FREE DOWNLOADS: Mid-Atlantic Stream Restoration Conference Presentations

The Resource Institute hosted its 9th Annual Mid-Atlantic Stream Restoration Conference in Baltimore, Maryland, where water resource professionals, researchers, and practitioners come together for three days to share ideas and learn about stream restoration planning, assessment, design, construction, evaluation, and other topical stream issues. The conference, which was themed Building Resilient Streams in the Mid-Atlantic and Northeast regions, included presentations, discussions, exhibits, and pre-conference workshops. Princeton Hydro participated in three presentations on a variety of topics. Below, we provide a synopsis and free download of each presentation:

Innovative Design and Funding Approaches for Dam Removal Projects Where an Unfunded Mandate Exists

Lead Presenter: Kirk Mantay, PWS, GreenTrust Alliance, Inc.
Co-Authors: Geoffrey Goll, P.E.; Princeton Hydro President; John Roche, Maryland Department of Environment; and Brett Berkley, GreenVest.

The presentation provides a detailed look at the removal of the Martin Dam in Fallston, Maryland, and how project partners were able to drastically expand the footprint of this emergency dam removal to generate enough ecological restoration benefits to adequately fund the dam removal itself.

The Martin Dam was constructed in 1965 as part of USDA’s sustainable farms pond construction initiative, which promoted aquaculture and subsistence fish production on small farms across the region as an income source for agricultural producers. Dam-related impacts included the permanent loss of spring-fed sedge wetlands, ditching of forested floodplain wetlands, pollution from stream bank entrenchment, and thermal impacts to a wild brook trout population downstream.

Overtime, the dam structure began to degrade. With each state and local agency inspection that was conducted, the dam increased in hazard category. In 2016, the Maryland Department of the Environment (MDE) was forced to list the dam as a, “public safety hazard at risk of immanent failure.” The landowner, unable to fund the dam removal, contacted GreenTrust Alliance (GTA), a regional green infrastructure nonprofit organization, for help.

By emphasizing the ecological benefits of restored wetlands and streams above and below the dam as well as the critical public safety hazard faced by residents and motorists downstream, GTA, in partnership with Princeton Hydro and GreenVest, was able to secure restoration funding for the site. The design and permitting was lead by Princeton Hydro, and the dam was safely breached as part of restoration construction in January 2019.

Learn more and download the full presentation.

 

Columbia Lake Dam Removal; Using Drones for Quantitative Evaluation of River Restoration

Lead Presenter: Beth Styler-Barry of The Nature Conservancy
Co-Authors from Princeton Hydro: Geoffrey Goll, P.E., President; Casey Schrading, EIT, Staff Engineer; Kelly Klein, Senior Project Manager, Natural Resources; and Christiana Pollack, CFM, GISP, Senior Project Manager, Environmental Scientist.

In order to explore the use of drone or UAV technology to evaluate the effects of dam removals, the presentation showcases the Columbia Lake Dam removal, the largest dam removal in New Jersey to date.

The Columbia Lake Dam, built in 1909, was 18 feet high, 330 feet long dam, and stretched more than 1.5 miles on the Paulins Kill less than 0.25 miles upstream from its confluence with the Delaware River. As part of The Nature Conservancy’s (TNC) mission to improve the quality of the Paulins Kill, removing this “first blockage” was the cornerstone of the larger mission. Princeton Hydro served as the engineer-of-record, designing and permitting this project. Dam removal activities commenced in 2018 and were finalized in 2019. Its removal opens 10 miles of river for fish migration and improves recreation access, floodplain reconnection, habitat enhancement and higher water quality.

TNC will conduct five years of monitoring, a vitally important component of this project, to determine long-term ecological uplift, short-term positive and negative effects, and to develop data to provide information for future dam removals. And, as a result of the programmable and repeatable nature of drone flight paths, such monitoring will be able to be conducted for years and decades, producing invaluable data for research and future project design.

The presentation reviews the various parameters investigated, the results and significance of the data retrieved, and recommendations for the use of drone technology for future ecosystem restoration projects.

Learn more and download the full presentation.

Modeling 3D Rivers in AutoCAD to Enhance Design and Deliverables

Lead Presenter: Daniel Ketzer, PE, Princeton Hydro Senior Project Manager, River Restoration
Co-Authors from Princeton Hydro: Eric Daley, Water Resources Engineer; Cory Speroff, MLA, ASLA, CBLP, Landscape Designer; and Sumantha Prasad, PE, ENV SP, Water Resource Engineer

This presentation provides an overview on how to create 3D river models based on geomorphic input to enhance the overall accuracy and quality of a river restoration project.

In river restoration, the proposed geometry of the river channel is the key part of the design. It impacts earthwork, utility conflicts, plan set layout, and many other aspects of the project. In larger projects with reaches measuring thousands of feet and greater, manual grading is extremely time consuming and tedious; and determining the entire implication of the proposed design is difficult to achieve when simply analyzing proposed cross-sections and profiles. To increase efficiency and maintain uniformity throughout the subject reach developing a 3D-surface model of the proposed restoration reduces design time and increases quality. AutoCAD Civil 3D can be used to convert the proposed profiles and cross-sections from a geomorphic design into a 3D surface of the river corridor.

The presentation goes through the key steps that need to be taken and strategic questions that need to be asked when modeling 3D rivers in AutoCAD along with important tips and reminders.

