APPENDIX I-O: Dibrom-Inerts.

This appendix is copied from:

http://www.westchestergov.com/hdbooklets/StingEIS/DGEISfiles/3A_Framework%20of%20Analysis.pdf.

CHAPTER 3.A

FRAMEWORK OF THE ANALYSIS

A. INTRODUCTION

PRIMARY ISSUES

The Proposed Action is the adoption of a County-wide Comprehensive Mosquito-Borne Disease Surveillance and Control Plan (Comprehensive Plan). Many components of the Comprehensive Plan, such as surveillance, provider and public education, and research and evaluation, consist of activities that would not likely to result in significant adverse environmental impacts. However, the Comprehensive Plan also provides for mosquito control activities, some of which may be shaped by the aforementioned activities, which may have significant adverse short- and long-term impacts. Therefore, major concerns for examination in this Generic Environmental Impact Statement (GEIS) are the potential adverse impacts from the application of larvicides and the spraying of adulticides to control transmission of mosquito-borne pathogens County-wide.

Issues that relate to the Comprehensive Plan relate primarily to the application of larvicides and adulticides and the potential effect that these products would have on public health—such as reactions by healthy people or by those who are particularly vulnerable to classes of adulticides (which implies sensitive individuals)—and on non-target biota, such as birds, non-target mosquito species and other insects, fish, mammals, and other animals. Other chapters in this GEIS provide information on the ef-fects of diseases resulting from mosquito-borne pathogens such as West Nile virus, more fully discuss the severity of illnesses that result from West Nile virus, and identify those segments of the population most at risk. An overview of the overall analysis approach is summarized below, along with a review of the technical areas, which have been studied to address the specific in this GEIS.

ANALYSIS APPROACH

Larviciding and Adulticiding

The potential for impacts from larvicides would be quite different than those from adulticides. Larvicide would be applied directly to structures or land areas which retain water and serve as breeding grounds for mosquito species identified as vectors of pathogens which threaten public health. The exposure to the environment and humans from such applications would be limited to a distinct number of pathways. While larvicides are placed in stationary locations with no direct contact with humans commonly expected, adulticides are applied into the ambient air, and are transported by local winds to areas beyond the point of application. Therefore, the potential for impacts from adulticides would depend on which adulticide is applied, where it is applied, how it is applied, the meteorological conditions under which it is applied, and what exposure scenarios for individuals and biota (other living organisms in an area) are created by the application. Once these parameters are defined and projected, it is then possible to develop methodologies for assessing the risk and consequences of exposure to adulticides. This chapter outlines the overall procedures and rationale of

3.A-1 November 2001 COMPREHENSIVE MOSQUITO-BORNE DISEASE SURVEILLANCE AND CONTROL PLAN DGEIS

the impact assessment for application of larvicides and adulticides, and “sets up” the discussion and presentation of the technical analyses which are presented in the following chapters.

Defining the Future Alternatives

Before detailing the methodologies which have been followed to determine the potential environmental impacts of the Comprehensive Plan in this GEIS, it is important to understand the characterization and terminologies of existing and future conditions with and without the Comprehensive Plan in this study.

The GEIS considers relevant existing environmental conditions, projects those conditions into the fu-ture without the Proposed Action (also known as “No Action” condition), and compares future conditions with and without the Comprehensive Plan to identify potential impacts. For several of the study areas in this GEIS, existing conditions and the future without the Proposed Action are essentially the same within the context of the technical assessments required in the GEIS. However, as discussed above, while the County has recently authorized short-term programs to combat the spread of West Nile virus, there is currently no long-term Comprehensive Plan authorized by the Board of Health and funded by the County to proactively control the risk to the public from mosquito-borne pathogens. In addition, if this Comprehensive Plan were not adopted and implemented by the County, the Commissioner of Health (with funding approved by the County) could choose to adopt non-mosquito control components in the future. Therefore, as discussed earlier in Chapter 1, “Description of the Proposed Action,” the GEIS addresses two potential “Future without the Proposed Action” scenarios.

The primary future analysis scenarios for the GEIS are:

􀂃 No Action Scenario (i.e., a Future without the Proposed Action scenario which assumes passive human surveillance as required by New York Public Health Law, but no additional long-term funding of surveillance, education, control, or research programs);

􀂃 As-of-Right Scenario (i.e., a Future without the Proposed Action scenario which assumes that there would be year-by-year education, surveillance and research programs which the Commissioner of Health may undertake in the future pursuant to the New York Public Health Law and the County Administrative Code, but no mosquito control actions); and

􀂃 Proposed Action (i.e., the future with all the components of the Comprehensive Plan in place, including larviciding and potential adulticiding).

These primary alternatives are discussed throughout the chapters in this GEIS. A separate section explicitly reserved for a comparison of alternatives is provided in Chapter 3.S, “Alternatives.”

Information in this Chapter

So that the reader may understand the complexity of the analyses, this chapter provides information on the overall procedures and rationale of the impact assessment and selection of the representative areas included in the GEIS. This chapter is called “Framework of the Analysis” because it provides information to assist the reader in understanding the various environmental analyses in the GEIS. This chapter includes the following general discussions.

Examination of Data/Information on Insecticides

This section includes information on larvicides, including: a) information on the regulatory and operational limitations on larviciding, b) summaries of larviciding practices of other jurisdictions, c) larvicides registered for New York, d) the larvicides selected for evaluation in the GEIS, why they were selected, and the application rates and restrictions, e) descriptions of the physical and chemical

November 2001 3.A-2 CHAPTER 3.A: FRAMEWORK OF THE ANALYSIS

properties of the chemical pesticides, and biological properties of the biological pesticides, f) a description of the fate of the larvicides and their persistence in the environment once they have been applied in the County, g) identification of any differences in effectiveness of the larvicides for the different mosquito species found within the County or outside the County based on surveys, and h) a description of the likely application protocol for each of the larvicides selected for evaluation within the County.

This information is intended to provide the reader with an understanding of the issues associated with short- and long-term use of larvicides to control mosquito-borne pathogens in the County.

For the proposed adulticiding activities under the Comprehensive Plan, the examination of the products and product ingredients which may be applied, potential ranges of application rates, and the ability of these ingredients to persist in the environment is also provided in this section, in order to assist the reader in understanding the development of reasonable worst-case potential future application scenarios. The County does not envision the use of additives or carriers to ultra-low volume (ULV) adulticide products as part of its program, unless it is a manufacturer’s requirement as specified on the label, and thus the analysis focuses on the use of products as ULV. The use of additional carriers or additives are discussed in Chapter 3.S, “Alternatives.” This section includes a discussion of active and inert (to the extent that information on inert ingredients is available) adulticide ingredients for the products under consideration in the Comprehensive Plan. A compilation of half-life data (e.g., breakdown of products) for the various active ingredients in the adulticides has been performed, and this chapter summarizes such information, while Appendix 3.AI, “Adulticide Characteristics and Limitation of Use,” provides the details of the compilation efforts. As discussed later in the technical studies, for analysis purposes, conservative (i.e., longer) estimates of half-lives have been included in the risk assessment studies.

The mosquito species of concern is an important consideration on the methods employed in all components of an Integrated Pest Management Plan. Just as the surveillance and larviciding efforts would be targeted towards the detection and control of the mosquito species that are considered primary vectors of a mosquito-borne disease in the County, the selection of products and application methods should also consider the mosquito species targeted for control. Appendix 3.AI also provides information on parameters which affect adulticiding data and data reported in the literature on the reported observed control of mosquito species by various adulticide products and active ingredients. Under the Comprehensive Plan, the County would balance the understanding of the potential adverse impacts from the various adulticides products and active ingredients, which are reported in this GEIS, versus the expected or observed control of the mosquito species of concern from such products.

Drift/Deposition Modeling of Adulticides

This section provides information on the air drift/deposition modeling studies of adulticides, plus historic meteorological conditions during periods when adulticiding operations would be expected to occur. The modeling of the dispersion and deposition of such materials into the environment helps serve as one of the tools for estimating the potential exposures of the public and the environment to adulticides that may be applied under the Comprehensive Plan.

Environment Types And Representative Areas

3.A-3 November 2001 COMPREHENSIVE MOSQUITO-BORNE DISEASE SURVEILLANCE AND CONTROL PLAN DGEIS

affected by larviciding and adulticide applications from the Comprehensive Plan. While the application of larvicides would occur at discrete locations throughout the County, the application of adulticides in the future could exposure a variety of environments (both human and wildlife) directly and indirectly to these products. Therefore, this GEIS has identified seven typical environments found in the County where potential larviciding and adulticiding activities may occur, with emphasis on those that may be particularly vulnerable to the application of adulticides. These environment types are discussed in this section, and a short synopsis of potential pathways by which either humans or wildlife could be affected by the Comprehensive Plan is also provided. With the range of environment types in mind, eight representative geographic areas of the County have been selected for site-specific study to address potential impacts from the Comprehensive Plan. These Representative Areas, which are discussed in this section, were analyzed to project potential County-wide impacts from the proposed Comprehensive Plan. For example, these Representative Areas were employed to a) identify human populations and exposure pathways for the public health risk impact assessment, b) identify fauna, flora and habitats for the natural resources impact assessment, and c) provide examples of water bodies for the natural resources and water quality analysis.

Exposure Scenarios

This section describes the way people or biota can potentially be exposed to adulticides as a result of spraying. It also identifies the “pathways” by which they may be exposed, and provides an overview of the potential exposure scenarios within the representative areas.

Regional Issues

This section presents an overview of the methodology for addressing potential regional issues of concern. This includes potential adverse impacts on regional water supplies, and potential discharges related to regional storm water runoff into the surrounding waterbodies, such as the Hudson River and Long Island Sound, from the application of pesticides from the proposed Comprehensive Plan.

B. EXAMINATION OF DATA/INFORMATION ON INSECTICIDES

Before undertaking a detailed study of the potential affects of pesticides which can be used to control mosquitoes as part of the Comprehensive Plan, it is important to first identify the products which are available for use (which are discussed in Chapter 2, “Pesticide Regulations and Usage, and Other Regulatory Constraints”), and collect information on physical parameters

For example, with respect to larvicides, information about characteristics of larvicides and their potential impact on the environment was collected by examining various sources (e.g., public and scientific libraries, reference and periodical databases, the Internet, and research and contributions from the scientific community and larvicide vendors). Expert and government agencies involved in the field of mosquito control were contacted to inquire about their knowledge, history of experience, and involvement in mosquito abatement activities. The results of this examination of larvicides were utilized to assist in addressing the potential environmental impacts from the larviciding component of the Comprehensive Plan.

For adulticides, several literature searches were undertaken to assist in the assessment of the potential effects of pesticide exposure on humans and animals. These searches were performed on peer-reviewed published articles as well as government documents. For example, to assist the public health analysis assessment, a literature search was performed in major databases, including MedLine and ToxLine from the National Library of Medicine (NLM). MedLine covers the medical and public

November 2001 3.A-4 CHAPTER 3.A: FRAMEWORK OF THE ANALYSIS

health journals (including, among others, Journal of the American Medical Association, the New England Journal of Medicine, the CDC’s Morbidity and Mortality Weekly Report [MMWR], and the American Journal of Epidemiology). ToxLine surveys broader toxicology literature, including some conference proceedings and international toxicology guidance documents. These databases offer extensive toxicological and health information available for chemicals, including those in the adulticides evaluated in the GEIS. In addition to the literature search, vendors of adulticides and experts in the field of mosquito control were contacted in order to compile information on the known physical characteristics and constituency of adulticide products.

