Led by the Massachusetts Executive Office of Energy and Environmental Affairs (EEA), in partnership with Cornell University, U.S. Geological Survey and Tufts University, the Massachusetts Climate and Hydrologic Risk Project (Phase 1) has developed new climate change projections for the Commonwealth. These new temperature and precipitation projections are downscaled for Massachusetts at the HUC8 watershed scale using Global Climate Models (GCMs) and a Stochastic Weather Generator (SWG) developed by Cornell University.

Stochastic weather generators provide a computationally efficient and complementary alternative to direct use of GCMs for investigating water system performance under climate stress. These models are configured based on existing meteorological records (i.e., historical weather) and are then used to generate large ensembles of simulated daily weather records that are similar to but not bound by variability in past observations. Once fit to historical data, model parameters can be systematically altered to produce new traces of weather that exhibit a wide range of change in their distributional characteristics, including the intensity and frequency of average and extreme precipitation, heatwaves, and cold spells.

The Phase 1 SWG was developed, calibrated, and validated across all HUC8 watersheds that intersect with the state of Massachusetts. A set of climate change scenarios for those watersheds were generated that only reflect mechanisms of thermodynamic climate change deemed to be most credible. These thermodynamic climate changes are based on the range of temperature projections produced by a set of downscaled GCMs for the region. The temperature and precipitation projections presented in this dashboard reflect a warming scenario linked to the Representation Concentration Pathway (RCP) 8.5, a comparatively high greenhouse gas emissions scenario.

The statistics presented in this series of map layers are expressed as either a percent change or absolute change (see list of layers with units and definitions below). These changes are referenced to baseline values that are calculated based on the median value across the 50 model ensemble members associated with the 0°C temperature change scenario derived from observational data (1950-2013) from Livneh et al. (2015). The temperature projections derived from the downscaled GCMs for the region, which are used to drive the SGW, are averaged across 30 years and centered on a target decade (i.e., 2030, 2050, 2070). Projections for 2090 are averaged across 20 years.Definitions of climate projection metrics (with units of change):Total Precipitation (% change): The average total precipitation within a calendar year. Maximum Precipitation (% change): The maximum daily precipitation in the entire record. Precipitation Depth – 90th Percentile Storm (% change): The 90th percentile of non-zero precipitation. Precipitation Depth –99th Percentile Storm (% change): The 99th percentile of non-zero precipitation. Consecutive Wet Days (# days): The average number of days that exist within a run of 2 or more wet days. Consecutive Dry Days (# days): The average number of days that exist within a model run of 2 or more dry days. Days above 1 inch (# days): The number of days with precipitation greater than 1 inch. Days above 2 inches (# days): The number of days with precipitation greater than 2 inches.Days above 4 inches (# days): The number of days with precipitation greater than 4 inches.Maximum Temperature (°F): The maximum daily average temperature value in the entire recordAverage Temperature (°F): Daily average temperature.Days below 0 °F (# days): The number of days with temperature below 0 °F.Days below 32 °F (# days): The number of days with temperature below 32 °F.Maximum Duration of Coldwaves (# days): Longest duration of coldwaves in the record, where coldwaves are defined as ten or more consecutive days below 20 °F.Average Duration of Coldwaves (# days): Average duration of coldwaves in the record, where coldwaves are defined as ten or more consecutive days below 20 °F.Number of Coldwave Events (# events): Number of instances with ten or more consecutive days with temperature below 20 °F.Number of Coldstress Events (# events): Number of instances when a 3-day moving average of temperature is less than 32 °F. Days above 100 °F (# days): The number of days with temperature above 100 °F.Days above 95 °F (# days): The number of days with temperature above 95 °F.Days above 90 °F (# days): The number of days with temperature above 90 °F.Maximum Duration of Heatwaves (# days): Longest duration of heatwaves in the record, where heatwaves are defined as three or more consecutive days over 90 °F.Average Duration of Heatwaves (# days): Average duration of heatwaves in the record, where heatwaves are defined as three or more consecutive days over 90 °F.Number of Heatwave Events (# events): Number of instances with three or more consecutive days with temperature over 90 °F.Number of Heatstress Events (# events): Number of instances when a 3-day moving average of temperature is above 86 °F.Cooling Degree Days (# degree-day): Cooling degree days assume that when the outside temperature is below 65°F, we don't need cooling (air-conditioning) to be comfortable. Cooling degree-days are the difference between the daily temperature mean and 65°F. For example, if the temperature mean is 85°F, we subtract 65 from the mean and the result is 20 cooling degree-days for that day. (Definition adapted from National Weather Service).Heating Degree Days (# degree-day): Heating degree-days assume that when the outside temperature is above 65°F, we don't need heating to be comfortable. Heating degree days are the difference between the daily temperature mean and 65°F. For example, if the mean temperature mean is 25°F, we subtract the mean from 65 and the result is 40 heating degree-days for that day. (Definition adapted from National Weather Service).Growing Degree Days (# degree-day): A growing degree day (GDD) is an index used to express crop maturity. The index is computed by subtracting a base temperature of 50°F from the average of the maximum and minimum temperatures for the day. Minimum temperatures less than 50°F are set to 50, and maximum temperatures greater than 86°F are set to 86. These substitutions indicate that no appreciable growth is detected with temperatures lower than 50° or greater than 86°. (Adapted from National Weather Service).Please see additional information related to this project and dataset in the Climate Change Projection Dashboard on the Resilient MA Maps and Data Center webpage.