Learn more and download the full presentation.

Stay tuned for our Spring Events Spotlight to learn how you can participate in upcoming environmental events! Click here to read more about Princeton Hydro’s river restoration services.

Feasibility Study Identifies Key Opportunities for Hudson River Habitat Restoration

Hudson River Bear Mountain Bridge (Photo from Wikipedia)

The Hudson River originates at the Lake Tear of the Clouds in the Adirondack Mountains at an elevation of 4,322 feet above sea level. The river then flows southward 315 miles to New York City and empties into the New York Harbor leading to the Atlantic Ocean. The Hudson River Valley lies almost entirely within the state of New York, except for its last 22 miles, where it serves as the boundary between New York and New Jersey.

Hudson River Basin (Image by USACE)Approximately 153 miles of the Hudson River, between the Troy Dam to the Atlantic Ocean, is an estuary. An estuary is defined by the USEPA as “a partially enclosed, coastal water body where freshwater from rivers and streams mixes with salt water from the ocean. Estuaries, and their surrounding lands, are places of transition from land to sea. Although influenced by the tides, they are protected from the full force of ocean waves, winds and storms by landforms such as barrier islands or peninsulas.”

The Hudson River’s estuary encompasses regionally significant habitat for anadromous fish and globally rare tidal freshwater wetland communities and plants, and also supports significant wildlife concentrations. As a whole, the Hudson River provides a unique ecosystem with highly diverse habitats for approximately 85% of New York State’s fish and wildlife species, including over 200 fish species that rely on the Hudson River for spawning, nursery, and forage habitat.

The Hudson is an integral part of New York’s identity and plays a vital role in the lives of the people throughout the area. Long valued as a transportation corridor for the region’s agricultural and industrial goods, and heavily used by the recreation and tourism industries, the Hudson plays a major role in the local economy. It also provides drinking water for more than 100,000 people.

At the end of the American Revolution, the population in the Hudson River Valley began to grow. The introduction of railroad travel in 1851 further accelerated development in the area. Industrial buildings were erected along the river, such as brick and cement manufacturing, which was followed by residential building. Along with the aforementioned development, came the construction of approximately 1,600 dams and thousands of culverts throughout the Hudson River.

According to the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACE), these human activities have significantly degraded the integrity of the Hudson River ecosystem and cumulatively changed the morphology and hydrology of the river. Over time, these changes have resulted in large-scale losses of critical shallow water and intertidal wetland habitats, and fragmented and disconnected habitats for migratory and other species. Most of this loss and impact has occurred in the upper third portion of the estuary.

As part of the effort to restore the vital river ecosystem, the USACE New York District launched a Hudson River Habitat Restoration Feasibility Study, which helps to establish and evaluate baseline conditions, develop restoration goals and objectives, and identify key restoration opportunities. Princeton Hydro participated in data collection and analysis, conceptual restoration designs, and preparation of the USACE Environmental Assessment for the Hudson River Habitat Restoration Ecosystem Restoration Draft Integrated Feasibility Study and Environmental Assessment.

Basic map depicting project sites (Created by Princeton Hydro)The study area includes the Hudson River Valley from the Governor Mario M. Cuomo Bridge downstream to the Troy Lock and Dam upstream. The primary restoration objectives include restoring a mosaic of interconnected, large river habitats and restoring lost connectivity between the Hudson River and adjacent ecosystems.

A total of six sites were evaluated using topographic surveys, installation and monitoring of tide gauges, evaluation of dam and fish barrier infrastructure, and field data collection and analysis to support Evaluation of Planned Wetlands (EPW) and Habitat Suitability Indices (HSI) functional assessment models. Literature reviews were also completed for geotechnical, hazardous toxicity radioactive waste, and aquatic organism passage measures.

Multiple alternatives for each of the six sites were created in addition to the preparation of conceptual designs, quantity take-offs, and cost estimates for construction, monitoring and adaptive management, and long-term operation and maintenance activities.

Princeton Hydro also prepared an environmental assessment in accordance with NEPA standards, addressing all six sites along the Hudson River and its tributaries. This assessment served to characterize existing conditions, environmental impacts of the preferred Proposed Action and No Action Alternatives, and regional cumulative environmental impacts. Our final report was highlighted by USACE at the 2019 Planning Community of Practice (PCoP) national workshop at the Kansas City District as an example of a successfully implemented Ecosystem Restoration Planning Center of Expertise (ECO-PCX) project.

USACE’s specific interest in Hudson River restoration stems from the aforementioned dramatic losses of regional ecosystems, the national significance of those ecosystems, and the apparent and significant opportunity for measurable improvement to the degraded ecological resources in the river basin.

The feasibility study is among the first of several critical steps in restoring the Hudson River’s ecosystem function and dynamic processes, and reestablishing the attributes of a natural, functioning, and self-regulated river system. Stay tuned for more updates on the Hudson River restoration efforts.

Delaware River Watershed Forum Participants Tour Musconetcong River Dam Removals

The 7th Annual Delaware River Watershed Forum, a two-day conference hosted by The Coalition for the Delaware River Watershed, brought together organizations, consultants, and individuals spanning the four watershed states of PA, NY, NJ, and DE. This year’s Forum included presentations, interactive discussions, capacity-building workshops, and site visits that highlighted local conservation projects.

