Progress in Ground-Water Protection and Restoration

United States
Environmental Protection
Agency
Office Of Water
(WH-550G)
EPA 440/6-90-001
February 1990

'ir,
•,\ -
^••.•^"-..'••.^-«,"--- "•*••." -*".-.••-•-.* "-"' -^^^^^^ILtx^i

•-:

*.* ""•'„•." ' * 'S'-.--*^.' V- **/• - '%t§\i^*vv-ii?.'!.'/ .r*/•/j--*^**.-*-''*'* -" V -V''*"lilil^««5«^'iS^":'i"-'^*"'**. * *".""-*," ."'*'.*;* *•'"." ;'.**--• -*--•- *!•***'-?* *•', -%V.'''V'"*'*"'*^'"^'^*^V^'-^^ *''-'-."('*/*"*.* ••'•ns"'"i" *""'.-; -'-Vj'""tJ-:'*v"-^>
J^'"- •"*•' *'..'*^ *•-•.'- •"*'- *'-^:?i^^''/''*'''V:'1^4Jr;-;'' ''-'-* .'•':;.. .7'"'"irJT;~^ » ^ *i^""'l"*tl -%'*;-.-"4*'1'"'." •"' V * V .* *-*"-'*/-t*.V--
-------
-------
Progress in Ground-Water
Protection and Restoration
Office of Water
Office of Ground-Water Protection
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
February 1990
-------
-------
ADMINISTRATOR'S PREFACE
The nation's ground water is a vitally important natural resource — as a source
of drinking water for a major portion of our population, as a support system for sensi-
tive ecosystems, and as a water supply source for industry and agriculture. Once
contaminated, it is a resource that can pose substantial risks to human health, our
economy, and our environment. And once contaminated it can prove enormously
expensive to clean up.

Since issuing EPA's "Ground-Water Protection Strategy" in 1984, me Agency has
made significant strides in the protection of ground-water resources, both in implement-
ing our ground-water related statutory authorities and in developing new EPA initia-
tives and activities. States also have made great progress in developing their own
ground-water protection strategies and wellhead protection programs.

Despite the progress already made in the protection and restoration of ground
water, as documented in this report, much remains to be done - especially with respect
to preventing pollution of ground-water resources. On July 18, 1989,1 formed a ground-
water task force with the primary goal to develop a strategy for the direction EPA will
take in ground-water protection. This strategy will incorporate recommendations and
initiatives to ensure effective and consistent decision-making in all Agency actions
affecting this resource, guide us as we deal with future ground-water issues, and
assure that a clean and safe source of water will be available to all Americans and to
the ecological systems on which we depend.
William K. Reilly
-------
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
This document was prepared by the Office of Ground-Water Protection,
Marian Mlay, Director, under the overall guidance of Ron Hoflfer and Chuck Job. The
project manager was John Simons. The document represents the combined Input of a
workgroup representing the Offices of Water; Solid Waste and Emergency Response;
Air and Radiation; Pesticides and Toxic Substances: Research and Development;
Policy, Planning and Evaluation; External Affairs; and EPA Regional Offices. The
technical Input and overall efforts of the workgroup members, which made It possible
to complete this project and meet a tight schedule, are appreciated.
-------
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Page Number

Administrator's Preface , . i

Acknowledgements ii

Table of Contents iii

Chapter 1: Introduction 1

Chronology of Actions Taken to Protect Ground Water 2
EPA Organization for Ground-Water Protection 3
Organization of this Report 5

Chapter 2: Resource Protection 7

State Ground-Water Protection Strategies 8
Wellhead Protection 9
Sole Source Aquifer Program 10
Drinking Water Standards 11

Chapter 3: Product Controls 17

Pesticides 18
Toxic Chemicals 20

Chapter 4: Contaminant Source Control 21
Hazardous Waste Management and Disposal 22
Solid Waste Disposal 23
Underground Storage Tanks 24
Underground Injection Control 25
Sewage Sludge Use and Disposal 27
Septic Tank Management 28
Radioactive Waste Control 29
Drinking Water Requirements 30
Dredge and Fill Control for Wetlands 31

Chapter 5: Contaminant Cleanup 33

Superfund Sites 34
Hazardous Waste Management Facilities 36
Nonhazardous Land Disposal Facilities 37

Chapter 6: Data Management 39

Chapter 7: Research and Development 41

Chapter 8: Pollution Prevention 43

Chapter 9: Coordination of Activities 45

Appendices
A. EPA Regulations and Guidance for Ground-Water Protection 47
B. Selected References 49

iii
-------
-------
CHAPTER 1:
INTRODUCTION
Ground water was once widely thought to be virtually immune from contamination, and Interest
In ground water focused on the quantity of water that an aquifer yielded. In the late 1960s, synthetic
organic chemicals were discovered in ground-water sources of drinking water In several states. In-
creasing discoveries of contaminated wells and environmental incidents in the 1970s reinforced the
fact that ground water could be contaminated, and interest in ground water broadened to include the
quality as well as the quantity of water available.

When William Ruckelshaus became U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) Administrator In
1984, he convened a task force to develop a ground-water strategy to clearfy identify the difficult
public policy issues concerning the protection of this nation's ground-water resources. This Ground-
Water Protection Strategy, adopted In 1984, lays out approaches for achieving these four goals:

• Strengthen state ground-water programs:

• Cope with major, inadequately addressed ground-water problems;

• Create a policy framework for guiding EPA programs; and

• Strengthen internal EPA ground-water organization.

EPA has made significant progress in implementing these goals. This report provides an inte-
grated presentation of what the EPA has accomplished in the protection and restoration of ground
water since the issuance of the Strategy in August, 1984.

This chapter covers:
Chronology of ActionsTaken &> Protect CrrOwnd Wafer
EPA Organization to Enhance Ground-Water Protection
Organization of tills Report
-------
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^B Chronology of Actions Taken to Protect
CHAPTER 1:
INTRODUCTION =^=====|^=
As ground-water contamination problems received national attention, recognition of the need to
protect this valuable resource increased. This need was reflected in the many laws passed by Con-
gress and in other actions. For a perspective of legislation and events leading up to the present day,
see the following chronological listing in Table 1.
Table 1
EVENT/KEY RESULTS

1972
Clean Water
Act
(CWA)

» Directed mainly
to surface water
quality

• Only indirect
attention given
to ground water

1984
RCRA,
Amended

» Regulated
underground
storage tanks to
control leaking

1974
Safe Drinking
Water Act
(SDWA)

• Set standards for
pollutants in
public drinking
water

» Regulated
injection of
wastes into wells
•Established Sole
Source Aquifer
Program
1986
SDWA,
Amended

» Established
Wellhead
Protection
Program and
accelerated
standard setting
for public water
supplies
1976
Resource
Conservation
and Recovery
Act
(RCRA)

• Regulated
hazardous waste
disposal

198<>
Superfund
Amendments and
Reauthorization
Act
(SARA)

• Established
"Right-to-Know"
laws on releases
to environment

1978
Love Canal
and Other
Environmental
Incidents

• Showed
vulnerability of
ground water
and heightened
public concern

1987
CWA,
Amended

• Provided
state grants for
ground-water
protection
activities

1980
Comprehensive
Environmental
Response,
Compensation
and Liability Act
(Superfund)

•Provided Federal
program for
cleanup of
abandoned waste
disposal sites
and ground-
water
contamination

1988
Federal
Insecticide,
Fungicide, &
Rodenticide Act,
Amended

« Streamlined
re-registration
of pesticides

1984
EPA Ground-
Water Protection
Strategy

• Presented a
consolidated
statement of EPA
ground-water
policy and future
activities

1989
Pollution
Prevention
Policy

• Established
program to
reduce or
eliminate sources
and volumes of
pollution

-------
CHAPTER 1:
INTRODUCTION
EPA Organization for Oroirocl-Water Protection
EPA's organizational structure for ground-water protection reflects the laws enacted by Congress.
The offices described below have many functions outside the field of ground water; only their major
ground-water related functions are highlighted here.
Office of Wate*

• Assists and evaluates Agency implementation of the ffiound^Water Protection Strategy.
• Coordinates ground-water protection policy through the Office of Ground-Water
Protection. ' , , , ,
• Provides grants to states to develop ground-water protection strategies,
• Implements wellhead protection, sole source aquifer, and nonpoint source management
programs,
• Sets overall Agency policy on ground-water data management*
• Addresses ground-water discharge to surface water in wetlands and marine and
estuarlne areas, _ \/~
• Sets standards and implements the drinking water regulations affecting public water
systems, including those using ground water as a source,
„, • Implements the Underground Injection Control (UIQ program,
• Sets standards for the land application and disposal of Sewage sludge*
• Co-sponsors the National Surrey of Pesticides in Drinking Water Wells,
Office of Solid Waste and Emergency Response

