United States Office of M=.» IQQR
Environmental Protection Ground-Water Protection O4 rtDOC4 H4
Agency Washington DC 20460 Ol UKOO IU I
Selected State and Territory
Ground-Water Classification
Systems
-------
SELECTED STATE AND TERRITORY
GROUND-WATER CLASSIFICATION SYSTEMS
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
Region V, Library
230 South Dearborn CLraet
Chicago, Illinois 60604
Office of Ground-Water Protection
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
Washington, D.C.
May 1985
-------
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
This report was prepared by Mary Ellen Myers
and Janice Quinn, Office of Ground-Water
Protection/ Office of Water, U.S. Environ-
mental Protection Agencyf Washington, B.C.
EPA appreciates the time and effort of
State officials in providing the infor-
mation needed for this document. EPA
Regional Ground-Water Coordinators also
deserve thanks for their cooperation and
assistance on this project.
LL3.
-------
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Page
I. Introduction i
II. Executive Summary 1
III. Selected State and Territory Ground-Water
Classification Systems 6
Connecticut 7
Florida 14
Guam 21
Maryland 26
Massachusetts 31
Montana 37
New Mexico 43
New York 50
North Carolina 54
Vermont 59
Wyoming 68
IV. Appendices 77
Appendix A - Application of Connecticut's 1980
Water Quality Standards 78
Appendix B - New York Ground-Water Classification:
Quality Standards for GA 91
Appendix C - New York Ground-Water Classification:
Effluent Standards or Limitations on
Class GA 96
Appendix D - State and Territory Classification
Systems: Number of Classes and
Criteria for Designations 100
Appendix E - Participating State and Territory
Agencies 104
-------
INTRODUCTION
Since the late 1970's, concern for protection of
ground-water resources has significantly increased throughout
the United States. State and local governments, who have the
primary responsibility for protecting ground-water resources,
are in various stages of developing policies and implementing
ground-water protection programs.
Such efforts include establishing mechanisms which will
ensure consistency in the decision-making process and will
serve as planning tools in determining appropriate levels of
protection and cleanup of ground-water supplies. One of
the mechanisms States use is a ground-water classification
system. A ground-water classification system enables a state
to identify and categorize current and potential sources and
uses of ground water. It can be used to set water quality
standards, permit requirements, and land-use controls to
protect ground-water resources.
The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) has
undertaken a variety of activities to support States in
providing comprehensive ground-water protection. In August
1984, the EPA issued the Ground-Water Protection Strategy
which identifies four key areas of concern: strengthening
State ground-water programs; coping with currently unaddressed
ground-water problems; creating a policy framework for guid-
ing EPA programs; and strengthening internal ground-water
organization.
The EPA Ground-Water Protection Strategy includes a
classification system which EPA will use to ensure consistency
among the Agency's programs. EPA is currently developing
classification guidelines to assist EPA programs in both
general and specific decision-making processes. Certain
decisions on facility siting, acceptable management practices,
and cleanups will be based on the use, value, and vulnerability
of the affected ground water.
The purpose of this paper is to provide information on
selected State and Territory classification systems. EPA
is using this information to develop its classification
guidelines. This report may also be useful to States that
are beginning to examine overall ground-water protection
issues, as well as those States in various stages of develop-
ing their classification systems. This information can be
used by the general public who wish to know what steps their
State officials are taking to protect ground-water resources.
-------
Although nearly half the States have developed or pro-
posed classification systems, this report was not intended
to cover all of them. The classification systems of the
States and Territory presented in this document represent a
variety of systems.
The classification descriptions in this report have
been reviewed and verified by each State. Terms such as
mapping, mixing zone, point-of-use, and discharge standards
are used throughout this report, but the terms may have
somewhat different meanings in each case. The inconsistency
in use reflects the different interpretations of these terms
by the various States.
Each of the State classification descriptions is
divided into five parts. Part one includes an Introduction
which provides a brief background of each State's system.
Part two embodies the Classification System itself. It sets
forth the classes and what is included in each class. Part
three presents the Criteria involved in formulating the
classes and Part four provides information on the Implementa-
tion Activities which include institutional mechanisms in-
volved in implementing decisions based on the classification
of potential ground-water sources. Part five presents
overall Comments on the respective systems.
An Executive Summary is provided to highlight key aspects
of the various State and Territory classification systems.
11
-------
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
Ground-water classification as set forth in the State
and Territory systems presented in this report involves
establishing at least two classes which determine the level
of protection needed to maintain designated use and quality
of ground water. When establishing a classification system,
States stipulate the level of protection each class of ground
water will receive.
The criteria used to distinguish ground-water classes
varies from State to State. Most States regard present or
future use of ground water to be the primary considerations
for classification. Ground-water quality, yield, vulner-
ability contamination, and geologic settings are factors
States also used to distinguish ground-water classes.
States use a variety of protection mechanisms to imple-
ment their classification systems. Many States employ
numerical quality standards as well as narrative descriptions
for each class. States may require pollution source controls,
such as permits, effluents limitations, mixing zones, waste
facility design standards, and best management practices to
keep ground-water quality at the level prescribed in the
classification system. Some States employ land-use restric-
tions, such as zoning guidelines, siting regulations, and
public acquisition of land to maintain designated levels.
All of these mechanisms require enforcement plans that include
State monitoring programs.
There are a number of ways in which the States use
classification systems to carry out ground-water programs.
Classification helps the States set priorities since such a
system identifies what is regarded as the most valuable ground-
water resources which merit the highest level of protection.
Classification promotes consistency among various programs
involved in setting ground-water policies. The adoption of
classification systems provide State officials and the public
an opportunity to determine long-range ground-water protection
goals. Finally, States using the classification systems to
set quality standards, facility siting guidelines, permit
requirements, and land-use controls to protect ground water.
Highlights of the Eleven State and Territory Ground-Water
Classification Systems
Although the ten States and one Territory included in
this report appear to have taken a variety of approaches in
establishing ground-water classification systems as is shown
in Table I, several common threads pervade the various descrip-
tions .
-1-
-------
TABLE I
STATE AND TERRITORY GROUND-WATER CLASSIFICATION SYSTEMS
State
Number
of
Classes
Criteria for Classification
Connecticut
Florida
Guam
Maryland
Massachusetts
Suitable for public and private
drinking water supplies without
treatment;
May be suitable for public or
private drinking water supplies
without treatment;
May have to be treated to be
potable;
May be suitable for waste
disposal practices.
Single-source aquifers for
potable water use with total
dissolved solids content
(TDS) of less than 3,000 mg/1;
Potable water use with
TDS content less than 10,000
mg/1 ;
Non-potable water use from
unconfined aquifers with TDS
content of 10,000 mg/1 or
greater;
Non-potable water use with TDS
content of or greater than
10,000 mg/1 from confined
aquifers;
Drinking water quality;
Saline;
(a) less than 10,000 gpd, (b)
greater than 10,000 gpd.
TDS less than 500 mg/1;
TDS between 500 and 6,000 mg/1;
TDS greater than 6,000 mg/1.
Drinking water quality; saline;
below drinking water quality.
-2-
-------
State
Number
of
Classes
Criteria for Classification
New Mexico
New York
North Carolina
Montana 4 • Suitable for public and private
water use with little or no
treatment
• Marginally suitable for public
and private use;
• Suitable for industrial and
commerical uses;
• May be suitable for some
industrial and other uses;
2 • TDS less than 10,000 mg/1;
• TDS more than 10,000 mg/1.
3 • Fresh water for potable use;
• Saline waters containing
between 250 mgCl/1 and 1,000
mgCl;
• Saline waters with chloride
in excess of 1,000 mg/1.
5 • Fresh waters for drinking
water use;
• Brackish waters at greater
than 20 feet below surface
for recharge use;
• Fresh waters at less than
20 feet below surface for
recharge use;
• Brackish waters less than
20 feet below surface;
• Not suitable for drinking
or food processing.
Vermont 2 • Aquifers that supply or in the
future could supply community
water supplies;
• All other ground waters.
Wyoming 7 • Domestic;
• Agricultural;
• Livestock;
• Aquatic life;
• Industry;
• Hydrocarbon and
mineral deposits;
• Unsuitable for any use.
Source: Some of the information in this Table was derived from
the Overview of State Ground-Water Summaries, Volume I,
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, March 1985.
-3-
-------
First, most of these States have a differential protec-
tion policy based on maintaining water quality standards
which will ensure the protection of present and future uses
of ground-water resources. Three States have a limited
degradation policy which involves protecting ground-water
sources to as high a level as possible, with allowance of
some degradation up to a specific limit. These States are:
Florida, Montana, and New Mexico. One State, Montana, seeks
to maintain a non-degradation policy allowing for no contami-
nation, but it involves exemptions which pertain to non-point
sources.
Second, in all State descriptions presented in this
report, the Class I designation pertains to ground water used
as drinking water. Drinking standards from USEPA's Safe
Drinking Water Act are used as a basis for classification
designations. Some States, such as Florida and Montana, have
stricter requirements.
Third, most States undertake monitoring efforts only
after an incident of ground-water contamination has occurred
or is reported. In some States, however, efforts are under-
way which involve a more organized approach to monitoring
areas where potential contamination problems may be most
likely to occur.
Fourth, State and local institutions used to implement
State policies vary from state to state, but in most States,
implementation activities originate at the State level.
Fifth, the two most common systems of classification are
three-tier and four-tier approaches. Of the eleven States
discussed in this document, eight States (72%) have either a
three-tier or four-tier system. This is only significant in
that it implies an organizational format which may be prefer-
able to others.
Finally, all of these classification systems have been
developed over the past decade when ground-water contamina-
tion was becoming increasingly apparent as a major environ-
mental problem in several States. The systems were designed
on a state-by-state basis, focusing on the most pervasive
areas of contamination. Some States have expanded use of
the system for more comprehensive coverage, while others
continue to employ the system on a case-by-case basis.
-4-
-------
Embodied in the following eleven chapters of this report
are descriptions of the ground-water classification systems
: Connecticut, Florida, Guam, Maryland,
are descriptions or tne grounu-water uj.ass it icatiori systems
for these States: Connecticut, Florida, Guam, Maryland,
Massachusetts, Montana, New Mexico, New York, North Carolina,
Vermont and Wyoming. For more information, a list oc oj--j--
offices and their addresses are provided in Appendix
of State
E.
-5-
-------
SELECTED STATE AND TERRITORY
GROUND-WATER CLASSIFICATION
SYSTEMS
-6-
-------
CONNECTICUT
Introduction
In September 1980, Connecticut adopted a ground-water
classification system in pursuit of its statutory mandate to
protect the public health and welfare, promote economic
development, and preserve and enhance water quality for
present and future use for public water supply, agriculture,
industrial and other legitimate uses.^/
Connecticut's position is unique in that a great deal of
hydrogeological information existed at the time the State
developed its ground-water protection plan. Connecticut
profited from previous data compiled by the U.S. Geological
Survey (USGS) and the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA)
Soil Conservation Service.jV In addition, Connecticut
mapped the following data:
• all surface watersheds with drainage areas greater
than 1 square mile;
• depth to bedrock;
• till and depth of till deposits;
• depth to water table;
• stratified drift including thickness and grain
size of deposits;
• stratified drift with a saturated thickness greater
than 40 feet;
• stratified drift with an unsaturated thickness greater
than 10 feet;
• water-quality sensitive lands and water courses;
• existing and planned surface water supply reservoirs;
• all existing public water supply wells;
• all wastewater and cooling water discharges to ground
and surface water;
• industrial waste lagoons;
• landfills;
-7-
-------
• oil and chemical spills or leaks;
• salt piles;
• agricultural waste disposal;
• widespread septic system failure areas;
• public water supply service areas;
• septage lagoons; and
• contaminated wells and plumes of contamination.^/
Connecticut compared this data with broad land use informa-
tion such as topography, natural and preservation areas,
parklands, state-owned fish and game preserves, trout stocked
streams, and conservation and development plans.£/
Classification Designations
Connecticut's four classes of ground water are as follows:
Class GAA — Existing or proposed drinking water
use without treatment.
Class GA — May be suitable for public or private
drinking water use without treatment.
Class GB — May not be suitable for public or
private use as drinking water without
treatment since the ground water is
known or presumed to be degraded.
High density housing, waste disposal,
or industrial sites form the basis
for designating the ground water as
GB.
Class GC — May be suitable for certain waste
disposal practices because land use
or hydrogeologic conditions render
this ground water more suitable for
receiving permitted discharges than
for development as a public or private
water supply. Often, these areas
have suffered waste disposal practice
that have permanently made the ground
water unsuitable for drinking without
-8-
-------
treatment. These are areas of strati-
fied drift with greater than 10 feet
of unsaturated thickness that have
the capability to provide optimum
renovation for wastewater discharges.
Thus far, all of the State's surface and ground waters
have been classified and the State will revise its classifi-
cation system every three years. Revising the classification
system involves four steps: (1) updating information; (2)
revising maps; (3) holding hearings; and (4) drafting final
reports.
The major problem during the classification hearing
process was a lack of public acceptance of the need to
classify some ground water as GC. As a result, a disparity
exists between the amount of ground water classified as GC
(waste receiving) and Connecticut's waste disposal needs.
To address this problem, Connecticut has identified specific
land use conflicts and developed ground-water management
objectives to resolve them.jy These objectives are presented
in Appendix A.
Criteria
Connecticut's primary criteria used for classifying
ground water focus on ground-water and aquifer use. The
primary objective of the ground-water classification system
is to preserve and restore drinking water throughout the
State.V
Robert Moore, Assistant Deputy Commissioner of Connecti-
cut's Department of Environmental Protection cites several
reasons for choosing existing and potential use over numeric
quality standards to classify ground water. First, numeric
quality standards for discharges to ground water will not
provide the basic guarantees necessary for assurance that
any ground water is suitable for direct human consumption
without need for treatment, a basic and principal overriding
goal for almost all Connecticut's ground waters. With nearly
one-quarter million wells being utilized as the sole source
of potable water in this highly industrialized and densely
populated State, there is no way to guarantee safe drinking
water quality and to allow ground-water discharges short of
continuously sampling every well for every possible contami-
nant. Secondly, regulating ground water in order to protect
its potential use as drinking water is consistent with the
State's broad legislative water quality goals. Thirdly,
such a system provides the State with flexibility to react
to changing drinking water standards and new types of pollu-
tants. Finally, such a system integrates State goals and
local zoning and aquifer protection programs.?/
-------
The specific policy and use standards are:
It is the policy of the State to restore or
maintain the quality of the ground-water to
a quality consistent with its use for drinking
without treatment. In keeping with this policy,
all ground water shall be restored to the extent
possible to a quality consistent with Class GA.
However, restoration of ground-water to Class GA
shall not be sought when:
. The ground water is in a zone of influence of a
permitted discharge;
. The ground water is designated as Class GB
unless there is demonstrated need to restore
ground water to a Class GA designation or where
it can be demonstrated to the Commissioner that
restoration to Class GA can be reasonably
achieved;
. The ground water is designated Class GC.£/
Connecticut implements its classification system by
setting forth guidelines on land uses and discharges that are
compatible with each class. The discharges allowed for each
class are as follows:
Class GAA— Restricted to wastewaters of human
or animal origin and other minor
cooling and clean water discharges.
Class GA -- Restricted to wastewaters of predomi-
nately human, animal or natural
origin which pose minimal threat to
drinking water supplies.
Class GB —
Wastewater discharges allowed for
GAA and GA ground water and certain
treated industrial wastewaters where
the soils will be used as an integral
part of the treatment system. (The
intent of doing so is to allow the
soil to be part of the treatment
system for easily biodegradable
organics and also function as a
filtration process for inert solids).
Such discharges shall not cause
degradation of ground water that
could preclude its future use for
drinking without treatment.
-10-
-------
Class GC — All discharges allowed for GAA, GA,
or GB and industrial wastewater dis-
charges that do not result in surface
water quality degradation below estab-
lished classification goals. The
intent is to allow the soil to be
part of the treatment process.£/
Implementation Activities
Although the State has set forth these guidelines, the
Department of Environmental Protection (DEP) makes discharge
permit decisions on a site-specific basis. Thus, the State
increases its flexibility and avoids conflicts over effluent
limitations and numerical quality standards.££/
As mentioned above, the State will allow ground water
to vary from the drinking water quality if it is in a zone
of influence of a permitted discharge. A zone of influence
is the solid or water area needed to allow the treatment of
effluent by soils or the mixing of effluent with ground or
surface waters to acceptable concentrations for discharge
to the surface waters in a mix which will not violate the
established water quality classification for the surface
water .H/
The zone of influence for subsurface sewage disposal
which are permitted are defined as the area established as
minimum requirements of the Public Health Code. For septic
systems, the Code requires them to be at least 75 feet away
from a private well.*2/
The zone of influence for all other discharges shall be
the area in which the ground water could contravene any
pertinent Federal and State drinking water standards or
otherwise be polluted by the discharge.13/
The Commissioner of the DEP may require the acquisition
of property and/or property rights to ground waters which
may be degraded by a discharge or its zone of influence.^/
Also, the Commissioner may require the acquisition of pro-
perty and/or property rights to ground water when it is
acting as part or all of the treatment system for the
discharge.jjY By appropriation, dischargers compensate
landowners for the reduced use of their property.
-11-
-------
The major strength of Connecticut's classification
system is that it is based on ground-water use. Consequently,
it forces communities to make difficult land use decisions,
and it requires dischargers to respect those decisions. Not
all sources of ground-water contamination are addressed
through the discharge permit program, however. Therefore,
the State is currently completing a Water Quality Management
Plan to set forth other measures the State plans to use to
control these sources of contamination .
On the municipal level, the State plans to provide model
regulation and ordinance as well as technical assistance for
protecting ground water. j}^/ One advantage of the use-based
classification system is that it is readily understood by
municipal officials. In fact, some towns have begun to
revise their zoning in order to cooperate with the State-
wide classification system. \% /
Furthermore, Connecticut hopes to create a "citizen
ethic" to protect ground water. Through a multimedia
campaign, the State plans to educate its citizens about
ground-water contamination and measures citizens can take to
prevent it .I9/
Comments
The Connecticut ground-water program is consistent,
thorough and closely coordinated with the State's other
environmental programs.^/ The program integrates ground and
surface water by mapping and classifying both, taking into
account the hydrogeologic connections between the two. All
of the State's management tools, including its Solid and
Hazardous Waste Land Disposal Siting Policy and Solid Waste
Management Plan have as their concern the use and quality of
surface and ground waters. State officials attribute the
success of this classification process to broad public
acceptance of the need to protect Connecticut's highly
utilized, finite ground-water resources.
-12-
-------
Footnotes
1. Robert E. Moore, "Defining the Basic Objectives of a
Ground-Water Program." In State, County, Regional and
Municipal Jurisdictions of Ground-Water Protection;
Proceedings of the Sixth National Ground-Water Quality
Symposium (Worthington, Ohio: National Well Water
Association, 1983.) p. 13.
2. Moore, p. 13.
3. Moore, p. 13.
4. Moore, p. 13.
5. Moore, p. 14.
6. Paula L. Magnuson, "Ground-Water Classification." In
State, County, Regional and Municipal Jurisdictions of
Ground-Water Protection; Proceedings of the Sixth
National Ground- Water Quality Symposium (Worthington,
Ohio: National Well Water Association, 1983.) p. 34.
7. Moore, p. 14.
8. Moore, P. 14.
9. Robert Smith, June 1984. Personal Communication.
10. Dr. Hugo Thomas, June 1984. Personal Communication.
11. Timothy Henderson, Jeffrey Trauberman, and Tara Gallagher,
Ground-Water Strategies for State Action Washington, D.C.
Environmental Law Institute, 1984 p. 232-241.
12. Henderson, Appendix, p. 222.
13. Henderson, Appendix, p. 223.
14. Henderson, Appendix, p. 224.
15. Henderson, Appendix, p. 224.
16. Hugo Thomas, June 1984. Personal Communication.
17. Thomas.
18. Thomas.
19. Thomas.
20. Thomas.
-13-
-------
FLORIDA
Introduction
Florida has given the statutory authority to protect
ground-water resources to the Florida Department of Environ-
mental Regulation. The Environmental Regulatory Commission,
a lay-body appointed by the Governor, has the authority to
classify ground water. The Florida Department of Environ-
mental Regulation is authorized to regulate discharges to
ground water through the permitting process.
Classification Designations
Florida's ground-water strategy is to protect ground
water for its "current and future most beneficial use."£/
To that end, the State, in 1983 established a four-class
system based on water quality, confinement and availability
of other sources of drinking water, and ability to contain
waste ._£/
The four classes are as follows:
Class G-I — "Single Source Aquifers" for potable
water use and having a total dissolved
solids content (TDS) of less than 3,000
mg/1.
Class G-II — Potable water use, ground water in
aquifers which has a TDS content of less
than 10,000 mg/1, unless otherwise
classified by the Environmental Regulatory
Commission.
Class G-III — Non-potable water use, ground water in
unconfined aquifers which has a TDS
content of 10,000 mg/1 or greater, or
which has a TDS content of 3,000 to
10,000 mg/1 and either has been re-
classified by the Commission as having
no reasonable potential as a future
source of drinking water, or has been
designated by the Department as an
exempted aquifer.
Class G-IV —
Non-potable water use, ground water in
confined aquifers which has a TDS content
of 10,000 mg/1 or greater.V
-14-
-------
Criteria
The Department of Environmental Regulation (DER) has
adopted quality standards to protect the State's ground-water
resources through required monitoring and cleanup. The
narrative "minimum criteria" for ground water prohibit dis-
charges having components that are carcinogenic, mutagenic,
teratagenic or toxic to human beings, unless specific
criteria are established for these components ._V Until the
State develops numerical values for these standards the DER
will attempt to prohibit the presence of such chemicals in
ground waters classified as G-I, G-II or G-III in concentra-
tions higher than their detection limits.£/
The DER will determine discharge levels of these com-
ponents in G-IV aquifers on a case-by-case basis.£/ In
April 1984, the State incorporated Maximum Contaminant
Levels (MCLS) for eight of these chemicals into Florida's
drinking and ground-water standards. They include:
tricholoroethylene 3 ug/1
carbon tetrachloride 3 ug/1
1,1,1,-trichloroethylene 200 ug/1
1,2-dichloroethylene 3 ug/1
vinyl chloride 1 ug/1
benzene 1 ug/1
tetrachloroethylene 3 ug/1
ethylene dibromide 0.02 ug/1
According to Florida's DER, compliance with the new MCL's
will be required by June 1985 for community water systems
that serve 1,000 or more people and by January 1987 for those
serving less than 1,000 people.^/
Additionally, th« DER prohibits the discharge of domestic,
industrial, agricultural, or other man-induced, non-thermal
components of discharges in concentrations which alone or in
combination with other substances that:
• are harmful to plants, animals, or organisms
native to the soil and responsible for
treatment or stabilization of the discharge;
• are acutely toxic to indigenous species
important to the aquatic community within
surface waters at the point of contact with
ground water;
• pose a serious danger to the public health,
safety, or welfare;
-15-
-------
• create or constitute a nuisance;
• impair the reasonable and benificial use
of adjacent waters.^/
The numerative standards for ground water state that
Classes G-I and G-II ground water must meet the primary and
secondary drinking water quality standards, or the background
level if the natural quality exceeds these standards. The
DER will determine standards for Class IV on a case-by-case
basis .jV
Implementation Activities
Florida implements its classification system through
a permit program. The State has not classified aquifers
throughout the State; it classifies ground water as permit
applications are submitted.^/ The State, however, does have
information regarding ground-water quality of the State due
to a U.S. Geological Survey study completed for the State in
1980.£V
The permitting procedure in Florida requires the appli-
cant to submit his application to the DER. (Florida's five
Water Management Districts that authorize Consumptive Use
Permits have an invitational role in the discharge permit
process.) The DER then has 30 days to request further
information if needed, and 90 days to issue or deny a
permit.^/ According to State officials, the heavy workload
on the Department forces the DER to trust the applicant to
supply accurate information. Once the DER makes its findings
on the application, it informs the applicant of its decision
as to denial or approval of permit application. Although
there is no available figure stating the number of ground-
water permits issued each year by the DER, estimates are
that the total number of permits issued by the DER is between
14,000 to 16,000 each year. Because of Florida's geology,
most of the activities permitted affect the ground water;
therefore, the 14,000 figure accurately reflects the DER's
ground-water workload.13/
In order to designate an aquifer as a single source, the
Commission must find that:
1) The aquifer or portion of the aquifer is the
only reasonable available source of potable
water to a significant segment of the population;
and
-16-
-------
2) the designated use is attainable, upon consideration
of environmental, technological, water quality,
institutional, societal, and economic factors .