One of the site visits, led by Musconetcong Watershed Association (MWA) Executive Director Alan Hunt, toured dam removal sites along the Musconetcong River. The field trip visited the Finesville Historic District, where a dam was removed in 2012, and the village of Warren Glen, where the Hughesville dam was removed in 2016. Trip participants heard from project partners including Princeton Hydro President Geoff Goll, P.E., Beth Styler Barry of New Jersey Nature Conservancy,  Dale Bentz of RiverLogic Solutions, Beth Frieday of U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Jacob Helminiak of U.S Army Corps of Engineers, and Christine Hall of USDA Natural Resources Conservation Service.

“We really appreciate everyone who, despite the rainy weather, participated in the Musconetcong River Restoration field trip to learn about how dam removals are helping to restore the river back to it’s natural free-flowing state and the numerous resulting environmental benefits,” said Geoff. “This river restoration work exemplifies how a diverse group of public and private entities can work together to overcome challenges and achieve tremendous success.”

Princeton Hydro President Geoff Goll, P.E. provides field trip participants with information about the Hughesville Dam removal project and the adaptive management work currently happening at the site.Princeton Hydro has been working with MWA in the areas of river restoration, dam removal, and engineering consulting since 2003, when the efforts to remove the Gruendyke Mill Dam in Hackettstown, NJ began. To date, Princeton Hydro has investigated, designed, and permitted five dam removals along the Musconetcong River, the most recent being the Hughesville Dam. This 16’ dam was removed in 2016 and, one year later in 2017, American Shad returned to the site for the first time in at least 100 years, and the removal was credited by the State as a contributing factor for the increase in Delaware River shad population. There is an ongoing project to monitor fishery and aquatic habitat recovery at the site. The next Musconetcong dam targeted for removal is the 32-foot high Warren Glen Dam. It is the largest dam in the river; by comparison, the Hughesville Dam was 15-feet tall.

The Coalition for the Delaware River Watershed was formed in 2012, the Coalition works to raise awareness of the river and its surrounding landscape by bringing together groups already working to restore degraded resources, safeguard vulnerable assets, and educate their communities. The Coalition is committed to protecting and restoring the Delaware River, its tributaries, and more than 13,500 square miles of forests, wetlands, communities, and other distinctive landscapes in the watershed so that clean water and valued resources are secured for generations to come.

MWA is an independent, non-profit organization dedicated to protecting and improving the quality of the Musconetcong River and its Watershed, including its natural and cultural resources. Members of the organization are part of a network of individuals, families and companies that care about the Musconetcong River and its Watershed, and are dedicated to improving the watershed resources through public education and awareness programs, river water quality monitoring, promotion of sustainable land management practices and community involvement.

Princeton Hydro has designed, permitted, and overseen the reconstruction, repair, and removal of dozens of small and large dams in the Northeast. To learn more about our fish passage and dam removal engineering services, visit: bit.ly/DamBarrier. To learn more about our Musconetcong River restoration work, go here:

The Return of the American Shad to the Musconetcong River

 

 

Laura Wildman Awarded for “Bringing the Presumpscot River Back to Life”

Photo provided by the Friends of the Presumpscot River

The Friends of the Presumpscot River (The Friends) Board of Trustees awarded Laura Wildman, P.E., Princeton Hydro’s New England Regional Office Director and Water Resources and Fisheries Engineer, with its “Chief Polin Award.” The award recognizes Laura for her accomplishments and efforts in bringing life back to the Presumpscot River and rivers across the nation. The award was presented at The Friends’ Three Sisters Harvest Dinner & Annual Celebration.

The Chief Polin Award recognizes those who are making significant efforts to restore fish passage, improve water quality and bring back the natural character of the Presumpscot river.During her acceptance speech, Laura thanked The Friends for its continued dedication to restoring fish passage and revitalizing the river. “I am so proud to be part of the ‘river warriors’ team,” Laura said. “Our collective efforts to protect and restore the river have resulted in invaluable benefits to fish, aquatic organisms, wildlife, and the surrounding communities.”

The award is named after local Abanaki tribe leader Chief Polin, who led the first documented dam protest in New England during the mid-1700s, advocating for fish passage, which had been compromised by the first dams built along the river. The award recognizes those who are making significant efforts to restore fish passage, improve water quality, and bring back the natural character of the Presumpscot River. Sean Mahoney from the Conservation Law Foundation also received the Chief Polin Award during the Annual Celebration.

Map provided by The Friends of the Presumpscot RiverLocated in Cumberland County, Maine, the Presumpscot is a 25.8-mile-long river and the largest freshwater input into Casco Bay. The river has long been recognized for its vast quantity of fish. According to The Friends, when Europeans first arrived, they reported that “the entire surface of the river, for a foot deep, was all fish.”

In the 1730s, however, the construction of dams halted the passage of fish up the river. As more dams sprung up in the following centuries, the ecological vitality of the river steadily declined.

For more than 250 years, people have advocated for the unobstructed passage of fish up the Presumpscot River. Over the last 50 years, the river has undergone profound transformation due to the enactment of the Clean Water Act, the removal of a few dams, and the installation of fish passages on existing dams. Fish passage at Cumberland Mills Dam, which was completed in 2013, restored critical habitat to sea run fish such as shad, American eel, and river herring, and allowed them to move upstream again.