Stormwater runoff pollution is a serious problem in municipalities. The goal of this project was to promote communication between the Massachusetts Department of Environmental Protection and the Central Massachusetts Regional Stormwater Coalition by facilitating increased understanding of the MS4 permit, assessing the current state of municipality MS4 compliance and assess the feasibility of the implementation of the Zoho database.

Comprehensive dataset containing 19 verified Stage businesses in Massachusetts, United States with complete contact information, ratings, reviews, and location data.

Stormwater runoff is the leading cause of water pollution in the United States. It is precipitation that flows over impervious surfaces, collects pollutants, and discharges untreated into a surface water body. The goal of this project was to improve stormwater management programs in municipalities within Central Massachusetts (MA). We worked with the Massachusetts Department of Environmental Protection to help the towns of Auburn, Holden, and Upton prepare for the upcoming MA MS4 permit. With assistance from the Central Massachusetts Regional Stormwater Coalition, we developed the Catchment Area Priority Ranking System database and created several documents to aid municipalities in understanding the requirements of both the 2003 MA MS4 general and 2013 New Hampshire MS4 draft permit.

The Massachusetts Drought Management Plan (DMP, 2023) uses data from select lake and impoundment systems as an index for drought in six of seven regions in the state. The contents of these lakes and impoundments are reported to Massachusetts Department of Conservation and Recreation (DCR) and classified as one of five levels for drought severity ranging from level 0 (Normal; percentile greater than 30) to level 4 (Emergency; percentile less than 2). Lake and impoundment system data are provided at the end of each month to DCR through multiple agencies as lake levels, volumes, or percent-full (reservoir capacity). USGS reviewed data from 14 of the lake or impoundment systems including 28 waterbodies. Diagrams for each system show the capacity of each waterbody and how water is transported through the systems. This data release provides historical monthly data in volume for each system and historical monthly data in feet for systems that consist of only one waterbody when recorded values were available . From these historical monthly data, the 50th-, 30th-, 20th-, 10th-, and 2nd- percentiles were computed. Stage volume rating data for each waterbody at each system are provided in two formats to convert gage height (feet) to volume (million gallons). The stage volume rating data files are formatted as a text (.txt) table for easy manual reading and the other is a comma-separated value (.csv) column format that is easily loaded into a spreadsheet. Stage volume rating data were provided by the municipalities and agencies that manage the systems or were developed for this study. At one system (Hudson, Gates Pond), no stage volume rating data or bathymetry data were available. A stage volume rating was developed using a python script using maximum depth and a shape file of the pond shoreline. The Python script used to develop the stage volume rating data and the R script used to compute the quantiles are published as a part of this data release. Files for each system include supplied historical volume, computed volume percentiles, stage volume rating(s), and a system diagram. Historical elevation data and computed elevation percentiles are included when applicable.

