EPA
w
United States
Environmental Protection
Agency
OHice of Ground-Water
Protector (WH-550G)
Washington DC 20460
March 1985
WH550G
Overview of
State Ground-Water
Program Summaries
Volume 1
H State Ground-Water
Program Summaries
(EPA REGION 6 STATES)
•v>
-------
OVERVIEW OF STATE GROUND-WATER
PROGRAM SUMMARIES
VOLUME I
£ STATE GROUND-WATER
PROGRAM SUMMARIES
VOLUME II
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
Office of Water
Office of Ground-Water Protection
Washington, D.C. 20460
March 1985
Additional copies of these reports can be obtained from
The Superintendent of Documents
U.S. Government Printing Office
Washington, D.C. 20401.
When ordering please include stock numbers:
Volume I - #055-000-00246-1 Price: $2.75
Volume II - #055-000-00247-1 Price: $22.00.
-------
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
This report was compiled by the Environmental Protection Agency
(EPA), Office of Ground-Water Protection, in Washington, D.C., and the
Ground-Water Offices of the ten EPA Regions. Steve Page of the Office
of Ground-Water Protection coordinated this project. It was reviewed by
state officials. EPA appreciates the assistance provided by the states
in this effort. Technical support was provided by Policy Planning &
Evaluation, Inc., located at 8301 Greensboro Drive, Suite H60, McLean,
Virginia 22102.
-------
Vo/ume I " _
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Page No.
INTRODUCTION i
I. GROUND-WATER USES AND CONTAMINATION 1
Primary Uses of Ground Water 1
Domestic Use 2
Agricultural Use 2
Industrial Use 3
Nature of Ground-Water Contamination 3
Movement of Ground Water 3
Discharge to Surface Water 4
Ground-Water Withdrawals 1
Characteristics of Recharge Areas and
Unsaturated Zones 5
Sources of Ground-Water Contamination 5
Waste Disposal Methods and Facilities 6
Landfills 6
Surface Impoundments 7
Abandoned Hazardous Waste Sites 7
Septic Systems 7
Brine Pits 7
Injection Wells 8
Land Treatment 8
Nond isposal Activities 8
Agricultural Practices 8
Industrial and Manufacturing Operations 9
Underground Storage 9
Other Sources 9
II. STATE ACTIVITIES AIMED AT PROTECTING GROUND WATER 11
Developing Ground-Water Policies and Strategies 11
Nondegradation 12
Limited Degradation 12
Differential Protection 13
Quality Standards 14
-------
TABLE OF CONTENTS (CONTINUED)
_ Page No.
II. STATE ACTIVITIES AIMED AT PROTECTING
GROUND WATER (CONTINUED)
Administering Ground-Water Programs
Establishing Responsibility for Ground-Water
Protection Programs ................................ 15
Assessing and Monitoring Ground-Water Resources ...... 15
Ground-Water Resource Assessment ................. 16
Ground-Water Contamination Assessment
and Monitoring ................................. 16
Nonhazardous Waste Sites ......................... 17
Hazardous Waste Sites ............................ 17
Salt-Water Intrusion ........................... . . 17
Pesticides ....................................... 17
Drinking Water ................................... 18
Other Areas of Monitoring ......... . ......... ..... 18
Developing State-Originated Control Programs ......... 18
Land Use ......................................... 18
Septic Tank Regulations .......................... 19
Agricultural Contamination Control ............... 19
Leaking Underground Storage Tanks ................ 20
Contamination Response ........................... 20
Brine Disposal ................................... 20
Radioactive Materials ............................ 20
Formulating Interagency Agreements ................... 21
Policy and Strategy Development .................. 21
Protection of Specific Aquifers .................. 21
Discharges to Ground Water .................. ..... 22
Underground Injection Control ...... . ............. 22
Response to Contamination ........................ 23
Hydrogeologic Studies ............................ 23
Managing and Funding Federally Delegated Programs .... 23
UIC Program ...................................... 24
RCRA Subtitle C Program .......................... 25
FIFRA Program .................................... 25
CWA Program ........ . ............................. 26
PWS Program ...................................... 27
Involving the Public in Protecting Ground Water ...... 27
Appendix. A: Summary Tables on Ground-Water Use and Quality ... A-1
Appendix B: EPA Regional Ground-Water Representatives ........ B-1
Appendix C: State Contacts ................................... C-1
-------
INTRODUCTION
In the last decade, ground-water contamination has emerged as a
major problem throughout the country. State and local agencies, which
have the primary responsibility for protecting ground water, are in
various stages of developing and implementing policies, statutes, and
strategies to meet their particular needs.
In August 198U, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency released
the EPA Ground-Water Protection Strategy. Among other things, the
strategy commits EPA to assisting states in building the institutional
capability they need to protect their ground water. This report is part
of that effort. It presents information EPA compiled from available
sources on the basic elements of ground-water programs and activities in
the fifty states and selected territories. It is not a comprehensive
summary of all state ground-water programs.
EPA will use this report for program development purposes. In
addition, EPA will make it available to the states to help them exchange
information and ideas on approaches for addressing common ground-water
problems.
State officials have reviewed this report for accuracy. However,
some of its information may differ from information in other sources.
In certain cases, this is because information was not readily available
and thus could not be provided in time for this report. Also, this
report was prepared before EPA awarded $7 million to the states and
territories for identifying ground-water problems in their jurisdictions
and for developing and implementing ground-water protection strategies
and programs. EPA intends to update this information periodically using
information from the state ground-water grants and other sources.
-------
This report is divided into two volumes. Volume I first discusses
the uses and contamination of ground water and then provides an overview
of state policies and strategies for protecting ground water. Volume II
presents the background information compiled by EPA. This information
was used in preparing Volume I. Each volume contains the same three
appendices. Appendix A provides summary tables on ground-water use and
quality, Appendix B lists the EPA Regional Ground-Water
Representatives, and Appendix C lists the state officials who verified
the information. Any questions about Volume I should be directed to
Marian Mlay, Director, Office of Ground-Water Protection, 401 M Street,
S.W., Washington, D.C. 20460. Any questions about Volume II should be
directed to the EPA Regional Ground-Water Representatives or the
appropriate state officials.
ii
-------
I. GROUND-WATER USES AND CONTAMINATION
Ground water is a vast resource beneath the surface of the earth.
It appears in aquifers, which are geologic formations that contain
enough water to yield usable amounts to wells and springs.
Usable ground water is present nearly everywhere in the United
States. The volume of known ground water is about fifty times greater
than annual surface flow in the entire nation. Another way to
conceptualize the immense size of this resource is to consider that the
volume of ground water to be found within one-half mile of the earth's
surface is estimated to be more than four times that of the Great Lakes.
Because of its dimension and because of geologic and geochemical
factors that influence its movement and characteristics, ground water is
a very complex resource to understand. Once contaminated, ground water
is difficult to monitor and expensive to clean. Sometimes it cannot be
cleaned using proven technology. Following is a brief discussion of the
primary uses of ground water and the nature and sources of its
contamination.
PRIMARY USES OF GROUND WATER
In general, the degree to which people use ground water depends on a
number of factors. One is whether good-quality surface water is
available, and another is the relative cost of delivering the ground
water to individual users.
Ground water makes up about one-fourth of all the fresh water used
in the United States. Between 1950 and 1980, total ground-water
withdrawals increased from 3^ to 89 billion gallons per day (BCD), an
increase of 162 percent. The 1980 figure represents 2*» percent of all
the fresh water used (372 BCD) that year. In part, this increase has
-1-
-------
been the result of changes in irrigation and population migration during
the 1970s to rural and suburban areas, where ground water is-more easily
accessible than surface water. The 1985 ground-water withdrawals are
projected to reach 100 BCD.
The principal uses of ground water in 1980 were for irrigation (60
BCD) and public drinking water (12 BCD). While smaller amounts were
used in industries and rural households, the degree of dependence was
often more acute.
Domestic Use
About 117 million people in the United States rely on ground water
for their domestic needs (Table A-1). Of the 100 largest cities, 31*
derive their water either completely or partly from ground water. And
in the seven most populated states — New York, California, Florida,
Illinois, Ohio, Michigan, Texas, and New Jersey — more than 52 million
people receive their drinking water at least partly from ground water.
Of the 622 public water supply systems in New Jersey, 558 obtain most of
their supplies from ground water.
In the less populated, rural areas of the country, 95 percent of the
residents depend entirely on this resource for domestic uses.
Agricultural Use
The agricultural states in the Midwest and the West depend heavily
on ground water for irrigation. Arkansas, Nebraska, Colorado, and
Kansas use over 90 percent of their ground water for agricultural
activities (Table A-2).
*"Ground Water: Issues and Answers," American Institute of Professional
Geologists, 1983.
-2-
-------
Industrial Use
Although small when compared with the quantities of ground water
used for agriculture, some states' withdrawals for industrial uses
constitute a large portion of their total withdrawals. Because a
significant number of industries are located in the eastern half of the
country, many states there use over 30 percent of their ground water for
industrial purposes. Kentucky uses 58 percent of its ground water for
industry (Table.A-3).
NATURE OF GROUND-WATER CONTAMINATION
Ground-water contamination and its impact on the environment depend
in part on geologic and hydrologic characteristics that vary from state
to state. These characteristics determine how quickly ground water
moves, how and whether it is discharged to surface water, how
withdrawing it affects surface water, how effectively soils filter out
pollutants, and how easily pollutants can enter aquifers.
Movement of Ground Water
In general, ground water moves very slowly. Formations containing
layers of consolidated clays with little fracturing allow ground water
to move as slowly as a few inches a year. But in strata containing
unconsolidated sand and gravel, ground water moves as fast as 800 feet a
year or more. Ground water may also move comparatively rapidly through
cavernous limestone formations.
These slow rates do not allow contaminants to spread or mix
quickly. The contaminants thus remain concentrated in slow-moving
plumes, which can remain undetected until water wells or surface waters
are contaminated.
-3-
-------
Moreover, contaminants in ground water — unlike those in surface
water — generally move in a plume with relatively little mixing or
dispersion, so concentrations remain high. These plumes move slowly
through the aquifer and are typically present for many years —
sometimes for decades or longer — making the resource virtually
unusable over periods of time. Although opportunity exists for chemical
or biological transformation, changes in the concentrations of
contaminants occur slowly, so that they may not be readily discernible
in the short term. Because an individual plume may underlie only a very
small part of the land surface, it is difficult to detect by aquiferwide
or regional monitoring.
Discharge to Surface Water
Even though ground water moves slowly through the ground, it usually
discharges to surface waters. In some areas of the country, springs and
aquifers contribute large quantitites of water to the flow of streams.
In the coastal states, aquifers discharge into the seas and wetlands and
supplement fresh-water flows. In other areas, ground waters discharge
into lakes, ponds, and inland wetlands.
If ground water becomes contaminated, the contamination may
eventally appear in surface water. Depending on the geologic and
hydrological characteristics of the aquifers involved, contaminated
ground water may discharge to surface areas as quickly as within one
year or as slowly as within one thousand years or more.
Ground-Water Withdrawals
In almost all parts of the country, ground water is present in
alluvium along streams and rivers. In these settings, the ground water
often interconnects with the surface water. This means that at times
excessive ground-water withdrawals can reduce stream flows. If the
stream waters are polluted, the withdrawals can thus increase the
concentration of pollutants in ground waters.
-------
Characteristics of Recharge Areas and Unsaturated Zones
The potential for contamination also depends on the characteristics
of recharge areas. These are areas where water enters the aquifers
through geologic formations. In many parts of the country, the recharge
areas are close to the land surface and may be affected significantly by
land use and industrial practices.
The depth and types of soils above the aquifer, the depth from the
earth's surface to ground water, and many other facts also affect the
potential for contamination. In some areas, the water table is within
twenty feet of the land surface, and the unsaturated zone consists of
highly permeable sand and gravel beds. Ground water in these areas can
become contaminated relatively quickly by industrial, domestic, and
agricultural activities.
In other areas, the unsaturated zones are deep, and their beds
consist of layers of highly impermeable materials. Contaminants in such
areas may not reach ground waters, or will do so only after a very long
time. Finally, certain aquifers are buried deep beneath other
aquifers. They become contaminated either through leakage from other
aquifers, through poorly cased wells, or through pollutants' entering
their recharge zones.
Because the geologic and hydrologic characteristics of aquifers vary
within and among states, they are too numerous to discuss in this
summary report. Thus, they are described briefly for each state in
Volume II.
SOURCES OF GROUND-WATER CONTAMINATION
Ground-water contamination can result from a wide variety of sources
and substances. The substances include inorganic compounds, such as
nitrates and chlorides; complex organic compounds, including
-5-
-------
trichloroethylene, benzene, and dioxin; metals; pesticides; and
radioactive materials (Tables A-H and A-5). ~
Some of these substances occur naturally. They include salts,
nitrates, radium, and barium. Nitrates can also be man-made, such as
fertilizers and human and animal waste disposal. However, the focus
here is on man-made sources of ground-water contamination. This is
because of the feasibility of using preventive measures to control them.
There are two categories of sources of ground-water contamination:
waste disposal methods and facilities, and nondisposal activities. As a
result of differences in hydrogeologic conditions and ground-water use,
the threats posed by these sources vary greatly with each specific site.
Waste Disposal Methods and Facilities
Improper waste disposal accounts for a substantial amount of ground-
water contamination. Many types of waste disposal methods and
facilities have contaminated ground water substantially. They include
landfills, abandoned hazardous waste sites, surface impoundments, septic
systems, brine disposal, injection wells, and land application.
Landfills
There are an estimated 93,000 landfills in the United States. Of
these, 75,000 are classified as on-site/industrial landfills, and we
know little about them. Another 18,500 are classified as municipal
landfills.
Landfills have been located on such sites as marshlands, old strip
mines, and limestone sinkholes. Many of these sites are susceptible to
ground-water contamination. As a result, over half of the states have
experienced contamination problems from on-site industrial landfills
(excluding surface pits, lagoons, and surface impoundments) and
municipal landfills.
-6-
-------
Surface Impoundments
A situation similar to that at landfills is found at pits, ponds,
and lagoons. Usually grouped and referred to as surface impoundments,
these sites receive both hazardous and nonhazardous wastes. Most of
them are unlined, and about 40 percent are located over thin or
permeable soils, over aquifers currently used for drinking or that could
be used for drinking. As a result, thirty-six states have ground-water
contamination at these sites.
Abandoned Hazardous Waste Sites
It is estimated that there are more than 20,000 abandoned hazardous
waste sites across the United States. It is expected that ground-water
contamination is occuring at a majority of these sites.
Septic Systems
Approximately 20 million American households use septic systems.
These systems discharge high volumes of waste to ground water. The
primary health hazard is from the release of pathogens and nitrates to
ground water. Thirty-six states have experienced ground-water
contamination due to septic tanks. The presence of organic cleaning
solvents from efforts to clean the tanks is a growing concern as well.
Brine Pits
The disposal of brine-containing fluids into unlined pits has
contaminated the ground water in many oil-producing states. Twenty-one
states have known ground-water contamination due to oil and gas brine
pits.
-7-
-------
Injection Wells
The practice of disposing of wastes into the ground through
injection wells has contaminated ground water in at least eighteen
states. Currently, underground injection is regulated under the Safe
Drinking Water Act. Wastes legally disposed of into injection wells
include hazardous and toxic industrial wastes, municipal sewage wastes,
radioactive wastes, and oil-field brines. The abandoned and improperly
plugged wells also cause ground-water pollution and can be more
problematic than operating wells.
Land Treatment
The disposal of wastes through land treatment is intended to return
nutrients and waters to the soil. This method, when done incorrectly,
can introduce toxic materials into the ground water. Seven states have
experienced such contamination.
Nondisposal Activities
Nondisposal practices account for a large number of the incidents of
ground-water contamination across the country. These include using
pesticides, animal feedlot wastes, fertilizers, and chemigation (where
chemicals are mixed with irrigation waters) for agricultural activities;
applying chemicals in industrial and manufacturing operations; and
storing liquids in underground tanks.
Agricultural Practices
Pesticides have been found in ground water in about half of the
states. Besides being detected in the primary agricultural states,
pesticides have been discovered in ground water in such states as
Arizona, Rhode Island, and Connecticut.