M Sets standards for the land; disposal of hazardous wastes, including ground-water
concentration limits for hazardous chemicals and ground-water monitoring
requirements. '<'" " ""
• Establishes requirements for identification and cleanup of active and abandoned
hazardous waste sites,
• Implements a program to stop contamination resulting from leakingunderground
storage tanks.
• Takes enforcement action for ground-water related contamination.
Office of Pesticides and Toxic Substances

• Determines whether, and under what conditions, pesticides may be sold, and regulates'
their use and disposal* Including potential effect on ground water.
• Sets standards for the use and disposal of toxic substances, including steps to protect
ground water.
• Takes enforcement actions as required.
• Co-sponsors the National Survey of Pesticides in Drinking Water Wells.
-------
CHAPTER 1:
INTRODUCTION
EPA Organization for Ground-Water Protection
Office of Air and Radiation , , , -51' ',,,,,
* Sets standards for radiation levels in ground water at sites of radioactive waste
disposal arid cleanup, '- <, ~
Officeof Research and Development
• Guides and funds research to ground-water restoration and protection.
Office of Policy* Planning and Evaluation
• Develops Overall AgeftCy policy on pollution prevention,
• Conducts policy studies on a variety of EPA issues with ground-water quality
implications.
• Coordinates JEPA's strategic planning for water resources.
-------
CHAPTER 1:
INTRODUCTION
Organization of tnis Report
As indicated previously, a variety of EPA program offices operating under a range of statutory au-
thorities have responsibility for protecting the nation's ground water. This report is organized by
cross-program functions, which provides a clear picture of the overall progress achieved by the
Agency in ground-water protection and restoration. Exhibit 1 outlines the remainder of this report.
Exhibit 1
CHAPTER 2: Resource Protection. Describes the Agency's
evolving ground-water protection activities that have led
to achievements such as the establishment of SO State
ground-water protection strategies, and the wellhead protection
program.

CHAPTER 3: Product Control. Addresses product registration
and controls to protect the public from risk resulting from
use of products such as pesticides.

CHAPTER 4: Contaminant Source Control. Describes
multi-faceted EPA ground-water protection activities to control
contaminants that are generated or require disposal each day.

CHAPTER S: Contaminant Cleanup. Demonstrates EPA's
efforts to remove contamination from existing and old sites.
CHAPTER 6: Data Management. Describes EPA's actions
to manage the vast amount of data that has been generated
by ground-water associated activities.

CHAPTER 7: Research and Development. Demonstrates
EPA's scientific commitment to continually try to improve its
response to ground-water problems.

CHAPTER 8: Pollution Prevention. Describes the long-term,
comprehensive program to reduce or eliminate contamination
at the source.

CHAPTERS: Coordination of Activities. Describes
interagency and infra-agency coordination.
-------
-------
CHAPTER 2:
RESOURCE
PROTECTION
The maxim, "An ounce of prevention is worth a pound of cure," is especially true when applied to
ground water. To clean up one contaminated wellfield could cost many times more than establishing
a ground-water protection program for an entire state. Thus, the goal of resource protection is to
prevent contamination from occurring in the first place, with the primary focus on areas most vulner-
able to pollution. Resource protection is a combination of individual, local, state and federal activities
ranging from land-use control to public education.

This chapter covers:
State Ground-Water Protection Strategies
Wellhead Protection
Sole Source Aquifer Program
Drinking Water Standards
-------
CHAPTER 2:
RESOURCE
PROTECTION
State Ground-Water Protection Strategies
EPA's Strategy recognizes that the most effective way to increase national institutional capability
to protect ground water is to strengthen state programs. State and local governments have the pri-
mary role in ground-water protection because of the importance of land use and water allocation
Issues in comprehensive protection of the resource. Lti addition, currently there is no comprehensive
federal ground-water protection statute. Specifically, EPA's role is to foster development of state
ground-water protection programs and strategies, and to support implementation of ground-water
protection programs by providing technical guidance and conducting research.

Since 1985, EPA has provided funding under section 106 of the Clean Water Act to develop
ground-water protection strategies based on each state's individual problems and needs. The strate-
gies provide an overall policy and planning framework to protect ground water for its highest benefi-
cial use, and address such topics as public education, ground-water data management, legislative
and regulatory development, resource assessment, ground-water classification, and point and non-
point source contaminant controls. Guidance for development of the strategies is provided by EPA,
drawing on reports from groups such as the National Ground-Water Forum and the Urban Institute.
Accomplishments:

• The states have received approximately $7 million per year since 1985, a total of
$35 million, for ground-water strategy development. " -

• All states. U.S. territories, and the District of Columbia have prepared ground-water
strategies. ' .-. — -*„ "' "-' i-'"-/ - -
,
• Thirty-three states passed legislation, incorporating: elements of, or entire state
strategies. ' '-- ,v - - , - ' -, -
-. :$ •;./f sfs s
m EPA completed draft guidelines for ground-water classification, to assist states in
making more consistent decisions a&ecting ground water, and to provide them with
an example to use in developing their own ground-water classification systems for
priority setting and regulatory decisions. '.,

• Twenty-two states have developed formal ground-water classification systems to
guide their planning and regulatory decisions; another 11 have informal o,r implicit
classification systems. -;«_.,_, / '''//„,;'

• EPA supported an assessment of state ground-water protection strategies by the
Urban Institute. - ;
-------
CHAPTER 2:
RESOURCE
PROTECTION
Wellhead Protection
prol
well
thai
sou
spe
foci
wat
toE
eac
flex
tan
The Wellhead Protection fWHP) Program Is EPA's program to comprehensively address resource
tectlon for public water systems. Established under Section 1428 of the Safe Drinking Water Act,
head protection Is an Innovative approach that Is unlike most other ground-water programs In
: it focuses on the resource requiring protection, rather than on a limited set of contamination
rces. Furthermore, the program focuses on a very Important part of ground-water resources; the
cific areas that support wells or wellfields used to suppty drinking water for public systems. This
is on public water systems will protect approximately 90 percent of the total amount of ground
er used for drinking in the United States. Each state must prepare a WHP Program and submit it
:PA for review. Local government participation is critical for effective WHP Programs. Although
ti state WHP Program must contain specific elements, EPA recognizes that states must have
ibility to tailor program details to best suit their Individual needs and circumstances.
At a mm&Bttm, the Safe Drinking Water Act requires each state's 1#HP Program to:
, » Specify Htfe roles of state and local governments and public water suppliers.
B Delineate wellhead protection areas for each weH or weBneld, ,
« Identify sources of eontamtaants within each WHP area.
•-• Develop management approaches to protect the water supply within WHP areas from
those eonisontnants, - ' ' "
• Develop cojiMngency plans for each public water supply system in the went of welt or
weHueld eontaiainatton. ,,,
m locate new wells propertyto minimize potential contamination,
• Ensure public participation In WHP program development,
Once a state has an approved WHP program, other federal agencies controlling sources of con-
lination In the wellhead protection area must comply with the requirements of the program.
Accomplishments? - ' , ,
• Completed guidance to states on developing a state Wellhead Protection Program and
methods of delineating WHP areas,
' % '•,"", , ,<"•' ' , ' - -
m Receded 29 state wellhead protection submittals for EPA review and approval by
ilanuary 1990*
• Conducted 12 training courses for state and local representatives around the country
on methods for delineating WHP areas and developing local management tools for
, wellhead protection.
m Included fti :key EPA drinking water regulations recognition of the relationship of state
wellhead protection areas and area! assessments around public water wells, focussing
on the common need to remove these sources of contamination,
M Developed a series of technical assistance documents ranging from delineation
methodologies for complex ground-water factors to state and local financing.
„,,''•'

-------
CHAPTER 2:
RESOURCE
PROTECTION
Sole Source Aquifer Program
The Sole Source Aquifer (SSA) Program was established under Section 1424(e) of the Safe Drink-
ing Water Act (SDWA) of 1974. The program allows individuals and organizations to petition the EPA
to designate aquifers as the "sole or principal source" of drinking water for an area. The primary
purpose of SSA designation Is to provide EPA review of federal financially assisted projects planned
for an area to determine their potential for contaminating the aquifer In the area. The SDWA Amend-
ments of 1986 added Section 1427 to "establish procedures for development, Implementation and as-
sessment of demonstration programs designed to protect critical aquifer areas located within desig-
nated sole source aquifers." No funds have been appropriated for this program, although grant-related
regulations for Identifying critical aquifer protection areas have been Issued. For a map of designated
sole source aquifers, see Exhibit 2.
Accomplishments: -^ "^ -
• Designated 52 SSAs since 1074, serving over 2$ million people.
• Prepared and distributed SSA petitioner guidance to tile public describing the
hydrogeologlc and drinking water data needed, to make a SSA determination,
• Reviewed federally financially assisted projects in designated SSAs,
Exhibit 2

SOLE SOURCE AQUIFERS
SEPTEMBER 1989
10
-------
CHAPTER 2:
RESOURCE
PROTECTION
Drinking Water Standards
In this country, we are fortunate to be able to drink water from public water supply systems with
little concern for contracting a water-borne disease or exposure to long-term health risk. The safety of
drinking water is determined by testing its chemical composition against EPA standards called maxi-
mum contaminant levels (MCLs). The Safe Drinking Water Act establishes a specific timetable for
EPA to set MCLs and regulations for 83 specific contaminants. At the same time an MCL is set for a
contaminant, MCL goals are set. MCL goals are non-enforceable health goals set at levels that cause
no adverse effects and allow an adequate margin of safely. MCLs are set as close to the MCL goals as
is achievable in practice, using the best available technology. EPA also issues health advisories (HAs)
for drinking water contaminants for which no regulations currently exist. Each HA contains informa-
tion on the nature of the adverse health effects associated with the contaminant, and gives informa-
tion on analytical and treatment techniques.