Aerodyne Research, Inc. and the University of Massachusetts at Amherst will collaborate to develop laser desorption ionization (LDI) mass spectrometric analysis of organic analytes of interest in planetary exploration, based on microchip laser illumination.

The relationship between crime control policies and fundamental parameters of the criminal career, such as career length, participation in offenses, and frequency and seriousness of offenses committed, is examined in this data collection. The investigators coded, recoded, and computerized parts of the raw data from Sheldon and Eleanor Glueck's three-wave, matched sample study of juvenile and adult criminal behavior, extracting the criminal histories of the 500 delinquents (officially defined) from the Glueck study. Data were originally collected by the Gluecks in 1940 through psychiatric interviews with subjects, parent and teacher reports, and official records obtained from police, court, and correctional files. The subjects were subsequently interviewed again between 1949 and 1965 at or near the age of 25, and again at or near the age of 32. The data coded by Laub and Sampson include only information collected from official records. The data address in part (1) what effects probation, incarceration, and parole have on the length of criminal career and frequency of criminal incidents of an offender, (2) how the effects of criminal control policies vary in relation to the length of sentence, type of offense, and age of the offender, (3) which factors in criminal control policy correlate with criminal career termination, (4) how well age of first offense predicts the length of criminal career, and (5) how age of offender relates to type of offense committed. Every incident of arrest up to the age of 32 for each respondent (ranging from 1 to 51 arrests) is recorded in the data file. Variables include the dates of arrest, up to three charges associated with the arrest, court disposition, and starting and ending dates of probation, incarceration, and parole associated with the arrest.

Due to continued coastal population growth and increased threats of erosion, current data on trends and rates of shoreline movement are required to inform shoreline and floodplain management. The Massachusetts Office of Coastal Zone Management launched the Shoreline Change Project in 1989 to identify erosion-prone areas of the coast. In 2001, a 1994 shoreline was added to calculate both long- and short-term shoreline change rates at 40-meter intervals along ocean-facing sections of the Massachusetts coast. The Coastal and Marine Geology Program of the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) in cooperation with the Massachusetts Office of Coastal Zone Management, has compiled reliable historical shoreline data along open-facing sections of the Massachusetts coast under the Massachusetts Shoreline Change Mapping and Analysis Project 2013 Update. Two oceanfront shorelines for Massachusetts (approximately 1,800 km in total length) were (1) delineated using 2008/09 color aerial orthoimagery, and (2) extracted from topographic LIDAR datasets (2007) obtained from NOAA's Ocean Service, Coastal Services Center. The new shorelines were integrated with existing Massachusetts Office of Coastal Zone Management and USGS historical shoreline data in order to compute long- and short-term rates using the latest version of the Digital Shoreline Analysis System (DSAS).

Seagrass beds are critical wetlands components of shallow marine ecosystems along the Massachusetts coastline. Seagrass beds provide food and cover for a great variety of commercially and recreationally important fauna and their prey. The leaf canopy of the seagrass bed calms the water, filters suspended matter and together with extensive roots and rhizomes, stabilizes sediment. Seagrasses are often referred to as "Submerged Aquatic Vegetation" or SAV. This distinguishes them from algae, which are not classified as plants by biologists (rather they are often placed in the kingdom protista), and distinguishes them from the "emergent" saltwater plants found in salt marshes.

In Massachusetts, the dominant SAV is Zostera marina or eelgrass. The other species found in the embayments of the Massachusetts coast is Ruppia maritima, commonly called “widgeon grass,” which is present in areas of less salinity along Cape Cod and Buzzards Bay. Widgeon grass, found in the upper reaches of embayments, has a thread-like morphology that makes it difficult to identify using remotely sensed data. It can only be identified and located by on-site survey.

