United States
Environmental Protection
Agency
EPA/600/N-93/015
September 1993
rxEPA
ECHNOLOGY
RANSFER
from
Office of Research and Development
Office of Science, Planning, & Regulatory Evaluation
New Technology Transfer
Publications
[use form in back to order]
Control of CSO Discharges
(625/R-93/007)
This manual presents technical guid-
ance for use in selecting and designing
controls for discharges from combined
sewer overflows (CSOs). This manual will
assist municipalities and regional sewer
authorities that are required to provide
adequate control of overflows from
combined sewer systems.
The manual concentrates primarily on
the six most often applied CSO control
technologies:
• In-system Controls/In-line Storage
• Off-line Near-surface Storage/
Sedimentation
• Deep Tunnel Storage
• Coarse Screening
• Swirl/Vortex Technologies
• Disinfection
The manual also addresses CSO
control process selection by discussing
various performance goals that can be set
for CSO controls, data requirements for the
design of CSO controls, and factors that
influence control technology selection. The
manual concludes with a presentation of
costs for various CSO controls.
Nitrogen Control (625/R-93/010)
This manual is an update and revision
of the original 1975 edition. It strives to
maintain the high technical quality and
generous provision of reference materials
provided by the 1975 edition, although it
represents a significant shift in overall
content. Given the experience of the past
18 years, the focus of this second edition
is directed to those biological/mechanical
systems that have found widespread use
for nitrification and nitrogen removal.
Design criteria for physical/chemical
systems are not provided; however, there
is a brief discussion of such processes in
Chapter 2, in which their applicability under
specific site conditions and wastewater
applications is addressed. The design of
natural systems also is not considered
within the context of this manual, except in
the planning and development of alterna-
tives for technology selection, a point of
discussion within Chapter 2. Adequate
references are given in Chapter 2 to assist
the reader in seeking design information
on both natural systems and physical/
chemical processes.
The primary audience is the designer of
small to medium sized facilities, although
the application of the manual is not limited
to any range of plant sizes. Detailed
theoretical discussions are not provided.
Rather, the manual focuses on the major
process and design aspects considered in
the development of an effective design. It
begins with process basics and proceeds
to the presentation of detailed design
criteria and the development of process
designs, using examples to demonstrate
calculation sequences. In addition, the
manual is organized to help the designer in
the planning stages of a facility, highlight-
ing important process and O&M consider-
ations.
The manual also is assembled for use
as a desk reference or handbook. In
addition to aiding designers, the manual
can serve as a source for reviewers,
operators, regulators, and manufacturers.
The manual progresses from a broad
discussion of nitrogen in the environment,
to the concepts of using biological pro-
cesses to control or remove nitrogen, and
finally to the details of designing specific
systems. The first chapter describes the
relationships of nitrogen in the environ-
ment. The fundamental purpose of the
manual, implementation of nitrogen
controls in municipal systems, is brought
into focus in Chapter 2 by outlining design
principles. Issues are presented that enter
into the designer's strategy. The chapter
discusses the relative importance of each
issue in order to help the designer avoid
Printed on Recycled Paper
-------
pitfalls before they are compounded by the
growing detail of design. Chapters 3 and 4
give the theoretical foundations of the
nitrification and denitrification processes by
drawing on concepts of microbiology,
chemistry, and kinetics. Although the
discussions of mathematical and computer
modeling in Chapter 5 are intended to
stand independently from the other
chapters, they provide a useful bridge
between Chapters 3 and 4 and Chapters
6, 7, and 8.
In the latter three chapters, the concep-
tual bases of nitrification and denitrification
are developed to design criteria, and
design examples are presented to assist in
producing a specific configuration that will
meet performance objectives. Chapter 6
addresses suspended growth and at-
tached growth configurations for biological
nitrification. Denitrification processes are
addressed in Chapter 7, but only as
applied in a separate stage using a
supplemental carbon source. The current
trend has been to accomplish nitrification
and denitrification in single-sludge sys-
tems, using wastewater carbon for the
denitrification step. Single-sludge systems,
which are addressed in Chapter 8, have
seen increasing application in lieu of the
alternative two- or three-sludge systems
for nitrogen removal.
impacts of urban runoff. In addition, the
handbook will be quite useful to federal
and state regulatory personnel and
environmental consultants.
bibliographic references to look further into
the topic when needed.
Use of Airborne, Surface and
Borehole Geophysical Techniques
at Contaminated Sites: a Reference
Guide (625/R-92/007)
This document is a single source tool
for reviewing the many and varied geo-
physical techniques that can be used for
characterization, screening, and remedia-
tion efforts at contaminated sites. To
explore the spectrum of available tech-
niques when preparing or reviewing a
project is a monumental task, requiring the
use of a library of references. The docu-
ment will serve regional and state staff, the
private sector, and educators in consider-
ing the selection of geophysical techniques
at a contaminated site. The descriptions of
each technique are concise and brief,
some accompanied by diagrams. The
document gives good coverage to the
available methods, including which
methods are appropriate for certain
circumstances. The document contains
references to literature demonstrating the
use of the technique for given purposes.