These standards and advisory levels are also used as the target concentrations down to which
chemical levels in ground water must typically be reduced at Superfund and other waste disposal
sites. Resource protection includes taking actions, such as implementing a wellhead protection
program, to ensure that chemical concentrations in ground water do not increase to the MCLs.
Accomplishments: ;
,- ^-'- ^J'^""- •,"':--: * -
• Issued proposed or final regulations on 55 MCLs to date [see Tables 2 and 3).

• Issued 144 HAs in proposed or final form, including 62 HAs on pesticides being
studied in ^he National Pesticide Survey^ , ','' ."' :

B Proposed regulations requiring assessments for sources of contamination in the
area around public water supply wells. These studies could be implemented by
states through approved wellhead protection programs.
• Identified more than 6,000 community ground-water systems per year (of the
* 59,000 total) that were in violation of regulations and took steps to bring them back
into compliance, — "-
\ Reduced the number of significant noncompliers (SNCs) with water quality viola-
tions by approximateiyr 50 percent from 1985 to 1988, {SNCs are water supply
systems having a history of more serious violations J
• Initiated an effort to mobilize resources throughout the drinking water community
' to foster the action-oriented partnerships needed to support implementation of the
Mw drinking water standards.
11
-------
CHAPTER 2:
RESOURCE
PROTECTION
Drinking Water Standards
Table 2

PRIMARY DRINKING WATER STANDARDS
Contaminants
Health Effects
MCI/1
Sources
Microbiological

Total Collforms
(Collform bacteria, fecal
collfonn, streptococcal,
and other bacteria)
Turbidity

Inorganic Chemicals

Arsenic

Barium

Cadmium

Chromium

Lead
Mercury
Nitrate

Selenium
Silver
Flourlde
Organic Chemicals

Endrin

Lindane
Not necessarily disease
producing themselves, but
can be indicators of organisms
that cause assorted gastroen-
teric Infections, dysentery,
hepatitis, typhoid fever,
cholera, and others; also
Interfere with disinfection
process.

Interferes with disinfection
Dermal and nervous system
toxlclty effects

Circulatory system effects

Kidney effects

Liver/kidney effects

Central and peripheral
nervous system damage;
kidney effects; highly toxic to
infants and pregnant women

Central nervous system
disorders; kidney effects
Methemoglobinemla ("blue-
baby syndrome")

Gastrointestinal effects

Skin discoloration (Argyria)

Skeletal damage
Nervous system/kidney
effects
Nervous system/kidney
effects
1 per 100
milllliters
1 toSNTU

.05

.01

.05

.052

.002

.01

.05

4
.0002
.004
human and animal fecal
matter
erosion, runoff, and dis-
charges
geological, pesticide resi-
dues, Industrial waste and
smelter operations
geological, mining and
smelting
leaches from lead pipes and
lead-based solder pipe joints
used in manufacture of
paint, paper, vinyl chloride,
used in fungicides, and
geological

fertilizer, sewage, feedlots,
geological

geological, mining

geological, additive to
drinking water, toothpaste,
foods processed with flouri-
nated water
Insecticide used on cotton,
small grains, orchards
(cancelled)

insecticide used on seed and
soil treatments, foliage
application, wood protection
In milligrams per liter, unless otherwise noted.
Agency considering substantially lower number.
12
-------
CHAPTER 2:
RESOURCE
PROTECTION
Drinking Water Standards
Table 2

PRIMARY DRINKING WATER STANDARDS (cont'd)
Contaminants
Health Effects
MCI/
Sources
Methoxychlor

2,4-D
2,4,5-TP Silvex

Toxaphene

Benzene
Carbon tetrachloride

p-Dichlorobenzene

1,2-Dichloroethane

1,1-Dlchloroethylene

1,1,1-Trichloroethane

Trichloroethylene (TCE)
Vinyl chloride
Total trihalomethanes
fTIHM) (chloroform, bro-
moform, bromo-dlchlorom-
ethane, dibromochlorom-
ethane)
Nervous system/kidney
effects

Liver/kidney effects
Liver/kidney effects

Cancer risk

Cancer
Possible cancer

Possible cancer

Liver/kidney effects

Nervous system problems

Possible cancer
Cancer risk
Cancer risk
.1

.1
.01

.005

.005
.005

.075

.005

.007

.005
.002
.1
Insecticide used on fruit
trees, vegetables

herbicide used to control
broad-leaf weeds in agricul-
ture, used on forests, range,
pastures, and aquatic
environments

herbicide (cancelled in 1984)

Insecticide used on cotton,
corn, grain

fuel (leaking tanks), solvent
commonly used in manufac-
ture of industrial chemicals,
Pharmaceuticals, pesticides,
paints and plastics

common in cleaning agents,
Industrial wastes from
manufacture of coolants

used In Insecticides, moth
balls, air deodorizers

used in manufacture of
Insecticides, gasoline

used In manufacture of
plastics, dyes, perumes,
paints SOCs

used in manufacture of food
wrappings, synthetic fibers

waste from disposal of dry
cleaning materials and
manufacture of pesticides,
paints, waxes and varnishes,
paint stripper, metal de-
greaser

polyvinylchloride pipes and
solvents used to join them,
waste from manufacturing
plastics and synthetic
rubber

primarily formed when
surface water containing
organic matter is treated
with chlorine
1 In milligrams per liter, unless otherwise noted.
-------
CHAPTER 2:
RESOURCE
PROTECTION
Drinking Water Standards
Table 2

PRIMARY DRINKING WATER STANDARDS (cont'd)
Contaminants
Health Effects
Sources
J
Rfldlonuclldes

Gross alpha particle
activity
Gross beta particle
activity

Radium 226 & 228
(total)

Other Substances

Sodium
Cancer

Cancer

Bone cancer
Possible Increase in blood
pressure in susceptible
individuals
15 pCi/L

4 mrem/yr

5 pCi/L
None
(20 mg/1
reporting
level)
radioactive waste, uranium
deposits

radioactive waste, uranium
deposits

radioactive wate, geological
geological, road salting
1 In milligrams per liter, unless otherwise noted.
14
-------
CHAPTER 2:
RESOURCE
PROTECTION
Drinking Water Standards
Tables
SECONDARY DRINKING WATER STANDARDS
Contaminants
Suggested Levels
Contaminant Effects
PH
Chloride
Copper
Foaming agents
Sulfate
Total dissolved
solids (hardness)
Zinc
Flouride

Color
Corrosivity
Iron
Manganese
Odor
6.5 - 8.5
250 mg/1
1 mg/1
0.5 mg/1
250 mg/1
500 mg/1
5 mg/1
2.0 mg/1

15 color units
non-corrosive
0.3 mg/1
0.05 mg/1
3 threshold odor
number
Water is too corrosive
Taste and corrosion of pipes
Taste and staining of porcelain
Aesthetic
Taste and laxative effects
Taste and possible relation
between low hardness and
cardiovascular disease; also an
indicator of corrosivity (related
to lead levels in water); can
damage plumbing and limit
effectiveness of soaps and
detergents
Taste
Dental flourosis (a brownish
discoloration of the teeth)
Aesthetic
Aesthetic and health related
(Corrosive water can leach pipe
materials, such as lead, into
drinking water.)
Taste and staining of laundry
Taste and staining of laundry
Aesthetic
Secondary Drinking Water Standards are unenforceable federal guidelines regarding the taste, odor, color - and
certain other non-aesthetic effects - of drinking water. ERA recommends them to the States as reasonable goals,
but Federal law does not require water systems to comply with them. States may, however, adopt their own
enforceable regulations governing these concerns. To be safe, check your State's drinking water rules.
15
-------
-------
CHAPTER 3:
PRODUCT CONTROLS
Usually, EPA protects the environment and the health of citizens by removing pollutants from the
environment. Some pesticides and toxic substances, however, are allowed to be introduced into the
environment because it has been determined that benefits derived from their use outweigh the risks
incurred. But the release of these materials Into the environment and the exposure to humans and
ecosystems must be carefully controlled to ensure that the risks associated with their use continue to
be within acceptable limits. Ground-water contamination is one of the major risks that can result
from release of pesticides or toxic substances into the environment.