In order to make this designation, the Commission must speci-
fically consider, upon presentation of any competent evidence
at the hearing, the following:
1) The other sources of potable water which could be
used and the costs of developing these sources;
2) The long-term adequacy of the ground-water aquifer
to supply expected future demands if other sources
are not developed;
3) Potential adverse effects from continued consumption
of water from the aquifer if G-I Classification does
not occur;
4) Potential adverse impacts on existing and potential
discharges to the affected ground water if G-I
Classification occurs.
Thus far, four petitions for single-source aquifers have
been submitted. Two of these applications have been rejected,
and two more are under consideration, one in Flagler County
and another in the Middle Gulf region.^/
Florida enforces its permit requirements through a
monitoring program. A computer system is being developed
that will contain data on aquifer characteristics, boundaries,
and monitored contaminants .£V Criteria required for direct
discharges are stricter than those required for indirect
discharges. Direct discharges to G-I or G-II, through a
natural or man-maeia "discharge conduit" such as a well or
sink hole must meet primary and secondary drinking water
standards or be equal to background quality levels before it
comes into contact with the ground water. jJV This end-of-
the-pipe standard can prevent contamination to the ground
water.
Indirect discharges, such as those from landfills and
spray irrigation, percolate through the land before reaching
the ground water. Consequently, the DER imposes less strict
conditions on these discharges recognizing that the soil
will provide some filtration and an opportunity for breakdown
for the waste prior to reaching the ground water. The State
has chosen "100 feet of lateral extension around the source
(radius), and vertically, to the "base of the most surficial
aquifer, or the first confining bed" as the zone of
discharge .
-17-
-------
Four wells can be required for indirect discharges: a
background well, an interceptor well, and a compliance well.
The background well is located upgradient of the discharge in
order to determine the quality of the ground water unaffected
by any discharge. The well located at the edge of the waste
may be necesssary to ensure that the discharge does not
violate the "minimum criteria" discussed above. The com-
pliance well is placed at the edge of the zone of discharge
to ensure that the filtration of the contamination has in
fact taken place. Because this type of monitoring is an
after-the-fact measure, (discovering the damage after it has
occurred), the State also uses interceptor wells. Interceptor
wells are placed downgradient of the waste and upgradient to
the compliance well on a site-specific basis. These wells
enable the DER to warn the discharger that he will violate
the standards in a certain amount of time. The strategy is
to provide ample time for the permittee to institute correc-
tive action as warranted.
Comments
The Florida classification system has been in effect
since January 1983. State officials predict that the
classification system will provide the DER with a useful tool
to protect the State's ground water. When granting discharge
permits, the State must rely on the "good faith" testimony of
applicants. Therefore, enforcement measures will be crucial
to the success of the classification system. To address this
need, Florida has developed a strong monitoring program. As
part of this program, the use of interceptor wells will
greatly help the State to detect a violation of a permit
condition before contamination threatens quality standards
and present or potential use.^£/ Furthermore, each dis-
charger to ground water must develop a ground water monitor-
ing plan and submit it to the State as a permit condition.
The State is also in the process of establishing a
state wide ground-water monitoring network that will evaluate
the quality of water in relation to sources of pollution as
well as the ambient quality. This network will augment the
permit-generated data in evaluating the impact of point and
non-point sources on the quality of ground water.
-18-
-------
Footnotes
1. "Federal and State Efforts to Protect Ground Water: Report
to the Chairman Subcommittee on Commerce, Transportation
and Tourism Committtee on Energy and Commerce, House of
Representatives, U.S. General Accounting Office, February
21, 1984, p. 38. [Hereinafter GAO Report.]
2. "Groundwater Protection Program Chronology," State of
Florida Department of Environmental Regulation, June 25,
1984, p. 4.
3. Florida Department of Environmental Regulation, Water
Quality Standards 17-3.403. February 1, 1983.
4. "Florida's Ground Water Programs, " State of Florida
Department of Environmental Regulation, p. 3. [Hereinafter,
Programs].
5. Programs, p. 3.
6. Programs, p. 3.
7. Programs, p. 4 .
8. Florida Department of Environmental Regulation, Water
Quatity Standards 17-3.402. February 1, 1983.
9. Guide to Ground Water Standards of the United States,
(Washington, D.C.: American Petroleum Institute, Pub. No.
4366, 1983) Chapter 5.
10. Dr. Rodney DeHan, July 1984. Personal Commmunication.
11. GAO Report, p. 39.
12. Dr. Rodney DeHan, July 1984. Personal Communication.
13. Dr. Rodney DeHan, July 1984. Personal Communication.
14. Florida Department of Environmental Regulation, Water
Quality Standards Section 17-3.403(f).
15. Ibid., Section 17-3.403(6)(f).
16. "Groundwater Protection Program Chronology, "State
of Florida Department of Environmental Regulation,
June 25, 1984, p. 7.
-19-
-------
17. GAO Report, p. 38.
18. Dr. Rodney DeHan, July 1984, Personal Communication,
19. Dr. Rodney DeHan, July 1984, Personal Communication,
20. Dr. Rodney DeHan, July 1984, Personal communicatin.
-20-
-------
GUAM
Introduction
Guam has employed a classification system in their water
quality system (WQS) for several years. In the Territory,
most of the drinking water comes from the northern ground-
water aquifer and, therefore, there has been great interest
in developing a ground-water protection plan. In fact, the
northern aquifer was designated a principal source aquifer
in 1978. j/
The Territory's WQS employed a five-tiered classifica-
tion system in 1975, but since then a great deal of revision
in the system has taken place. Between 1979 and 1982, Guam
underwent an extensive ground-water monitoring and modeling
program in order to better understand the quality and quan-
tity of the northern ground-water lens.£/ In 1981, the Terri-
tory revised their WQS to widen the coverage over their
ground-water resources.^/ A vertical profile map was added
to describe the different classifications and covered all
ground-water resources on Guam. Further, numerical standards
were developed to limit effluent discharge quality, so that
pollution sources could be controlled before the ground
water had been contaminated. In December 1982, the Territory
completed the Northern Guam Lens Study and the Ground-Water
Management Program. The ground-water management plan was
certified by the Governor in 1983, and has begun to be
implemented. The program has four basic components: manage-
ment to be provided by one lead agency and interagency
cooperative agreements; technical revisions to current design
and planning documents; institutional requirements, such as
land use controls; and an enforcement program by ongoing
monitoring and inspection activities.£/ In 1984, Guam
reaffirmed the 1981 WQS, including the ground-water classi-
fication system.^/
The three classes of water, distinguished by use, flow
system, quality, and depth, are as follows:
Classification Designations
Category G.-l: RESOURCE ZONE
The use of this ground water is drinking water. Almost all
of the water in the saturated zone is included.
-21-
-------
This water includes all water occurring in the saturated zone
below the ground water table, all vadose water in an unsatu-
rated zone interval extending 100 feet (30.5 ro) above a
water table, all water of the basal and parabasal freshwater
bodies (the freshwater lens), and all water of and below the
freshwater/salt water transition zone beneath the basal
water body.
Category G-2: RECHARGE ZONE
This water is tributary to, replenishes and recharges G-l
ground water and must be of drinking water quality before it
enters the RESOURCE ZONE.
This water includes all waters which are collected or disposed
of within a zone which is bounded above by G-3 and below by
G-l. Vertically, this zone extends from 20 feet (6 m) below
the surface to the upper surface of the Category G-l waters.
Category - G-3: BUFFER ZONE
This water includes all waters which are collected and
disposed of or recharged at or near the existing ground
surface. Vertically, the zone extends from the surface to
20 feet (6iti) below the surface.^/
Criteria and Implementation Activities
Guam implements its classification system by regulating
discharges to each ground-water class. Because the Territory
uses G-l ground water as tributary to ground water that is an
actual or potential source of fresh drinking water, the
Territory prohibits any pollutant discharges to the ground
water within this zone."]_/
G-2 ground waters move through soil and rock before
reaching the Resource Zone; and, therefore, some contaminants
may be filtered out of the percolate before it reaches the
G-l waters. The Territory, however, recognizes the difficulty
of traping pollutants reaching the G-l zone to a particular
source,* as well as the difficulty in knowing how much filtra-
tion actually takes place. Therefore, the Territory has
established discharge limitations to these ground waters.^/
The discharge limitations are described in Table I.
-22-
-------
Similarly, the Territory has established discharge
limitations to G-3 ground water. Because Guam has decided
that minor discharges primarily from small, scattered,
individual dwelling units probably have less adverse impact
on ground water than major point source discharges have, the
Territory differentiates between discharges greater and less
than 10,000 gallons per day (gpd). Discharges less than
10,000 gallons per day within the G-3 zone are designated
G-3b.;V The discharge limits for these ground waters are
presented in Table I.
Comments
Because Guam is an island, there is wide acceptance of
the importance of ground-water protection. Ground-water
conditions have been studied thoroughly for the past fifteen
years .jj_P_/ As a result of this work, officials in Guam have
a very good idea about the Territory's ground-water quality.
Much of this information came from the Northern Guam Fresh-
water Lens Study. H/
Currently, the Territory is in the process of enacting
legislation to strengthen the authorities for regulating
ground-water use. Its Ground-Water Management Program includes
specific monitoring guidelines to enforce the classification
system.^/ Because extensive monitoring and modeling work has
already been done, the Territory plans to do ambient monitor-
ing with previously used exploratory wells to detect any
changes in ground-water quality.^/ Noting that no ground-
water contamination incidents have occurred, regional officials
report that the classification system is an effective tool to
ensure protection of the Territory's ground water.14/
-23-
-------
M
W
rJ
CQ
4*
£
00
1
O
-D
C
(0
CN
1
O
CQ
0
•H
Li
O
CT
0
JJ
tO
U
O
jj
CO
0
CT
Li
tO
X!
O
CQ
•fH
Q
Li
O
U-l
CQ
C
O
JJ
m
jj
•H
g
•H
rJ
0 rH
l« CO \
(0 CT
rH 0 g
1 t .
•H M *— '
o o
w \
<: CT
ca g
c
0} -~s
1 CTZ ~
0 O 1 -H
JJ Lioo \
tO JJ O CT
Ll-rt J5 g
JJ & —~
•H
z
0
JJ
tO --
1 X! OH —
O a 1 rH
x: w *s*x
•P O O CT
LI .c ft e
o a~~
CQ
0
-O "•
•H rH
Ll \
O CT
rH g
s: >—
u
X
&
H
N.
Q CT
0 g
U —
0
iH 14-1
<0 -H
O rH
0 O
fa U
Li
0
JJ
(0
l> hw
f •>•
Ll
•o o
C CT
3 0
O JJ
Ll IT)
O U
m o
in
CN
m ^--
l
—^
00
o -^
rH 0
O
i— 1
o in
rH
O
c
0
CT
<
0
X!
JJ
>i
XI
CO
•H
CQ
(0
X)
0
CQ
(T)
O
1
>i
X)
1
0
CQ
(0
O
(0
C
o
•o
0
x;
CQ
•iH
rH
XI
(0
JJ
CO
0
0
X)
o
JJ
0
Li
(0
10
C
O
•H
JJ
(0
Li
jj
C
0
o
c
o
u
CN
0
CQ
(D
U
1
>i
X!
1
0
CQ
(0
U
<0
C
O
•D
0
JJ
JJ
•iH
S,
Li
0
a
0
X)
>i
m
g
CQ
C
O
•H
JJ
<0
JJ
•iH
g
•H
rH
0
CT
M
(0
XI
o
CQ
•H
•D
Li
0
XI
CT
•H
XT
••
CO
c
o
• H
JJ
(0
Ll
0
a
o
jj
o
rH
•D
0
0
MH
rH
to
g
•H
C •
ta CQ
•H
Ll CQ
O (0
En Xl
00
•
0
CT
(TJ
Ll
0
>
10
>i
rH
•H
(0
Q
TJ-
I
^J1
CN
-------
Footnotes
1. Janet Rosati. August 1984. Personal Communication
2. Doris Betuel. August 1984. Personal Communication.
3. Doris Betuel. August 1984. Personal Communication
4. Doris Betuel. August 1984. Personal Communication.
5. Janet Rosati. August 1984. Personal Communication
6. Guam Environmental Protection Agency. Territory of
Guam Water Quality Standards, November 16, 1981,
pp. 4-5.
7. Water Quality Standards, p.4.
8. Water Quality Standards, p.4.
9. Water Quality Standards, p.5.
10. Doris Betuel. August 1984. Personal Communication.
11. Doris Betuel. August 1984. Personal Communication.
12. Doris Betuel. August 1984. Personal Communication.
13. Doris Betuel. August 1984. Personal Communication.
14. Doris Betuel and Janet Rosati. August 1984.
Personal Communication.
-25-
-------
MARYLAND
Introduction
Maryland's ground-water classification system is based
on use, or potential use, of ground water.\_/ Maryland
classifies aquifers according to permeability and total
dissolved solids concentrations. Type I aguifers are those
that are capable of being used for drinking water supplies.2/
Type II aquifers are those whose water quality and yield
characteristics are most suitable for industrial use.^3/
Classification Designations and Criteria
Maryland's three classes of aquifers are described as
follows:
Type I;
Description:
Quality Standards
Type II;
Description:
An aquifer having a transmissivity greater
than 10,000 gallons/day/foot and a perme-
ability greater than 100 gallons/day/
square foot. In addition, the total
dissolved solids (TDS) concentration for
natural water in each aquifer shall be
less than 500 mg/liter.4/
The characteristics or constituents of
waters may not exceed primary or second-
ary standards for drinking water as
adopted by the State of Maryland in
COMAR 10.17.07.5/
a) An aquifer having a transmissivity
greater than 10,000 gallons/day/foot,
a permeability greater than 100
gallons/day/square foot and a natural
water with a TDS concentration of
between 500 and 6,000 mg/liter; or,
b) A transmissivity between 1,000 and
10,000 gallons/day/foot, a permea-
bility greater than 100 gallons/day/
square foot and natural water with a
TDS concentration of between 500 and
1,500 mg/liter.6/
-26-
-------
Quality Standards; The characteristics or constituents of
waters after treatment by commercially
available home water treatment or soften-
ing systems may not exceed primary or
secondary standards for drinking water,
except for total dissolved solids, as
adopted by the Department in COMAR
10.17.07 and COMAR 08.04.04 B (2) .]_/
Type III:
Description; All aquifers other than Type I and Type
II aquifers.
Quality Standards; The characteristics or constitutents of
waters shall be such that they do not
meet Type I or Type II quality criteria.£/
Implementation Activities
Maryland has extensively mapped aquifers throughout the
state from a geologic and hydrologic perspective, but these
aquifers have not been classified.£/ Most of the aquifers in
Maryland fall into Type I classification, with only small
portions or zones of aquifers limited to uses other than for
drinking water supplies.j^V Since it is infeasible to identify
all of the these zones in advance, mapping must be left to be
determined at the time a project is conceived. Instead,
Maryland classifies its aquifers upon a petition to discharge
substances into the ground water.
Maryland issues discharge permits to State waters,
including underground waters to satisfy the requirements of
the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES).
In addition, Maryland created a General Permit Program in
1981, which issues permits to discharges within the following
classes:
1) Storm water control systems.
2) Landfills or sludge handling facilities designed
to achieve natural attenuation of leachate, with
no discharge to surface water.
3) Individual on-lot, domestic, sub-surface disposal
systems permitted by the Department pursuant
to Article 43 387C e_t seq.
4) Separate storm sewers.
5) Ground-water heat pumps discharging to waters of
the State.
6) Other categories of discharges as established
pursuant to this regulation .H/
-27-
-------
The permit process does not formally require the dis-
charge applicant to prove what type of aquifer will be affected
by this discharge, since most aquifers fall into the Type I
category and discharge requirements are the most restrictive
in the State .j^/ Since discharges must meet the most
restrictive requirements, there is no need to determine the
type of aquifer involved from this standpoint. It is the
responsibility of the applicant to prove the aquifer is not a
Type I, or that his discharge would not affect a Type II or
surface water.
Permits are granted on a case-by-case basis using best
geological judgment.^/ There are no general review criteria
for granting permits. This is due to the variation in the
types of waste being permitted, the means by which the wastes
are assimilated in the ground, and the relative risk involved
with the different types of waste materials.^/ As each
permit is granted, the State specifies best management
practices, engineering specifications, and monitoring
requirements, as the State deems necessary to protect the
ground water.
The guidelines employed by Maryland in considering
permits are as follows:
(1) Land disposal of municipal or similar wastes shall
follow the Department's Guidelines for Land
Treatment of Municipal Waste Waters.
(2) Discharges to a ground-water aquifer of specific
classification may not result in pollution of an
aquifer possessing higher water quality criteria.
(3) Discharges to ground water may not result in degrada-
tion of the criteria established by the water quality
standards, outside of a mixing zone specified in a
State discharge permit or other permit issued by
the Department .
(4) Discharges or potential discharges to ground waters
may be required to monitor ground or surface waters,
or both, in a manner and frequency, and at locations
specified by the Department and to periodically
submit the results of these activities .
-28-
-------
Comments
Ground-water classification is determined by the State
on a case-by-case basis as permit applications arise.
Conditions attached to permits are subject to the Department
of Health and Mental Hygiene's discretion.
Some State officials believe the system is effective in
aiding the State to reach a balance between protecting ground-
water resources and development.^/ One State official
pointed out that this system was designed to protect ground-
water resources, not to be a land-use or water-use priority
setting procedure.
-29-
-------
Footnotes
1. Correspondence from Kenneth McElroy, October 26, 1984.
2. Correspondence from Kenneth McElroy, October 26, 1984.
3. Correspondence from Kenneth McElroy, October 26, 1984.
4. Code of Maryland Regulations 10.50.04 (B).
5. Code of Maryland Regulations 10.50.04 (C), as amended
August 3, 1984.
6. Code of Maryland Regulations 10.50.04 (B).
7. Code of Maryland Regulations 10.50.04 (C).
8. Code of Maryland Regulations 10.50.04 (C).
9. Correspondence from Kenneth McElroy, October 26, 1984.
10. Correspondence from Kenneth McElroy, October 26, 1984.
11. Code of Maryland Regulations 10.50.04.
12. Correspondence from Kenneth McElroy, October 26, 1984.
13. Correspondence from Kenneth McElroy, October 26, 1984.
14. John Lawther, July 1984. Personal Communication.
15. Correspondence from Kenneth McElroy, October 26, 1984.
16. Code of Maryland Regulations 10.50.04 (D), as amended
August 3, 1981.
17. John Lawther, July 1984. Personal communication.
18. Roger Simon, July 1984. Personal communication.
-30-
-------
MASSACHUSETTS
Introduction
On October 15, 1983, the Massachusetts Department of
Environmental Quality Engineering (DEQE) promulgated two
regulations establishing the Massachusetts Ground-Water
Discharge Permit Program and the Massachusetts Ground-Water
Quality Standards.^/ These two regulations, respectively
identified as Title 314 of the Code of Massachusetts Regula-
tions Chapters 5.00 and 6.00 (314 CMR 5.00 and 6.00) were
designed to provide for the protection of all ground waters
of the Commonwealth.
Major features of the regulations include a state-wide
ground-water classificiation program and ground-water dis-
charge permit and enforcement program. Under the former, a
mechanism has been created for the classification of the
Commonwealth's ground waters with respect to protecting its
most sensitive use.
Classification Designations
The three classes of ground waters are:
Class I: Fresh ground waters found in the saturated
zone of unconsolidated deposits or uncon-
solidated rock and bed rock and are
designated as a source of potable water
supply.
Class II: Saline waters found in the saturated zone of
the unconsolidated deposits or consolidated
rock and bed rock are designated as a source
of potable mineral waters, for conversion
to fresh potable waters, or as raw material
for the manufacture of sodium chloride or
its derivatives or similar products.
Class III: Fresh or Saline waters found in the saturated
zone of unconsolidated deposits or consoli-
dated rock and bed rock and are designated
for uses other than that as a source of
potable water supply. At a minimum ,the
most sensitive use of these waters is as a
source of non-potable water which may come
in contact with, but is not ingested by
humans.2/
•31-
-------
Criteria
Under 314 CMR 6.00, DEQE will make an initial, state-
wide classification of ground waters on or after June 1,
1985. Persons desiring a particular classification for a
ground water use are given until January 1, 1985 to submit a
petition of request to DEQE. DEQE will review all such
requests and will assign classifications based upon the
submitted data. Ground waters for which no specific classi-
fication petitions are received will be designated as
Class I, thereby affording protection to the most sensitive
use — drinking water supply. Reclassifications will also
be initiated by a petition. Petitions for reclassification
will be accepted at any time.
All petitions must include certain minimum information
including a description of the existing ground-water quality,
current and potential uses of the ground waters, identifica-
tion of potentially affected water supplies, and a statement
of need. Petitioners may also be required to submit a hydro-
geologic study, the required detail of which will depend on
the complexity of the area's geology and hydrology and the
potential environmental impacts.