The Massachusetts Department of Environmental Protection (MassDEP) began a program to map the state's SAV resources in the early 1990s and since 1995 the MassDEP Eelgrass Mapping Project has produced multiple surveys of SAV along the Massachusetts coastline, as listed here:

PhaseProject YearsProject Area11995Entire MA Coast22001Coast-wide MA Coast except Elizabeth Islands (Gosnold) and Mount Hope Bay32006/07Selected embayments, coast-wide including Elizabeth Islands42010-20132010 - South Shore of Cape Cod: Woods Hole to Chatham, selected embayments, Pleasant Bay;2012 - North Shore, Boston Harbor, South Shore to Provincetown;2013 - Buzzards Bay, Elizabeth Islands, Martha's Vineyard and Nantucket52015-20172015 - South Shore of Cape Cod, Pleasant Bay, Nantucket;2016 - North Shore, Boston Harbor, South Shore to Canal;2017 - Buzzards Bay, North Shore of Cape Cod, Elizabeth Islands and Martha's Vineyard62019-20232019 - South Shore of Cape Cod, Pleasant Bay, North Shore of Nantucket2020 - Martha’s Vineyard, Buzzards Bay and Elizabeth Islands 2021 - Cape Cod Bay (Provincetown through Duxbury) 2022 - South Shore, Boston Harbor, North Shore (Marshfield through Rockport)2023 - Cape Ann to the New Hampshire border (Essex through Newburyport)

View full metadata

Also see the map service.

The Water Quality Monitoring Station data layer was compiled by staff within the Massachusetts Department of Environmental Protection (MassDEP), Division of Watershed Management (DWM), Watershed Planning Program (WPP) to fulfill Federal Clean Water Act reporting requirements.The Federal Clean Water Act (CWA) directs states to monitor and report on the condition of their water resources. The Water Quality Monitoring Stations data layer was compiled by MassDEP staff in fulfillment of CWA mandates. The stations data layer represents water quality monitoring locations sampled by WPP staff from 1983 to 2022.Four types of WPP monitoring stations are detailed below. Each station, stored as a single point in the data layer, represents a location that was sampled on one or more occasions during one or more years by WPP staff or their agents:Fish Toxics Stations: 1983-2022 (n=446); locations where whole fish were collected for subsequent tissue analysis of one or more contaminants. Coverage may include MassDEP Office of Research & Standards (ORS) Mercury Project sampling locations if also sampled by WPP.Fish Population Stations: 2005-2011 (n=177); locations where fish were collected, identified, measured, and released and where habitat quality conditions have been recorded. Locations for 2012-2022 sampling will be provided in a future update.Benthic Macroinvertebrate Stations: 1983-2022 (n=1290); locations where samples of benthic macroinvertebrates have been collected for subsequent subsampling and taxonomic identification and where habitat quality conditions have been recorded. (“Macroinvertebrate” is defined to include all aquatic members of the Annelida; all aquatic Mollusca; aquatic macro-Crustacea; aquatic Arachnida; and the aquatic life stages of Insecta—the exception being the Collembola, Hemiptera, and adult Coleoptera other than Elmidae).Water Quality Stations: 1994-2022 (n=3111); locations where water quality monitoring has been conducted, including one or more of the following data types: discrete or continuous in-situ probe measurements (e.g., dissolved oxygen, temperature, pH, specific conductance); laboratory results for water samples (e.g., bacteria, nutrients, algal toxins, metals, organics); or general site observations. Note: for display purposes, stations are differentiated into two major types: Surface Water (e.g., River/Stream, Lake, Estuarine) or Discharge (e.g., Facility Industrial, Facility Municipal Sewage (POTW), Storm Sewer).Stations can overlap if they were monitored for more than one survey type.The water quality monitoring stations should be displayed with the MassDEP DWM WPP Watersheds data layer, which is included in this service. Those delineations are based on MassGIS 'Major Basins' layer but modified by WPP to reflect surface drainage areas used for the Massachusetts Integrated Report: Multi-part List of Waters (IR).Learn more about the WPP water quality monitoring program.See full metadata.Feature service also available.