LARVICIDE CHARACTERISTICS AND IMPACT ANALYSIS

Larvicides are insecticide formulations that can be applied by ground or aerial application to target specific insect groups in their larval or pupal development stages. According to the CDC (1999), “cost-effective mosquito control can only be accomplished through source reduction (i.e., control of larval mosquitoes before they emerge as adults).” To maximize the effectiveness from the application of larvicides, it is necessary to understand the mosquito life cycle, have knowledge of species that inhabit an area (especially areas which are known vectors of mosquito-borne disease), locate potential breeding sites for larvicide application, and follow up with monitoring by control personnel to ascertain whether the larvicide is producing expected mortality to limit emergent adult mosquito populations. Application of larvicides is an essential component of any integrated mosquito control program since the “objective of larviciding is to control the immature stages at the breeding habitat before adult populations have had a chance to disperse and to maintain populations levels at which the risk of arbovirus transmission is minimal” (CDC, 2001). Unlike adulticides that have little residual effect, some larvicides can control larvae and achieve high mortality rates for extended periods of time (e.g., for more than one month).

With respect to larvicides, Appendix 3.AII, “Larvicide Component of the Comprehensive Plan,” provides the following information:

􀂃 A description of the mosquito life cycle and breeding habitats, locally common species, and potential use of larvicides in breeding sites in the representative areas;

􀂃 Information on larvicide products registered (by USEPA and NYSDEC) and available for use in New York State, product label information, and environmental hazards/warning statements on labels;

􀂃 Physical and chemical properties (e.g., solubility in water and organic material, vapor pressure, boiling and melthing points), half life and degradation information of the five larvicide active ingredients which are registered for use by the NYSDEC in New York State—Bacillus sphaericus (Bs), Bacillus thuringiensis israelensis (Bti), methoprene, monomolecular surface film (MSF), and temephos;

􀂃 Results of technical surveys of local, State, and regional mosquito control experts or health agencies related to knowledge of the use of larvicides;

􀂃 A review of historical data and recent literature findings with respect to larvicides;

􀂃 Published environmental effects from scientific literature (e.g., USEPA toxicity data), including current research findings;

􀂃 Reported control sources with the active ingredients and potential adverse impacts of larvicides contemplated under the Comprehensive Plan;

􀂃 Potential benefits of larviciding versus adulticiding and potential cumulative effects; and

3.A-5 November 2001 COMPREHENSIVE MOSQUITO-BORNE DISEASE SURVEILLANCE AND CONTROL PLAN DGEIS

􀂃 Potential environmental impacts of larvicides contemplated under the Comprehensive Plan, including any cumulative or long-term impacts anticipated from continual yearly applications.

The information on the larvicides provided in Appendix 3.AII was used to help formulate the potential environmental impact analyses related to the application of larvicides for the GEIS, which are described in the respective impact analysis chapters (e.g., Chapter 3.D, “Natural Resources”).

While the County has not finalized an application protocol for future larviciding actions under the proposed Comprehensive Plan at this time, it is expected that future applications would be similar to applications performed in the past under Operation STING. For example, before undertaking any larviciding activities, the County must file permit applications to the NYSDEC to obtain approval for larviciding actions, such as the application of larvicides in catch basins. Pursuant to Environmental Conservation Law Article 24 (Freshwater Wetlands Act), applications of pesticide in any freshwater wetland or adjacent area require an Article 24 Freshwater Wetlands Permit. In addition, before applying larivicides in catchbasins, the County would need to obtain NYSDEC Permit for the Use of Pesticides for the Control or Elimination of Aquatic Insects, Environmental Conservation Law (ECL) Article 15/Part 329 of the New York Compilation of Codes, Rules and Regulations (6 NYCRR) to treat storm water catch basins, drainage ditches, and woodland pools County-wide. Therefore, these permits would need to be obtained before undertaking such control activities.

All applicators would be required to meet applicable training requirements before applying such products into the environment. The County would also keep records on the amount of larvicides applied, and would likely employ a methodology similar to that employed in 2001 to track the application of products with a physical marker. For example, in 2001 the County inspected 57,879 catch basins for larviciding; it applied larvicides to catch basins which retain water, but would not treat catch basins which do not retain water (i.e., they are not potential mosquito breeding sites). The catch basins treated were painted with one orange dot. Two dots were painted on catch basins that were evaluated but did not require larvicide (e.g., because they did not retain water).

Under the Comprehensive Plan, the County may perform reapplications of larvicides in areas identified as continual breeding grounds for known vectors of mosquito-borne disease or in locations where other surveillance signs of active arboviral activity or positive mosquito pools are found. For example, after the initial applications of methoprene-based products early in the mosquito-breeding season, the County performed one reapplication in 2001, this time with Vectolex, in some catch basins where larvae, pupae, and adult mosquitoes were found. A third application (second reapplication) was made in September 2001, with Altosid and Vectolex in Mount Vernon where several West Nile virus positive dead birds and positive mosquito pools were found.

ADULTICIDES

The chemical composition of adulticides and the way in which they are applied would strongly affect the potential for impact. There are numerous adulticides that have been approved by the NYSDEC for use in New York State. While there are various products from specific vendors/distributors that have recommended application rates and limitations on the approved labels, there are a limited number of active ingredients in these products. Therefore, the active and inactive ingredients in adulticides which are approved for use in New York State, the known limitations and restrictions for the applications of these products, and the physical characteristics of these adulticides were examined. Although data on inert ingredients are considered proprietary information by the manufacturers, the GEIS includes data, where available, on the known identity of inerts in the products. The GEIS includes a discussion and assessment of the potential effects of inerts and carriers on the environment,

November 2001 3.A-6 CHAPTER 3.A: FRAMEWORK OF THE ANALYSIS

based on the information available. (Inerts are non-insecticidal components of the products as sold by the manufacturers; carriers are substances added to products by applicators in order to facilitate application.) Information on adulticide products that are registered for use in New York State for the control of adult mosquitoes, not just on active ingredients, are discussed in Chapter 2, “Pesticide Regulations and Usage, and Other Regulatory Constraints.” Active ingredients in the GEIS impact assessments include:

􀂃 Naled,

􀂃 Permethrin,

􀂃 Piperonyl Butoxide (used as a synergist),

􀂃 Resmethrin,

􀂃 Sumithrin, and

􀂃 Malathion.

Appendix 3.AI identifies and discusses the physical and chemical characteristics of New York Department of Environmental Conservation (NYSDEC) and United States Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA) registered adulticide products that are available for use on a community-scale basis and that could be used in the Comprehensive Plan. Appendix 3.AI also includes information on key material characteristics, active and inert ingredients and their fate in the environment, material safety data, potential toxicity levels, and half-lives. The product label restrictions and recommendations for the applications of these products are also summarized in this appendix.

The following USEPA-registered adulticide products which could be used on a community-scale basis by the County are included in this GEIS assessment:

􀂃 Anvil 2+2 Ultra Low Volume (ULV)

􀂃 Anvil 10+10 ULV

􀂃 Aqua-Reslin

􀂃 Biomist 1.5+7.5 ULV

􀂃 Biomist 3+15 ULV

􀂃 Bonide Mosquito Beater 2-2

􀂃 Flit 10 EC

􀂃 Mosquito Beater 4-4

􀂃 Permethrin 57% OS

􀂃 Scourge Insecticide with SBP-1382/Piperonyl Butoxide 4%+12% MF Formula II

􀂃 Scourge Insecticide with SBP-1382/Piperonyl Butoxide 18%+54% MF Formula II

􀂃 Atrapa Insecticide VCP

􀂃 Atrapa Insecticide ULV

􀂃 Dibrom Concentrate Insecticide

􀂃 Formula MU-17

􀂃 Fyfanon ULV Ultra Low Volume Concentrate Insecticide

􀂃 Trumpet EC Insecticide

3.A-7 November 2001 COMPREHENSIVE MOSQUITO-BORNE DISEASE SURVEILLANCE AND CONTROL PLAN DGEIS

As discussed later in this chapter, an examination of the maximum allowable applications of the registered adulticides was performed. These limitations help set the framework of analysis for evaluating the potential fate and exposure to the public and the environment from the adulticiding component of the Comprehensive Plan.

Chapter 2, “Pesticide Regulations and Usage, and Other Regulatory Constraints,” provides a discussion of agency oversight, State and Federal regulations related to pesticide applicator licensing, pesticide registration and handling requirements (i.e., the use of personal protective equipment, such as gloves, masks, and respirators).

PRODUCT CLASSIFICATION AND INGREDIENTS

The two primary constituents found in adulticide products are the “active” ingredient and “inert” ingredients. The active ingredient in an adulticide product is the chemical component in the adulticide that is intended to target and eradicate the adult mosquito. This component of the product is of primary significance for the public health and natural resources impact assessments. Synergists, such as piperonyl butoxide, are also added to pyrethroid products to enhance effectiveness. (As discussed below, the synergist piperonyl butoxide was treated as an active ingredient for this study.) “Inert” ingredients are defined as any ingredients in the product that are not intended to affect a target pest (an ingredient with no pesticidal effect), and they are generally in the product formulation either as impurities or to aid in the dispersion of the product. Although inert ingredients can be present in adulticide products, the information on inert ingredients is limited and is considered proprietary by the product manufacturers. As discussed in Chapter 2, “Pesticide Regulations and Usage, and Other Regulatory Constraints,” information about the specific inert ingredients found in the adulticides was not disclosed by all of the manufacturers to the County for the purposes of this GEIS. Since details on the individual constituent chemicals comprising the inerts are not available from USEPA and manufacturers, these ingredients are discussed qualitatively.

Active Ingredients

Under the Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act (FIFRA), an active ingredient is defined as one that prevents, destroys, repels or mitigates a pest, or is a plant regulator, defoliant, desiccant or nitrogen stabilizer. As described earlier in Chapter 2, “Pesticide Regulations and Usage, and Other Regulatory Constraints,” the 17 adulticides registered for use in New York State that would likely be used on a community-scale basis belong to either the pyrethroid class or the organophos-phate class. Within these 17 adulticides, 4 active ingredients common to the pyrethroid class, and 2 active ingredients common to the organophosphate are found, and are described below.

Synergist

Although piperonyl butoxide may be considered an active ingredient on its own, it is typically added to pyrethroid formulations to function as a chemical synergist. A synergist is a chemical that enhances the effectiveness of another chemical. Pyrethroids can be metabolized (detoxified) by enzymes in the insect. Synergists such as piperonyl butoxide may be added to the pyrethroid in order to slow down or prevent the metabolism of pyrethroids, thereby enabling a smaller amount of pyrethroids to have the same effectiveness. Therefore, a pyrethroid product may contain larger amounts of piperonyl butoxide than the active ingredient. For purposes of this GEIS, piperonyl butoxide was subjected to the quantified technical analyses, and was treated as equivalent to an active ingredient.