Standards for granting a Class III designation include
the following:
1) The ground water impacted by the classification is
under single ownership by the discharger proposing
the classification; or
2) The ground water affected by the classification is
not a present or potential source of drinking water
because:
a) the depth or location of the ground water
makes its use as drinking water economically
or technologically infeasible; or
b) the ground water is sufficiently contaminated
to make its recovery for drinking water use
economically or technologically infeasible;
or
c) the discharge is located over a federally-
defined Class III well-mining area subject
to subsidence or catastrophic collapse; or
-32-
-------
3) The ground water affected is a potential source of
drinking water, but an alternate source is available
and will be provided by the discharger proposing the
classification to all existing and potential users
of the aquifer affected by the discharge.£/
Furthermore, once all the above has been fully satisfied,
the State will consider potential adverse effects on hydro-
logically-connected surface and ground waters. The State
must take into account future as well as present uses of
adjacent surface water and ground water.V
Implementation Activities
Currently, the protection of ground water from point
sources of pollutants is accomplished through the DEQE's
Ground-Water Discharge Permit Program. All discharges of
pollutants into the ground waters require a permit. This
includes, but is not limited to: facilities discharging a
liquid effluent below the land surface or through percola-
tion into pits, ponds or lagoons; facilities discharging a
liquid effluent into leaching pits, galleries, chambers,
trenches, fields and pipes; facilities discharging a liquid
effluent into an injection well; and any facility with an
unlined pit, pond, lagoon or surface impoundment in which
wastewaters or sludges are collected, stored, treated or
disposed of; or conveyances that collect and convey storm
water run-off contaminated by contact with process wastes,
raw materials, toxic pollutants, or hazardous substances
which discharge onto or below the land surface.
Discharges to Class I and Class II ground water must
meet the more stringent of either technology standards or the
national primary and secondary drinking water standards. For
parameters for which there are no drinking water standards,
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Health Advisories are
used as effluent concentration guidelines. Compounds which
are considered toxic and for which there is neither a water
quality standard nor a health advisory are prohibited from
discharge.
The discharge of sanitary wastewater in excess of 15,000
gallons per day requires a minimum of secondary wastewater
treatment or its equivalent. All industrial process wastewater
discharges are required to meet technology standards and the
proposed treatment system must receive Department approval.
These measures serve to ensure that the permitted discharge
will be in compliance with Class I or Class II standards.
-33-
-------
Discharge to Class III ground waters must also meet the
more stringent of technology standards or water quality
standards, but water quality standards for Class III ground
waters are determined on a case-by-case basis and are generally
less stringent than those for Class I or Class II ground
waters. Water quality standards for Class III ground waters
are determined based upon the most sensitive identifiable
water use. At a minimum, Class III ground waters must meet
water quality criteria based upon human exposure limits.
In Massachusetts, each permit must contain monitoring
requirements to assure compliance with permit limitations and
conditions. The Department of Environmental Quality Engineer-
ing determines the number of wells, locations, dimensions,
method of construction, and frequency of reporting on a
case-by-case basis. The State has established guidelines
for making these determinations. The guidelines vary accord-
ing to the type of facility and the aquifer type under
consideration. For Class I and Class II ground water, most
of the monitoring will occur at the point where the effluent
emerges from a treatment works, disposal system, outlet or
point source prior to being discharged into the ground. For
Class III ground water, the State will require monitoring
between the point source and the compliance boundary.
An integral part of the ground-water discharge permit
program is the permit review and process which encompasses
all the divisions within the Department such as Water Supply,
Water Pollution Control, and Hazardous Waste. The review
process ensures that the environmental concerns particular to
each division within the Department are considered and addressed.
The ground-water classification and discharge permit
program is a part of the Department's overall ground-water
protection strategy. The strategy identifies existing and
proposed stated programs to protect ground-water quality and
it also establishes the overall policy which guides these
programs. The strategy states that the most practical approach
to protecting ground water is one where the Federal and State
government provide the needed policy framework, and financial
support necessary for the cities and towns to take the lead
in terms of implementation of ground-water protection measures.
-34-
-------
In the area of regulatory guidance/ the Department has
the following regulations to protect ground-water quality:
sanitary landfill regulations; hazardous waste management
regulations; wetlands protection regulations; on-site and
municipal wastewater treatment regulations; drinking water
regulation; inter-basin transfers; and surface and ground-
water discharge permitting and classification.
Comments
Technical assistance/information is provided to cities,
towns and water and sewer districts through structured courses,
informal seminars and workshops, handbooks, maps and direct
assistance in systems operation and maintenance, land use
controls and ground-water protection.
Along with the technical support, direct financial support
is provided to cities, towns and water districts for the
purchase of land to protect existing ground-water supplies,
for cleanup of contaminated public water supplies and in
grants for water conservation programs. Under the State's
Aquifer Land Aquisition Program, $14.25 million is available
for communities to buy land to protect ground-water supplies,
$10 million is also available for grants to cleanu p contami-
nated public water supplies and to conduct studies for
remedial actions.
These economic incentives for ground-water protection,
management and cleanup should assist in strengthening the
ability of local authorities in protecting, conserving and
developing their ground-water supplies.
-35-
-------
Footnotes
1. "Federal and State Efforts to Protect Ground Water";
Report to the Chairman, Subcommittee on Commerce,
Transportation and Tourism Committee on Energy and
Commerce, House of Representatives, U.S. General Account-
ing Office, February 21, 1984. p. 57. [Hereinafter GAO
Report.]
2. Title 314 of the Code of Massachusetts Regulations
Chapter 6.03 (314 CMR 6.03). Massachusetts Ground-Water
Quality Standards. "Ground-Water Classes and Designated
Uses", p.3.
3. 314 CMR 6.05. p. 11.
4. 314 CMR 6.05.(4)(g). p.12.
-36-
-------
MONTANA
Introduction
In 1982, Montana adopted a classification system to pro-
tect the "present and future most beneficial uses of water".£/
To assess ground-water quality, Montana uses specific con-
ductivity, a measure of inorganic content in a water sample.
Ground water is then classified either by use or quality,
whichever places it in a more protected class ._£/
Classification Designations
The system consists of the following four classes:
Class I Suitable for public and private water
supplies, culinary and food processing
purposes, irrigation, livestock and wildlife
watering, and for commercial and industrial
purposes with little or no treatment.
These ground waters have a specific
conductance of less than 1,000 micromhos/cm
at 25°C.
Class II Marginally suitable for public and private
water supplies, culinary and food processing
uses and are suitable for irrigation of
some agricultural crops, for drinking water
for most wildlife and livestock, and for
most commercial and industrial purposes.
These waters may be used for municipal or
domestic water supplies in areas where
better water quality is not available.
These ground waters have a specific
conductance ranging from 1,000 to 2,500
micromhos/cm at 25°C.
Class III Suitable for some industrial and commercial
uses and as drinking water for some wildlife
and livestock and for irrigation of some
salt-tolerant crops using special water
management practices.
In some cases these waters are the only
economically feasible source for municipal
or domestic water supplies.
-37-
-------
These ground waters have specific conduct-
ance ranging from 2,500 to 15,000 micromhos/
cm at 25°C.
Class IV May be suitable for some industrial/
commercial and other uses, but are unsuit-
able, for practical purposes, untreatable
for higher class beneficial uses.
These ground waters have specific conduct-
ance greater than 15,000 micromhos/cm
25°C.V
Criteria
Montana has established numerical and narrative ground-
water quality standards for each class of ground water.
Classes I and II (as well as Class III ground water used for
drinking water) may not possess concentrations of total dis-
solved substances that exceed Montana's maximum contamination
limits (MCL's) for drinking water.^/ Concentrations of other
dissolved or suspended substances must not exceed levels
which make the waters harmful, detrimental, or injurious to
public health.jY Furthermore, concentration of these sub-
stances may not exceed levels that would further affect
existing beneficial uses or designated beneficial uses of
that classification.^/
The State employs a type of non-degradation policy by
stating "any ground water whose existing quality is higher
than the established ground-water quality standards for its
classification must be maintained at that high quality". No
degradation may occur unless it has been demonstrated to the
Board of Health and Environmental Sciences that a change is
justifiable as a result of necessary economic or social
development and will not preclude present or anticipated use
of such waters.]V The non-degradation policy, however, does
not apply to changes in ground-water quality, whether or not
standards are violated, from non-point source pollutants for
lands or operations where all reasonable land, soil and water
conservation practices have been applied.^/
-38-
-------
Implementation Activities
The State implements its classification system upon the
application for ground-water pollution control permits. The
regulations list the following exemptions from the permit
requirement:
1) activities regulated under the Federal UIC
program;
2) solid waste management systems licensed pursuant
to the Administrative Rules of Montana (ARM)
16.14.501;
3) normal household wastes on owners property;
4) hazardous waste management facilities permitted
pursuant to ARM 16.44.601;
5) water injection wells, reserve pits and produced
water pits employed in oil and gas field opera-
tions and approved pursuant to ARM 36.22.1005,
ARM 26.22.1226 through 36.22.1234, and
ARM 16.20.916;
6) agricultural irrigation facilities;
7) storm water disposal or storm water detention
facilities;
8) subsurface disposal systems for sanitary wastes
serving individual residences;
9) subsurface disposal systems already reviewed and
approved by the Department or local authorities
under other regulations;
10) existing treatment works reviewed and approved by
the Department prior to October 29, 1982;
11) facilities approved pursuant to ARM 16.20.401;
12) in situ mining of uranium facilities controlled
under MIMUCS;
13) mining operations subject to license under other
legislative acts;
14) facilities reviewed under the provisions of the
Major Facility Siting Act.£/
-39-
-------
In spite of all of these exceptions, the ground-water
classification system plays an important role in Montana's
ground-water protection plan. Even though all of the activi-
ties listed above do not require a permit under the Ground-
Water Pollution Control System Regulations, the ground-water
quality standards apply and the Department of Health and
Environmental Sciences may require these dischargers to
submit monitoring information pursuant to Section 75-6-602
MCA. Through this provision, the State tries to insure that
the ground-water quality standards are consistently applied
to all discharge activities throughout the State.I"/
The permit program that is included as part of the
Ground-Water Pollution Control System applies to pits, ponds,
and lagoons holding process solutions.^/ All applications
must include the following information:
1) A specific site plan, including topography;
2) Location of treatment works and disposal systems;
3) Location of adjacent State surface waters;
4) Surface owners and lessees of land within one
mile of the proposed sources;
5) Location of water supply wells and springs within
one mile;
6) Description of waste or process solutions to be
contained on site; and
7) Existing ground-water quality and uses within one
mile of the site.12/
In addition, the Department of Health and Environmental
Sciences may require information about the specific design
conditions and processes used, as well as alternatives to
these designs and processes. Also, the permittee may have to
explain the hydrogeology of the area, including soil and
ground-water characteristics. Furthermore, the applicant may
have to explain preventive measures it will take, such as the
use of pond sealants and linings and measures it will take in
case of emergencies and accidental spills.
-40-
-------
In industrial waste applications, the Department may
require waste flow diagrams showing water and material
balances, chemical additions, and waste volumes and concentra-
tions before and after treatment. In addition, applicants
may have to explain measures to provide alternative water
supplies or treatment if an accident, leak, or spill occurs.
Finally, the Department may require a written evaluation of
alternative disposal practices for maximization of environ-
mental protection.14/
Once the Department receives a permit application, it
must provide an opportunity for a public hearing on the issue.
State officials report that only a few of the applications
have been controversial.jjy If the Department issues a
permit, it must specify the proposed discharge limitations
and conditions, the monitoring and reporting requirements if
any, and the compliance schedule.1^/ Every permit issued may
not exceed a term of ten years. 177~
Enforcement measures for permits are determined on a case-
by-case basis, although the State's regulations require a
permittee to maintain self-monitoring records for a minimum of
three years. j|JV
Comments
Although ground water is classified only in response to a
permit application, the classification system is quite
important in protecting Montana's ground water. The system
is important because the State Department of Health and
Environmental Sciences has the authority to review other
permit programs to make sure the discharges are consistent
with the ground-water quality goals specific for the ground-
water's designated class.19/
The other major strength of Montana's classification
system is the use of mixing zones in granting pollution
control permits. Mixing zones are discharge zones where the
State may allow some degradation to occur. State officials
argue that mixing zones are necessary if a State wants to
allow any type of development to take place. Generally, the
size of the mixing zone will not extend beyond the property
boundaries of the operator of the source.^/ The permit
applicant has the burden of proof to show that neither the
beneficial uses of the ground water nor the quality standards
established for the ground water will be impaired beyond the
boundaries of the mixing zone.^jY State officials assert
that the use of the mixing zone is a necessary tool for
balancing the need for economic development with the need
for preserving the State's ground water.22/
-41-
-------
Footnotes
1. Administrative Rules of Montana, Title 16, Chapter 20 -
Water Quality. Sub-Chapter 10: Montana Ground-Water
Pollution Control System. Rule 16.20.1002 [Hereinafter,
ARM 16.20.1002].
2. ARM 16.20.1002 (3) .
3. ARM 16.20.1002 (2) .
4. Guide to Ground-Water Standards of the United States
(Washington, DC: American Petroleum Institute, Pub. No.
4366, 1983) Chapter 5. [Hereinafter, A.P.I. Guide]
5. A.P.I. Guide.
6. A.P.I. Guide.
7. ARM 16.20.1011 (1) .
8. ARM 16.20.1011 (3) .
9. ARM 16.20.1012 (1) .
10. ARM 16.20.1012 (2) .
11. Fred Shewman, August 1984. Personal Communication.
12. ARM 16.20.1013 (4) .
13. ARM 16.20.1013 (5)(a).
14. ARM 16.20.1013 (5)(b).
15. Fred Shewman, August 1984. Personal Communication.
16. ARM 16.20.1014 (3)(b)(i, ii, iii).
17. ARM 16.20.1017.
18. ARM 16.20.1016 (5)(g).
19. Fred Shewman, August 1984. Personal Communication.
20. ARM 16.20.1010 (1) .
21. ARM 16.20.1010 (1) .
22. Fred Shewman, August 1984. Personal Communication.
-42-
-------
NEW MEXICO
Introduction
New Mexico adopted a State Water Quality Act in 1967.
The Act established the Water Quality Control Commission
(WQCC) and authorized it to adopt standards and regulations
to prevent water pollution from all types of activities.V
In 1974, the WQCC directed the Environmental Improvement
Division (EID) to draft proposed regulations to protect
ground water.£/
Classification Designations
The purpose of the regulations adopted is to "...pro-
tect all ground water of the State of New Mexico which has
an existing concentration of 10,000 mg/1 or less of total
dissolved solids (TDS) for present and potential future use
as domestic and agricultural water supply, and to protect
those segments of surface water which are gaining because of
ground-water inflow, for uses designated in the New Mexico
Water Quality Standards".^J Thus, New Mexico has distin-
guished two classes of ground water, based on TDS concentra-
tion levels in the ground water and, therefore, has adopted a
type of classification system.
The State has not mapped ground water to determine where
TDS concentrations are less than 10,000 mg/1. Instead, the
State uses a general surveillance system to gain knowledge of
New Mexico's ground-water quality.£/ The State will investi-
gate ground-water quality when it suspects a threat to that
quality exists. Most frequently, the State classifies ground
water when considering an application for a discharge permit.
Thus, New Mexico uses quality standards coupled with a permit
program to implement its classification system.
Criteria
New Mexico has adopted the following 35 numerical
standards for ground-water of 10,000 mg/1 TDS concentration
or less:
A. Human Health Standards - Ground water shall meet the
standards of Sections A and B unless otherwise provided,
Arsenic (As) 0.1 mg/1
Barium (Ba) 1.0 mg/1
Cadmium (Cd) 0.01 mg/1
Chromium (Cr) 0.05 mg/1
Cyanide (CN) 0.2 mg/1
Fluoride (F) 1.6 mg/1
-43-
-------
Lead (Pb) 0.05 mg/1
Total Mercury (Hg) 0.002 mg/1
Nitrate (NOsas N) 10.0 mg/1
Selenium (Se) 0.05 mg/1
Silver (Ag) 0.05 mg/1
Uranium (U) 5.0 mg/1
Radioactivity: Combined Radium-226
and Radium-228 30.0 pCi/1
Benzene 0.01 mg/1
Polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs) 0.001 mg/1
Toluene 15.0 mg/1
Carbon Tetrachloride 0.01 mg/1
1,2-dichloroethane (EDC) 0.02 mg/1
1,1-dichloroethylene (1,1-DCE) 0.005 mg/1
1,1,2,2-tetrachloroethylene (PCE) 0.02 mg/1
1,1,2-trichloroethylene (TCE) 0.1 mg/1
B. Other standards for domestic water supply.
Chloride (Cl) 250.0 mg/1
Copper (Cu) 1.0 mg/1
Iron (Fe) 1.0 mg/1
Manganese (Mn) 0.2 mg/1
Phenols 0.005 mg/1
Sulfate (304) 600.0 mg/1
Total dissolved solids (TDS) 1,000.0 mg/1
Zinc (Zn) 10.0 mg/1
pH between 6 and 9
C. Standards for Irrigation Use Ground Water shall meet the
standards of subsections Af B and C unless otherwise
provided.
Aluminum (Al) 5.0 mg/1
Boron (B) 0.75 mg/1
Cobalt (Co) 0.05 mg/1
Molybdenum (Mo) 1.0 mg/1
Nickel (Ni) 0.2 mg/1
When an existing concentration of these contaminants in ground
water naturally exceeds the standard specified, the existing
concentration becomes the standard.^/
These numerical standards are similar to the National
Primary Drinking Water Regulations, but some differences do
exist. For example, the standard for selenium is less strict
than the Federal standard, while standards for cyanide, uranium,
eight toxic organics and the non-health parameters are more
strict than the Federal standards.^/
-44-
-------
The BID realized that it is impossible to conduct a
public hearing and adopt numerical standards for all possible
contaminants. Therefore, the BID chose to supplement the
standards with a "toxic pollutant" provision adopted in 1981
which lists "potential toxic pollutants" but does not specify
the numerical level at which contaminants are actually
considered too toxic."]_/
In 1977, nine uranium companies challenged the ground-
water standards and regulations. The regulations remained
in full effect during the challenge. In 1979, the New Mexico
Supreme Court upheld the regulations, except for the defini-
tion of "toxic pollutants" which the court held invalid
because it was "unconstitutionally vague. "_£/ Subsequently,
the State refined the definition of toxic pollutant to mean
concentrations that current scientific literature shows to
unreasonably threaten human health or the health of commonly
cultivated or protected plants or animals.V Most importantly,
the court upheld the regulation's requirement that the burden
of proof lies on the discharger to prove his discharge will
not pollute the ground water ,10/
The ground-water quality standards are implemented in
turn through a permit program. New Mexico requires a dis-
charge plan for any activity that causes or allows effluent
or leachate to discharge so that it moves directly or
indirectly into ground water. Those discharges exempt from
the regulation include:
1) effluent or leachate conforming to the listed
standards and which does not contain any toxic
pollutant;
2) small sewage systems (less than 2,000 gal/day)
which are controlled by another bureau of the
BID;
3) irrigation water quality (except land applica-
tion of sewage, etc.); and
4) constituents subject to the NPDES permit program
(downstream of the NPDES outfall), flood control
systems, natural leachate, leachate regulated
under solid waste management regulations, or
effluent or leachate regulated by the New Mexico
Coal Surface Mining Commission or the Oil
Conservation Division.
-45-
-------
Each application must describe the discharge and explain
the flow characteristics of the discharge and the location of
the discharge relative to any aquifers .JjV Each discharge
plan must explain "the methods or techniques the discharger
proposes to use, or the processes expected to naturally
occur which will insure compliance with the regulations".13/
In addition, the applicant must provide any information
needed to demonstrate that the discharge plan will not affect
ground water with a TDS of 10,000 mg/1 or less, or that the
discharge will not cause the violation of numerical standards
of a toxic pollutant at any place of present or foreseeable
future use of ground water.^/ In practice, the State
considers most all of its ground water with a TDS less than
10,000 mg/1 as potential drinking water unless the discharger
demonstrates that he can control future well-drilling in that
area as long as contamination from his discharge remains.15/
It is important to note that New Mexico protects private wells
in addition to public water supplies in its definition of
present or potential drinking water because the State has a
large rural population completely dependent on private wells.16/
Implementation Activities
New Mexico's permit program is based on ground-water
quality as opposed to effluent limitation and technology-
based controls. Thus, the discharger can tailor his protect-
ion techniques to the particular hydrological characteristics
underlying the site. According to a State official, this
approach has encouraged selection of sites with natural
barriers to contamination.^/ When granting a permit, the
Director of the EID has the authority to require extensive
monitoring and reporting.JJV In some cases, this includes
effluent monitoring devices and monitoring wells in places
where leakage will most likely occur .^JV Thus, the State
can discover problems before a great amount of contamination
occurs. Additionally, the permit plans must include adequate
procedures to prevent ground-water contamination after
operations cease, including post-operational monitoring.20/
The strength of using ground-water quality as the basis
for granting permits is that it allows the discharger to use
the most efficient method to protect the ground water. Vary-
ing the technology used according to the hydrogeologic condi-
tions is appropriate in New Mexico, since ground water is
found at varying depths and in a great variety of geological
formations•££/ The disadvantage of using a flexible permit
program is, of course, that it requires a large amount of
manpower. New Mexico has expanded its staff of three to a
staff of twelve.
-46-
-------
In addition, the EID uses outside consultants to aid them
with particularly difficult cases. 22/
Thus far/ the State has issued over 300 permits .j_3/
State officials report that no known cases of ground-water
pollution have been caused by any discharger operating under
the regulations.^/ (As of 1984, one suspected case is currently
under investigation.) Although several controversial discharge
plans have been proposed, EID required the applicant to use
adequate technology to demonstrate that no violation of the
standards would occur.^JV In some cases, the preventive
technology failed, but the monitoring system detected the
failure in time for corrective action.26/
Implementing the ground-water regulations is much more
difficult for older facilities than for new ones. Older
facilities, that have been contaminating ground water, require
a great deal of administrative and scientific effort in order
to develop an adequate discharge plan.j"?/
Comments
When asked to evaluate the effectiveness of New Mexico's
classification system as a tool to protect the State's ground-
water, State officials said that the classification system
actually is a small part of the State's overall ground-water
protection plan.^/ The importance of the classification
system, however, is that the State protects ground water up
to 10,000 mg/1 for potential drinking water use. The strict-
ness of this system is essential in helping a water-poor
State, such as New Mexico, protect and preserve its ground
waters.29/
-47-
-------
Footnotes
1. Maxine S. Goad, "New Mexico's Experience in setting and
using Ground-Water Quality Standards". State, County,
Regional and Municipal Jurisdictions of Ground-Water Protec-
tion; Proceedings of the Sixth National Ground-Water Quality
Symposium (Worthington, Ohio: National Well Water Association,
1983) p. 42.
2. Goad, p. 43.
3. New Mexico Ground-Water Quality Control Regulations Part 3,
Water Quality Control, 3-101.A.
4. Maxine Goad, August 1984. Personal Communication.
5. Goad, p. 44.
6. Goad, p. 44.
7. Goad, p. 44.
8. Goad, p. 44.
9. Goad, p. 43.
10. Goad, p. 43.
11. Western State Ground-Water Management, Western States Water
Council, October 1982. p. 57.
12. Timothy R. Henderson, Jeffrey Trauberman, and Lara Gallagher,
Ground-Water Strategies for State Action, (Washington, D.C.:
Environmental Law Institute, 1984), pp. 97-98.