This chapter covers:
Pesticides
Toxic Chemicals
17
-------
CHAPTER 3:
PRODUCT CONTROLS
Pesticides
More than. 25,000 pesticide products, containing about 600 active Ingredients, are registered by
EPA for use In the U.S. Yearly production is approximately 1.1 billion pounds. About 77 percent of all
pesticides In this country are applied to land in agricultural production and some have the potential
to find their way Into and contaminate ground water. In 1988, EPA confirmed that normal agricul-
tural usage had contributed to contamination of the ground water by at least 46 pesticides in at least
26 States. (See Exhibit 3.)

Exhibits

NUMBERS OF PESTICIDES FOUND IN GROUND WATER AS A RESULT OF
AGRICULTURAL PRACTICE
Figurt» contain both confirmed and unconfirmed data attributed to agricultural uses.
Accomplishments:

• Proposed EPA's Pesticides to Ground-Water: Strategy to lay out the conceptual frame*
work to address the prevention of pesticides in ground water. Workshops were
conducted to develop the Strategy and criteria documents for designing state
management plans. The strategyf
- Delineates EPA's role relative to the states and other federal agencies. The states
will be given the lead role to the local management of pesticides.
- Uses standards and advisory, levels developed winder the Safe DrJnMog Water Act
as reference points for pesticides management.
-------
CHAPTER 3:
PRODUCT CONTROLS
Pesticides
Accomplishments Ccont'd)
' '*',,/
m Sponsored the National Survey of Pesticides in Drinldng Water Wells, a statistical
designed to determine titie presence of pesticides and nitrates ^ drinking water
- Sampling 1,3130 community and domestic drinking water wells in SO States Irorp
1988- 1990 for 127 pesticides and nitrates, , , " , '"
- Information in the survey included characteristics of wells, hydrogeologjeal
vulnerability, and pesticide and fertilizer history, - - ;;::

•1 Provided traintog'an.d certification for pesticide applicators in every state, Training
included major 'factors causing ground-water contamination,:

' • Developing ia 1990 a Restricted-Use Rule which lden*i$es pesticides
posing pl3tentially:se*t&us hazards to applicator^ 6i*the
ground water, and^whicJa require trafioed> certified applicators.
• Conducted: "Special Reviews" of pesticides ^tiiat ; may p
- -grotthd water or general environtaent (e.g. , aldlcarb, alaehlorjx , .
-. ", V. % „ ^ ** "-K-. i '•'•'•••'• f ff f f ' "• "^ ff ' VAvt't-"' ff ^ •" ffff t f •• •,
m Developed draft guidance on, ground-water monitoring study designs for pesticide ? ™ ;
,registrints required td ^monitor ^'ounjl water for pe^tid:de active ingeedtents:

• Developed the Pisticlde'^ irt Groimd W^ter Data Base which .contains the results of
monitoring studies conducted ^"federal arid state agencies, tmfc-eWities and «
pesticide JtegistrantsV %1 . s i % ,,„,.„,..
- • Extended the requirement for ground-water monitoring data to support o€,pestidde
registrations, "" -- " ^

• Set up pesticide coopejtative agreements with, and provided funding toV ai states for
ground-water protection activities relatedjto pesticides, x.
- • Required scientific studies on the ground- water leaching potential for over 140
pesticides. % ' ' - - " ,
19
-------
CHAPTER 3:
PRODUCT CONTROLS
Toadc Chemicals
Under authority of the Toxic Substances Control Act CTSCA), EPA regulates approximately 65,000
chemicals used In commerce. Many of these chemicals have the potential, through improper use or
disposal, to contaminate ground water. If any of these chemicals are suspected of causing problems,
EPA performs a risk analysis of the chemical which may result In placing restrictions on the use of
the chemical. Additional Information may also be collected on any suspect chemical. Including
ground-water Information, that may lead to use restrictions, or in extreme cases, to an outright ban,
such as was done in the case of potychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs).

Newly developed or Imported toxic chemicals are also reviewed for unreasonable risk. If problems
exist, more data Is collected and use restrictions may be Imposed.
Accomplishments: , ™ s ;

• Since 1979. reviewed about 12,000 submissions for new chemicals; about 10 percent
of these submissions required some form of action or regulation,

m Since 1979, performed a preliminary analysis of risk' for abbut:4QQQ fsdsttog cherai-
cals that triggered concerns., ;\ , , ,, , >„„ , ' , >„;„,<-, „,<-/,

• Developed techniques for hazard assessment of chemicals based on Structure Activity-
Relationships (SARs) which can be 1%d when data on^e chemical is lacking;

• Published a Rule ta 1988 called the Comprehensive Assessment Information Rule
(CAIRJ that allows the collection of detailed and comprehensive information. Under
CAIR, if ground-water contamtoatto is or'taay be a problem, information can be
collected for risk identification, assessment and regulation of the chemical substance.
The Agency is presently collecting data on about 20 chemicals under CAIR. '
20
-------
CHAPTER 4:
CONTAMINANT SOURCE
CONTROLS
Everyday, at thousands of locations across the U.S., chemical wastes are produced. Regulatory
controls placed on the handling, storage, and disposal of these wastes reduce their potential as a
threat to the environment and reduce each person's risk of exposure to contamination. Contaminant
source controls include design features, standards, or prohibitions on release of chemical wastes from
regulated facilities. These facilities typically treat, store, or dispose of wastes. In the first year of
reporting (1987) under the Toxics-Release Inventory (TRI) for more than 300 chemicals, facilities
reported the release of 18 billion pounds of chemicals to the air, water, land, or into underground
wells; an additional 4.6 billion pounds of chemicals were transferred off-site (e.g., to sewage systems
for disposal). Almost half the total amount of TRI releases and transfers (9.6 billion pounds) was
discharged to surface water. An additional 3.2 billion pounds were disposed of by underground
injection. Of the total TRI chemicals released to the land, underground injection accounted for 56
percent. Releases to underground wells, surface water, and land may have a high potential for
ground-water contamination If inadequately controlled.

This chapter covers:
Hazardous Waste Management and Disposal
Solid Waste Disposal
Underground Storage Tanks
Underground Injection Control
Sewage Sludge Use and Disposal
Septic Tank Management
Radioactive Waste Control
Drinking Water Requirements
Dredge and Fill Control for Wetlands
21
-------
CHAPTER 4:
CONTAMINANT SOURCE
CONTROLS
Hazardous Waste Management and Disposal
EPA estimates that about 275 million metric tons of hazardous wastes are handled each year at
about 3000 facilities. Until the 1970s, the land was used for dumping a variety of hazardous and
nonhazardous wastes at uncontrolled sites across the country. We now know that this Indiscriminate
dumping threatens not only the land, but also the quality of the surrounding air, surface water, and
ground water. Today, facilities that treat, store or dispose of hazardous wastes must obtain a state or
federal permit that Includes ground-water protection standards and monitoring requirements. (For an
example of a hazardous waste landfill, see Exhibit 4.)

Exhibit 4

DOUBLE LINER SYSTEM FOR A LANDFILL
Filter Modkirn
Top Liner
Primary LMch . „
Collection «nd -
R«nov*l 3y*i*m
" V.-. ••
Low Pwnwiblllty Soil „

Bottom Liner
Secondary LMchat*
Collection and
Ramoval SysUm
Ground Water
Accomplishments:
• Since 1985, conducted an average of 1,925 ground-water monitoring and compliance
inspections at land disposal facilities annually,
• Completed major guidance documents explaining regulatory requirements in the
areas of establishing grouncl-water standards (alternate concentration limits),
evaluating ground-water monitoring systems, evaluating compliance and enforce*
ment, setting design standards, investigating releases to ground water, and remedi-
ating contaminated sites. " ' " x/"
* Since 1985, proposed and/or adopted regulations affecting ground water that:
- Banned disposal of certain hazardous wastes in land disposal facilities.
- Set waste management facility design and location standards, including monitor-
Ing network design. . . -" ,,
- Improved data submission and analysis procedures.
- Modified the list of compounds monitored in ground water,
- Provided early detection of releases; and tailoring monitoring requirements to site
conditions.
- Provided more protective closure standards for interim status facilities.
- Evaluated ground-water data, -
• Since 1985. conducted 57 Inspector training programs for ground-water monitoring,
enforcement corrective action; and facility assessment.
22
-------
Solid Waste Disposal
CHAPTER 4:
CONTAMINANT SOURCE
CONTROLS
There were more than 11 billion tons of solid waste generated In 1986 and managed in some
227,000 solid waste disposal facilities. This included 160 million tons of municipal solid waste, 126
million tons of which were disposed of in 6,034 municipal solid waste landfills. Only twenty-five
percent of these facilities have ground-water monitoring capabilities. Although this waste is not
considered hazardous and is not regulated as such, common household and industrial wastes such
as cleaners, automobile parts, paint thinners, and pesticides have characteristics of hazardous waste
and have a high potential to contaminate ground water if not handled properly. Case studies of 163
municipal solid waste landfills revealed ground-water contamination at 146 (90 percent).
Accomplishments:
I Proposed revised regulations, to be issued In early 1990, that require more strin-
gent controls on landfills, irtdttdtog ground-water tnonitoitng during the active life of
the landfill, at closure, and after closure,

i Completed a study on characterization of municlp.al solid waste In the U,S*

I States will be .required; to s?et ground-water standards and remediation .levels based
on the value of the resource* hydrology, damage to the environment, and human
health risk,1 "
23
-------
Underground Storage Tanks
CHAPTER 4:
CONTAMINANT SOURCE
CONTROLS
Underground storage tanks (USTs), which are used to store petroleum or hazardous chemicals
below the surface of the ground, can leak and contaminate soils and ground water. About 400,000
USTs of an estimated total of 5-6 million are thought to be leaking. Products released from these
leaking tanks threaten ground water. EPA regulates about 30 percent of all tanks that store petro-
leum or certain hazardous materials. Tanks not covered by the regulations Include farm and residen-
tial tanks holding less than 1,100 gallons of motor fuel for noncommercial uses, tanks storing heating
ott used on premises, septic tanks, and tanks holding less than 110 gallons. For an example of an
underground storage tank using a monitoring system to protect ground-water, see Exhibit 5.