-8-
-------
Industrial and Manufacturing Operations
r Information has been gathered on synthetic organic chemicals in
general, and volatile organic chemicals in particular. Both result, in
part, from industrial and manufacturing activities. Often contaminants
enter ground water by percolating as leachate from unllned industrial
waste pits. Accidental leaks and spills of these chemicals from storage
and transportation facilities also contaminate ground water. At least
thirty states have documented ground-water contamination because of
synthetic organic chemicals, and thirty-three have experienced localized
contamination by volatile organic compounds.
Underground Storage
Underground storage tanks containing gasoline, oil, and hazardous
chemicals have received increasing attention recently. Many bare steel
tanks are over twenty years old and are not protected from corrosion.
Detecting cracks, corrosion, and leakages in them is difficult. In at
least forty-one states, these facilities have contaminated ground
waters.
Other Sources
High concentrations of sodium chloride can seep into ground water
from road de-icing and the improper storage of road salts. Eleven
states, including all the New England states, attribute some ground-
water contamination to de-icing practices.
Because of excessive ground-water withdrawal, salt water in nineteen
states has intruded into fresh-water supplies. This intrusion can occur
from a saline aquifer located beneath the fresh-water supplies or from
the ocean. This problem exists principally in the coastal states.
Contamination from other inorganic chemicals has been found in the
ground water of about a dozen states. For example, sulfate and chloride
-9-
-------
contamination have resulted from improperly constructed wells and
damaged well casings. Abandoned mines have discharged acidic_waters and
caused contamination in some states.
About half the states have documented contamination due to metallic
residues. Much of the problem can be attributed to mineral processing
and heavy industrial activites. Contamination due to metals has
occurred in mining as well as nonmining states.
Radioactive substances occur as waste products from uranium mining,
nuclear-reactor operations, and hospital activities. As a result, they
have been found in the ground-water supplies of about a dozen states.
-10-
-------
II. STATE ACTIVITIES AIMED AT PROTECTING GROUND WATER
In structuring a comprehensive ground-water protection program, a
state has a number of possibilities: to develop a protection strategy,
to adopt a ground-water classification system, to establish protection
standards, to enact specific statutes, and to create an organizational
structure. In addition, a state may assess its resources and develop
monitoring programs. Individual states develop interagency agreements
to coordinate the activities of state agencies and direct federal grants
to ground-water protection. The order in which these activities are
conducted depends on the particular needs of a state.
In general, state activities can be divided into two broad
categories: development of policies and strategies, and administration
of programs.
DEVELOPING GROUND-WATER POLICIES AND STRATEGIES
Before developing their policies, several states prepared extensive
background information. For example, Delaware prepared a "Ground-Water
Quality Management" report in 1983; Michigan, a "Ground-Water Protection
Initiatives" report; Oklahoma, a background report called the "Task 832
Report"; and Kansas, a "Ground-Water Quality Management Plan."
To date, twenty-seven states have already developed policies for
protecting ground-water quality, and twenty-eight states are either
formulating or revising such policies (Table A-6). Many factors
influence how a state develops its ground-water protection policies.
These factors include the state's geography and hydrogeology, the nature
and extent of its water resources, its economic interests, and how
heavily it depends on ground water. States with a high demand for
ground water generally establish policies very different from those in
states where surface water is abundant.
-11-
-------
While some states rely on statutes to carry out their policies for
protecting ground water, many others rely on existing administrative
authorities. Twelve states have enacted specific ground-water
protection statutes. States use these statutes for a variety of
purposes, including to establish discharge limits in permits, to prevent
further degradation of ground-water quality, to bring enforcement
actions, to clean contaminated ground waters, and to control land uses.
Many states have adopted or proposed one of three general
policies: nondegradation, limited degradation, or differential
protection. Although these categories are different, some states have
combined more than one policy (Table A-7). For example, while some
states have differential protection policies, they may also have limited
degradation policies to protect their drinking-water supplies.
Ground-water quality standards are also used by some states to
determine the permissible level of contaminants in ground water
sometimes in combination with differential protection policies.
Nond eg rad a t i on
A nondegradation policy protects the quality of ground water at
existing levels. This policy is generally accompanied by waivers for
specific activities for which nondegradation is not achievable. Sixteen
states have policies incorporating nondegradation goals.
Limited Degradation
A limited degradation policy is designed to preserve ground-water
quality above a specified standard. Seventeen states have adopted
limited degradation policies. Most of them use a combination of
prescriptive and narrative standards.
-12-
-------
Differential Protection
A differential protection policy focuses on the present and
potential uses of ground water. Among the states and territories, those
uses and the accepted levels of purity for them will vary. Twelve
states have policies incorporating differential protection. To reduce
the complexity of their task, states have classified their ground water
and established criteria for the different classifications. Twenty-two
states have adopted or proposed some type of classification system
(Table A-8). Following are some examples of the diversity of the
criteria for classifications.
• Types of uses — While some states protect drinking-water
supplies only, others protect waters suitable for domestic uses,
agricultural uses, fish and aquatic life (ground water may
discharge to surface waters), and livestock.
• Degree of treatment. — In certain states, the classifications
are based on degree of treatment. Sources of drinking water
that are usable without any treatment and those that may have to
be treated to be potable receive different levels of protection.
• Salinity-quality levels — In some states, waters with chloride
concentrations of less than 250 mg/1, between 250 mg/1 and 1,000
mg/1, and over 1,000 mg/1, and with total dissolved solid
concentrations of less than 500 mg/1, between 500 mg/1 and
10,000 mg/1, and over 10,000 mg/1, are divided into separate
classes and receive different degrees of protection.
• Vulnerability to contamination — Only a handful of states have
classified ground water based on depth to the saturated zone.
However, they have not specified any criteria for permeability
of the aquifers.
• Environmental importance of aquifers — A few states have taken
steps to protect the ground water of unique and fragile
ecosystems. These areas have usually received the highest level
of protection.
• Availability of other water supplies — Some states apply as a
classification standard whether drinking water is available from
surface supplies or whether ground water is the only source of
supply.
-13-
-------
Quality Standards
In general, states have specified two types of quality standards:
prescriptive and narrative. Prescriptive standards specify the
contaminants and their respective levels that must not be exceeded.
Narrative standards, on the other hand, are general and contain such
statements as: "discharges shall not cause a public health hazard," or,
"discharges shall not impair future uses." Narrative standards are,
thus, general guidelines that must be implemented on a case-by-case
basis.
In specifying prescriptive standards, states have generally begun by
listing chemicals for which maximum contaminant levels have been
specified or for which health advisories under the Safe Drinking Water
Act have been issued. Then, after further examination, they have
expanded the list. For example, New York regulates more than eighty
chemicals, New Jersey has specified between thirty-five and forty
organic and inorganic chemicals, and North Carolina has regulated twenty
to thirty chemicals. In addition to specifying regulated chemicals,
many classifications also contain standards for taste, odor, color,
biochemical oxygen demand, and coliform bacteria (Table A-9).
ADMINISTERING GROUND-WATER PROGRAMS
States have undertaken a variety of actions to manage their ground-
water resources. These include
• establishing responsibility for ground-water protection
programs,
• assessing and monitoring ground-water resources,
• developing state-originated control programs,
• formulating interagency agreements,
• managing and funding federally delegated programs, and
• involving the public in protecting ground water.
-11-
-------
Establishing Responsibility for Ground-Water Protection Programs
Across the states, different agencies are handling similar
responsibilities for protecting ground water (Table A-10). For example,
almost all states have programs for collecting data related to ground-
water and aquifer mapping programs. In many states, agencies share
these responsibilities. Depending on the state, the state geological
survey and the departments of natural resources, water resources,
environmental management, health, or mining may be responsible for
collecting data.
Assessing and Monitoring Ground-Water Resources
Ground-water resource assessments, which are often complex, require
extensive time and money. For this reason they are not conducted
frequently by the states. In addition, the lack of testing methods for
some chemicals and a growing list of potential contaminants make this
task more difficult. Nevertheless, all states have at least assessed
their ground-water resources or the extent of ground-water contamination
(Table A-11).
Increased monitoring and assessment of ground-water resources have
created the need in many states to develop and maintain many types of
databases. In addition to water-quality data, some states are also
gathering data on pollution sources. For example, Vermont and Florida
have developed an inventory of ground-water pollution sources.
Ground-Water Resource Assessment
Several states have undertaken studies to map their aquifers, to
assess the vulnerability of aquifers for contamination, and to evaluate
the quality of ground water. For example, Maryland and Illinois have
completed atlases that classify aquifers and their vulnerability to
-15-
-------
contamination. Wyoming and New Mexico have performed reconnaissance-
level mapping based on existing data, and Missouri has conducted a
hydrological study of shallow aquifers in the western "part of the
state. Similarly, West Virginia is mapping aquifer recharge areas, and
New York is mapping valley aquifers.
Several states, including Rhode Island and Vermont, are identifying
recharge areas of aquifers from which public water systems withdraw
their water. Furthermore, many states, including Louisiana and
Arkansas, have prepared an inventory of public water supply wells.
Finally, some states have prepared maps containing geographical
information. Florida, for example, has developed maps showing the
locations of cities and communities in relation to its aquifers, while
Nebraska has developed maps indicating sensitivity to ground-water
pollution.
Ground-Water Contamination Assessment and Monitoring
Thirty states have recently conducted major assessments of waste
sites to evaluate the extent of contamination. Under the Resource
Conservation and Recovery Act's hazardous waste and the Superfund
programs, most states are conducting water-quality assessments. Some
are developing databases to facilitate data retrieval. With respect to
nonhazardous waste facilities, such as the RCRA Subtitle D facilities,
states usually undertake major studies of specific types of
facilities. For example, Florida is assessing how industrial surface
impoundments and septic tanks affect ground water. Similarly,
California is studying ground-water contamination by pesticides.
Generally, monitoring programs focus on nonhazardous waste sites,
hazardous waste sites, salt-water intrusion, pesticides, and drinking
water (.Table A-12).
Nonhazardous Waste Sites. Nonhazardous waste facilities are
generally regulated under the RCRA Subtitle D or similar state
-16-
-------
programs. In most cases, monitoring requirements are developed on a
site-specific basis as part of the permitting process. The operators of
these facilities also are required to report the results of their
periodic testing.
Many states have established the programs either as part of their
enforcement efforts or as an ongoing effort to identify sources of
contamination. In the latter case, states monitor specific types of
facilities, such as municipal landfills, lagoons, and surface
impoundments. Note that contaminants for which drinking-water standards
have been set are usually monitored at these sites. Recently thirty-two
states conducted monitoring at nonhazardous sites.
Hazardous Waste Sites. Monitoring hazardous waste sites ranges from
operating joint federal-state programs following BCRA and CERCLA
guidelines in several states, to monitoring spills and leaks. Most
states have established programs under which either they or responsible
private parties monitor the quality of water. A few states have
conducted special studies to detect the presence of specific
contaminants in drinking-water supplies that are threatened by hazardous
waste sites. These states include Connecticut, Kansas, Missouri, and
New York.
Salt-Water Intrusion. Salt-water intrusion, the replacement of
fresh ground water by salt water, has caused concern in several coastal
states. Since most of the affected states are aware of this problem,
they are periodically conducting salt-water-intrusion studies.
Pesticides. At least twenty-two states have conducted some
monitoring for levels of specific pesticides in sources of drinking
water and other areas. States developing more extensive monitoring
programs include Iowa, Florida, Wisconsin, Texas, Nebraska, and
Washington. The pesticides that are monitored include EDB and
Aldicarb. In Texas, state efforts are under way to expand laboratory
services and the environmental monitoring plan to include monitoring of
ground water in"areas susceptible to pesticide contamination.
-17-
-------
Drinking Water. Monitoring public drinking-water supplies under the
Safe Drinking Water Act is a joint federal-state program._ The actual
monitoring, however, is conducted by each public water supply.
Monitoring is conducted at the point where the drinking water is used—
at the "tap"—not at the well for ground-water supplies.
Other Areas of Monitoring. Forty-six states have a variety of other
types of ground-water monitoring programs. Permit holders for ground-
water discharge are required to conduct periodic tests and file reports
in several states. Water-quantity levels are monitored in a number of
states, particularly those located in the West where water supplies are
limited.
Specific-site monitoring programs are under way in some states. New
Jersey tests ground water for contaminating substances at road
construction sites, while Arkansas monitors selected irrigation wells
for contaminants associated with agricultural practices. In New Mexico,
studies are currently investigating the potential for nitrate
contamination from dairy waste ponds. Arizona is monitoring areas in
close proximity to Phoenix's water supply for acidity, heavy metals, and
sulfate.
Developing State-Originated Control Programs
To carry out their ground-water policies, states are developing or
have already developed various control programs. Many of these programs
focus on land use, septic tanks, agricultural contamination, underground
storage tanks, response to contamination incidents, brine disposal, and
radionuclides.
Land Use
^
In-many states protection of the recharge areas is a major ground-
water issue, and some states are developing land-use policies. For
example, Massachusetts has instituted an Aquifer Land Acquisition
-18-
-------
program, and Florida has banned the location of certain types of
facilities (including landfills) in the recharge areas. New Hampshire
state statutes prohibit earth excavations that would substantially
r damage a known aquifer. Virginia has designated ground-water management
areas.
Septic Tank Regulations
Septic tanks have been regulated in the past mostly by local
governments. New cleaning treatments and other contamination problems
associated with septic tanks have caused recent public concern. Many
states are also undertaking regulatory actions. For example, the states
of Maine, Mississippi, and New Jersey are developing regulations for
septic tanks. South Carolina, Florida, and Pennsylvania are either
developing regulations for septic tanks, individual waste-treatment
systems, and land waste-treatment disposal systems or assessing soil-
dependent sewage systems.
Agricultural Contamination Control
Pesticides and animal feedlot wastes have also contributed to
ground-water pollution. Iowa, Florida, and North Dakota are,
respectively, monitoring ground water, drinking-water wells, and public
water systems for specific pesticides. Nebraska is conducting a study
in the southeast part of the state to assess the extent of contamination
from all agricultural practices. Montana has conducted a survey of the
potential for ground-water contamination, specifically from agricultural
production practices. Indiana has an Animal Waste Control Program to
prevent ground-water contamination from nitrates. And several states,
including Texas, are developing plans for monitoring ground water for
the presence of pesticides.
Other states are taking action to prevent ground-water contamination
from pesticides. Oklahoma has taken a variety of actions to prevent
ground-water contamination from pesticides including measures to
-19-
-------
coordinate generation, storage, treatment, and disposal of pesticide
waste. Maine has a Returnable Container Program including deposits,
labeling, identifying distributors, and a state collection program.
Leaking Underground Storage Tanks
The potential for contamination from gasoline, diesel, and other
petroleum and nonpetroleum products stored in underground tanks has
emerged as a major environmental issue. Some states, such as
Massachussetts, are developing inventories and assessments of their
leaking underground storage tanks. About a dozen states have already
developed regulations, and others are developing regulations to control
leaks from such tanks.
Contamination Response
The complexities of issues involved in any contamination incident
have required that states undertake coordinated actions. Many states,
including Maine and North Carolina, have developed and implemented
emergency response programs as precautionary measures.
Brine Disposal
Several states have developed programs to regulate the disposal of
oil and gas wastes in open pits and ponds. Both New Mexico and North
Dakota have banned brine disposal pits. Other states are regulating
brine disposal pits and underground injection wells.
Radioactive Materials
Some states have created programs to protect ground water from
contamination by radionuclides, byproducts of uranium mining. Texas is,
regulating in situ uranium mining and New Jersey has imposed a
moratorium on uranium mining.
-20-
-------
Formulating Interagency Agreements
By entering into comprehensive interagency agreements, state
agencies, regional authorities, and local governments have been pooling
their resources and defining their responsibilities for protecting
ground water. The interagency agreements that have evolved over the
last few years cover such topics as policy and strategy development,
protection of specific aquifers, ground-water discharges, underground
injection control, contamination incidents, and hydrogeologic studies
(Table A-13).
Policy and Strategy Development
Most states have formed task forces, ad hoc commissions, or councils
to develop policies and strategies for protecting ground water.
Usually, these groups are composed of various high-level officials from
environmental, health, natural resources, geology, agriculture, and
transportation departments; water planning boards; and oil and gas
commissions. After developing the overall policy and strategy, these
groups sometimes work out implementation issues as well.