This dataset includes shorelines from 164 years ranging from 1845 to 2009 within the South Cape Cod coastal region of Massachusetts from Stage Harbor Light in Chatham to Nobska Point in Woods Hole. Shorelines were compiled from T-sheets and air-photos obtained from the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) and the Massachusetts Office of Coastal Zone Management (MA CZM). Historical shoreline positions serve as easily understood features that can be used to describe the movement of beaches through time. These data are used to calculate rates of shoreline change for the MA CZM Shoreline Change Project. Rates of long-term and short-term shoreline change were generated in a GIS using the Digital Shoreline Analysis System (DSAS) version 4.3. DSAS uses a measurement baseline method to calculate rate-of-change statistics. Transects are cast from the reference baseline to intersect each shoreline, establishing measurement points used to calculate shoreline change rates. For publication purposes, the shoreline data for Massachusetts were organized by region in order match the extent of previously published uncertainty files used in shoreline change calculations. Due to continued coastal population growth and increased threats of erosion, current data on trends and rates of shoreline movement are required to inform shoreline and floodplain management. The Massachusetts Office of Coastal Zone Management launched the Shoreline Change Project in 1989 to identify erosion-prone areas of the coast. In 2001, a 1994 shoreline was added to calculate both long- and short-term shoreline change rates at 40-meter intervals along ocean-facing sections of the Massachusetts coast. The Coastal and Marine Geology Program of the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) in cooperation with the Massachusetts Office of Coastal Zone Management, has compiled reliable historical shoreline data along open-facing sections of the Massachusetts coast under the Massachusetts Shoreline Change Mapping and Analysis Project 2013 Update. Two oceanfront shorelines for Massachusetts (approximately 1,800 km) were (1) delineated using 2008/09 color aerial orthoimagery, and (2) extracted from topographic LIDAR datasets (2007) obtained from NOAA's Ocean Service, Coastal Services Center. The new shorelines were integrated with existing Massachusetts Office of Coastal Zone Management (MA CZM) and USGS historical shoreline data in order to compute long- and short-term rates using the latest version of the Digital Shoreline Analysis System (DSAS). .

The mosaic image contained in this file is comprised of multiple true color (RGB) images that were collected by the Coastal Zone Mapping and Imaging Lidar (CZMIL) system along the shoreline of Massachusetts. CZMIL integrates a lidar sensor with topographic and bathymetric capabilities, a Phase One iXU1000RS Digital camera, and a Itres' CASI-1500 hyperspectral imager on a single remote sensing p...

This dataset details No Discharge Zones (NDZ) for Stage Harbor, Chatham, MA. Boaters may not discharge waste into these areas. Boundaries were determined mostly by Federal Register Environmental Documents in coordination with Massachusetts Coastal Zone Management (MA CZM) and EPA Region 1 Office of Ecosystem Protection (OEP) staff.

Terms of UseData Limitations and DisclaimerThe user’s use of and/or reliance on the information contained in the Document shall be at the user’s own risk and expense. MassDEP disclaims any responsibility for any loss or harm that may result to the user of this data or to any other person due to the user’s use of the Document.This is an ongoing data development project. Attempts have been made to contact all PWS systems, but not all have responded with information on their service area. MassDEP will continue to collect and verify this information. Some PWS service areas included in this datalayer have not been verified by the PWS or the municipality involved, but since many of those areas are based on information published online by the municipality, the PWS, or in a publicly available report, they are included in the estimated PWS service area datalayer.Please note: All PWS service area delineations are estimates for broad planning purposes and should only be used as a guide. The data is not appropriate for site-specific or parcel-specific analysis. Not all properties within a PWS service area are necessarily served by the system, and some properties outside the mapped service areas could be served by the PWS – please contact the relevant PWS. Not all service areas have been confirmed by the systems.Please use the following citation to reference these data:MassDEP, Water Utility Resilience Program. 2025. Community and Non-Transient Non-Community Public Water System Service Area (PubV2025_3).IMPORTANT NOTICE: This MassDEP Estimated Water Service datalayer may not be complete, may contain errors, omissions, and other inaccuracies and the data are subject to change. This version is published through MassGIS. We want to learn about the data uses. If you use this dataset, please notify staff in the Water Utility Resilience Program (WURP@mass.gov).

This GIS datalayer represents approximate service areas for Public Water Systems (PWS) in Massachusetts. In 2017, as part of its “Enhancing Resilience and Emergency Preparedness of Water Utilities through Improved Mapping” (Critical Infrastructure Mapping Project ), the MassDEP Water Utility Resilience Program (WURP) began to uniformly map drinking water service areas throughout Massachusetts using information collected from various sources. Along with confirming existing public water system (PWS) service area information, the project collected and verified estimated service area delineations for PWSs not previously delineated and will continue to update the information contained in the datalayers. As of the date of publication, WURP has delineated Community (COM) and Non-Transient Non-Community (NTNC) service areas. Transient non-community (TNCs) are not part of this mapping project.