Exhibits

UNDERGROUND STORAGE TANK WITH MONITORING WELLS
Accomplishments: -

• Completed a state-by-state Inventory of underground storage tanks. - ' '"/

M Promulgated new tank performance standards, and requirements for release
detection, release reporting and investigation, corrective action, tank closure,
financial responsibility and state program approvalsr'As a result, extensive
replacement of old tanks has occurred. -

• Signed cooperative agreements with almost all states for states to receive funds for
cleaning up sites contaminated byleaktog USTs.
24
-------
CHAPTER 4:
CONTAMINANT SOURCE
CONTROLS
Underground Injection Control (UIC)
Underground Injection wells are used for a variety of purposes, ranging from the disposal of
various waste fluids to the extraction of mineral and hydrocarbon resources. In the proper setting,
injection wells are an effective tool for safe waste management. For an example of a deep injection
well for hazardous waste, see Exhibit 6.
Exhibit 6

DEEP INJECTION WELL FOR WASTES
Surface
aquifer

Confining
layer
Confining
layer
Injection
well
Injection
zone
EPA has defined five broad classes of injection well practices. See Exhibit 7.

Class I wells are deep wells that inject hazardous, industrial or municipal wastes below the lower-
most underground source of drinking water. This source Is defined as an aquifer either currently
being used to supply a public water system, or containing water of sufficient quantity to supply a
public water supply system and containing less than 10,000 parts per million of total dissolved
solids. There are more than 500 Class I wells nationally, approximately 200 of which are regulated
specifically for Injection of hazardous wastes.

Class II wells are used in oil and gas operations and include activities such as injection of fluids
for the enhanced recovery of oil and gas and disposal of fluids associated with these processes. There
are more than 164,000 of these wells. Class II wells that have been abandoned and not properly
plugged, or operated improperly can pose a significant ground-water risk as pathways for contamina-
tion of ground water.

Class HI wells Inject fluids to remove minerals, such as salt, sulfur or uranium. Accurate invento-
ries of these wells are difficult to maintain because such a well's useful working life may be as short
as a few weeks. Current inventories Indicate there are more than 25,000 Class HI wells nationally.

Class IV wells inject hazardous waste directly into or above an underground source of drinking
water. These wells were banned at the onset of the UIC program because of their obvious risk to hu-
man health and the environment.
25
-------
CHAPTER 4:
CONTAMINANT SOURCE
CONTROLS
Underground Injection Control {UIC)
Class V wells encompass all other types of wells and Include activities such as agricultural and
storm drainage; and septic systems associated with Industrial, commercial and multlfamily dwellings.
Many of these activities discharge directly Into shallow aquifers and may cause ground-water
contamination. Currently, EPA has data on 180,000 Class V wells; many more are known to exist.

Exhibit 7

NUMBER OF UNDERGROUND INJECTION CONTROL (UIC) WELLS
CLASS!
CLASS •
CLASS III
CLASS IV
CLASSV
500
B
A
N
N
E
D
21,000
164,000
1 MILLION +
Accomplishments; ,

M EPA and the states together regulate a universe of more than 1/3 million injection
wells,
• Established requirements for state programs that prohibit unauthorized Injections;
ensure the protection of underground sources of drtnktog water; and speeUy
construction, operating, monitoring and reporting requirements.

• Regular inspection and testing of Class I, H and IDE wells are fti effect nationally,

K Under the UIC program", in F5T1988, EPA and the states:
- Conducted 94350 inspections -
- Performed 36,470 mechanical integrity tests of wells
- Pound 26,002 violations
- Took 41,448 enforcement actions
- Returned to compliance 10,147'wefls
• Adopted the provisions of the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA)
amendments which t>an the infection ol untreated hazardous waste unless a
demonstration has been made that there will be no migration of hazardous
materials from the injection 2»ne,
26
-------
Sewage Sludge Use and Disposal
CHAPTER 4:
CONTAMINANT SOURCE
CONTROLS
Sewage sludge is a solid waste by-product of wastewater treatment. Municipal wastewater treat-
ment plants currently generate 7.7 million dry metric tons each year. This sludge sometimes contains
hazardous wastes and must meet disposal standards under the Solid Waste Act. It is often disposed
of in a landfill. Most sludge, however, does not contain contaminants at toxic levels and is better
viewed as a valuable resource that can be used as a fertilizer in agriculture and silviculture or proc-
essed into compost and used as a soil conditioner. If handled improperly, however, sludge disposal on
the land or in the water has the potential to contaminate ground water.
Accomplishments:

m, Broposed regulations for facilities generating sewage sludge and identified 5,000
final regulations in 1989 f&f state programs, including requirements for
jgrownd^water monitoring data.

n Proposed regulations glvtog standards for maxteuwn concentrations of poEtrtants
allowed in sewage sludge intended for disposal in landfills or spreading on land; a
]$ey concern was to protect vulnerable ground water.
27
-------
Septic Tank Management
CHAPTER 4:
CONTAMINANT SOURCE
CONTROLS
For domestic disposal, most households In rural areas and many In suburban areas rely on septic
systems. As of 1980, approximately 23 million domestic septic systems were In operation in the U.S.,
discharging about one billion gallons of wastewater annually. One-half million new systems are
Installed each year. Among the seven sources of ground-water contamination most frequently re-
ported by the states and territories, septic tanks seem to be of greatest concern. The degree of poten-
tial risk to ground water depends upon local hydrogeology and the size, design, installation, opera-
tion, and maintenance of the system. A 1980 estimate Indicates that up to one-third of the nation's
septic systems may be operating improperly. Except for large septic tank systems regulated as Class
V UIC wells, EPA does not regulate septic tanks.
Accomplishments: " ' ' ,,'"",,

m Prepared technical guides for local communities to design and pirn, local $eptic
systems to minimize risks of ground-water contamination (see reference list IB.
Appendix B), -, "
28
-------
Radioactive Waste Control
CHAPTER 4:
CONTAMINANT SOURCE
CONTROLS
Radioactive wastes are produced every day In the U.S. by a wide variety of facilities, such as
national defense and federal research facilities, hospitals, commercial Industrial facilities, and nu-
clear power reactors. These wastes have accumulated over many decades and are typically disposed
of by the Department of Energy (for federally generated wastes) and licensees of the Nuclear Regula-
tory Commission (for commercially generated wastes). Approximately 200,000 cubic meters of low-
level radioactive waste are generated annually. The Department of Energy operates six major and
several smaller low-level radioactive waste disposal sites. There are three operating commercial low-
level radioactive waste disposal sites but there may be as many as ten or more in the next few years.
Disposal of low-level waste and high-level waste can lead to ground-water contamination if precau-
tions are not taken. In addition, uranium and thorium mill tailings are located at 50 sites nationwide;
about half of these sites are still in operation. Rain and runoff water can leach the radioactive, as well
as the nonradioactive, hazardous constituents in the tailings into the ground water. Radioactivity
poses a special threat to ground water because of the longevity of the radionuclides, their ability to
migrate with ground water, and their ability to induce serious health effects.
Accomplishments:

M Established ground-water protection standards for active uranium and thorium
tailings sites/Standards for inactive mill tailings sites are under review by the Office
of Management and Budget prior to formal proposal, ' , ,

m Established ground-water protection standards for the disposal of high-level waste,
E#A is re-promulgating its high-level waste disposal standard, which will contain
grxmnd-water protection provisions.