Saccarappa Falls dam removal in actionIn July, work began to restore a large reach of the river through Westbrook, Maine. The project involves the removal of two dam spillways from the upper Saccarappa Falls and the construction of a fishway around the lower falls. The project, which was three years in the making, was finally approved to move forward once the City of Westbrook, Sappi Fine Paper, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, the Maine Department of Marine Resources, and the nonprofits, Friends of the Presumpscot River and Conservation Law Foundation, were able to reach a ground breaking settlement. The Saccarappa Falls project is a major step in restoring the river and was a focal point of the Three Sisters Harvest Dinner, celebrating decades of effort on the parts of the Friends of the Presumpscot along with their numerous project partners, including Princeton Hydro.

About the Friends of the Presumpscot River: A nonprofit organization founded in 1992, supported primarily by membership dues and small donations. Its mission is to protect and improve the water quality, indigenous fisheries, recreational opportunities and natural character of the Presumpscot River.
Learn more: presumpscotriver.org

About Princeton Hydro: Princeton Hydro has designed, permitted, and overseen the removal of dozens of small and large dams along the East Coast. To learn more about our fish passage and dam removal engineering services, visit: bit.ly/DamBarrier.

Sediment Testing on the St. Lawrence Seaway

Way up in Northern New York, the St. Lawrence River splits the state’s North Country region and Canada, historically acting as an incredibly important resource for navigation, trade, and  recreation. Along the St. Lawrence River is the St. Lawrence Seaway, a system of locks, canals, and channels in both Canada and the U.S. that allows oceangoing vessels to travel from the Atlantic Ocean all the way to the Great Lakes.

Recently, the St. Lawrence Seaway Development Corporation (SLSDC) contracted Princeton Hydro to conduct analytical and geotechnical sampling on material they plan to dredge out of the Wiley-Dondero Canal. Before dredging, sediment and soils have to be tested to ensure their content is suitable for beneficial reuse of dredged material. In August, our Geologist, Marshall Thomas and Environmental Scientist, Pat Rose, took a trip up north to conduct soil sampling and testing at two different sites within the canal near Massena and the Eisenhower Lock, which were designated by the SLSDC. The first site was at the SLSDC Marine Base, which is a tug/mooring area directly southwest of Snell Lock. The second location was directly northeast of the Eisenhower Lock, which is also used as a mooring area. Both of these sites require dredging in order to maintain mooring access for boat traffic navigating the channel.

During this two-day sampling event, our team, which also included two licensed drillers from Atlantic Testing Laboratories, used a variety of equipment to extract the necessary samples from the riverbed. Some of the sampling equipment included:

  • Vibracoring equipment: this sampling apparatus was assembled on Atlantic Testing’s pontoon boat. To set up the vibracore, a long metal casing tube was mounted on the boat more than 10 feet in the air. The steel casing was lowered through the water approximately 17-20 feet down to the mudline. From there, the vibracore was then vibrated through the sediment for an additional 4-6 feet. For this project, vibracore samples were taken at 4 feet in 10 different locations, and at 6 feet in 3 different locations.

  • A track mounted drill rig: this rig was positioned along the shoreline to allow advancement of a standard geotechnical test boring close to existing sheet piling. Advancement of the boring was done by way of a 6-inch hollow stem auger. As the auger was advanced, it resembled a giant screw getting twisted into the ground. This drilling method allows the drilling crew to collect soil samples using a split spoon sampler, which is a 2-foot long tubular sample collection device that is split down the middle. The samplers were collected by driving the split spoon into the soil using a 140 lb drop hammer.

For our team, conducting sampling work on the St. Lawrence Seaway was a new experience, given most of our projects occur further east in the Mid-Atlantic region. The most notable difference was the hardness of the sediment. Because the St. Lawrence River sediments contain poorly sorted, dense glacial till, augering into it took a little more elbow grease than typical sediments further south do.  The St. Lawrence River is situated within a geological depression that was once occupied by glaciers. As the glaciers retreated, they were eventually replaced by the Champlain Sea, which flooded the area between 13,000 and 9,500 years ago. Later on, the continent underwent a slight uplift, ultimately creating a riverlike watercourse that we now deem the St. Lawrence River. Because it was once occupied by a glacier, this region is full of glacial deposits.

For this project, our team was tasked with collecting both geotechnical and analytical samples for physical and analytical testing. Physical testing included grain size analysis, moisture content, and Atterberg limit testing. Grain size analysis helps determine the distribution of particle sizes of the sample in order to classify the material, moisture content testing determines exactly that — how moist the sediment is, and Atterberg limits help to classify the fines content of the materials as either silt or clay. Analytical testing included heavy metals, pesticides, volatile organic compounds, and dioxins.

Our scientists were responsible for logging, testing, and providing a thorough analysis of fourteen sampling locations. The samples collected from the vibracore tubes filled with sediment were logged and spilt on-shore. In order to maintain a high level of safety due to the possible presence of contaminants, all of the sampling equipment was decontaminated. This process involves washing everything with a soapy water mixture, a methanol solution, and 10% nitric acid solution.

The samples collected at each vibrocore location were split into multiple jars for both analytical and physical testing. The physical test samples were placed into air and moisture tight glass sample jars and brought to our AASHTO accredited soils laboratory in Sicklerville, New Jersey for testing. The analytical samples were placed into airtight glass sample jars with Teflon-lined caps. These samples were then placed into an ice-filled cooler and sent to Alpha Analytical Laboratories for the necessary analytical testing.