Protection of Specific Aquifers
Federal, state, and local agencies have been working to develop
protection programs for specific aquifers and to conduct comprehensive
studies. In many states, there are agreements for cooperation among the
agencies responsible for public water systems, geological surveys, and
natural resources; those responsible for regulating sources that may be
threatening aquifers; the USGS; the EPA; and local governments. Such
agreements are usually of limited duration.
Some interagency agreements have been developed to protect inter-
state aquifers. For example, the High Plains Technical Coordinating
Committee was involved in a six-state study of the Ogallala aquifer.
Also the states of Washington and Idaho are cooperating to protect the
Spokane/Rathdrum aquifer.
-21-
-------
Discharges to Ground Water
Interagency groups that comprehensively assess and control ground-
water discharges can be found in only a handful of states. However,
they represent useful examples of arrangements that can be made.
In Virginia, the State Water Board, the Health Department, and the
Division of Mine and Land Reclamation coordinate periodic reviews of
various projects, such as injection wells, sanitary landfills, and
mining projects. In Hawaii, an existing state commission has started to
investigate ground-water contamination due to pesticides. In Iowa, the
Department of Water, Air and Waste Management, the Department of Soil
Conservation, the U.S. Geological Survey, and county conservation
districts are working together to control contamination in twenty-two
counties. Also, in Wyoming, the Department of Environmental Quality and
the state engineer provide comments to the oil and gas commission before
the latter approves permits for salt-water-disposal impoundments.
Underground Injection Control
The UIC program covers deep injection of hazardous wastes, secondary
recovery of oil and gas, solution mining, and municipal wells. The
major oil and gas states have interagency agreements to regulate or
provide proper oversight. Agreements covering other classes of wells or
abandoned wells, however, exist only in a few states.
In Florida, for example, a technical advisory committee consisting
of representatives of USGS, EPA, regional water management districts,
and local agencies provides broad guidance. In Missouri, a council made
up of members of the divisions of geology and land survey, a university,
and the clean-water commission periodically reviews the program for
illegal, malfunctioning, or unplugged wells. And in Nebraska, a
*•
memorandum of agreement between the Department of Environmental Control
and the Nuclear Regulatory Commission governs the in-situ mining of
uranium ores.
-22-
-------
Response to Contamination
Memoranda of agreement or other interagency agreements have been
developed more and more to address contamination incidents. The
frequency and nature of the incidents — that is, the types of
contaminants, the urgency of the response, and the types of natural
resources threatened — have affected the types of agreements that have
evolved. Following are examples of three types of agreements.
Definition of agency role — Often the department of police and
other law enforcement, health, and environmental management and
planning boards for emergency preparedness and water resources
become involved in contamination incidents. The agreements
specify the duties of each agency.
Sharing of data — The state geological surveys and departments
authorizing private and public drinking-water wells have often
gathered geological and hydrological data in the past. These
data are useful for taking effective emergency actions as well
as for planning long-range studies. Hence, agreements are
necessary.
Resolution of issues — Most agreements specify the procedures
for resolving issues in contamination cases.
Hydrogeologic Studies
Most states, through their geological survey or natural resources
departments, have working agreements with USGS to conduct specific
water-quantity and -quality studies. In general, states contribute 50
percent of the funds required to conduct the studies.
Managing and Funding Federally Delegated Programs
Various federal programs can be used to protect ground water. While
many of them fall under the aegis of the U.S. Environmental Protection
Agency, other federal agencies also play a role through their authority
over such activities as soil conservation and mining.
-23-
-------
Most of the states have accepted full administrative responsibility,
or primacy, for many EPA programs. However, some states prefer that the
federal government assume full responsibility for these programs, and
some states share the administrative burden with federal agencies. For
the remaining programs, the federal agencies retain their full
authority.
The states that are managing either fully or partially federal
water-protection programs have chosen different agencies to administer
them (Table A-14). Which agencies they select very often depends on the
organization of existing state agencies.
The following EPA programs offer some financial resources to protect
ground water: the Underground Injection Control (UIC) program; the
programs under the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA), the
Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act (FIRFA), and the
Clean Water Act (CWA); and the Public Water Supply (PWS) program.
UIC Program
Established as part of the Safe Drinking Water Act, the UIC program
protects ground-water drinking sources from contamination by regulating
the we11-injection of liquids and liquid wastes into the ground. For
fiscal 1985, EPA is distributing among thirty-five delegated states a
total of $5.3 million under the UIC program. They are using these funds
for such activities as ground-water mapping, assessment of potential
discharges to aquifers, and assessment of Class V wells. In over half
the states, the departments of natural resources and/or environmental
conservation administer these programs. Twelve states have oil and gas
commissions operating at least part of their UIC program, and in seven
states, delegation for the program is pending.
-------
RCRA Subtitle C Program
Proper planning and management practices for treating, storing, and
disposing of hazardous waste is the goal of RCRA. During fiscal 1985,
$^7 million is available for such RCRA-related activities as monitoring
ground water, testing laboratory samples, reviewing results, and
preparing technical information for permit writers.
Twenty-five states are fully authorized to run this program, and
most other states have received partial authorization. In about sixteen
states, the departments of natural resources and/or environmental
conservation administer the program, and in about twelve, the health
department administers it.
FIFRA Program
FIFRA establishes procedures for classifying, registering, selling,
using, researching, monitoring, and disposing of pesticides. No
pesticide may be bought, sold, or distributed unless registered, and all
registered pesticides are classified for either general or restricted
use, depending on their potential environmental hazards.
In fiscal 1985, two grants are available to the states under
FIFRA. One, for $1.3 million, is for certification and training of
pesticide applicators; it is going to forty-nine states. The other, for
$9.7 million, is for enforcement and compliance; it will go to fifty
states. Two states are using a portion of their funds for ground-water
activities. North Dakota is allocating funds toward developing a
strategy for protecting ground water. South Dakota is conducting
pesticide contamination sampling, a study of a disposal site for farm
chemicals, and a chemigation educational program. In forty-one of these
states, the agriculture department is responsible for these programs.
In the .other states, the managing agencies include the departments of
environmental protection and natural resources.
-25-
-------
CWA Program
Various sections of the CWA authorize states to use federal funds to
protect ground water.
Section 106. Section 106 of the CWA authorizes states to receive
federal funds designed for preventing, reducing, and eliminating water
pollution. This authority includes enforcement activities.
In fiscal 1985, $61 million is available to the states under the 106
program. Of this amount, $7 million has been earmarked for states to
support development and implementation of their ground-water programs.
States were encouraged to give highest priority to development of a
state ground-water strategy. The states will also use the funds to
undertake a variety of program development activities, including
developing data management systems, establishing programs for
investigating ground-water pollution on site, and designing monitoring
networks and aquifer-mapping programs.
Section 205(j). Section 205(J) of the CWA allows states to receive
federal funds for managing water-quality programs. In fiscal 1985, the
states have received over $2H million. Several states are using these
funds for such ground-water protection activities as developing a
ground-water protection strategy; designing programs for managing septic
systems; initiating an inventory of leaking underground-storage tanks;
assessing the impacts of pesticides, surface impoundments, and abandoned
or other landfills on ground water; studying the control of on-lot waste
treatment; identifying the best agricultural management practices; and
assessing dairy waste disposal.
Section 205(g). In fiscal 1985, $9^ million is available to forty-
nine states and Puerto Rico for carrying out activities related to -
construction grants. South Carolina will use 2 percent of its grant to
review how proposed land treatment and disposal systems will affect
ground water. Wyoming will apply 38 percent of its grant toward
developing small waste-water facilities.
-26-
-------
PWS Program
The Safe Drinking Water Act established drinking-water standards
specifying the maximum allowable contamination levels for certain
substances and how to ensure compliance with these standards. The
levels and procedures apply to every public water supply system in each
state.
In fiscal 1985, approximately $27 million is available to forty-
seven states and two territories to administer this program. Usually
administered by the health department, the program is handled by the
department of natural resources in ten states.
Involving the Public in Protecting Ground Water
All states are actively including the public in their development of
ground-water programs. Although the types of activities may not vary
considerably, the extent of public involvement may.
States are required to hold public hearings before approving permits
under RCRA, UIC, and the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination
System. And public officials often hold public hearings before issuing
well-drilling permits. The public generally participates in decisions
concerning siting landfills and hazardous waste facilities. Several
states have encouraged public participation while revising those parts
of the Clean Water Act's Section 208 plans that deal with ground
water. A few states have published handbooks to inform the public about
issues concerning underground storage tanks. Finally, there is
extensive public participation when states are formulating plans for
long-range water use or development.
As a first step in developing ground-water policy and strategy, most
states .have formed ground-water task forces or commissions. These
groups usually obtain the public's views by holding public hearings,
meeting with local public officials, and publishing handbooks and
-27-
-------
brochures explaining ground-water issues. In addition, they have
provided the public with knowledgeable speakers to explain the issues in
more detail.
Some states have also provided for public participation in the
implementation stages of their ground-water policy. Specific elements
that require public participation are aquifer acquisition, approval of
ground-water discharge permits, aquifer delineation, and ground-water
cleanup. Hence, it appears that the public is involved to some extent
in all phases of state policy development and implementation.
-28-
-------
APPENDIX A
SUMMARY TABLES ON GROUND-WATER USE AND QUALITY
-------
TABLE A-1
PERCENTAGES OF PEOPLE RELYING ON GROUND WATER FOR DOMESTIC USE
States
Percent of
State
Population
Arizona, Florida, Hawaii, Idaho, Mississippi,
Nebraska, Nevada, New Mexico Over 90
South Dakota 80-89
Delaware, Iowa, Maine 70-79
Alaska, Indiana, Kansas, South Carolina,
Washington, Wisconsin, Utah 60-69
Arkansas, California, Illinois, Louisiana,
Michigan, Montana, New Hampshire,
North Dakota, Tennessee, Texas, Vermont,
West Virginia, Wyoming 50-59
Georgia, Minnesota, New Jersey, New York, Ohio,
Pennsylvania, Virginia UO-Hg
Alabama, Connecticut, Massachusetts, Missouri,
North Carolina, Oklahoma, Oregon 30-39
Colorado, Kentucky, Rhode Island 20-29
Maryland, Puerto Rico, Virgin Islands Under 20
Note: For the purposes of this report, Puerto Rico and the Virgin
Islands are treated as states in this table and all
following tables. The information for these tables has
been developed from Volume II of this report.
A-1
-------
TABLE A-2
USE OF GROUND WATER FOR AGRICULTURAL ACTIVITES
States
Percent of
Ground.Water
Used for
Agricultural
Activities
Arkansas, Colorado, Kansas, Nebraska Over 90
Arizona, California, New Mexico, Texas,
Wyoming 80-89
Hawaii, Idaho, Louisiana, Mississippi, Nevada,
Oklahoma, South Dakota, Utah 50-79
Florida, Montana, North Dakota 40-49
Georgia, Indiana, Minnesota, Puerto Rico 30-39
Illinois, Missouri 20-29
Delaware, Maine, Vermont, Wisconsin 10-19
Alabama, Alaska, Connecticut, Iowa, Kentucky,
Massachusetts, New Hampshire, New Jersey,
North Carolina, Ohio, Rhode Island,
South Carolina, Tennessee, Virginia,
West Virginia Under 10
Note: Information available on forty-five states,
A-2
-------
TABLE A-3
USE OF GROUND WATER FOR INDUSTRIAL ACTIVITIES
States
Percent of
Ground Water
Used for
Industrial
Activities
Kentucky, West Virginia Over 50
Maine, Tennessee 40-49
Georgia, Idaho, Iowa, Mississippi,
North Carolina, Ohio, Rhode Island 30-39
Connecticut, Florida, Indiana, Louisiana,
Massachusetts, Missouri, New Hampshire,
New Jersey, Puerto Rico, South Carolina,
Virginia 20-29
Alabama, Delaware, Hawaii, Illinois, Minnesota,
Montana, Vermont, Wisconsin 10-19
Alaska, Arizona, Arkansas, California, Colorado,
Kansas, Nebraska, Nevada, New Mexico,
North Dakota, Oklahoma, South Dakota, Texas,
Utah, Wyoming Under 10
Note: Information available on forty-five states,
A-3
-------
TABLE *-* — MAJOR TYPES OF GROUND-HATER CONTAMINATION
States
Alabama
Alaska
Arizona
Arkansas
California
Colorado
Connecticut
Delaware
Florida
Georgia
Hawaii
Idaho
Illinois
Indiana
Iowa
Kansas
Kentucky
Louisiana
Maine
Maryland
Massachusetts
Michigan
Minnesota
Mississippi
Missouri
Montana
Nebraska
Nevada
New Hampshire
New Jersey
New Mexico
New York
North Carolina
North Dakota
Ohio
Oklahoma
Oregon
Pennsylvania
Puerto Rico
Rhode Island
South Carolina
South Dakota
Tennessee
Texas
Utah
Vermont
Virgin Islands
Virginia
Washington
West Virginia
Wisconsin
Wyoming
Total
Organic
Volatile
X
Chemicals
Synthetic
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
33
30
Inorganic Chemicals
Nitrates
X
Fluorides Arsenic Brine/Salt
X« X
Other
x«
X« X*
X
x»
X
XXX
XXX
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X X
X
X
X
xc,d
yb T*
X
X
X
X« X
x«
X
X
X
X
X
X X
X
X
X
X
X
xb
X X
X
x"=
X* X* X* X*
X
X
X
XXX
X= X
X
X
X
X
X X
X
X
X
X
X X
X
X
X
X
X
X
XXX
X
X
X
X
X X
X X
X
XXX
T*
X
X
31
16 15 28
10
(Continued)
A-4
-------
TABLE A-« (Continued)
States
Alabama
Alaska
Arizona
Arkansas
California
Colorado
Connecticut
Delaware
Florida
Georgia
Hawaii
Idaho
Illinois
Indiana
Iowa
Kansas
Kentucky
Louisiana
Maine
Maryland
Massachusetts
Michigan
Minnesota
Mississippi
Missouri
Montana
Nebraska
Nevada
New Hampshire
New Jersey
New Mexico
New York
North Carolina
North Dakota
Ohio
Oklahoma
Oregon
Pennsylvania
Puerto Rico
Rhode Island
South Carolina
South Dakota
Tennessee
Texas
Utah
Vermont
Virgin Islands
Virginia
Washington
West Virginia
Wisconsin
Wyoming
Total
Metals
X
Radioactive
Materials Pesticides
X X
Other
1
X
X
X
X*
X
3
X
X
X
X
2
X
X
X
1
x«
X
X« X
X
X
3
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
2
X
X
X
X
X
x"
X
14
2
X
X
X
X X
X
X
1
1
2
1
X
1
X
1
X
X
X
X
X
X X
X X
X
2
X
X
X
X X
1
X
X
X X
1,2
X X
1
26
13 25
16
•Natural mineral deposits. C5ulfates.
bAgricultural activities. ^Chlorides (other than salt water).
KEY: 1 = bacteria; 2 = petroleum products; 3 - sodium; and 4 = acids.
A-5
-------
TABLE A-5 — MAJOR SOURCES OF CROUHD-WATEB CONTAMINATION
States
Alabama
Alaska
Arizona
Arkansas
California
Colorado
Connecticut
Delaware
Florida
Georgia
Hawaii
Idaho
Illinois
Indiana
Iowa
Kansas
Kentucky
Louisiana
Maine
Maryland
Massachusetts
Michigan
Minnesota
Mississippi
Missouri
Montana
Nebraska
Nevada
New Hampshire
New Jersey
New Mexico
New York
North Carolina
North Dakota
Ohio
Oklahoma
Oregon
Pennsylvania
Puerto Rico
Rhode Island
South Carolina
South Dakota
Tennessee
Texas
Utah
Vermont
Virgin Islands
Virginia
Washington
Vest Virginia
Wisconsin
Wyoming
Total
Septic
Tanks
X
X
X
X
Municipal
Landfills
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
On-Site*
Industrial
Landfills
X
X
X
X
X
X
Other
Landfills
X
X
X
X
X
X
Surface*1
Impoundments
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
Oil and Gas
Brine Pits
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
'
X
X
X
36
31
30
20
36
X
21
(Continued)
'Excluding surface pita, lagoons, surface Impoundments.
^Excluding oil and gas brine pits.