November 2001 3.A-8 CHAPTER 3.A: FRAMEWORK OF THE ANALYSIS

Inert or Other Ingredients

As discussed in Chapter 2, “Pesticide Regulations and Usage, and Other Regulatory Constraints,” inerts are simply defined as ingredients that are not active as pesticide, and are generally added as a solvent and/or to aid in the dispersion of the product. The Federal and State laws do not require individual inert ingredients to be identified by name and percentage on the product label. However, the total percentage of all inert ingredients must be declared. As mentioned above, for the purposes of the GEIS, the technical analyses address the potential impact issues related to inerts qualitatively, as specific information about the inerts was not disclosed by the manufacturers to the County.

Additional Carriers /Additives

Some of the products may require or allow dilution depending on the application method used. Additives can include a number of substances such as water, light mineral oil, petroleum distillate, or soybean oil. Adulticide products applied as ultra-low volume (ULV) formulations (i.e., using the least amount of product with still proven effectiveness to cover a large area) do not require additional carriers or additives. The analyses in this GEIS are based on adulticides applied as ULV, since the Comprehensive Plan currently only considers the use of ULV products. The impacts resulting from non-ULV applications are discussed in Chapter 3.S, “Alternatives.” Under the proposed Comprehensive Plan, the County would not employ thermal fogging or add carriers or additives to the product unless required by the label.

NEWYORK STATE REGISTERED ADULTICIDE PRODUCTS TO BE ANALYZED

As described in Chapter 2, “Pesticide Regulations and Usage, and Other Regulatory Constraints,” there are 17 adulticides (11 pyrethroid and 6 organophosphate products) registered in New York State that can be used on a community-scale basis. This GEIS considers the potential impacts of only the products that are registered at this time, with their current formulations. Changes in product formulations are likely over time, and the County may evaluate new formulations in the future. The 17 adulticides registered for use in New York State that would likely be used for application on a community-based scale in this EIS fall into two major categories: organophosphates and pyrethroids.

As mentioned above, for the purposes of the GEIS, the synergist piperonyl butoxide was considered as equivalent to an active ingredient. Therefore, within the five products listed above, further references to the six “active ingredients” refer to malathion, naled, permethrin, resmethrin, sumithrin, and piperonyl butoxide.

Current manufacturer product labels were obtained from NYSDEC for all the above-mentioned adulticides registered in New York State that can be used on a community-scale basis. Beyond identifying the ingredients in each product, the labels provide information on how the adulticide is to be used and limitations on how the products may be applied. A discussion of the composition, recommended application procedures and limitations provided in the labels for the six active ingredients selected for detailed technical analysis is outlined below.

Chemical Composition

The chemical compositions of sample adulticides which contain at least one of the active ingredients available to the County for use under the Comprehensive Plan are presented in Table 3.A-1 below. Appendix 3.AI contains a comparable listing of the known chemical compositions of all synthetic adulticides registered for community-scale use in New York State. As shown in Table 3.A-1, pyrethroid-based products typically contain the synergist piperonyl butoxide, but the relative

3.A-9 November 2001 COMPREHENSIVE MOSQUITO-BORNE DISEASE SURVEILLANCE AND CONTROL PLAN DGEIS

Table 3.A-1 Chemical Composition of Adulticides
Sample Adulticide	Ingredient		Percentage
Organophosphates
Fyfanon ULV Concentrate Insecticide	Malathion		95.0
Inerts		5.0
Dibrom Concentrate Insecticide	Naled		87.4
Inerts		12.6
Pyrethroids
Permethrin 57% OS	Permethrin		57.0
Inerts (Aromatic Solvents)		43.0
Scourge Insecticide with SBP-1382/Piperonyl Butoxide 18%+54% MF Formula II	Resmethrin		18.0
Piperonyl Butoxide		54.0
Inerts (Petroleum Distillates)		28.0
Anvil 10+10	Sumithrin		10.0
Piperonyl Butoxide		10.0
Inerts (Petroleum Distillates)		80.0

percentage of piperonyl butoxide may differ among the products and the maximum allowable application rates, which are discussed further below.

Application Techniques and Recommended Application Amounts

In addition to the constituency of these adulticides, it is important to understand the mechanisms by which such adulticides could be applied. The primary mechanisms for application of adulticides would be via truck or aerial methods. As discussed in Chapter 2, “Pesticide Regulations and Use, and Other Regulatory Constraints,” there are limitations to the maximum amount of active ingredient which may be applied. The primary limitation for the maximum amount of adulticides that could be applied are dependent upon the amount of active ingredient applied per acre. Therefore, while there may be several products containing varying percentages of active ingredient, the actual amount of active ingredient would largely be the same among the products with a common active ingredient. With this in mind, the maximum allowable active ingredient which could be applied per acre were determined, and used to represent all products which contain such active ingredients in this GEIS. These application amounts per unit area for the active ingredients are provided in Table 3.A-2. Table 3.A-2 presents the recommended active ingredient application amounts per unit area for ground and aerial applications for the six active ingredients selected for detailed technical analysis. With respect to inerts, however, there is a range of potential amounts of inerts which are associated with each product, which is further discussed later in this chapter.

November 2001 3.A-10 CHAPTER 3.A: FRAMEWORK OF THE ANALYSIS

Table 3.A-2 Adulticide Active Ingredient Application Amounts
Active Ingredient		Application Rate (lbs/acre)
Ground		Aerial
Organophosphates
Malathion	0.0542		0.2280
Naled	0.0175		0.1044
Pyrethroids
Permethrin	0.0210		0.0234
Resmethrin	0.0070		0.0070
Sumithrin	0.0036		0.0036
Piperonyl Butoxide*	0.0210		0.0210
Note: * Based on amounts in Scourge Insecticide with SBP-1382/ Piperonyl Butoxide 18%+54% MF Formula II. Piperonyl Butoxide application amounts in other products would be less would be less than those presented. Source: NYS Registration Labels

To illustrate the relative amount of adulticides that can be applied over an acre, a comparison using the maximum allowable application rate of the active ingredient is provided. For ground application, according to the registration label, products which contain malathion, such as Fyfanon ULV Concentrate Insecticide, are to be applied at a rate of up to 4 fluid ounces per acre. This is equivalent to approximately 8 tablespoons per acre (an acre is an area approximately 210 feet x 210 feet). Figure 3.A-1 presents the example given above for ground application, illustrating the amount of adulticide that could be applied over an acre of land. While Figure 3.A-1 provides a depiction of the amount of product that could be applied relative to an acre of land, it is also important to recognize the relative amount of active ingredient within the adulticide that could be applied. Malathion-based products, for example, have the highest relative application rates among the active ingredients that are available in New York State-registered adulticides, and malathion-based products are also almost all malathion (e.g., 95 percent or greater). While not depicted in Figure 3.A-1, relative volume amounts of naled and pyrethroid active ingredients would generally be less than those shown for malathion in the figure. The next section, “Physical and Chemical Properties,” discusses the active ingredient application rates for all New York State-registered adulticides being analyzed in this GEIS.

Physical and Chemical Properties

Research on the chemical and physical characteristics of the active ingredients was performed for the GEIS, and Appendix 3.AI presents summaries of this information.

Other Label Limitations

In addition to the method of application and the recommended amount of adulticide to be applied per acre, the manufacturers’ product labels provide information about other limitations on how the products may be applied. These include either general or specific recommendations about droplet size distributions, and recommended meteorological conditions for application. Recommended ranges of droplet sizes are generally given in terms of mass median diameter (or volume median diameter). The mass median diameter is the diameter which divides the spray such that half of the mass has droplets of diameters less than the mass median diameter, and half the mass has droplets of diameters greater than the mass median diameter. These recommendations were incorporated into the air drift/deposition modeling of adulticides that is discussed in the next section.

3.A-11 November 2001 COMPREHENSIVE MOSQUITO-BORNE DISEASE SURVEILLANCE AND CONTROL PLAN DGEIS

C. DRIFT/DEPOSITION MODELING OF ADULTICIDES

This section provides an overview of the air modeling studies which were performed to address the potential airborne concentrations and deposition levels that humans and the environment may be exposed to as a result of the Comprehensive Plan. Appendix 3.AIII, “Air Drift and Deposition Modeling,” provides the detailed modeling studies which were performed for the GEIS, and a review of local meteorological data (e.g., typical wind speeds which occur during time periods when applications of adulticides would be more likely to occur). The discussions below summarize a) the selection of the mathematical models employed in these studies, b) the modeling approach that was employed in the air modeling to conservatively estimate resultant predicted concentrations for input into the technical analyses, c) the air modeling results for a one-time application of adulticides, and d) the maximum likely repeat applications of adulticides which could occur in any year and any part of the County under the Comprehensive Plan.

In order to estimate the potential dispersion and settling of adulticides which could be emitted into the environment under the Comprehensive Plan, mathematical tools (i.e. computer models) were employed to estimate maximum airborne concentrations at locations of likely public and environmental exposure (e.g., pedestrians on streets). In addition, these models were used to determine estimates of the amounts of ingredients which may deposit onto the ground or surfaces (i.e., deposition) that, over time, may subsequently serve as a means of exposure for the public (e.g., children playing in grass or dirt) or wildlife in the environment.

The use of mathematical models is a useful and common practice when projecting the potential future conditions which may occur with a Proposed Action. The environmental industry utilizes proven mathematical air modeling tools to assess potential air concentrations and deposition amounts from complex operations (e.g., power plant emissions, discharges from conveyor belt operations, fugitive releases from transfer operations such as those at waste or soil handling facilities). In many ways, air modeling is a superior method to estimate exposure to the public and environment from actions, such as those included as part of the Comprehensive Plan, compared to other methods, such as air or soil monitoring (e.g., collecting samples of air concentrations or soils after applying adulticides into the environment). For example, the meteorological conditions (e.g., wind speeds, wind direction, mixing conditions within the atmosphere) that occur in the environment after the application of adulticides have a great degree of variability. Under such conditions, it would be difficult to ensure emplacement of air monitoring sites and soil collection sites that would collect the maximum concentrations or deposition levels of adulticide ingredients. In addition, if monitoring were selected, it would require the application of adulticides into the environment for testing purposes, and there would be no assurances that the worst-case meteorological conditions are encountered during the time period the tests are performed. Therefore, other methods, such as monitoring, would not be able to simulate the full range of conditions which could occur in the future as effectively as those of the mathematical modeling techniques which were employed for this study and are discussed further below.

However, while still selecting a mathematical modeling approach to estimate the fate of adulticide ingredients in the environment, it is also understood that no mathematical model will likely predict such complex actions with 100 percent accuracy at all times, and that alternative models will likely predict different results under the same sets of simulation conditions. Therefore, the most suitable models which may be able to simulate adulticiding actions were examined, and the modeling exercises were performed to determine maximum predicted concentrations and deposition levels that may be computed by these models for adulticide applications, in order to yield conservative high

November 2001 3.A-12 CHAPTER 3.A: FRAMEWORK OF THE ANALYSIS

estimates of exposure to the public and the environment for input into the subsequent technical analyses.

