, or will it use on-site, one or more sources of air emissions, including fuel �˝ Yes �˝ No

combustion, waste incineration, or other processes or operations?If Yes, identify:

i. Mobile sources during project operations (e.g., heavy equipment, fleet or delivery vehicles)_________________________________________________________________________________________________________

ii. Stationary sources during construction (e.g., power generation, structural heating, batch plant, crushers)________________________________________________________________________________________________________

iii. Stationary sources during operations (e.g., process emissions, large boilers, electric generation)________________________________________________________________________________________________________

g. Will any air emission sources named in D.2.f (above), require a NY State Air Registration, Air Facility Permit, �˝ Yes �˝ No or Federal Clean Air Act Title IV or Title V Permit?

If Yes: i. Is the project site located in an Air quality non-attainment area? (Area routinely or periodically fails to meet �˝ Yes �˝ No

ambient air quality standards for all or some parts of the year)ii. In addition to emissions as calculated in the application, the project will generate:

• ___________Tons/year (short tons) of Carbon Dioxide (CO2)• ___________Tons/year (short tons) of Nitrous Oxide (N2O)• ___________Tons/year (short tons) of Perfluorocarbons (PFCs)• ___________Tons/year (short tons) of Sulfur Hexafluoride (SF6)• ___________Tons/year (short tons) of Carbon Dioxide equivalent of Hydroflourocarbons (HFCs)• ___________Tons/year (short tons) of Hazardous Air Pollutants (HAPs)

Page 7 of 13

h. Will the proposed action generate or emit methane (including, but not limited to, sewage treatment plants, �˝ Yes �˝ No landfills, composting facilities)?

If Yes: i. Estimate methane generation in tons/year (metric): ________________________________________________________________

ii. Describe any methane capture, control or elimination measures included in project design (e.g., combustion to generate heat orelectricity, flaring): _________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

i. Will the proposed action result in the release of air pollutants from open-air operations or processes, such as �˝ Yes �˝ Noquarry or landfill operations?

If Yes: Describe operations and nature of emissions (e.g., diesel exhaust, rock particulates/dust): _________________________________________________________________________________________________________ _________________________________________________________________________________________________________

j. Will the proposed action result in a substantial increase in traffic above present levels or generate substantial �˝ Yes �˝ No new demand for transportation facilities or services?

If Yes: i. When is the peak traffic expected (Check all that apply): Morning Evening Weekend

Randomly between hours of __________ to ________.ii. For commercial activities only, projected number of truck trips/day and type (e.g., semi trailers and dump trucks): _____________

iii.iv.v.

Parking spaces: Existing ___________________ Proposed ___________ Net increase/decrease _____________________Does the proposed action include any shared use parking? Yes No

�˝ Yes �˝ No vi. Are public/private transportation service(s) or facilities available within ½ mile of the proposed site?vii Will the proposed action include access to public transportation or accommodations for use of hybrid, electric �˝ Yes �˝ No

or other alternative fueled vehicles? viii. Will the proposed action include plans for pedestrian or bicycle accommodations for connections to existing �˝ Yes �˝ No

pedestrian or bicycle routes?

k. Will the proposed action (for commercial or industrial projects only) generate new or additional demand �˝ Yes �˝ No for energy?

If Yes: i. Estimate annual electricity demand during operation of the proposed action: ____________________________________________

_________________________________________________________________________________________________________ii. Anticipated sources/suppliers of electricity for the project (e.g., on-site combustion, on-site renewable, via grid/local utility, or

other):________________________________________________________________________________________________________

iii. Will the proposed action require a new, or an upgrade, to an existing substation? �˝ Yes �˝ No

l. Hours of operation. Answer all items which apply.i. During Construction: ii. During Operations:• Monday - Friday: _________________________ • Monday - Friday: ____________________________• Saturday: ________________________________ • Saturday: ___________________________________• Sunday: _________________________________ • Sunday: ____________________________________• Holidays: ________________________________ • Holidays: ___________________________________

If the proposed action includes any modification of existing roads, creation of new roads or change in existing access, describe:________________________________________________________________________________________________________

________________________________________________________________________________________________________

Page 8 of 13

m. Will the proposed action produce noise that will exceed existing ambient noise levels during construction, �˝ Yes �˝ No operation, or both?

If yes: i. Provide details including sources, time of day and duration:

_______________________________________________________________________________________________________ _______________________________________________________________________________________________________

ii. Will the proposed action remove existing natural barriers that could act as a noise barrier or screen? �˝ Yes �˝ No Describe: _________________________________________________________________________________________________ _________________________________________________________________________________________________________

n. W thill prope os actioed havn e outd lighoor ting? �˝ Yes �˝ No If yes: i. Describe source(s), location(s), height of fixture(s), direction/aim, and proximity to nearest occupied structures:

__________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

ii. Will proposed action remove existing natural barriers that could act as a light barrier or screen? �˝ Yes �˝ NoDescribe: __________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

o. Does the proposed action have the potential to produce odors for more than one hour per day? �˝ Yes �˝ NoIf Yes, describe possible sources, potential frequency and duration of odor emissions, and proximity to nearestoccupied structures: ______________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ ________________________________________________________________________________________________________

p. �˝ Yes �˝ No Will the proposed action include any bulk storage of petroleum (combined capacity of over 1,100 gallons)or chemical products 185 gallons in above ground storage or any amount in underground storage?

If Yes: i. Product(s) to be stored ______________________________________________________________________________________ii. Volume(s) ______ per unit time ___________ (e.g., month, year)iii. Generally, describe the proposed storage facilities:________________________________________________________________

________________________________________________________________________________________________________

q. Will the proposed action (commercial, industrial and recreational projects only) use pesticides (i.e., herbicides, �˝ Yes �˝ No insecticides) during construction or operation?

If Yes: i. Describe proposed treatment(s):

________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

ii. Will the proposed action use Integrated Pest Management Practices? �˝ Yes �˝ No r. Will the proposed action (commercial or industrial projects only) involve or require the management or disposal �˝ Yes �˝ No

of solid waste (excluding hazardous materials)?If Yes:

i. Describe any solid waste(s) to be generated during construction or operation of the facility:• Construction: ____________________ tons per ________________ (unit of time)• Operation : ____________________ tons per ________________ (unit of time)

ii. Describe any proposals for on-site minimization, recycling or reuse of materials to avoid disposal as solid waste:• Construction: ________________________________________________________________________________________

____________________________________________________________________________________________________• Operation: __________________________________________________________________________________________

____________________________________________________________________________________________________iii. Proposed disposal methods/facilities for solid waste generated on-site:

• Construction: ____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

• Operation: ______________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

Page 9 of 13

s. Does the proposed action include construction or modification of a solid waste management facility? �˝ Yes �˝ No If Yes:

i. Type of management or handling of waste proposed for the site (e.g., recycling or transfer station, composting, landfill, orother disposal activities): ___________________________________________________________________________________

ii. Anticipated rate of disposal/processing:• ________ Tons/month, if transfer or other non-combustion/thermal treatment, or• ________ Tons/hour, if combustion or thermal treatment

iii. If landfill, anticipated site life: ________________________________ years

t. Will the proposed action at the site involve the commercial generation, treatment, storage, or disposal of hazardous �˝ Yes �˝ No waste?

If Yes: i. Name(s) of all hazardous wastes or constituents to be generated, handled or managed at facility: ___________________________

__________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

ii. Generally describe processes or activities involving hazardous wastes or constituents: ____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

iii. Specify amount to be handled or generated _____ tons/monthiv. Describe any proposals for on-site minimization, recycling or reuse of hazardous constituents: ____________________________

________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

v. Will any hazardous wastes be disposed at an existing offsite hazardous waste facility? �˝ Yes �˝ No If Yes: provide name and location of facility: _______________________________________________________________________

________________________________________________________________________________________________________ If No: describe proposed management of any hazardous wastes which will not be sent to a hazardous waste facility:

________________________________________________________________________________________________________ ________________________________________________________________________________________________________

E. Site and Setting of Proposed Action

E.1. Land uses on and surrounding the project site

a. Existing land uses.i. Check all uses that occur on, adjoining and near the project site.

�˝ Urban �˝ Industrial �˝ Commercial �˝ Residential (suburban) �˝ Rural (non-farm) �˝ Forest �˝ Agriculture �˝ Aquatic �˝ Other (specify): ____________________________________

ii. If mix of uses, generally describe:__________________________________________________________________________________________________________ __________________________________________________________________________________________________________

b. Land uses and covertypes on the project site.Land use or Covertype

Current Acreage

Acreage After Project Completion

Change (Acres +/-)

• Roads, buildings, and other paved or impervioussurfaces

• Forested• Meadows, grasslands or brushlands (non-

agricultural, including abandoned agricultural)• Agricultural

(includes active orchards, field, greenhouse etc.) • Surface water features

(lakes, ponds, streams, rivers, etc.) • Wetlands (freshwater or tidal)• Non-vegetated (bare rock, earth or fill)

• OtherDescribe: _______________________________ ________________________________________

Page 10 of 13

c. Is the project site presently used by members of the community for public recreation? �˝ Yes �˝ No i. If Yes: explain: __________________________________________________________________________________________

d. Are there any facilities serving children, the elderly, people with disabilities (e.g., schools, hospitals, licensed �˝ Yes �˝ No day care centers, or group homes) within 1500 feet of the project site?

If Yes, i. Identify Facilities:

________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

e. Does the project site contain an existing dam? �˝ Yes �˝ No If Yes:

i. Dimensions of the dam and impoundment:• Dam height: _________________________________ feet • Dam length: _________________________________ feet • Surface area: _________________________________ acres • Volume impounded: _______________________________ gallons OR acre-feet

ii. Dam=s existing hazard classification: _________________________________________________________________________iii. Provide date and summarize results of last inspection:

_______________________________________________________________________________________________________ _______________________________________________________________________________________________________

f. Has the project site ever been used as a municipal, commercial or industrial solid waste management facility, �˝ Yes �˝ No or does the project site adjoin property which is now, or was at one time, used as a solid waste management facility?

If Yes: i. Has the facility been formally closed? �˝ Yes �˝ No • If yes, cite sources/documentation: _______________________________________________________________________

ii. Describe the location of the project site relative to the boundaries of the solid waste management facility:______________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

iii. Describe any development constraints due to the prior solid waste activities: _________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

g. Have hazardous wastes been generated, treated and/or disposed of at the site, or does the project site adjoin �˝ Yes �˝ No property which is now or was at one time used to commercially treat, store and/or dispose of hazardous waste?

If Yes: i. Describe waste(s) handled and waste management activities, including approximate time when activities occurred:

_______________________________________________________________________________________________________ _______________________________________________________________________________________________________

h. Potential contamination history. Has there been a reported spill at the proposed project site, or have any �˝ Yes �˝ No remedial actions been conducted at or adjacent to the proposed site?