Once all the laboratory testing was completed, a summary report was developed and presented to the client. This report was made to inform the SLSDC of the physical properties of each sediment sample tested and whether contaminants exceeded threshold concentrations as outlined in the New York State Department of Environmental Conservation (NYSDEC) Technical & Operation Guidance Series (TOGS) 5.1.9. This data will ultimately be used by the SLSDC to determine the proper method for dredging of the material and how to properly dispose of the material.

Princeton Hydro provides soil, geologic, and construction materials testing to both complement its water resources and ecological restoration projects and as a stand-alone service to clients. Our state-of-the-art Soils Testing Laboratory is AASHTO-accredited to complete a full suite of soil, rock, and construction material testing for all types of projects. For more information, go here: http://bit.ly/2IwqYfG 

A Day in the Life of a Stormwater Inspector

Walking through a park isn’t always a walk in the park when it comes to conducting stormwater inspections. Our team routinely spots issues in need of attention when inspecting stormwater infrastructure; that’s why inspections are so important.

Princeton Hydro has been conducting stormwater infrastructure inspections for a variety of municipalities in the Mid-Atlantic region for a decade, including the City of Philadelphia. We are in our seventh year of inspections and assessments of stormwater management practices (SMPs) for the Philadelphia Water Department. These SMPs are constructed on both public and private properties throughout the city and our inspections focus on areas served by combined sewers. 

Our water resource engineers are responsible for construction oversight, erosion and sediment control, stormwater facilities maintenance inspections, and overall inspection of various types of stormwater infrastructure installation (also known as “Best Management Practices” or BMPs).

The throat of a sinkhole observed by one of our engineers while on site.

Our knowledgeable team members inspect various sites regularly, and for some municipalities, we perform inspections on a weekly basis. Here’s a glimpse into what a day of stormwater inspection looks like:

The inspector starts by making sure they have all their necessary safety equipment and protection. For the purposes of a simple stormwater inspection the Personal Protection Equipment (PPE) required includes a neon safety vest, hard hat, eye protection, long pants, and boots. Depending on the type of inspection, our team may also have to add additional safety gear such as work gloves or ear plugs. It is recommended that inspectors hold CPR/First Aid and OSHA 10 Hour Construction Safety training certificates. 

Once they have their gear, our inspection team heads to the site and makes contact with the site superintendent. It’s important to let the superintendent know they’re there so that 1) they aren’t wondering why a random person is perusing their construction site, and 2) in case of an emergency, the superintendent needs to be aware of every person present on the site.

Once they arrive, our team starts by walking the perimeter of the inspection site, making sure that no sediment is leaving the project area. The team is well-versed in the standards of agencies such as the Pennsylvania Department of Environmental Protection, the Pennsylvania Department of Transportation, the New Jersey Department of Environmental Protection, and local County Soil Conservation Districts, among others. These standards and regulations dictate which practices are and are not compliant on the construction site.

After walking the perimeter, the inspection team moves inward, taking notes and photos throughout the walk. They take a detailed look at the infrastructure that has been installed since the last time they inspected, making sure it was correctly installed according to the engineering plans (also called site plans or drainage and utility plans). They also check to see how many inlets were built, how many feet of stormwater pipe were installed, etc.

If something doesn’t look quite right or needs amending, our staff makes recommendations to the municipality regarding BMPs/SMPs and provides suggestions for implementation.

One example of an issue spotted at one of the sites was a stormwater inlet consistently being inundated by sediment. The inlet is directly connected o the subsurface infiltration basin. When sediment falls through the inlet, it goes into the subsurface infiltration bed, which percolates directly into the groundwater. This sediment is extremely difficult to clean out of the subsurface bed, and once it is in the bed, it breaks down and becomes silt, hindering the function of the stormwater basin.

To remedy this issue, our inspection team suggested they install stone around the perimeter of the inlet on three sides. Although this wasn’t in the original plan, the stones will help to catch sediment before entering the inlet, greatly reducing the threat of basin failure.

Once they’ve thoroughly inspected the site, our team debriefs the site superintendent with their findings. They inform the municipality of any issues they found, any inconsistencies with the construction plans, and recommendations on how to alleviate problems. The inspector will also prepare a Daily Field Report, summarizing the findings of the day, supplemented with photos.

In order to conduct these inspections, one must have a keen eye and extensive stormwater background knowledge. Not only do they need to know and understand the engineering behind these infrastructure implementations, they need to also be intimately familiar with the laws and regulations governing them. Without these routine inspections, mistakes in the construction and maintenance of essential stormwater infrastructure would go unnoticed. Even the smallest overlook can have dangerous effects, which is why our inspections team works diligently to make sure that will not happen.

Our team conducts inspections for municipalities and private entities throughout the Northeast. Visit our website to learn more about our engineering and stormwater management services.

 

Senior Engineer Kevin Yezdimer Appointed to Chief Operating Officer

We are thrilled to announce a new executive position in the firm, Chief Operating Officer (COO), to which Kevin M. Yezdimer, P.E. was appointed effective July 1, 2019. Most recently, Kevin served as the Director of Geoscience Engineering and Office Manager for the company’s Sicklerville, New Jersey location since joining the firm in 2016.