Layers and Tables:

The MassDEP Estimated Public Water System Service Area data comprises two polygon feature classes and a supporting table. Some data fields are populated from the MassDEP Drinking Water Program’s Water Quality Testing System (WQTS) and Annual Statistical Reports (ASR).

The Community Water Service Areas feature class (PWS_WATER_SERVICE_AREA_COMM_POLY) includes polygon features that represent the approximate service areas for PWS classified as Community systems.The NTNC Water Service Areas feature class (PWS_WATER_SERVICE_AREA_NTNC_POLY) includes polygon features that represent the approximate service areas for PWS classified as Non-Transient Non-Community systems.The Unlocated Sites List table (PWS_WATER_SERVICE_AREA_USL) contains a list of known, unmapped active Community and NTNC PWS services areas at the time of publication.

Production

Data Universe

Public Water Systems in Massachusetts are permitted and regulated through the MassDEP Drinking Water Program. The WURP has mapped service areas for all active and inactive municipal and non-municipal Community PWSs in MassDEP’s Water Quality Testing Database (WQTS). Community PWS refers to a public water system that serves at least 15 service connections used by year-round residents or regularly serves at least 25 year-round residents.

All active and inactive NTNC PWS were also mapped using information contained in WQTS. An NTNC or Non-transient Non-community Water System refers to a public water system that is not a community water system and that has at least 15 service connections or regularly serves at least 25 of the same persons or more approximately four or more hours per day, four or more days per week, more than six months or 180 days per year, such as a workplace providing water to its employees.

These data may include declassified PWSs. Staff will work to rectify the status/water services to properties previously served by declassified PWSs and remove or incorporate these service areas as needed.

Maps of service areas for these systems were collected from various online and MassDEP sources to create service areas digitally in GIS. Every PWS is assigned a unique PWSID by MassDEP that incorporates the municipal ID of the municipality it serves (or the largest municipality it serves if it serves multiple municipalities). Some municipalities contain more than one PWS, but each PWS has a unique PWSID. The Estimated PWS Service Area datalayer, therefore, contains polygons with a unique PWSID for each PWS service area.

A service area for a community PWS may serve all of one municipality (e.g. Watertown Water Department), multiple municipalities (e.g. Abington-Rockland Joint Water Works), all or portions of two or more municipalities (e.g. Provincetown Water Dept which serves all of Provincetown and a portion of Truro), or a portion of a municipality (e.g. Hyannis Water System, which is one of four PWSs in the town of Barnstable).

Some service areas have not been mapped but their general location is represented by a small circle which serves as a placeholder. The location of these circles are estimates based on the general location of the source wells or the general estimated location of the service area - these do not represent the actual service area.

Service areas were mapped initially from 2017 to 2022 and reflect varying years for which service is implemented for that service area boundary. WURP maintains the dataset quarterly with annual data updates; however, the dataset may not include all current active PWSs. A list of unmapped PWS systems is included in the USL table PWS_WATER_SERVICE_AREA_USL available for download with the dataset. Some PWSs that are not mapped may have come online after this iteration of the mapping project; these will be reconciled and mapped during the next phase of the WURP project. PWS IDs that represent regional or joint boards with (e.g. Tri Town Water Board, Randolph/Holbrook Water Board, Upper Cape Regional Water Cooperative) will not be mapped because their individual municipal service areas are included in this datalayer.

Some PWSs that are not mapped may have come online after this iteration of the mapping project; these will be reconciled and mapped during the next phase of the WURP project. Those highlighted (e.g. Tri Town Water Board, Randolph/Holbrook Water Board, Upper Cape Regional Water Cooperative) represent regional or joint boards that will not be mapped, because their individual municipal service areas are included in this datalayer.

PWSs that do not have corresponding sources, may be part of consecutive systems, may have been incorporated into another PWSs, reclassified as a different type of PWS, or otherwise taken offline. PWSs that have been incorporated, reclassified, or taken offline will be reconciled during the next data update.