If Yes: i. Is any portion of the site listed on the NYSDEC Spills Incidents database or Environmental Site �˝ Yes �˝ No

Remediation database? Check all that apply:�˝ Yes – Spills Incidents database Provide DEC ID number(s): ________________________________ �˝ Yes – Environmental Site Remediation database Provide DEC ID number(s): ________________________________ �˝ Neither database

ii. If site has been subject of RCRA corrective activities, describe control measures:_______________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

iii. Is the project within 2000 feet of any site in the NYSDEC Environmental Site Remediation database? �˝ Yes �˝ No If yes, provide DEC ID number(s): ______________________________________________________________________________ iv. If yes to (i), (ii) or (iii) above, describe current status of site(s):

_______________________________________________________________________________________________________ _______________________________________________________________________________________________________

Page 11 of 13

v. Is the project site subject to an institutional control limiting property uses? �˝ Yes �˝ No • If yes, DEC site ID number: ____________________________________________________________________________• Describe the type of institutional control (e.g., deed restriction or easement): ____________________________________• Describe any use limitations: ___________________________________________________________________________• Describe any engineering controls: _______________________________________________________________________• Will the project affect the institutional or engineering controls in place? �˝ Yes �˝ No • Explain: ____________________________________________________________________________________________

___________________________________________________________________________________________________ ___________________________________________________________________________________________________

E.2. Natural Resources On or Near Project Sitea. What is the average depth to bedrock on the project site? ________________ feet

b. Are there bedrock outcroppings on the project site? �˝ Yes �˝ No If Yes, what proportion of the site is comprised of bedrock outcroppings? __________________%

c. Predominant soil type(s) present on project site: ___________________________ __________% ___________________________ __________% ____________________________ __________%

d. What is the average depth to the water table on the project site? Average: _________ feet

e. Drainage status of project site soils: �˝ Well Drained: _____% of site �˝ Moderately Well Drained: _____% of site �˝ Poorly Drained _____% of site

f. Approximate proportion of proposed action site with slopes: �˝ 0-10%: _____% of site �˝ 10-15%: _____% of site �˝ 15% or greater: _____% of site

g. Are there any unique geologic features on the project site? �˝ Yes �˝ No If Yes, describe: _____________________________________________________________________________________________

________________________________________________________________________________________________________

h. Surface water features.i. Does any portion of the project site contain wetlands or other waterbodies (including streams, rivers, �˝ Yes �˝ No

ponds or lakes)?ii. Do any wetlands or other waterbodies adjoin the project site? �˝ Yes �˝ No

If Yes to either i or ii, continue. If No, skip to E.2.i.iii. Are any of the wetlands or waterbodies within or adjoining the project site regulated by any federal, �˝ Yes �˝ No

state or local agency?iv. For each identified regulated wetland and waterbody on the project site, provide the following information:

• Streams: Name ____________________________________________ Classification _______________________ • Lakes or Ponds: Name ____________________________________________ Classification _______________________• Wetlands: Name ____________________________________________ Approximate Size ___________________ • Wetland No. (if regulated by DEC) _____________________________

v. Are any of the above water bodies listed in the most recent compilation of NYS water quality-impaired �˝ Yes �˝ No waterbodies?

If yes, name of impaired water body/bodies and basis for listing as impaired: _____________________________________________ ___________________________________________________________________________________________________________

i. Is the project site in a designated Floo dway? �˝ Yes �˝ No

j. Is the project site in the 100-year Floodplain? �˝ Yes �˝ No

k. Is the project site in the 500-year Floodplain? �˝ Yes �˝ No

l. Is the project site located over, or immediately adjoining, a primary, principal or sole source aquifer? �˝ Yes �˝ No If Yes:

i. Name of aquifer: _________________________________________________________________________________________

Page 12 of 13

m. Identify the predominant wildlife species that occupy or use the project site: ______________________________ ______________________________ _______________________________ ______________________________ ______________________________ _______________________________ ______________________________

n. Does the project site contain a designated significant natural community? 9 Yes 9 No If Yes:

i. Describe the habitat/community (composition, function, and basis for designation): _____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

ii. Source(s) of description or evaluation: ________________________________________________________________________iii. Extent of community/habitat:

• Currently: ______________________ acres • Following completion of project as proposed: _____________________ acres• Gain or loss (indicate + or -): ______________________ acres

o. Does project site contain any species of plant or animal that is listed by the federal government or NYS as 9 Yes 9 No endangered or threatened, or does it contain any areas identified as habitat for an endangered or threatened species?

p. Does the project site contain any species of plant or animal that is listed by NYS as rare, or as a species of 9 Yes 9 Nospecial concern?

q. Is the project site or adjoining area currently used for hunting, trapping, fishing or shell fishing? 9 Yes 9 No If yes, give a brief description of how the proposed action may affect that use: ___________________________________________

________________________________________________________________________________________________________

E.3. Designated Public Resources On or Near Project Sitea. Is the project site, or any portion of it, located in a designated agricultural district certified pursuant to 9 Yes 9 No

Agriculture and Markets Law, Article 25-AA, Section 303 and 304?If Yes, provide county plus district name/number: _________________________________________________________________

b. Are agricultural lands consisting of highly productive soils present? 9 Yes 9 No i. If Yes: acreage(s) on project site? ___________________________________________________________________________

ii. Source(s) of soil rating(s): _________________________________________________________________________________

c. Does the project site contain all or part of, or is it substantially contiguous to, a registered National 9 Yes 9 No Natural Landmark?

If Yes: i. Nature of the natural landmark: 9 Biological Community 9 Geological Featureii. Provide brief description of landmark, including values behind designation and approximate size/extent: ___________________

________________________________________________________________________________________________________ ________________________________________________________________________________________________________

d. Is the project site located in or does it adjoin a state listed Critical Environmental Area? 9 Yes 9 No If Yes:

i. CEA name: _____________________________________________________________________________________________ii. Basis for designation: _____________________________________________________________________________________

iii. Designating agency and date: ______________________________________________________________________________

If Yes: i. Species and listing (endangered or threatened):______________________________________________________________________________

________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

If Yes: i. Species and listing:____________________________________________________________________________________________________

_______________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

Page 13 of 13

e. Does the project site contain, or is it substantially contiguous to, a building, archaeological site, or district �˝ Yes �˝ Nowhich is listed on the National or State Register of Historic Places, or that has been determined by the Commissioner of the NYS Office of Parks, Recreation and Historic Preservation to be eligible for listing on the State Register of Historic Places?

If Yes: i. Nature of historic/archaeological resource: �˝ Archaeological Site �˝ Historic Building or District

ii. Name: _________________________________________________________________________________________________iii. Brief description of attributes on which listing is based:

_______________________________________________________________________________________________________

f. Is the project site, or any portion of it, located in or adjacent to an area designated as sensitive for �˝ Yes �˝ No archaeological sites on the NY State Historic Preservation Office (SHPO) archaeological site inventory?

g. Have additional archaeological or historic site(s) or resources been identified on the project site? �˝ Yes �˝ No If Yes:

i. Describe possible resource(s): _______________________________________________________________________________ii. Basis for identification: ___________________________________________________________________________________

h. �˝ Yes �˝ No Is the project site within fives miles of any officially designated and publicly accessible federal, state, or localscenic or aesthetic resource?

If Yes: i. Identify resource: _________________________________________________________________________________________

ii. Nature of, or basis for, designation (e.g., established highway overlook, state or local park, state historic trail or scenic byway,etc.): ___________________________________________________________________________________________________

iii. Distance between project and resource: _____________________ miles.i. Is the project site located within a designated river corridor under the Wild, Scenic and Recreational Rivers �˝ Yes �˝ No

Program 6 NYCRR 666?If Yes:

i. Identify the name of the river and its designation: ________________________________________________________________ii. Is the activity consistent with development restrictions contained in 6NYCRR Part 666? �˝ Yes �˝ No

F. Additional InformationAttach any additional information which may be needed to clarify your project.

If you have identified any adverse impacts which could be associated with your proposal, please describe those impacts plus any measures which you propose to avoid or minimize them.

G. VerificationI certify that the information provided is true to the best of my knowledge.

Applicant/Sponsor Name ___________________________________ Date_______________________________________

Signature________________________________________________ Title_______________________________________

EAF Mapper Summary Report Thursday, September 17, 2020 2:28 PM

Disclaimer: The EAF Mapper is a screening tool intended to assist project sponsors and reviewing agencies in preparing an environmental assessment form (EAF). Not all questions asked in the EAF are answered by the EAF Mapper. Additional information on any EAF question can be obtained by consulting the EAF Workbooks. Although the EAF Mapper provides the most up-to-date digital data available to DEC, you may also need to contact local or other data sources in order to obtain data not provided by the Mapper. Digital data is not a substitute for agency determinations.

B.i.i [Coastal or Waterfront Area] Yes

B.i.ii [Local Waterfront Revitalization Area] Yes

C.2.b. [Special Planning District] Yes - Digital mapping data are not available for all Special Planning Districts. Refer to EAF Workbook.

C.2.b. [Special Planning District - Name] Remediaton Sites:C356037, NYS Heritage Areas:Kingston

E.1.h [DEC Spills or Remediation Site - Potential Contamination History]

Yes - Digital mapping data for Spills Incidents are not available for this location. Refer to EAF Workbook.

E.1.h.i [DEC Spills or Remediation Site - Listed]

Yes

E.1.h.i [DEC Spills or Remediation Site - Environmental Site Remediation Database]

Yes

E.1.h.i [DEC Spills or Remediation Site - DEC ID Number]

C356037

E.1.h.iii [Within 2,000' of DEC Remediation Site]

Yes

E.1.h.iii [Within 2,000' of DEC Remediation Site - DEC ID]

C356037, 356052, C356036, 546031

E.2.g [Unique Geologic Features] No

E.2.h.i [Surface Water Features] Yes

E.2.h.ii [Surface Water Features] Yes

E.2.h.iii [Surface Water Features] Yes - Digital mapping information on local and federal wetlands and waterbodies is known to be incomplete. Refer to EAF Workbook.

E.2.h.iv [Surface Water Features - Stream Name]

855.4-1

E.2.h.iv [Surface Water Features - Stream Classification]

C

E.2.h.iv [Surface Water Features - Wetlands Name]

Federal Waters

1Full Environmental Assessment Form - EAF Mapper Summary Report

E.2.h.v [Impaired Water Bodies] No

E.2.i. [Floodway] Yes

E.2.j. [100 Year Floodplain] Yes

E.2.k. [500 Year Floodplain] No

E.2.l. [Aquifers] Yes

E.2.l. [Aquifer Names] Principal Aquifer

E.2.n. [Natural Communities] Yes

E.2.n.i [Natural Communities - Name] Tidal River, Freshwater Intertidal Shore, Freshwater Tidal Marsh

E.2.n.i [Natural Communities - Acres] 74248.64, 6.0, 30.0

E.2.o. [Endangered or Threatened Species] Yes

E.2.o. [Endangered or Threatened Species - Name]

Atlantic Sturgeon, Shortnose Sturgeon, Indiana Bat, Least Bittern, Northern Long-eared Bat

E.2.p. [Rare Plants or Animals] No

E.3.a. [Agricultural District] No

E.3.c. [National Natural Landmark] No

E.3.d [Critical Environmental Area] No

E.3.e. [National or State Register of Historic Places or State Eligible Sites]

Yes - Digital mapping data for archaeological site boundaries are not available. Refer to EAF Workbook.

E.3.e.ii [National or State Register of Historic Places or State Eligible Sites - Name]

Eligible property:CORNELL SHOPS BUILDING, Eligible property:CORNELL STEAMBOAT CO BOILER SHOP, CATAWISSA (Coastal Tugboat), Cornell Steamboat Company Machine Shop Building, Brooklyn & Queens Transit Trolley No. 1000

E.3.f. [Archeological Sites] Yes

E.3.i. [Designated River Corridor] No

2Full Environmental Assessment Form - EAF Mapper Summary Report

AMcCarthy

Callout

Project Site

State Wetlands, 72/75 Inches Sea-level Rise - Kingston WWTP

Source: Esri, Maxar, GeoEye, Earthstar Geographics, CNES/AirbusDS, USDA, USGS, AeroGRID, IGN, and the GIS User Community,Esri, HERE, Garmin, (c) OpenStreetMap contributors, and the GISuser community

January 4, 20210 0.08 0.160.04 mi

0 0.1 0.20.05 km

1:4,514

Not a legal documentAuthor: AGM

Environmental Resource Mapper - Kingston WWTP

Sources: Esri, HERE, Garmin, Intermap, increment P Corp., GEBCO,USGS, FAO, NPS, NRCAN, GeoBase, IGN, Kadaster NL, OrdnanceSurvey, Esri Japan, METI, Esri China (Hong Kong), (c)OpenStreetMap contributors, and the GIS User Community

January 4, 20210 0.65 1.30.33 mi

0 1 20.5 km

1:36,112

Not a legal documentAuthor: AGM

May 05, 2021

United States Department of the InteriorFISH AND WILDLIFE SERVICE

New York Ecological Services Field Office3817 Luker Road

Cortland, NY 13045-9385Phone: (607) 753-9334 Fax: (607) 753-9699

http://www.fws.gov/northeast/nyfo/es/section7.htm

In Reply Refer To: Consultation Code: 05E1NY00-2021-SLI-2515 Event Code: 05E1NY00-2021-E-07911 Project Name: Kingston Wastewater Treatment Plant Outfall Subject: List of threatened and endangered species that may occur in your proposed project

location or may be affected by your proposed project

To Whom It May Concern:

The enclosed species list identifies threatened, endangered, proposed and candidate species, as well as proposed and final designated critical habitat, that may occur within the boundary of your proposed project and/or may be affected by your proposed project. The species list fulfills the requirements of the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (Service) under section 7(c) of the Endangered Species Act (ESA) of 1973, as amended (16 U.S.C. 1531 et seq.). This list can also be used to determine whether listed species may be present for projects without federal agency involvement. New information based on updated surveys, changes in the abundance and distribution of species, changed habitat conditions, or other factors could change this list.