A-6
-------
States
Alaba>a
Alaska
Arizona
Arkansas
California
Colorado
Connecticut
Delaware
Florida
. Georgia
Hawaii
Idaho
Illinois
Indiana
Iowa
Kansas
Kentucky
Louisiana
Main*
Maryland
Massachusetts
Michigan
Minnesota
Mississippi
Missouri
Montana
Nebraska
Nevada
New Hampshire
New Jersey
New Mexico
New York
North Carolina
North Dakota
Ohio
Oklahoma
Oregon
Pennsylvania
Puerto Rico
Rhode Island
South Carolina
South Dakota
Tennessee
Texas
Utah
Vernont
Virgin Islands
Virginia
Washington
West Virginia
Wisconsin
Wyoming
Total
Underground
Storage Tanks
X
Injection
Wells
X
Abandoned Regulated Land
Hazardous Hazardous Salt-Water Application/
Waste Sites Waste Sites Intrusion Treatment
XXX
X
X
X X
X
X
X
XXX
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X X
X
X X
X X X X
X
X
XX X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
XXX
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X X
X
X
X
X
XXX
X
X X X X
X
X
X
X X
X X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X X
X
X
X
111
18
25 15 19 7
(Continued)
A-7
-------
TABLE A-5 (Continued)
States
Alabama
Alaska
Arizona
Arkansas
California
Colorado
Connecticut
Delaware
Florida
Georgia
Hawaii
Idaho
Illinois
Indiana
Iowa
Kansas
Kentucky
Louisiana
Maine
Maryland
Massachusetts
Michigan
Minnesota
Mississippi
Missouri
Montana
Nebraska
Nevada
New Hampshire
New Jersey
New Mexico
New York
North Carolina
North Dakota
Ohio
Oklahoma
Oregon
Pennsylvania
Puerto Rico
Rhode Island
South Carolina
South Dakota
Tennessee
Texas
Utah
Vermont
Virgin Islands
Virginia
Washington
West Virginia
Wisconsin
Wyoming
Total
Highway
Agricultural De-icing
X
X
Other*
e
e
7
X
X
X X
7
1,8
7,8
X
X
8
X
X
X
X
2.7,8
e
x
1,5,7
i)
X
1,2,8
X X
X X
X X
X X
7,8
X X
X
2,3.1,7
1.7
X
8
X
X
X X
X
X
1.2,1,8
1,5
7
7
5
X
8
3,6
X
1.8
X
6,8
X X
X
X
X
X
3,6
2.1
2,8
1.5
X X
8
X
8
1.1
X
1,7
*,5
33 11
35
"Excluding surface pits, lagoons, surface impoundments.
KEY: 1 = abandoned wells; 2 = Inadequately constructed wells; 3 *
improperly plugged wells; 1 = mining activities; 5 = oil and gas
activities; 6 • petroleum product storage; 7 * accidental spills
and leaks; and 6 = miscellaneous.
A-8
-------
TABLE A-6
STATE GROUND-WATER POLICY — CURRENT STATUS OF POLICY DEVELOPMENT
States
Alabama
Alaska
Arizona
Arkansas
California
Colorado
Connecticut
Delaware
Florida
Georgia
Hauall
Idaho
Illinois
Indiana
Iowa
Kansas
Kentucky
Louisiana
Maine
Maryland
Massachusetts
Michigan
Minnesota
Mississippi
Missouri
Montana
Nebraska
Nevada
New Hampshire
New Jersey
New Mexico
New York
North Carolina
North Dakota
Ohio
Oklahoma
Oregon
Pennsylvania
Puerto Rico
Rhode Island
South Carolina
South Dakota
Tennessee
Texas
Utah
Vermont
Virgin Islands
Virginia
Washington
West Virginia
Wisconsin
Wyoming
Total
Existing Policy
Specific State for Protecting
Statutes for Ground-Water
Ground Water Quality
Policy under
Development
X
X X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X X
X X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X X
X
X X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X X
X
X X
X X
X
X
X
X X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X X
X X
12 27
26
A-9
-------
TABLE A-7
STATE GROUND-WATER POLICY: CHARACTERISTICS OF POLICIES DEVELOPED
States
Alabama
Alaska
Arizona
Arkansas
California
Colorado
Connecticut
Delaware
Florida
Georgia
Hawaii
Idaho
Illinois
Indiana
Iowa
Kansas
Kentucky
Louisiana
Maine
Maryland
Massachusetts
Michigan
Minnesota
Mississippi
Missouri
Montana
Nebraska
Nevada
New Hampshire
New Jersey
New Mexico
New York
North Carolina
North Dakota
Ohio
Oklahoma
Oregon
Pennsylvania
Puerto Rico
Rhode Island
South Carolina
South Dakota
Tennessee
Texas
Utah
Vermont
Virgin Islands
Virginia
Washington
West Virginia
Wisconsin
Wyoming
Total
Limited
Nondegradation Degradation
Differential
Protection
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X X
X
X
X X
X
X X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X X
X
X
X
X X
X
X
X
16 17
X
12
A-10
-------
TABLE A-8
EXISTING AND PROPOSED GROUND-WATER CLASSIFICATION SYSTEMS
States
Number
of
Classes
Criteria for Classification
California2
Connecticut
Florida
Hawaii
Idaho
Illinois
Iowa
Kansas
Maine
Maryland3
Massachusetts
Montana
New Jersey
2
2
3
2
3
3
Based on use quality, land use, and flow
system.
Highest protection for "single source" and
potable aquifers.
Fresh water and saline water.
Special-resource water — protection against
degradation, unless social or economic factors
override; potable-water supplies — protection
as drinking water without treatment.
Domestic use, limited use, or general non-
domestic use or limited use.
Based on vulnerability to contamination by
considering hydrogeologic characteristics.
Fresh; usable; and brine water.
Suitable for drinking-water supplies; suitable
for everything else.
Drinking-water quality; saline; below
drinking-water quality.
Based on present and potential beneficial
uses.
Total dissolved solids.
(Continued),
alnfonnation regarding number of classes and/or criteria for
classification not available.
A-ll
-------
TABLE A-8 (Continued)
States
Number
of
Classes
Criteria for Classification
New Mexico
New York
North Carolina
Oklahoma3
Texasa
Vermont
Virgin Islands
West Virginia3
Wyoming
Full protection of ground water with less than
10,000 mg/1 TDS; ground water with more than
10,000 mg/1 TDS not covered by standards.
Fresh ground water; saline ground water;
saline ground water with chloride concentra-
tions in excess of 1,000 mg/1 or TDS greater
than 2,000 mg/1.
Fresh ground water used as the primary source
of drinking water (GA); brackish waters at
depths greater than 20 feet below the land
surface that recharge surface and ground water
(GSA); fresh water at depths less than 20 feet
that recharge surface and ground water (GB);
brackish waters at less than 20 feet (GSB);
contaminated water technically or economically
infeasible for upgrading to a higher class
(GC).
Beneficial uses have been designated for 21
ground-water basins and formations, but
standards being developed for each beneficial
use.
Ground waters that supply or could supply
community water.
Ranked categories of use.
Domestic; agricultural; livestock; aquatic
life; industry; hydrocarbon and mineral
deposits; unsuitable for any use.
Information regarding number of classes and criteria for
classification not available.
A-12
-------
TABLE A-9
SAMPLE OF STATE GROUND-WATER QUALITY STANDARDS
States
Range of Contaminants
Covered by Standards
Alaska
Arizona
Connecticut
California
Florida
Idaho
Kansas
Maryland
Minnesota
Montana
Nebraska
New Jersey
New Mexico
New York
North Carolina
Oklahoma
Utah
Vermont
Wyoming
13 contaminants.
Any contaminant that would interfere with current or
future uses of ground water.
EPA drinking-water standards; includes taste, odor, and
color.
Inorganic salts.
Primary and secondary drinking-water constituents, MCLs
for 8 other organics, and natural background levels for
other constituents.
Primary and secondary drinking-water standards.3
Federal drinking-water standards, inorganic chemicals.
Federal drinking-water standards.
National primary and secondary drinking-water
standards.
All drinking-water parameters and all substances
deleterious to beneficial uses.
Federal primary drinking-water standards and most of
the secondary drinking-water standards.
Nutrients, metals, and organics.
35 numerical standards, plus a generic "toxic
pollutant" standard defining acceptable levels of
protection for human and animal health.
83 contaminants.
19 contaminants.
Primary standards, including 10 inorganic chemicals and
5 radiological contaminants and secondary standards.
Regulations from Safe Drinking Water Act.
Less stringent than federal drinking-water standards.
Maximum 26 contaminants, depending on class, pH, and
IDS.
aTo be adopted in FY 1985.
A-13
-------
TABLE A-10
STATE AGENCY RESPONSIBILITIES FOR GROUND-WATER PROTECTION ACTIVITIES
Activities
Number of
State
Agencies
Involved
Aquifer Mapping
Department of Natural Resources
State Geological Survey
Water Resources/Supply
Department of Health
State Department of Environmental Protection
Geology/Hydrology
Minerals/Mining
Department of Conservation
Miscellaneous
Ground-Water Quality Monitoring
Department of Health
Department of Natural Resources
State Department of Environmental Protection
Water Resources/Supply
Department of Conservation
Minerals/Mining
Miscellaneous
Ground-Water Policies/Rules/Standards
Department of Natural Resources
Department of Health
Water Resources/Supply
State Department of Environmental Protection
Pollution Control Commission
Miscellaneous
De-icing
Department of Transportation
Environmental Protection
Department of Natural Resources
Department of Health
State Geological Survey
20
15
13
10
8
2
2
2
_J_
73
18
13
10
9
5
3
_7
65
12
12
9
10
3
IP.
56
7
3
3
1
_1
15
A-14
-------
TABU *-H — STATUS OF GROUND-WATER RESOURCE ASSESSMENT ACTIVITIES
States
Alabama
Alaska
Arizona
Arkansas
California
Colorado
Connecticut
Delaware
Florida
Georgia
Hawaii
Idaho
Illinois
Indiana
Iowa
Kansas
Kentucky
Louisiana
Maine
Maryland
Massachusetts
Michigan
Minnesota
Mississippi
Missouri
Montana
Nebraska
Nevada
New Hampshire
New Jersey
New Mexico
New York
North Carolina
North Dakota
Ohio
Oklahoma
Oregon
Pennsylvania
Puerto Rico
Rhode Island
South Carolina
South Dakota
Tennessee
Texas
Utah
Vermont
Virgin Islands
Virginia
Washington
West Virginia
Wisconsin
Wyoming
Total
Ground -Wa ter
Resource
Assessment
Assessment
at Waste Sites Other
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X X
X
X X
X
X
X
X
X
X X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X X
X
X X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X X
xa
X
X
X X
X
X
X
51
X
X
31 16
•USGS has plans to conduct aquifer mappings In the Virgin Islands
A-15
-------
TABLE *-1j — STATE GROUND-WATER MONITORING PROGRAMS
States
Alabama
Alaska
Arizona
Arkansas
California
Colorado :
Connecticut
Delaware
Florida
Georgia
Hawaii
Idaho
Illinois
Indiana
Iowa
Kansas
Kentucky
Louisiana
Maine
Maryland
Massachusetts
Michigan
Minnesota
Mississippi
Missouri
Montana
Nebraska
Nevada
New Haopshlre
New Jersey
New Mexico
New York
North Carolina
North Dakota
Ohio
Oklahoma
Oregon
Pennsylvania
Puerto Rico
Rhode Island
South Carolina
South Dakota
Tennessee
Texas
Utah
Vernont
Virgin Islands
Virginia
Washington
West Virginia
Wisconsin
Wyoming
Total
Nonhazardoua
Waste Sites
X
Hazardous
Waste Sites
X«
Salt-Water
Intrusion Pesticides
X
Ambient
Monitoring
X
Other
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X*
x«
X
X
X
X
X X
X X
X
X
X X
X —
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X"
X
Xs
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
x«
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
xa
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
xa
X
X
X
X
X X
X X
X X
X X
X
X
X
X X
X
X Xb
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
32
X
X
X
X
38
X
X X
X
12 25
X
X
X
X
DO
X
X
X
^
X
146
•Follow BCBA guidelines.
under development.
A-16
-------
TABU «-13 _ DCTERAOENCT AGREEMENTS
States
Alabama
Alaska
Arizona
Arkansas
California
Colorado
Connecticut
Delaware
Florida
Georgia
Hawaii
Idaho
Illinois
Indiana
Iowa
Kansas
Kentucky
Louisiana
Maine
Maryland
Massachusetts
Michigan
Minnesota
Mississippi
Missouri
Montana
Nebraska
Nevada
New Hampshire
New Jersey
New Mexico
New York
North Carolina
North Dakota
Ohio
Oklahoma
Oregon
Pennsylvania
Puerto Rico
Rhode Island
South Carolina
South Dakota
Tennessee
Texas
Utah
Vermont
Virgin Islands
Virginia
Washington
West Virginia
Wisconsin
Wyoming
Total
Protection Policy and
of Specific Strategy
Aoulfers Development
Ground -Water
Discharges
Underground Ground-Water
Injection Contamination Geological
Control Incidents Survey
Other
X X
X X
X
X X
X
X
X
X
X X
XXX
X
X
X X
X
X X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X« X
X
X X
X X
X
X X
X
X
X
X X
*
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
XXX
X
X
X X
X X
X X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X X
X X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X* XX
X X
8 21
X
9
X X
X
19 16 25
X
30
Interstate agreement between Idaho and Washington.
A-17
-------
TABLE A-1H
STATE AGENCY RESPONSIBILITIES FOR FEDERAL PROGRAMS3
Responsible Agency
Number of
States
CWA
Department of Environmental Management
RCRA
Department of Health
Department of Natural Resources
State Department of Environmental Protection
Water Resources/Permits
Pollution Control
Hazardous Waste Management
UIC
Department of Natural Resources
State Department of Environmental Protection
Oil & Gas Conservation Commission
Department of Health
Water Resources/Supply/Permits
PWS
Department of Health
State Department of Environmental Protection
Department of Natural Resources
Water Supply/Potable Water
FIFRA
Department of Agriculture
State Department of Environmental Protection
Department of Natural Resources
52
16
15
13
3
2
1
50
16
12
11
6
_i
50
30
8
8
2
6
_1
50
(Continued)
aln some cases, responsibility is shared by more than one
agency.
A-18
-------
TABLE A-14 (Continued)
Number of
Responsible Agency States
Soil Conservation
Department of Agriculture 7
Soil/Water Conservation Commission 7
Department of Natural Resources 5
State Lands/Land Resources 3
State Department of Environmental Protection 2
Minerals/Mining 2
State Geological Survey 1
27
Mining
Department of Natural Resources 13
State Department of Environmental Protection 8
Minerals/Mining 8
State Geological Survey/Geologist 4
Land Resources/Soil Conservation 3
Water Allocation/Permits 3
Miscellaneous _.t
A-19
-------
APPENDIX B
EPA Regional Ground-Water
Representatives
-------
EPA Regional Ground-Water
Representatives
Region I
Carol Wood
Office of Ground Water
Water Management Division
JFK Federal Building, Room 2113
Boston, MA 02203
(8)223-6486; (617) 223-6486
Region VI
Eloy Lozano
Office of Ground Water
Water Management Division
1201 Elm Street, (60 CL)
Dallas, TX 75270
(8)729-9984; (214) 767-2605
Region II
William Pedicino
Office of Ground Water
Water Management Division
26 Federal Plaza, Room 805
New York, NY 10278
(8)264-5635; (212) 264-1148
Region VII
Timothy Amsden
Office of Ground Water
Water Management Division
324 E. 11th St.
Kansas City, MO 64106
(8)757-2815; (214) 236-2815
Region III
Thomas Merski
Office of Ground Water
Water Management Division
Curtis Building
6th & Walnut Sts.