Urban Runoff Pollution Prevention
and Control Planning (625/R-93/004)
This handbook provides a systematic
approach to developing comprehensive
urban runoff pollution prevention and
control programs. Municipalities face many
regulatory and programmatic requirements
relating to the management and control of
urban runoff. This handbook presents a
step-by-step process to plan urban runoff
control that can be adapted to site-specific
conditions and needs. The handbook is
divided into chapters that outline each
major step in the planning process. At the
end of each chapter, case studies are
used to illustrate application of each
planning step. Chapters address the
following:
• Regulatory Framework
• Overview of the Planning Process
• Defining Existing Conditions
• Data Collection and Analysis
• Problem Assessment and Ranking
• Screening Best Management
Practices
• Selection of Best Management
Practices
• Plan Implementation
This handbook will be a valuable tool for
communities facing the challenges of
assessing and controlling the adverse
Subsurface Field Screening,
Characterization and Monitoring
Techniques: A Desk Reference
Guide (635/R-93/003a and b)
This two-volume set contains a variety
of references covering the many tech-
niques available for screening, characteriz-
ing, and monitoring sites. The documents
will be of great use to individuals in both
the regulatory and the regulated communi-
ties. It provides regional and state staff, the
private sector, and educators with a
document from which they can begin to
analyze a plan for site remediation. The
document is a starting point for individuals
determining if methods selected for use on
a site are appropriate. It gives examples of
where the method has been used, under
what circumstances, and identifies
successes and failures. It discusses the
relative costs and which methods are used
frequently for a given situation. The
assumption has been made that the user
has at least a minimal knowledge of the
subject area. A user should seek the
advice of a professional or use some of the
Municipal Pretreatment Programs
(625/R-93/006)
This guide presents information for use
by municipal wastewater treatment plant
personnel involved in the control of sewer
discharges from commercial and industrial
facilities. In most instances, the control of
these nondomestic discharges to sewer
systems is required as the main goal of a
pretreatment program. Therefore, this
guide concentrates on assisting pretreat-
ment program personnel in integrating
pollution prevention into program activities.
The guide will also be useful to commercial
and industrial dischargers to municipal
sewer systems because it provides a good
overview of pollution prevention concepts
and detailed summaries of pollution
prevention opportunities at specific types
of commercial and industrial facilities.
The guide is comprised of three main
chapters:
• Overview of Pollution Prevention
Concepts
• Targeting Pollution Prevention Efforts
• Promoting Pollution Prevention
among Regulated and Unregulated
Sewer Users
In addition, the guide presents pollution
prevention summaries on several types of
commercial and industrial facilities:
• Automotive-Related
• Commercial Printing
• Fabricated Metal Products
• Industrial and Commercial Laundries
• Paint Manufacturing
• Pesticide Formulation
• Pharmaceuticals Manufacturing
• Photoprocessing
• Printed Circuit Board Manufacturing
• Selected Hospital Waste Streams
The guide provides information that
focuses on encouraging the adoption of
pollution prevention methods that assist
municipal wastewater treatment plants in
reducing the influent loadings of commer-
cial and industrial pollutants and resultant
effects on the operation of the POTW.
Non-Agricultural Pesticide Users
(625/R-93/009)
This guide provides an overview of non-
agricultural pesticide use and presents
options for minimizing waste generation
through source reduction and recycling.
-------
The guide is intended for use
by the non-agricultural pesti-
cide industry, regulatory
agency representatives,
industry suppliers, and
consultants. Specific small
industry users that can benefit
from this information include
lawn and garden; forestry, tree
and shrub; sanitary; structural;
nursery; and greenhouse pest
control services. Although
these industries do not
generate large quantities of
waste, some of the wastes can
be acutely toxic.
This publication consists of
the following sections:
• A profile of the non-
agricultural pesticide
industry and the pro-
cesses used in it.
• Waste generation options
for the industry.
• Waste minimization
assessment guidelines
and work sheets.
• Appendices, containing
case studies of waste
generation and waste
minimization practices in
the industry and referral
sources.
A number of waste minimi- 1)
zation options are discussed,
including integrated pest
management practices,
inventory management, proper 2)
mixing, product substitution,
container waste minimization,
efficient applications, house-
keeping practices, and 3)
economic considerations for
these practices. Three case
studies are drawn from the
California Department of Health
Services publications on field
assessments involving
Herbicide applications to a
large business and
industrial park of approxi-
mately 500 acres;
Weed and pest control
practices to a regional
road and highway system;
An integrated pest control
management program to
determine pest control
strategies for a large park
system that covers several
thousand acres and
includes golf courses, a
botanical garden, commer-
cial farms, and range
lands.
EPA is establishing a database of
GRITS/STAT users. The database wilt
be used to notify GRITS/STAT users of
updates to the software and potential
problems and solutions encountered in
using the softwaf$. If you are a GRITS/
STAT user, send your name, organiza-
tion, address, and phone number to
USEPA
Attn: GFHTS/STAT
Mail Code #5303 W
Washington DC 20460
EPA is pleased to offer you software
we feet will enable you to analyze
technical data efficiently. Since the
softy/are is currently being improved
and expanded, s^nd any problems
encountered white using it or enhance-
ment ideas for it to the above address.
Hotline telephone support is
available by catting 913-551-7074.