13. New Mexico Ground-Water Quality Control Regulations, Part 3.
Water Quality Control, 3-106.C.
14. Goad, p. 45.
15. Goad, p. 45.
16. Goad, p. 45.
17. Goad, p. 47.
18. Henderson, p. 98.
19. Maxine Goad, August 1984. Personal Communication.
20. Henderson, p. 98.
-48-
-------
21. Goad, p. 45.
22. Henderson, p. 100.
23. Maxine Goad, August 1984. Personal Communication.
24. Goad, p. 46.
25. Goad, p. 46.
26. Goad, p. 46.
27. Goad, p. 46.
28. Maxine Goad, August 1984. Personal Communication.
29. Maxine Goad, August 1984. Personal Communication.
-49-
-------
NEW YORK
Introduction
New York State, in 1978, adopted a ground-water quality
goal "to prevent pollution of ground waters and to protect
the ground waters for use as potable water."£/ To that end
the State's Department of Environmental Conservation (DEC),
updated ground-water quality standards and established a
three-tier classification system.
Classification Designations
The three classes are:
Class GA - The best usage of Class GA water is as
a source of potable water supply.
Class GA waters are fresh ground waters
found in the saturated zone of uncon-
solidated deposits and consolidated
rock or bedrock.
Class GSA - The best usage of Class GSA waters is
as a source of potable mineral waters,
for conversion to fresh potable waters,
or as raw material for the manufacture
of sodium chloride or its derivatives
or similar products. Such waters are
saline water found in the saturated
zone.
Class GSB - The best usage of Class GSB waters is
as a receiving water for disposal of
wastes. Such waters are those saline
waters found in the saturated zone
which have a chloride concentration in
excess of 1,000 mg/1 or a TDS
concentration in excess of 2,000
mg/1.2/
Criteria
The classification system is carried out through numerical
and narrative quality standards, effluent limitations, and
monitoring requirements. Numerical quality standards for
Class GA have been identified for 83 pollutants, including
metals, chloride, foaming agents, nitrates, pH, numerous
pesticides and some organic solvents.£/ Narrative standards
for all three classes prohibit the introduction of any sewage,
industrial waste or other wastes, taste or odor-producing
-50-
-------
substances, toxic pollutants, thermal discharges, radioactive
substances, or other deleterious matter into the ground water
if they would make the ground water unsafe for its designated
use or if they would cause or contribute to a contravention
of quality standards for other classified waters of the
State.£/ The quality standards for New York's ground-water
quality are included in Appendix B.
The State also has effluent standards for discharges to
Class GA waters. These standards apply to any discharge from
a point source or outlet that enters the saturated or
unsaturated zone. Effluent samples are collected at a point
where the effluent emerges from a treatment works, disposal
system, outlet or point source prior to being discharged into
the ground.£/ The effluent limits established for Class GA
are included as Appendix C.
New York's regulations provide that the Department of
Environmental Conservation may establish a more stringent
set of standards than those listed in Appendix C if it deems
such standards as necessary to protect the ground water
resource. Situations that are appropriate for such action
include: a discharge into a sole-source aquifer; an existing
or proposed discharge directly on or into consolidated rock
or bedrock; a discharge which in combination with other
elements is likely to produce a toxic pollutant; or where
adverse accumulative or combined effects can be established
for constituents in a discharge.^/
Additionally, the regulations establish conditions for a
variance to the effluent standards.jV According to a State
official, however, no party has ever petitioned for such a
variance, and, therefore, none have been granted.^/
It is important to note that New York State does not
treat septic tanks as a point source. Therefore, regulation
of septic tanks must take place at local levels through land
use controls.V
Implementation Activities
From 1979 to 1981, New York State received grant monies
under Section 208 of the Clean Water Act totalling 3.5 million
dollars which were used in part to develop a statewide ground-
water protection plan. The plan clearly emphasizes that New
York will strictly adhere to its position of protecting all
fresh ground water for drinking water use. A report by the
Environmental Law Institute criticizes this position arguing
-51-
-------
that it is unrealistic and uneconomical in that the State
will take strong measures even where ground water is unused
or of poor natural quality »]^_/ A State official explains,
however, the DEC realizes that much of New York's ground
water is contaminated, and it is not suggesting cleanup.
Instead, the State wants to set forth the basic goals, while
realizing they may be impossible to achieve in order to
protect all ground water for drinking water use. By so
doing, the State refuses to condone any contamination of the
ground water. j^V New York State recommends in its policy
document that EPA take action to establish National Drinking
Water Standards for toxic chemicals commonly found in ground
water .
To enforce its quality standards, New York's ground-
water monitoring policy emphasizes a combination of effluent
monitoring and monitoring of drinking water sources. Similar
to the Federal EPA ground-water policy, New York rejected the
option of doing ambient ground-water monitoring.
Comments
In summary, a State official reports that ground-water
classification is only a "tiny part" of the State's overall
ground-water protection plan.2^7 It is important to note,
for example, that no ground water has been classified as GSB,
or waste receiving ground water.^JV Thus, in practice, New
York's classification system simply distinguishes between
fresh and saline ground water. As a result, New York must
use other management tools to set priorities for protecting
the State's ground water.
-52-
-------
Footnotes
1. Veronica I. Pye, Ruth Patrick, and John Quarles, Ground
Water Contamination in the United States (Philadelphia:
University of Pennsylvania Press, 1983) p.216.
2. Pye, p. 216-218.
3. Ground Water Classifications, Quality Standards and Effluent
Standards and/or Limitations (Title 6, Official Complication
of Codes, Rules, and Regulations, Part 703) New York State
Department of Environmental Conservation, September 1978.
[Hereinafter, Part 703] .
4. Part 703.5.
5. Part 703.4.
6. Part 703.7(b).
7. Part 703.8.
8. Dan Halton, August 1984. Personal Communication.
9. Dan Halton, August 1984. Personal Communication.
10. Timothy R. Henderson, Jeffrey Trauberman, and Tara
Gallagher, Groundwater; Strategies for State Action
(Washington, DC: Environmental Law Institute, 1984) p. 79.
11. Dan Halton, August 1984. Personal Communication.
12. Dan Halton, August 1984. Personal Communication.
13. Executive Summary, "Draft, Long Island Ground Water
Management Program," (New York State Department of
Environmental Conservation) p. 15.
14. Dan Halton, August 1984. Personal Communication.
15. Dan Halton, August 1984. Personal Communication.
-53-
-------
NORTH CAROLINA
Introduction
In 1979, North Carolina's Environmental Management Comm-
ission adopted a ground-water classification system in order
to "maintain and preserve the quality of the ground waters,
to prevent and abate pollution and other contamination, to
protect the public health, and to permit management of ground-
waters for best usage by the citizens of North Carolina."_!/
The classification system creates five classes of ground water,
based primarily on natural quality, best use and the depth
at which the water occurs below the land surface.
Classification Designations
The classes are:
GA (a) Fresh waters that occur deeper than 20 feet below
land surface, except where such waters are pol-
luted or otherwise contaminated and do not meet
GA standards. The best usage of these waters is
as a source of drinking water.
(b) Fresh waters that occur at depths of less than 20
feet below land surface if:
1. they are the only source of potable ground
water, or
2. they are the best source of potable ground
water, or
3. maintenance of GA standards is essential for
preventing violation of surface water stand-
ards .
GSA Brackish waters (natural chloride content exceeds
250 mg/1) that occur at depths greater than 20
feet below land surface, except those classified
otherwise. The best usage of these waters is as
a source of recharge to the surface and ground
waters.
GB Fresh Waters that occur at a depth of less than
20 feet below land surface, except those classi-
fied otherwise. The best usage of these waters
is as a source of recharge to the surface and
ground waters. It is recognized that the zone
in which these waters may occur is the zone of
maximum natural treatment of pollutants. By
regulation, water supply wells may not be
completed in this zone.
-54-
-------
GSB Brackish waters that occur at depths less than 20
feet below land surface.
GC Waters that, because of pollution, do not meet the
quality criteria requirements of waters having a
higher classification and for which treatment to
upgrade to a higher classification would
technically or economically not be feasible, or
in the best public interest.£/ Classification
would normally result in some remedial action by
the party responsible for the pollution.
RS (Restricted) - A designation assigned to a classifi-
cation which indicates that:
(a) naturally occurring concentrates exceed the
standard for the class.
(b) standards have been exceeded and remedial
action is feasible. Quality may be improved
to the level of the standard by treatment.
Criteria
North Carolina has adopted numerical and narrative quality
standards for its classes of ground water. Numerical standards
exist for Class GA and Class GSA. GA waters have chloride
concentrations less than 250 mg/1 and do not need treatment
except to reduce naturally occurring concentrations to meet
the National Interim Primary Drinking Water Regulations.
GSA waters have a chloride concentration greater than 250
mg/1, but they are suitable for treatment to fresh water to
meet the National Interim Primary Drinking Water Regulations.
For Class GC water, none of these substances shall exceed the
concentration existing at the time of classification.2.7
The standards for GB and GSB waters require that any
increase in toxic or deleterious substances above the naturally
occurring concentrations may not:
1. contravene standards in adjoining waters of a
different class;
2. because of changing hydrologic conditions
threaten public health or the environment; or
3. threaten an existing or potential water supply.
-55-
-------
The State finished the process of classifying ground
water in December 1983.£/ In order to classify ground
water, the State did extensive studies of the major aquifer
systems in the State. In addition, classifications were
proposed at public hearings. State officials report that
there was little public interest at these hearings; the
principal organized public voice was that of the "Citizens
for Business and Industry."
Unlike Connecticut, which attempted to classify some of
its waters as waste receiving, none of the ground waters in
North Carolina were designated RS.£/ This might account, in
part, for the lack of public response to the classification
system.
Implementation Activities
Ground water standards are protected by means of pollu-
tion prevention and detection requirements included in State
permits for waste treatment and disposal facilities. Monitor-
ing and reporting are required in most instances. Pollution
from activities at a facility not requiring a permit may
result in an order from the State requiring contaminant,
cleanup or other remedial action.
Currently, the State is conducting a Pollution Source
Inventory using existing information to identify locations
where the ground water fails to comply with the quality
standards for their classification. The State plans to
finish this inventory by the end of 1984.
For each site identified, the State is determining the
hydrogeologic characteristics of the site, the extent and
magnitude of the problems, the cause of the problem, and
possible solutions.£/ Based on the assessment, the State
will identify areas that need reclassification or additional
measures to improve the ground-water quality. Some remedial
actions the State may take include: conditions for facility
permits; alternative management practices; schedules for
recommended actions; reclassification; or monitoring
requirements."]_/
-56-
-------
Monitoring requirements for specific pollution sources
will be determined on a case-by-case basis. In order to
detect contamination before contravention of the standards
occurs, North Carolina will monitor within the "perimeter of
compliance." The perimeter consists of a cylinder in which
the State allows some degradation to occur. If the contami-
nant level reaches 50 percent of the level specified in the
particular ground-water quality standards, then the Commission
may take action by requiring alternative management practices
or additional monitoring requirements.^/
Comments
All of the ground water of North Carolina has been
classified. The pollution potential of all waste treatment
and disposal facilities is evaluated and permits are condi-
tioned to prevent pollution. The State responds to pollution
incidents by conducting or requiring investigations to deter-
mine the nature and extent of pollution, identify the
responsible party, and assess the possible need for cleanup
or penalties or both. A comprehensive inventory and first-cut
evaluation and ranking of all known ground-water pollution
sites will be completed by December 1984.
North Carolina views its classifications and standards
as the foundation for the protection of ground-water quality.
The State's success in implementing this strategy will depend
upon support from the people and legislature for a comprehen-
sive ground-water management program.V
-57-
-------
Footnotes
1. Harry M. Peek and Leland L. Laymon, "Development
of a Strategy for Groundwater Quality Management in North
Carolina," (New Programs Development Branch, Division of
Environmental Management, North Carolina Department of
Natural Resources and Community Development, April, 1981)
p. 15.
2. Peek and Laymon, p. 16.
3. Guide to Ground-Water Standards of the United States
(Washington, D.C.: American Petroluem Institute, Pub. No.
4366, 1983) Chapter 5.
4. Leland L. Laymon. July 1984. Personal Communication.
5. Leland L. Laymon. July 1984. Personal Communication.
6. Peek and Laymon, p. 19.
7. Leland L. Laymon. July 1984. Personal Communication.
8. E.P.A., Office of Exploratory Research, Ground-Water
Management in the Southeastern United States.
9. Peek and Laymon, p. 27.
-58-
-------
VERMONT
Introduction
Vermont's original Ground-Water Protection Program was
submitted to the General Assembly in 1974. In 1978, the
Secretary of the Agency of Environmental Conservation dele-
gated authority to amend and operate the program to the
Commissioner of the Department of Water Resources and Environ-
mental Engineering.
The goal of the Vermont Ground-Water Protection Programs
are the following:
I. To develop and implement a program that will prevent
ground water from being contaminated and which will
correct or properly manage known or suspected cases
of contamination.
II. To provide maximum protection and allow only minimum
degradation of Vermont's ground-water resources.
III. To provide some level of ground-water protection for
all of Vermont.
IV. To develop the Vermont Ground-Water Protection
Program with adequate flexibility to respond to the
rapidly expanding ground-water science and
technology.^/
In 1980, the Commissioner launched an 18-month
effort to analyze available ground-water information and
develop the Vermont Ground-Water Protection Strategy. The
Commissioner and his staff identified ten management prin-
ciples to guide the development of the strategy and released
them for public evaluation. The majority of the public
agreed with the strategy, but they wanted a more detailed
program to be developed.^/ This reguest resulted in Vermont's
Ground-Water Protection Strategy. The elements of the strategy
follow:
1. Coordinate or consolidate ground-water aspects of
existing State programs.
2. Develop the ground-water classification system.
3. Determine if the exempted aquifer concept is an
appropriate ground-water class. If it is, develop
a procedure to identify and map exempted aquifers.
-59-
-------
4. Develop a protection program that maintains the
drinking water quality of public water supplies, and
protects the public investment in the same.
5. Develop and conduct ground-water protection technical
assistance programs for local officials, regional
planning commissions, water supply planning engineers,
state pollution control officials and other interested
individuals or companies.
6. Determine impact of onsite waste water treatment
systems on ground-water quality in Vermont.
7. Develop a method to determine onsite wastewater
treatment system densities appropriate to Vermont
ground-water protection goals.
8. Develop a program that maintains the drinking water
quality of non-municipal water supplies and private,
individual supplies.
9. Amend the Agency of Environmental Conservation
Pollution Control regulations to include aquifer
protection areas consideration in permit review
criteria.
10. Evaluate the ground-water law and recommend necessary
changes.
11. Investigate, document, and maintain records of reported
ground-water contamination problems.
12. Maintain well log records.
13. Enhance the ground-water quantity component of the
Vermont Ground-Water Protection Program.
14. Evaluate the hydrogeologic skills in State government,
especially the Health Department and the Department
of Water Resources and Environmental Engineering
Programs, and determine if additional technical
skills are needed to review permits and to provide
technical assistance to communities or individuals.
15. Develop a program that will enable the State to
identify public water supply needs and potential
aquifers in order to site potential future supply
sources that maximize the public investment.
-60-
-------
16. Develop a research strategy to investigate the
applicability of ground-water theory to Vermont's
geology and coordinate with the State institutions
of higher learning and private sector to accomplish
this work.^/
Classification Designations
Developing a ground-water classification system plays a
crucial role in Vermont's overall ground-water protection
plan. The underlying principle behind the classification
system is to base classification on existing and future uses,
vulnerability, and an acceptable degree of risk. Initially,
the Department divides ground water into two classes. Class I
ground water will be high-yield aquifers which could be used
for future community water supplies. Class I will receive
the most restrictive level of protection. Class II will be
protected by existing codes, standards, rules, and
regulations.^/
Criteria
The criteria used to separate ground water into two
classes included: population served by the system; system
ownership; public investment in the planning and construction
of the system; cost of rehabilitation of contaminated systems;
sources of rehabilitation funds; yield capability of the
systems; and system vulnerability due to aquifer hydrogeology
or surface land uses.£/ The criteria were employed by the
State in its initial phase of implementing the system, the
Aquifer Protection Areas Pilot Project.
The Aquifer Protection Area Pilot Project consisted of a
12-month test of. the feasibility of using Aquifer Protect-
ion Areas as a basis for the State's ground-water classifica-
tion system.£/ The State defines an Aquifer Protection
Area (APA) as the land surface area which encompasses the
recharge, collection, transmission, and storage zones for a
particular aquifer.^/ Because of the large number of public
water supply systems in Vermont that use ground water as a
source (316), Phase I of the Project included only those
community water systems that qualified as "Municipal Systems,"
meaning a system that serves a cluster population residing
in buildings not constructed as a single housing park.^/
Thus, the project encompassed only 136 of the 316 community
water systems. To protect the 136 systems, 209 individual
areas were identified.^/
-61-
-------
Under the grant from the 208 Water Quality Program of
the EPA, the State Department of Water Resources and
Environmental Engineering developed a procedure to define
APAs .^P_/ Each site was classified under one of the
following hydrogeologic categories:
1. Wells in unconfined and leaky unconsolidated aquifers
with available engineering pump tests.
2. Wells in unconfined and leaky unconsolidated aquifers
without engineering pump tests.
3. Wells in confined unconsolidated aquifers.
4. Bedrock wells, using an infiltration model.
5. Bedrock wells, using a leakage model.
6. Springs in unconsolidated material and at the inter-
face between unconsolidated material and bedrock,
with high relief in the upgradient direction.
7. Springs in unconsolidated material and at the inter-
face between unconsolidated material and bedrock
with low relief in the upgradient direction.
8. Springs emanating from bedrock . H/
The procedure for determining the APA for each
particular source varied depending on the category. These
methods are described in detail in Vermont's Aquifer Protec-
tion Area Reference Document y
In addition to the hydrogeologic identification and
mapping procedure, the pilot project conducted a land use
survey in order to determine which APAs were relatively
underdeveloped and which areas presented conflicts between
existing activities and water supply.
The procedure for conducting the land use survey con-
sisted of three parts. First, the USDA provided infrared
aerial photos at a scale of 1:20,000. "The presence of
buildings, roads, forests and agricultural lands, powerline
corridors, and railroads was interpreted from the photos . " * -J_/
Secondly, the Vermont Ground-Water Pollution Source Inventory
(December 1980) was consulted to locate potential pollution
sources within the APAs. Potential pollution sources
-62-
-------
mapped included petrochemical storage sites, solid waste
sites, and waste lagoons.^/ Finally, knowledgeable State
personnel were interviewed to determine the location of
other existing and proposed activities within the areas.
Activities included in the survey were existing and proposed
waste generating facilities, proposed sanitary landfills,
wastewater treatment plants and residential subdivisions.
Wetlands and primary agricultural lands were also noted
where applicable. The extent of any municipal sewer systems
and the water quality classification of streams running
through APAs or along their borders were also determined.15/
Aquifer Protection Areas were placed in the following
categories to determine the degree to which water supplies
may be compromised by, or protected from, potential pollution
sources.
1. Protected: The area does not contain any potential
pollution sources, the densities of septic systems
are greater than one system per acre or the area is
zoned for recreation, forestry, agricultural use or
open space. (Twenty-five ground-water systems or
19% of the statewide total.)
2. Possibly Protected: Generally the town has one acre
residential zoning or a ground-water protection goal
in the plan with no zoning. (Twenty-nine ground-water
systems or 21% of statewide total.)
3. Minimal Protection: Planned or zoned for medium to
high residential development, commerical, industrial
or village areas. Potential pollution sources are
already present. (Thirty-one ground-water systems
or 23% of statewide total.)
4. Not Protected: Major conflicts exist between ground-
water protection goals and current or projected uses.
Plans and zoning ordinances openly permit or allow
the siting of high risk, potentially polluting
activities within the areas. (Fifty ground-water
systems or 37% of the statewide total.
-63-
-------
Implementation Activities
In 1983, Vermont sent its information from the Aquifer
Protection Project to approximately 104 municipalities through
the State. In addition, Elizabeth B. Mullikin under contract
to Vermont's Department of Water Resources and Environmental
Engineering wrote a handbook for local officials about how to
implement the State's ground-water protection plan. These
efforts coupled with the public response to a widely public-
ized contamination case in Williams town, Vermont, in the fall
of 1983 has prompted action by a number of local officials.^/
Thus far, the most common protection device used by the
municipalities is the town plan.jJJV Town plans "express
objectives and policies to guide future growth and to protect
the environment. They provide the guidelines for zoning by-
laws, subdivision regulations, and official maps."^P_/ To
enforce town plans, Vermont employs its land use and develop-
ment law. The law requires that a project will comply with
a town plan. Additionally, permit approval requires evidence
that the subdivision or development "will not result in
undue water pollution, [and] will not cause an unreasonable
burden on an existing water supply" (Title 10 V.S.A. Chapter
151 Sec. 6086). ^J The law is effective because it provides
a forum for all towns and adjoining property owners to address
projects that may affect ground-water quality .
In some cases, municipalities respond to conflicts by
seeking out alternative ground-water sources that do not
present land use conflicts. Then the municipality employs a
town plan or zoning to protect that new source.
In a few cases, municipalities have responded to the
APA information by enacting zoning laws. Such a law can
allow best management practices or compatible activities in
the Aquifer Protection Area to protect the ground water.
State officials hope that Vermont will have received
responses from all of the 104 municipalities contacted by
mid-1985. j^/ Meanwhile the State is working on Phase II
of the Aquifer Protection Project, the mapping of the remain
ing community systems. This work should be completed by
spring 1985. fV
-64-
-------
Continents
State officials see the classification system's greatest
strength in its capability to deal with the ground water that
people are presently consuming. Consequently/ the State
avoids the conflicts accompanying a decision about projected
use of ground water.^£/ Secondly, this system is economically
efficient, costing approximately $480 per aquifer protection
area mapped._^Y Phase I of the APA project cost $65,000
and took approximately 2 years.££/ The development of
Vermont's ground-water strategy required an additional 2 1/2
person-years and $80,000.^7/
According to State officials, the effectiveness of
Vermont's Ground-Water Protection Plan will depend upon the
participation of local officials who must make difficult land-
use decisions now.28/
-65-
-------
Footnotes
1. Vermont Ground-Water Protection Strategy (Vermont Agency
of Environmental Conservation, 1983) p. 5. [Hereinafter,
Vermont Strategy.]
2. Cheryl King Fischer, "Designating Aquifer Protection Areas
in Vermont." reprinted in State, County, Regional and
Municipal Jurisdictions Ground-Water Quality Symposium.
(Worthington, Ohio: National Well Water Association,
1983) p. 37.
3. Vermont Strategy, pp. i-ii.
4. Vermont Strategy, p. 7.
5. Vermont Strategy, p. 8.
6. Vermont Aquifer Protection Area Reference Document,
Agency of Environmental Conservation, Department of Water
Resources and Environmental Engineering. (1983) p. 1.