Princeton Hydro has grown from a small four person idea operating out of a living room to a 65+ person qualified Small Business with five office locations in the Northeast region. Last year, the firm realized record revenue and is projected to continue notable growth due to its strong position in the marketplace of providing innovative and “value-added” ecological and engineering solutions. With Princeton Hydro’s steady growth, this new executive position is essential to optimize operational processes across the firm’s technical practice areas and geographic locations, as well as to best implement their strategic growth plan within the Mid-Atlantic and New England regions.

We are all excited and happy to have Kevin join the Princeton Hydro Executive Team. He has demonstrated leadership and success in executing strategies that are key to our success. Kevin has proven himself to have an intuitive understanding of technical and business practices, and can communicate these often complicated issues into meaningful and comprehensible conversation. Most importantly, Kevin is a true mentor to staff and will be able to support them in his new role,” said Princeton Hydro’s President Geoffrey Goll, P.E.I am proud that we were able to internally find someone to fill this position, and am confident that Kevin will be a great fit. As a firm, we are committed to maintaining the mission and values envisioned by the firm’s founders, including supporting our diverse clientele in the commercial, NGO, and government industries, while maintaining a personal touch and small business culture. This new position is vital to maintaining the stability and continuity of our mission and values.

Kevin is a multidisciplinary professional civil engineer with degrees in both Geology and Civil Engineering. With 14 years of experience as a design consultant and project manager, Kevin has proven his ability to lead others. His move to COO is a testament to all of Kevin’s continued success. In his new role, he will be working hand-in-hand with each practice area, the administration, and the principals to propel the firm forward. He will also work to ensure that the company culture remains driven towards excellence in innovative and integrated science and engineering. As the company continues to grow and mature, Kevin will ensure that the firm remains well-balanced and provide a positive working culture for all employees.

Our firm’s executives have afforded me with a tremendous leadership opportunity; I am truly humbled, honored, and ready to take on the role of Chief Operating Officer for Princeton Hydro,” said Kevin Yezdimer, P.E. “In this new position, I will have the ability to empower our passionate staff to achieve their full potential, unify operational practices, and assure that our business goals and mission are achieved. I’m looking forward to further implementing the vision of the firm’s founders as we continue to grow and evolve.

Kevin resides in Hockessin, Delaware with his wife Kristen, three children, and newly rescued dog Lizzy. Outside of the office, you can find Kevin running, swimming, playing disc golf, performing home improvement projects, following all Philadelphia sports (especially the Eagles), developing his faith, and striving to make the most of each and every day.

 

Part Two: Damned If You Do, Dammed If You Don’t: Making Decisions and Resolving Conflicts on Dam Removal

Credit: FWRA.org

In this two part blog series piece we take a look at addressing and preventing potential conflicts and the key factors involved in dam removal decision-making – to remove or not to remove.

What to Do About Dams

Typically, the decision to remove a dam is made by varying entities, depending on the regulatory oversight of the dam. In most cases, the dam owner itself is the decision-maker, often deciding that the costs of continuing to operate and maintain the dam are more than removing the dam. State dam safety offices can sometimes order a dam to be removed or lowered if there are major safety concerns. State fish and wildlife offices and environmental organizations are also often involved in the decision-making, particularly when the goals of the project include restoration of habitat for migratory and resident aquatic species. If the dam in question is a hydropower facility, the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission also has the power to order a hydropower dam under their jurisdiction to be removed for both environmental and safety reasons.

Laura Wildman, P.E., dam removal and river restoration expert and Director of Princeton Hydro’s New England Regional Office, says, “Identifying key barriers early on and understanding which of those barriers might have potential solutions versus remain an impediment, is critical to prioritizing limited ecological restoration resources.”

The careful formulation and communication of the benefits for dam removal specific to each project, adequate education of the public, and stakeholder involvement are incredibly important components to dam removal conflict resolution. As is an understanding that not all dams will or should be removed, and that the local community and stakeholders needs/concerns should be fully integrated into the decision-making process.

Key facets of stakeholder involvement, include:

  • Initial Stakeholder Discussions: Gather information and input from all stakeholders involved
  • Field Work & Initial Assessment: Know the project site inside and out, conduct an in-person inspection, and gather all of the initial data needed to have an informed discussion
  • Report Back with Results, without Judgement: Share the current state of the dam with stakeholders & regulators, without implying any solution or recommendation
  • Detailed Analysis, Feasibility & Alternatives Assessment: Collaboratively select alternative options, and include for a discussion of the alternative analysis process in the pre-application regulatory and stakeholder meetings
  • Formal Regulatory Review w/ Public Meetings: Present solution and/or submit engineering design and permit applications to regulators, and host public meetings to inform the community about the timeline and status.  Some public meetings are required as part of the regulatory process, however, it is important to keep the stakeholders involved in the process. So, additional meetings or presentations are recommend for true engagement.
  • Implementation: If the solution is to remove or repair the dam, continue to update the community about the status and timeline of construction. Local residents, elected officials, and nonprofit groups could be your best allies in keeping everyone informed.

It’s crucial to keep stakeholders and general public informed throughout the process via regular social media and traditional media outreach. Successful projects are based on a transparent process that integrates the local community.  It is the local community that then becomes the environmental stewards of the restored river system.

Celebrating the start of the Columbia Dam removal with the New Jersey Nature Conservancy, American Rivers, Princeton Hydro, USFWS, NJDEP, the local community, and other stakeholders.