Philadelphia, PA 19106
(8)597-2786; (215) 597-2786
Region VIII
Richard Long
Office of Ground Water
Water Management Division
1860 Lincoln St., 8W
Denver, CO 80295
(8)564-1445; (303) 293-1445
Region IV
Stallings Howell
Office of Ground Water
Water Management Division
345 Courtland St., N.E.
Atlanta, GA 30365
(8)257-3781; (404) 881-3781
Region IX
James Thompson
Office of Ground Water
Water Management Division
215 Fremont St.
San Francisco, CA 94105
(8)454-8095; (415) 974-8093
Region V
Robert Hilton
Office of Ground Water
Water Management Division
230 S. Dearborn St.
Chicago, IL 61604
(8)886-1490; (312) 886-1490
Region X
William Mullen
Office of Ground Water
Water Management Division
1200 6th Avenue, M/S 437
Seattle, WA 98101
(8)399-1216; (206) 442-1216
B-1
-------
APPENDIX C
State Contacts
-------
State Contacts in Region I
Connecticut
Robert Smith
Assistant Director
Water Compliance Unit
Department of Environmental
Protection
122 Washington Street
Hartford, CT 06115
(203)566-2588
Maine
Gary S. Westerman
Management Planning
Division
Department of Environ-
mental Protection
State House, Station 17
Augusta, ME 04333
(207)289-2811
Massachusetts
David Terry
Director
Water Supply Planning and
Development
Department of Environmental
Quality Engineering
One Winter Street
Boston, MA 02108
(617)292-5529
New Hampshire
David Scott
Acting Director
Office of State Planning
2 1/2 Beacon Street
Concord, NH 03301
(603)271-2155
Rhode Island
Michael Annarummo
Supervisor
Permits and Planning Section
Division of Water Resources
Department of Environmental
Management
75 Davis Street, Health Bldg.
Providence, RI 02908
(401)277-2234
Vermont
David Butterfield
Chief
Ground-Water Management
Section
Water Quality Division
Department of Water
Resources and Environ-
mental Engineering
State Office Building
Montpelier, VT 05602
(802)828-2761
C-l
-------
State Contacts in Region II
New Jersey
John Gaston
Director
Division of Water
Resources
Department of Environ-
mental Protection
CN029
Trenton, NJ 08625
(609)292-1638
New York
Dan Barolo
Director
Ground-Water Division
Department of Environ-
mental Conservation
50 Wolfe Road
Albany, NY 12233
(518)457-6674
Puerto Rico
Carl-Ixel P. Soderberg
Environmental Water Quality
Board
P.O. Box 11488
San Turce, Puerto Rico 00910
(809)725-0717
Virgin Islands
Angel Lebron
Commissioner
Department of Conservation
& Cultural Affairs
P.O. Box 4399
Charlotte Amalie, St. Thomas
Virgin Islands V100801
(809)774-3320
C-2
-------
State Contacts in Region III
West Virginia
Marc Nelson
Hazardous Waste Branch
Division of Water Resources
1201 Greenbrier Street
Charleston, WV 25311
(304)348-5935
Virginia
P.J. Smith
Divison of Enforcement
& Environmental Research
Water Control Board
2111 Hamilton Street
Richmond, VA 23230
(804)257-0072
Maryland
Rick Collins
Program Development Division
Office of Environmental Programs
201 W. Preston Street
Baltimore, MD 21201
(301)383-5740
Delaware
Michael Apgar
Chief
Water Supply Branch
Division of Environmental
Control
P.O. Box 1401
Dover, DE 19903
(302)736-5743
Pennsylvania
John 0. Osgood
Bureau of Water Quality
Management
Department of Environmental
Resources
P.O. Box 2063
Harrisburg, PA 17120
(717)783-3638
C-3
-------
State Contacts in Region IV
Alabama
John Poole
Chief
Ground-Water Section
Department of Environmental
Management
1751 Federal Drive
Montgomery, AL 36130
(205)271-7832
Florida
Dr. Rodney DeHan
Administrator
Ground-Water Section
Department of Environmental
Regulation
Twin Towers Office Bldg.
2600 Blair Stone Road
Tallahassee, FL 32301
(904)488-3601
Georgia
Harold Reheis
Assistant Director
Environmental Protection
Division
Department of Natural
Resources
270 Washington St., S.W.
Room 825
Atlanta, GA 30334
(404)656-4713
Kentucky
Karen Armstrong-Cummings
Assistant to the Commissioner
Department for Environmental
Protection
Fort Boone Plaza
18 Reilly Road
Frankfort, KY 40601
(502)564-3035
Mississippi
William A. Barnett
Coordinator
Ground-Water Protection
Program
Department of Natural
Resources
P.O. Box 10385
Jackson, MS 39209
(601)961-5171
North Carolina
Perry Nelson
Chief
Ground-Water Section
Department of Natural
Resources Community
Development
P.O. Box 27687
Raleigh, NC 27611
(919)733-5083
C-4
-------
State Contacts in Region IV (cont'd)
South Carolina
Don Duncan
Director
Ground-Water Protection
Division
Environmental Quality Control
Department of Health and
Environmental Control
2600 Bull Street
Columbia, SC 29201
(317)758-5213
Tennessee
Don Rima
Coordinator
Ground-Water Program
Division of Water
Management
Department of Health
& Environment
T.E.R.R.A. Bldg., 7th Floor
150 Nineth Avenue, North
Nashville, TN 37219-5404
(615)741-0690
C-5
-------
State Contacts In Region V
Indiana
Robert Carter
Coordinator
Environmental Programs
Indiana State Board of
Health
1330 West Michigan Street
Indianapolis, IN 42606
(317)633-8467
Illinois
Robert Clarke
Manager
Ground-Water Section
Division of Public Water
Supplies
Illinois Environmental
Protection Agency
2200 Churchill Road
Springfield, IL 62706
(217)782-9470
Michigan
Richard Johns
Director
Ground-Water Quality
Division
Michigan Department of
Natural Resources
P.O. Box 30028
Lansing, MI 48989
(517)373-1947
Minnesota
John Hoick
Chief
Ground-Water Unit Program
Development Section
Division of Solid &
Hazardous Waste
Minnesota Pollution Control
Agency
1935 W. County Road B-2
Roseville, MN 55113
(612)296-7787
Ohio
Russ Stein
Chief
Ground-Water Section
Water Quality Monitoring
& Assessment Division
Ohio Environmental Protection
Agency
361 E. Broad Street
Columbus, OH 43216
(614)466-9092
Wisconsin
Kevin Kessler
Chief
Ground-Water Management
Section
Bureau of Water Resources
Management
Wisconsin Department of
Natural Resources
P.O. Box 7921
Madison, WI 53707
(608)267-9350
C-6
-------
State Contacts in Region VI
Arkansas
Ralph H. Oesmarais
Planning Specialist
Arkansas Department of
Pollution Control &
Ecology
P.O. Box 9583
Little Rock, J« 72209
(501)562-7444
Louisiana
Patricia L. Norton
Secretary
Louisiana Department of
Environmental Quality
P.O. Box 44066
Baton Rouge, LA 70804
(504)342-1265
New Mexico
Maxine Goad
Program Manager
Ground-Water Section
Groundwater & Hazardous
Waste Bureau
New Mexico Environmental
Improvement Division
P.O. Box 968
Santa Fe, NM 87504-0968
(505)984-0020
Oklahoma
David Harkness
Assistant Director
Oklahoma Department of
Pollution Control
P.O. Box 53504
Oklahoma City, OK 73152
(405)271-4677
Texas
Henry Alvarez
Chief
Data Collection &
Evaluation Section
Texas Dept. of Water
Resources
P.O. Box 13087, Capitol
Station
Austin, TX 78711
(512)475-3681
C-7
-------
State Contacts in Region VII
Iowa
Richard Kelley
Environmental Specialist
Iowa Department of Water,
Air, and Waste Management
Henry A. Wallace State Office
Building
900 E. Grand
Des Moines, 10 50319
(515)281-3783
Kansas
James A. Power, Jr.
Environmental Engineer
Bureau of Water Protection
Kansas Department of
Health & Environment
Bldg. 740, Forbes Field
Topeka, KS 66620
(913)862-9360, ext. 235
Missouri
Jerry Vineyard
Assistant State Geologist
Division of Geology and
Land Survey
Missouri Department of
Natural Resources
P.O. Box 250
Rolla, MO 65401
(314)364-1752
Nebraska
U. Gale Button
Acting Chief
Program Plans Section
Water & Waste Management
Division
Nebraska Department of
Environmental Control
P.O. Box 94877, State
House Station
Lincoln, NB 68509
(402)471-2186
C-8
-------
State Contacts in Region VIII
Colorado
Mary Gearhart
Public Health Engineer
Colorado Department of
Health
4210 East llth Avenue
Denver, CO 80220
(303)320-8333
Montana
Fred Schewman
Supervisor
Water Quality Bureau
Department of Health &
Environmental Sciences
Cogswell Building
Helena, MT 59601
(406)444-2406
North Dakota
Rick Nelson
Environmental Engineer
Water Supply & Pollution
Control
State Department of Health
Bismarck, ND 58501
(701)224-2372
South Dakota
Steve Pirner
Director
Office of Water Quality
Department of Water &
Natural Resources
Pierre, SD 57501
(605)773-4523
Utah
Jay Pitkin
Deputy Director
Bureau of Water Pollution
Control
Department of Health
P.O. Box 45500
Salt Lake City, UT 84145-0500
(801)533-6146
Wyoming
Anthony J. Mancini
Ground-Water Control
Supervisor
Department of Environmental
Quality
122 W. 25th
Cheyenne, WY 82002
(307)777-7938
C-9
-------
State Contacts In Region IX
Arizona
Phil Briggs
Deputy Director
Engineering
Department of Water Resources
99 E. Virginia Avenue
Phoenix, AZ 85004
(602)255-1554
Jack Bale
Arizona Division of
Environmental Health
Services
2005 N. Central
Phoenix, AZ 85004
(602)257-2291
California
Fran Anderson
State Water Resources
Control Board
P.O. Box 100
Sacramento, CA 95801
(916)322-4562
Hawaii
Brian Choy
Environmental Planner
State Department of Health
P.O. Box 3378
Honolulu, HW 96801
(808)548-6767
Nevada
Wendell McCurry
Water Quality Officer
Division of Environmental
Protection
201 South Fall St.
Carson City, NV
(702)885-4670
C-10
-------
State Contacts la Region X
Alaska
Dan Easton
Environmental Engineer
Alaska Department of
Environmental Conservation
Pouch 0
Juneau, AK 99811
(907)465-2653
Oregon
Neil Mullane
Contract Administrator
Oregon Department of Environ-
mental Quality
P.O. Box 1760
Portland, OR 97207
(503)229-6065
Idaho
Gary Shook
Senior Water Quality
Analyst
Idaho Department of Health
& Welfare
Division of the Environment
450 West State Street
Boise, ID 83720
(208)334-4251
Washington
Tony Barret
Program Manager
Ground-Water Protection
Program
Washington Department of
Ecology
Mail Stop PV-11
Olympia, WA 98504
(206)459-6072
QCVEFWCMT PRDffDC OFFICE 1995 527-134/30431
C-ll
-------
STATE GROUND-WATER
PROGRAM SUMMARIES
VOLUME II
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
Office of Water
Office of Ground-Water Protection
Washington, D.C. 20460
March 1985
-------
ITAT1 QtOOID-WATtB HOOIAM SOTOU!!?
BTATIl ARKANSAS
1. IATUXI OF TIE OROOND-VATIR lESOOBd
1.1* Geologic and lydrologio Chareoteriatioa. Deaoribe general geological and hydrologioel characteristics
(i.a. formationa, rook typea, areal extent and thiokneaa, tranamiaaivity, aquifer interconnection, extent
of contamination),
Cbaraoteriatloa
Phyalocrapfaio
Region/Province At
Interior Highland Province
Phyaiacraphio
Betioo/ProTlaoo Bi
Qulf Coaatal Plain
Ptyaiacrtphio
B«floB/Pro?iao* Ci
Pwomt of §Ut« oorcrcd
fey this PPOTIOO* (M
ApproxlBAttly
50J
Apprexiutaly
90S
OboeoflMd Aquifv(a)
Tha northwtatarn half of
Arkanaaa, tha Zntarier
Highland, it a hilly to
•ountainoua region. Tha
badrook consist* of
Intarbadded ahala, aand-
atona, and liaaatona.
Tha rooks ara ralativaly
old gaologloally, and
they have baan ooopaoted
and oamentad. There ara
2 aain types of aquifers:
the Interior Highland
consolidated bedrook
aquifer, and tha Arkanaaa
Valley aquifer. In tha
first type, water occurs
in fractures, joints, and
solution channels in
carbonated sandstones and
ahales which ara generally
lass than 100 feat deep.
In the second type, the
alluvium la of Quaternary
age and consists of
unconsolidated sands,
silts, olays, and gravela
about 65 feet thick.
Tha Quaternary
(unoonfinad) deposits,
especially thoae of
tha Miaaiaaippian
alluviun ara tha coat
productive aquifara in
tha state, used aoatly
for irrigation purpoaaa.
Confined Aquifer (a)
There are two fairly
extensive aquifers in
the Interior Highlands,
the Roubidoux and the
Ounter, which are found
at depths of 600-2000
feet.
Tha Oulf Coastal Plain
consists of low hills
and relatively flat
land. The underlying
deposits generally
consist of unoonsol-
idated aanda, ailta,
clays, and gravels
which are uaually
separated by con-
fining layers of olay.
The deposits range in
thickness from alnost
nothing by the Interior
Highland boundary to
4,50G feet at the
southern oorner of the
atata.
Tha aaoond swat important
aquifer la the Sparta
Sand, which ia a major
source of drinking water
for ooMBunltlea in both
Arkanaaa and Louisiana.
-------
STATE:
1.2.
of
Water M Peroent of ToUl
to.
Public Mater Systeaa
(including •unloipal)
Industrial
(except •unielpal)
Agricultural
Doaestic/Burel
Other (specify):
Wildlife l»poundBents
ToUl
% ot Total f QrouDd Ihtor
Orouod Httor of ToUl fetor
S
2
93
2
0.1
100.1
1.3. Population •olianeo OB Ground HaUr for DrlaldDi Hrtar for lomr 1980
Percent of population relying on
ground wattr for drinking w»t«r
iuaber of pooplt relying on
ground water for drinking water
Public Jtater OoMatle
Syatea* Valla Total
569
1,220,000
Rote: Counties in the eastern and southern part are totally dependent on ground
water for drinking water; 76$ of ooonunitiea in the state are totally dependent on
ground water for drinking water.
-------
STATE:
Sources (Cbeok Major sources of
2 * BSXt BQat aeriOUS, «tO.)
tamlmtion and ruk top four — 1
t merlons,
Seuroa Gteok teak
Septic tanks
Municipal land fill*
On-aite industrial
landfills (excluding
pita, lagoons, surface
Impoundments)
Other landfills X*
Surface Impoundments
(excluding oil and
gas brine pits)
Oil and gas brim pits X°
Dnderground storage
tanks
Other ( specify)!
Spills X
Souroe Cbeok lank
Injection veils
Abandoned hazardous
Haste sites
Regulated hazardous
waste sites
Salt water intrusion Xb
Land application/
treatment
Agricultural
Road salting
3U monitoring reports indicate serious contamination in wells surrounding eight sites in the state. Some
•e located in recharge areas of major aquifers. (See draft, USOS Report *84, Ground-Water Problems in Arkansas,
trtially funded by ADPC4E and delivered to the EPA, Dallas, Mater Programs Section.)
lit water Intrusion in eastern Arkansas continues to increase. The worst area is in Monroe County near
•inkley. Other areas are in Cnicot, Desna, Independence, and White counties.
•ine pits in south Arkansas and salt water intrusion into the El Dorado and Magnolia public supplies are a
«rce of concern.
Contaminating Substances
(check)
Organic chemicals:
Volatile
Synthetic
Inorganic chemicals:
Nitrates
Fluorides
Arsenic
Brine salinity
Other
X
X*
_ X
X
X
_
Metals I
Radioactive material
xp
Pesticides _____
Other (specify)
x°
i northwest Arkansas, nitrates are a major problem to rural domestic wells. Partly because of this nitrate
•oblem, most of the larger oomaunities have switched to surface water.
turally occurring.
vela of Increasingly higher sodium have been detected in municipal water supplies in southern and eastern
kansas.
-------
STATE: AUAISAS
3. STATE GXODHD-VATEI MANAGEMENT STRUCTURE
3.1. State Statute* Pertaining to Ground-Water Quality and Pollution Control
Subject Monitored by Statute
Statute
Description of Authority Pertaining
to Ground-Hater Protection
General inter pollution
control
Arkansas Hater and Air Pollution
Control Act, Act 472, as amended
This act gives the Department of
Pollution Control and Ecology the
authority to protect the quality of the
state's Maters, including ground water.
Ground-water quality
(including public health
standards)
Sam as above.
Saae as above.
Solid waste
Arkansas Solid Haste Management Act,
Act 237 of 1971; Arkansas Solid Haste
Management Code, Act 236 of 1973
General sanitation regulations
Act 402 of 1977
General sanitation regulations prohibit
the contamination of the ground water.
