NEW BEDFORD — Andy Herlihy, executive director of the Community Boating Center of New Bedford, says all children of the South Coast should be able to connect with the water. So when Clark’s Cove turns rust-red with algal blooms on hot summer days, it pains him to tell his sailing students to avoid jumping in.
“You want the kids to be kids,” he said. “If they’re near the water, they want to get in it.”
And it’s not just kids who struggle with poor water quality in Buzzards Bay. Orell Baumann, board vice chair of the New Bedford Rowing Center, says some people hesitate to join his Pope’s Island-based group, because they don’t want to fall into the waters of the inner harbor.
“If we are trying to engage people to row, and they know it’s in the inner harbor, and it’s known to be contaminated in multiple ways, they may not want to join,” he said.
That’s why Herlihy and Baumann are pleased with the Massachusetts Department of Environmental Protection’s plan to guide New Bedford, Fairhaven, and four inland towns on the Acushnet River towards upgrading their wastewater systems. Its goal is to reduce nitrogen pollution in the inner harbor, which would improve water quality there and in Buzzards Bay.
MassDEP issued its draft nitrogen reduction plan for the Acushnet River and inner New Bedford harbor this fall, and the public comment period closed in early December. It shows that New Bedford, Fairhaven, Acushnet, Freetown, Lakeville, and Rochester would have to cut the amount of nitrogen they release into the watershed by about half to meet state water quality standards, through upgrading their wastewater treatment and reducing agricultural runoff.
Common sources of nitrogen in a watershed include sewage, animal waste, and chemical fertilizers. High levels of nitrogen in the water are linked to nuisance algal blooms, fish kills, and impaired ecosystem function.
New Bedford and Fairhaven, which are already upgrading their wastewater systems, support the state’s move.
But the inland towns on the Acushnet River are urging MassDEP to slow down on advancing their draft plan. They say it may force many of their residents to invest in expensive wastewater upgrades sooner than they can afford to.
“It’s pretty tough for DEP to even come up with these regulations right now,” said Karen Walega, the health director for Rochester. She argues that the state’s new demands are outpacing the region’s post-pandemic economic recovery. “To impose this on people is just wrong, unless you put up some money and help people out.”
Meanwhile, the Buzzards Bay Coalition and local recreation groups say MassDEP’s plan to reduce nitrogen in the Acushnet River watershed is not a mandate, and is long overdue. They support implementing it promptly to promote water quality and the coastal economy.
“Everything we can do to advocate for clean water is important, because our residents deserve a clean harbor to enjoy,” Herlihy said. “We all need to be team players, and look at the results not in our front yard, but downstream.”
‘Too much nitrogen, pretty much everywhere’
Rachel Jakuba, vice president of bay science with the Buzzards Bay Coalition, says that 30 years of data about the cloudy waters of Buzzards Bay make one thing clear.
“There is too much nitrogen, pretty much everywhere,” she said.
Nitrogen is a natural part of the ecosystem, and does not pose significant human health risks. But nitrogen facilitates the growth of marine plant life, and too much nitrogen from increasing development across the South Coast is causing overgrowth of nuisance algae in Buzzards Bay.
These algae block sunlight for aquatic plants like eelgrass that grow on the floor of Buzzards Bay. That degrades habitat for local fish and shellfish. And when these algae die and sink to the floor of the watershed, the bacteria that break them down consume dissolved oxygen in the water, reducing available oxygen for other species.
Nitrogen pollution also hurts the pocketbooks of coastal residents. Under the Clean Water Act, MassDEP must list bodies of water that do not meet the state water quality standards on the state’s “impaired waters” list, and share this information with the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency.
This listing can lead state agencies to limit recreational activities on the impaired body of water. It can depress property values and commercial activity. The only way to get a body of water off the impaired list is to establish a nitrogen pollution management plan.
Since the 1990s, Bristol County has grown from roughly 500,000 people to 590,000. And more than 10 of the 30 estuaries and embayments of Buzzards Bay — including the Acushnet River-Inner New Bedford Harbor system — are impaired with nitrogen, according to MassDEP.
Korrin Petersen, vice president of clean water advocacy of the Buzzards Bay Coalition, urged MassDEP to develop a schedule for the new nitrogen management plan, and to finalize it “without delay.”
“We’re not going to fix it tomorrow,” she said. “It’s time to move.”
Fairhaven, New Bedford taking action
Petersen added that when it comes to reducing nitrogen pollution, “most of the fix for the inner harbor is already underway.”
The EPA has already required upgrades to limit two major sources of nitrogen pollution: the Fairhaven Wastewater Treatment Plant and New Bedford’s combined sewer system.
Fairhaven’s plant, constructed in 1969, treats both Fairhaven’s and Mattapoisett’s sewage. It discharges through an outfall south of Union Wharf, and accounts for 47% of controllable nitrogen pollution in the inner harbor.
In 2018, the EPA ordered Fairhaven to upgrade its wastewater facility treatment within the decade. This means that the town will build wastewater holding tanks at the facility, filled with bacteria that can consume the nitrogen in wastewater before it is discharged. The process takes four days for the bacteria to complete.
Vincent Furtado, superintendent of Fairhaven’s Board of Public Works, said the town hit its deadlines for planning the project and started construction work in mid-November.
The upgrades — which will reduce close to 90% of the nitrogen pollution from the treatment plant — will cost Fairhaven and Mattapoisett residents a combined $70 million and be completed by 2026. The upgrades will drive up water and sewer rates for residents by roughly $10 to $20 per month.
Furtado said Fairhaven is already on track to meet MassDEP’s nitrogen target because of the EPA-mandated upgrades.
“They’re already hitting us over the head with it,” he said. “We have no choice. The only thing we can do is make this palatable for ratepayers.”