[Hereinafter, Reference Document.]
7. Reference Document, p. 1.
8. Reference Document, p. 4.
9. Reference Document, p. 4.
10. Reference Document, p. 4.
11. Reference Document, p. 5-6.
12. Reference Document, pp. 6-15.
13. Reference Document, p. 19.
14. Reference Document, p. 19.
15. Reference Document, p. 19.
16. Reference Document, p. 21.
17. Lawrence Becker, Vermont Ground-Water Planner, Department
of Water Resources and Environmental Engineering. Personal
communication, July 1984.
18. Becker, July 1984.
-66-
-------
19. Elizabeth B. Mullikin, An Ounce of Prevention; A Ground-
Water Protection Handbook for Local Officials (Vermont
Department of Water Resources and Environmental Engineering,
Health and Agriculture, 1984) p. 23.
20. Mullikin, p. 27.
21. Mullikin, pp. 23-27.
22. Becker, July 1984.
23. Becker, July 1984.
24. Becker, July 1984.
25. Becker, July 1984.
26. Becker, July 1984.
27. Fischer, p. 41.
28. Fischer, p. 42.
-67-
-------
WYOMING
Introduction
In 1980, a set of rules and regulations relating to
Quality Standards for Ground Waters of Wyoming was adopted and
implemented by the Department of Environmental Quality (DEQ).
These rules include a classification system for ground waters
of the State.
Protection is afforded all underground water bodies
including water in the vadose zone, through a two-tier
classification system. Waters being used (appropriated) are
protected for existing and potential uses. Waters not being
used (unappropriated) are protected for use suitability based
on ambient water quality.
The regulations identify domestic water, water for fish
and aquatic life, water for agriculture, water for livestock,
and water for industry. However, the regulations do not
establish water-use criteria.
Classification Designations
Based on ambient water quality, seven classes of use-
suitability have been established:
Class I
Class II
Class III
Suitable for domestic use; classified
by ambient water quality and feasi-
bility of treatment to meet use suit-
ability standards.
- Suitable for agricultural use where
soil conditions and all other factors
are adequate.
- Suitable for livestock.
Class Special A - Suitable for fish and aquatic life
Class IV
Class IV (A)
Class IV (B)
- Suitable for industry; quality stand-
ards vary with type of industry.
- Water having a total dissolved solids
concentration <_ 10,000 mg/1.
Water having a total dissolved solids
concentration > 10,000 mg/1.
-68-
-------
Class V
Class VI
Ground water closely associated with
commercial deposits of hydrocarbons
and/or other minerals, or is considered
a geothermal resource.
Hydrocarbon Commercial - For the produc-
tion of oil and gas.
Mineral Commercial - For the production
of mineral resources.
Geothermal - For the purpose of the
production of geothermal resources.
This water is unsuitable for any use due
to:
A. An excessive concentration of
total dissolved solids or
specific constitutents ;
B. A heavy contamination making it
economically or technologically
impractical to make the water
useable; or
C. Unfavorable location (including
depth below the surface making
use economically and technolog-
ically impractical) .V
The DEQ uses the Class VI designation in conjunction with
Standards for the Underground Management Waste (deep well
disposal), which specifies that the underground water in the
receiver cannot be an economically available source of water
and must be unuseable (Class VI).
Criteria
The State has established numerical and narrative
standards for its ground water. The numerical standards for
Class I, II, III, or Special A are listed in Table I.
Narrative standards for Classes I, II, III and Special A
stipulate that these ground waters may not contain biological,
hazardous, toxic, or potentially toxic materials or substances
in concentrations that exceed maximum allowable concentrations
based on information from EPA. These standards are published
-69-
-------
UNDERGROUND WATER
CLASS
Use Suitability
Constituent
or Parameter
Aluminum (Al)
Ammonia (NH)
Arsenic (As)
Barium (Ba)
Beryllium (Be)
Boron (B)
Cadmium (Cd)
Chloride (Cl)
Chromium (Cr)
Cobalt (Co)
Copper (Cu)
Cyanide (CN)
Fluoride (F)
Hydrogen Sulfide
(H2S)
Iron (Fe)
Lead (Pb)
Lithium (Li)
Manganese (Mn)
Mercury (Hg)
Nickel (Ni)
Nitrate (N03-N)
Nitrate (N02~N)
(N03+N02)
Oil & Grease
Phenol
Selenium (Se)
Silver (Ag)
Sulfate (S04)
Total Dissolved
Solids (TDS)
Uranium (U)
Vanadium (V)
Zinc (Zn)
PH
TABLE I
Domestic
Concentration*
0.58
0.50
1.0
0.75
0.01
250.0
0.05
1.0
0.2
1.4-2.47
0.05
0.3
0.05
0.05
0.002
10.0
1.0
-N ---
Virtually Free
0.001
0.01
0.05
250.0
500.0
5.0
5.0
6. 5-9. Os. u
SAR
RSC
Combined Total
Radium 226 and
Radium 2289 5pCi/l
Total Strontium 90 8pCi/l
Gross alpha particle
radioactivity (in-
cluding Radium 226
but excluding
Radon and Uranium)9 15pCi/l
II
Agriculture
Concent.*
5.0
0.1
0.1
0.75
0.01
100.0
0.1
0.05
0.2
5.0
5.0
2.5
0.2
0.2
10.0
0.02
200.0
2000.0
5.0
0.1
2.0
4.5-9.0s.u
8
III
Livestock
Concent.*
5.0
0.2
5.0
0.05
2000.0
0.05
1.0
0.5
0.1
0.00005
10.0
100.0
10.0
0.05
3000.0
5000.0
5.0
0.1
25.0
6.5-8.5s.u,
1.25 meq/1
5pCi/l
8pCi/l
15pCi/l
5pCi/l
8pCi/l
15pCi/l
*mg/l, unless otherwise indicated
Source: Wyoming Department of Environmental Quality, Water
Quality Division, 1980.
-70-
-------
TABLE I
UNDERGROUND WATER
CLASS
Use Suitability
Constituent or Parameter
Aluminum (Al)
Ammonia (NHj)
Arsenic (As)
Barium (Ba)
Beryllium (Be)
Boron (B)
Cadmium (Cd)
Chloride (Cl)
Chromium (Cr)
Cobalt (Co)
Copper (Cu)
Cyanide (CN)
Fluoride (F)
Hydrogen Sulfide (H2S)
Iron (Fe)
Lead (Pb)
Lithium (Li)
Manganese (Mn)
Mercury (Hq)
Nickel (Ni)
Nitrate (N03-N)
Nitrate (N02-N)
Oil & Grease
Phenol
Selenium (Se)
Silver (Aq)
Sulfate (S04)
Total Dissolved Solids (TDS)
Uranium (U)
Vanadium (V)
Zinc (Zn)
PH
Combined Total
Radium 226 and
Radium 2289
Total Strontium 90
Gross alpha particle
radioactivity (including
Radium 226 but excluding
Radon and Uranium) 9
*mg/l, unless otherwise indicated
Special (A)
Fish/Aquatic Life
Concentration*
0.1
0.021
0.05
5.0
0.011-1.13
0.0004-0.0153
0.05
0.01-0.043
0.005
0.0022
0.5
0.004-0.153
1.0
0.00005
0.05-0.43
Virtually free
0.001
0.05
0.0001-0.000253
500.04-1000.05-2000.06
0.03-1.43
0.05-0.63
6.5s.u.-9.Os.u.
5pCi/l
8pCi/l
15pCi/l
-71-
-------
TABLE I
Explanation for Superscript Used in Table I
^Unionized ammonia: When ammonia dissolves in water,
some of the ammonia reacts with water to form ammonium ions.
A chemical equilibrium is established which contains unionized
ammonia (NH^), ionized ammonia (NH^+J and hydroxide ions (OH~).
The toxicity of aqueous solutions of ammonia is attributed
to NH3; therefore, the standard is for unionized ammonia.
(Note: 0.02 mg/1 NH3 is equivalent to 0.016 NH3 as N.)
2Undissociated H2S: The toxicity of sulfides derives
primarily from H2S, rather than from the disssociated (HS)
or (S) ions; therefore, the standard is for the toxic
undissociated H2S.
^Dependent on hardness: The toxicity of metals in
natural waters varies with the hardness of the water; generally,
the limiting concentration is greater in hard water than in
soft water.
hatching.
rearing.
6Fish and aquatic life.
^Dependent on the annual average of the maximum daily
air temperature: 1.4 mg/1 corresponds with a temperature
range of 26.3 to 32.5 degrees C and 2.4 mg/1 corresponds with
a temperature of 12.0 degrees C (53.7 degrees F) and below.
^Total ammonia-nitrogen.
^Requirements and procedures for the measurement and
analysis of gross alpha particle activity, Radium 226 and
Radium 228 shall be the same as requirements and procedures
of the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, National Interim
Primary Drinking Water Regulations, EPA-570/9-76-003, effective
June 24, 1977.
-72-
-------
as maximum contaminant levels (MCLs) in the Federal Register
under Water Programs, National Interim Primary Drinking
Water Regulations, December 24, 1975, (Part IV); and Water
Programs, Hazardous Substances, March 13, 1978, (Part II) ._£/
Furthermore, classes I, II, III, or Special A may not contain
biological, hazardous, toxic or potentially toxic materials
or substances in concentrations or amounts that impair the
suitability of the water for its designated use, contribute
to the violation of water quality standards, or have a toxic
or hazardous effect on natural biota.jV
.M-..:.i-wy,.* ,,., „*.!, ny ,tu_ i.ot attempted to classify ground
water throughout the State, it can classify any time the State
perceives a threat to ground-water quality. For example, in
Northwest Wyoming, just south of Yellowstone National Park,
the ground water is of good quality and is very important for
receational use. Because Wyoming's definition of domestic
water includes the phrase, "including but not limited to",
the State has designated overall-good-quality shallow ground
water in a scenic/recreation area as having Class I use-
suitability in order to help preserve a pristine environment.
Ground water normally is classified during the permit
application review process. This implies that adequate
information, including background water quality, has been
submitted. For Class V and VI groundwaters of the State,
public notice is made of proposed designation and a comment
period provided. Due process provides the opportunity for a
Public Hearing.
Nothing in the regulations prohibits ground-water
classification if a permit application is neither required
nor submitted. The regulations have applied to spill events
and can be applied, as has been previously stated, whenever
there is a threat of ground-water pollution. The State has
established regulations for discharges into each class of
ground water. Discharges into Class I, II, III or Special
A ground water may only exceed the quality standards for
each class if post-discharge water quality can be returned to
its original quality.£/ The uranium concentration in ground
water being used as a domestic supply may not exceed the
pre-discharge background concentration.^/
Discharges into industrial water supplies, Class IV (A)
or (B) may not make the ground water unfit for its designated
use. A discharge into Class IV (A) or (B) ground water may
neither create oil and grease concentrations in excess of
10 mg/liter (or a lesser amount considered to be toxic), nor
create oil and grease concentrations in excess of background
conditions at any place of withdrawal or natural flow to the
surf ace ._£/ Furthermore, discharges into industrial ground
waters may not exceed the greater of either the background
-73-
-------
concentrations or the quality standards for radioactivity set
forth for Classes I, II, III, and Special A ground waters
at any place of withdrawal or natural flow to the surface.^/
Narrative standards for discharges into any class of
ground water stipulate that discharges shall not result in
biological, hazardous toxic or potentially toxic materials or
substances in concentrations which will impair the background
quality of the ground water's designated class or which
would contribute to the violation of quality standards for
the designated class, or which would cause any harmful effect
on natural biota.^/
Discharges into three types of Class V ground water,
hydrocarbon commercial, mineral commercial, and geothermal,
shall be for the purposes of oil, gas, mineral, and geothermal
production, and may not degrade other water resources.^/ A
discharge into mineral commercial ground water may not degrade
associated or other ground water unless the affected ground-
water quality can be returned to background or better quality
after mining ceases.l^/ If the Administrator of the Water
Quality Division (WQD) determines that upgrading the ground
water to background quality cannot occur due to technical and
economic considerations, the water will at least be upgraded
to a quality sufficient for the pre-discharge use-suitability
of the ground water.J^/ The operator must demonstrate during
the research and development phase of an in si_tu mining
project that affected ground water can be restored (upgraded),
otherwise a commercial phrase will not be authorized.
Implementation Activities
The State uses a monitoring program to enforce its water
quality regulations. The State has the authority to require
monitoring if a threat to ground-water quality exists,
whether or not the State has issued a ground-water permit.^/
Although the State does not employ a zone of discharge„ or
interceptor wells, the State establishes warning limits to
alert the State of potential contamination. If the discharger
reaches a particular limit, the State may require the dis-
charger to take further preventive action. This helps to
mitigate the pitfall of discovering contamination after-the-
fact associated with monitoring requirements.^/
It is important to note that in all cases Wyoming tries
to preserve the natural quality of its ground water as much
as is feasible. Thus, a potential discharger may not exceed
the background conditions, even if the upper contamination
levels are higher, unless he can prove it is infeasible to
prevent further degradation of the ground water.
-74-
-------
Comments
In evaluating the usefulness of Wyoming's classification
system, State officials explain that although decisions are
made on a case-by-case basis, the classification system is a
very useful tool for protecting ground water. A major bene-
fit of Wyoming's system is the establishment of a regulatory
procedure to protect and enhance ground waters of the State,
and to prevent, reduce and eliminate ground-water pollution.
The system prohibits indiscriminate use of Wyoming's under-
ground water as a receptacle for waste. Further, a polluter
can be required to restore ground-water quality to acceptable
use suitability.
Because the States's regulations only discuss quality and
say nothing about yield, they help the State protect ground
water in the vadose zone as well as the zone of saturation.
Using a highly stratified classification system helps Wyoming
avoid policy conflicts by recognizing the importance of
mineral, petroleum, and geothermal energy developed so long
as there is no permanent adverse effect on associated ground
water.15/
Water may be classified today because it is being affected
by an activity (un-permitted) which began prior to the adop-
tion of the regulations which protect ground-water quality.
The activity which began at an earlier time may be exempt
from permitting requirements ("grandfathered") but is not
exempt from requirements to protect ground-water quality.
There is a difficulty, however, in always being able to
establish the pre-discharge (pre-impact) background water
quality, which is necessary in order to classify the original,
unaffected ground water.
-75-
-------
Footnotes
1. Wyoming, Department of Environmental Quality, Rules and
Regulations. Chapter VIII: Quality Standards for
Wyoming Ground Water Section 4.(4)(d)(1-7) p.5-6. Also
Guide to Ground-Water Standards of the United States
(Washington, DC: Amercian Petroleum Institute, Pub. No.
4366, 1983) Chapter 5. [Hereinafter, A.P.I.]
2. A.P.I., Chapter 5.
3. A.P.I., Chapter 5.
4. A.P.I., Chapter 5.
5. A.P.I., Chapter 5.
6. A.P.I., Chapter 5.
7. A.P.I., Chapter 5.
8. A.P.I., Chapter 5.
9. A.P.I., Chapter 5.
10. A.P.I., Chapter 5.
11. A.P.I., Chapter 5.
12. Tony Mancini, August 1984, Personal Communication.
13. Tony Mancini, August 1984, Personal Communication.
14. Tony Mancini, August 1984, Personal Communication.
15. Tony Mancini, August 1984, Personal Communication.
-76-
-------
APPENDICES
-77-
-------
X
H
Q
04
CO
•o
i-l
03
•O
C
03
OS
3
O
0)
4-1
OS
5
o
00
Oi
CO
4-1
3
O
•H
4J
O
CD
C
c
o
u
c
o
•iH
4J
03
O
a
a
^1
CJ
c
CD
4-1
CO
•H
CO
c
o
cj
0>
Di
OS
r|
U
CO
•H
Q
>,
i-i
O
Vj Di
0 CD
OS 03
5 U
1
•O 0
C Oi
3 iH
O OS
V-i *"!
O O
CO
•H
Q
V-l rH
0 OS
OS O
1 >1
•O 4J
C -fH
3 rH
o m
»H 3
O O
u
0
Vj Oi
o c
•H
C iH
OS O
e o
3 U
x:
IH
>4H O
o c
•H
CO g
0 Vj •
4-> 0 CO
0! A Q)
» 4J 01
0 O Vj
4-1 03
CO T3 XT
OS C CJ
$ OS CO
•iH
o c -o
4-1 -H
Ol Vj
•D .H 0
0 IH 4-)
4j o os
CJ *
•H iH
M OS C
4J g 03
CO -iH 0
0) C r-l
tt OS CJ
CO
4-1
c
CD
3
rH
<4H
MH
TT"]
iH
0
4J
0)
S
0)
4J
CO
OS
M
O
CO
CO
OS
•H
CJ
•
4-1
C
0)
4-1
CO
•H
CO
C
0
CJ
4J
o
z
CO
iH
CD
4J
(0
Tp
0
4J
CO
OS
5
rH
03
•(H
iH
4->
CO
3
T3
C
M
•
^
CO
CO
CD
CO CJ
0 o
Ol V-i
VH a
OS
A 4-1
O -H
CO g
•O 0
a
Ol
C OH
•H [d
rH O
0
O (D
0 XI
4J
4J
0 0
OS 4J
4J
C 4J
O CJ
U 0
1 -n
C rO
0 3
C CO
^_*
IH
O >i "
C iH TJ
•H C C
a o os
Di
C
•H
rH
O
O
CJ
rH
03
•rH
Vj
4-> CO
CO V-l
3 0
T3 4->
C 03
M J2
•
CQ
4J
a
(D
o
X
CD
CO
CD
>
4J
•iH
•o
•o
OS
rH
03
0 •-
•H 0
g c
0 -rH
r; ^j
CJ O
rH
O A
C O
•
rH
>1
rH
a
a
- g 3
0O CQ
iH Vj
jQ UH Vj
•rH 0
Dl CO 4J
•rH 0 OS
rH Dl ^
Dl Vj
0 03 Oi
c x: c
O -rf
CO CO rH
•H -H O
•o o
rH CJ
03 VJ
3 0 -O C
•O 4J C "H
•H nj TJ«
C Ok
OS U
x: Q
4J
OS
te
0 CO
4-1 0
OS VJ
0 -rH
V-i 3
Di D1
CD
CO Vj
CD
Dl >i
V-l OS
03 -D
X3
CJ V-l
CO 0
•rH a
Q
CO
c
• o
4J rH
C rH
CD OS
4-1 Ol •
CO 4J
•rH O -H
CO O g
COM
O - 0
cj m a
CO
Ui
CD
jj
OS
*
0
4J
CO
OS
[5
CJ
•rH
4-1
CO
CD
g
g
•
CJ
-~ 4J
4J 1 O
•H Vj C
g CD
IH 4J 0
0 0 IH
a-o os
*^
&4 CO
Ed CQ 0
Q 4J "D
C -H
OS 0 CJ
Ol'iH
0 OS Ol
(VI rH
•rH Ol 03 •
3 C 0
D'-'H "O DI
,rH -- O
OS O CO CO
g "O -H
— ' 4J -rH "D
OS O
-x: 03 >,
4J 4J C
C -O 03
CD "O C
4-> 0 OS UH
co -O O
•H -H CO
CO > 4-1 4-1
C O C Vj
O V-i CD 03
cj a 01 a
CO
CD
Ol
03
^M
0
CQ
•rH
Q
IH
0
4J
OS
;s
c
03
0
r— 1
CJ
•
Q
CD
Di
IH
03
A
O
CO
•rH
-D
P^
fjj
Q
Q)
X?
j^J
O
jj
CJ
CD
•i — j
J3 •
3 CO
CO CQ
CD
- O
J-> O
C VJ
a /^
a o
3 03
C/> PQ
iH 4->
0 C
4-> OS
OS rH
S ft
•
u
in
o o
03
Vj rH
a os
V-l
•H 3
0) 4-1
iH OS
3 C
4-1
•H UH
3 O
U
•H CO
V-l rH
Dl 0!
03 3
"O
0 -rH
rH CO
X3 0
OS iH
4J
a M
0 CD
o x:
O 4J
OS O
-------
•o
0
3
C
•H
4->
C
O
CJ
X
M
Q
Z
Ed
On
On
<
CQ
•O
VJ
m
•o
c
(0
jj
en
10
O
VJ
(0
O
00
CQ
4-1
3
CJ
CJ
CD
C
c
o
c
o
•H
JJ
(0
CJ
a
>1
o
c
CD
CQ
•H
CQ
C
0
0
CD
DI
Vj
(0
£!