SELECTION OF MODELS

In selecting the appropriate mathematic model to best simulate the discharge of adulticides into the environment, several factors were considered. These include:

􀂃 The ability to simulate releases of adulticides from source types that best represent aerial or ground applications;

􀂃 The ability to simulate ambient air concentrations as well as deposition levels of adulticides after release from a source; and

􀂃 The ability to simulate drift/deposition in rural and urban environments.

Based on the requirements listed above, two models were identified for possible inclusion into the modeling efforts: the USEPA Spray Drift Task Force AgDRIFT® model and USEPA’s Industrial Source Complex Short Term ISCST3 model (ISCST3).

Figure 3.A-2 provides a conceptual diagram that depicts the real-world conditions that need to be defined to simulate the application of adulticides.

A series of sensitivity runs were performed with both AgDRIFT® and ISCST3 to determine the model input parameters that have: (1) a significant effect on the resultant predicted airborne concentrations and deposition levels (e.g., wind speed, droplet size distribution, height of release); and (2) relatively no effect on the model predictions (e.g., humidity, temperature). The sensitivity runs were also performed to provide a comparison of the magnitude of the predicted results from both models.

The results indicated that, in general, the predicted levels of adulticides were higher using the ISCST3 model than when the AgDRIFT® model was used. A full presentation of the results for the sensitivity analysis is found in Appendix 3.AIII. Since it is important to provide high-end estimates of exposure for input to the subsequent technical impact studies (e.g. public health, natural resources), the maximum numbers resulting from the sensitivity studies with the ISCST3 model were selected to provide reasonably conservative estimates of adulticide airborne concentrations and deposition values for the risk assessment analyses included in the GEIS. The ISCST3 model inputs used for the site-specific analyses are outlined below.

MODELING APPROACH

One of the goals of the modeling exercise was to determine the maximum potential exposures to the public and the environment from the application of adulticides. Therefore, based on the results of the sensitivity analysis which identified key input variables, the variables which resulted in the maximum predicted concentrations and deposition amounts were selected to predict reasonable worst-case values for input to the analyses. The net effect of this analysis is to employ upper end estimates in the GEIS impact analyses.

For example, the mean droplet sizes of applied adulticides, wind speeds, and other atmospheric conditions which resulted in maximum impacts were assumed to occur at all locations. In addition, the County has areas which could be considered as either urban (more indicative of the southern part of the County) and rural (more indicative of the northern part of the County), and the highest modeled values which were calculated (from either urban or rural simulations) were assumed to occur County-wide in the technical studies. In reality, concentrations and deposition that the total populations would

3.A-13 November 2001 COMPREHENSIVE MOSQUITO-BORNE DISEASE SURVEILLANCE AND CONTROL PLAN DGEIS

be expected to encounter would be substantially less than those projected from these modeling studies.

MODELING RESULTS

Active Ingredients in Adulticides

Table 3.A-3 presents the results of the maximum predicted airborne concentrations from ground and air applications of the active ingredients for each adulticide active ingredients from one application of the adulticides. The results which are presented in Table 3.A-3 represent a “peak” one-hour maximum concentration value at the receptor distance 25 feet from the source and at pedestrian height.

Table 3.A-4 presents the maximum predicted deposition amounts from the modeling efforts. Maximum predicted results are presented for both ground and aerial application. These simulations assumed that the first pass of a spray truck or helicopter occurs adjacent to a 300-foot swath treatment area, and all subsequent passes occur parallel to and upwind from the first pass, at intervals of 300 feet. The results represent a “peak” maximum deposition value at the 25-foot receptor distance from the first pass of the source and an average deposition value within the 300-foot swath adjacent to the first pass of the source (which incorporates multiple passes of the truck every 300 feet upwind of the first pass). This conservative approach to accounting for multiple passes resulted in average deposition concentrations within 300 feet of the point of application that are actually greater than the application rate for truck applications for a one-time application of the adulticides.

Table 3.A-3 Active Ingredient Concentration Modeling Results
Active Ingredient		1-hour Average Concentration (µg/m3)* Peak Value
Ground		Air
Organophosphates
Malathion	60.8		9.1
Naled	19.6		4.1
Pyrethroids
Permethrin	23.6		0.9
Resmethrin	7.9		0.3
Piperonyl Butoxide	23.6		0.8
Sumithrin	4.0		0.1
Piperonyl Butoxide **	4.0		0.1
Notes: * Micrograms of active ingredient per cubic meter of air. ** Based on amounts in Scourge Insecticide with SBP-1382/ Piperonyl Butoxide 18%+54% MF Formula II. Piperonyl butoxide application amounts in other products would be less than those presented. Source: ISCST3 modeling runs with maximum allowable label application rates.

November 2001 3.A-14 CHAPTER 3.A: FRAMEWORK OF THE ANALYSIS

Table 3.A-4 Active Ingredient Deposition Level Modeling Results
Active Ingredient			Modeled Deposition Level (mg/m2)*
Average Within 300 Feet			Peak Value
Ground	Air		Ground		Air
Organophosphates
Malathion	7.31	10.15		37.56		15.62
Naled	2.36	4.65		12.13		7.15
Pyrethroids
Permethrin	2.83	1.04		14.55		1.60
Resmethrin	0.94	0.31		4.85		0.48
Sumithrin	0.49	0.16		2.49		0.25
Piperonyl Butoxide**	2.83	0.93		14.55		1.44
Notes: * Milligrams of active ingredient per square meter of surface. ** Based on amounts in Scourge Insecticide with SBP-1382/ Piperonyl Butoxide 18%+54% MF Formula II. Piperonyl Butoxide application amounts in other products would be less than those presented. Source: ISCST3 modeling runs with maximum allowable label application rates.

Inerts in Adulticides

As discussed in Chapter 2, “Pesticide Regulations and Usage, and Other Regulatory Constraints,” the issues relating to potential impacts from inerts in the adulticide products are dealt with qualitatively within the technical analyses in this GEIS. However, to gain a better understanding of the relative amounts of the ingredients within an adulticide product that may be applied in a treatment area, estimates of the total amounts of inerts (in terms of concentration and deposition levels following an application) can be calculated for comparison with the values for the active ingredients. As discussed in Chapter 2, “Pesticide Regulations and Usage, and Other Regulatory Constraints,” inerts can make up a relatively large percentage of pyrethroid products. Biomist 1.5+7.5 ULV, which contains 1.5 percent of the active ingredient permethrin, and 91 percent inerts, contains the maximum amount of applied inerts in any of the pyrethroid products. This amount is approximately 118 times greater than the maximum application rate of the active ingredient sumithrin (found in Anvil 2+2 and Anvil 10+10). The minimum amount of applied inerts in any of the pyrethroid products is found in Scourge 18+54, and has an application rate approximately three times that of the active ingredient sumithrin. Based on the summary of results in Table 3.A-3, the maximum predicted one-hour air concentrations of inerts from ground applications would range from 12 to 472 µg/m³, while for aerial applications, maximum one-hour air concentrations would range from 0.3 to 12 µg/m³. Maximum predicted peak deposition values for inerts would range from 7 to 294 mg/m²for ground applications, and from 0.8 to 30 mg/m²for aerial applications, based on the results from Table 3.A-4.

POTENTIAL REPEAT APPLICATIONS PER YEAR

The technical analyses, such as the public health and natural resource impact assessments; also need to address the potential repeat applications of adulticides within an area of the County in any given year. The immediate objective of an adulticide application is to reduce the transmitting population (i.e., infected mosquitoes) to a level that would minimize virus transmission to humans and, if possible, to a level where continuous transmission in the basic cycle between vectors and avian hosts

3.A-15 November 2001 COMPREHENSIVE MOSQUITO-BORNE DISEASE SURVEILLANCE AND CONTROL PLAN DGEIS

will be interrupted. The objective then is to accelerate the daily mortality of the adults from the usual 20-50% to above 90%. Theoretically, if this can be accomplished over a large enough area and the population can be held at this low level for 7 to 10 days, the basic transmission level of major mosquito borne viruses will be reduced effectively or interrupted completely (Reeves 1990). Thus, repeat applications of adulticides in the same region of the County may be required over the short term in order to suppress the infected mosquito population to the point that the potential for a virus to amplify in the wildlife is substantially diminished.

In order to provide a reasonable worst-case estimate of the number of times a given area might be subjected to adulticiding in any year to lessen the threat for human contraction of mosquito-borne diseases, the following potential maximum application schedule of adulticides within the same representative area was employed in the analyses:

Day 1 – Day 4 – Day 14 – Day 17

In other words, the technical analyses assumed that after the first application in an area, a follow-up application would occur 3 nights later. This assumption on repeat applications (or pairs of applications) was employed in the analysis, because it is recognized that adulticides are intended to control adult mosquitoes, and would not control mosquitoes that are still in the larvae or pupae stage during the time of the first application. Thus, if in the case that there is surveillance data in an area of the County, which indicates a potential threat to public health from mosquito-borne diseases, the first application of adulticides would attempt to substantially reduce the existing mosquito population in the area. A follow up application (in this example, the application on Day 4) would target those mosquitoes that have reached the adult stage in the area after the first application, and also, to control the remainder of the mosquitoes who survived the original application on Day 1. Paired or multiple applications are intended to substantially suppress adult mosquito populations long enough, so that the animal hosts of the viruses (e.g., birds) can recover from their original infection. If the animal hosts have time to recover from the disease, then the chances of mosquitoes propagating a mosquito-borne virus to humans may be substantially reduced for the season.

With the potential re-emergence of adult mosquitoes and/or based on additional surveillance data, in order to project worst-case conditions, another spraying event may be required 10 nights later (i.e., Day 14). This event may again be followed up by an application 3 days later (i.e., Day 17). This assumption of four applications of adulticides over a 17 day period in the same area of the County was applied, so that conservative projections of the potential impacts from the applications of adulticides are addressed in the GEIS. Assuming a short time frame between reapplication scenarios would result in higher short-term concentrations because of the worst-case prediction that such materials accumulate on surface in the ambient environment, even though products would break down based on the media the ingredient is present.

If a lesser number of applications were assumed for the analyses, the predicted longer-term impacts would be less than those projected in the technical analyses. Chapter 3.C, “Public Health,”, Chapter 3.D, “Natural Resources,” and Chapter 3.E, “Water Supply”, also address potential long-term impacts under the scenario that more than four applications would be required in an area in the County in one year.

The values reported in Tables 3.A-3 and Tables 3.A-4, in conjunction with the supporting air modeling results in Appendix 3.AIII and the degradation rates summarized in Appendix 3.AI, were employed with the repeat application scenario discussed above to help determine short- and long-term exposure of the public and the environment to the ingredients in adulticides. These estimates were

November 2001 3.A-16 CHAPTER 3.A: FRAMEWORK OF THE ANALYSIS

then employed in the technical study areas, the results of which are presented in other chapters of the GEIS.