Act 402 of 1977 gives the Health
Department the authority to develop
regulations for septic tanks and review
use of septic tanks, and sets up rules and
regulations for sewage disposal systems
and installers.
Hazardous waste
The Hazardous Materials Transportation
Act of 1977, Act 421 of 1977
(Arkansas Transportation Commission)
Rules and Regulations Governing
Transport of Hazardous Haste
(Arkansas Transportation Commission)
Railroad Transportation Procedures of
Hazardous Materials, Act 651 of 1979
Mining
Arkansas Surface Coal Mining and
Reclamation Act of 1979, Act 13" of
1979
Arkansas Open Cut Land Reclamation Act,
Act 336 of 1977
Oil and gas
Act 105 of 1939 Oil and Gas Regulations
Permits injection wells.
Other (specify):
Agency enabling
legislation
Salt water/field
waste control
Hater quality standards
Pesticides, herbicides
control
Act 96 of 1913 gives the Health
Department Board the power to develop
regulations to control pollution.
Regulation No. 1 for the Prevention of
Pollution by Salt Hater and Other Field
Hastes Produced by Hells in New Fields
or Pools.
Regulation No. 2, as amended, Arkansas
Hater Quality Standards Interim
Revisions
Pest Control Law, Act 488 of 1975
Pesticide Control Act and Regulations,
Act 410 of 1975
Pesticide Use and Application Act and
Regulations Act 389 of 1975
-------
STATE: ABUI313
. State Ground-Water Policy
.1. Status
Ground water covered under
general state statutes
Specific state statutes for
ground water
Policy in existence for
protecting ground-water quality
Policy under developnent
Check
X
X
-------
STATS: *•«••».«*.«
3.2.2. Development of Oround-fetw rolloy
3.2.2.1. It there • ground-wtar policy or strategy development prooeaa?
Tea
3.2.2.2. LMd agency/ateering committee: Department of Pollution Control and (oology for quality; Sou and
Hater Conservation Commission for quantity
3.2.2.3. Describe development prooeaa (inter-agency agreementa, progress to data, target ooaplation date, ate.}:
A ground-water strategy la being put together with 206 fuoda under the atate Miter Quality Manageaent
Plan. Draft* of this strategy along with ooapleted report* froa thia project have been sent to EPA, Dallas, Hater
Prograaa and Ground-Vater Protection Sections.
3.2.3. CteraoUrlstios of Policy Developed
Type of Proteotioa
General language
Non-degradation
Llalted degradation
Differential protection
Check
X
Notes:
3.2.4. Policy QLaaaifloation
3-2.4.1. Does state have a ground-water classification system or other system for distinguishing
among types of ground water (e.g. use, quality, or other contamination potential)? Yes
3.2.4.2. If yes, give brief description of classes:
No X
3.2.5. Quality Standards
3.2.5.1. Has the state adopted ground-water quality standards?
3.2.5.2. Bow are the standards used?
Yes
No X
3.2.5.3. Describe briefly the range of contaminants covered.
-------
STATIl AUABSAS
toU Acanay BMpcnalbllittM far
-Hater Protection
isponaible
State
Agency
*ent of
.Ion Control
sology
jtent of Health
Plant Board
itry CooBisaion
and Water
srvation
.ssion
oglcal
.sslon
and Gas
i sslon
Oround-
Weter
•» • 4 *m I
rouoyr
Bole/
Standard
Fan
BCBA
X
arally-^alatW^
arc*
X
X
V&
X
1 ProgJ
n-
X
na>
Otter
*
Data
Colleo-
Uon,
Aquifer
Napping,
X
QrooDd-
Hater
Quality
X
Boll
X
X
•
Protec-
tion
Boad
Otter
*
Xf
*•
c Underground Injection Control.
« Public Water Systea.
Pesticides Enforcement.
Departaent also iapleaents aost Clean Water Act programs such as the Section 208, 106, and construction grants
,rama that have an indirect l*paet.
Department also regulates construction and use of septic tanks.
Commission oversees use of BMP pesticides in state forests.
Coeaisslon is charged with composing and updating State Water Plan.
-------
mtii aiuma
3*4.
Toploa
if
Applloabla
of
•ad
Promotion of apaoifio aqulfara
Policy and atratagy developaent
Tha State Xntaraganoy Oround-Vatar Bteeri&g CooBittaa «aa put
together aa part of tba 206 Ground-Water atratagy Task. Tha
Steering Coeaittaa providaa guidance and review ppcjtoti
oonn«oUd with th* d*v«2epa«at of that atrttagyt
Oround-wtar diaeh«r(«a
UBdwfreuad injaotioo control
Th* Oil and Oti Conmitiion and tba Dapartaant of Pollution
Control and Koolofy hava a Mmorandun of undaratandini to
eooparata In tha adminlatration of th« atata'a DIG prograa.
Tba foraar la raaponalbla for Claaa XI walla wblla tha
Dapartaant of Pollution Control and Boology la raaponaibla
for all othar olaaaaa, axoapt for Claai V bromina-ralatad
walla whioh ar* adainlatarad jointly by tha two aganoiaa.
Oround-watar oontaoination Inoldtnta
Tha Dapartaant of Pollution Control and Ecology and tha Haalth
fiapartaant hava an agrcaaant for aaarganoy raaponaa undar whioh
tha Dapartaant of Pollution Control and Ecology will handIt
whatavar olaanup ia naoaaaary, and tha Haalth Dapartaant will
handla thraata to public haalth.
Oaologioal aurvay
Tha Arkansaa Oaologioal Conaiaaion haa aavaral oooparativa
agi^eaenta with tha U.S. Oaologioal Survay>Vatar Raaouroaa
Dlvlalon, including a ground-watar aurvay, a atraaa gauging
progran, and a watar quality program. Tha fiiractor of tha
Oaologioal Comnlaalon aarvaa on tha Dapartaant of Pollution
Control and Ecology Coaaiaaion and tba atata'a Natural Xaaouroa
Consnlttaa.
Othar (apaolfy)t
Lacking atoraga tank oontrol
(nota RCKA 11 changes)
Through tha office of tha State Pira Harahall, intaragenoy
ooordinatlon aaatinga hava been bald on tha problaa of leaking
atoraga tanka.
-------
8TATI: A1KAISA3
3.5. Status of OrouDd-Vater leoouros Assessment Activities
Activity
Check if
Applicable
Description of AotivlU.es
Ground-water resources assessment
(aquifer mapping, etc.)
Ongoing cooperative project* between the Geological Commission
and USGS include a ground-water survey, a stream gauging
program and a water quality program. Other DSCS activities
include: trying to determine the salt water sources in aqulfen
at El Dorado, Brinkley, and Eudora; mapping deep aquifers in
north Arkansas; maintaining a file of drillers' logs of all
water wells drilled in Arkansas; maintaining a file of
geophysical logs of selected water wells used in various
projects; and maintaining a repository of selected well samples
for study.
Ambient ground-water quality
Assessment at waste sites
Other (specify):
UIC
Under the UIC program, the Soil and Water Conservation
Commission and USGS undertook to conduct aquifer identification
and characteristics projects for the Department of Pollution
Control and Ecology. The State Soil and Water Conservation
Commission completed the following projects: 1) an inventory of
public water supply wells; 2) an inventory of locations of
irrigation wells; 3) state maps with county boundaries, one map
for each aquifer showing squifer boundaries and location of
public water wells; and 4) state maps showing total population
served by ground water in each county. USGS completed the
following projects: 1) approximately 20 maps for each aquifer
in the Coastal Plain showing overlying and underlying aquifers,
thickness, potentiometric surface, and IDS concentration; 2)
four cross-sections showing aquifers and dissolved-sollds
concentration; and 3) a hydrogeologic narrative describing
llthology, hydrologic characteristics, and water quality in
aquifers of the Coastal Plain.
-------
STATE: ABKalSAS
3.6. State
-Vater MonlfcorlBC
Typee of Mooltcrias
•on-aaxardous
WASte Cite*
Hazardous waste mites
Salt water
Pesticides
Ambient monitoring
Other:
Hater Quantity
monitoring
Irrigation well
monitoring
Project-spec if io
monitoring
Cheek
Z
X
X
X
X
•rief Deeorlption of Monitoring Program
Some 1? eltM are monitored on a elte-apeoiflo basis
under the Federal ItCRA program. Bewly permitted land-
filla are now required to install ground-water monltor-
la( wella and report results on a quarterly basis.
OSCS Booitors 26 water quality wells on a five-a-year
basis. The oheilcal data froa these aaaples are
published every two years. (The Health Department
monitors tri-annually about 435 communities using
(round-water for those parameters identified la the
Sefe Drinking water Aot. Bacteriological samples
are analyzed on a monthly basis.)
OM8 and the State Geological Commission Jointly
monitor water levels for over 200 wells, and publish a
yearly water-level report.
The Soil Conservation Service has begun a special 11-
oounty irrigation well monitoring survey, mostly for
water levels; some testing for nitrates has also been
done.
Many wells are sampled and some monitoring wells are
established for particular ground -water projects in
the state (e.g., the salt water contamination in the
Sparta Sand, 11 Dorado area, and in Quaternary
aquifers in the Brinkley end Budora areas).
Mooitoriag
DaU
Computerised
(Check)
X
Bam* of
Database
(Specify)
STQRET
3*7. State Programs for Public Participation
""- ^^^ Context
Approaches ~"~— -^^^
Public hearings, meetings, workshops
Meetings with local officials
Citizens' advisory groups
Public notloes
Handbook, other written materials
Other (specify)
General Specific
Ground- Begulatlon Ground* {
maur Permit Adoption, Hater
Issues Issuance Changes Strategy Other •
X X X X
X*
•The Health Department informs the public through public notloes of Safe Drinking
Water Act violations.
10
-------
STATE: AMTAMAS
4. arm HTLKMBITATIOI or FEDERAL PROGRAMS TO PROTECT OROOID WATER
4*1*
Federal
Status of Program Delegation
State Xapl
ing Agoioy
ttauBual/lotevorthy
Prccru
rac
ficlegatad
Clasa Z, HI, XT:
Department of Pollution
Control and Ecology
Class II: Oil and Oaa
Coanlssion
Class V: Oil and Qas
Commission, and
Department of Pollution
Control and Ecology
The Department of Pollution
Control and Ecology is the lead
agency; it works jointly on
Class V responsibilities with
the Oil and Oaa Conlsslon.
RCM
Delegated
Phase I, A, B, C
Department of Pollution
Control and Ecology
State regulations are more
stringent than the Federal
regulations; health monitoring
is required at new commercial
facilities.
PWS
Delegated
Department of Health
Exceeds EPA's 1965 compliance
goals.
Pesticides
Enforcement
Delegated
State Plant Board
11
-------
STATE:
«.2. Grant Status
Grant
FX 1965 Allocation
Specific around-Utter
Projecta/Taska and Btatg*t
Clean Water Act
Section 106
$800,000 These funds will be applied to the coordination and
administration of the ground-water atratagy task and
policies.
Clean Hater lot
Section 205(J)
$160,030
None
Clean Water act
Section 205(g)
4640,120 The facility planning portion of the grant process
Includes planning for protection of ground water.
RCJU
Section 3011
$350,700 Ground-water aonitorlng will be required of 17
treatment, storage, or disposal sites.
QIC
$148,200
PIFHA
Section 23(a)(1)
$165,000
Hone
-------
STATE:
TATB-OBIOXIATBD OBOUID-VATBB F10TBCTXMI PBOGBAN3
Ground-Hater Strategy
(including ground-water quality standards and classification)
ription: A ground-water strategy la being put together with 208 funds under the state Hater Quality
genent Plan. Drafts of this strategy, along with oonpleted reports, have been submitted to the EPA In Dallas,
ir Programs and Ground-Water Protection Sections.
964 Funding:
ing Source:
. Ground-Hater Monitoring
jription: About 435 communities using ground water are monitored trl-annually by the Health Department for
>e parameters called for under the Safe Drinking Nater Act. Bacteriological samples are analyzed on a monthly
.a.
Newly permitted landfills are required to Install ground-water monitoring wells and report results quarterly.
Monitoring for salt water contamination is conducted in the Sparta Sand (El Dorado area) and the Quaternary
ifera (Brinkley and Eudora area).
1981 Funding:
ding Source:
. Ground-Hater Resource Assessment/Aquifer Study/Mapping
crlption: The USGS has developed approximately 20 aquifer maps revealing contours, thickness, and
entiometric surfaces. A hydrogeologlc narrative describing lithology, hydrologic characteristics and water
llty in aquifers of the Coastal Plain has also been completed.
1981 Funding:
id ing Source:
. Agricultural Contamination Control
icription: The State Plant Board is in charge of pesticides enforcement.
1984 Funding: $160,000
nding Source:
13
-------
STATES A1K1ISAS
5.5. Feralta/Control of Dlaobargss to Qrooad Hater
Description: The Water Veil Committee register* and licenses mter well drillers and contractor*.
FT 198* Fvndlnf.:
Funding Source:
5.6. Septic
Description: The Health Department has a statewide penalt and inspection program for septic tank systems. It is
conducted by the County Sanitarian who approves applications for installation and conducts on-slte inspections
prior to operation.
PX 19M Funding:
Funding Source:
5.7. Bulk Storage/Underground Storage Tank Programs
Description: Through the office of the State Fire Marshall, interagency coordination meetings have been held on
the problem of leaking storage tanks. No funds have yet been appropriated.
FT 1981 Funding:
Funding Source:
5.8. Contamination Response Program
(other than RCRA/Superfund)
Description: The Department of Pollution Control and Ecology Is responsible for contamination Incident clean-up,
Mhlle the Department of Health handles threats to public health.
FX 1981 Funding:
Funding Source:
5.9. Other
14
-------
Ti gBODBTMtATBi noo****
BTATlj LOOXSXABA
BATOU Of TU OROUnMIATtB U30O1CB
. Ox)1n»1n mad lytfrolQglo Cbaraetariatiea. Describe general geological and hydrologloal characteristics
(i.e. formations, rock types, areal extant and thickness, transmisslvlty, aquifer interconnection, extent
of contamination).
teristioa
Fbyalcejrapbio
Begion/FroTlae* At
Southwestern
Ftiyalograpbio
B:
Ct
Baton Rout* ar«a
Baton Doug*/
law Orlaana Araa
roaot of state
' this
(a*Uaat«dl)
aquifar(a)
Thla araa la uadarlaln
by a tnlok aaquanoa of
aoutbarly and aouth-
aastarly dipplnt Intar-
baddad »r»rel«t aanda,
ailta, and clays that
hava baan dividad into
the Oiloot, EvangeUna,
and Jasper Aquifers.
The Chicot Reservoir
underlies Boat of south-
western Louisiana and
extends an unknown dis-
tance beneath the Gulf
of Hexleo. The beds of
clay, sand, ailt, and
gravel varies in thick-
ness froa 100-800 feet.
It ia recharged primarily
by precipitation. The
Evangeline and Jasper
Reservoirs consist of
unconsolidsted fine to
B*diun-grained sand
ranging between 200-
3,400 feet thick.
Tbia araa ia underlain
by a ooaplex sequence
of continental and
ajarine sediments. The
allurlua and older
artesian aquifers
range between 100-
2,800 feet deep.
Alluvial deposits of
recent and Pleistocene
agea are limited to
the floodplain of the
Mississippi River near
Baton Rouge. These
deposits are approx-
imately 80$ Mater-
bearing sands and
gravel, and 20J silt
and clay.
Tbia araa is part of
the upper deltaic plain
of the Miaaiaaippl
River. Fresh water
aquifers are limited to
the upper 600 faat of
aadlment by aalt water
encroachment.
Confined Aquifer (a)
Motes: All of the above physiographic region aquifers are unconfined in the outcrop areas. However, the^ complex
fades changes results in these aquifers being artesian in nature down dip from the outcrop area. For the most
part it is the artesian portion of the above aquifers that are utilized, especially for municipal, irrigation, or
industrial uae.
15
-------
•TATI: L00UZAM
IATBM
TH1 OftOOID-VATBR U300ICK
1.1. Oeologlo and Hydrologlo Oaraoteriatlos. Describe general geological and hydrologlcal characteristics
(i.e. formations, rook types, areal extent and thickness, tranaoiasivity, aquifer interconnection, extent
of contamination).