Please feel free to contact us if you need more current information or assistance regarding the potential impacts to federally proposed, listed, and candidate species and federally designated and proposed critical habitat. Please note that under 50 CFR 402.12(e) of the regulations implementing section 7 of the ESA, the accuracy of this species list should be verified after 90 days. This verification can be completed formally or informally as desired. The Service recommends that verification be completed by visiting the ECOS-IPaC site at regular intervals during project planning and implementation for updates to species lists and information. An updated list may be requested through the ECOS-IPaC system by completing the same process used to receive the enclosed list. If listed, proposed, or candidate species were identified as potentially occurring in the project area, coordination with our office is encouraged. Information on the steps involved with assessing potential impacts from projects can be found at: http:// www.fws.gov/northeast/nyfo/es/section7.htm

Please be aware that bald and golden eagles are protected under the Bald and Golden Eagle Protection Act (16 U.S.C. 668 et seq.), and projects affecting these species may require development of an eagle conservation plan (http://www.fws.gov/windenergy/ eagle_guidance.html). Additionally, wind energy projects should follow the Services wind

05/05/2021 Event Code: 05E1NY00-2021-E-07911   2

   

▪

energy guidelines (http://www.fws.gov/windenergy/) for minimizing impacts to migratory birds and bats.

Guidance for minimizing impacts to migratory birds for projects including communications towers (e.g., cellular, digital television, radio, and emergency broadcast) can be found at: http:// www.fws.gov/migratorybirds/CurrentBirdIssues/Hazards/towers/towers.htm; http:// www.towerkill.com; and http://www.fws.gov/migratorybirds/CurrentBirdIssues/Hazards/towers/ comtow.html.

We appreciate your concern for threatened and endangered species. The Service encourages Federal agencies to include conservation of threatened and endangered species into their project planning to further the purposes of the ESA. Please include the Consultation Tracking Number in the header of this letter with any request for consultation or correspondence about your project that you submit to our office.

Attachment(s):

Official Species List

05/05/2021 Event Code: 05E1NY00-2021-E-07911   1

   

Official Species ListThis list is provided pursuant to Section 7 of the Endangered Species Act, and fulfills the requirement for Federal agencies to "request of the Secretary of the Interior information whether any species which is listed or proposed to be listed may be present in the area of a proposed action".

This species list is provided by:

New York Ecological Services Field Office3817 Luker RoadCortland, NY 13045-9385(607) 753-9334

05/05/2021 Event Code: 05E1NY00-2021-E-07911   2

   

Project SummaryConsultation Code: 05E1NY00-2021-SLI-2515Event Code: 05E1NY00-2021-E-07911Project Name: Kingston Wastewater Treatment Plant OutfallProject Type: WASTEWATER FACILITYProject Description: Located at 124-134 East Strand Street in Kingston, NY 12401, the goal of

the project is to improve the City of Kingston's Wastewater Treatment Plant (WWTP) by constructing a new outfall structure, which is currently being upgraded to comply with the New York State Department of Environmental Conservation (NYSDEC) updated individual SPDES permit for ammonia nitrogen limits. The work is to install the water-side portion of the outfall extension and improve the existing headwall structure. This involves the installation of 24 HP12 piles to support 2 twin 28” diameter flanged pipes along the Rondout Creek Bed, a marine mattress, a stormwater pipe, and a PZ13 sheet pile to act as a cofferdam during construction and a permanent bulkhead post-construction. The discharge points of the outfall pipes will rest at an elevation of about 23'6" below the mean high water mark.

Project Location:Approximate location of the project can be viewed in Google Maps: https:// www.google.com/maps/@41.92024245,-73.97811475389997,14z

Counties: Ulster County, New York

05/05/2021 Event Code: 05E1NY00-2021-E-07911   3

   

1.

Endangered Species Act SpeciesThere is a total of 2 threatened, endangered, or candidate species on this species list.

Species on this list should be considered in an effects analysis for your project and could include species that exist in another geographic area. For example, certain fish may appear on the species list because a project could affect downstream species.

IPaC does not display listed species or critical habitats under the sole jurisdiction of NOAA Fisheries , as USFWS does not have the authority to speak on behalf of NOAA and the Department of Commerce.

See the "Critical habitats" section below for those critical habitats that lie wholly or partially within your project area under this office's jurisdiction. Please contact the designated FWS office if you have questions.

NOAA Fisheries, also known as the National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS), is an office of the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration within the Department of Commerce.

MammalsNAME STATUS

Indiana Bat Myotis sodalisThere is final critical habitat for this species. The location of the critical habitat is not available.Species profile: https://ecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/5949

Endangered

Northern Long-eared Bat Myotis septentrionalisNo critical habitat has been designated for this species.Species profile: https://ecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/9045

Threatened

Critical habitatsTHERE ARE NO CRITICAL HABITATS WITHIN YOUR PROJECT AREA UNDER THIS OFFICE'S JURISDICTION.

1

MS4, EJA, Remediation Parcels/Site - Kingston WWTP

Source: Esri, Maxar, GeoEye, Earthstar Geographics, CNES/Airbus DS,USDA, USGS, AeroGRID, IGN, and the GIS User Community, Esri, HERE,

January 4, 20210 0.1 0.20.05 mi

0 0.15 0.30.07 km

1:9,028

Not a legal documentAuthor: AGM

1/4/2021 DECinfo Locator Legend (Active Layers)

1/1

DECinfo Locator Legend (Ac�v e Layers)

Permits and Registra� ons

Municipal Separate Storm Sewer System (MS4) MS4 Extended

Environmental Cleanup

Remedia�on P arcels

Remedia�on Sit es

Public Involvement

Poten�al En vironmental Jus�ce Ar eas

Reference Layers

DEC Regional Offices County Boundary

United StatesDepartment ofAgriculture

A product of the NationalCooperative Soil Survey,a joint effort of the UnitedStates Department ofAgriculture and otherFederal agencies, Stateagencies including theAgricultural ExperimentStations, and localparticipants

Custom Soil Resource Report for

Ulster County, New York

NaturalResourcesConservationService

September 22, 2020

PrefaceSoil surveys contain information that affects land use planning in survey areas. They highlight soil limitations that affect various land uses and provide information about the properties of the soils in the survey areas. Soil surveys are designed for many different users, including farmers, ranchers, foresters, agronomists, urban planners, community officials, engineers, developers, builders, and home buyers. Also, conservationists, teachers, students, and specialists in recreation, waste disposal, and pollution control can use the surveys to help them understand, protect, or enhance the environment.

Various land use regulations of Federal, State, and local governments may impose special restrictions on land use or land treatment. Soil surveys identify soil properties that are used in making various land use or land treatment decisions. The information is intended to help the land users identify and reduce the effects of soil limitations on various land uses. The landowner or user is responsible for identifying and complying with existing laws and regulations.

Although soil survey information can be used for general farm, local, and wider area planning, onsite investigation is needed to supplement this information in some cases. Examples include soil quality assessments (http://www.nrcs.usda.gov/wps/portal/nrcs/main/soils/health/) and certain conservation and engineering applications. For more detailed information, contact your local USDA Service Center (https://offices.sc.egov.usda.gov/locator/app?agency=nrcs) or your NRCS State Soil Scientist (http://www.nrcs.usda.gov/wps/portal/nrcs/detail/soils/contactus/?cid=nrcs142p2_053951).

Great differences in soil properties can occur within short distances. Some soils are seasonally wet or subject to flooding. Some are too unstable to be used as a foundation for buildings or roads. Clayey or wet soils are poorly suited to use as septic tank absorption fields. A high water table makes a soil poorly suited to basements or underground installations.

The National Cooperative Soil Survey is a joint effort of the United States Department of Agriculture and other Federal agencies, State agencies including the Agricultural Experiment Stations, and local agencies. The Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS) has leadership for the Federal part of the National Cooperative Soil Survey.

Information about soils is updated periodically. Updated information is available through the NRCS Web Soil Survey, the site for official soil survey information.

The U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) prohibits discrimination in all its programs and activities on the basis of race, color, national origin, age, disability, and where applicable, sex, marital status, familial status, parental status, religion, sexual orientation, genetic information, political beliefs, reprisal, or because all or a part of an individual's income is derived from any public assistance program. (Not all prohibited bases apply to all programs.) Persons with disabilities who require

2

alternative means for communication of program information (Braille, large print, audiotape, etc.) should contact USDA's TARGET Center at (202) 720-2600 (voice and TDD). To file a complaint of discrimination, write to USDA, Director, Office of Civil Rights, 1400 Independence Avenue, S.W., Washington, D.C. 20250-9410 or call (800) 795-3272 (voice) or (202) 720-6382 (TDD). USDA is an equal opportunity provider and employer.

3

ContentsPreface.................................................................................................................... 2How Soil Surveys Are Made..................................................................................5Soil Map.................................................................................................................. 8

Soil Map (Kingston WWTP Outfall)...................................................................... 9Legend................................................................................................................10Map Unit Legend (Kingston WWTP Outfall)....................................................... 11Map Unit Descriptions (Kingston WWTP Outfall)............................................... 11

Ulster County, New York................................................................................. 13CF—Cut and fill land................................................................................... 13

References............................................................................................................15

4

How Soil Surveys Are MadeSoil surveys are made to provide information about the soils and miscellaneous areas in a specific area. They include a description of the soils and miscellaneous areas and their location on the landscape and tables that show soil properties and limitations affecting various uses. Soil scientists observed the steepness, length, and shape of the slopes; the general pattern of drainage; the kinds of crops and native plants; and the kinds of bedrock. They observed and described many soil profiles. A soil profile is the sequence of natural layers, or horizons, in a soil. The profile extends from the surface down into the unconsolidated material in which the soil formed or from the surface down to bedrock. The unconsolidated material is devoid of roots and other living organisms and has not been changed by other biological activity.

Currently, soils are mapped according to the boundaries of major land resource areas (MLRAs). MLRAs are geographically associated land resource units that share common characteristics related to physiography, geology, climate, water resources, soils, biological resources, and land uses (USDA, 2006). Soil survey areas typically consist of parts of one or more MLRA.

The soils and miscellaneous areas in a survey area occur in an orderly pattern that is related to the geology, landforms, relief, climate, and natural vegetation of the area. Each kind of soil and miscellaneous area is associated with a particular kind of landform or with a segment of the landform. By observing the soils and miscellaneous areas in the survey area and relating their position to specific segments of the landform, a soil scientist develops a concept, or model, of how they were formed. Thus, during mapping, this model enables the soil scientist to predict with a considerable degree of accuracy the kind of soil or miscellaneous area at a specific location on the landscape.

Commonly, individual soils on the landscape merge into one another as their characteristics gradually change. To construct an accurate soil map, however, soil scientists must determine the boundaries between the soils. They can observe only a limited number of soil profiles. Nevertheless, these observations, supplemented by an understanding of the soil-vegetation-landscape relationship, are sufficient to verify predictions of the kinds of soil in an area and to determine the boundaries.

Soil scientists recorded the characteristics of the soil profiles that they studied. They noted soil color, texture, size and shape of soil aggregates, kind and amount of rock fragments, distribution of plant roots, reaction, and other features that enable them to identify soils. After describing the soils in the survey area and determining their properties, the soil scientists assigned the soils to taxonomic classes (units). Taxonomic classes are concepts. Each taxonomic class has a set of soil characteristics with precisely defined limits. The classes are used as a basis for comparison to classify soils systematically. Soil taxonomy, the system of taxonomic classification used in the United States, is based mainly on the kind and character of soil properties and the arrangement of horizons within the profile. After the soil

5

scientists classified and named the soils in the survey area, they compared the individual soils with similar soils in the same taxonomic class in other areas so that they could confirm data and assemble additional data based on experience and research.