BugAtortf
Several users have detected st
bug— the FCfD problem. This problem
can appear as garbled characters in
the FCID column or as a message
stating "facility does not have data" or
"wefts do not exist." ft is created in
several ambiguous ways.
The problem corrupts the FCID
structure, shifting it from 12 characters
to 10. To fix a corrupted GRITS/STAT
dbase file, several approaches are
available:
A. The first approach copies the
facility's information to another
"target path." This can be done by
using the Utilities-Create Skeleton
option and creating another
directory on the hard disk. Sec-
ondly, use the Utilities-Facility to
Disk option to copy the "good"
information to the newly created
directory. Only uncorrupted informa-
tion will be copied to the new
directory. This approach doe$ not
save the corrupted information.
R This approach corrects the cor-
rupted information. Use the ASSIST
database edit tool in dBase.
1. Select the corrupted dBase fife
{WELLS.DBF,
PARAMETER.DBF,?}
2. Use the "Modify-Database file"
command to restructure the
FCID to the needed 12 charac-
ters. Selecting the above
command and typing Control-
End wiii restructure the FCID
field to the correct size.
3, Use the "Updat6-Brow$&"
command to remove unwanted
characters from the FCfD field.
Agatri, use Control-End to save
the changes.
To alleviate the FCID problem, use
the Utility-Skeleton option to create a
separate subdirectory for each facility.
Printing a Control Chart in the
Statistics module with the "hot key"
(alt-P} will cause tfie printer driver to
"hang." To prints control chart, use the
"GraphtcsPftnter-Port" option to choose
a "filename" instead of the usual LPT1:.
The system will create a compatible
graphics file for the printer type with the
filename chosen each time the alt-P is
pressed. Use the DOS CQPY/B
command to copy the graphics file
"filename" to the printer.
Please contact the hotline for
assistance fixing the FCID problem or
the control chart problem.
Thank you for your interest and
support of the GRITS/STAT software.
-------
The EPA/NRWA Ground Water
Well Head Protection Program
There is probably no environmental area where the adage,
"An ounce of prevention is worth a pound of cure," has as
much meaning as it does in ground water protection. Ameri-
cans rely on ground water for over half of their drinking water.
Ninety-five percent of all rural communities and agronomic
areas depend on ground water. For small communities
throughout the United States, it is a life-sustaining resource.
There is an abundance of ground water in the United
States, and it has been taken for granted in the past. The
earth was viewed as a natural filter. We know now, however,
that ground water is vulnerable to contamination, and that the
results of that contamination can cause a profound financial
impact on small communities. Installing treatment facilities,
locating and developing new water sources, or remediating
contamination are costly alternatives.
Ground water contamination headlines are making the
papers across the country:
From the Salt Lake Tribune —Kennecott, State Lawyers
Hedge on How They Settled on Water - Attorneys from
Kennecott and the Utah Department of Environmental Quality
were reluctant Friday to explain how they decided that
contaminated ground water in western Salt Lake County was
worth $12 million. Both Kennecott and the state agreed to the
figure as a settlement for contamination caused by runoff
water from its mining operations in the Oquirrh Mountains.
The $12 million has been criticized as too low by the Salt
Lake County Water Conservancy District. They estimate the
water's value at two to three times this figure.
From the EPA—Ground Water Action Against 10 Major
Oil Companies - More than 1,800 service stations operated
by major oil companies in 49 states and territories have been
guilty of discharging contaminated automotive fluids into, or
directly above, underground sources of drinking water,
according to proposed administrative orders issued by EPA
and agreed to by the companies involved. In addition to
proposed penalties totaling $838,761, the companies agreed
to extensive cleanup measures and other steps to protect
ground water around the stations.
From the Associated Press—Cyril Files Suit Over Water
- The town of Cyril, Oklahoma, wants four companies to pay
for a new public water source it had to obtain after the
corporations allegedly polluted its water supply. The town of
Cyril filed a $10 million lawsuit contending that oil wells have
contaminated the town's public water supply.
From the Associated Press—Fuel Spill Headed for Lake
Michigan, Watch Group Says - Diesel fuel is seeping from a
ruptured underground pipe near Charlevoix, Michigan, and
may reach Lake Michigan before it can be cleaned up, an
environmental group says. A regional environmental group
contends that up to 20,000 gallons of diesel has contami-
nated the soil and ground water at the Medusa Cement Co.
The company and the Michigan Department of Natural
Resources must jointly determine how much fuel is in the
ground and water and remove contaminated soil and ground
water. The cleanup could cost up to $500,000 and take three
to seven years.
These are a few sensational examples of the vulnerability
of our ground water supplies and the extensive costs
associated with their cleanup. Additionally, most Superfund
sites have ground water cleanup phases that can be costly.
Massive spills and industrial pollution make the headlines,
but ground water can become contaminated in much more
subtle ways. The backyard mechanic who dumps used oil on
the ground, the homeowner who overuses pesticides on
lawns and gardens, or the dry cleaning establishment that
dumps solvents down the drain are examples of subtle, but
potentially just as costly, contamination threats.