D. ENVIRONMENT TYPES AND REPRESENTATIVE AREAS

It is not possible to predict exactly where it may be necessary to apply insecticides to control breeding or adult mosquitoes in the future. In large measure, areas that may be impacted in the future would be determined by the presence of a mosquito-borne disease in humans, mammals, birds, and mosquitoes. However, it is possible that most land uses in the County, including its natural areas, could be affected by larviciding and adulticide spraying. Therefore, the GEIS includes and addresses potential impacts on environments in the County where potential larviciding and adulticiding activities may occur. With the range of environment types in mind, eight representative geographic areas of the County have been selected for site-specific study to address the potential impacts from the Comprehensive Plan. These representative areas were analyzed to project potential County-wide impacts from the proposed Comprehensive Plan. As shown in Table 3.A-5 and further discussed below, these include areas where the presence of mosquitoes is likely, areas with a variety of land uses, and areas with a variety of natural environments. Areas with vulnerable populations and threatened or endangered wildlife species have also been considered, as discussed below. A discussion of the potential environment types, which were considered before the selection of the representative areas, is provided below.

ENVIRONMENT TYPES

Seven environment types, comprising the County’s overall environment, were identified as relevant for examination in the GEIS, as discussed below. While not typically considered a specific environment type, drinking water supplies are also a major concern, and were considered in the selection of representative areas (see Chapter 3.E, “Water Supply,” for the assessment of potential impacts on water supply sources from the proposed Comprehensive Plan). Also included in these descriptions of environment types is a short synopsis of potential pathways by which either humans or wildlife could be affected by the Comprehensive Plan.

The representative areas selected for detailed analysis are meant to reflect the various environment types that can be found anywhere in the County. Chapter 3.B, “Land Use, Community Facilities, Public Policy, and Zoning,” discusses why these areas are considered representative of other West-chester County regions for the purposes of the GEIS and evaluation of the Comprehensive Plan.

Residential Environment

The predominant developed land use in the County is residential. Areas which were included in the GEIS include high-, medium- and low-density areas, which correspond with greater and lesser concentrations of people and contain different building forms (e.g., high-rise, mid-rise, low-rise). Single-family homes and townhouses with gardens and yards contain exposure pathways to sprayed adulticides. Dust in this lower-density housing might contain a higher percentage of outside soil than in high-rise apartments because soil is more likely to be tracked into lower density housing with attached yards. In addition to direct exposures to adulticides during or immediately after spraying, indirect pathways of exposure exist in all types of housing through open windows and doors and deposition of material on window ledges, roofs, open stairs, yards, and other surfaces. For residential scenarios, potential adulticide exposures to children and adults were examined in the public health risk assessment. Potentially complete exposure pathways (e.g., actual contact with adulticide products either directly or indirectly, resulting in exposure) that may be considered in the public health risk

3.A-17 November 2001 COMPREHENSIVE MOSQUITO-BORNE DISEASE SURVEILLANCE AND CONTROL PLAN DGEIS

Table 3.A-5 Representative Areas and Environment Types

Representative Areas

Environment Types

Residential

Low Density

Medium Density

High Density

Parks/Open Areas

Public Open Space

Marinas/Waterfront Recreation (i.e., beach, boating)

Agricultural

Childcare/Day Camps

Natural Resources

Upland Forest

Old Field/Open Field

Tidal Wetland

Freshwater Wetland

Surface Water

Marine Environments

County Biodiversity Reserves

Drinking Water Supply

NYC Watershed Lands/Reservoirs

Municipal Watershed Lands/Reservoirs

Municipal and Private Groundwater Resources

Community Facilities/Institutional Uses

Schools

Hospitals

Elder Care Centers

Commercial

Retail

Outdoor Dining

Open Markets

Malls/Shopping Plazas

Office Parks

Industrial/Transportation

Municipal Facilities (including transfer stations, WWTP*, depots)

Manufacturing/Warehouse

Rail/Transit System

Major Arterials/Highways

Airport

Note: * WWTP – Wastewater Treatment Plant

Source: AKRF, Inc. 2001

November 2001 3.A-18 CHAPTER 3.A: FRAMEWORK OF THE ANALYSIS

assessment for this type of use would include inhalation of airborne adulticides, dermal contact with adulticides from direct deposition or dermal transfer from other surfaces, incidental ingestion of adul-ticide residues from hand-to-mouth behavior, and ingestion of contaminated produce or drinking water.

Parks and Publicly Accessible Open Spaces

Open areas, particularly where there are conditions that support mosquito activity and where people congregate, are environments likely to expose the public to infected mosquitoes and to direct or indi-rect contact with adulticides. These areas are located throughout the County and range from small “vest-pocket” parks and play areas to very large parks with substantial facilities and large numbers of users. Facilities such as schools and parks for each of the representative areas are provided in Chapter 3.B, “Land Use, Community Facilities, Public Policy, and Zoning.” For this study, two types of open space were considered: paved playgrounds, where deposited material could be washed off in a rainfall and be discharged into a storm sewer system; and dirt or grassy play areas where the deposited materials could persist in the environment for a much longer time. In addition to direct exposures to adulticides in drift during or immediately after spraying, potentially complete indirect exposure pathways include inhalation of adulticides in dust (e.g., dust resuspended while playing on a dirt field), incidental ingestion of adulticides deposited on soil or in swimming areas, direct ingestion of adulticides deposited on skin (e.g., child hand-to-mouth behavior), and dermal contact with adulti-cides in soil, surfaces, plants, or in surface water (e.g., children playing in wading pools). In addition, exposure could occur when contaminated soil is tracked by people and pets into homes. This would depend primarily on the type of home and its proximity to the open space.

Drinking Water Supply

All of the reservoirs located within Westchester County, which are used as a source of drinking water for much of the public, are openly exposed and could be subject to pesticide runoff and atmospheric deposition after adult mosquito control activities. Some residents within Westchester County rely upon municipal or private groundwater supplies. Therefore, areas which were included in the GEIS include portions of the New York City reservoirs (which are contained within the County) and their surrounding lands, and locations that rely upon groundwater supplies. However, given the broad range and coverage of drinking water supplies, this is also considered to be a regional issue, which is discussed later in this chapter.

Natural Resources

A natural resource may be considered a plant or animal species, or any area “capable of providing habitat for plant and animal species or capable of functioning to support environmental systems and maintain the County's environmental balance.” Included in these resources are the County's upland habitats, wetlands, and fresh and marine waterbodies. Many of these habitats are found in the County’s parks or nature preserves, but some flourish on land that is not publicly accessible. Throughout the County, these habitats support a wide variety of mammals, migratory and non-migratory birds, amphibians, reptiles, fishes, insects and other invertebrates, and marine organisms. Species of special concern because of their local rarity or status as threatened or endangered also reside in or use the County’s natural habitats. Natural resource areas often contain mosquitoes and breeding grounds for mosquitoes and are therefore likely targets for application of adulticides. It is necessary to understand how these habitats function to assess the exposure and risk of harm to flora and fauna of the County’s natural resource system. The assessment of potential impacts on natural

3.A-19 November 2001 COMPREHENSIVE MOSQUITO-BORNE DISEASE SURVEILLANCE AND CONTROL PLAN DGEIS

resources takes into account the influence of season, which affects the abundance and diversity of biota and their sensitive life stages.

In order to assess the potential effects of pesticide applications on the County’s natural resources, the various types of habitats within the representative areas must be described with respect to the plant and animal community and important physical and chemical characteristics specific to each habitat type. Habitats included for evaluation in the GEIS included uplands (woodlands and fields), beaches/marine environments, tidal and non-tidal wetlands, and estuarine and freshwater surface waterbodies. The GEIS provides an evaluation of the potential impacts to the plant and animal resources of the habitats in the representative areas, including fish, birds, mammals, insects and other invertebrates, amphibians and reptiles, and threatened or endangered species. The evaluation considered seasonal use of these habitats by animals and the life stages present during the mosquito season.

Community Facilities and Institutional Uses

This category includes schools, day-care centers, hospitals, and nursing homes. The risk of both mosquito-borne disease and impacts from adulticides may be greater for certain segments of the population (e.g., the elderly, the very young, people with respiratory disorders, and hospitalized patients) who use these facilities.

For patients in hospitals, incidental inhalation of adulticides in drift during or immediately following application was considered as a potentially complete exposure pathway. This assumes an environment with open windows and ventilation that allows uncontrolled airborne and deposition exposure (although hospitals may have filtered heating, ventilation, and air conditioning [HVAC] systems, in which case no complete exposure pathway exists). For residents in nursing homes, potentially complete exposure pathways are similar to those under the residential scenario. Thus, the effects of adulticide application on this sensitive segment of the population are included under the residential scenario.

For children less than 6 years old in daycare centers, potentially complete exposure pathways (e.g., dermal exposure) would be similar to those for child residents; thus, the effects of adulticide application on this segment of the population are included under the residential scenario. In addition to direct exposures to adulticides in drift during or immediately after spraying, potentially complete exposure pathways at school would include inhalation of airborne pesticides, dermal contact due to direct or indirect deposition, incidental ingestion of adulticides in soil through hand-to-mouth behavior, dermal contact with adulticides in soil, ingestion via contaminated water, and inhalation of adulticides in dust.

Commercial Uses

The commercial areas of the County include such uses as offices, stores and shopping centers, local retail establishments, and wholesale markets. For most segments of the population, these land uses would represent significantly lower risks than residential, open space or natural resources areas. For example, children are not likely to play or be present in these areas for a significant portion of their daily activity. Risk to human health in these areas mainly concerns the adult population. Potential health impacts to humans in commercial areas are evaluated qualitatively because the primary and potentially complete exposure pathways are addressed through the more conservative residential exposure scenario. Potentially complete exposure pathways that were considered in the public health risk assessment include inhalation of adulticides in dust and accidental dermal contact and inhalation of adulticides in drift during or immediately following application.

November 2001 3.A-20 CHAPTER 3.A: FRAMEWORK OF THE ANALYSIS

A sub-category of potential concern includes wholesale food markets with open air stalls or restau-rants with open air dining where deposition of adulticide particles could contaminate food and there-fore affect consumers.

Industrial Uses

This environment type includes a range of industries and utilities, as well as transportation uses, such as railroads and highways. The population at risk is primarily the adult worker. The worker population is generally less dense in industrial areas than in commercial areas; nonetheless, small factories with open windows and facilities where employees work out of doors (e.g., yards) could offer pathways for exposure to mosquitoes and to adulticides. In addition to direct exposures to adulticides in drift during or immediately after spraying, potentially complete exposure pathways for the adult worker include incidental ingestion of adulticides deposited on soil, inhalation of adulticides in dust, and dermal contact with adulticides in soil, surface water, or surfaces (including vegetation).

REPRESENTATIVE AREAS

Considering the potential areas for adulticide applications, the human and natural resource popu-lations, and the environment types, eight representative areas have been proposed for more detailed study in the GEIS (See Figure 3.A-3). As shown in Table 3.A-5, the representative areas include all environment types, likely mosquito breeding grounds, and locations of vulnerable populations and species. These areas, and some reasons for their selection are described below. These areas are intended to be representative of the many types of neighborhoods and uses that occur throughout the County.