The objective of soil mapping is not to delineate pure map unit components; the objective is to separate the landscape into landforms or landform segments that have similar use and management requirements. Each map unit is defined by a unique combination of soil components and/or miscellaneous areas in predictable proportions. Some components may be highly contrasting to the other components of the map unit. The presence of minor components in a map unit in no way diminishes the usefulness or accuracy of the data. The delineation of such landforms and landform segments on the map provides sufficient information for the development of resource plans. If intensive use of small areas is planned, onsite investigation is needed to define and locate the soils and miscellaneous areas.

Soil scientists make many field observations in the process of producing a soil map. The frequency of observation is dependent upon several factors, including scale of mapping, intensity of mapping, design of map units, complexity of the landscape, and experience of the soil scientist. Observations are made to test and refine the soil-landscape model and predictions and to verify the classification of the soils at specific locations. Once the soil-landscape model is refined, a significantly smaller number of measurements of individual soil properties are made and recorded. These measurements may include field measurements, such as those for color, depth to bedrock, and texture, and laboratory measurements, such as those for content of sand, silt, clay, salt, and other components. Properties of each soil typically vary from one point to another across the landscape.

Observations for map unit components are aggregated to develop ranges of characteristics for the components. The aggregated values are presented. Direct measurements do not exist for every property presented for every map unit component. Values for some properties are estimated from combinations of other properties.

While a soil survey is in progress, samples of some of the soils in the area generally are collected for laboratory analyses and for engineering tests. Soil scientists interpret the data from these analyses and tests as well as the field-observed characteristics and the soil properties to determine the expected behavior of the soils under different uses. Interpretations for all of the soils are field tested through observation of the soils in different uses and under different levels of management. Some interpretations are modified to fit local conditions, and some new interpretations are developed to meet local needs. Data are assembled from other sources, such as research information, production records, and field experience of specialists. For example, data on crop yields under defined levels of management are assembled from farm records and from field or plot experiments on the same kinds of soil.

Predictions about soil behavior are based not only on soil properties but also on such variables as climate and biological activity. Soil conditions are predictable over long periods of time, but they are not predictable from year to year. For example, soil scientists can predict with a fairly high degree of accuracy that a given soil will have a high water table within certain depths in most years, but they cannot predict that a high water table will always be at a specific level in the soil on a specific date.

After soil scientists located and identified the significant natural bodies of soil in the survey area, they drew the boundaries of these bodies on aerial photographs and

Custom Soil Resource Report

6

identified each as a specific map unit. Aerial photographs show trees, buildings, fields, roads, and rivers, all of which help in locating boundaries accurately.

Custom Soil Resource Report

7

Soil MapThe soil map section includes the soil map for the defined area of interest, a list of soil map units on the map and extent of each map unit, and cartographic symbols displayed on the map. Also presented are various metadata about data used to produce the map, and a description of each soil map unit.

8

9

Custom Soil Resource ReportSoil Map (Kingston WWTP Outfall)

4641

430

4641

435

4641

440

4641

445

4641

450

4641

455

4641

460

4641

430

4641

435

4641

440

4641

445

4641

450

4641

455

4641

460

584709 584714 584719 584724 584729 584734 584739 584744 584749 584754

584709 584714 584719 584724 584729 584734 584739 584744 584749 584754

41° 55' 14'' N73

° 5

8' 4

2'' W

41° 55' 14'' N

73° 5

8' 4

0'' W

41° 55' 12'' N

73° 5

8' 4

2'' W

41° 55' 12'' N

73° 5

8' 4

0'' W

N

Map projection: Web Mercator Corner coordinates: WGS84 Edge tics: UTM Zone 18N WGS840 10 20 40 60

Feet0 3 6 12 18

MetersMap Scale: 1:228 if printed on A landscape (11" x 8.5") sheet.

Soil Map may not be valid at this scale.

MAP LEGEND MAP INFORMATION

Area of Interest (AOI)Area of Interest (AOI)

SoilsSoil Map Unit Polygons

Soil Map Unit Lines

Soil Map Unit Points

Special Point FeaturesBlowout

Borrow Pit

Clay Spot

Closed Depression

Gravel Pit

Gravelly Spot

Landfill

Lava Flow

Marsh or swamp

Mine or Quarry

Miscellaneous Water

Perennial Water

Rock Outcrop

Saline Spot

Sandy Spot

Severely Eroded Spot

Sinkhole

Slide or Slip

Sodic Spot

Spoil Area

Stony Spot

Very Stony Spot

Wet Spot

Other

Special Line Features

Water FeaturesStreams and Canals

TransportationRails

Interstate Highways

US Routes

Major Roads

Local Roads

BackgroundAerial Photography

The soil surveys that comprise your AOI were mapped at 1:15,800.

Warning: Soil Map may not be valid at this scale.

Enlargement of maps beyond the scale of mapping can cause misunderstanding of the detail of mapping and accuracy of soil line placement. The maps do not show the small areas of contrasting soils that could have been shown at a more detailed scale.

Please rely on the bar scale on each map sheet for map measurements.

Source of Map: Natural Resources Conservation ServiceWeb Soil Survey URL: Coordinate System: Web Mercator (EPSG:3857)

Maps from the Web Soil Survey are based on the Web Mercator projection, which preserves direction and shape but distorts distance and area. A projection that preserves area, such as the Albers equal-area conic projection, should be used if more accurate calculations of distance or area are required.

This product is generated from the USDA-NRCS certified data as of the version date(s) listed below.

Soil Survey Area: Ulster County, New YorkSurvey Area Data: Version 19, Jun 11, 2020

Soil map units are labeled (as space allows) for map scales 1:50,000 or larger.

Date(s) aerial images were photographed: Oct 7, 2013—Sep 3, 2017

The orthophoto or other base map on which the soil lines were compiled and digitized probably differs from the background imagery displayed on these maps. As a result, some minor shifting of map unit boundaries may be evident.

Custom Soil Resource Report

10

Map Unit Legend (Kingston WWTP Outfall)

Map Unit Symbol Map Unit Name Acres in AOI Percent of AOI

CF Cut and fill land 0.1 100.0%

Totals for Area of Interest 0.1 100.0%

Map Unit Descriptions (Kingston WWTP Outfall)The map units delineated on the detailed soil maps in a soil survey represent the soils or miscellaneous areas in the survey area. The map unit descriptions, along with the maps, can be used to determine the composition and properties of a unit.

A map unit delineation on a soil map represents an area dominated by one or more major kinds of soil or miscellaneous areas. A map unit is identified and named according to the taxonomic classification of the dominant soils. Within a taxonomic class there are precisely defined limits for the properties of the soils. On the landscape, however, the soils are natural phenomena, and they have the characteristic variability of all natural phenomena. Thus, the range of some observed properties may extend beyond the limits defined for a taxonomic class. Areas of soils of a single taxonomic class rarely, if ever, can be mapped without including areas of other taxonomic classes. Consequently, every map unit is made up of the soils or miscellaneous areas for which it is named and some minor components that belong to taxonomic classes other than those of the major soils.

Most minor soils have properties similar to those of the dominant soil or soils in the map unit, and thus they do not affect use and management. These are called noncontrasting, or similar, components. They may or may not be mentioned in a particular map unit description. Other minor components, however, have properties and behavioral characteristics divergent enough to affect use or to require different management. These are called contrasting, or dissimilar, components. They generally are in small areas and could not be mapped separately because of the scale used. Some small areas of strongly contrasting soils or miscellaneous areas are identified by a special symbol on the maps. If included in the database for a given area, the contrasting minor components are identified in the map unit descriptions along with some characteristics of each. A few areas of minor components may not have been observed, and consequently they are not mentioned in the descriptions, especially where the pattern was so complex that it was impractical to make enough observations to identify all the soils and miscellaneous areas on the landscape.

The presence of minor components in a map unit in no way diminishes the usefulness or accuracy of the data. The objective of mapping is not to delineate pure taxonomic classes but rather to separate the landscape into landforms or landform segments that have similar use and management requirements. The delineation of such segments on the map provides sufficient information for the development of resource plans. If intensive use of small areas is planned, however,

Custom Soil Resource Report

11

onsite investigation is needed to define and locate the soils and miscellaneous areas.

An identifying symbol precedes the map unit name in the map unit descriptions. Each description includes general facts about the unit and gives important soil properties and qualities.

Soils that have profiles that are almost alike make up a soil series. Except for differences in texture of the surface layer, all the soils of a series have major horizons that are similar in composition, thickness, and arrangement.

Soils of one series can differ in texture of the surface layer, slope, stoniness, salinity, degree of erosion, and other characteristics that affect their use. On the basis of such differences, a soil series is divided into soil phases. Most of the areas shown on the detailed soil maps are phases of soil series. The name of a soil phase commonly indicates a feature that affects use or management. For example, Alpha silt loam, 0 to 2 percent slopes, is a phase of the Alpha series.

Some map units are made up of two or more major soils or miscellaneous areas. These map units are complexes, associations, or undifferentiated groups.

A complex consists of two or more soils or miscellaneous areas in such an intricate pattern or in such small areas that they cannot be shown separately on the maps. The pattern and proportion of the soils or miscellaneous areas are somewhat similar in all areas. Alpha-Beta complex, 0 to 6 percent slopes, is an example.

An association is made up of two or more geographically associated soils or miscellaneous areas that are shown as one unit on the maps. Because of present or anticipated uses of the map units in the survey area, it was not considered practical or necessary to map the soils or miscellaneous areas separately. The pattern and relative proportion of the soils or miscellaneous areas are somewhat similar. Alpha-Beta association, 0 to 2 percent slopes, is an example.

An undifferentiated group is made up of two or more soils or miscellaneous areas that could be mapped individually but are mapped as one unit because similar interpretations can be made for use and management. The pattern and proportion of the soils or miscellaneous areas in a mapped area are not uniform. An area can be made up of only one of the major soils or miscellaneous areas, or it can be made up of all of them. Alpha and Beta soils, 0 to 2 percent slopes, is an example.

Some surveys include miscellaneous areas. Such areas have little or no soil material and support little or no vegetation. Rock outcrop is an example.

Custom Soil Resource Report

12

Ulster County, New York

CF—Cut and fill land

Map Unit SettingNational map unit symbol: 9xg2Elevation: 160 to 1,970 feetMean annual precipitation: 41 to 62 inchesMean annual air temperature: 41 to 50 degrees FFrost-free period: 110 to 200 daysFarmland classification: Not prime farmland

Map Unit CompositionUdorthents and similar soils: 80 percentMinor components: 20 percentEstimates are based on observations, descriptions, and transects of the mapunit.

Description of Udorthents

Typical profileH1 - 0 to 4 inches: gravelly sandy loamH2 - 4 to 70 inches: very gravelly sandy loam

Properties and qualitiesSlope: 0 to 8 percentDepth to restrictive feature: More than 80 inchesDrainage class: Somewhat excessively drainedCapacity of the most limiting layer to transmit water (Ksat): Moderately low to high

(0.06 to 5.95 in/hr)Depth to water table: About 36 inchesFrequency of flooding: NoneFrequency of ponding: NoneCalcium carbonate, maximum content: 15 percentAvailable water capacity: Low (about 5.5 inches)

Interpretive groupsLand capability classification (irrigated): None specifiedLand capability classification (nonirrigated): 6sHydrologic Soil Group: BHydric soil rating: No

Minor Components

BathPercent of map unit: 5 percentHydric soil rating: No

TunkhannockPercent of map unit: 5 percentHydric soil rating: No

LyonsPercent of map unit: 5 percentLandform: DepressionsHydric soil rating: Yes

Custom Soil Resource Report

13

CayugaPercent of map unit: 5 percentHydric soil rating: No

Custom Soil Resource Report

14

ReferencesAmerican Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials (AASHTO). 2004. Standard specifications for transportation materials and methods of sampling and testing. 24th edition.

American Society for Testing and Materials (ASTM). 2005. Standard classification of soils for engineering purposes. ASTM Standard D2487-00.

Cowardin, L.M., V. Carter, F.C. Golet, and E.T. LaRoe. 1979. Classification of wetlands and deep-water habitats of the United States. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service FWS/OBS-79/31.

Federal Register. July 13, 1994. Changes in hydric soils of the United States.

Federal Register. September 18, 2002. Hydric soils of the United States.

Hurt, G.W., and L.M. Vasilas, editors. Version 6.0, 2006. Field indicators of hydric soils in the United States.

National Research Council. 1995. Wetlands: Characteristics and boundaries.