Qiaraotoriatioa
Percent of state oorered
by ttoia province (estimated)
Oboooflnad Aquifar(a)
Confined Aquifer (a)
i
Bagion/Provlaoe D: laglon/Proviaoe I: •aslOB/Proriao* P:
northern and Central
Southeastern Louisiana
This area is underlain
by a aeries of deposits
yielding amall to large
Mounts of ground-water.
Three of the lore
Important aquifera are
the Sparta Sand of the .
Clalborne Croup, the
Vilcox Croup, and the
Quaternary Alluvium of
the Red River.
The Sparta Aquifer
varies between 400-
1,200 feet thick and la
composed of several
quasi-connected, thick
beds of aand.
The aquifers of the
Vilcox Croup yield water
in northwestern
Louisiana, and are
composed of a aequence
of thin beds of lignltle
sands, allty aand, sandy
and allty clay, and clay.
The Quaternary alluvial
deposits located in
northwestern and central
Louisiana consist of an
upper level of clay and
silt with sand and
gravel in the lower
half. The thickness
varies from less than
50 feet in central and
northern Louisiana to
3,500 feet near the
coast.
Knoraous quantities of Artesian conditions occur
aoft, drinkable water in portions of the above
are available fro* aqulfera, including the
Miocene sands to depths Quaternary deposits where
exceeding 3,500 feet in artesian and water table
aoae places. conditions exist.
I
.
16
-------
LOQXSttli
Primary QMS of Orouad Water w Paroeat of Total DBS**
«.,
Public Mater Systems
(including municipal)
Industrial
(except municipal)
Agricultural
Domestic/Rural
Other (specify)
Total
$ of Total % Orouad Natar*
Ground Watar of Total Watar
13 M
26° 15°
56d SO*
3 93
100
'Total withdrawals: 7,770 MOD.
Includes: industrial—23J; power—3>.
°Includes: industrial—m$; power—1}.
^Includes: agriculture--53fi tquaeulturt—31.
'includes: agriculture— M7f; aquaculture—331.
Notes: Figures on "c* and "e" above appear misleading due
to combining of aquaculture categories.
3. Population Reliance on Ground Hater for Drinking Vater for Tear 1979
Percent of population relying on
ground water for drinking water
Number of people relying on
ground water for drinking water
Public Vater
System*
381
1,520,000
DomMtio
Wells
171
660,000
Total
55S
2,200,000
17
-------
STATBx tOOXSXABA
Of
2 • aest Boat marietta, efte.)
to* four — 1 •
*HR» 0»0k Bemk
Septic tanka
Huniclpal landfills
On-*ite industrial
land fill* (excluding
pita, lagoons, surface
impoundments)
Other landfills X
Surface Impoundments X*
(excluding oil and
fas brim pita)
Oil and gas brine pita X*
Underground storage X
tanks
Other (specify):
Saltwater injection X
veils
Hazardous waste X
underground
Injection
tarn* 0~* ta*
Injection walla
abandoned hazardoua
waste aites
Bagulated hatardous
waste aites
X
Salt water Intruaion
Land application/
treatment
Agricultural
X
Road salting
Petro-ehemioal and wood
preserving Industries
Poorly constructed and
abandoned wells
Contaminated water
piping
xb
X
xc
*The greatest potential risk to ground-water contamination Bay be the result of loproperly constructed and/or
maintained surface Impoundments and from salt water injection wells.
^Sources of ground-water contamination have been identified fro* the petro-chemical and wood preserving
industries, and primarily Involve creosote and chlorinated organic compounds with specific gravities greater than
water. There does not appear to be a aajor problem involving other hazardous constituents or heavy sjetals.
Sources related to the petro-chemlcal industry are not necessarily related to waste Banageaent facilities, but
often involve manufacturing and process areas, with contamination originating from product aplllage and/or
leaking pipelines, storage, tanks, raw material transfer lines, or chemical sumps and drains designed for the
collection of accidental spills or routine maintenance runoff.
°There la a widespread occurrence of moderately corroaive ground-water which is often not corrected by treatment
before use. This is a cause for concern due to the introduction of corrosion products into the water from the
corrosion of pipe and pipe joint materials. A common corrosion product appears to be lead which arises primarily
from the corrosion of pipe Joint material la house and service lines.
18
-------
2.
«
(check)
f» MbsUooe*
STATE: LOOXSIAIA
Organic chemicals:
Volatile
Synthetic
Inorganic chemicals:
Nitrates
Fluorides
Arsenic
Brine salinity
Other
Metals
Radioactive material
Pesticides
Other (specify)
tere is the natural occurrence of flourlde in 13 eonnnunity public water supplies at levels that exceed the state
od Federal standard of 1.6 mg/1 and which are as high as 4 ig/1.
D sooe areas of tne state, depleted aquifers are resulting in increasing salinities.
odlun is naturally occurring in Many smaller supplies at levels of health significance of up to 100 mg/1. There
» also the widespread natural occurrence of contaminants with significant, but non-health, effects, such as iron
nd canganese.
19
-------
STATE: LOOX3ZAIA
3. STATE GRODH>-HATER MAIAGEMEIT STIDCTOHB
3.1. State Statutes Pertaining to Ground-Water
Pollution, Control
Subject Monitored by SUtute
Statute
/to.
description of Authority Pertaining
to Ground-Hater Protection
General utter pollution
control
Louisiana Water Control Law,
L.B.S. 30:1091-1096
Tbla law provides for regulation of activities
which result in the discharge of substances into
toe waters of the state including ground
waters. Section 1095 prohibits any such
activity without the appropriate permit or
license required under regulations adopted
pursuant to the law.
Ground-water quality
(including public health
standards)
L.B.S. 40:1148
Regulates treatment and distillation systems
and monitors drinking water quality.
Solid waste
The Louisiana Solid Waste
Management and Resource Recovery
Law, L.R.S. 30:1121-1125.
Hazardous waste
The Louisiana Solid Waste
Management and Resource Recovery
Law, L.R.S. 30:1121-1125.
The law provides for the monitoring of drinking
water wells which provide public water supplies
located near commercial hazardous waste
facilities; requires that the regulations
regarding the treatment, storage, and disposal
of hazardous waste insure that the water
supplies of the state are protected; provides
for a Hazardous Waste Protection Fund from which
monies can be used to maintain closed hazardous
waste facilities to protect ground waters;
provides for the cleanup of abandoned or
inactive hazardous waste sites in the state—it
Includes provisions which would allow the
secretary to order the responsible person to
test, monitor, and analyze to ascertain the
extent of the hazard; provides for a Hazardous
Waste Site Cleanup Fund from which monies are
available to pay for the cleanup of hazardous
waste sites; provides for the identification and
response to inactive and abandoned hazardous
waste site; provides that no person shall
discharge into any underground waters of the
state any hazardous waste except In accordance
with the underground injection program, or in
accordance with a permit Issued under the Water
Pollution Control Law.
Mining
L.R.S. 30:902(B), 30:803,
30:23(B)(2), 30:1150.2(A)(2>
Surface mining, geothermal development activity
use of salt domes, and resource recovery
activity are also mandated to use all reasonable
precautions to protect the environment and to
prevent pollution of state waters.
Oil and gas
L.R.S.
Requires that the drilling, casing, and plugging
of wells be done in a manner to prevent the
pollution of fresh water supplies by oil, gas,
or salt water.
Other (specify):
UIC
L.R.S. 30:4(C)(16)
Water Control Law, Act 190,
Section 1096F
Subsurface Injection wells and all surface and
storage facilities incidental to oil and gas
exploration and production are to be regulated
in such a manner as to prevent the escape of a
waste product into fresh ground-water aquifers.
20
-------
STAT1: LOOXSXAJU
. State Orouad-lfeUr Polio?
.1. Status
Ground water covered under
general state statute!
Specific state statutes for
ground water
Policy In existence for
protecting ground-water quality
Policy under derelopment
Cbeok
X
21
-------
ftTATB: LOOX3XAJU
3.2.2. tevelopaeet of
-ItoUr Policy
3.2*2.1. Is there • tround-«Bter policy or strategy developaent prooeaa?
3.2.2.2. L«ad agency/steering ooaalttee: Departaent of Invironaental Quality
TM X Ro
3.2.2.3. Describe developaent process (inter-agency agreeaents, progreas to date, target ooapletlon datt, etc.):
State agencies have Jointly produced a ground-water prograa description. The Departaent of
Knvlronaental Quality aod the Departaent of Batumi Resoureea (Offloe of Conaenratioo, Injection and Mining
Plvlaion), the Departvent of Tranaportatlon and Oevelopcent (Offioe of Public Works}, Louisiana Geological Survey,
and the Regional Ground-Water Coanlsslon «bich is closely associated with the nSQS, routinely exchange Information
or engage in Joint Inspections and reporting as necessary in regard to problea areas. Also, the Oepartaent of
Environmental Quality now has a Ground-Water Protection Advisory Group. The Department of Bnvironaental Quality
using a ground-water program grant (under CHA Section 106) will, through the PAC and formation of a Technical and
• Policy Advisory Coavlttee, develop • state (round-Mater •anageaent plan.
3.2.3. Characteristics of Policy Developed
Type of Protection
General language
Hon-degradatlon
Llalted degradation
Differential protection
Check
Kotes:
3.2.*. Policy Classification
3.2.4.1. Does state have a ground-water classification system or other system for distinguishing
among types of ground water (e.g. use, quality, or other contamination potential)? Yes
3.2.4.2. If yes, give brief description of classes:
No
3.2.5. Quality Standards
3.2.5.1. Has the state adopted ground-water quality standards?
3.2.5.2. Bow are the standards used?
Tes Ho X
3.2.5.3. Describe briefly the range of contaminants covered.
22
-------
STATS: LOOI3XA1A
SUU Aceaoy BwpaulblUtiM for
tter Protection
Mpoulbl*
State
Acwtoy
A! ATM Ground-
• CooaenratioB
.••tea
•taent of Natural
ircea, Off lot of
srvation
•t»ent of Natural
ircea, Louisiana
igloal Survey*
•taent of Health
uman Resources,
i* of Preventive
'ubllc HMlth
oea
se of Conaerva-
, Injection and
ig Diviaion
rtaent of
Mlturc, Office
rl culture and
ronaental
icea
rtsent of
ronaental
ity, Office
kzardoua and
1 Waste*
rtaent of
ronnental
ity, Office of
r Resources
rtaent of
sportatlon and
lopaent, Office
ublic Vorka"
Vfeter
PoUoj/
Sul*/
Staotard
X
r«
KU
X
«*Mll*-D*1anta
01(5
X
X
MS*
X
d Pl^QflWB
n°
X
OUMT
X
s*u
OoUeo-
Uoa,
aquifer
Ikppias,
•to.
X
X
X
X
Oround-
Mat«r
QtaUity
X
X
X
Soil
ration
Wnloc
X
X
Proteo-
UOB
fro*
toad
De-loii«
Other
* Underground Injection Control.
* Public Water System.
Pesticides Enforceaent.
latea injection/disposal operations related to oil and gas, hazardous Mate, and lignite aurface mining, geothermal
a, and aalt doae atorage.
idea technical assistance to other atate agencies upon request. Such assistance la often alaed at aquifer research
aubaurface geologic napping. Pisposal zone studies are aimed at deep well injection of hazardous wastes.
eaents aeuage disposal regulationa; conducts Mater quality nonitoring and apecial atudles of drinking water quality.
ews ground-water aanpllng and laboratory analyses on a atatewide basis with attention to analytical trends and
istical results. Appropriate enforcement action ia initiated as necessary, and la the primary mechanism used to
ire that an adequate ground-water protection ayatem ia maintained.
bliahea water veil standards and abandonment procedures, and licenses water well drillers; works cooperatively with
USCS in collecting water data and sponsoring apecial investigations.
-------
LocxauBA
3.4. XBter-Ageaey
Toploa
Protection of apeclflc aquifera
Policy and strategy development
Ground-water dlaehargea
Underground injection control
Ground-water contamination incidents
Geological survey
Other (specify):
Information exchange
Data coordination
Cbeok if
applicable
X
X
X
X
X
Peaeription of AgreeaHBta
aad Ageaciea
Capital Area Ground-Hater Conservation Coaaiiaalon
Department of Environmental Quality Adviaory Group
Hater Resources Study Commission
Information exchange among various agencies.
Louisiana Geological Survey has agreements or working
arrangements with the Office of Conservation, Injection and
Mining Division, the Departaent of Environmental Quality, Office
of Hazardous and Solid Haste, the Louisiana Hater Resources
Study Commission, and the Office of Hater Resources, Hater
Pollution Control Division.
The Department of Environmental Quality and the Department of
Natural Resources, Office of Conservation, Injection and Mining
Division, the Department of Transportation and Development,
Office of Public Works, Louisiana Geological Survey, and the
Regional Ground-Hater Commission which is closely associated
with the OSGS, routinely exchange Information or engage in Joint
inspections and reporting aa necessary in regard to problem
areas. Also, the Department of Environmental Quality now baa a
Ground-Hater Protection Adviaory Group.
The Hater Data Coordinating Committee.
3.5. Status of Ground-Hater Raaouroe Assessment Activities
Activity
Ground-water resources assessment
(aquifer mapping, etc.)
Ambient ground-water quality
Assessment at waste aites
Other (specify) i
Hell inventory
Cneck if
Applicable
X
X
X
X
Description of Activities
Louisiana Geological Survey has conducted an aquifer
Identification and characterization study, an aquifer exemption
study, a critical aquifer mapping study, a sole-source aquifer
study, a shallow ground-water study, and a recharge study. In
addition, the Capital Area Ground-Water Conservation Commission
has a cooperative agreement with the USGS to model the principal
aquifers of the Baton Rouge area. Ground-water flow models for
2,000 ft. sand, 1,500-1,700 ft. sand, and 400-600 ft. sand are
underway or completed.
Louisiana Geological Survey has conducted a baseline water
quality study.
Louisiana Geological Survey has conducted a disposal tone study,
a radioactive tracer/cement bond log study of injection well
integrity, and a best management practices study for waste
disposal in areas of shallow ground-water interaction.
Louisiana Geological Survey has conducted a water well and
an injection well Inventory.
24
-------
BTATBi LOOZSZABA
•teU OrouaJ-toUr Monitorial
?aa of Monitorial
i-hatardoua
at* aitaa
sardoua watt aitea
It NtUr
atloidea
bttnt monitoring
Public Mttr aupply
Bonltoring
•her:
Oil and Oaa
_
X
X
X
•rlef Boa«ri»tioB of Monitorial »O*TU
Monitoriaf rtqulrad under tba KOU progru.
The Offioe of Prcvtntirt and Public Haalth Strviota
haa a ground-watar quality Bonltorinc program, which
la ppi»»rily eca^riaad of tba routin* •onitoring for
tha inorcanlo ohavioala on a fiva yaar oyola at all
OMB unity public watar auppliaa uaing ground-watar
aouroaa. In addition, tha undatory (primary)
Inorganic oontanlnanta aa Mtll aa th« inorganic
ehaaioala ara conitorad in tha diatribution ayataaa
of aach aupply en a thra* yaar eycla. Thaaa two
aonitoring activitiaa ara ooordinatad to allainata
redundancy. In addition, undar tha Offioa of Public
Vorka/USGS Cooparatlva Prograa, thara ara 761 ground-
water Bonltoring walla, 115 for quality Monitoring
and 6<)9 for watar lavtl Bonitoring.
Tha Offioa of Conservation raquiraa monitoring aa
naadad on a aita apacifio baaia.
Mo&itoriag
DaU
OoapuUrUad
(Cbaok) J
••aa of
DaUbaaa
(•p*olfy)
Sut« Prograaa for Public Participation
" ^^.^ Coataxt
Approaehaa ^*^^^»^-^^
Public haaringa, Baatinga, workahopa
Meatinga with local offioiala
Citizens' advisory groupa
Public notloaa
Handbook, other written aatariala
Other (apecify)
Oaaara.1
Ground -
MkUr Parmit
laauaa Zaauanoa
X X
X
Specific
•agulfttioo Ground -
Adoption, Matar
Ghaagaa Strategy Other
X X«
X
X
X
X
x«
or the Capital Area Ground-Water Conservation Coooisaion tha principal Beana of public participation is by board
eetings and by tha dissemination of information on an irregular baaia using a newsletter.