Preventing contamination by protecting ground water
sources is an effective approach for communities that want to
ensure a high-quality water supply and economic viability,
now and in the future. It is also the approach of the EPA,
where pollution prevention is viewed as the most effective
and cost-efficient form of environmental protection. In an
effort to promote that approach, a joint EPA/National Rural
Water Association (NRWA) Ground Water Wellhead Protec-
tion Program was funded through a $1 million grant in March
of 1991. The program is proving to be successful and cost
effective.
The Program
The wellhead protection program began March 15th, 1991,
with a $1 million grant from EPA's Office of Ground Water
and Drinking Water. In its first year, the program was able to
protect the drinking water sources for 303,367 Americans.
Over 400 water systems initiated wellhead protection plans.
After the second year, over 1,250,000 American's lives and
communities were safer because of wellhead protection.
To implement the program, NRWA hired 12 ground water
technicians to work in 14 states: Arkansas, Georgia, Idaho,
Iowa, Kentucky, Louisiana, Michigan, Massachusetts, New
Hampshire, Pennsylvania, Utah, Vermont, West Virginia, and
Wisconsin. The technicians were selected on the basis of
their experience with municipal water programs, technical
knowledge, communications skills, and willingness to travel.
They received intensive training on the program's objectives,
ground water pollution, wellhead protection, a simple five-
step planning approach that can be accomplished at the local
level, outreach and education strategies, and follow-up
techniques. Figure 1 shows a ground water technician.
These technicians visit small communities and rural water
systems that rely on ground water and promote the benefits
of a wellhead protection program. They make presentations
to community decision makers about the importance and
benefits of protecting their water supply. When community
members choose to protect their drinking water, the techni-
cian assists them with the development and implementation
of their plan. This service is provided free to the community.
-------
Figure 1. Ground water technician using computer at WHPA training session.
The Five-Step Plan
Step 1—Selecting a Planning Team
After decision makers have decided to protect their water
supply with a well head protection plan (WHPP), they must
select a representative group of community members that will
form a planning team. The size and makeup of the team will
depend on local needs and style. The team should include a
diverse group that represents the different interests in the
community. The team might include represenjatives from
community service organizations, local government, infra-
structure services like the water plant or fire department, and
local business and farming interests. The ground water
technician can provide technical assistance and information
to the planning team throughout the development of the plan.
Step 2—Delineating the Well Head Protection Area
The first step in any delineation technique involves
gathering as much information about the hydrologic and
geologic nature of the water source as possible. The planning
team must develop a base map of the community showing
detailed natural features of the area, both surface and sub
surface. This map and the information gathered are then
used to begin the delineation process. Regulations for
delineating protection areas vary from state to state. Delinea-
tion methods range from a simple fixed radius circle around
the well site to intricate, computer generated, numerical
models.
Delineation methods include the following:
Arbitrary Fixed Radius
This method involves drawing a circle around the well site.
In the state of Louisiana, a one-mile radius is used for a
confined aquifer and a two-mile radius for unconfined
aquifers. In some areas of Georgia, a 1,500-foot radius is
used. The radius length should reflect the hydrogeology of
the area. Using this method is inexpensive, easily imple-
mented, and requires little technical expertise. However, this
method is not based on hydrogeologic principles, and there
may not be enough information available to select an
appropriate radius. This method includes the risk that the
defined protection will be too small, which could lead to
inadequate protection of the recharge area, or too large,
which could increase the cost of land management in the
area unnecessarily. A sample map of this method is shown in
Figure 2.
Calculated Fixed Radius
This delineation approach involves drawing a circle around
the well that represents a specific ground water travel time.
The equation used to calculate the circle's radius is based on
the volume of water a well could potentially pump in a
specified time period. This time period (e.g., five years) is
selected to provide adequate time to respond to a contamina-
tion incident.
The calculated fixed radius equation is
where
Q = Pumping rate of well (cu ft/yr)
n = Aquifer porosity (percent)
H = Open interval or length of well screen (feet)
t = Travel time to well (years) selected based on
hydrology and contaminant source locations
This method provides greater accuracy than the arbitrary
radius method but still does not take into account all the
factors influencing the movement of contaminants in the
aquifer. This method might not be effective in areas where
there is complex geology and where hydrologic boundaries
exist. This method is relatively inexpensive and requires only
minimal technical expertise.
-------
WHPA BOUNDARY ,*
Figure 2. Arbitrary fixed radius delineation in Palmetto, Louisiana.
Analytical Modeling
This method uses equations to delineate the boundaries of
wellhead protection areas. These models are useful for
understanding ground water flow networks and potential
contaminant transportation systems. Uniform flow equations
are used to define zones of contribution to a pumping well in
a sloping water table. These equations also define ground
water flow within an aquifer.
Specific hydrogeologic data for each well are required for
these equations. The data include hydraulic conductivity,
transmissivity, hydraulic gradient, pumping rate, and satu-
rated zone thickness. The data are used to define specific
protection area features, like the distance to the
downgradient divide (stagnation point) and appropriate
contribution zones.
This method is relatively inexpensive, but the level of
technical expertise involved may require a consultant.
Analytical modeling is one of the most extensively used
delineation methods.