M Developed proposed ground-water protection standards for the management and
disposal of low-level waste. These standards are under review by the Office of
Management and Budget prior to formal proposal.
29
-------
Drinking Water Requirements
CHAPTER 4:
CONTAMINANT SOURCE
CONTROLS
Approximately 74 million people, or 40 percent of the U.S. population, receive their drinking water
from public water supplies that rely on ground water. This does not Include the rural population,
which Is almost totally dependent on ground water from private wells for their drinking water. EPA
regulates the quality of public water supplies by requiring regular monitoring, public notification of
contamination, and specific tlmeframes for removal of the contamination. For percentages of state
and territory populations served by ground water for private use, see Exhibit 8.
Accomplishments:
• Completed a 1988 national inorganic and radionuclide chemical stacvey which
plied information or* occurrence of inorganic'chemicals and radicamclhjes in approxi-
mately 500 ground-water systems. ;

• Established and issued proposed or final MCLs for 5£ potential drtoMng water con-
taminants (counting microbiological contaminants afe one group),
• Issued final regulations on MCLs for volatile organic chemicals (July 1987J, fluoride
(April 1986), surface water treatment (June 1989), and eolform (June 1989),
• Plan to propose or promulgate regulations by 1992 to cover organic chemicals,
synthetic organic chemicals, lead and copper» radionuclldes, and disinfectants and
disinfection by-products, '-" ,„ ' I'"""'
t ,-.,,,, K '/H ,
m Increased state and federal enforcement of drinking water requirements.
Exhibits

PERCENTAGE OF STATE AND TERRITORY POPULATIONS SERVED BY GROUND
WATER FOR PRIVATE USE
LEGEND
Pwcent of PopulnUon
75-100
Scum: 1888 Stato 305(b) Water Quality Reports or 1088 USGS National Water Summary
30
-------
CHAPTER 4:
CONTAMINANT SOURCE
CONTROLS
Dredge and Fill Control for Wetlands
The United States Is losing one of its most valuable, and perhaps irreplaceable, resources - the
nation's wetlands. Once regarded as wastelands, wetlands are now recognized as important resources
to people and the environment. Of the estimated 200 million acres of wetlands that existed in the U.S.
prior to European settlement, only 99 million acres remained by the mid 1970s. Wetlands slow the
surface flow of water and reduce flooding, provide habitat to ducks and other wildlife, filter pollutants,
and in many cases, act as recharge sites for ground water or as discharge sites depending on the
location and hydrology of the individual wetland sites. Contaminants in dredge and fill material and
the subsequent loss of wetlands can therefore affect ground-water quality.
Accoinplislimeixts: ,,','",

W. Mttated the National Wetlands Policy Foram that was conducted by the Oonserva-
tfon Foundation at which a policy was adopted of "no net loss of wetlattds." This
policy will be applied to regulatory decisions under the Clean Water Act Section 404,
which requires approval from EPAlbefore aay modification is made to wetlands.

• Developed, in cooperation with the O.S. Army Corps of Engineers* the Wetlands
Evaluation Technique (WET).'WET provides specific methods for analysing ground-
water recharge and discharge functions.

s • Issued regulations for states to assume the Section 404 Bredge and Fffl Program of
the Clean Water Act to control the wlurae..and qualty of dredge and fill materials
before removal and disposal*
31
-------
-------
CHAPTER 5:
CONTAMINANT
CLEANUP
Ground-water contamination has occurred In every state. The full extent of the contamination is
not known, but the discovery of more contamination continues. A major source of contamination is
the legacy of abandoned waste sites around the country, particularly hazardous wastes sites. In other
cases, contamination created by spills or other accidental releases has caused severe ground-water
contamination problems. The federal and state regulatory communities now are faced with the tasks
of cleaning up these sites and fostering voluntary or enforcement-directed cleanup by the private
sector.

This chapter covers:
Superfund Sites
Hazardous Waste Management Facilities
Nonhazardous Land Disposal Facilities
33
-------
CHAPTER 5:
CONTAMINANT
CLEANUP
Superfund Sites
The Comprehensive Environmental Response. Compensation, and Liability Act (CERCLA), or
Superfund as it is known, is one important tool in EPA's response to the nation's hazardous waste
problem. Since the creation of Superfund in 1980, approximately 31,000 hazardous waste sites have
been identified. Of the sites at which investigations have been completed, approximately 42 percent
involve ground-water contamination, most of which affects or threatens ground water that is cur-
rently used or potentially usable for drinking water.

In the Superfund process, after a site is identified, a preliminary assessment is made to determine
if there is an imminent threat requiring immediate attention. Any time a threat is imminent, EPA can
take prompt action to remove the source of contamination and control the risk. If the threat is not
imminent, the site is ranked considering various factors. Ground water is one of three major factors
considered in scoring a site for future consideration. The scoring considers the extent of actual or
potential contamination of the ground water and the population that could be affected. Sites that
receive high "scores" on the ranking factors are placed on a National Priorities List (NPL). These sites
are then studied to determine the best remedial action. Sites presenting the most acute risks to
human health are given the earliest and most aggressive action.

When contamination of ground water is involved, cleanup often takes longer than anticipated
because its complex nature makes results difficult to predict. Ground-water monitoring is a key ele-
ment in understanding the problem and planning the cleanup. Data must be collected on a variety of
parameters such as type and movement of contaminants, and the hydrogeology of the site. Data col-
lection Is often done by using monitoring wells, which are costly and sometimes difficult to employ
successfully. Many of the cleanup methods that are used push the limits of technology, and experi-
ence Is lacking in their effectiveness and time requirements. If drinking water wells are found to be
contaminated, EPA may determine it is necessary to provide an alternate source of drinking water to
protect human health. For major Superfund program accomplishments, see Exhibit 9.
Accomplishments (1980-1989);

• Conducted preliminary assessments at most of the 30.844 identified sites (te.. 03
percent).
M Conducted more than 1,000 removal actions (prompt action to remove the source of
contamination when, risk is imminent),
• Evaluated about 9,000 sites to determine if they should be included on the National
Priorities List (NPL),
If Placed 951 sites on the NPL, and proposed addition of 179 sites to the list.
• Began work (including assessment) at 89 percent of the NPL sites.
• Completed remedial investigation feasibility studies at 319 sites, implemented 117
remedies, and deleted 16 sites as no longer presenting a risk.
m Issued a guidance document on remedial actions for contaminated ground water at
Superfund sites*
34
-------
CHAPTER 5:
CONTAMINANT
CLEANUP
Superfund Sites
Exhibit 9

SUMMARY OP FT 1987-89 SUPERFUND ACCOMPLISHMENTS
(FUND AND ENFORCEMENT)
Remedial Site Work:

Completions*

Deletions**
Remedial Action
Starts (1 st and Subseq.)
Remedial Design
Starts (1st and Subseq.)
Records of
Decision
Subsequent
Remedial
Investigations/
Feasibility Studies

First
Remedial
Investigations/
Feasibility Studies
Removal
Starts
(NPLandNON-NPL)
0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800 900 1,000
* FY 87=9, FY 88=7, FY 89=8

** FY 87=3, FY 88=6, FY 89=6
35
-------
CHAPTER 5:
CONTAMINANT
CLEANUP
Hazardous Waste Management Facilities
When rainfall or runoff percolates Into a waste site. It can pick up hazardous substances from the
waste and carry them into the underlying ground water. Or, even worse, the waste Itself can come
Into contact with the aquifer. As of late 1988, there were 1,162 hazardous waste land disposal facili-
ties In the U.S., many of which had contaminated ground water. Under the Resource Conservation
and Recovery Act (RCRA), Subtitle C, these land disposal facilities are required to obtain permits
either to continue operating or to close, and waste must be treated to reduce toxicily. To obtain a
permit, ground-water monitoring is required during the life of the permit to determine If contamina-
tion has entered the ground water, and to determine the effectiveness of any ground-water corrective
action. Approximately 39 percent of applications for operating permits were denied because of
ground-water concerns.

The vast majority of hazardous waste facilities are in the process of closing. There are two types of
facility closures: "clean" closures In which all the hazardous waste is removed from the facility prior
to closing, and landfill closures in which the hazardous waste remains In place and stringent long-
term ground-water monitoring is required to assure no future contamination will occur.
Accomplishments BB of December 1988;

• 86 percent of all hazardous waste disposal facilities are slated to close.

M Completed 853 facility assessments at closing land disposal facilities.

• Issued 174 operating permits,

H Denied 81 operating permits: -

m Conducted 116 facility Investigations,
^- s
M Completed 6 corrective action remedies,

• Provided training'workshops to all Regional offices on Investigations of
ground-water contamination.
36
-------
CHAPTER 5:
CONTAMINANT
CLEANUP
Nonhazardous Land Disposal Facilities
Of the 951 Superfund sites, 231 are municipal landfills. EPA is in the process of establishing a
framework for federal, state, and local government cooperation for the management of solid waste.
The federal role is to establish the overall regulatory direction, provide minimum standards for the
protection of human health and the environment, and provide technical assistance to states for plan-
ning and developing sound solid waste management. The actual implementation of the programs
remains a state and local function.