O
CQ
•H
a
^i
^_i
o
M DI
CD CD
JJ 4->
(0 (0
!2 CJ
1
•D CD
C DI
3 VJ
O 10
Vj JS
O cj
CO
•H
Q
VJ rH
CD (C
£3
5
•D 4J
C -H
3 rH
O (C
Vj 3
O O
•
4-1
C
CD
jJ
CO
•H
CO
c
o
u
4J
o
z
CO
rH
10
3
•0
•rH
CQ
CD
P£
CO
rH CD
10 Dl
•rH T3
VJ 3
4J rH
CO CO
3
•O -O
C C
M (0
<
< -o
o -
JJ
CQ C
CO O
(0 CJ
i-H ^*
CJ
•
4J
C
CD
jJ
CQ
•rH
CQ
C
O
CJ
4->
O
z
CQ
f_f
i-H
•rl
*4H
•o
c
1C
J
CQ
CQ CD
CM A
£
CQ >i
rtJ
> e
JJ CD
C Dl
CD VJ
JJ (0
CQ £,
•rH O
CQ CO
C -H
o -a
CJ
o
4J C
o
c c
•rH
CQ
•rl 4->
rH
CD 3
D> CO •
VJ 0 -O
(0 SJ 0)
O -P O
CO <0 rH
•H JS rH
Q 4J (C
CD
Dl
(0
4J
a
CD
en
u
o
Cn
CQ Ed
CM Q
£
OQ >i
J3
•C W
C Q
(0
T3 O
0) 10 JJ
CQ CD
3 CD 4-1
U CJ
CO JJ 0)
0
jj
CO
(0
S
T:
•H
CO
CM
£
CQ
0
CO
D
CD •i—ii-t
• CN
JJ 00
C C^
CD rH
JJ
CQ VJ
•H O
CO
C rH
O 00
cj a\
rH
JJ
O C
C -.-1
CQ -O
•H CD
a
CD O
DlrH
VJ CD
(0 >
JC CD
U "O
CQ
•iH CD
Q X3
CD
Dl
•o
3
rH
cn
0)
DI
m
j£
CD
Q
4-* UH jQ
•H O 3
CO CO
rH
•« (C •>
VJ CQ 4->
CD O C
> a CD
CD CO 4J
> -H CO
O -O -H
£ CO
CD C
*.C O
4J 4J CJ
C
CD VJ CD
4-> o n
CQ UH
•iH >,
CO >, (0
C rH g
O 4J
o cj jC
•H CO
4-1 VJ 3
O JJ VJ
Z CQ X)
1
•H
rH
o
6 -H
0) (C
Q CQ
O
l-t Cu
O CO
•H
co a
CD
JJ (U
CQ 4-1
<0 CQ
3: (0
^
^i
^ c
rH O
3 -H
CQ JJ
H
o
en
UH
O
CD
O
•H
MH
MH
0
CD
JC
JJ
>, •
jQ 4-*
e
rH 0
0
O DI
Vj (0
a c
a
10
0 *
C
•o
0 C
rW| ^
3 O
CQ VJ
C Dl
0
0
O JC
4J 4J
CQ
CM
£ 1
03 4J
0
0
• C
(C C
•H O
VJ CJ
0
4J ^
•H JQ
^_j
CJ rH
00
Vj O^
O i-H
•
>i C g
O -rH (0
•H VJ
rH -O Dl
O 0 O
a a vj
o a
CJ rH
•rl 0 00
MH > O
•H 0 CM
O 'O
0 CQ
a 0 "
CO jQ 4->
3
O O CJ
Z 4J -rt
c
0
•H
JJ
(0
CJ
•H
i-H
a
<;
UH
4-> UH
rH O
(0 C
cn 3
P£
-D
« T3
O C
a io
o
•
(C
•rH
Vj
0
4J
•H
^
O
Vj
o
^1
CJ
•H
rH
O
a
U
•i-i
U-l
•rH
0
0
a
CO
o
z
c
o
•H
4J
C
0
4J
0
OH
Vj
0
JJ
(C
* CO
e c
Vj -H
O CO
4-> (0
cn CQ
33
O
•H
'O
>
O
a
a
(0
Cu
Ed
Q
O
jJ
jj
CJ
0 •
•r-i CO
-Q CM
3 £
CO CD
- 0
4-> JJ
C (C
0 -H
4J VJ
co a
•rH O
CQ VJ
c a
o a
U (0
0 £
4J 0
CO JJ
(C CQ
IS >i
cn
0
VJ JJ
3 C
JJ 0
iH g
3 0
CJ DI
•H (0
Vj C
Oi (0
-------
0
3
C
•H
-U
C
o
u
X
M
Q
25
di
CO
•a
u
03
T3
C
(0
•u
>1
4J
•H
rH
03
O
0
•P
03
o
CO
CTl
CO
3
u
u
0
c
c
o
u
4-1
O
C
o
03
O
Di
D,
>,
cj
c
0
JJ
CO
•H
CO
c
o
u
0
0)
in
03
.C
U
CO
•H
a
^i
jj
0
SH Di
0 0
JJ JJ
(0 03
IS U
1
•o 0
C Di
3 -H
O 05
i-i .C
O U
CO
•rH
Q
0 03
JJ O
03 a
1 ^
*D JJ
C -H
3 rH
O 0>
>H 3
a o
CO TJ
3 C
O O 05
0 jj -a
CO rH M CO
D 03 JJ 05 C
> ON 0
O 0 05 -rH
• • M -r-i X jj
05 (H 03 Di JO 05
•rH 0 -rH Dl 30 l-l
iJ JJ VJ 05 CO .C 0 •
0 OS 0 JJ Di JJ
JJ 5 JJ CX O C
•H -rH W • 4H 0
Si *O l-i Q H O i-l JJ 0 E JJ C CO
O i-l O JJ05-HOSC
Dl JJ -H H C 0 0
>i >i U i-i Di £> >H CJ
O O O 0 O O O
•H C -H T-l >H JJ JJ
rH rH jQ i-l Di C E O
O 0 • O 3 O0OC
Di i-i C Di CO Di E i-l
3 O >i C 0 M-l 0
O CO -H CJ ** O "rH Dl i-l
•rl C JJ --H JJ -H 03 03 CO 03
4H 0 03 4H C rHCC 0
•HC-rH 0 O 0 <0 D> 0
OO-H O JJ Di CJ £ SHJJ
0JJ60 CO -H 0505
Di 05 Di '"H O ' — 10 *C *C
COCOJJCO CO SJJUO
Oi C C &i CO CO 05
OSO O O OUH3-H0
ZCOU 25 CJ 2QS QrH
1
0 CO
JJ 0
03 13 JM
rH rH S -rH 0
03 03 0 O UH
O U Q -H CO
•H -rH JJ CO C
E E rH co 0 (0
0 0 03 0 T3 U
£ —- XI — -H CU -rH EH
U 0 CJ rH ^ 0
CO>H COOS0 »-H 0
J>j)>-l3 V^V-I'H JJ COJJ JJ
O0JJ O0JJ o! 0O CO
NfH NCS TD0 05CO
O -H 3 O -H 0 -rt CO S C
•HrHO-HrH-O 0 OC O
C -rl -rH C -H -H D> -H M t3 -iH
05JJSH OSJJCO'D JD -HJJ
Dl^JDl D>JH0 0D> M'D i — 105
M0<^ M0Pn MC 0C OJJ
Ofcj — • Ofcj^- Q-H ffiOS COCO
• • • • •
ID « J S 25
< -^
a^3
CO C
CO O
OS CJ
_J ^^ ,,
u
1
E
o
"D
0
Jij
Di
4H
O
CO
)H
0
4J
05
5
0
JJ
CO
05
5
o
JJ
•a
0
JJ
CJ
•H
^
4J
CO
0
04
CO
JJ
c
0
3
rH
M-l
4-1
[jj
^4
0
JJ
05
5
0
CO
05
s
H
<
O
CO
CO
05
r-H
u
C
•H 1 JJ >,
Dl CO C 05
•H co 0 I ^ E
>H •• 0 3 C T3
O in O rH O C 0
•O 0O4HO05>iDi
rH 0 > >H 4H CM
05JJ 0Di0^^0J05
(j m * c co fi
30 O'OW-rHJJOO
jJM KOJJDiCjJCO
05 JJ O -rH -H 05 -H
C C UH M JJ JJ t3
3 • JJ O 3 05
IH • JJ «• 05 rH 0 03
OOCO C •jCrHrHM
JJ0 00JJ05OJ3 •»
r-H -rH JJ» UD|JJ>I
OSJJrH CQ-H03 rH«
gOSQi •rH'^'jJjJjJODlDj
•H0D! CO 030SCCDiCd
CM3 C>,iHC0 3Q
05.CCO OMJJ JJCOCO
JJ OJJCO»HC00 >i
^ M COCO'HCOiHjD
CO0 JJ3O COO0
fl3 C 4-* O T3 £ ^H k-i Q[ 4J *O
E 05 CC0030 050
30S "H-OEDi-SJJ
JC CO >1 -rl 0 JJ
ODi rHCCCOS-iDi-'H
>iDiC rHOSOSOSCOCE
rH -rH OS O 4-1 -H M
JJ.jCJ*? M0 4H(00*^0
C CJ C 0 V-i -"^ O C Vj C Di
03 -H -r-l C 0 Dl -rH 0 -H
C f*, i-l 0 .C C CO 05 J^ i-l 0
•H S "O O S -H -H JJ JJ T3 jQ
CO
M
0
JJ
0!
u
0
CO
03
U
rH
03
•rH
*^
JJ
CO
3
•o
C
M
•
*
I
O
00
I
-------
TO
•D
Li
(0
•D
C
<0
JJ
to
•D 3
0 O
3
C Ll
•rH 0
C
O
U
<
X
M
Q
Z
cu
cu
(0
o
CO
TO
JJ
3
O
•H
JJ
O
0
c
c
o
CJ
c
o
•r-l
JJ
to
U
a
^1
o
c
0
JJ
TO
•H
TO
C
O
U
0
CT
Li
(0
.C
CJ
TO
•H
Q
^i
Ll
O
Li CT
0 0
JJ JJ
m to
S u
1
•O 0
C CT
3 Li
O tO
Li JC
O O
TO
•rH
Q
Ll rH
0 10
JJ O
(0
X)
3 —
TO TO
--' TO
0
>i U
rH 0
o a
TO
Li
0
JJ
to
S
- E
0 O
rH Ll
JD U-l
JJ *H
a CT TO
CD 'H 0
O rH Dl
X CT Li
0 0 <0
C JC
TO 0
0 CO TO
> «H -H
.rH -O
JJ rH
•H 10 Ll
•O 30
•O "O JJ
flj -rH (0
co S
f-l 0
(0 Ll CT
O •» C
•iH 0 0 >rH
E C C rH
0 vH -rH O
JC U M O
O O O O
rH rH
O A JC O
C O O C
• • •
•H CM ro
^
rH
a
a
3
TO
Li
0
JJ
(0
CT
C
•H
rH
O
o
o
c
•iH
0
TO C
Li to
0 .*"!
TO O •
m 0
0 03 0
iW 04 ^-1
D> 3
0 O O
•D C CQ
•
^J1
C
to
JS
JJ
Li
0
JJ
(0
0
Li
CT
TO
0
CT
10
JS
O
TO
•iH
Q
•
JJ
C
0
jJ
TO
•H
TO
C
O
U
CO
Li
0
JJ
to
s
0
JJ
TO
<0
5
CJ
•H
JJ
TO
0
E
a
U
ft*
W
Q
to
TO
0
•H
3
D1
0
Li
j>^
(0
•o
Li
Q)
QJ
TO
C
O
rH
rH
(0
CT •
JJ
O -H
o E
0 Ll
- 0
in a
^
"•^ JJ
JJ 1 O
•H Ll C
E 0
Ll JJ 0
0 0 Ll
cu *o to
^««
CU TO
U TO 0
Q JJ -D
C -rl
<0 0 O
CT>(H
0 to CT
Ll rH
•H CT to
3 C
CT-H T3
0 C C
Li to <0
0
^irH «"-»
tO O TO
E T3
<0 0
-j=l <0
JJ JJ
C -O
0 T3 C
JJ 0 (0
TO T3
•H TH TO
TO > JJ
C 0 C
O Ll 0
CJ a CT
TO
0
CT
Li
10
£,
O
TO
•tH
Q
s^
0
JJ
to
S
c
(0
0
rH
U
Q
•
0
CT
IH
to
JS
CJ
TO
t3
>i
C
(0
U-l
O
jj
Li
to
a
0
CT
Ll
(0
JM
CJ
TO
•H
•o
cu
Cd
Q
0
.C
JJ
O
JJ
JJ
CJ
0
•r-i
JD •
3 TO
TO TO
0
- O
4J O
C Li
0 a
JJ
TO JJ
•H -H
TO E
C Li
O 0
u a
0
CT
JJ Li
C flS
0 .C
E 0
JJ TO
(TJ -H
0 Q
Ll
EH JS
TO
>i (0
iH 3s
a.*
a o
3 OS
V) CQ
Ll JJ
0 C
JJ (0
10 rH
S Cu
w
0
CT
Ll
10
^
CJ
TO
•H
•o
cu
w
Q
0
r-;
JJ
O
JJ
JJ
CJ
0
•r—i
XI
3
TO
*
JJ
C
0
JJ
TO
•H
TO
C
O
CJ
CT
C
• rH
TO
TO
0
CJ
O
Li
CM
rH
0
to
Li
O
eg
T3
C
(0
en
*
•
TO
TO
0
CJ
O
Li
a
jj
•H
g
Ll
0
a
CO
I
-------
0 0
(0 (0
50
1
"O 0
C D)
o ^
*O 4-*
C -H
D rH
O *0
ll ^
o o
£
4J
•H
^
T3
0
JJ
(0
•H
O
o
CO
CO
10
0
JJ
(0
JC
CJ
0
rH
O
•o
0
JJ
o
•rH
^J
JJ
CO
0
CO
0
CJ
3
O
CO
0
4-1
OS
C"j
CJ
0
[ ^
H
M
'-N
itf *O
o-
4->
CO C
CO O
(0 U
rH »--
u
•D
C
(0
ite •
CO - C
0 0 -H
o cn DI
•rH T3 -H
JJ 3 l-i
CJ rH O
10 CO
V-l rH
a 0 J 0 (0
3 CO C
JJ
rH rH UH
3 (0 O
cj a
•H T-l CO
(H CJ rH
Dl'rH *0
(0 C 3
3 -O
0 g -H
rH CO
JO - 0
TO Q) V)
4-1 Ol
a TO s-i
04-10
o ax:
U 0 JJ
(0 CO O
•
4J
c
0
JJ
CO
•H
CO
c
o
CJ
JJ
o
2
•D
c
TO
rH
(0
3
TJ
•H
CO
0
rH
TO
•rH
M CO
JJ 0
CO D)
3 TJ
•0 3
C rH
M CO
*
*
•
4-1
C
0
JJ
CO
•rH
CO
c
o
CJ
JJ
o
2
CO
r-H
r-H
•rH
U-l
•D
C
to
•
OQ
4J
•H
g
(_|
0
a
(X
w
Q
0
jj
O
4J
CJ
0
•r-i
£)
3
CO
^
4J
C
0 •
JJ CO
CO CO
•rH 0
CO CJ
C O
O IH
o a
0
DI
TO
4J
a
0
•
o
_J
05
^
O
^i
a
a
10
OH
w
Q
0
jC
O
i i
^J
0
0
•r— i
Q
3
CO
^
JJ
C
0
4-1
CO
•rH
CO
c
o
u
0
D>
T3
3
r-H
CO
0
cn
(0
^
0
CO
•
a
•
(0 C
> 0
o e
u 0
a DI
a -H
rH
•P O
CJ CO
0
•r-iUH
J3 O
3
CO 0
CJ
* -rH
4J *| I
C UH
0 O
JJ
CO 0
•H r;
CO JJ
C
O >i
O JO
1
•rH
rH
O
6 rH
0 (0
Q CO
o
M Oj
O CO
•H
CO Q
0
4J 0
CO JJ
(0 CO
12 (0
5
^i
3t C
r-H O
3 -H
CD 4-1
c
CO O
(X JJ
s
OQ "D
0
0 D)
CO M
D <0
CJ
• CO
4J -H
C -0
0
JJ CO
CO -rH
•rH
CO 0
C 4J
O TO
CJ JS •
0 CO
JJ TO U
O 0 0
C rH 4J
(0
CO O S
•rH C
•o
0 0 C
DI ^J 3
>-i 3 O
(0 CO IH
j= c cn
CJ 0
CO 0
•H O J=
f\ 1 1 1 \
0
cn
1
"H jQ
l-l
CJ rH
00
|j O^
O rH
^i C
CJ -H
•H
•H TD
O 0
O< Qj
o •
CJ rH g
•H 0 (0
UH > 14
•H 0 cn
CJ TJ O
0 M
a 0 a
CO JO
CO
O O 0
Z 4J
0
^1
0
JJ
(0
$ CO
£ C
Vj "H
O CO
4-1 (0
CO OQ
1
H
UH
O
rH
<0
>
0
IH
a
a
(0
PI
w
Q
0
4J
JJ
CJ •
0 CO
•T—\~
jD CU
3 S
CO CO
- 0
JJ 4-1
C TO
0 -H
JJ U
co a
•H O
CO IH
c a
o a
CJ TO
0 g
jj 0
CO 4-1
(0 CO
5 >1
CO
0
J>-( 4^
3 C
JJ 0
rH g
3 0
O Dl
•rH TO
IH C
Oi (0
< s
e
M
-------
•o
0
3
C
•H
4J
C
O
U
x
M
Q
2
O,
03
•o
V4
03
•o
C
03
4J
U)
4J
03
O
i-i
0
o
oo
CO
4J
3
U
•1-1
4J
O
0
C
c
o
u
IH
O
C
o
03
U
•1-1
rH
ft
ft
^1
o
c
0
4J
03
•r-l
CO
c
0
u
0
Oi
^_l
05
c~|
0
03
•H
Q
^,
ti
O
V-i Oi
0 0
4J 4->
05 05
S U
1
•O 0
C en
3 M
O 03
V4 .C
O 0
CO
• r-l
Q
ij rH
0 03
4J O
03 CJ5
5
•O 4J
C -H
3 rH
O 03
i-l 3
O O
03 *O
3 C
1 O 05
06 • O T3
03 05 rH 4J >-i 03
D 4-> 03 03 C
C > 4-> N O
O O 0 03 -H
• U • 1*1 0 1C 4-1
03 03 ft ••"> 03
•H Sj -H ft -Q 0 i-l
1-10 V-i 03 3 jC 0 •
0 4J 0 03 4J ft 4-1
4-) 05 4J A O C
•H 5 -in u ^ IH 0
>j "O ti Q 03O CT. 4-i
U C O "H C 03
3 0 i-i CO • -H -H
i-l O !M 4J 0 £; 4-> C 03
O)-i O 4->o3-HOSC
Oi 4J -r-i l-i C 0 O
^i >i O i-4 Ol D i — IO
O O O 0 O O O
•H C -H T-i i-l 4J 4-1
rH rH jO V-l Oj C £ O
O0 O 3 O0OC
ft i-l ft 03 O> S i-l
3 >i C 0 IH 0
CJ 03 O * O-iHOl lJ
•iH C -H 4J -H 03 03 03 03
4-40 IH C rHCC'0
•r-i • «iH Q) O 0 03 Oi 0
OOC 0 4J ftOS M4J
0 4J O 0 03 "iH 03 03
ft >fH ft -H O rH 0 r^ c^
C0034J 03 CO S4JOO
&i 03 C Oj CO 03 03
OSC O O OU05-.H0
2 PQ **H 2 O 2 Q IS Q rH
1
0 03
4J 0
03 "O l-l
rH rH Jt -H 0)
03 03 0 O IH
O O Q --H 03
•H .H 4-> 03 C
6 E rH 03 0 03
0 0 05 0 T3 U
si *^ x; — -in P-I -H H
CJ 0 U rH U 0
COlj 03030 ""iH 0
M^3 (JM-H 4J 034J 4-1
O04J O04J 03 0O CO
NrH NCE T50 0303
O -H 3 U -H 0 -H CO S C
-HrHO-iHrH-D 0 CJC O
C -H -H C -iH -H OI -i-t M *O --H
054JM 034->03'O X) -H 4-)
Ol ^4 Ol Ol M 0 0 Ol ^4 *O rH (0
U
OS
U
03
•r-l
•o
0
U3
O
JS
4->
0
0
•H
n
03
•H
3
03
4->
C
0
3
rH
IH
IH
U
^
0
4J
03
U
0
4->
03
03
.
M
CQ
O
03
CO
03
rH
CJ
e
T3 0
0 01 4J 4-1 03
4J rH C 03 03
05 -H 0 0 >, t> 0
00OgjC03CU
X) i-l CO 4-> 4J 03 O
4-> 05 4-> J-l
>, 0 0 S C 03 ft
03 C JZ Vi O 0 0
S -iH 4J 4-> •— 1 6 -H C
03 rH 4J C O
4-> C 0 05 03 03 -iH
• Vj 0 £ 0 Ol4->
^ 0 «C! I ' O ^4 V4 03
CJ CJ S 4J 4J O S-i
IH 4->
03O103O030TJrH
03 C >J "H £ 0 .H
03 -iH 0 4-> 4J T3 IH
i-l > 4J i-l 4J 03
U-iHOSOSCU-li-iOS
0 S ft 0 O Oi •
TJ O 0 4-> 0 03 03
C 04-lrH C4-1'O OJ'O
03 iJ 03 03 -H W O -rH
03 i-l 03 -H C rH
l4-l
03 C JQ i— I O 4->
03 0 -H -H -H C i-l
03rHiM «O0330
03X)4JCE4-)03IHC
rH 03 03 03 0 0 -H
U 4J 3 4-> rH O
-H T3 0 03 -H i-l CO iJ
C3Ci4^(OOrHO
•H03-H0303031H031H
I
co
oo
I
-------
3
C
•H
4J
C
O
u
X
H
Q
2
W
ft,
a,
co
•a
c
to
to
3
O
Ll
0)
4J
03
o
CO
CO
3
O
•H
4->
O
,
0
c
CD
4-)
CQ
•t-l
CQ
C
O
u
o
Li
(0
x:
o
CO
•1-1
Q
>i
Ll
O
Ll O>
CD CD
4-1 4-1
to to
"£• U
1
T3 CD
C O>
3 Li
O (0
LI x:
O 0
CO
•H
Q
!
-Water
r Goal
1 *•"!
•D 4->
C -H
3 -H
O ffi
Li 3
U O
>i CD
fri XI •• O
ta T3 CO rH >i C
Q -O CD -i-l rH 4-> CD
0) T3 -H -r-i 3 1
CD 4-> -H Ll S rH rH CO "O
X! <0 ^ CD (OU-l-HC
4J3O4JCD3C'O<0
rH Ll tO 01 O1 -H
O *0 Qj U Ll CD •*»
4J > m LI y-i x; co
CDCQCDXtCDO^J-1
4J -.-I O O 4-> Xi
ocDcomcomcD'OO)
CD .Q fO MH -H S C C T-I
•r-i J3 Ll "O O O Ll
n rH 3 CD N >i
3 rH CD CO CD O CD>,
CQ-HCO X3 U-l XI Ll
O C Ll 4-» *O CD
4J 1 CD - 3 C D<
C •>i-HCQ8)rDCDO
CD— .jO-OCO C4JLI
4-) CO 1 J O -H (0 C CD
Od'O'OCQ^'O 01
CQ C CQ Ll
d)4->cma>m
n-H OXlrH O4J OX!
gH U C CO -D U
c^
10 CD Cd •
£ aQ rH
CQ
Ll
CD
4-1
10
V
CD
4J
CQ
m
Jg
rH
It)
•H
Ll
4->
CO
3
•o
C
M
CQ -O
O -
CO C
CO O
03 0
rH ^^
U
Li CO t-. D>
CD Li Li -O >i C
4-1 W-l ICDCDCD LiCD*^
(0OL| C0-H(0(0 (OLl CDCOO (OC
C 0) ^i 4-J TD 5 U '*H O ^H 3 >r^ •* 0) flJ
'H ^
U-iiW CU4JO(O^W'H Q) CT3^
Li C C) D (0^-4"*Ofl3V-ij£^JU)VjfO 4-*
n-rHoo^iSOico^ jjo CO,CCO-HCD ex!-H
•r*C Ll CD C6 OOOOCD t)«
'OOCDCQCX'-HnSCDlO 0l-'"l4->LiC4->4J-r-l(Q
it)NX!CQ (OrHrH COC4-ln5O4>rHCOC4-)CLi
Ll 4JOW'HUX1CQL|T-I(OL| CX -HCOO
^T] Q) Ll * Vj *r^ Qi ^) J kj O O f^i| *13 ^4 flj j^
C .^ jf^ ^ JL4 4 -* Q^ -t-* *^H ^Jl O Q^ j(^ ^,i «^H CJ ^^ ^^ JQ
S 4J U CDCOX!R)ULlrHal(OOLl(a Qi
O 'O ^^ C^ 3 ^J Q) «rH (Q nH O ^H j^ ^J •* Ql
*O ^ 0) O ^J *O EM rH <^ O O| yj ^j uj «^ j^
U}O •HiLtfl!(J2O'0
4JCQOO)WCO)-U>ifD^-H-HLlDCCO-i-l(J3
(OCO-H-H0O4-J 4JLJ4J4J4JO) 4->i-H
Q)rH 'O'O'OD^C'Hd) Q)>tCO"H±J4JfOO
Lj C) CO 4-* Ll i-Ht/}^£rHZ5CCCL(
0) <0>1
X^COOC^^Z^Li^J^ -H OCCDfO^O QjLi
S.H-o«4Juu(oa1H»o«-HiwEcxo'0
*
CN
I
•*r
oo
I
-------
•D
Q)
3
C
•H
JJ
C
o
CJ
X
M
Q
2
ft
CO
(Q
•D
C
cn
>i
o
i
i-i
O
ij Dl
CD CD
j^J Jj
03 (0
IS CJ
1
•O CD
C 01
O (0
w ^s
o o
10
•H
Q
CD (0
4J O
flj O
g
1 ><
73 *J
C -H
3 rH
O tO
ij 3
o o
ft
w
Q
CD
XI
JJ
0
4->
JJ
CJ
CD
•r— >
.0
3
CO
*
4-1
C
CD
jj
CO
•H
CQ
C
o
u
Dl
C
•H
rH
O
o
CJ
rH
to
•H
^|
4J
CO
3
T3
C
M
CQ
^-N.