WHPA Code 2.1 (Computer Modeling)
This method is a modular, semianalytical ground water
flow model developed by EPA's Office of Ground Water and
Drinking Water to assist state and local technical staffs with
delineations. This computer modeling program solves
analytical equations for two-dimensional flows to a well under
various hydrologic conditions. It can be used on most
personal computers and is user-friendly. The program
contains modules that include Multiple Well Capture Zones,
General Particle Tracking, and Uncertainty Analysis. WHPA
(pronounced 'woppa') can be used to model multiple pump-
ing and injection wells and can simulate barrier or stream
boundary conditions that exist over the entire aquifer.
The advantages of WHPA modeling are the precise
determination of ground water flow paths and travel times,
incorporating the effects of well interference, and rapid
solutions of analytical equations. The disadvantages stem
from the limitation of two-dimensional modeling and assump-
tions that the aquifer is homogeneous and isotropic (proper-
ties that are the same in all directions).
Hydrogeologic Mapping
This method uses geological, geomorphic, geophysical,
and dye tracing methods to map flow boundaries and time of
travel data. Hydrogeologic mapping is useful for delineating
areas of karst aquifers that exhibit high flow rates and are
rapidly recharged due to channel-like structure. Dye tracing is
essential in karst aquifers because ground water flow
patterns commonly do not follow topographic divides and can
change significantly depending on conditions. This method
requires a high level of expertise in geological science and
professional judgment based on experience. It can be
expensive because of the amount of data needed and can be
tricky if data extrapolation techniques are used.
Numerical Modeling
This method is similar to EPA's WHPA, but the computer
models generated are three dimensional. The numerical
approach emphasizes mathematical flow models and
contaminant transport models. Flow models are used to
calculate changes in the distribution of head pressure,
drawdowns, rate and direction of flow, travel times, and fluid
interfaces. Transport and fate models predict movement,
concentrations, and mass balance components of water
soluble constituents.
Numerical modeling is advantageous in its ability to model
aquifers that exhibit complex hydrogeology, and requires a
significant amount of field information. The data required
cover a wide range of hydrogeologic parameters. The
predictive nature of modeling techniques allow the planning
team to determine the system's response to a variety of
proposed management options. Numerical modeling is
accurate, but a high degree of hydrogeological and computer
expertise is needed. The expertise required and the massive
amounts of data needed for modeling can prove costly;
however, if a detailed data base is available, it is cost-
effective. Figure 3 is a WHPA modeling map example.
-------
Figure 3. WHPA computer modeled delineation map, Cottage Grove, Wisconsin.
-------
* Step Three—Identifying Potential
• Contamination Sources
This step is also referred to as
inventorying the area. The planning
team must identify and locate the
potential threats to the water supply
that are located in the delineated
wellhead protection area. These
potential sources of contamination
should include naturally occurring,
agricultural, commercial, and residen-
tial sources. State regulatory agencies
should have complete inventory lists
available as a guideline for identifying
potential contaminants. Ground water
technicians can provide these
guidelines to the planning team.
Figure 4 is an example of an inventory
list.
Step Four—Managing the Well
Head Protection Area
After the planning team has
identified the risks present in the
community, they must develop a plan
to manage the protection area. The
plan should be developed that best
suits that particular community's
character. Land use planning, by law,
is primarily a matter of local discretion.
There are two broad categories of
management tools available, regula-
tory and non-regulatory controls.
Regulatory controls can be as simple
as issuing permits for activity in the
protection area or as intricate as
zoning ordinances. Non-regulatory
controls can include educating the
community about the wellhead
protection program with fliers or
pamphlets, or acquiring land within
the protection area. A sample land
use risk chart is shown in Figure 5.
Step Five—Developing a Plan For
the Future
To ensure the health and economic
viability of the community, the
planning team should plan for the
future. They should develop a
contingency plan with procedures for
responding to a crisis and ideas for
new or alternative water supplies. For
the management plan to remain
effective, it should be reviewed
regularly (at least annually).
The five-step development process
for wellhead protection can be
effective for small communities that
want to prevent contamination of their
drinking water sources. It offers
communities with limited resources or
experience in hydrogeologic methods
a simple, structured approach to
designing a comprehensive program
locally.
Accomplishments
In just two years, with total funding
of just $2 million, the EPA/NRWA
Ground Water Wellhead Protection
Program has helped initiate and assist
efforts by local communities that are
protecting the drinking water of
1,250,000 Americans. That works out
to less than $1.60 per person and less
than $3,200 per community. Those
averages will decrease as more
communities reach Step Five in their
plans and are accounted for in these
numbers. As the ground water WHPP
increases the number of communities
involved and the states that are being
served, this program could become a
model program for future technical
assistance projects. Some long-time
EPA officials have called it the most
effective program they've seen in their
time at the agency.
The information and experience \
gained through the program is being
shared across the country through an
intense technology transfer program
carried out by NRWA and the Office of
Science, Planning, and Regulatory
Evaluation. It provides workshops for
bringing interested state, federal, and
local groups together to discuss
wellhead protection strategies, share
information, and develop implementa-
tion plans.