Soil Survey Division Staff. 1993. Soil survey manual. Soil Conservation Service. U.S. Department of Agriculture Handbook 18. http://www.nrcs.usda.gov/wps/portal/nrcs/detail/national/soils/?cid=nrcs142p2_054262

Soil Survey Staff. 1999. Soil taxonomy: A basic system of soil classification for making and interpreting soil surveys. 2nd edition. Natural Resources Conservation Service, U.S. Department of Agriculture Handbook 436. http://www.nrcs.usda.gov/wps/portal/nrcs/detail/national/soils/?cid=nrcs142p2_053577

Soil Survey Staff. 2010. Keys to soil taxonomy. 11th edition. U.S. Department of Agriculture, Natural Resources Conservation Service. http://www.nrcs.usda.gov/wps/portal/nrcs/detail/national/soils/?cid=nrcs142p2_053580

Tiner, R.W., Jr. 1985. Wetlands of Delaware. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service and Delaware Department of Natural Resources and Environmental Control, Wetlands Section.

United States Army Corps of Engineers, Environmental Laboratory. 1987. Corps of Engineers wetlands delineation manual. Waterways Experiment Station Technical Report Y-87-1.

United States Department of Agriculture, Natural Resources Conservation Service. National forestry manual. http://www.nrcs.usda.gov/wps/portal/nrcs/detail/soils/home/?cid=nrcs142p2_053374

United States Department of Agriculture, Natural Resources Conservation Service. National range and pasture handbook. http://www.nrcs.usda.gov/wps/portal/nrcs/detail/national/landuse/rangepasture/?cid=stelprdb1043084

15

United States Department of Agriculture, Natural Resources Conservation Service. National soil survey handbook, title 430-VI. http://www.nrcs.usda.gov/wps/portal/nrcs/detail/soils/scientists/?cid=nrcs142p2_054242

United States Department of Agriculture, Natural Resources Conservation Service. 2006. Land resource regions and major land resource areas of the United States, the Caribbean, and the Pacific Basin. U.S. Department of Agriculture Handbook 296. http://www.nrcs.usda.gov/wps/portal/nrcs/detail/national/soils/?cid=nrcs142p2_053624

United States Department of Agriculture, Soil Conservation Service. 1961. Land capability classification. U.S. Department of Agriculture Handbook 210. http://www.nrcs.usda.gov/Internet/FSE_DOCUMENTS/nrcs142p2_052290.pdf

Custom Soil Resource Report

16

AMcCarthy

Callout

Project Site

Sincerely,

R. Daniel Mackay

Deputy Commissioner for Historic PreservationDivision for Historic Preservation

Based upon this review, it is the opinion of OPRHP that no properties, including archaeological and/or historic resources, listed in or eligible for the New York State and National Registers of Historic Places will be impacted by this project.

If further correspondence is required regarding this project, please be sure to refer to the OPRHP Project Review (PR) number noted above.

Re:

Thank you for requesting the comments of the Office of Parks, Recreation and Historic Preservation (OPRHP). We have reviewed the project in accordance with the New York State Historic Preservation Act of 1980 (Section 14.09 of the New York Parks, Recreation and Historic Preservation Law). These comments are those of the OPRHP and relate only to Historic/Cultural resources. They do not include potential environmental impacts to New York State Parkland that may be involved in or near your project. Such impacts must be considered as part of the environmental review of the project pursuant to the State Environmental Quality Review Act (New York Environmental Conservation Law Article 8) and its implementing regulations (6 NYCRR Part 617).

October 09, 2020

Arica McCarthyPlannerTighe & Bond47 West Market St., Suite 2Rhinebeck, NY 12572

DECKingston WWTP Outfall134 E Strand St, Kingston, NY 1240120PR05831

Dear Arica McCarthy:

Division for Historic PreservationP.O. Box 189, Waterford, New York 12188-0189 • (518) 237-8643 • parks.ny.gov

ANDREW M. CUOMOGovernor

ERIK KULLESEIDCommissioner

National Flood Hazard Layer FIRMette

0 500 1,000 1,500 2,000250Feet

Ü

SEE FIS REPORT FOR DETAILED LEGEND AND INDEX MAP FOR FIRM PANEL LAYOUT

SPECIAL FLOODHAZARD AREAS

Without Base Flood Elevation (BFE)Zone A, V, A99

With BFE or DepthZone AE, AO, AH, VE, AR

Regulatory Floodway

0.2% Annual Chance Flood Hazard, Areasof 1% annual chance flood with averagedepth less than one foot or with drainageareas of less than one square mileZone X

Future Conditions 1% AnnualChance Flood HazardZone X

Area with Reduced Flood Risk due toLevee. See Notes.Zone X

Area with Flood Risk due to LeveeZone D

NO SCREENArea of Minimal Flood HazardZone X

Area of Undetermined Flood HazardZone D

Channel, Culvert, or Storm Sewer

Levee, Dike, or Floodwall

Cross Sections with 1% Annual Chance17.5 Water Surface Elevation

Coastal Transect

Coastal Transect BaselineProfile BaselineHydrographic Feature

Base Flood Elevation Line (BFE)

Effective LOMRs

Limit of StudyJurisdiction Boundary

Digital Data Available

No Digital Data Available

Unmapped

This map complies with FEMA's standards for the use ofdigital flood maps if it is not void as described below.The basemap shown complies with FEMA's basemapaccuracy standards

The flood hazard information is derived directly from theauthoritative NFHL web services provided by FEMA. This mapwas exported on 5/6/2021 at 2:17 PM and does notreflect changes or amendments subsequent to this date andtime. The NFHL and effective information may change orbecome superseded by new data over time.

This map image is void if the one or more of the following mapelements do not appear: basemap imagery, flood zone labels,legend, scale bar, map creation date, community identifiers,FIRM panel number, and FIRM effective date. Map images forunmapped and unmodernized areas cannot be used forregulatory purposes.

Legend

OTHER AREAS OFFLOOD HAZARD

OTHER AREAS

GENERALSTRUCTURES

OTHERFEATURES

MAP PANELS

8

B20.2

The pin displayed on the map is an approximatepoint selected by the user and does not representan authoritative property location.

1:6,000

73°59'1"W 41°55'25"N

73°58'23"W 41°54'59"N

Basemap: USGS National Map: Orthoimagery: Data refreshed October, 2020

APPENDIX H

NOAA Fisheries Greater Atlantic Regional Fisheries Office Essential Fish Habitat (EFH) Assessment & Fish and Wildlife Coordination

Act (FWCA) Worksheet This worksheet is your essential fish habitat (EFH) assessment. It provides us with the information necessary to assess the effects of your action on EFH under the Magnuson Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act and on NOAA trust resources under the Fish and Wildlife Coordination Act (FWCA). Consultation is not required if: 1. there is no adverse effect on EFH or NOAA trust resources (see page 10 for more info).2. no EFH is designated and no trust resources may be present at the project site.

Instructions Federal agencies or their non-federal designated lead agency should email the completed worksheet and necessary attachments to nmfs.gar.efh.consultation@noaa.gov. Include the public notice (if applicable) or project application and project plans showing:

● location map of the project site with area of impact.● existing and proposed conditions.● all waters of the U.S. on the project site with mean low water (MLW), mean high water(MHW), high tide line (HTL), and water depths clearly marked.

● sensitive habitats mapped, including special aquatic sites (submerged aquatic vegetation,saltmarsh, mudflats, riffles and pools, coral reefs, and sanctuaries and refuges), hardbottom or natural rocky habitat areas, and shellfish beds.

● site photographs, if available.

We will provide our EFH conservation recommendations and recommendations under the FWCA, as appropriate, within 30 days of receipt of a complete EFH assessment (60 days if an expanded consultation is necessary). Please submit complete information to minimize delays in completing the consultation.

This worksheet provides us with the information required1 in an EFH assessment: 1. A description of the proposed action.2. An analysis of the potential adverse effects on EFH and the federally managed species.3. The federal agency’s conclusions regarding the effects of the action on EFH.4. Proposed mitigation, if applicable.

Your analysis should focus on impacts that reduce the quality and/or quantity of the habitat or result in conversion to a different habitat type for all life stages of species with designated EFH within the action area.

Use the information on the HCD website and NOAA’s EFH Mapper to complete this worksheet. If you have questions, please contact the appropriate HCD staff member to assist you.

1 The EFH consultation process is guided by the requirements of our EFH regulation at 50 CFR 600.905.

1

EFH ASSESSMENT WORKSHEET

General Project Information

Date Submitted:

Project/Application Number:

Project Name:

Project Sponsor/Applicant:

Federal Action Agency (if state agency acting as delegated):

Fast-41 or One Federal Decision Project: Yes No

Action Agency Contact Name:

Contact Phone: Contact Email:

Latitude: Longitude:

Address, City/Town, State:

Body of Water:

Project Purpose:

Project Description:

Anticipated Duration of In-Water Work or Start/End Dates:

2

Habitat Description

EFH includes the biological, chemical, and physical components of the habitat. This includes the substrate and associated biological resources (e.g., benthic organisms, submerged aquatic vegetation, shellfish beds, salt marsh wetlands), the water column, and prey species.

Is the project in designated EFH2? Yes No

Is the project in designated HAPC2? Yes No

Is this coordination under FWCA only? Yes No

Total area of impact to EFH (indicate sq ft or acres):

Total area of impact to HAPC (indicate sq ft or acres):

Current water depths: Salinity: Water temperature range:

Sediment characteristics3:

What habitat types are in or adjacent to the project area and will they be permanently impacted? Select all that apply. Indicate if impacts will be temporary, if site will be restored, or if permanent conversion of habitat will occur. A project may occur in overlapping habitat types.

Habitat Type Total impact (sq ft/acres)

Impacts are temporary

Restored to pre-existing conditions

Permanent conversion of all or part of habitat

Marine

Estuarine

Riverine (tidal)

Riverine (non-tidal)

Intertidal

Subtidal

Water column

Salt marsh/ Wetland (tidal)

Wetland (non-tidal)

2 Use the tables on pages 7-9 to list species with designated EFH or the type of designated HAPC present. 3 The level of detail is dependent on your project – e.g., a grain size analysis may be necessary for dredging.

3

Habitat Type Total impact (sq ft/acres)

Impacts are temporary

Restored to pre-existing conditions

Permanent conversion of all or part of habitat

Rocky/hard bottom4:

Sand

Shellfish beds or oyster reefs

Mudflats

Submerged aquatic vegetation (SAV)5 , macroalgae, epifauna

Diadromous fish (migratory or spawning habitat)

Indicate type(s) of rocky/hard bottom habitat (pebble, cobble, boulder, bedrock outcrop/ledge) and species of SAV:

Select all that apply

Project Type/Category

Hatchery or Aquaculture

Agriculture

Forestry

Military (e.g., acoustic testing, training exercises)

Mining (e.g., sand, gravel)

Restoration or fish/wildlife enhancement (e.g., fish passage, wetlands, beach renourishment, mitigation bank/ILF creation)

4 Indicate type(s). The type(s) of rocky habitat will help you determine if the area is cod HAPC. 5 Indicate species. Provide a copy of the SAV report and survey conducted at the site, if applicable.

4

Project Effects

Proposed action is associated with an existing wastewater treatment plant.

Project site contains soft sediment/muddy bottom and species of SAV include wild celery (vallisneria americana) and water chestnut (trapa natans). See Attachment 1

Select all that apply

Project Type/Category

Infrastructure/transportation (e.g., culvert construction, bridge repair, highway, port)

Energy development/use

Water quality (e.g., TMDL, wastewater, sediment remediation)

Dredging/excavation and disposal

Piers, ramps, floats, and other structures

Bank/shoreline stabilization (e.g., living shoreline, groin, breakwater, bulkhead)

Survey (e.g., geotechnical, geophysical, habitat, fisheries)

Other

Select all that apply

Potential Stressors Caused by the Activity

Select all that apply and if temporary or permanent

Habitat alterations caused by the activity

Underwater noise Temp Perm

Water quality/turbidity/ contaminant release

Water depth change

Vessel traffic/barge grounding

Tidal flow change

Impingement/entrainment6 Fill

Prevent fish passage/spawning

Habitat type conversion

Benthic community disturbance

Other:

Impacts to prey species Other:

6 Entrainment is the voluntary or involuntary movement of aquatic organisms from a water body into a surface diversion or through, under, or around screens and results in the loss of the organisms from the population. Impingement is the involuntary contact and entrapment of aquatic organisms on the surface of intake screens caused when the approach velocity exceeds the swimming capability of the organism.