EPA expects to issue final regulations for municipal solid waste landfills in early 1990. These
regulations require ground-water monitoring systems and include corrective action requirements to
ensure that ground-water contamination at new and existing landfills will be detected and cleaned up
as necessary to protect human health and the environment. The owner or operator of the landfill is
required to conduct a corrective action assessment if contaminant levels are exceeded. The state will
be required to evaluate corrective action measures, select the remedy, establish corrective action
standards, and set the corrective action schedule. The owner or operator is required to carry out
corrective action until the state determines that ground-water protection standards have been met.
37
-------
-------
CHAPTER 6:
DATA MANAGEMENT
Effective management of our nation's ground-water resources by all levels of government depends
on adequate and accessible Information. A vast amount of ground-water data* collected from a multi-
tude of sources, does exist; however, the quality of the data Is not always known, the standards under
which they were collected varies, and easy access to the data is not always possible. In an effort to
improve ground-water data management, EPA has been working to:

• Develop common data standards;

• Improve access to ground-water data across programs; and

• Enhance ground-water data analysis capabilities.
Accomplishments:

-•I Developed a minimum set of data elements for ground water to promote consistency
Between data collections and to facilitate data sharing and cross-media analyses.
*£he set consists of 22 data elements, including geographic, well/spring, and
sample/analysis descriptors. EPA has adopted an Agency policy which requires the
collection of at least this set whenever EPA or its contractors collects ground-water
data, EPA has been working with members of Hip ground-water community to
encourage adoption of the jninimtrm set

'"" m Developed a set t>l "indicators" that can be used to track progress and set priorities
in ground-water'protectionefforts. These indicators cover such areas asr public
drinking water supplies* hazardous waste sites* waste sites and industrial sites* and
nonpoint sources of nitrate and pesticide contamination,

• Modified and enhanced SrORET, EPA*S national database for water quality
information* by updating the system to more readily accept ground-water data, and
adding user-friendly menu-driven functions-

M Sponsored a series of pilot projects at the county, state, and regional levels which
demonstrate,the effective use of Geographic Information Systems (GIS), Several
Regional offices are actively Incorporating GIS into their ground-water protection
efforts.
39
-------
-------
CHAPTER 7:
RESEARCH AND
DEVELOPMENT
EPA ground-water research serves two functions: It supports program office regulatory and tech-
nical assistance needs, and it builds a longer term scientific underpinning for future Agency needs
and priorities. The research supports seven program offices, EPA's ten Regions, and a number of
cross-media offices and task forces. EPA is increasing its emphasis on transferring technologies and
providing technical assistance to state and local agencies that must apply new knowledge and tech-
nologies to improve the protection of ground-water resources from man-made contamination.

EPA ground-water research is underway in four areas:

• Monitoring: to develop, evaluate and adopt geochemlcal and geophysical techniques.

• Transport and transformation: to predict the physical movement of water and contaminants in
the subsurface, which is incorporated into predictive models of contaminant behavior and
potential exposure to humans and the environment.

• "In situ" remediation: to develop methods to recover contaminants from, or to enhance,
subsurface treatment.

• Underground source control: to address protocols for injection well practices to control leak-
age to ground water.

The research program also funds certain "initiatives" to quickly build the scientific basis of key
Agency thrusts. Wellhead protection research is one such initiative. This program contains a number
of technical elements such as the hydrogeologic delineation of protection areas and the assessment
of potential contaminating sources. To carry out wellhead protection responsibilities, the states must
develop approaches to assess the risk to human health of contamination from various categories of
sources, and develop management criteria to reduce the threat from such activities. To support these
activities, research is needed to improve methods for detecting and monitoring ground-water contami-
nation, predicting the transport and transformation of pollutants In ground water, and using "in situ"
technologies to remediate ground-water contamination.
Accomplishments;
• Invested $22,6 million to ground-water research in JT1989; the i99GlJUdget is
similar, and includes $810 thousand for a research initiative in wellhead protection.
- ' ' ,-,>,,-,,„,, <-;-<; / - :,?"'--- •" -- -
• Provided technical support on 232 ground-water investigations and remedial
projects, and responded to numerous Inquiries through a Superfund Technology,
Support Project since 1987,

• Provided assistance to states in developing wellhead delineation models and man-
agement strategies for wellhead, protection areas,
** "• w ^«, •, s^x*-^"-"--'* -h*/"* " ' -•-- ••'
• Advanced the understanding of the biology of subsurface environments, progressing
from a rudimentary understanding to a point where control of biological processes Is
possible in certain situations •—* knowledge valuable in cleaning up contaminated
aquifers using bibremediation techniques. J ~,\ ^ „ \~-~--
' "'" ' '• •••••••• •• _',_" s~.. -,C .
II Developed a new computer model that provides a method of screening a geographi-
cal data base to Identify sites vulnerable to ground-water pbflutiorL The model"
allows rapid evaluation of soils to determine the leaching potential of pesticides,
toxic and other etiemicals. -~
41
-------
-------
CHAPTER 8:
POLLUTION
PREVENTION
EPA recently established a pollution prevention program with the principal charge of developing
a policy and Integrating pollution prevention into Agency program activities. The Agency has issued a
proposed policy that highlights a hierarchy of pollution prevention in terms of source reduction, envi-
ronmentally sound recyling, treatment and disposal. Currently the program is funding several pilot
projects. Reducing and eliminating the quantity and sources of pollution will be a significant means
of reducing contamination of the nation's ground-water resources.
a proposed Pollution Prevention Folicyfor public comment.

Proposed approximately $10 million for 1991 and 1992 to Bind pilot projects to
examine the feasfbflitjr of preventtrig pollution* with approximately $2 mflliori each,
year going to ground-water related projects.

Awarded almost $4 million in grants to states for development or support of
prevention programs, and at least $6 million is proposed for FY 1990.
43
-------
-------
CHAPTER 9:
COORDINATION OF
ACTIVITIES
The broad spectrum of authority for ground-water protection, Including CERCLA, RCRA, FIFRA,
CWA, SDWA and TSCA, makes it essential that ground-water activities be coordinated both within
EPA and among the federal and state agencies.

The Agency has a new emphasis on improving interagency and intra-agency actions dealing with
the threat to ground-water from agricultural chemicals.

To help achieve coordination with other federal agencies, EPA is working closely with the U.S.
Department of Agriculture (USDA), the Department of the Interior (DOI), and other federal agencies on
the President's Water Quality Initiative to improve management of agricultural chemicals and wastes.
The Agency has established an internal Agricultural Policy Committee to coordinate and better inte-
grate its environmental programs with USDA agricultural programs. Emphasis is being placed on
coordinating research in the Midwestern corn and soybean belt. Further, EPA is coordinating re-
search efforts with all the other agencies doing ground-water research through the Inter-agency
Subcommittee on Ground-Water of the Federal Coordinating Committee on Science, Engineering, and
Technology. Finally, EPA continues to work with other agencies to implement EPA's regulatory,
technical assistance, and technology transfer responsibilities through the Federal Roundtable and
through hundreds of other coordination efforts.
EPA Coordination Activities with Other Federal Agencies and States:
I As part of the President's Water Quality Initiative, headed by USDA. joined in the
new Mid-Continent Initiative to ,stndy the Impact of agricultural chemicals qn ground
water,, " „,'„ , , -
i Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) with the U.S, Geological Survrey'(USG'SJ which
Includes an EPA-USGS Coordination Committee to facilitate information exchange
and resolve differences between agencies, A second MOU with USGS addressed
ground+water research, training, and monitoring.
I Federal Coordinating Council for Science, Engineering, and Technology established an
Inter-Agency Committee on Ground Water and prepared a report which presents a
compilation of federal, scientific* and technical activities in ground water.' ; /
I The Ground Water Subcommittee of the Inter-Agency Committee on Water Data meets
bimonthly to'discuss interagency ground-water data needs arid issues,'and is
attended by EPA, DOI, and USGS, _
I The National Coordinating Workshop of National Water Quality Assessment meets
biannually* and is attended by EPA, DOI, and USGS.
i Cooperating with USGS to determine types of hydrogeologteal maps needed by federal,
state, and local environmental managers. ...
I Participates in a cooperative agreement with tTSGS to conduct interdisciplinary field
Site investigations of processes affecting the movement; of hazardous waste through
the subsurface, " ',,,---.. :*-"^\'^'^*'" f - (t-t
i Participated on several workgroups with DOI, USDA, and other agencies on under-
ground injection wells, " " ......... . ""™" " " " y,L\
I Works on Tindergrottnd injection control programs on federal lands $$h DOL ,
45
-------
-------
Appendix A

EPA REGULATIONS & GUIDANCE FOR GROUND-WATER PROTECTION
i!
it
II
»

ll
= ?
s s
= i

11
II
.2

si
01 ••>
•g

•S °»

i|§

ll
- K 3.