Conclusion
Without this program, most of these
plans would not exist, and many of
these communities would not know
how to develop a plan nor could they
afford to develop one. The benefits, in
dollars, are immeasurable. These
plans will have far reaching effects as
communities face increased environ-
mental pressure. By managing the
areas that may affect their water
resources now, they can have a
profound impact on that future. And if,
by chance, a major spill or contamina-
tion incident occurs in their area that
poses a threat, they will be prepared
to deal with it effectively and in a cost-
efficient manner. The potential
savings in future dollars is staggering.
But, the true beauty of the program is
that local people are taking the
initiative to protect their environment
now and for future generations.
If a community's wellhead protec-
tion plan meets both the requirements
of the state wellhead protection
program and that of the state public
water supply supervisory program,
then the community system may
eligible for a waiver from monitoring
under the Phase 2 and 5 drinking
water regulations and thereby may
save as much as $10,000-12,000/year
in monitoring costs.
-------
Wellhead Protection Area
Inventory of Potential Contaminant Sources
Directions
Place a number next to each category that you identify in your wellhead protection area, PJace a
corresponding number on a map at the location of the source. Maps that tnay be «sed lor the inventory
include topography, zoning, village, city, and utility maps. Piease consider ease of photocopying m
your selection of a map. if there is more than one source for a category, label each site with a letter
(i.e,, 1A, 1&, 1C, 2A,28}, Record the owner's name and address of each site on a separate sheet of
paper. Please consider all sources within a t/2-mile radius of each pubtk? water supply wefi and an
assessment within the recharge area(s).
Abandoned WelJs
Aboveground Storage Tank
Airport
Animal Feedlot/Waste Storage
Asphalt Plant
Auto Repair/Body Shop/
Cemetery
Chemical Production/Mixing/
Drainage Canal
Dumps
Electroplaters/Metal Finishers
Fertilizer/Pesticide Storage^
Production/Mixing
Goif Courses/Nurseries
Grain Storage Bin
Holding Pond/Lagoon
Inactive/Abandoned Hazard-
ous Waste Site
Injection Well
Irrigation Practices
Laboratories
Laundromat/Dry Cleaner
Machine Shops
Major Highways and/or
Railroads
Military Base/Depot
Mining
Qit/Qas Pipelines
pjtoto Processors
Printers
Production/Other Wells
Refineries
fteftnisning
Road Salt Storage
Septic Systems
Service/Gas Stations
Sewage Plant
Underground Storage Tank
Waste Piles
Wood Preserving
Other (specify)
Figure 4,
Example inventory list
-------
Land Uses and Their Relative Risk to Ground Water
Least Risk A, 1, Land surrounding a well or reservoir, owned by a water company.
2. Permanent open space dedicated Jo passive recreation,
3. Federal, state, municipal, and private parks.
4. Woodlands managed for forest products,
5. Permanent open space dedicated to active recreate.
8. 1. Field oops: pasture, hay. grains, vegetables.
2, Low density residential: lots terger than 2 acres.
3, Churches, municipal offices,
C. 1. Agricultural production: dairy, livestock, poultry, nurseries, orchards, berries.
2. Golf course, quarries.
3. Medium density residential: lots from 1 # to 1 acre.
0, 1, Institutional uses: schools, hospitals, nursing homes, prisons, garages, sat storage,
2, High density housing: lots smaier than 1/2 acre.
3. Commercial uses: limited hazardous material storage and only sewage disposal.
Greatest Risk
E. 1. Retail commercial: gasoline, farm equipment, automotive, sales and services; dty eieaners; photo processor:
medical arts; furniture strippers; machine shops; radiator repair; printers; luet oil distributors,
2. Industrial: ail forms of manufacturing and processing, research facilities.
3, Underground storage oi chemicals, petroleum.
4, Waste disposal: pits, ponds, tagoons, injection wells used for waste disposal; bulky waste and domestic garbage
landfills; hazardous waste treatment, storage and disposal sites.