 

Analyzing Dams for Removal

There are few “easy” dam removal decisions. Most dams have both positive and negative impacts. The challenge in making a sound decision about whether or not to remove a dam is to identify all of the costs and benefits of keeping (and eventually repairing or replacing) that particular structure, as well as the costs and benefits of removing it, and balance the findings to determine the best option. It is important to ensure that the full range of costs and benefits are identified.

Working through the many issues involved in deciding to keep or remove a dam can offer surprising conclusions that can lead to a reasoned approach – reducing subjectivity and increasing objectivity. The key issues typically investigated include:

  • Impounded sediment
  • Infrastructure/utility impacts
  • Current use (& economic value of dam)
  • Environmental concerns & benefits
  • Geomorphic equilibrium
  • Public health & safety
  • Flooding & hydrologic impacts
  • Aesthetic & sentimental value
  • Historic/archeological
  • Community concerns
  • Sensitive or invasive species
  • Water rights
  • Cost & funding availability

When making a final decision, it’s important to critically examine all factors to understand the influences on the decision. No matter the final outcome, at least it will be a well-informed process, and the information and understanding gained can help shape future decisions.

Although each dam removal project is unique, we developed a standard process that we follow:

While there is often no definitive answer to a question about whether a particular dam should be removed, there is a right and wrong way to go about making a dam removal decision. A good dam removal/retention decision is one that is based on an assessment of all the facts, collaboration with all stakeholders, and objective criteria.

Princeton Hydro has designed, permitted, and overseen the reconstruction, repair, and removal of dozens of dams throughout the Northeast.  To contact us and learn more about our fish passage and dam removal engineering services, visit: bit.ly/DamBarrier.

Revisit part-one of this blog series:

Part One: Damned If You Do, Dammed If You Don’t: Making Decisions and Resolving Conflicts on Dam Removal

Part One: Damned If You Do, Dammed If You Don’t: Making Decisions and Resolving Conflicts on Dam Removal

People have been building dams since prerecorded history for a wide variety of economically valuable purposes including water supply, flood control, and hydroelectric power. Back in the 1950s and 60s, the U.S. saw a boom in infrastructure development, and dams were being built with little regard to their impacts on rivers and the environment. By the 1970s, the rapid progression of dam building in the U.S. led researchers to start investigating the ecological impacts of dams. Results from these early studies eventually fueled the start of proactive dam removal activities throughout the U.S.

Despite the proven benefits of dam removal, conflicts are a prevalent part of any dam removal project. Dam removal, like any other social decision-making process, brings up tensions around economics and the distribution of real and perceived gains and losses. In this two part blog series, we take a look at addressing and preventing potential conflicts and the key factors involved in dam removal decision-making – to remove or not to remove.

Why We Remove Dams

The primary reasons we remove dams are safety, economics, ecology, and regulatory. There has been a growing movement to remove dams where the costs – including environmental, safety, and socio-cultural impacts – outweigh the benefits of the dam or where the dam no longer serves any useful purpose. In some cases, it’s more beneficial economically to remove a dam than to keep it, even if it still produces revenue. Sometimes the estimated cost of inspection, repair, and maintenance can significantly exceed the cost of removal, rendering generated projected revenue insignificant.

Safety reasons are also vital, especially for cases in which dams are aging, yet still holding large amounts of water or impounded sediment. As dams age and decay, they can become public safety hazards, presenting a failure risk and flooding danger. According to American Rivers, “more than 90,000 dams in the country are no longer serving the purpose that they were built to provide decades or centuries ago.” Dam removal has increasingly become the best option for property owners who can no longer afford the rising cost of maintenance and repair work required to maintain these complex structures.

The goal of removal can be multi-faceted, including saving taxpayer money; restoring flows for migrating fish, other aquatic organisms, and wildlife; reinstating the natural sediment and nutrient flow; eliminating safety risks; and restoring opportunities for riverine recreation.

Moosup River

Common Obstacles to Dam Removal

Dam removal efforts are often subjected to a number of different obstacles that can postpone or even halt the process altogether. Reasons for retaining dams often involve: aesthetics and reservoir recreation; water intakes/diversions; hydroelectric; quantity/quality of sediment; funding issues; cultural/historic values of manmade structures; owner buy-in; sensitive species; and community politics.

Of those common restoration obstacles, one of the more frequently encountered challenges is cost and funding. Determining who pays for the removal of a dam is often a complex issue. Sometimes, removal can be financed by the dam owner, local, state, and federal governments, and in some cases agreements are made whereby multiple stakeholders contribute to cover the costs. Funding for dam removal projects can be difficult to obtain because it typically has to come from a variety of sources.

Anecdotally, opposition also stems from fear of change and fear of the unknown. Bruce Babbitt, the United States Secretary of the Interior from 1993 through 2001 and dam removal advocate, said in an article he wrote, titled A River Runs Against It: America’s Evolving View of Dams, “I always wonder what is it about the sound of a sledgehammer on concrete that evokes such a reaction? We routinely demolish buildings that have served their purpose or when there is a better use for the land. Why not dams? For whatever reason, we view dams as akin to the pyramids of Egypt—a permanent part of the landscape, timeless monuments to our civilization and technology.”

Negative public perceptions of dam removal and its consequences can seriously impede removal projects. Although there are many reasons for the resistance to dam removal, it is important that each be understood and addressed in order to find solutions that fulfill both the needs of the environment and the local communities.