Meanwhile, New Bedford has been reducing its combined sewer overflows ever since it signed a consent decree with the EPA in 1987. Today, the city’s sewer overflows to the New Bedford harbor comprise 9% of the harbor’s controllable nitrogen load.
That’s because, between 1990 and 2016, New Bedford spent $283 million in 2016 dollars to upgrade its wastewater system and reduce the volume of combined sewer overflows from its 300-mile sewer system by 94%. Then, in 2012, the EPA ordered the city to further reduce its sanitary sewer overflows. The city’s new upgrade plan, worth $291 million in 2016 dollars, started in 2019. It should reduce the volume of New Bedford’s remaining discharges an additional 45% from 2016 levels.
The new upgrades will also generate progress towards MassDEP’s nitrogen reduction goals for the harbor, while keeping yearly rate increases relatively affordable, between the EPA’s moderate and high burden thresholds.
“The city has done quite a bit of work to improve water quality, when it comes to nitrogen and other CSO issues,” said Jamie Ponte, commissioner of the New Bedford Department of Public Infrastructure. “But there’s still a lot of work that needs to be phased out.”
Acushnet River towns push back
Fixing Fairhaven’s treatment plant and New Bedford’s combined sewer overflows can only reduce nitrogen in the inner harbor so much, Furtado said. That’s because upstream septic systems comprise 20% of the controllable nitrogen. He expressed concerns that the EPA isn’t holding upstream polluters accountable.
“If you’ve got three people peeing in the tub, and New Bedford and Fairhaven stop, you still have one more person peeing in the tub to deal with,” Furtado said.
But officials in these upstream towns — including Acushnet and Rochester — say they are being blindsided by the draft watershed nitrogen target, which may require them to reduce 77% of upstream nitrogen loads from septic systems in coming years to meet the target. These changes could include the costs of sewering or widespread septic upgrades.
Bob Hinckley, a member of the Acushnet Board of Selectmen, argued that MassDEP is pushing septic upgrades on local towns at a pace that is ahead of both the region’s post-pandemic recovery and the current understanding of the watershed’s nitrogen sources.
Half of the Acushnet River watershed lies in the town of Acushnet, and 70% of homes in the town are on septic systems. Hinckley said upgrading Acushnet homes in the watershed with unreliable early-stage denitrifying systems — or expanding the sewers to the whole town — would cost tens of millions of dollars the town does not have. He added that Acushnet is a right-to-farm town.
Hinckley argues that he cannot ask residents to upgrade anything until New Bedford’s combined sewer overflow challenges are resolved, the EPA’s remediation work in the harbor is done, and MassDEP studies how much nitrogen is coming from septic systems in Acushnet.
“I don’t think jumping the gun to do something that is easy from the environmental protection standpoint is always the right answer,” he said.
Walega of Rochester says she understands the Acushnet River is “being troubled” by nutrient pollution. Her problems with MassDEP’s nitrogen target boil down to money and timing, especially after the South Coast pushed successfully to be exempted from new MassDEP septic regulations for Southeast Massachusetts last year.
“Here we go again, with another unfunded mandate,” she said.
Walega said the draft nitrogen target for the inner harbor suggests MassDEP wants to move at an accelerated timeline on septic upgrades in certain South Coast watersheds.
Just 3% of Rochester falls within the Acushnet River watershed, and developing a wastewater management plan would run hundreds of thousands of dollars, which Walega said the town does not have. She added that upgrading septic systems would cost $30,000 to $35,000 per home, which is unaffordable for Rochester’s residents, especially seniors, who comprise roughly 30% of the town’s population.
“You can’t expect a senior to do a reverse mortgage just to put in a new septic system,” she said. “Where’s the money gonna come from?”
Coletta of MassDEP said that the nitrogen plan for the Inner Harbor is “not a permitting document, regulation or a mandate,” though its goals are enforceable through the Clean Water Act and state regulations if progress is lagging. He added that there is currently “no timeline” to expand Title 5 natural resource nitrogen-sensitive areas and septic upgrades beyond Cape Cod, and that this plan for the harbor is unrelated.
Coletta said that communities will have many options to fund the wastewater improvements to meet the nitrogen targets for the Acushnet River, including the Massachusetts State Revolving Fund Clean Water Program, and Southeast New England Program Watershed Implementation grants.
‘Inaction is not an option’
Much of the local economy in southeastern Massachusetts is dependent on a clean Buzzards Bay, said Roland Samimy, a senior research manager for the Coastal Systems Program at UMass Dartmouth’s School of Marine Science and Technology.
“No one’s happy about having to spend money for a benefit that is not quickly seen, but is very much real and will come in time,” Samimy said. “We have to recognize that inaction is not an option, and that it’s benefiting our community.”
Bodies of water are gathering places for the community, said Baumann of the New Bedford Rowing Center. He added that reducing nutrients in the harbor would benefit all residents who frequent the waters of the South Coast and Buzzards Bay.
“It just needs to get done,” Baumann said. “Whenever you can get to it. We need to create the opportunity ourselves.”
Meeting the inner harbor nitrogen target “will take time,” Petersen of Buzzards Bay Coalition said. Yet she added that she is optimistic it can be reached through careful watershed planning with Acushnet River towns over the next decade. MassDEP anticipates releasing a finalized pollution target in 2024.
“I’m looking forward to being able to tell a good news story,” she said. “I am confident we will see cleaner water in our New Bedford harbor.”
Clarification: This story was amended on Jan. 3, 2024, to clarify that MassDEP‘s nitrogen management plan will not require Acushnet River towns to upgrade septic systems, though it could serve as the basis for future regional wastewater regulations. The nitrogen management plan also is unrelated to Title 5 septic regulations on Cape Cod.
Email Adam Goldstein at agoldstein@newbedfordlight.org