Eight areas within Westchester County were chosen in order to more directly examine pesticide/larvicide/adulticide exposure pathways that may differ depending on land use or land cover type. These areas include a representative sampling of the types of environments in the County and are drawn from different geographic locations to maximize diversity—for example, northeast forested areas, north and south Hudson River towns, south and central areas with higher residential density, and an area incorporating the Long Island Sound shoreline. Where possible, these representative areas are delineated to conform to municipal or census tract boundaries. However, their principal purpose is to capture the multitude of land cover types in the County and depict the exposure pathways. In choosing these eight representative areas, many environmental features were examined on a County-wide basis to narrow the selection to those locations which would cover all possible pathways/ exposures to insecticides applied to control mosquito-borne diseases, environmental habitats, land uses, and population densities. In this way, natural areas such as wetlands, river systems, groundwater resources, parklands, and other sensitive habitats would be considered specifically, as would all potential human uses such as outdoor recreation, school uses, office parks, various residential densities, transportation centers and corridors, etc.

Each of the eight representative areas selected includes one or more of the County’s environment types. This provides a broad range of the environments that exist within the County. For example, community facilities, such as elder care centers, will cover the potential concerns for safety of elder residents in the County. The objective of selecting representative areas is only to demonstrate the range of uses and the potential adverse environmental impacts that could occur in these different environment types. It is important that each issue (i.e., high risk population) is covered in at least one representative area; but it is not feasible to cover every area of the County. Chapter 3.B, “Land Use, Community Facilities, Public Policy, and Zoning,” provides information and discussions on how the uses found in the representative areas are indicative of other areas in the County.

3.A-21 November 2001 COMPREHENSIVE MOSQUITO-BORNE DISEASE SURVEILLANCE AND CONTROL PLAN DGEIS

Provided below is a summary discussion of geographic coverage of the selected representative areas.

Representative Area 1

Representative Area 1, as shown in Figure 3.A-4, is located in the southwestern portion of the City of Yonkers adjacent to the Hudson River and is bounded by the Hudson River to the west, the municipal boundary to the south, the eastern edge of Tibbetts Brook Park to the east, and Ashburton Avenue to the north. It represents one of the most densely populated areas of the County and incorporates commercial/industrial development, along with small and large parklands in an urban environment.

Representative Area 2

Representative Area 2, as shown in Figure 3.A-5, is located along the southern border of Westchester County and includes a large portion of the City of Mount Vernon. Parkways, such as the Hutchinson River Parkway and the Bronx River Parkway, as well as the Cross County Parkway, enclose the study area. Land uses consist of a mix of both high- and medium-density residential uses, several small public parks, and large industrial areas. The area also includes the Bronx River and portions of the Hutchinson River, which are within County parklands and have been designated as Critical Environmental Areas (CEA) by Westchester County.

Representative Area 3

Representative Area 3, as shown in Figure 3.A-6, is located within the City of Rye and is bounded by the municipal border to the west and east, Long Island Sound to the south, and the Boston Post Road and Forest Avenue to the north. This area was chosen to represent coastal land uses and environments along Long Island Sound, also found in other municipalities including Mamaroneck, Larchmont, and New Rochelle. It includes tidal wetlands, and beach and brackish impoundments, and encompasses the unique parkland use at Playland Amusement Park, a park that attracts many visitors during the day and night. In addition, this area incorporates medium- and low- density residential neighbor-hoods.

Representative Area 4

Representative Area 4, as shown in Figure 3.A-7, is located along the eastern border of Westchester County between I-684 and the Connecticut border, and extends south to I-287. The study area includes the Westchester County Airport, a large transportation use within the County located just east of Rye Lake, and Blind Brook with its associated freshwater, state-regulated wetlands.

Representative Area 5

Representative Area 5, as shown in Figure 3.A-8, includes the central portion of the Village of Tarrytown, including its waterfront industrial and recreational uses north of I-287, and southern Sleepy Hollow, including inland Tarrytown Lakes and a portion of the Rockefeller property. The area includes a conglomeration of recreational uses associated with the Hudson River (marina, boating, fishing) as well as institutional/education uses (Marymount College and other private and/or public institutions) located within a moderately dense pattern of residential and commercial development.

Representative Area 6

Representative Area 6, as shown in Figure 3.A-9, includes the entire City of Peekskill located along the Hudson River in the northwestern portion of Westchester County. The city consists of a mixed commercial and residential downtown area, where a majority of the uses include small private shops with second floor multifamily residences. Other uses, outside the downtown area, consist primarily of medium- to low-density residences, scattered public parks (including the Blue Mountain

November 2001 3.A-22 CHAPTER 3.A: FRAMEWORK OF THE ANALYSIS

Reservation), and some industrial uses along the waterfront. Designated Critical Environmental Areas named within this study area include Blue Mountain Park for its open space and habitat, the areas along the Hudson River, and Peekskill Hollow Brook, whose watershed provides drinking water for the entire City of Peekskill.

Representative Area 7

Representative Area 7, as shown in Figure 3.A-10, is characterized by variable topography and low-density development descending to the valley of the New Croton Reservoir. The area is bounded by the Taconic State Parkway to the west, the Yorktown municipal boundary to the south, and by local and state roads to the east and north. In addition, the North County multi-use trailway runs north and south through the area, as do both the Croton and Catskill Aqueducts. This area includes very low-density, wooded portions of north central Westchester, with a high ratio of open spaces to developed area in close proximity to the Croton Watershed System.

Representative Area 8

Representative Area 8, as shown in Figure 3.A-11, encompasses Ward Pound Ridge Reservation County Park and adjacent lands within the Pound Ridge, Lewisboro, and Bedford area. Aside from the passive forested park uses, this study area contains very low-density residential development, horse farms, open fields, and other undeveloped forested lands. The area is bounded by Route 172 and Bedford Village to the south, Hook Road (Route 137) to the west, Route 124 east of Ward Pound Ridge Park, and Route 35 to the North. Agricultural uses, including tree and horse farms (Rosedale Tree Nusery and JT Farm), and incidental commercial uses (primarily country store and automotive), are also scattered throughout the study area. The 3,867-acre Ward Pound Ridge Reserve composing the majority of this representative area has been designated a Critical Environmental Area within Westchester County because of its unique open space qualities and its biodiversity characteristics.

Bedford has mapped important groundwater aquifers as “aquifer protection zones” and has given them a Critical Environmental Area designation. A portion of the town’s aquifer protection zone has been included within the southern portion of this representative area to consider potential effects to important local or municipal groundwater drinking sources.

UTILIZATION OF INFORMATION FROM ENVIRONMENT TYPES AND REPRESENTATIVE AREAS

The selection of representative areas that cover a variety of environment types allows for the identification of potential exposure scenarios to the public and environment from the proposed Comprehensive Plan, which are described in the next section.

E. EXPOSURE SCENARIOS

The GEIS addresses the potential effects of long-term larviciding (use of insecticides to eradicate immature mosquitoes [larvae], or to inhibit larvae from developing into adult mosquitoes) and adulticiding (use of insecticide used to control adult mosquitoes). As discussed above, for larvicides, the pathways of exposures to humans and the environment would be limited when compared to adulticides. Larvicides would largely be applied to catch-basins or areas subject to flooding. Runoff from these sources would be the primary exposure to the environment from these applications. For adulticides, the potential exposure to the environment is much more complex to address.

An exposure scenario describes the way people or biota can potentially be exposed to adulticides as a result of spraying. Exposure scenarios are defined by the potential “populations” (public health) and

3.A-23 November 2001 COMPREHENSIVE MOSQUITO-BORNE DISEASE SURVEILLANCE AND CONTROL PLAN DGEIS

“receptors” (natural resources) that may be exposed, and the “pathways” by which they may be exposed. Exposure pathways are the routes by which a population or receptor may come in contact with an adulticide and depend on how the adulticide is applied (e.g., ground or aerial spraying), when it is applied (e.g., sunset, middle of night, before sunrise), and what medium (e.g., water, air, soil) may be affected. As part of the public health and natural resources technical analyses, the potential risk resulting from exposure to adulticides in airborne and surface concentrations were addressed. The various populations, receptors, and exposure pathways included in the analyses for public health and natural resources are outlined below.

GENERAL PATHWAYS/SCENARIOS

The various human populations that can potentially be exposed to adulticiding activities are identified below. To account for the variability in human populations (i.e., differences in age, or levels of activity) resulting in the potential variability in exposures to the adulticides, the identified human populations were further broken down into specific age ranges and population subgroups. The following human populations and age groups address these issues:

Public Health

Residents:

􀂃 Younger Child (0 to 6 years)

􀂃 Older Child, Adolescent and Adult (7 years and older)

Workers:

􀂃 Pesticide Applicators

􀂃 Commercial/Industrial

􀂃 Outdoor Public Worker

Sensitive Groups:

􀂃 Hospitalized/In Nursing Homes

􀂃 Homeless

􀂃 Suffering from Asthma, Multiple Chemical Sensitivity, Autism and Learning Disabilities

School Populations:

􀂃 Older Child (7 to 12 years)

􀂃 Adolescent (13 to 18 years)

􀂃 Staff and Teachers (older than 18 years)

Park Visitors/Gardeners:

􀂃 Young Child (0 to 6 years)

􀂃 Older child (7 to 12 years)

􀂃 Adolescent (13 to 18 years)

􀂃 Adult (older than 18 years)

􀂃 Community Gardener (older than 18 years)

November 2001 3.A-24 CHAPTER 3.A: FRAMEWORK OF THE ANALYSIS

Exposures to developing fetuses, pregnant women, the elderly and those with chronic illnesses are also accounted for within the populations listed above, and are addressed in the analyses.

Natural Resources

The various types of wildlife that can be potentially exposed to adulticiding activities are identified below. In the GEIS, these species are called receptors. As part of the preparation of the GEIS, sensitive habitats within each representative area (salt marshes, wetlands, public and private ponds, breeding and nursery areas), sensitive species (fish and aquatic invertebrates, birds, raccoons, reptiles, amphibians, non-target insects (e.g., bees and butterflies), and threatened or endangered species that may be affected by the Proposed Action based on the description of existing conditions, were identified. This information was developed through review of existing information. Threatened or endangered species information was requested from the New York Natural Heritage Program. The identification of sensitive non-target insects was based on existing information describing the insect communities in the representative areas, and life history information on the species or insect groups of concern.

Terrestrial (Land) Receptors

􀂃 Mammals

􀂃 Birds

􀂃 Insects

􀂃 Reptiles

􀂃 Amphibians

􀂃 Sensitive Plants

Aquatic Receptors

􀂃 Fish

􀂃 Reptiles

􀂃 Crustaceans

􀂃 Aquatic Insect Larvae

􀂃 Mollusks

􀂃 Algae

􀂃 Amphibians

Exposure Pathways

If adulticides are used to control adult mosquitoes, people may be exposed to these adulticides in a variety of ways. Potential risks to public health may include exposure via inhalation, dermal contact, and ingestion. These could occur from direct exposure following adulticide application, and indirect exposure to adulticides in soil, food, or water. During spraying, adulticides in the air could be inhaled; they could also settle and leave a residue on people’s skin and clothing. Such residues also may settle on non-targeted outdoor surfaces (such as lawns, gardens, and swimming areas) and on surfaces within homes, which airborne insecticides could enter through open windows or ventilation systems. Therefore, the “exposure pathways” through which human exposure might occur include not only inhalation of airborne adulticides and skin contact with adulticide residue during spraying, but also accidental ingestion (eating) of adulticide residues because of hand-to-mouth behaviors, ingestion of

3.A-25 November 2001 COMPREHENSIVE MOSQUITO-BORNE DISEASE SURVEILLANCE AND CONTROL PLAN DGEIS

contaminated produce and drinking water, and exposure due to participation in outdoor aquatic activities.