OQ -D
O -
4-1
CO C
CO O
to o
iH •*"
CJ
••
4J
(0
x:
4-1
•o
CD
•D
•H
>
O
^4
a
«»
CO
CQ
CD
CJ
O
a
jj
•H
E
CD
a
CO
^
CD
JJ
to
5
•D
CD
j£
CD
•H
^
CD
S-l
CD
^l
to
CQ
CD
^
•iH
JJ
•H
•O
•D
(0
rH
<0
CJ
•H
E
CD
x;
CJ
•
rH
E
0
j^
U-l
CO
CD
Dl
"O U
C (0
(0 XI
CJ
•» CQ
ft -H
ta TD
Q
JhJ
^1 CD
jO 4J
m
•o *
CD
> Di
O C
k-l -H
a-H
a o
fl3 O
U
T3
c o
m c
•
CN
•
CQ
Vj
CD
CO
to
0
Vj
D)
0
•o
C PI
as u
x; Q
4J
to
^
0 CQ
JJ 0
(0 M
0 -H
^ 3
Dl D
0
CQ M
0
Dl >i
LI m
(0 *D
XI
CJ U
CQ 0
•H a
Q
CO
c
• o
4J ~i Oi <^™*>
3 C CO
D^'H *O
0 C -H
M m u
0 a]
>1-H
m o -o
E c
-^ 4J (0
(C
-XI CQ
4J 4J 4-1
C C
0 -D 0
•
0
Dl
03
£
CJ
CO
• r-l
-D
>i
C
(0
m
o
4J
Vj
03
a
4-> 0 D14J
CO -D »J
•H -H 0
CO > 4J
C O 0
O^J^
cj O,^
CO
0
Di
i-i
03
XI
o
CO
•H
D
M
0
JJ
03
IS
C
OJ
0
rH
CJ
Q
o
c
0
^i
03
0
Di
03
X!
O
CQ
•H
•D
ft
W
Q
0
XI
JJ
O
JJ
JJ
CJ
0
•r-i
•Q •
3 CO
CQ CQ
0
«• CJ
4-> O
C 14
0 a
4-1
CO 4-1
•H -H
(0 Q
C t)
O 0
cj a
0
DI
4-J V-l
C 03
0 XI
E CJ
4J CO
03 -H
0 Q
^i
H XI
CO
>t 03
•H je
a^<:
a u
3 03
CO CQ
J»-t ±J
0 C
JJ 03
tO rH
IS ft
*
0
Dl
to
XI
CJ
CQ
• H
•o
ft
Cd
Q
0
XI
JJ
O
4J
4J
CJ
0
•r— i
f)
3
CQ
*
4J
C
0
4J
CO
•H
CO
c
o
CJ
rH
0
10
^4
O
t8
r>
c
to
fa
•
CO
CO
0
CJ
o
a
4-1
•H
E
0
a
Dl
c
•H
CQ
CQ
0
CJ
O
^_|
ft
I
in
CD
I
-------
•o
0
3
C
•rH
JJ
C
o
u
X
M
Q
Oi
to
•o
S-i
(0
•D
c
(0
JJ
(0
O
0
4J
(0
o
ao
to
4J
3
O
•H
.U
u
0
c
c
o
u
U-J
o
c
o
•H
4J
(0
o
•iH
rH
a
a
^1
o
c
0
CO
•H
to
c
0
u
0
Oi
^j
m
X!
U
to
•^
p
>,
J^
o
lj Oi
0 0
[ i [ 1
1
•O -P
C -H
3 rH
o m
M 3
o o
1
•O -P
C tO C in T3
30 0 • 0 O C
O O 0T3 M 4J4JH-I (0
i-i s-i •- .0 c .u m cto
o CJ O
0O T3 O04J OtO V-i •HO0>'O -HCOV-l
a 00^ rHio c- m cnooicc SH0 0
>*iCQ4-*'UOCO.Q0 4J 73 C OXi^O Oi C
4J 03 nj -H 4J -iH ^( COC C O0M -P^O O*
0rHOOOfl3^ OO4-* rHC 0KCX 0
•UCJfOtl CX00 •O-'H tO 4J>i-PrH-H 4Jt_) 001
^i 0 Oi 1 ' g ^ f^ rH O ^0 "•"* rtJ rH tO P1*! ^ X! ^J
Xi^JrH O-H04J 0CJ4 >i CggO'-H -iH — O 4J(0
OCCMC^J OOi'D-l-' (H-iHCXtOMH rH
TC( (0 Vj W ^1 *W C fO CH 'rH 0 tO 0 i-t .^* C CO M-t C
0 0Pwj->0o 0 (OrH jj0cxoo ocw 00
rH<£ -r-t-Hj-l 30 (0 (DJJ 4->O OO-U
0 CO O O rH (0 ^-t M-( I ' CO O1 CO CO FT"1 »H tO •• CO 1 ^ 0 CO
CO f03rO(OC-4-J 0PX!'O "rH (0 g 0 C
oioc'uoo'ca -iH-oxiij JJ-D 00 rH0-o4J
X!CO-H0Oi <0 C0I0 •HrH0JJ4JrO03MCXtn
j-i 03 rO -P V-i^-10 U-lO'-H-P* WOX;(0'H.rHOO)-'-<<00'iH
^ U tj -H 2 S TJ 'H 0S'0 rHU-l'U5^oTj£o'«-.rH0
o 0g3m0rH 0ja>, c moo CMU 0rnmu
U-t C O ^ 4^ S ^J ••"( *^C -4J0"H CO 4JCOOO4mrHMm0C
•H 03T3OOgO"O^OHJ OC 0 lJ(T3 COVJ0
0 CU^C-PC00NC0(Q4-} CUO4-*"'HlOrHO4V-i0O<03
rH>O« 3-H 4J 0Qt«-lC CO--HO(-l0lt) 04JQ< rH
JD0C000OC0C004JOi-l->-l •Ht00-UNt00rOix:XM3(0 -oc-i~ito-Hox;0-w-Hx;c
4J O 0 ^ Ol g 4^ tO 4-J 0 Oi 10 g flj Q 0 rH QI 4-J QLI CO *0 AJ '»H
•HrHJJ>, SQl3'O'HtQ
3 iH (0 «0 • • • • (D X (0 C -U -i-l • •
COfOSgrHCN CO TT 2 Cd — -H 3 -O rH CM
CO
(0
3
•D
•H
to
M 0
0 0i
u to
M rH 0
3 (0 01
O -iH T3
CO lj 3
JJ rH
0 CO CO
•P 3
tJ *O *O
x; c c
O M (0
nj
0
H
H
^_.
OQ -O
O -
j->
to c
to o
m o
rH ^«
U
I
U3
CD
I
-------
0
3
C
•H
4J
C
o
CJ
Q
2
CM
03
•0
U
(0
•o
c
(0
4J
CO
(0
3
O
0
4-1
(0
o
00
3
U
•H
4J
U
0
C
c
o
CJ
c
o
(0
u
••H
rH
a
a
^1
CJ
c
0
4J
03
•H
03
C
O
CJ
0
01
S-l
OS
X!
O
03
•H
Q
^i
ti
0
rH 01
0 0
4J 4J
<0 OS
& CJ
1
•0 0
C 0>
3 r*-l
O <0
>H XI
O U
03
-H
Q
S-l rH
0 05
4J O
(0 O
5
•0 4->
C -H
3 rH
O 10
rH 3
o o
•
4J
c
0
03
•H
03
C
O
0
4J
0
c
0
rJ
OS
03
rH
rH
•H
UH
•0
C
10
rH
J
0
z
03
rH
rH
•H
U-l
*0
C
OS
J
09
CQ —
O TD
03 4J
03 C
(0 O
rH CJ
CJ ~
4->
C
0
03
• r-l
03
C
o
o
0
X3
>i
(0
E
c
o
• r-l
03
C
(0
a
x
0
• •
rH -0
rH 0
•H -O
U-J *r-(
'O >
C O
(0 JH
ij a
(4_)
o -o
c
0 05
c
o •»
N "O
0
0 01
XI rH
4J OS
rH
14-1 C
O 0
4-J 4->
C O
0 C
4->
X 03
C
0 •
•H CO
•0 CO
03
rH JH
Oi O
c
5 OQ
0
-O 03
03
0 05
XI rH
4J CJ
•
CN
U-l
03 O
•H
C
>-i O
0 -iH
4J 03
(0 C
» (0
a
0 X
CJ 0
10
U-l rH
>4 (0
3 !H
03 0
4J
4J (0
C rH
0
•r-l K
•0 <
m co
x^
Oi U
c o
^
o *
•0 <
0 *
£3
0 03
r-l 03
0 (0
XI rH
3: cj
T3
rH 0
1 (0 C
C CJ -H
O-H e
U 4J r-l
r-l 0
4-1 0 4->
O > 0
c -0
c
03 O 0
•r-l -H XI
4-1
03 (0 Sx,
0 3 flJ
rH 4J E
03 -iH
03 03
CD rH
O 03 (0
•H 03
03 XI O
jj a
c o
•H C r-l
M a
rH
rH C
•H • O
UH 4-1 -H
•O C 03
C 0 C
OJ 4-> 03
rH 03 a
•H X
OS 03 0
,»
•0
0
03
OJ
0
^
U
0
•0
0
C
OS
CJ
c
o
• • -H
II 1 1 1
• rH (Q
^
4J 0
C C
0 0
4J 01
03
••H 0
03 4->
C 03
0 XI
O CJ
OS -O
0 0 C
J2 rH 03
0 •
4-> rH
03
03 0
^
•0 3
0 03
03 O
O rH
a u
o
r-l rH
a-H
•H
03 U-l
•H -0
C
C 03
0 rH
• H
03 -0
C 0
03 >
a o
X rH
0 a
a
rH OS
03
O C
•H 03
4->
r-l U-l
0 O
^ *
4-> C
0 rH 03
XI 03 rH
4J a a
•
CJ
0
•r-i
XJ
3
03
>.
4->
C
0 •
4-1 03
03 03
•H 0
03 CJ
C O
O b
cj a
0
01
OS
4->
a
0
CO
CJ
.
rH
03
^
O
a
a
03
PM
DQ
Q
0
XI
4J
O
4J
4->
O
0
•r-l
XJ
3
03
>.
4->
C
0
03
•H
03
C
O
CJ
0
01
T!
3
rH
CO
0
01
03
^
0
Q
.
rH 4->
OS C
> 0
0 E
1-1 0
a 01
a 03
(0 C
03
&. s,
O 0
4-1
0 03
XI OS
4-> IS
o -0
4-1 T-l
rH
4-* O
u co
0
•r-| U-l
£1 O
3
03 0
U
•• -r-l
4-1 U-l
C UH
0 O
4J
03 0
•H X!
03 4J
c
O >i
CJ -Q
1
•rH
rH
0
E -H
0 03
O 03
O
rH a
O 03
•iH
03 Q
0
4J 0
03 4->
03 03
S OS
[2
r^l
^ c
rH O
3 -H
QQ 4J
w
-------
•o
0)
3
C
•r-l
4J
C
O
U
<
X
to
•o
r4
m
•o
c
us
4J
CO
4J
(0
tH
0
4-1
(0
o
00
CO
4-)
Q 3
Z -H
ft
ft
O
0
C
c
8
C
o
ro
U
a
a
>1
0
c
0
4-)
to
•r-l
CO
c
o
cj
0
CT
(0
.c
u
CO
•H
Q
^1
rH
O
M Ol
0 CD
4-> 4-1
m
0)
f-;
O •
rO CO
0 rH
rH 0
4-1
o m
c »
•o
0 C
rH 3
3 O
CO rH
C Ol
0
0
O.C
4-1 4-1
•
to
•rH
Xj
0
4J
•H
^4
O
^
0
^
0
•H
rH
O
U
•H
U-l
•rH
U
0
a
CO
o
z
c
o
•r-l
4-J
(0
O
rH
a
a
4J
rH
to
CO UH
MH
•o o
(0 C
0 3
fl£ OH
O
•
ro
•H
rH
0
4->
•H
j^
0
rH
O
^
0
•H
rH
0
a
u
•r-l
MH
•rl
0
0
a
CO
o
z
c
o
•r-l
4J
C
0
4->
0
rX
J^
0
4-1
(0
* to
e c
iH -rl
O 10
4J ro
CO CQ
EC
UH
O
rH
rO
>
O
^
p.
a
(0
ft
w
Q
O
Jj
JJ
O •
4-1
C <0
0 -H
4J ^
to a
•rH O
CQ -J
c a
o a
CJ ro
0
•p e
CO 0
10 4->
IS to
>i
rH O3
(0
r-l 4-1
3 C
4-> 0
•H g
3 0
cj 01
•H tO
r4 C
O> ro
< £
M
1
•rl
e
0 tO
CO 4J
D C
0
o
•
(0 r4
•H CD
r4 4->
0 (0
4-1 $
•fH *D
r4 C
0 3
o
~4 r4
O Oi
>i O
O C
•H
rH 0
O r4
a 3
CQ
u c
•H CD
UH
•rH O
0 4J •
0 C
a to o
CO - -H
ft 4-1
o £ m
Z CQ C
rH
(0
o
•H
&
0
-C ~
CJ 0
CQ r4
>-l r4 3
O 0 4J
N rH
0 -H 3
•rH rH CJ
C -rH -H
rO 4-) rH
Ol r4 Ol
rH 0 1<
O Cu « —
*
•
(0
•H
^
0
4->
•H
^j
0
rH
O
^
U
•rH
rH
0
a
u
•rl
UH
•r-l
0
0
a
CO
o
z
rH
ro
O
•H
e
0
.£
u
CO
V4 VH
O 0
N
O -H
•H rH
C -H
tO 4->
Ol >H
U 0
O Ctj
M
^^
rH
ro
•rH
4->
c
0
•o
•H
CQ
0
*-*
•
rH
(0
^
o
r4
a
a
(0
ft
Ed
Q
O
4J
4J
O
0
•I— i
jQ
3
CQ
•.
4J
C
0
4J
to
•rH
to
C
o
CJ
1
LH
0
4->
ro
S
0
Q
rH
ro
•H
S-l
0
4-1
rO
£
0
Ol
TD
0 O)
S-J C
Q -H
^
0
JC
4J
-UH
(0 O
•rl
-4 CO
0 e •
4-1 m 4J
•H ,4 -r-l
rH Ol C
0 O D
SH
LJ p, j_i
O C
Ol 0
>i c e
U -H 0
•rH tQ D>
rH C (0
0 0 C
a u ro
•H £
>irH
4J 0
•rH ft 4->
rH td tO
(0 Q (0
3 IS
O1 O
4-> CO
14 3
0 4J O
4-> 0 TD
(0 0 rH
S T-I ro
-O N
O 3 ro
z co as
•k
0
-o
•H
u
•H (0
4-> 0
10 'O
0 -H
ft O
•H
^ 4J
0 U
•O 0
•rl CO
u c
•rH M
Q
rH 'O
0 C
DC ro
£
jj
•rH
e
0
a
ft
CO
Q
0
•C
4J
0
4J
4-)
O
0
•r-i
Q
3
CO
k
4-)
C
0 •
4-> CO
CQ CO
•H 0
CO O
C 0
O r4
cj a
V_i
0
UH
CO
C
ro
r4
H
0
4J
CO
ro co
IS C
o
-O -H
•rH 4J
rH (0
O 4J
U5 CO
*"
-------
•D
0
3
C
•H
JJ
C
o
u
I
<
X
M
Q
z
On
0.
CO
1
o
c
0
JJ
CO
•rH
CO
c
o
CJ
0
0>
tH
<0
x;
o
CO
•H
Q
>i
0
i-i O)
0 0
JJ JJ
03 05
S u
I
•D 0
C D)
3 U
o 05
rH .C
O 0
CO
•H
Q
0 05
JJ O
to a
[5
1 >i
•O JJ
C -H
3 rH
O (0
J^j ^
a o
i
0
JJ
CO
OS
*
O)
C
•H
>
•rH
0
0
0
rH
^
O
14-1
0
1— 1
X!
«s
JJ
•H
3
CO
^i
r-H
rH
03
tH
0
c
0
o
0
0
CO
••_•
CO
1 1
+J
c
0
3
rH
WH
U-l
w
^
0
4J
03
*
0
JJ
CO
03
12
M
U
o
CO
CO
OJ
rH
U
— — — — — — — — — — — ^— — ,x: «j jJ co co o u
&iJJrO0HCXrH0tHyH 05
W 05 C XI Ot , jj Q) rH
•O . jQ . jj aj jJ
00T3CCQ g S 05 CT
.CO00JJO0COCD-H C
jJ 03 C JJ x: JJ JJ 3JJ IH «iH
UH -H X O> CO O CO CX >
OtHOJ0-tHT3>1^iflJO '"H
JJ 3 JJ tH rH CO 0 1^ tH 0
co c jj -H g ex o
JJ '»H O >i O JJ 3 rH CX 0
O "O 05 C JJ CO C C (0 03 in
0 0 g JH 0 U C •
•l-l "O CO 0 0 g JJ -H -iH CO (H
x)-H00o.x;jJo5jH 0 o
3^rHOOJJi
•H CX O -H CO C -H rH OS rH
T3 >lUHCO 05i 0 0 1 CO 0
jj x: jj jj -H xj 0
jj 'H 0 jj c 05 x: 0 •
•HrHC •H0EH0rHWCO
gCOO'O lH XIrH tH
tH3NC0JJ JJ-H 0
0 cr ox: • » • c
CX 0>iH05C00 CO-iH
tHx;0 0*0x1 -HI—I
CU0JJX) CODI3CJCO
UJJ *05!HrH-rH05C
Q03rOfUCO 03OX!X)O
l^ c c: jj jj .0 0 ^
0 05 0 x: o o M 0 c
x:0 jJo^ojcocx^icoo
JJ O "D X -r-t -H O> 03 -H
0500tnOT3JJOUjJ
O «w C JJ O rH I 05
JJ>J.|HJJ>, 0CO>|g
3 03 O JJ ^H CO C .O )H
jj co jj c in 'rH 0 co x: i o
o c 0ox:0o0<4H
0 *O '"H CO CX CO JJ 0 0 CO C
•i — i 0 05 0 O 'O JJ 03 -H
X) *O g O tn 0 SH O
3 >rH 'o cx x: o c in LI
C0^0 JJMHO005O
•^-OrH0CO T-lC U-4
tnOICJ* ^gJJ'HC
COCX CrHO005rHOU
0 CO 0 0 iH JJ O
DI^^ *O 3 OlrHCO-H rH'O X
rHCOrHrHrH05*VtMHO0 **H
05C005MH05 CO-HMHCO'D
x;0T3Cx:o co coc
OOC-HOJJJJCOT300
CQO03 CO C OJ 0 W CX
•H rHJJ<4-l-HC00rH0COD.
•OCXCQO'D-HgOC(8i<
O
•o
C
0
0
x:
jj
jj
OS •
--^
C 0
0 rH
•rH X!
CO 03
CO JJ
3
O CO
CO -H
•H x;
TJ JJ
CD
I
-------
•D
0
3
C
•H
JJ
C
o
CJ
X
M
Q
z
u
CM
CM
CO
•D
i-i
C
(0
4J
cn
(0
o
0
o
oo
CO
3
CJ
•H
4J
O
0
C
c
o
u
c
o
fi
o
ft
ft
>,
o
c
0
4J
to
•H
CO
c
o
cj
0
D)
S-l
03
.c
0
(0
-rH
p
^,
tl
o
J^ Q)
0 0
•p -p
03 (0
!2 o
1
•O 0
C D^
3 VH
O <0
l_i jC
C9 O
CO
•H
Q
JM »~H
0 05
-P O
03 O
s
1 ^1
TD -P
C "H
3 -H
O (0
^ 3
o o
.P 4-> O
•H -H 4J
E E
000
ft ft 0
•i— i
CM CM X5
U CO 3
a Q to
00"
JC JS 4J
-P .P C
0 •
O O -P CQ
-P 4-> W CO
•H 0 •
•P -P CO CJ CO
O O C O 0
0 0 O >-l -H
•n T-i U Qi CJ
£> X) -H
3 3 CO -P rH
CO CO IM -H O
«5 6 ft
^ K ^
•P 4J CO 0 D3
C C 0 D, O
0 • 0 • Di
-P CO .P CQ Li CM to
CO CO CQ CQ (C U 05
•H 0 -H 0 JS Q
CO CJ CO O O 0
CO CO CQ 0 6
O >-i O >-i -H £ <0
CJ ft O ft Q J-> W
"D
C
(0
CQ S~t
rH 0
(0 U-l
3 CQ
-a c
•H <0
CO U
0 EH
&
0
rH .p
03 CO CO
•H rH 05 CO
M rH 5 C tO
•P -H O Vj
CO U-l -D -H 0
3 T3 -H 4J X!
TD C rH (0 -P
C <0 O -P O
M kJ CO W
• • • •
< CQ U Q
*-^
CJ *D
CD •
4J
CO C
CO O
(0 CJ
rH ^
CJ
UJ
0
Dl CO 0
O 0 0 -H
rH 0 !>J >
O C «5 0
C (0 rJ
x; -P co
O CO rH C
0 JD (0 O
4-> 3 CO -H
CQ O -P
4J ft ro
c to o cj
0 3 M -H
E 0 ftrH
4J t3 ft
(0 CO 4J
XI -H -H
J-> CO g
C 0 (0 Vj
0 CO XI 0
E -H ft
CO S 0
D> Vj to 0
(0 0 (0 DI
c x; o sj
(0 4J 1 05
E 0 >iXJ
X3 CJ
J-) S-i 1 W
W O 0 -H
0 to -D
jQ >i 03
iJ O 0
>i O -P
O -P (0 05
ft oj c cn
e H o
(D 14-1 (0
0 -D X!
O Vj 0 -P
| i 1 J
f4 C M— 1
>i-P 0 O
0 -H g
•H S 0 JJ
rH rH U
o 0 ft m
ft -p g ft
tO -H
0 05 CQ
•P S 0 05
05 .Q
J-> ^ CM
W O -D EC
-H P
003
X! Dl O 0
^ j ^_i * ^|
05 O
^ 1 f* ^^ M 1
rH CJ O 0
•H CO -H X!