Stay tuned for Part Two of this blog series in which we explore strategies for analyzing dams and what goes into deciding if a dam should remain or be removed.

Study Data Leads to Healthier Wreck Pond Ecosystem

Wreck Pond is a tidal pond located on the coast of the Atlantic Ocean in southern Monmouth County, New Jersey. The 73-acre pond, which was originally connected to the sea by a small and shifting inlet, got its name in the 1800s due to the numerous shipwrecks that occurred at the mouth of the inlet. The Sea Girt Lighthouse was built to prevent such accidents. In the 1930s, the inlet was filled in and an outfall pipe was installed, thus creating Wreck Pond. The outfall pipe allowed limited tidal exchange between Wreck Pond and the Atlantic Ocean.

In the 1960s, Wreck Pond flourished with wildlife and was a popular destination for recreational activities with tourists coming to the area mainly from New York City and western New Jersey. In the early spring, hundreds of river herring would migrate into Wreck Pond, travelling up its tributaries — Wreck Pond Brook, Hurleys Pond Brook and Hannabrand Brook — to spawn. During the summer, the pond was bustling with recreational activities like swimming, fishing, and sailing.

Over time, however, the combination of restricted tidal flow and pollution, attributable to increased development of the watershed, led to a number of environmental issues within the watershed, including impaired water quality, reduced fish populations, and flooding.

Throughout the Wreck Pond watershed, high stream velocities during flood conditions have caused the destabilization and erosion of stream banks, which has resulted in the loss of riparian vegetation and filling of wetlands. Discharge from Wreck Pond during heavy rains conveys nonpoint source pollutants that negatively impact nearby Spring Lake and Sea Girt beaches resulting in beach closings due to elevated bacteria counts. Watershed erosion and sediment transported with stormwater runoff has also contributed to excessive amounts of sedimentation and accumulations of settled sediment, not only within Wreck Pond, but at the outfall pipe as well. This sediment further impeded tidal flushing and the passage of anadromous fish into and out of Wreck Pond.

In 2012, Hurricane Sandy caused wide-spread destruction throughout New Jersey and the entire eastern seaboard. The storm event also caused a major breach of the Wreck Pond watershed’s dune beach system and failure of the outfall pipe. The breach formed a natural inlet next to the outfall pipe, recreating the connection to the Atlantic Ocean that once existed. This was the first time the inlet had been open since the 1930s, and the reopening cast a new light on the benefits of additional flow between the pond and the ocean.

Hurricane Sandy sparked a renewed interest in reducing flooding impacts throughout the watershed, including efforts to restore the water quality and ecology of Wreck Pond. The breach caused by Hurricane Sandy was not stable, and the inlet began to rapidly close due to the deposition of beach sand and the discharge of sediment from Wreck Pond and its watershed.

Princeton Hydro and HDR generated the data used to support the goals of the feasibility study through a USACE-approved model of Wreck Pond that examined the dynamics of Wreck Pond along with the water bodies directly upland, the watershed, and the offshore waters in the immediate vicinity of the ocean outfall. The model was calibrated and verified using available “normalized” tide data. Neighboring Deal Lake, which is also tidally connected to the ocean by a similar outfall pipe, was used as the “reference” waterbody. The Wreck Pond System model evaluated the hydraulic characteristics of Wreck Pond with and without the modified outfall pipe, computed pollutant inputs from the surrounding watershed, and predicted Wreck Pond’s water quality and ecological response. The calibrated model was also used to investigate the effects and longevity of dredging and other waterway feature modifications.

As part of the study, Princeton Hydro and HDR completed hazardous, toxic, and radioactive waste (HTRW) and geotechnical investigations of Wreck Pond’s sediment to assess potential flood damage reduction and ecological restoration efforts of the waterbody. The investigation included the progression of 10 sediment borings conducted within the main body of Wreck Pond, as well as primary tributaries to the pond. The borings, conducted under the supervision of our geotechnical staff, were progressed through the surgical accumulated sediment, not the underlying parent material. Samples were collected for analysis by Princeton Hydro’s AMRL-accredited (AASHTO Materials Reference Library) and USACE-certified laboratory. In accordance with NJDEP requirements, sediment samples were also forwarded to a subcontracted analytical laboratory for analysis of potential nonpoint source pollutants.

In the geotechnical laboratory, the samples were subjected to geotechnical indexing tests, including grain size, organic content, moisture content, and plasticity/liquid limits. For soil strength parameters, the in-field Standard Penetration Test (SPT), as well as laboratory unconfined compression tests, were performed on a clay sample to provide parameters for slope stability modeling.

The culvert construction and sediment dredging were completed at the end of 2016. Continued restoration efforts, informed and directed by the data developed through Princeton Hydro’s feasibility study, are helping to reduce the risk of flooding to surrounding Wreck Pond communities, increase connectivity between the pond and ocean, and improve water quality. The overall result is a healthier, more diverse, and more resilient Wreck Pond ecosystem.

During the time of the progression of study by the USACE, the American Littoral Society and the towns of Spring Lake and Sea Girt were also progressing their own restoration effort and completed the implementation of an additional culvert to the Atlantic Ocean.  The American Littoral Society was able to utilize the data, analysis, and modeling results developed by the USACE to ensure the additional culvert would increase tidal flushing and look to future restoration projects within Wreck Pond.

American Littoral Society

 

To learn more about our geotechnical engineering services, click here.