General Exposure Scenarios Related to Public Health

During spraying application, adulticide formulations would be dispersed in air, and may settle and leave a residue directly on an individual’s skin, due to dispersion and spray drift. Adulticide residues may also settle on non-targeted outdoor surfaces (such as lawns, gardens and swimming areas) and surfaces within homes (through open windows or ventilation systems). There is also the potential for insecticides to enter drinking water supply systems. For the above populations, at least one of the following scenarios for each pathway was considered in the public health analysis.

Inhalation

Listed below and illustrated in Figure 3.A-12 are the various exposure scenarios related to inhalation of adulticides through direct and indirect exposure:

􀂃 Spray drift while spraying

􀂃 Re-suspended outdoor soil and/or dust

􀂃 Re-suspended indoor dust

􀂃 Water vaporized from domestic supplies while showering or bathing if water is contam-inated

Dermal (Skin) Contact

Listed below and illustrated in Figure 3.A-13 are the various exposure scenarios related to dermal contact through direct and indirect exposure:

􀂃 Drift while spraying

􀂃 Contaminated soil

􀂃 Swimming/wading

􀂃 Showering/bathing

􀂃 Via contaminated surfaces

Ingestion

Listed below and illustrated in Figure 3.A-14 are the various exposure scenarios related to ingestion through direct and indirect exposure:

􀂃 Incidental, from deposition on skin/hands while spraying

􀂃 Incidental, via dermal transfer from contaminated surfaces to hands

􀂃 Contaminated soil

􀂃 Incidental, from water while swimming/wading

􀂃 Drinking water

􀂃 Fruits and vegetables

􀂃 Fish and shellfish

A more complete description of the exposure parameters (e.g., intake rates, body weights, exposure duration, exposure frequency) and the methodology used to quantify such exposures are included in Chapter 3.C, “Public Health,” and the supporting appendices to Chapter 3.C.

November 2001 3.A-26 CHAPTER 3.A: FRAMEWORK OF THE ANALYSIS

Determination of Potential Adverse Impacts

A weight of evidence approach that incorporated the results of the literature research (including information from other empirical studies) and conclusions from the public health risk assessment computations, was compared to the potential public health impacts under the future No Action Scenario to assess the potential adverse impacts of the Comprehensive Plan on the County’s public health. The potential for determining potential significant adverse impacts on public health was determined by following the guidance provided in Title 6 of the New York Code of Rules and Regulations, State Environmental Quality Review, Part 617.7, Determining Significance (6NYCRR Part 617.7). The significance of a likely consequence (i.e., whether it is material, substantial, large or important) of the predicted adverse impacts from the Comprehensive Plan considered the setting, probability of occurrence, duration, irreversibility, geographic scope, magnitude, and the number of people affected.

General Exposure Scenarios Related to Natural Resources

Exposure to terrestrial and aquatic receptors can occur through direct exposure from the primary source (drift and deposition of the adulticide spray) or indirect exposure through secondary sources. Exposure from secondary sources can occur via the terrestrial-based food chain, the aquatic-based food chain, or from runoff from precipitation events that follow an application.

Direct Source

The primary source of exposure to terrestrial systems is via direct exposure to the adulticide. Mammals, birds, insects and other non-target organisms may experience direct exposure through inhalation of the spray drift or through direct bodily contact with the adulticide from deposition, which may then be ingested during grooming or preening. The drift from application can also transport adulticides to ponds, streams, and wetlands, where aquatic organisms may potentially be exposed through direct contact with the water. Figure 3.A-15 illustrates the various exposure scenarios related to direct sources of exposure of adulticides to terrestrial and aquatic receptors.

Secondary Sources

Secondary sources of adulticide exposure include those that occur through the terrestrial and aquatic-based food chains. For example, spray that falls on grasses, seeds and insects may be consumed by birds and mammals. Fish-eating birds and mammals are also potentially exposed through the aquatic-based food chain from fish that have been exposed through direct exposure to the spray, or through runoff from precipitation events (i.e., rainfall that washes away deposited adulticides to waterbodies) that may follow an adulticide application. The various scenarios related to exposure through secondary sources are illustrated in Figure 3.A-16.

Determination of Potential Adverse Impacts

A weight of evidence approach that incorporates the results of the field and literature research (including information from other empirical studies) and conclusions from the natural resources risk assessment computations, was employed to assess the potential adverse impacts of the Compre-hensive Plan on the County’s natural resources. The potential for the occurrence of significant adverse impacts on natural resources was determined by following the guidance provided in Title 6 of the New York Code of Rules and Regulations, State Environmental Quality Review, Part 617.7, Determining Significance (6NYCRR Part 617.7). The significance of a likely consequence (i.e., whether it is material, substantial, large, or important) of the predicted adverse impacts from the

3.A-27 November 2001 COMPREHENSIVE MOSQUITO-BORNE DISEASE SURVEILLANCE AND CONTROL PLAN DGEIS

Comprehensive Plan considered the setting, probability of occurrence, duration, irreversibility, geographic scope, magnitude, and the number of people affected.

EXPOSURE SCENARIOS WITHIN THE REPRESENTATIVE AREAS

The eight selected representative areas include all environment types, some likely mosquito breeding grounds, and locations of vulnerable populations and species (See Figure 3.A-3). These areas are intended to be representative of the many types of neighborhoods and uses that occur throughout Westchester County, bearing in mind that there are many other neighborhoods in Westchester County with similar characteristics to those included as the representative study areas in this GEIS. The potential areas for insecticide applications, vulnerable human and natural resource populations and environment types, and exposure scenarios within these representative areas, are discussed below. Nearly all of the areas included residential and commercial uses. In addition, all of the areas could have outdoor workers, who could be exposed either directly or indirectly from the application of adulticides. Exposure scenarios that are particular to a respective representative area are noted in the discussion below. Land use information and mapping for each representative area are presented in Chapter 3.B, “Land Use, Community Facilities, Public Policy, and Zoning.”

A description of the representative areas is provided earlier in this chapter. Detailed discussions of the uses within these representative areas are included in Chapter 3.B “Land Use, Community Facilities, Public Policy, and Zoning,” and documentation of natural resources in the representative areas are included in Chapter 3.D, “Natural Resources.” Therefore, these descriptions are not repeated in the discussion below, but may be found in the referenced chapters. In the discussion below, a summary of the pertinent public and environmental exposure pathways are provided.

Representative Area 1

Representative Area 1, as presented earlier in Figure 3.A-4, is located in the southwestern portion of the City of Yonkers adjacent to the Hudson River and is bounded by the Hudson River to the west, the municipal boundary to the south, the eastern edge of Tibbetts Brook Park to the east, and Ashburton Ave to the north.

Exposure Scenarios Particular to Public Health in the Representative Area:

􀂃 High-Density Residential

􀂃 Waterfront Recreation

�� Parks

􀂃 Schools

􀂃 Hospitals

Exposure Scenarios Particular to Natural Resources in the Representative Area:

􀂃 Hudson River

􀂃 Saw Mill River

􀂃 Tidal Wetlands

􀂃 Freshwater Wetland

Representative Area 2

Representative Area 2, as presented earlier in Figure 3.A-5 is located along the southern border of Westchester County and includes a large portion of the City of Mount Vernon. Parkways, such as the

November 2001 3.A-28 CHAPTER 3.A: FRAMEWORK OF THE ANALYSIS

Hutchinson River Parkway and the Bronx River Parkway, as well as the Cross County Parkway, enclose the study area.

Exposure Scenarios Particular to Public Health in the Representative Area:

􀂃 High-Density Residential

􀂃 Parks

􀂃 Schools

􀂃 Hospitals

􀂃 Elder Care Centers

Exposure Scenarios Particular to Natural Resources in the Representative Area:

􀂃 Hutchinson River

􀂃 Bronx River

Representative Area 3

Representative Area 3, as presented earlier in Figure 3.A-6, is located within the City of Rye and is bounded by the municipal border to the west and east, Long Island Sound to the south, and the Boston Post Road and Forest Avenue to the north.

Exposure Scenarios Particular to Public Health in the Representative Area:

􀂃 Low- to Medium-Density Residential

􀂃 Parks

􀂃 Beach/Marinas/Waterfront Recreation

􀂃 Childcare/Day camps

􀂃 Schools

Exposure Scenarios Particular to Natural Resources in the Representative Area:

􀂃 Marshlands Conservancy: Tidal Saltwater Marsh

􀂃 Edith G. Read Wildlife Sanctuary: Significant Bird Habitat

􀂃 Long Island Sound: Marine Environments

􀂃 Upland Forest

􀂃 Open Field

Representative Area 4

Representative Area 4, as presented earlier in Figure 3.A-7, is located along the eastern border of Westchester County between I-684 and the Connecticut border, extending south to I-287.

Exposure Scenarios Particular to Public Health in the Representative Area:

􀂃 Low-Density Residential

􀂃 Parks

􀂃 Golf Courses

􀂃 Childcare/Day Camps

􀂃 New York City Watershed Lands/Resevoirs

3.A-29 November 2001 COMPREHENSIVE MOSQUITO-BORNE DISEASE SURVEILLANCE AND CONTROL PLAN DGEIS

􀂃 Schools

􀂃 College Campuses

􀂃 Hospitals

􀂃 Airport Operations

Exposure Scenarios Particular to Natural Resources in the Representative Area:

􀂃 Blind Brook

􀂃 Freshwater Wetlands

􀂃 Upland Forest

􀂃 Open Field

Representative Area 5

Representative Area 5, as presented earlier in Figure 3.A-8, includes the central portion of the Village of Tarrytown, including its waterfront industrial and recreational uses north of I-287, and southern Sleepy Hollow, including inland Tarrytown Lakes and a portion of the Rockefeller property.

Exposure Scenarios Particular to Public Health in the Representative Area:

􀂃 Medium- to High-Density Residential

􀂃 Parks

􀂃 Marinas/Waterfront Recreation

􀂃 Municipal Watershed Lands/Resevoir

􀂃 Schools

􀂃 College Campuses

􀂃 Hospitals

Exposure Scenarios Particular to Natural Resources in the Representative Area:

􀂃 Hudson River

􀂃 Freshwater Wetlands

Representative Area 6

Representative Area 6, as presented earlier in Figure 3.A-9, includes the entire City of Peekskill located along the Hudson River in the northwestern portion of Westchester County.

Exposure Scenarios Particular to Public Health in the Representative Area:

􀂃 Low- to High-Density Residential

􀂃 Parks

􀂃 Marinas/Waterfront Recreation

􀂃 Municipal Watershed Lands/Resevoirs

􀂃 Schools

􀂃 Elder Care

November 2001 3.A-30 CHAPTER 3.A: FRAMEWORK OF THE ANALYSIS

Exposure Scenarios Particular to Natural Resources in the Representative Area:

􀂃 Upland Forest

􀂃 Open Fields

􀂃 Hudson River

􀂃 Peekskill Hollow Brook

􀂃 McGregory Brook

􀂃 Annsville Creek

􀂃 Freshwater Wetlands

Representative Area 7

Representative Area 7, as presented earlier in Figure 3.A-10, is bounded by the Taconic State Parkway to the west, the Yorktown municipal boundary to the south, and by local and state roads to the east and north.