.p -H rH •
CO TD O -P CO
ax; co
tO 05 Dl 0
Vj -H O O
jJ O J^ i-j i-i
M iw H XI a
• •
c
o
•H
CQ
CQ
3
CJ
CO
•H
p
-------
APPENDIX B
New York Ground-Water Classification: Quality
Standards for Class GA
i he following quality standards shall be applicable to Class GA waters
/(ems Spec///cji/ons
1 Sewage, industrial waste or other 1. None which may impair the
wastes, taste or odor producing
substances, toxic pollutants, thermal
discharges, radioactive sub-
stances or other deleterious matter.
quality of the ground waters to
render them unsafe or
unsuitable for a potable water
supply or which may cause
or contribute to a condition in
contravention of standards
for other classified waters of
the State.
The concentration of the following 2. Shall not be greater than the
substances or chemicals.
ill Arsenic (As)
I2) Barium (Bai
\j) Cadmium (Cd)
<4i Chloride (Cll
6) Chromium (Cr) (Hexavaienu
>6) Copper (Cul
(7) Cyanide (CN|
8) Fluoride (Fi
'9l Foaming Agents
• lOl Iron (Fe)'
Ml LeadlPbi
'i2i Manganese (Mnr
>! j) Mercury (Hg)
Ml Nitraie (as Nl
IS) Phenols
]hi Selenium ibei
•1 7) Silver (Ag|
'181 SulfatelSO,)
>'9) Zinc (Zni
120) pH Range
.211 Aldrm or 1 2 34 1U lOnex
achloro 1 4 4a 5 8 8a hexariy
droendo-1 4 exc 5 8
Jimethanonaphthalene
limit specified, except where
exceeded due to natural
conditions:
U) 0025mg/l
(2) 1 0 mg/l
13) 001 mg/l
(4) 250 mg/l
(5) 005 mg/l
(6) 1 0 mg/l
(7) 0 2 mg/l
(81 1 5 mg/l
(91 0 5 mg/l
(101 0 3 my/I
(111 0025 my/I
(12) 03 my/I
113)0 002 mg, I
,14) 100 mg/l
i!5i 0001 mg/l
(161 002 mg/l
(17) 005 mg/l
(18) 250 mg/l
(19) 5 mg/l
(20) 6b 85
(21) noi detectable
Source: Ground Water Contamination in
the United States, by Veronica I. Pye,
Ruth Patrick, John Quarles (Philadelphia:
University of Pennsylvania Press, 1983).
pp. 217-226.
-91-
-------
APPENDIX B - Continued
(22)
(23)
(24)
(25)
(26)
(27)
Chtordane. or 1.2.4.5.6.7.88-
octachloro-2.3.3a.4.7,7d-hex-
ahydro-4.7 -methanoindene
DDT. or 2.2-bts-
(p-chlorophenyl)-l. 1.1 -tnchlo-
roethane and metabolites
Dieldnn. or 6.7-epoxy aldrin
Endnn. or 1.2.3.4.10.10-hex-
achkxo-6.7-epoxy-
1,4.4a.5.6,7.8.8a-octahydro-
endo-1,4-enab-5.8-
dimethanonaphthalene
Heptachlor. or 1.4.5,6.7.8.8-
heptachloro-3a.4.7,7a-tetrahy-
dro-4.7-methanoindene and
metabolites
Lindane and other Hexachkxo-
cyclohexanes or mixed iso-
mers of 1.2.3.4.5.6-
hexachtorocyctohexane
(28) Methoxychtor, or 2.2-bis-
(p-methoxyphenyl)-1.1.1-
tnchloroethane
(29) Toxaphene (a mixture of at
least 175 chlorinated camphene
derivatives)
130) 2.4 Dichlorophenoxyacenc
acid (2.4-D)
(31) 2.4 5-Tnchlorophenoxypro-
pionic acid (2.4 5-TP) (Silvex)
(32) Vinyl chloride (chloroethene)
(33) Benzene
(34) Benzo(a) pyrene
(35) Kepone or decachtorooctahy-
dro-1.3.4-metheno-2H-
cyclobuta led) pentalen 2
one (chlordeone)
(36) Polychlonnated biphenyls
(PCB) (Aroclor)
(37) Ethylene thiourea (ETU)
(381 Chtorotorm
(39) Carbon tetrachlonde
(tetrachloromethane)
(40) Pentachloronitrobenzene
(PCNB)
(22) 0.1 w\
(23) not detectable'
(24) not detectable1
(25) not detectable3
(26) not detectable'
(27) not detectable3
(28) 350^1
(29) not detectable1
(30) 4 4 jiyl
(31) 026^1
(32) 50n;l
(33) not detectable1
(34) not detectable3
(35) not detectable*
(36) 0 1 \jj\
(37) not detectable1
(38) 100n/l
(391 5ji/l
(40) not detectable1
-92-
-------
APPENDIX B - Continued
(4!) Tnchforoeihylene (41) 10^
(42) Diphenylhydrazine (42i r,ot detectaoie'
(43) bs (2-chloroethyl) ether (43) 1 0 \u\
(44| 2.4.5-Tnchlorophenoxyacetic (44) 35 \u'\
acid (2.4.5-T)
(45) 2.3.7.8-Tetrachtorodibenzo-p- (45) 35 x 10>n/l
dioxm (TCDD)
(46) 2-MethyW-chtorophenoxy- (46) 0 44 ^1
acetic acid (MCPA)
(47) Amioen, or 3-amino-2.5- (47) 87.5 ^\
dichlorobenzoic acid
(chloramben)
(48) Dicamba. or 2-methoxy-3.6- (48) 0.44 ^1
dichlorobenzoic acid
(49) Alachlor. or 2-chtoro-2'.6'- (49) 35.0 \jJ\
diethyt-/V-(meth oxymethyl)-
acetanilide (Lasso)
(50) Butachlor. or 2-chtoro-2',6'- (50) 3.5 n/l
diethyl-N-(butoxymethyl)-
acetanihde (Machete)
ibl) Propachlor. or 2-chlor-N- (51) 35.0^1
isopropyl-N-acetanihde
(Ramrod)
152) Propamt. or 3'.4'- (52) 7.0 ^1
dichloropropionanilide
1133) Aldicarb. l2-methyl-2- (53) 0.35 put
(methylthio) propionakjehycle
0-( methyl carbamoyl) oximel
and methomyl 11-
methylthioace-
taldhyde 0-(methyl-
carbamoyl) oximel
(54) Bromacil, or 5-broma-3-sec- (54) 4.4 \L/\
butyl-6-methluracil
ihbi Paraquat, or 1 1'(idimethyl- (55) 2.98(1,1
4,4'-rlipyridylium
(56) Trifluralin. or a.u.a tnfluoro- (56) 35.0 ^I
2.6-dinitro-N-dipropyl-p-toluidine
(Treflan)
(57) Nilralm. or 4-(methylsulfonyO- (57) 35.0 ^1
2.6-dinitro-N.N-dipropylaniline
(Planavin)
(58) Benefin. or N-butyl-N-ethyl- (58) 35.0 jt/l
a.a,a-trifluoro-2.6-
-------
APPENDIX B - Continued
(59) Azinpnosmetnyi. orO.Oaime- (591 4 4 jju?
thyl-S-4-oxo-l 2,3-benzotnazin-
3(4h/ rimethyipnospnorodi-
thioate iGuthion)
(60) Oiazmon. or O.Odiethyl 0-(2- (60) 0 7 ^1
isopropyl^J-methyl-6-pynmidi-
nyl)-phosphorothioate
(611 Phorate (also for Disulfoton) (61) not detectable"
or 0,0-diethyl-S-
[(etnylthio)methyll pnospho-
rodithioate (Thimet R), and
disulfoton or 0.0-diethyl-S-i(2-
ethylthiolethyl] phosphorodi
thioate (Di-System R)
(62) Carbaryl or 1-naprnhyl-N- (62) 287^1
meihvlcarbamate
(63) Ziram or zinc salts of dime- (63) 4 18^/1
thyl-dithiocarbamic acid
(64) Ferbam or iron salts of dime- (64) 418|A/I
tnyi-dnniocafbamic acid
(651 Cdptan or N inchloromethyl- (65) I75fjul
thio-4 cycionexene-1 2
dicarooximide
(66) Folpet or AMriciiloromethyl- 166) 56 0 n/l
thiophtnalimide
(67) Hexachlorobenzene IHCB) (67) 0 35 ^\
(68) Paradicniorobenzene (PDB) (68) 4 7 ^1
(also orthodichlorobenzene)
(69) Paraihion (and Methyl para- (69) 1 5 ^'1
thion). or (O.O-diethyl-O-p nitro-
pnenylphosphorthioaie and
methyl parathion or (J, 0 dime
thyi-O-p narophenylpnos
pnorothioate
i70l Malathion or S 1 2 Dis lethox |70) 70^1
ycarbonyil ethyl-0 0-dimeth
yiphosphorodithioate
|71) Maneb or manganese salt (71) 1 75 pu'l
of ethylene-bis-dithiocarbamic
acid
(72) Zmeu or zinc salt of ethyl- (72) 1 75^/1
ene-bib dithiocarbamic acid
(73) Dittidne or zincate of (73) 1 75 ji/l
manganese ethyiene-bis
dithiocarbemate
-94-
-------
APPENDIX B - Continued
(74) Thiram, or (74) 1.75ji/l
tetramethylthiuramdisulfide
(75) Atrazine, or 2-chloro4-ethy- (75) 7.5 \L!\
lamino-6-isopropylammo-S-
triazine.
(76) Propazine, or 2-chloroA6- (76) 16.0u7l
diisopropyl-ammo-S-tnazine.
(77) Simazine, or 2-chloro4,6- (77) 75.25^1
diethylamino-S-triazme.
(78) Di-n-butylphthalate (78) 770^1
(79) Di (2-ethylhexyl) phthalate (79) 4.2 mg/l
(DEHP)
(80) Hexachlorophene, or 2,2'- (80) 7 y/l
methylene-bis (3,4,6-
trichlorophenol)
(81) Methyl methacrylate (81) 0.7 mg/l
(82) Pentachlorophenol (PCP) (82) 21 \iJ\
(83) Styrene (83) 931 \L/\
1 Foaming agents determined as methylene blue active substances (MBAS) or other tests as specified
by the Commissioner
2 Combined concentration of iron and manganese shall not exceed 0 5 mg/l
3 "Not detectable" means by tests or analytical determinations referenced in Section 703 4
Source' New York Department of Environmental Conservation, 1978.
-95-
-------
APPENDIX C
New York Groundwater Classification: Effluent
Standards or Limitations on Class GA
Applicability The following effluent standards or limitations snail apply to all Class
GA waters in New York State
Biological organisms Coliform and/or paihogenc organisms shall not be discharged
in amounts sufficient to render fresh ground waters detrimental to public health.
safety or welfare
Chemical Characteristics
Maximum Allowable Concentration
Substance in mg/l (unless otherwise noted)
(1) Aluminum
(2) Arsenic
(3) Barium
(4) Cadmium
(5) Chloride
(6) Chromium (Cr) (Hexavalent)
(7) Copper
(8) Cyanide
(9) Fluoride
110) Foaming Agents'
(11) Iron'
(12) Lead
(13) Manganese'
(14) Mercury
(15) Nickel
(16) Nitrate (as N)
(17) Oil and Grease
(18) Phenols
(19) Selenium
(20) Silver
(21) Sulfate
(22) Sulfide
'?3> Zinc
124) pH RangeJ
(25) Aldnn. or 1 2.3.4,10.10 hexachtoro-1.4.4a 5 8.8a-
hexdhydro-endo-1,4-exc 5.8 dimethanonaphthalene
(26) Chtordane. or 1.2,4.5 6,7,8.8-octachloro-
2.3.3a.4.7,7a-hexahydro-4.7 methanomdene
(27) DDT. or 2.2-bts-(p-chlorophenv1)-1.1.1-trichloroethane
and metabolites
(28) Dieldnn. or 6.7 epoxy aldrin
(1) 20
(2) 005
(3) 20
(4) 002
(5) 500
(6) 0 10
(7) 10
(8) 040
(9) 30
(10) 1 0
(11) 06
(12) 005
(13) 06
(14) 0004
(15) 20
(16) 20
(17) 15
(18) 0002
(19) 004
(20) 0 1
(21) 500
(22) 1 0
(23) 50
(24) 65-85
(25) not detectable'
(26) 0 1 yJ\
(27) not detectable4
(28) not detectable'
-96-
-------
APPENDIX C - Continued
(29) Endnn, or 1,2,3,4,10,10-hexachloro-6,7-epoxy-
1,4,4a,5,e,7,8,8a-octahydro-endo-1,4-endo-5,8-
dimethanonaphthalene
(30) Heptachlor, or 1,4,5,6,7.8,8-heptachloro-3a,4,7,7a-
tetrahydro-4,7-methanoindene and metabolites
(31) Lindane and other Hexachlorocyclohexanes or
mixed isomers of 1,2,3,3,5,6-hexachbrocycbhexane
(32) Methoxychlor, or 2,2-b/s-(p-methoxphenyl)-1,1,1-
trichloroethane
(33) Toxaphene (a mixture of at least 175 chlorinated
camphene derivatives)
(34) 2,4-Dichlorophenoxyacetic acid (2,4-D)
(35) 2,4,5-Tnchlorophenoxypropionic acid (2,4,5-TP)
(Silvex)
(36) Vinyl chloride (chloroethene)
(37) Benzene
(38) Benzo(a) pyrene
(39) Kepone or decachlorooctahydro-1,3,4-metheno-
2H-cyclobuta (cd) pentalen-2-one (chlordeone)
(40) Polychlonnated biphenyls (PCB) (Aroclor)
(41) Ethylene thiourea (ETU)
(42) Chloroform
(43) Carbon tetrachlonde (tetrachloromethane)
(44) Pentachloronitrobenzene (PCNB)
(45) Tnchloroethylene
(46) Diphenylhydrazine
(47) bis (2-chloroethyl) ether
(48) 2,4,5-Tnchlorophenoxyacetic acid (2,4,5-T)
(49) 2,3,7,8-Tetrachlorodibenzo-p-dioxin (TCDD)
(50) 2-Methyl-4-chlorophenoxyacetic acid (MCPA)
(51) Amiben, or 3-amino-2,5-dichlorobenzoic acid
(chloramben)
(52) Dicamba, or 2-methoxy-3,6-dichlorobenzoic acid
(53) Alachlor, or 2-chloro-2',6'-diethyl-A/-(methoxymethyl)-
acetanilide (Lasso)
(54) Butachtor, or 2-chtor-2',6'-diethyl-N-J\
(36) 5.
(37) not detectable"
(38) not detectable"
(39) not detectable"
(40) 0.1 n/l
(41) not detectable"
(42) 100(1/1
(43) SM/I
(44) not detectable"
(45) 1QiL/\
(46) not detectable"
(47) 1 0 (JL/I
(48) 35^1
(49) 3.5 x 10'VI
(50) 0.44 (x/l
(51) 87.5^1
(52) 0.44 |i/l
(53) 35.0 »J\
(54) 35n/\
(55) 35.0^1
(56) 7.0 n/l
(57) 0.35^1
-97-
-------
APPENDIX C - Continued
CMmethy! carbamoyl) oximel and me thorny! |1-
methytthioacetaldhyde CHmethyl-cartiamoyO oximel
(58) Bromacil. or 5-broma-3-sec-butyl-6-rnethluracil (58) 4 4 n/l
(59) Paraquat, or l.V-dimethytA4'-dipyndylium (591 2 98 \jj\
(60) Tnfloralin. or u,u a-tnfluoro-2.6-dinitro-N
-------
APPENDIX C - Continued
(78) Thiram, or tetramethylthturamdisulfide (78) 1.75^71
(79) Atrazine, or 2Kttk^^-ethylamino-6HSOpropvlamino- (79) 7.5 n/l
S-tnazine
(80) Propazine, or 2-chloro-4,6-dnsopropylammo-S- (80) 16.0(x/l
tnazine
(81) Simazine, or 2-chloro-4,6-diethylamino-S-tnazine (81) 75.25^1
(82) di-n-butylphthalate (82) 770 \J\
(83) Di (2-ethylhexyl) phthalate (DEHP) (83) 4 2 mg/l
(84) Hexachlorophene, or 2,2'-methylene-bis (3,4,6- (84) 7 n/l
tnchlorophenoi)
(85) Methyl methacrylate (85) 0 7 mg/l
(86) Pentachlorophenol (PCP) (86) 21 \jj\
(87) Styrene (87) 931 |x/l
In addition to the effluent standards and/or limitations the following also apply
,n the counties of Nassau and Suffolk
Chemical Characteristics
Maximum Allowable
Substance Concentration in mg/l
Dissolved Solids, Total 1000
Nitrogen. Total (as N) 10
I F oammg agents determined as methylene blue active substances (MBAS) or other tests as specified
r>y the Commissioner
I Combined concentration of iron and manganese shall not exceed 1 0 mg/l
3 When natural ground waters have a pH outside the range indicated above, that natural pH may be one
extreme of the allowable range
4 \ot detectable means by tests or analytical determinations referenced in Section 703 4
.Source New York Department of cr>,v;...!nrnental Conservation, 1978
-------
APPENDIX D
State and Territory Classification Systems: Number
of Classes and Criteria for Designations
Connecticut - 4 Classes
GAA - Existing or proposed drinking water use with-
out treatment.
GA - May be suitable for public or private
drinking water u&e without treatment.
GB - May not be suitable for public or private
use as drinking water without treatment
since the ground water is known or presumed
to be degraded.
GC - May be suitable for certain waste disposal
practices since hydrogeologic conditions
render ground water more suitable for
permitted discharges than for development
as public or private water supply.
Florida - 4 Classes
G-I - Sole-source aquifers for potable water
use.
G-II - Potable water use with TDS contant of
less than 10,000 mg/1 in aquifers.
G-III - Non-potable water use with TDS content of
10,000 mg/1 or greater, or is regarded
as having no potential as a future source
of drinking water.
G-IV - Non-potable water use with TDS content
of 10,000 mg/1 or greater.
-100-
-------
APPENDIX D - Continued
Guam - 3 Classes
G-l - Resource Zone: Ground water used for
source of drinking water. Includes all
water in saturated zone.
G-2 - Recharge Zone: Water used to recharge
G-l ground water and' must be of drinking
water quality before entering the Resource
Zone.
G-3 - Buffer Zone: Includes all waters collected,
disposed of, or recharged at existing ground
surface.
Maryland - 3 Classes
Type I - Used for drinking water without treat-
ment with TDS content of less than 500
mg/liter.
Type II - Used for drinking water with treatment.
Type III - Ground water for non-potable use.
Massachusetts - 3 Classes
Class I - Fresh ground water used as a source of
potable water supply.
Class II - Saline ground water used for conversion
to fresh potable waters, potable mineral
waters, raw material for manufacture of
sodium chloride or similar product.
Class III - Fresh or Saline ground water used for
non-potable water supply.
-101-
-------
APPENDIX D - Continued
Montana - 4 Classes
Class I - Suitable for public and private water
supplies with little or no treatment.
Class II - Marginally suitable for public and
private water supplies with treatment,
Class III - Suitable for municipal and domestic
water supplies where it is the only
economically feasible source.
Class IV - Unsuitable for drinking water use and
suitable for only limited industrial,
commercial and other uses.
New Mexico - 2 Classes
Class I - Suitable for public or private water
supplies with TDS content of less than
10,000 mg/liter.
Class II - Suitable for other purposes with TDS
content of 10,000 mg/1 or greater.
New York - 3 Classes
GA
GSA
GSB
Fresh ground waters used primarily as a
source of potable water supply.
Saline ground waters used as a source
of potable mineral waters, for conver-
sion to fresh potable waters, or a raw
material for manufacture of sodium
chloride or similar products.
Saline ground waters with TDS content
of greater than 2,000 mg/1 and used
primarily as a receiving water for
waste disposal.
-102-
-------
APPENDIX D - Continued
North Carolina - 6 Classes
GA - Fresh ground waters used as the primary
source of drinking water.
GSA - Brackish waters which occur at depths
greater than 20 feet below land surface
used as a recharge source to surface and
ground waters.
GB - Fresh waters which occur at a depth of
less than 20 feet below land surface
used as a recharge source to surface
and ground waters.
GSB - Brackish waters that occur at depths
less than 20 feet below land surface.
GC - Waters unsuitable for treatment due to
technical or economic infeasibility.
RS - Naturally occurring TDS content exceeds
water quality standards, the standards
have been exceeded, but the standards
can be met through treatment of waters.
Vermont - 2 Classes
Class I - Restricted to use as future community
water supplies.
Class II - Ground waters protected by existing
State standards.
Wyoming - 7 Classes
I - Suitable for drinking water and domestic
use which may require some treatment.
II - Suitable for agricultural use.
Ill - Suitable for livestock.
Special A - Suitable for fish and aquatic life.
IV - Suitable for industry.
V - Ground water associated with commerical
deposits suitable for industrial use.
VI - Ground water unsuitable for any use.
-103-
-------
APPENDIX E
Participating State and Territory Agencies
Following is a list of State and Territory agencies
which reviewed and verified the information presented
in this document. Addresses are provided for those
who would like additional information on the ground-
water classification systems these States have
proposed or developed.
Connecticut
Water Compliance Unit
Connecticut Department of Environmental Protection
122 Washington Street
Harford, Connecticut 06115
Florida
Ground-Water Section
Department of Environmental Regulations
Twin Towers Office Building
2600 Blair Stone Road
Tallahassee, Florida 32301
Guam
Guam Environmental Protection Agency
P.O. Box 2999
Agana, Guam 96910
Maryland
Waste Management Administration
Office of Environmental Programs
Department of Health and Mental Hygiene
201 W. Preston Street
Baltimore, Maryland 21201
Massachusetts
Department of Environmental Quality Engineering
One Winter Street
Boston, Massachusetts 02108
-104-
-------
APPENDIX E - Continued
Montana
Department of Health and Environmental Sciences
Cogswell Building
Helena, Montana 59601
New Mexico
Environmental Improvement Division
New Mexico Health and Environment Department
P.O. Box 968
Santa Fe, New Mexico 87505-0968
New York
Division of Water
Department of Environmental Conservation
50 Wolf Road
Albany, New York 12233
North Carolina
Ground-Water Section
Department of Natural Resources and
Community Development
325 North Salisbury
Raleigh, North Carolina 27611
Vermont
Water Quality Division
Department of Water Resources and
Environmental Engineering
State Office Building
Montpelier, Vermont 05602
Wyoming
Water Quality Division
Department of Environmental Quality
122 W. 25th Street
Cheyenne, Wyoming 82002
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency.
Region V, Library
230 South Dearborn Street
Chicago, Illinois 60604
-105-
•U.S. GOVERNMENT PRIMING OFFICE : 1985 0-527-484/30480
-------
-
§ a
------- |