Methodologies and Data Sources

Several methodologies were used to create service area boundaries using various sources, including data received from the systems in response to requests for information from the MassDEP WURP project, information on file at MassDEP, and service area maps found online at municipal and PWS websites. When provided with water line data rather than generalized areas, 300-foot buffers were created around the water lines to denote service areas and then edited to incorporate generalizations. Some municipalities submitted parcel data or address information to be used in delineating service areas.

Verification Process

Small-scale PDF file maps with roads and other infrastructure were sent to every PWS for corrections or verifications. For small systems, such as a condominium complex or residential school, the relevant parcels were often used as the basis for the delineated service area. In towns where 97% or more of their population is served by the PWS and no other service area delineation was available, the town boundary was used as the service area boundary. Some towns responded to the request for information or verification of service areas by stating that the town boundary should be used since all or nearly all of the municipality is served by the PWS.

Sources of information for estimated drinking water service areas

The following information was used to develop estimated drinking water service areas:

EOEEA Water Assets Project (2005) water lines (these were buffered to create service areas)Horsely Witten Report 2008Municipal Master Plans, Open Space Plans, Facilities Plans, Water Supply System Webpages, reports and online interactive mapsGIS data received from PWSDetailed infrastructure mapping completed through the MassDEP WURP Critical Infrastructure InitiativeIn the absence of other service area information, for municipalities served by a town-wide water system serving at least 97% of the population, the municipality’s boundary was used. Determinations of which municipalities are 97% or more served by the PWS were made based on the Percent Water Service Map created in 2018 by MassDEP based on various sources of information including but not limited to:The Winter population served submitted by the PWS in the ASR submittalThe number of services from WQTS as a percent of

Groundwater and estuary water levels near Mill Creek and the Herring River in Wellfleet, Massachusetts, were measured from June 2017 to August 2022. The data contained in these datasets consist of tables of updated statistics provided in the original work by Mullaney and others (2020, Appendix 2) and associated data release by Mullaney and Barclay (2020). The data include summary tables of water-level statistics and summary tables of updated statistical coefficients for the models in the original work. The data release also includes the underlying input data sets for these statistical regression models and an update of table 2 from the larger work, which consists of summary statistics of water levels for the period of data analysis from 2017-06-01 to 2022-08-05. Mullaney, J.R., and Barclay, J.R., 2020, Data on Tidally Filtered Groundwater and Estuary Water Levels, and Climatological Data Near Mill Creek and the Herring River, Cape Cod, Wellfleet, Massachusetts, 2017-2018: U.S. Geological Survey data release, https://doi.org/10.5066/P9T167II. Mullaney, J.R., Barclay, J.R., Laabs, K.L., and Lavallee, K.D., 2020, Hydrogeology and interactions of groundwater and surface water near Mill Creek and the Herring River, Wellfleet, Massachusetts, 2017–18: U.S. Geological Survey Scientific Investigations Report 2019–5145, 60 p., https://doi.org/10.3133/sir20195145.

The Healthy Neighborhoods Study (HNS) aimed to better understand the relationship between urban development, neighborhood conditions, and population health in Boston. More specifically, the research completed was the planning and baseline phase for a longer 9 year longitudinal study with two overarching aims: to determine how to measure and evaluate the mid- to long-term impacts of transit-oriented development on neighborhood conditions and population health, and to better understand the drivers and mechanisms that mediate the relationship between neighborhoods and health. The study tracks measures in health, development, neighborhood conditions and resident experiences in nine urban centers in the Boston-metro area.