land use risk chart, (Source: Adapted from U.S, EPA, 1989&)
10
-------
TECHNOLOGY TRANSFER MATERIAL
MANUALS
Phosphorus Removal (Sept. 1987) 625/1-87/001
Land Treatment of Municipal Wastewater (Oct. 1981) 625/1-81/013
Supplement for Land Treatment of Municipal Wastewater (Oct. 1984) 625/1-81/013a
Dewatering Municipal Wastewater Sludges (Sept. 1987) 625/1-87/014
Land Application of Municipal Sludge (Oct. 1983) 625/1-83/016
Odor and Corrosion Control in Sanitary Sewerage Systems and Treatment Plants (Oct. 1985) 625/1-85/018
Municipal Wastewater Disinfection (Oct. 1986) 625/1-86/021
Constructed Wetlands and Aquatic Plant Systems for Municipal Wastewater Treatment (Oct. 1988) 625/1-88/022
Fine Pore Aeration Systems (Oct. 1989) 625/1-89/023
Alternative Collection Systems for Small Communities (Oct. 1991) 625/1-91/024
Guidelines for Water Reuse (Sept. 1992) 625/R-92/004
Wastewater Treatment/Disposal for Small Communities (Sept. 1992) 625/R-92/005
+ Control of CSO Discharges (Sept. 1993) 625/R-93/007
* Manual: Nitrogen Control (Sept. 1993) 625/R-93/010
TECHNICAL CAPSULE REPORT
Radon-Resistant Construction Techniques for New Residential Construction: Technical Guidance 625/2-91/032
SEMINAR PUBLICATIONS
Permitting Hazardous Waste Incinerators 625/4-87/017
Meeting Hazardous Waste Requirements for Metal Finishers 625/4-87/018
Transport and Fate of Contaminants in the Subsurface 625/4-89/019
Corrective Actions - Technologies and Applications 625/4-89/020
Solvent Waste Reduction Alternatives 625/4-89/021
Requirements for Hazardous Waste Landfill Design, Construction and Closure 625/4-89/022
Technologies for Upgrading Existing or Designing New Drinking Water Treatment Facilities 625/4-89/023
Risk Assessment, Management and Communication of Drinking Water Contamination 625/4-89/024
Design and Construction of RCRA/CERCLA Final Covers 625/4-91/025
Site Characterization for Subsurface Remediation 625/4-91/026
Nonpoint Source Watershed Workshop 625/4-91/027
Medical and Institutional Waste Incineration: Regulations, Management, Technology, Emissions, and
Operation 625/4-91/030
Control of Biofilm Growth in Drinking Water Distribution Systems 625/R-92/001
Organic Air Emissions from Waste Management Facilities 625/R-92/003
The National Rural Clean Water Program Symposium 625/R-92/006
RCRA Corrective Action Stabilization Technologies 625/R-92/014
Control of Lead and Copper in Drinking Water , 625/R-93/001
Wellhead Protection: A Guide for Small Communities 625/R-93/002
BROCHURE
Environmental Pollution Control Alternatives: Drinking Water Treatment for Small Communities 625/5-90/025
11
-------
TECHNOLOGY TRANSFER MATERIAL (continued)
HANDBOOKS
Septage Treatment and Disposal (Oct. 1984) 625/6-84/009
Control Technologies for Hazardous Air Pollutants (July 1991) 625/6-91/014
Ground Water (Revised 1990) Volume I (Sept. 1990) 625/6-90/016a
Ground Water (Revised 1991) - Volume II: Methodology (July 1991) 625/6-90/016b
Retrofitting POTWs for Phosphorus Removal in the Chesapeake Bay Drainage Area (Sept. 1987) 625/6-87/017
Guide to Technical Resources for the Design of Land Disposal Facilities (Dec. 1988) 625/6-88/018
Guidance on Setting Permit Conditions and Reporting Trial Burn Results (Jan. 1989) 625/6-89/019
Retrofitting POTWs (July 1989) 625/6-89/020
Hazardous Waste Incineration Measurement Guidance (June 1989) 625/6-89/021
Stabilization/Solidification of CERCLA and RCRA Wastes (July 1989) 625/6-89/022
Quality Assurance/Quality Control (QA/QC) Procedures for Hazardous Waste Incineration (Jan. 1990) 625/6-89/023
Operation and Maintenance of Hospital Waste Incinerators (Jan. 1990) 625/6-89/024
Assessing the Geochemical Fate of Deep-Well Injected Hazardous Waste (June 1990)
Reference Guide 625/6-89/025a
Summaries of Recent Research 625/6-89025b
Stabilization Technologies for RCRA Corrective Actions (Aug. 1991) 625/6-91/026
Optimizing Water Treatment Plant Performance Using the Composite Correction Program
Approach (Feb. 1991) 625/6-91/027
Remediation of Contaminated Sediments (Apr. 1991) 625/6-91/028
Sub-Slab Depressurization for Low-Permeability Fill Material
Design & Installation of a Home Radon Reduction System (July 1991) 625/6-91/029
Sewer System Infrastructure Analysis and Rehabilitation (Oct. 1991) 625/6-91/030
Materials Recovery Facilities for Municipal Solid Waste (Sept. 1991) 625/6-91/031
Assessment Protocols: Durability of Performance of a Home Radon Reduction System (Apr. 1991) 625/6-91/032
Vitrification Technologies for Treatment of Hazardous and Radioactive Waste (May 1992) 625/R-92/002
Control of Air Emissions from Superfund Sites 625/R-92/012
* Subsurface Field Screening, Characterization and Monitoring
Techniques: A Desk Reference Guide (Sept. 1993) 625/R-93/003
* Urban Runoff Pollution Prevention and Control Planning (Sept. 1993) 625/R-93/004