5

Concrete mats/anchors will sink into sediment and permanent

Mats will sink into sediment; impact is temp

All stressors are temporary during construction/repair.

Details: project impacts and mitigation

The level of detail that you provide should be commensurate with the magnitude of impacts associated with the proposed project. Attach supplemental information if necessary.

Describe how the project would impact each of the habitat types selected above. Include temporary and permanent impact descriptions and direct and indirect impacts.

What specific measures will be used to avoid impacts, including project design, turbidity controls, acoustic controls, and time of year restrictions? If impacts cannot be avoided, why not?

What specific measures will be used to minimize impacts?

Is compensatory mitigation proposed? Yes No

6

If no, why not? If yes, describe plans for mitigation and how this will offset impacts to EFH. Include a conceptual compensatory mitigation and monitoring plan, if applicable.

There is no permanent loss or conversion of habitat for EFH species. Based on the analysis of EFH species, there is no significant habitat for EFH designated species at or in the immediate vicinity of the project site. See Attachment 2 for specific details.

Federal Action Agency’s EFH determination (select one)

There is no adverse effect7 on EFH or EFH is not designated at the project site.

EFH Consultation is not required. This is a FWCA-only request.

The adverse effect7 on EFH is not substantial. This means that the adverse effects are no more than minimal, temporary, or can be alleviated with minor project modifications or conservation recommendations.

This is a request for an abbreviated EFH consultation.

The adverse effect7 on EFH is substantial.

This is a request for an expanded EFH consultation. We will provide more detailed information, including an alternatives analysis and NEPA document, if applicable.

EFH and HAPC designations8 Use the EFH mapper to determine if EFH may be present in the project area and enter all species and lifestages that have designated EFH. Optionally, you may review the EFH text descriptions linked to each species in the EFH mapper and use them to determine if the described habitat is present. We recommend this for larger projects to help you determine what your impacts are.

Species EFH is designated/mapped for:

Habitat present based on text description (optional)

EFH: eggs

EFH: larvae

EFH: juvenile

EFH: adults/ spawning adults

7 An adverse effect is any impact that reduces the quality and/or quantity of EFH. Adverse effects may include direct or indirect physical, chemical, or biological alterations of the waters or substrate and loss of, or injury to, benthic organisms, prey species and their habitat, and other ecosystem components. Adverse effects to EFH may result from actions occurring within EFH or outside of EFH and may include site-specific or habitat-wide impacts, including individual, cumulative, or synergistic consequences of actions.8 Within the Greater Atlantic Region, EFH has been designated by the New England, Mid-Atlantic, and South Atlantic Fisheries Management Councils and NOAA Fisheries.

7

Species EFH is designated/mapped for:

Habitat present based on text description (optional)

EFH: eggs

EFH: larvae

EFH: juvenile

EFH: adults/ spawning adults

8

HAPCs

Select all that are in your action area.

Summer flounder: SAV9 Alvin & Atlantis Canyons

Sandbar shark Baltimore Canyon

Sand Tiger Shark (Delaware Bay) Bear Seamount

Sand Tiger Shark (Plymouth-Duxbury-Kingston Bay)

Heezen Canyon

Inshore 20m Juvenile Cod Hudson Canyon

Great South Channel Juvenile Cod Hydrographer Canyon

Northern Edge Juvenile Cod Jeffreys & Stellwagen

Lydonia Canyon Lydonia, Gilbert & Oceanographer Canyons

Norfolk Canyon (Mid-Atlantic) Norfolk Canyon (New England)

Oceanographer Canyon Retriever Seamount

Veatch Canyon (Mid-Atlantic) Toms, Middle Toms & Hendrickson Canyons

Veatch Canyon (New England) Washington Canyon

Cashes Ledge Wilmington Canyon

9 Summer flounder HAPC is defined as all native species of macroalgae, seagrasses, and freshwater and tidal macrophytes in any size bed, as well as loose aggregations, within adult and juvenile summer flounder EFH. In locations where native species have been eliminated from an area, then exotic species are included. Use local information to determine the locations of HAPC.

9

More information

The Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act (MSA) mandates that federal agencies conduct an essential fish habitat (EFH) consultation with NOAA Fisheries on any actions they authorize, fund, or undertake that may adversely affect EFH. An adverse effect is any impact that reduces the quality and/or quantity of EFH. Adverse effects may include direct or indirect physical, chemical, or biological alterations of the waters or substrate and loss of, or injury to, benthic organisms, prey species and their habitat, and other ecosystem components. Adverse effects to EFH may result from actions occurring within EFH or outside of EFH and may include site-specific or habitat-wide impacts, including individual, cumulative, or synergistic consequences of actions.

We designed this worksheet to help you to prepare EFH assessments. It is important to remember that an adverse effect determination is a trigger to consult with us. It does not mean that a project cannot proceed as proposed, or that project modifications are necessary. It means that the effects of the proposed action on EFH must be evaluated to determine if there are ways to avoid, minimize, or offset adverse effects.

This worksheet should be used as your EFH assessment or as a guide to develop your EFH assessment. At a minimum, you should include all the information required to complete this worksheet in your EFH assessment. The level of detail that you provide should be commensurate with the magnitude of impacts associated with the proposed project. If your answers in the worksheet and supplemental information you attach do not fully evaluate the adverse effects to EFH, we may request additional information to complete the consultation.

You may need to prepare an expanded EFH assessment for more complex projects to fully characterize the effects of the project and the avoidance and minimization of impacts to EFH. While the EFH assessment worksheet may be used for larger projects, the format may not be sufficient to incorporate the extent of detail required, and a separate EFH assessment may be developed. However, regardless of format, you should include an analysis as outlined in this worksheet for an expanded EFH assessment, along with any additional necessary information. This additional information includes:

● the results of on-site inspections to evaluate the habitat and site-specific effects. ● the views of recognized experts on the habitat or the species that may be affected. ● a review of pertinent literature and related information. ● an analysis of alternatives that could avoid or minimize the adverse effects on EFH.

Please contact our Greater Atlantic Regional Fisheries Office, Protected Resources Division regarding potential impacts to marine mammals or threatened and endangered species.

10

Useful Links National Wetland Inventory Maps https://www.fws.gov/wetlands/ EPA’s National Estuary Program (NEP) https://www.epa.gov/nep/local-estuary-programs Northeast Regional Ocean Council (NROC) Data Portal https://www.northeastoceandata.org/ Mid-Atlantic Regional Council on the Ocean (MARCO) Data Portal http://portal.midatlanticocean.org/

Resources by State

Maine Maine Office of GIS Data Catalog https://geolibrary-maine.opendata.arcgis.com/datasets#data Town shellfish information including shellfish conservation area maps https://www.maine.gov/dmr/shellfish-sanitation -management/programs/municipal/ordinances/towninfo.html State of Maine Shellfish Sanitation and Management https://www.maine.gov/dmr/shellfish-sanitation-management/index.html Eelgrass maps https://www.maine.gov/dmr/science-research/species/eelgrass/index.html Casco Bay Estuary Partnership https://www.cascobayestuary.org/ Maine GIS Stream Habitat Viewer https://www.arcgis.com/home/item.html?id=5869c2d20f0b4c3a9742bdd8abef42cb

New Hampshire NH’s Statewide GIS Clearinghouse, NH GRANIT http://www.granit.unh.edu/ NH Coastal Viewer http://www.granit.unh.edu/nhcoastalviewer/ State of NH Shellfish Program https://www.des.nh.gov/organization/divisions/water/wmb/shellfish/

Massachusetts MA Shellfish Sanitation and Management Program https://www.mass.gov/shellfish-sanitation-and-management MassGIS Data, Including Eelgrass Maps http://maps.massgis.state.ma.us/map_ol/oliver.php MA DMF Recommended TOY Restrictions Document https://www.mass.gov/files/documents/2016/08/ry/tr-47.pdf Massachusetts Bays National Estuary Program https://www.mass.gov/orgs/massachusetts-bays-national-estuary-program Buzzards Bay National Estuary Program http://buzzardsbay.org/ Massachusetts Division of Marine Fisheries

11

https://www.mass.gov/orgs/division-of-marine-fisheries Massachusetts Office of Coastal Zone Management https://www.mass.gov/orgs/massachusetts-office-of-coastal-zone-management

Rhode Island RI Shellfish and Aquaculture http://www.dem.ri.gov/programs/fish-wildlife/marine-fisheries/shellfish-aquaculture.php RI Shellfish Management Plan http://www.shellfishri.com/ Eelgrass Maps http://edc.maps.arcgis.com/apps/View/index.html?appid=db52bb689c1e44259c06e11fd24895f8 RI GIS Data http://ridemgis.maps.arcgis.com/apps/webappviewer/index.html?id=87e104c8adb449eb9f905e5f 18020de5 Narragansett Bay Estuary Program http://nbep.org/ Rhode Island Division of Marine Fisheries http://www.dem.ri.gov/programs/fish-wildlife/marine-fisheries/index.php Rhode Island Coastal Resources Management Council http://www.crmc.ri.gov/

Connecticut CT Bureau of Aquaculture https://www.ct.gov/doag/cwp/view.asp?a=3768&q=451508&doagNav= CT GIS Resources https://www.ct.gov/deep/cwp/view.asp?a=2698&q=323342&deepNav_GID=1707 Natural Shellfish Beds in CT https://cteco.uconn.edu/viewer/index.html?viewer=aquaculture Eelgrass Maps https://www.fws.gov/northeast/ecologicalservices/pdf/wetlands/2012_CT_Eelgrass_Final_Repor t_11_26_2013.pdf Long Island Sound Study http://longislandsoundstudy.net/ CT GIS Resources http://cteco.maps.arcgis.com/home/index.html CT DEEP Office of Long Island Sound Programs and Fisheries https://www.ct.gov/deep/site/default.asp CT River Watershed Council https://www.ctriver.org/

New York Eelgrass Report http://www.dec.ny.gov/docs/fish_marine_pdf/finalseagrassreport.pdf Peconic Estuary Program https://www.peconicestuary.org/ NY/NJ Harbor Estuary https://www.hudsonriver.org/estuary-program

12

New York GIS Clearinghouse https://gis.ny.gov/

New Jersey Submerged Aquatic Vegetation Mapping http://www.crssa.rutgers.edu/projects/sav/ Barnegat Bay Partnership https://www.barnegatbaypartnership.org/ NJ GeoWeb https://www.nj.gov/dep/gis/geowebsplash.htm NJ DEP Shellfish Maps https://www.nj.gov/dep/landuse/shellfish.html

Pennsylvania Delaware River Management Plan https://www.fishandboat.com/Fish/Fisheries/DelawareRiver/Documents/delaware_river_plan_ex ec_draft.pdf PA DEP Coastal Resources Management Program https://www.dep.pa.gov/Business/Water/Compacts%20and%20Commissions/Coastal%20Resour ces%20Management%20Program/Pages/default.aspx PA DEP GIS Mapping Tools https://www.dep.pa.gov/DataandTools/Pages/GIS.aspx

Delaware Partnership for the Delaware Estuary http://www.delawareestuary.org/ Center for Delaware Inland Bays http://www.inlandbays.org/ Delaware FirstMap http://delaware.maps.arcgis.com/home/index.html

Maryland Submerged Aquatic Vegetation Mapping http://web.vims.edu/bio/sav/ MERLIN http://dnrweb.dnr.state.md.us/MERLIN/ Maryland Coastal Bays Program https://mdcoastalbays.org/

Virginia Submerged Aquatic Vegetation mapping http://www.mrc.virginia.gov/regulations/Guidance_for_SAV_beds_and_restoration_final_appro ved_by_Commission_7-22-17.pdf VDGIF Time of Year Restrictions (TOYR) and Other Guidance https://www.dgif.virginia.gov/wp-content/uploads/VDGIF-Time-of-Year-Restrictions-Table.pdf

13

Kingston Wastewater Treatment Plant: Outfall Upgrade EFH Attachment 1

1

National Marine Fisheries EFH Attachment

Project Description

Applicant: Kingston Wastewater Treatment Plant 124-134 East Strand Street Ulster County Kingston, NY 12401

Project Purpose and Description

Owned and operated by the City of Kingston New York (City), the Kingston Wastewater Treatment Plant (WWTP) was constructed in 1940. The WWTP has design flow is 6.8 million gallons per day (MGD) and an average flow of 5.1 MGD from 2017 through 2019. The WWTP discharges treated water per SPDES number NY0029351 at the discharge structure located across the street into the Rondout Creek at highwater mark. The existing outfall site has a headwall structure with side-wings and a concrete apron base, rip rap, and square timber piles held in place with rounded timber piles as the bulkhead. The outfall discharges into the Rondout Creek at the mean highwater mark (MHW). The WWTP is across the street (north) from the headwall structure and Rondout Creek. The existing outfall system consists of dual 20-inch PVC outfalls installed through a headwall which also includes an 18-inch diameter stormwater outfall situated above the dual outfalls; the outfall system consists of a “Low” and “High” outfalls based on discharge elevation at the WWTP. The outfalls were installed approximately 20 years ago. The area of the Rondout Creek and Hudson River in the vicinity of the project area consist mostly of muddy substrate and salinity levels of ≤ 0.2 ppt (LDEO 2004; ASA 2019). Historically, submerged aquatic vegetation (SAV) within the vicinity of the project area include beds of wild celery (Vallisneria americana) and water chestnut (Trapa natans; Findlay et al. 1997 ), however more recent surveys (Cornell IRIS 2019) found no SAV within the direct project area (Figure 1).