Exposure Scenarios Particular to Public Health in the Representative Area:

􀂃 Low-Density Residential

􀂃 Parks

􀂃 Agriculture

􀂃 New Croton Reservoir: New York City Watershed Lands/Resevoirs

􀂃 Municipal and Private Groundwater Resources

Exposure Scenarios Particular to Natural Resources in the Representative Area:

􀂃 Kitchawan Preserve

􀂃 Turkey Mountain Park

􀂃 Upland Forest

􀂃 Open Field

􀂃 Surface Waters

􀂃 Freshwater Wetlands

Representative Area 8

Representative Area 8, as presented earlier in Figure 3.A-11, encompasses Ward Pound Ridge Reservation County Park and adjacent lands within Pound Ridge, Lewisboro, and Bedford. The area is bounded by Route 172 and Bedford Village to the south, Hook Road (Route 137) to the west, Route 124 east of Ward Pound Ridge Park, and Route 35 to the North.

Exposure Scenarios Particular to Public Health in the Representative Area:

􀂃 Low-Density Residential

􀂃 Parks

􀂃 Agriculture

􀂃 Cross River Reservoir: New York City Watershed Lands/Resevoirs

􀂃 Municipal and Private Groundwater Resources

3.A-31 November 2001 COMPREHENSIVE MOSQUITO-BORNE DISEASE SURVEILLANCE AND CONTROL PLAN DGEIS

Exposure Scenarios Particular to Natural Resources in the Representative Area:

􀂃 Ward Pound Ridge Reserve: County Biodiversity Reserve

􀂃 Cross River and Tributaries

􀂃 Freshwater Wetlands

􀂃 Upland Forest

􀂃 Open Field

WORKER EXPOSURE

There would also be exposure pathways for the trained applicators who apply the insecticides. These would be addressed by conformance with the Occupational Safety and Hazard Act (OSHA) regulations and, if County employees were utilized as applicators, New York State Public Employees Safety and Health (PESH) regulations and standards.

F. REGIONAL ISSUES

The representative areas address the potential impacts associated with adulticiding applications on the various types of uses, activities, and pathways throughout the County. However, there is also the need to identify the potential regional impact on the water supply sources that serve County residents, workers and visitors, plus sources used to supply the public outside the County (e.g., New York City water supply sources located within the County). Potential discharges related to regional storm water runoff into the surrounding waterbodies, such as the Hudson River and Long Island Sound, from the application of pesticides from the Comprehensive Plan is also addressed in the GEIS.

WATER SUPPLY

The term “water supply” refers to the physical systems that support Westchester County’s population and downstate consumers (i.e., New York City residents) with water. Much of the County’s water supply is provided by two upstate watersheds: the New York City Catskill and Delaware water supply systems. These two systems collect rainwater via streams and pipes from large land coverage areas, and divert such rainwater to upstate reservoirs. A large portion of northern Westchester also functions as a drainage area for the Croton/Kensico watershed. The Croton/Kensico systems include reservoirs that store water supplies for use within the County and downstate (i.e., New York City). There is also a large area of the County that is supplied with water from groundwater sources. At least one representative area receives its water supply from these various sources. Chapter 3.E, “Water Supply,” and its supporting appendix provide the details on the examination of the potential impacts on the water supply for County consumers from the proposed Comprehensive Plan. This effort included estimating the maximum potential drift and infiltration into the ground- and surface-water supplies in Westchester County from the application of adulticides. The results of these initial worst-case estimates were used as part of the input to the public health risk assessment for the GEIS.

REGIONAL STORMWATER RUNOFF

An additional regional concern would be the potential discharge of insecticides into the aquatic environment if rain occurs after an application, and the runoff is discharged into the waterways surrounding the County. A substantial portion of the stormwater runoff in the northern part of the county drains into the surrounding waterbodies, including Long Island Sound, the Hudson River, and the Bronx River. Therefore, in the analysis of potential regional impacts from stormwater runoff, estimates of the water discharges to coastal inlet areas, such as the Blind Brook discharge to Milton

November 2001 3.A-32 CHAPTER 3.A: FRAMEWORK OF THE ANALYSIS

Harbor were developed. Projections of the potential worst-case loading of adulticide to such estuarine systeme were determined based on the label application limits, the approximate drainage coverage areas and the estimated percent impermeability for the various land use coverages in the basins, in order to determine the maximum expected total adulticide runoff to such waterbodies (See Chapter 3.D, “Natural Resources”. These projections of worst-case stormwater runoff, , which are reported in Chapter 3.F, “Water Quality”, were then employed to estimate the regional impact on these types of waterbodies, and other larger surrounding waterbodies, such as the Hudson River and Long Island Sound.

G. APPLICATION OF METHODOLOGY

The methodologies described above provide an overview of the analytical procedures, which were followed to assess the potential environmental impacts, associated with the control components of the Comprehensive Plan. The methodologies described in this chapter, are intended to project reasonably conservative assessments of the potential adverse environmental impacts that may result from the adoption and implementation of the Comprehensive Plan. Where information is not known or where there are uncertainties associated either with the constituents of the insecticide products considered for use under the Comprehensive Plan or their potential impacts on the environment, those issues are also noted throughout the GEIS.

Based on the methodologies described above, potential adverse environmental impacts by subject area are presented in the next chapters. The first chapter following this one is a discussion of land use and a more detailed description of the selected representative areas, which is intended to help the reader to better understand the diversity of environments, which may be found within the County. The combination of the information from Chapter 3.A, “Framework of the Analysis” with the land use data from Chapter 3.B, “Land Use, Community Facilities, Public Policy and Zoning” helps assist the evaluation of potential public health impacts in Chapter 3.C, “Public Health”, and natural resource impacts in Chapter 3.D, “Natural Resources”. The additional chapters of the GEIS provide the results of the assessments of potential impacts from the proposed Comprehensive Plan for other environmental study areas, such as Chapter 3.E, “Water Supply” and Chapter 3.S, “Alternatives”. In addition, there are some summary chapters near the end, such as Chapter 3.P, “Unavoidable Adverse Impacts”, which summarize the findings from earlier chapters.

H. REFERENCES

Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. Epidemic/Epizootic West Nile Virus in the United States: Guidelines for Surveillance, Prevention, and Control. 1999.

Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. Epidemic/Epizootic West Nile Virus in the United States: Revised Guidelines for Surveillance, Prevention, and Control. 2001.

Reeves, William C. 1990. “Epidemiology and “Control of Mosquito-Borne Aroboviruses in California, 1943-1987.” California Mosquito and Vector Control Association, Inc., Sacramento, California. 􀃘

3.A-33 November 2001 COMPREHENSIVE MOSQUITO-BORNE DISEASE SURVEILLANCE AND CONTROL PLAN DGEIS

FRAMEWORK OF THE ANALYSIS...........................................................................................................3.A-1

A. Introduction...................................................................................................................................3.A-1

Primary Issues........................................................................................................................................3.A-1

Analysis Approach................................................................................................................................3.A-1

Larviciding and Adulticiding..............................................................................................................3.A-1

Defining the Future Alternatives........................................................................................................3.A-2

Information in this Chapter.................................................................................................................3.A-2

B. Examination of Data/Information on Insecticides..........................................................................3.A-4

Larvicide Characteristics and Impact Analysis.......................................................................................3.A-5

Adulticides.............................................................................................................................................3.A-6

Product Classification and Ingredients...................................................................................................3.A-8

Active Ingredients...............................................................................................................................3.A-8

Synergist............................................................................................................................................3.A-8

Inert or Other Ingredients...................................................................................................................3.A-9

Additional Carriers /Additives............................................................................................................3.A-9

NewYork State Registered Adulticide Products to be Analyzed............................................................3.A-9

Chemical Composition.......................................................................................................................3.A-9

Application Techniques and Recommended Application Amounts.................................................3.A-10

Physical and Chemical Properties.....................................................................................................3.A-11

Other Label Limitations....................................................................................................................3.A-11

C. Drift/Deposition Modeling of AdulticideS...................................................................................3.A-12

Selection of Models..............................................................................................................................3.A-13

Modeling Approach..............................................................................................................................3.A-13

Modeling Results.................................................................................................................................3.A-14

Active Ingredients in Adulticides.....................................................................................................3.A-14

Inerts in Adulticides..........................................................................................................................3.A-15

Potential Repeat Applications Per Year................................................................................................3.A-15

D. Environment Types and Representative Areas.............................................................................3.A-17

Environment Types...............................................................................................................................3.A-17

Residential Environment..................................................................................................................3.A-17

Parks and Publicly Accessible Open Spaces.....................................................................................3.A-19

Drinking Water Supply.....................................................................................................................3.A-19

Natural Resources.............................................................................................................................3.A-19

Community Facilities and Institutional Uses....................................................................................3.A-20

Commercial Uses..............................................................................................................................3.A-20

Industrial Uses.................................................................................................................................3.A-21

Representative Areas............................................................................................................................3.A-21

Representative Area 1.......................................................................................................................3.A-22

Representative Area 2.......................................................................................................................3.A-22

Representative Area 3.......................................................................................................................3.A-22

Representative Area 4.......................................................................................................................3.A-22

Representative Area 5.......................................................................................................................3.A-22

Representative Area 6.......................................................................................................................3.A-22

Representative Area 7.......................................................................................................................3.A-23

Representative Area 8.......................................................................................................................3.A-23

Utilization of Information from Environment Types and Representative Areas..................................3.A-23

E. Exposure Scenarios.......................................................................................................................3.A-23

General Pathways/Scenarios.................................................................................................................3.A-24

Public Health...................................................................................................................................3.A-24

Natural Resources.............................................................................................................................3.A-25

Exposure Pathways...........................................................................................................................3.A-25

Exposure Scenarios within the Representative Areas...........................................................................3.A-28

Representative Area 1.......................................................................................................................3.A-28

Representative Area 2.......................................................................................................................3.A-28

Representative Area 3.......................................................................................................................3.A-29

November 2001 3.A-34 CHAPTER 3.A: FRAMEWORK OF THE ANALYSIS

Representative Area 4.......................................................................................................................3.A-29

Representative Area 5.......................................................................................................................3.A-30

Representative Area 6.......................................................................................................................3.A-30

Representative Area 7.......................................................................................................................3.A-31

Representative Area 8.......................................................................................................................3.A-31

Worker Exposure.................................................................................................................................3.A-32

F. Regional Issues.............................................................................................................................3.A-32

Water Supply.......................................................................................................................................3.A-32

Regional Stormwater Runoff................................................................................................................3.A-32

G. Application of Methodology.........................................................................................................3.A-33

H. References...................................................................................................................................3.A-33

Table 3.A-1 Chemical Composition of Adulticides.....................................................................................3.A-10

Table 3.A-2 Adulticide Active Ingredient Application Amounts.................................................................3.A-11

Table 3.A-3 Active Ingredient Concentration Modeling Results.................................................................3.A-14

Table 3.A-4 Active Ingredient Deposition Level Modeling Results............................................................3.A-15

Table 3.A-5 Representative Areas and Environment Types.........................................................................3.A-18