* Use of Airborne, Surface and Borehole Geophysical Techniques at Contaminated Sites:
A Reference Guide (Sept. 1993) 625/R-92/007
GUIDES TO POLLUTION PREVENTION
The Pesticide Formulating Industry (Feb. 1990) 625/7-90/004
The Paint Manufacturing Industry (June 1990) 625/7-90/005
The Fabricated Metal Industry (July 1990) 625/7-90/006
The Printed Circuit Board Manufacturing Industry (June 1990) 625/7-90/007
The Commercial Printing Industry (Aug. 1990) 625/7-90/008
Selected Hospital Waste Streams (June 1990) 625/7-90/009
Research and Educational Institutions (June 1990) 625/7-90/010
Approaches for Remediation of Uncontrolled Wood Preserving Sites (Nov. 1990) 625/7-90/011
The Photoprocessing Industry (Oct. 1991) 625/7-91/012
12
-------
TECHNOLOGY TRANSFER MATERIAL (continued)
The Automotive Repair Industry (Oct. 1991) 625/7-91/013
The Fiberglass-Reinforced and Composite Plastics Industry (Oct. 1991) 625/7-91/014
The Marine Maintenance and Repair Industry (Oct. 1991) 625/7-91/015
The Automotive Refinishing Industry (Oct. 1991) 625/7-91/016
The Pharmaceutical Industry (Oct. 1991) 625/7-91/017
The Mechanical Equipment Repair Industry (Sept. 1992) 625/R-92/008
Metal Casting and Heat Treating Industry (Sept. 1992) 625/R-92/009
* Municipal Pretreatment Programs (Sept. 1993) 625/R-93/006
* Non-Agricultural Pesticide Users (Sept. 1993) 625/R-93/009
SUMMARY REPORTS
Biomonitoring for Control of Toxic Effluent Discharges to the Marine Environment 625/8-89/015
In-Vessel Composting of Municipal Wastewater Sludge 625/8-89/016
Optimizing Water Treatment Plant Performance with the Composite Correction Program 625/8-90/017
Small Community Water and Wastewater Treatment 625/R-92/010
EXECUTIVE BRIEFINGS
Injection Well Mechanical Integrity 625/9-89/007
Experiences in Incineration Applicable to Superfund Site Remediation 625/9-88/008
Volumetric Tank Testing: An Overview 625/9-89/009
ENVIRONMENTAL REGULATIONS AND TECHNOLOGY PUBLICATIONS
The Electroplating Industry 625/10-85/001
Fugitive VOC Emissions in the Synthetic Organic Chemicals Manufacturing Industry 625/10-84/004
Autothermal Thermophilic Aerobic Digestion of Municipal Wastewater Sludge 625/10-90/007
Control of Pathogens and Vectors in Sewage Sludge 625/R-92/013
SOFTWARE
POTW Expert 625/11-90/001
Strategic WAste Minimization Initiative (SWAMI) Version 2.0 625/11-91/004
GRoundwater Information Tracking System with STATistical Analysis Capability 625/11-91/002
OTHER
ORD BBS User's Manual (V 2.0) 600/M-91/050
Description and Sampling of Contaminated Soils: A Field Pocket Guide 625/12-91/002
* Listed for first time.
To order any of the above items, please use the Ordering Form on the last page. To reduce our cost, please limit number of publica-
tions to 9. Justification on letterhead required for more than 9 copies.
-j 3 A-U.S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE: 1993 - 750-071 /HQ04S
-------
TECHNOLOGY TRANSFER ORDERING FORM
The numbers on this form correspond to those given to each publication. Circle the number of
the publication(s) you want to receive (not to exceed 9) and return this page to:
ORD Publications
P.O. Box19963
Cincinnati, OH 45219-0963
Telephone: 513-569-7562
Justification on letterhead required for more than 9 copies.
Manuals
625/1-87/001
625/1-81/013
625/1-81/013a
625/1-87/014
625/1-83/016
625/1-85/018
625/1-86/021
625/1-88/022
625/1-89/023
625/1-91/024
625/R-92/004
625/R-92/005
625/R-93/007
625/R-93/010
Capsule Report
625/2-91/032
Seminar
Publications
625/4-87/017
625/4-87/018
625/4-89/019
625/4-89/020
625/4-89/021
625/4-89/022
625/4-89/023
625/4-89/024
625/4-91/025
625/4-91/026
625/4-91/027
625/4-91/030
625/R-92/001
625/R-92/003
625/R-92/006
625/R-92/014
625/R-93/001
625/R-93/002
Brochure
625/5-90/025
Handbooks
625/6-84/009
625/6-91/014
625/6-90/01 6a
625/6-90/01 6b
625/6-87/017
625/6-88/018
625/6-89/019
625/6-89/020
625/6-89/021
625/6-89/022
625/6-89/023
625/6-89-024
625/6-89/0253
625/6-89/025b
625/6-91/026
625/6-91/027
625/6-91/028
625/6-91/029
625/6-91/030
625/6-91/031
625/6-91/032
625/R-92/002
625/7-90/004
625/R-92/002
625/R-92/007
625/R-92/012
625/R-93/003
625/R-93/004
PP Guides
625/7-90/005
625/7-90/006
625/7-90/007
625/7-90/008
625/7-90/009
625/7-90/010
625/7-90/011
625/7-91/012
625/7-91/013
625/7-91/014
625/7-91/015
625/7-91/016
625/7-91/017
625/R-92/008
625/R-92/009
625/R-93/006
625/R-93/009
Summary
Reports
625/8-89/015
625/8-89/016
625/8-90/017
625/R-92/010
Executive
Briefings
625/9-89/007
625/9-88/008
625/9-89/009
ER&T
Publications
625/10-85-001
625/10-84/004
625/10-90/007
625/R-92/013
Software
625/11-90/001
625/11-91/002
625/11/91/004
Others
600/M-91/050
625/12-91/002
If you are not on the mailing list for the Technology Transfer Newsletter, do you want to be added?
Name
Yes Q No Q
Company.
Street —
City/State/Zip Code -
15
------- |