The existing wastewater treatment plant outfall will be modified to meet new permitting requirements for discharge limits from the wastewater plant. The City plans to upgrade their existing WWTP, with modifications to their outfall structure. The City received a renewed Individual SPDES permit [NY0029351] in October 2016, which became effective December 1, 2016. The new SPDES permit limits included an effluent ammonia nitrogen (NH3-N) summer concentration limit of 5.9 mg/l, and a winter concentration limit of 9.0 mg/l, requiring that the City treat wastewater to a much higher level of quality. The SPDES permit also included an interim ammonia (as N) effluent limit of 25 mg/l, which was in effect while the City evaluated and upgraded the treatment system to meet the ammonia limit. The original compliance schedule for the evaluation in the form of an Engineering Report was June 1, 2018 with final plans and specification due within 12 months of NYSDEC approval of the Engineering Report. The NYSDEC offered an interim extension period to implement the upgrade, and construction is scheduled to be in 2022. The NYSDEC requires the outfall discharge into the Rondout Creek to an area with a minimum of twenty feet of water above the outfall terminus. WWTP alternatives were evaluated and the Main-Stream Seasonal Treatment alternative had the best outcome for the City meeting limit levels and cost. This alternative evaluates seasonal ammonia removal in mainstream flows to meet the revised ammonia limits with a 20-

Kingston Wastewater Treatment Plant: Outfall Upgrade EFH Attachment 1

2

foot outfall depth below the mean low water (MLW) mark. The proposed ammonia limits are 18 mg/L from June 1 to October 31, and 29 mg/L from November 1 to May 31.

The project will install the water-side portion of the outfall extension at a location to allow discharge of the WWTP effluent into the Rondout Creek in an area with a minimum twenty feet of water above it. To accommodate this, the outfall will be reconfigured from the existing outfall and discharge piping with restraint and protective structural systems will be installed (Figure 2). The permanent streambank impacts include the placement of a new bulkhead using a PZ13 sheet pile at a disturbance of 1.45 SF (51 linear feet). The sheet pile will be installed to allow for the construction area to be isolated during concrete and fill work and will remain in place post-construction to serve as a bulkhead and provide stabilization. Permanent streambed impacts include two 28-inch diameter steel pipes installed parallel to each other, 24 HP12 piles, dredging, and marine mattresses for a total impact of 725 SF. In addition, the removal of an existing car body on the streambed is also proposed, as the car currently sits where the pipes are proposed to be located. The car is a disturbance removal of 34 SF. As a result of the removal, the permanent streambed disturbance total decreases from 725 SF to 691 SF (Figure 2).

The outfall of the two sewer pipes sit at an elevation of 23 feet 6 inches below the mean highwater mark and extends 62 feet and 3 inches from the existing bulkhead (Figure 3). The outfall structure is not located within the navigable channel. The pipes will have a diameter of 28-inches to provide a capacity of 12 million gallons per day (MGD), the peak design discharge. The existing timber pile bulkhead will remain in place. Land based piles, the piles on the landward side of the PZ13 bulkhead, and the concrete encasement for uplift restraint will be installed as well. The wastewater flow will be rerouted in temporary 20-inch outfall pipes bent at 45 degrees around the existing headwall structure. The PZ13 sheet pile will have provided sealed openings to allow the temporary pipes through.

The sequence of activities is as follows:

• Mobilize to the site • Install perimeter controls • Install turbidity curtain • Remove car body • Perform headwall By-Pass • Install sheet pile to create cofferdam • Dewater Work Area • Perform dredging as necessary (approximately 108 cubic feet) on landward

side of cofferdam to install the 18-inches of gravel borrow and geotextile • Install piles on landside and waterside of cofferdam • Grade and prepare subgrade in front of existing headwall concrete structure • Install outfall sewer pipes then stormwater pipe on landside of cofferdam and

perform connection to existing headwall structure • Perform localized dredging as necessary (approximately 72 cubic feet) on

waterside of cofferdam to install last bend of the twin pipes • Install sewer pipes’ support and sewer pipes on the waterside of cofferdam (exclude

stormwater pipe, only to be extended on landside of cofferdam) • Perform pipe connection (for sewer and stormwater pipes)

Kingston Wastewater Treatment Plant: Outfall Upgrade EFH Attachment 1

3

o Install sewer pipe supports and sewer pipes using assistance from divers as necessary

• Form pipe concrete encasement over sewer pipes on landward side of cofferdam • Granular fill area over the concrete encasement on landward side of cofferdam to grade • Install protective steel frame and wood fender system. Cut sheet pile to grade as

necessary • Install marine mattress • Remove turbidity curtain • Surface restoration and cleanup • Dispose of excess dewatering water in accordance with local, state and federal

regulations • Demobilize

Best Management Practices for marine construction will be utilized to minimize the potential for adverse impacts, including the use of a turbidity curtain which will be placed around the project area to reduce impacts caused by construction activity. It is anticipated that the regulatory permit conditions may include time of year restrictions and/or underwater pile driving noise monitoring.

Kingston Wastewater Treatment Plant: Outfall Upgrade EFH Attachment 1

4

Source: Cornell IRIS 2019

Figure 1 Submerged aquatic vegetation conducted in 2018 within the vicinity of the Kingston WWTP Discharge.

Kingston Wastewater Treatment Plant: Outfall Upgrade EFH Attachment 1

Figure 2 Proposed Kingston WWTP outfall structure modifications, plan view.

Kingston Wastewater Treatment Plant: Outfall Upgrade EFH Attachment 1

Figure 3 Proposed Kingston WWTP outfall structure modifications, plan view.

Kingston Wastewater Treatment Plant: Outfall Upgrade EFH Attachment 1

7

References

ASA. 2019. Hudson River Biological Monitoring Program. 1974 – 2017. Final Report

Cornell Institute for Resource Information Sciences (Cornell IRIS). 2019. Hudson River Submerged Aquatic Vegetation 2018. Geospatial_Data_Presentation_Form: polygon shape file. Available online at: http://gis.ny.gov/gisdata/inventories/details.cfm?DSID=1350.

Findlay, Stuart, Elizabeth A. Blair, William C. Nieder, Eugenia Barnaba and Susan Hoskins. 1997. Distribution of submerged rooted vegetation beds of the tidal Hudson River. Unpublished report. Institute of Ecosystems Studies. Millbrook, New York. 15 pp.

Lamont-Doherty Earth Observatory (LDEO). 2004. Sediment Type, Hudson River Estuary, 2004. Available online at: https://cugir.library.cornell.edu/catalog/cugir-007884.

Kingston Wastewater Treatment Plant: Outfall Upgrade EFH Attachment 2

1

National Marine Fisheries EFH Attachment 2

Species and Associated Life Stages with Designated EFH in the Project Area Ambient Salinity in the Project Vicinity

Applicant: Kingston Wastewater Treatment Plant

124-134 East Strand Street Ulster County

Kingston, NY 12401 Regulatory Background

Under the Magnuson-Stevens Sustainable Fishery Act, the National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS) is required to designate Essential Fish Habitat (EFH). In the absence of quantitative site-specific data, NMFS relied on a variety of data including records of fish occurrence in similar habitats, such as the summary report prepared by Stone et al. (1994). The document consists primarily of summary tables, derived from a combination of quantitative and qualitative information from other mid-Atlantic estuaries. As a result, the assignments of fish species to salinity-based habitats within the Hudson River are based primarily on inferences from observations on other estuaries.

Hudson River Biological Monitoring Program

One source that was not available to NMFS when designating EFH in the Hudson River was the Hudson River Biological Monitoring Program (HRBMP). This program sampled the Hudson Estuary from its mouth (RM 0) to Albany (RM 152), using sampling gear appropriate for pelagic, benthic, and shoreline habitats, from 1974-2017 (ASA 2019). More than 5,000 samples were taken each year of the program, and in addition intensive water quality information, including salinity, was obtained. The HRBMP Water Quality Survey was conducted for RM 12-152 for the years 1988-2017 and for RM 0-152 for the years 1995-2017, over survey weeks 18-36 (May through early September), the time period in which the EFH species (and other fish) are found in the river. The upper limit of the mesohaline zone (5 ppt) typically was found near RM 33 during this period, but occasionally is as high as RM 38 or as low as region 23 (ASA 2019). The project site is located at RM 91 within the Kingston region (RM 86-93) of the HRBMP Water Quality Survey regions. Maximum salinity in the Kingston region over 2014-2016 was only 0.2 ppt (Table 1).

Kingston Wastewater Treatment Plant: Outfall Upgrade EFH Attachment 2

2

Table 1 Kingston Region (RM 86-93) minimum, maximum, and average Salinity (ppt) for each HRBMP sampling season collected in 2014 through 2016.

2014 Spring Summer Fall Number of Weekly Surveys 12 7 4 Minimum 0.1 0.1 0.1 Maximum 0.1 0.1 0.2 Average 0.1 0.1 0.2

2015 Spring Summer Fall Number of Weekly Surveys 11 7 5 Minimum 0.1 0.1 0.1 Maximum 0.1 0.1 0.2 Average 0.1 0.1 0.1

2016 Spring Summer Fall Number of Weekly Surveys 12 7 5 Minimum 0.1 0.1 0.1 Maximum 0.1 0.2 0.2 Average 0.1 0.1 0.2

Species and Associated Life Stages with Designated EFH in the Project Area

The analyses below use the HRBMP sampling results published in annual and summary reports, and other Hudson Estuary-specific data, to address EFH in the project vicinity.

Winter Flounder (Pseudopleuronectes americanus)

Eggs: Winter flounder eggs, which are demersal and adhesive, are typically found in waters a salinity range of 10 – 30 ppt (NOAA 1999a); average salinity in the project vicinity was ≤ 0.2 ppt, lower than the preferred range. (Table 1).

Although winter flounder eggs have been collected throughout the estuary, in the HRBMP, a river-wide study of the Hudson River that utilized data collected between 1974 – 2017, 99 percent of the eggs were collected below river mile (RM) 33 and thus were not found in the project vicinity (ASA 2019).

Accordingly, the project site (RM 91) does not represent preferred habit for winter flounder eggs, and project related impacts to this life stage of the species are unlikely.

Larvae: Larvae prefer waters with salinities between 4 – 30 ppt (NOAA 1999a); salinity in the project vicinity is typically ≤ 0.2 ppt. In the HRBMP sampling from 1988-2017, winter flounder larvae collected in the same region as the project (RM 86 through 93) comprised only 0.003% of all winter flounder larvae collected in the river (ASA 2019). Accordingly, the project site does not serve as preferred habitat for winter flounder larvae, and significant project related impacts to this life stage of the species are unlikely.

Juvenile: Juveniles tend to be found in waters with a salinity range of 10 – 30 ppt (NOAA 1999a). Salinity in the project vicinity is typically ≤ 0.2 ppt, much lower than the preferred range. As winter flounder

Kingston Wastewater Treatment Plant: Outfall Upgrade EFH Attachment 2

3

juveniles were not commonly collected at all in the HRBMP sampling that focused on the juvenile stage (ASA 2017). Therefore, the project site probably does not serve as significant habitat for winter flounder juveniles and project related impacts to this life stage of the species are unlikely.