On October 12, 2022, the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) collected 13 shallow groundwater samples and two quality-control samples for analysis of Per- and Polyfluoroalkyl Substances (PFAS). Samples were collected in Hen Cove, Pocasset, Massachusetts by using USGS water-quality sampling protocols (Shoemaker and Tettenhorst, 2020). Groundwater environmental and quality control samples were analyzed at SGS (Orlando, FL) using EPA method 537.1m. Samples were collected from temporary push point samplers (manufactured by MHE Inc.) installed 20 to 60 centimeters below the cove bottom sediment. Any use of trade, firm, or product names is for descriptive purposes only and does not imply endorsement by the U.S. Government. REFERENCES: Shoemaker, J., and Tettenhorst. D., 2020, Method 537.1, Determination of selected per- and polyflourinated alkyl substances in drinking water by solid phase extraction and liquid chromatography/tandem mass spectrometry (LC/MS/MS): U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, EPA 600/R-20-006, https://cfpub.epa.gov/si/si_public_record_report.cfm?Lab=NERL&dirEntryId=343042. U.S Geological Survey (USGS), 2015, National Field Manual for the Collection of Water-Quality Data. U.S. Geological Survey Techniques of Water-Resources Investigations, Book 9. https://pubs.usgs.gov/publication/twri09.

The Massachusetts Department of Transportation (MassDOT) is redeveloping a bridge in Massachusetts, the US.The project involves the redevelopment and widening of Longfellow Bridge. It will be developed in phases.The first phase includes the construction of Boston bound roadway and sidewalks, the second phase includes the Boston-bound MBTA Red Line track, the third phase includes the Cambridge-bound MBTA Red Line track and the fourth phase includes the Cambridge-bound roadway and sidewalk.The project includes the construction of access roads, the installation of safety systems, and the widening of sidewalks.J. F. White Contracting Co. has been appointed as a construction contractor.The project funds are funded by the Commonwealth of Massachusetts and the Federal Highway Administration.On August 17, 2015, construction works commenced.Construction works are expected to complete in May 2018. Read More

Future sea level projections are provided for the Massachusetts coastline at established tide gauge stations with long-term records at Boston Harbor, MA; Nantucket, MA; Woods Hole, MA; and Newport, RI. The projections shown in this map layer are adjusted to each station’s mean sea level and converted to the North American Vertical Datum of 1988 (NAVD88).

The analysis for Massachusetts (DeConto and Kopp, 2017) consisted of a probabilistic assessment of future relative sea level rise at each tide gauge location given two future atmospheric greenhouse gas concentration pathways, medium (RCP4.5) and high (RCP8.5), and for two methods of accounting for Antarctic ice sheet contributions to sea level rise: one based on expert elicitation (Kopp, 2014) and one where Antarctic ice sheet projections are driven by new, process-based numerical ice sheet model simulations (DeConto and Pollard, 2016; Kopp, 2017). A multi-year reference time period for relative sea level was used to minimize biases caused by tidal, seasonal, and inter-annual climate variability, following the accepted practice of using a 19-year tidal datum epoch centered on the year 2000 as the ‘zero’ reference for changes in relative sea level rise. To account for the ‘zero’ reference point utilized for the models and to provide elevations on a common geodetic datum, sea level rise model projection values at each tidal station were adjusted to the station’s mean sea level as computed for the 19 year tidal datum epoch of 1999-2017 and converted to NAVD88.

Following the approach in the 2017 National Climate Assessment and the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration’s Global and Regional Sea Level Rise Scenarios for the United States, conditional probability distributions for sea level rise projections can be integrated into different scenarios to support planning and decision-making, given uncertainty and future risks. This approach allows for the many different probabilistic projections (i.e., two models each using two greenhouse gas concentration pathways for multiple time series and several probabilities groups) to be filtered into four scenarios. Under this approach, each of the scenarios—Intermediate, Intermediate-High, High, and Extreme—is cross-walked with two or three probabilistic model outputs

On their own, while they are not site-specific projections of mean higher high water levels, these projections provide insight to overall trends in rising sea levels along the Commonwealth coastline, to help coastal municipal officials and workshop participants identify future hazards exacerbated by rising seas.

(For definitions of scenarios and projections shown in this map please reference the section on sea level rise beginning on page 11 of this 2018 report.)

*Please Note that the MA temperature and precipitation projections in this 2018 report have been superseded by those sourced from Cornell University and featured in this map viewer and the Climate Projections Dashboard: Massachusetts Climate and Hydrologic Risk Project (Phase 1) – Stochastic Weather Generator Climate Projections Dataset

This dataset provides information about the number of properties, residents, and average property values for Old Stage Road cross streets in Ashfield, MA.