> = .S
= l!i
§ « ° S
I 5= v
1:1
I
1

11
.11
si
(Si
J-i
'g-3

«sl
l».
•S3
5
I
I
11
S o
•s
o-S
1^
'3 &
5"1
>~
oe^ j.
.a
s
i
0.
D.
I
|3

ii
1
I

fa
•a
47
-------
Appendix A

EPA REGULATIONS & GUIDANCE FOR GROUND-WATER PROTECTION

(Cont'd)
11

"o~S
»*

it
u g.
B<
2 £

1|
po.
° «>
ig

If
|

oje
-fs
ill
il 111
:M ueo:
o
ll
II"
II
-------
Appendix B

SELECTED REFERENCES
Drinking Water
U.S. Congress, Safe Drinking Water Act. As Amended by the Safe Drinking Water Act Amendments of
1986, (Washington, B.C.: 1986)

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Water, Is Your Drinking Water Safe?. (Washington,
B.C.: 1989)

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Blinking Water, Removal of Radon from Household
Water. fWashlngton. B.C.: 1987)

Hazardous Waste Disposal/Non-Hazardous Waste Disposal

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Solid Waste, Draft, Practical Guide for Assessing and
Remediating Contaminated Sites. May 1989, (Washington, B.C.: 1989)

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Solid Waste, Interim Final, Statistical Analysis of
Ground-Water Monitoring at RCRA Facilities. (Washington, B.C.: 1989)

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Waste Programs Enforcement, Final, RCRA. Ground-
Water Monitoring Technical Enforcement Guidance Bocument. (Washington, B.C.: 1986)

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Solid Waste, Final, RCRA Facility Assessment Guid-
ance. (Washington, B.C.: 1986)

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Solid Waste, Interim Final, RCRA Facility Investiga-
tion (RFH Guidance. OSWER Birective No. 9502.00-6B. EPA 530/89/031, (Washington, B.C.:
1989)

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Solid Waste and Emergency Response, Solid Waste
Bisposal Facility Criteria: Proposed Rule, 40 CFR Parts 257-258, August 1988, (Washington, B.C.:
1988)

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Solid Waste, Alternative Concentration Limit Guid-
ance. Part I Policy and Information Requirements, (Washington, B.C.: 1987)

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Solid Waste, Alternate Concentration Limit Guidance
Based on 264.94fB) Criteria - Part II Case Studies. (Washington, B.C.: 1988)

Pesticides/Toxic Substances Management

U.S. Congress, Federal Insecticide. Fungicide and Rodenticide Act. As Amended in 1988, (Washing-
ton, B.C.: 1988)

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Pesticides and Toxic Substances, Proposed Pesticide
Strategy. (Washington, B.C.: 1987)

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Pesticide Programs, Pesticides in Ground-Water Bata
Base. 1988 Interim Report. (Washington, B.C.: 1988)

RL. Mason, L.L. Piper, W.J. Alexander, R.W. Pratt, S.K. LIddle, J.T. Lessler, M.C. Gauley, National
Pesticide Survey Pilot Evaluation Technical Report. (Prepared by Research Triangle Institute for
U.S. EPA, 1988)
49
-------
Appendix B

SELECTED REFERENCES (Cont'd)

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Pesticides and Toxic Substances, Agricultural
Chemicals in Ground Water; Proposed Pesticides Strategy. (Washington, D.C.: 1987)

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Pesticides and Toxic Substances, Toxic Substances
Control Act (TSCA) Report to Congress for Fiscal Year 1986. (Washington, D.C.: 1987)

Radiological Waste

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Air and Radiation, Re-Promulgation of Environmental
Standards for Disposal of Spent Nuclear Fuel and High-Level and Transuranic Waste. Proposed
Rule, 40 CFRPart 191 SubpartB, (Washington. D.C.: 1989)

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Air and Radiation, Environmental Standards for the
Management. Storage and Land Disposal of Low Level Radioactive Waste and Naturally Occuring
and Accelerator-Produced Radioactive Materials Waste. Proposed Rule 40 CFR Part 193 and 764,
(Washington, D.C.: 1989)

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Air and Radiation, Environmental Standards for
Uranium and Thorium Mill Tailings at Licensed Commercial Processing Sites. Final Rule, FR 40
Part 192, (Washington. D.C.: 1983)

Research and Development

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Environmental Processes and Effects Research,
Environmental Processes and Effects Research. (Washington, D.C.: 1988)

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Research and Development, Ground-Water Research,,
(Washington, D.C.: 1988)

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Research and Development, Final, Ground Water.
EPA/625/6-87/016, (Washington, D.C.: 1987)

Resource Protection

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Ground-Water Protection, Ground-Water Protection
Strategy. (Washington, D.C.: 1984)

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Ground-Water Protection, Guidance for Applicants
for State Wellhead Protection Program Assistance Funds Under the Safe Drinking Water Act.
(Washington, D.C.: 1987)

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Ground-Water Protection, Developing a State Well-
head Protection Program; A User's Guide to Assist State Agencies Under the Safe Drinking Water
Aei. (Washington, D.C.: 1987)

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Ground-Water Protection, Guidelines for Delineating
Wellhead Protection Areas. (Wahlngton, D.C.: 1987)

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Ground-Water Protection, Wellhead Protection; A
Peciston Maker's Guide. (Washington, D.C.: 1987)
so
-------
Appendix B

SELECTED REFERENCES (Cont'd)

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Ground-Water Protection, Protecting Ground-Water:
Pesticides and Agricultural Practices. (Washington. B.C.: 1988)

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Ground-Water Protection, Technical Assistance
Report 440/6-86-005, Sp.ptlr Systems and Ground-Water Contamination: An Executive's Guide
(Washington, D.C.: 1986)

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Ground-Water Protection, Technical Assistance
Report 440/6-87-007, Septir Systems and Ground-Water Contamination: A Program Manager's
Guide and Reference Book. (Washington, D.C.: 1986)

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Ground-Water Protection, Technical Assistance
Report 440/6-87-007, Septic Tank Siting to Minimize the Contamination of Ground Water bv
Microorganisms (Washington, D.C.: 1987)

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Ground-Water Protection, Sole Source Aquifer
Designation Petitioners Guidance. (Washington, D.C.: 1987)

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Ground-Water Protection, Wellhead Protection Pro-
gram: Tools for Local Governments. (Washington, D.C.: 1989)

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Ground-Water Protection, Indicators for Measuring
Progress in Ground-Water Protection. (Washington, D.C.: 1988)

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Ground-Water Protection, Local Financing fpr Well-
head Protection. (Washington, D.C.: 1989)

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Ground-Water Protection, Final Draft Guidelines for
Ground-Water Classification Under the EPA Ground-Water Protection Strategy. (Washington, B.C.;
1986)

Urban Institute, State Management nf Ground Water: Assessment of Practices and Progress. E.B.
Liner Et. al, (Washington, B.C.: 1989)

Sewage Sludge Use and Disposal

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Water Regulations and Standards, Standards for
' Bisnosal of Sewage Sludge. Proposed Rule, 54 FR 5746, February 6, 1989, (Washington, B.C.:
1989)

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Water Regulations and Standards, NPBES Permit
Regulations and State Slnriffp Management Requirements. Final Fule, 54 FR 18716, May 2, 1989,
(Washington, B.C.: 1989)

Superfund

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Emergency and Remedial Response, Guidance on
Remedial Actions for Contaminated Ground Water at Superfund Sites. (Washington. B.C.: 1988)

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Solid Waste and Emergency Response, AManage-
' merit Review of the SupprfnT^ Program (the 90 Bav Report), presented to William K. Reilly, Admin-
istrator, (Washington, B.C.: 1989)
51
-------
Appendix B

SELECTED REFERENCES (Cont'd)

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Solid Waste and Emergency Response, National Oil
and Hazardous Substances Pollution Contingency Plan. Proposed Rule, 40 CFR part 300, (Wash-
ington, D.C.: 1988)

Underground Injection Control

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Drinking Water, UIC Program Annual Report.
fWashington, D.C.: 1988)

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Drinking Water, Class V Injection Wells. Current
Inventory. Effects on Ground Water. Technical Recommendations. Executive Summary of the
Report to Congress. (Washington, D.C.: 1987)

U.S. General Accounting Office, Drinking Water. Safeguards Are Not Preventing Contamination From
Injected Oil and Gas Wastes. (Washington, D.C.: 1989)

Underground Storage Tanks

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Underground Storage Tanks, Funding Options for
State and Local Governments. (Washington, D.C.: 1988)

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Underground Storage Tanks, Musts for USTs (Under-
ground Storage Tanks). (Washington, D.C.: 1988)

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Underground Storage Tanks, Leak Lookout. (Wash-
ington, D.C.: 1988)

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Underground Storage Tanks, Dollars and Sense.
fWashington, D.C.: 1988)

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Water Enforcement and Permits, Model NPDES
Permit for Discharges Resulting from the Cleanup of Gasoline Released from UST. (Washington,
D.C.: 1989)

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Underground Storage Tanks, Oh No! Leaks and
Spills. (Washington, D.C.: 1989)

Wetlands

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Wetlands, Advance Identification (Guidance to EPA
Regional Offices on the Use of Advance Identification Authorities Under Section 404 of the Clean
Water Act). (Washington, D.C.: 1989)

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Department of the Army, Soil
Conservation Service Federal Manual for Identifying and Delineating Jurisdictional Wetlands.
(Washington, D.C.: 1989)
52
-------