Adults: Adults captured in the Hudson Estuary were found at salinities as low as 15 ppt, although most were found at > 22 ppt (NOAA 1999a). Salinity in the project vicinity is typically ≤ 0.2 ppt (Table 1), much lower than the preferred range. The project site does not serve as preferred habitat for winter flounder adults and significant project related impacts to this life stage of the species are unlikely.

Little Skate (Leucoraja erinacea)

Juveniles and Adults: Surveys of the Hudson Estuary conducted 1992-1997 found the two life stages of this species preferred a similar range of salinity (juveniles 20-35 ppt; adults 20-35 ppt) that is significantly higher than that found in the project vicinity (Table 1); few adults were collected in these surveys (NOAA 2003a). Little skate juveniles were not collected in the HRBMP estuary-wide sampling program from 1988-2016 (ASA 2017). Accordingly, the project site does not serve as significant habitat for adult or juvenile little skate, and project related impacts to these life stages of the species are unlikely.

Atlantic Herring (Clupea harengus)

Larvae: This life stage is frequently observed throughout the Hudson River Estuary, though data collected by the HRBMP from 1988 – 2017 show that 98 percent of the larvae were collected below RM 39, while only 0.01 percent of the larvae were collected in the project area (RM 86-93; ASA 2019). As such, the project site does not serve as preferred habitat for Atlantic herring larvae, and significant project related impacts to this life stage of the species is unlikely.

Juvenile: This life stage prefers salinities between 28-32 ppt and can only tolerate salinities as low as 5 ppt for short periods of time (NOAA 2005a); however, salinity in the project vicinity is typically ≤ 0.2 ppt. The species was extremely rare in HRBMP sampling that focused on the juvenile stage, with only 16 collected from 1985-2016 (ASA 2017). In addition, due to the low salinity in the vicinity of the project site, it is unlikely that the area serves as significant habitat for Atlantic herring juveniles, and project related impacts to this life stage of the species is unlikely.

Adult: Atlantic herring have a tendency to avoid brackish water in favor of waters with higher salinities with increasing age (NOAA 2005a). Most adults found in the Hudson estuary were collected in waters with a salinity range of either 24 -25 or 28 – 31 ppt (NOAA 2005a), salinities significantly above those recorded in the project vicinity (Table 1). As such, the low salinity at project site makes it to unlikely to serve as preferred habitat for Atlantic herring adults, and significant project related impacts to this life stage of the species is unlikely.

Red Hake (Urophycis chuss)

Eggs, Larvae, Juveniles and Adults: Only 3 larvae and 2 juveniles were collected in HRBMP in the entire estuary sampling conducted between 1988 -2017; few eggs were collected (ASA 2019). Adults in the Hudson Estuary were most often found in waters with a salinity range of 20 -33 ppt (NOAA 1999b), significantly above salinity levels typical of the project site (Table 1). Accordingly, the project site does

Kingston Wastewater Treatment Plant: Outfall Upgrade EFH Attachment 2

4

not serve as preferred habitat for red hake, and significant project related impacts to life stages of the species is unlikely.

Windowpane Flounder (Scophthalmus aquosus)

Eggs and Larvae: Both life stages have been collected in most regions of the Hudson River estuary, however 99 percent of the standing crop of eggs occur below RM 24, and 97 percent of the standing crop of larvae occur below RM 34 (ASA 2019). As the project site is located at RM 91, it is unlikely to serve as preferred habitat for windowpane flounder eggs and larvae, and significant project related impacts to these life stages of the species is unlikely.

Juveniles and Adults: Both life stages within the estuary were found in waters with a salinity range of 15 - 33 ppt (NOAA 1999c), salinities significantly above those typically observed in the project vicinity (Table 1). Juveniles and adults were not commonly caught in HRBMP sampling (ASA 2017). The project site probably does not serve as preferred habitat for windowpane flounder juvenile or adults, and significant project related impacts to these life stages of the species is unlikely.

Winter Skate (Leucoraja ocellata)

Juveniles and Adults: Juveniles collected in the Hudson – Raritan estuary were most often found in waters with a salinity range of 20 – 35 ppt (NOAA 2003b), salinities significantly above those typically observed in the project vicinity (Table 1). Few adults were collected in the estuary (NOAA 2003b) and the species was not collected in HRBMP sampling from 1985-2016(ASA 2016). The project site probably does not serve as significant habitat for winter skate juvenile or adults, and project related impacts to these life stages of the species is unlikely.

Clearnose Skate (Raja eglanteria)

Juveniles and Adults: Both life stages of this species exhibited a similar range of preferred salinities (juvenile 22-30 ppt; adults 23-30 ppt) in the Hudson-Raritan estuary (NOAA 2003c), salinities significantly above those typically observed in the project vicinity (Table 1). Clearnose skate were not collected in the HRBMP sampling from 1985-2016 (ASA 2016). The low salinity within the vicinity of the project site makes it unlikely to serve as preferred habitat for clearnose skate juvenile or adults, and significant project related impacts to these life stages of the species is unlikely.

Longfin Inshore Squid (Loligo pealeii)

Eggs: Eggs are demersal, often attached to rocky substrate, and typically laid in waters typically < 50 meters in depth with salinities between 30 -32 ppt (NOAA 2005b). As the eggs are demersal and adhesive, and water depth and salinity characteristics are not found in the project vicinity, the project site probably does not serve as preferred habitat for longfin inshore squid, and significant project related impacts to eggs of the species is unlikely.

Bluefish (Potatomus saltatrix)

Juvenile: This life stage prefers salinities between 23 – 33 ppt, but can tolerate salinities as low as 3 ppt (NOAA 2006). Bluefish juveniles have been found throughout much of the Hudson Estuary. The HRBMP conducted between 1988 – 2016 did not collect any of the estuary’s juvenile standing crop in the region

Kingston Wastewater Treatment Plant: Outfall Upgrade EFH Attachment 2

5

of the river (RM 86- – 93) that includes the project site (ASA 2019). As such, the project site does not serve as preferred habitat for bluefish juveniles, and significant project related impacts to this life stage of the species is unlikely.

Adults: This life stage prefers a salinity range of 33-36 ppt (NOAA 2006) significantly higher than those typically found in the project site (Table 1), which probably does not serve as preferred habitat for adult bluefish, and significant project related impacts to adults of the species is unlikely.

Atlantic Butterfish (Peprilus triacanthus)

Larvae: Atlantic butterfish larvae can be found in waters with salinities of 6.7 – 37.4 ppt (NOAA 1999d). None of the estuary’s standing stock of Atlantic butterfish larvae were collected in sampling conducted above RM 62 in conjunction the HRBMP (ASA 2019); thus, none within the vicinity of the project site at RM 91. Given the mobility typical of juveniles of this species, and the fact that the project site does not represent preferred Atlantic butterfish habitat, significant adverse effects upon Atlantic butterfish larvae are not anticipated.

Summer Flounder (Paralichthys dentatus)

Larvae and Juveniles: Transforming summer flounder larvae and juveniles are typically found in waters with “higher salinities” (NOAA 1999e), though post larval individuals can occur in a wide range of salinities (NOAA 1999e). Only 0.1 percent of the Hudson River standing crop of summer flounder larvae and 1.3 percent of the juveniles were captured above RM 62 in HRBMP sampling (ASA 2019). As the project site is located at RM 91, it does not represent preferred habitat for larvae and juvenile summer flounder, and project-related impacts upon these life stages are considered unlikely.

Adults: Adults prefer habitats with sandy substrates; however, individuals can be found in a variety of substrates, though more often found in the higher salinity portions of the estuaries (Mid-Atlantic Fishery Council 1998). The predominant muddy substrate (LDEO 2004) and low salinity at the project site indicates that it does not represent preferred summer flounder habitat, and that significant project-related impacts upon these life stages are considered unlikely.

EFH Summary

Although the EFH designated fish species discussed above can be found in waters with a range of salinities, all are considered marine fish, typically found in higher salinities. Salinity at the project site seldom if ever greater than the oligohaline (5 - 0.5 ppt) boundary. Salinity data from the HRBMP water quality study, demonstrate that the mesohaline-oligohaline boundary was typically well downstream of the project site. Combined with the biological sampling data of the HRBMP, which demonstrates only rare occurrences of EFH species in the vicinity, the project site does not represent preferred habitat for these marine EFH-designated species, and project-related impacts upon these life stages are considered unlikely.

Diadromous fishes included alewife (Alosa pseudoharengus), blueback herring (Alosa aestivalis), and American eel (Anguilla rostrata) which have been found to utilize habitat in and near the lower sections of the Rondout Creek (NEFMC 1998), but presumably not in the project area. Diadromous fishes would migrate upstream and downstream past the project area and the small footprint of the project area would not impact fish passage.

Kingston Wastewater Treatment Plant: Outfall Upgrade EFH Attachment 2

6

References

ASA Analysis & Communication, Inc. (ASA). 2017. 2016 Year Class Report for the Hudson River Estuary Monitoring Program. Prepared for Entergy Nuclear Indian Point 2 L.L.C., Entergy Nuclear Indian Point 3, L.L.C., and Entergy Nuclear Operations, Inc.

ASA. 2019. Hudson River Biological Monitoring Program. 1974 – 2017. Final Report

Lamont-Doherty Earth Observatory (LDEO). 2004. Sediment Type, Hudson River Estuary, 2004. Available on at: https://cugir.library.cornell.edu/catalog/cugir-007884.

Mid-Atlantic Fishery Council. 1998. Amendment 12 to the Summer Flounder, Scup and Black Sea Bass Fishery Management Plan. Mid-Atlantic Fishery Council.

National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA). 1999a. Essential Fish Habitat Source Document: Winter Flounder, Pseudopleuronectes americanus, Life History and Habitat Characteristics. U.S. Department of Commerce.

NOAA. 1999b. Essential Fish Habitat Source Document: Red Hake, Urophycis chuss, Life History and Habitat Characteristics. U.S. Department of Commerce.

NOAA. 1999c. Essential Fish Habitat Source Document: Windowpane Flounder, Scopthalmus aquosus, Life History and Habitat Characteristics. U.S. Department of Commerce.

NOAA. 1999d. Atlantic Butterfish, Peprilus triacanthus, Life History and Habitat Characteristics. NOAA Technical Memorandum NMFS-NE-145.

NOAA. 1999e. Summer Flounder, Paralichthys dentatus, Life History and Habitat Characteristics. NOAA Technical Memorandum NMFS-NE-151.

NOAA. 2003a. Little Skate, Leucoraja erinacea, Life History and Habitat Characteristics. NOAA Technical Memorandum NMFS-NE-175.

NOAA. 2003b. Winter Skate, Leucoraja ocellata, Life History and Habitat Characteristics. NOAA Technical Memorandum NMFS-NE-179.

NOAA. 2003c. Clearnose Skate, Raja eglanteria, Life History and Habitat Characteristics. NOAA Technical Memorandum NMFS-NE-174.

NOAA. 2005a. Atlantic Herring, Clupea harengus, Life History and Habitat Characteristics. NOAA Technical Memorandum NMFS-NE-192.

NOAA. 2005b. Longfin Squid, Loligo pealeii, Life History and Habitat Characteristics. NOAA Technical Memorandum NMFS-NE-193.

NOAA. 2006. Bluefish, Pomatomus saltatrix, Life History and Habitat Characteristics. NOAA Technical Memorandum NMFS-NE-198.

New England Fishery Management Council (NEFMC) in consultation with National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS). 1998. Amendment #11 to the Northeast Multispecies Fishery Management Plan for Essential Fish Habitat incorporating the Environmental Assessment Volume 1.

Stone, S. L., T. A. Lowery, J. D. Field, S. H. Jury, D. M. Nelson, M. E. Monaco, C. D. Williams, and L. Andreason. 1994. Distribution and abundance of fishes and invertebrates in mid-Atlantic

Kingston Wastewater Treatment Plant: Outfall Upgrade EFH Attachment 2

7

estuaries. ELMR Report No.12. NOAA/NOS Strategic Environmental Assessments Division, Silver Spring, MD 280 p.