25
-------
STATB: LOOISXaJU
4. STATI IKPLSHEITATXOI OT FBDtRAL PROGRAMS TO PROTECT GROOVD WAT1R
4.1. Procraa Status
Federal
Progi-aa
SUtua of Procraa Delegation
State
Otauaual/Kotevortliy
Frograa Characteristics
QIC
Delegated - all five classes
Office of Coaserrstion,
Injection and Mining
Division
RCRA
Delegated — Phase 1 and
Phase 2 interia authorization
Departaent of Environaental
Quality
PUS
Delegated
Departaent of Health and
Hunan Resources, Office
of Health Services and
Envlronaental Quality
Pesticides
Enforcement
Delegated
Department of Agriculture
One noteworthy program
characteristic of the Louisiana
Pesticide Law is that commercial
applicators are not permitted to
generate waste materials. This is
accomplished through requiring the
use of the rinsate from the
pesticide containers and
application equipment to be
recycled and used on compatible
crops. The Louisiana Pesticide
Law exceeds the requirements of
both the Federal Insecticide,
Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act,
and the Resource, Conservation,
and Recovery Act.
26
-------
STATS x LOCISXABA
Ormat Statue
Grant
FT 1965 Allocation
Specific Orouad-lhtw
ProjeoU/Taak* aad
OMB Hater iot
Section 106
•1,980,760
(Federal aad SUto)
dean Vattr Act
Section 205(J)
lot y«t
•lloc«t«d for
FT 1984/1985
MOM Identified
Clean Water Aet
Section 205(«)
$1,076,000
Hone
MCM
Section 3011
$1,900,393
(federal and SUte)
Host related to ground water are monitoring and
compliance, enforcement, compliance and monitoring.
Part B applications, total Federal/state funds:
$724,212.
UIC
$524,260
(Federal and State)
Entire program for ground-water protection.
PIFRA
Section 23(a)(1)
$197,700 Federal
56.276 State
$255,976
Ground-water efforts not yet identified.
27
-------
ST1TI: LOOI3IAJU
5. STiTB-OlIOnUTfD OROOHD-lfATll PIOTICTIM PROGRAMS
5.1. Oround-taUr Strategy
(including ground-water quality standards and olaaalfloatlon)
Description:
n 19«« Funding:
Funding Souroe:
5.2. OrouDd-llaUr Monitoring
Description: The Department of Envlronaental Quality (round-water monitoring coordinator, the aenior engineering
geologist in the Hazardous Waste Division and the project engineer in the Solid Haste Division review ground-water
sampling and laboratory analyses on a statewide basis with attention to analytical trends and statistical
results. Static water elevations fron the monitoring grid are of prime importance in determining the
effectiveness of installed systems. These elevations may reveal a need for modificationa, based on seasonal
variations in ground-water directional flow or regional geology. Appropriate enforcement action is initiated aa
necessary, and dependent upon the circumstances, is the primary mechanism used to insure that an adequate ground-
water protection system is maintained at all times. Of the approximate 75 facilities in Louisiana now requiring
ground-water monitoring, 41 have had enforcement action taken, and of this number, 29 have been issued an Order
with the possibility of a penalty assessment. The Department of Health and Human Services requires monitoring of
all public water supplies including those on ground water. USGS monitors selected wells (cooperative program with
Capitol Area Ground-Water Conservation Commission). The Office of Conservation requires ground-water monitoring
on an as needed basis. The Office of Public Works/USGS cooperative program monitors 764 wells, 115 for quality
and 649 for water levels.
FY 1964 Funding:
Funding Source: Through various programs
5.3. Ground-Water Resource Assessment/Aquifer Study/Mapping
Description: Most of the following aquifer studies originated aa ideas and work proposals at the atate level with
input at the Federal level: 1) Injection Well Inventory; 2) Aquifer Identification and Characterization Study; 3)
Water Well Inventory; 4) Ground-Water Heat Pump Inventory; 5) Base-Line Water Quality Study; 6) Aquifer Exemption
Studies; 7) Disposal Zone Studies; 8) Technical Assistance Program to OC; 9) Radioactive Tracer/Cement Bond Long
Study; and 10) Critical Aquifer Mapping Study. The studies are the result of the UIC program through the Office
of Conservation.
FY 1984 Funding:
Funding Source: 75> Federal, 25? state, where funded under UIC program, as described above.
5.4. Agricultural Contamination Control
Description:
FY 1964 Funding:
Funding Source:
28
-------
8TATI: L00Z3Z1XA
. Permits/Control of Discharges to Oround MaUr
eriptlon: The state tea a eomprehenalve program for prevention of discharges to ground-water from solid and
ardoua wast* altaa. Cround-watar pollelaa of tba Hazardous Waste and Solid Waste Divisions, the Department of
ironmantal Quality addraaa all known land management faeilltlaa involving aaeh diriaioo. Operatora are
tlnaly required to report on tba atatua of ground-water quality aaaoclatad to these operation*, and are
lodlcally Inspected by tba Department of Environmental Quality for compliance with ground-water monitoring
ulatlooa. Qpon discovery or notloa that ground-water contamination baa baan Identified by an operator, the
irtment of Environmental Quality routinely orders tba operator under threat of penalty assessment, to delineate
full extent of the problea, identify the aouroe, initiate remedial measures and elimination of the source.
1th and broad environmental risk assessments relative to the ground-water problem are a routine requirement of
Department of Environmental Quality Order (enforcement meohaniaism).
In addition, the statewide DIG program (in the Office of Conservation, Department of Natural Resources)
jlates disposal/Injection from oil and gas activities, hazardous waste facilities, and from lignite aurface
Jig activities, in order to control discharges to ground water.
981 Funding:
ing Source:
> Septic Management Program
:rlptlon:
961 Funding:
Ing Source:
Bulk Storage/Underground Storage Tank Programs
rlptlon:
981 Funding:
Ing Source:
Contamination Response Program
(other than RCRA/Superfund)
rlptlon: The Department of Environmental Quality emergency response program In cooperation with the Louisiana
e Police, Hazardous Materials Division, routinely addresses problems of leaking underground*gasoline or
rdous materials which may be a threat to surface of shallow ground water.
981 Funding:
ing Source:
Other: Hell Construction Controls
ription: The Department of Environmental Quality - Division of Hazardous and Solid Waste routinely advises
• tors engaged in ground-water monitoring, subsurface exploratlonal drilling or locating contamination, of
siana'a requirements for water wells and water well drillers, La. R.S. 38:3098, which is under the
sdiction of the DOTD (Office of Public Works) aa a precaution to insure against downhole or cross
aoination of water bearing strata.
Other ground-water protection programs originated at the state level Include the water well registration and
donoent procedures and the water well driller's licensing program. The Office of Public Works is the
eaenting agency for both programs. State appropriations fund the well registration and abandonment program at
sproximate level of $85,000 per year. The well drillers' licensing program is funded with self-generated fees
n approximate level of $25,000 per year.
29
-------
-------
ftATK OTOCTP-IATM HO01AM SOMMAKT
STATE: BV NBUCO
. BATUXI or nt nomoMUTU usoncs
.1. asmmlo sad lytfrolaglc Cteraeteri*tiaa. Describe general geological and hydrologioal characteristics
(i.e. foTBations, rook types, areal extent and thickness, transsissivlty, aquifer interconnection, extent
•f o«mt*«1 nation).
Gnmreeterietlea
•agion/Pr
AUurlu*
•agion/ProriBae It
Basin Fill
•etion/Prorinee Ct
Qgallala ForMtion
tt of state oorered
talc proviaoe (eatimted)
aguifer(.)
Quaternary Age, valley-
fill and terrace
deposit*, unoonsolidated
sands, gravels, silts,
and clays; saturated
thickness 0-350 feet
(typically 50 feet).
Quaternary and Late
Tertiary Age, lithology
siBllar to alluviua
but finer grained;
interbedded plateau
basalts and pyroclastlcs;
saturated thickness
0-5,000 feet
(typically 500 feet).
Tertiary Age, unconaoll-
dated or seal-consolidated
sand, silt, and clay,
saturated thickness 0-300
feet (typically 100 feet).
ioBfiMd Aquifer(a)
ote: Hew Mtxlco contains aany potential fresh water aquifers which, for planning purposes, have been categorized
nto the six basic types listed above. The vulnerability of the various aquifers to contamination can be assessed
1 combining the aquifer characteristics of the aquifer types with characteristics of the vsdose tone. Because
w Mexico is generslly arid, the depth to the water table is 200-500 feet over such of the western part of the
tate. Confining beds or caliche layers also offer protection in BOM areas.* More vulnerable areas have shallow
»ter tables or highly permeable recharge cones such as fractured lisestones (e.g., portions of the San Andres
ormation).
Therefore, portions of all the aquifer types (Regions A through F) are confined.
30
-------
•tint wn NUXOO
i. urni or ni otoon-virii IBOOICS
1.1. Owleiie and Vydroloflo OarMtarlatloa. Daaoriba ganaral (aolofioal tad bydrolofieal oharaoUriatiea
(i.a. ferutlon*. rook typaa, araal aatant and taloknaaa, trwuisiivity, »quir*r iaUroonntotloo, wt«nt
of eaeualaatioe).
Bi
It
CkTbOMtM
Other
ft
of ctaU
fej tbi« provlao*
to M
T«rtitry Af«
Mnditonti with Mturattd
thiokMM of 0-1,000 ft«t
(typiMlly 200 fMt).
Kxaaplti ineludt Dtkot*,
3anU ROM, Qilnl«,
Olorittt, Merriaen, and
othtr ferutlena.
Lata Palaoioio or
Ntiosoio A
-------
STATE: BH MEXICO
Prlsuu-y D*M of Orouad Hater m» Percent of Total
fe.
Public Water Systems
(iBoluding •unieipal)
Industrial
(except Bunioipal)
Agricultural
Domestic /Rural
Other (specify):
Minerals
Power
Military, recreation,
coomercial
ToUl
f of Total f Ground HaUr
Oround UaUr of Total Itator
8.2
0.1
en .6*
1.2
3.7
0.9
3.3
100.0
•includes 0.9J livestock and 83.11 irrigation.
Population Eellaoce on Ground Vater for Driakii* Hater for Tear 1984
Percent
ground
of population relying on
water for drinking water
Number of people relying on
ground water for drinking water
Public Hater Domestic
SysteBS Veils
90S 100$
1,091,750 206,250
ToUl
95S
1,300,000
32
-------
STATE: BW MZXOO
2.1. tamea (Cbeek major aoureea of
2 • mart moat aerioua, «to.)
ttlon mad nuk tea fanr — 1 « aoat aarioua.
Sfluroa 0»ok ftaak
Septic tanka X
Municipal land f ilia
On-alte industrial
land f ilia (excluding
pita, lagoons, aurface
iapoundmenta)
Other land f ilia
Surface lapoundaenta X*
(excluding oil and
gas brine pita)
Oil and gas brine pita Xb
Underground atorage X°
tanks
Other (specify):
Mining and Billing X
activities
ftooroe Check ftaak
Injection wells
Abandoned hazardous
waste aites
X
Regulated hazardous
waste sites
Salt water Intrusion
Land application/
treatment
Agricultural
X
Road salting
"includes on-aite liquid waste disposal systems.
^Abandoned pits. Some problems froa past disposal. Brine disposal pita are
now outlawed.
°Includes petroleum products.
2.2. Contaminating Substancea
(check)
Organic chemicals:
Volatile X*
Synthetic Xb
Inorganic chemicals:
Nitrates
Fluorides
Arsenic
Brine salinity
Other
X
Metals X_
Radioactive material __
Peatlcides
Other (specify)
X*
"Benzenes and chlorinated solvents.
^Hydrocarbon fuels.
"Naturally occurring.
dBacteria.
33
-------
STATE:
rv MEXICO
3. STATE OflOVED-MTER KAEICEKEVT STIOCTOKE
3.1. State Statute* Pertaining to Ground-Vater Quality and Pollution Control
Subject Monitored by Statute
Statute laae/Bo.
Description of Authority Pertaining
to OPound Mater Protection
Central water pollution
control
Water Quality Act
Envlronaental Improvement Act
Public Nuiaance Statute
Established Mater Quality Control
Commission and authorized It to set
•tandarda to prevent and abate pollution
from all aources except oil and gaa
activities which are controlled under the
Oil and Gaa Act.
Creates and enumerates the power of the
Environmental Improvement Division, which
is responsible for environmental
management and consumer protection
programs.
Includes a section on "Polluting Water,"
which Bakes it a public nuisance to
pollute water. Pollution is defined as
•knowingly and unlawfully introducing any
object or substance into any body of
public water causing It to be offensive or
dangerous for human or animal consumption
or use.*
Ground-water quality
(including public health
standards)
Water Ouslity Act
Set discussion above. Act included
authority to establish ground-water
standards.
Solid waste
Environments 1 Improvement Act
The Environmental Improvement Division is
authorised to adopt solid waste
regulations.
Hazardous waste
Hatarooua Waste Aot
Authorizes the Environmental Improvement
Division to adopt regulations equivalent
to EPA RCRA regulationsi provide!
authority for the regulation of the
transportationi treatment, storage, and
dlspossl of petroleum products.
Mining
Surface Mining Act
Authorises the Coal Surface Mining Bureau
of the Energy and Minerals Department to
promulgate pollution control regulation*
for coal mining.
Oil and gas
Oil snd Gas Act
Gives Oil Conservation Division
certain powers to control water pollution
from oil, natural gas, and carbon
dioxide. Also provides administrative
regulations pertaining to ground water at
facilities for the production,
transmission, and refinement of crude oil.
carbon dioxide facilities, and natural gas
transmission lines.
Other (specify):
Ceothermal Resource Act
Radiation Protection Act
Gives Oil Conservation Commission and Oil
Conservation Division authority over water
pollution from geothermal activities.
Authorizes Environmental Improvement
Division to adopt radiation control
regulations.
otes:
34
-------
STATE: BEN IBXICO
3.2. State Otouod-Mater Policy
3.2.1. Statua
Ground water covered under
general atate atatutea
Specific atate atatutea for
ground water
Policy in existence for
protecting ground-water quality
Policy under development
Oteek
X
X
X
35
-------
STATE: REV MEXICO
.2. Dwelopawnt of Grand-Hater Policy
,2.1. Xa there a ground-water policy or strategy development process? Tes _X Mo
Such a policy la already In place.
.2.2. Lead agency/ateerlng committee: Legislature and Utter Quality Control Commission
2.3. Describe developnent process (Inter-agency agreements, progress to date, target completion date, etc.):
The Hew Mexico State Legislature has adopted a aeries of statutes addressing ground-water, including the
ind-Hater Quantity Statutes of 192? and 1931. and the Hater Quality Act of 1967. In 1977, the Hater Quality
.rol Commission, established under the Act, adopted a comprehensive regulatory program to protect ground-wmter
.ity.
.3. Characteristics of Policy Developed
Type of Protection
General language
Non-degradation
Limited degradation
Differential protection
Check
X
a:
4. Policy Classification
4.1. Does state have a ground-water classification system or other system for distinguishing
among types of ground water (e.g. use, quality, or other contamination potential)? Tes X
1.2. If yes, give brief description of classes:
No
Full protection of ground water with less than 10,000 mg/1 total dissolved solids. Ground water with
than 10,000 mg/1 total dissolved solids is not covered by standards.
5. Quality Standards
5.1. Has the state adopted ground-water quality standards?
5.2. How are the standards used?
Yes X
No
The standards are used to protect all ground water in the state with a concentration of 10,000 mg/1 or
i of total dissolved solids for present and potential uses.
5.3- Describe briefly the range of contaminants covered.
The standards are numbers which represent the pH range and the maximum concentration of contaminants
:h will allow for present and potential use. There are presently 35 numerical standards plus a generic "texlc
utant" standard which defines levels as those available in current scientific literature to protect human
th or commonly cultivated or protected plants and animals.
36
-------
STATE: BH MZZOO
3.3. State Agency ReapaBsloiUtie* for Orounrt MiUr Protection
Responsible
State
Ageacy
Environmental
Improvement Division
of the Health and
Environmental
Department
Oil Conservation
Division of the
Energy and Minerals
Department
Coal Surface Mining
Bureau of the
Energy and Minerals
Department
State Engineer Office
Department of
Agriculture
Ground -
Hater
Policy/
Rule/
Standard
X
X
X
Federally-Delegated Pro«ram
RCRA
X
me*
xd
x«
HBb
X
ft0
X
Other
Bate
Collec-
tion,
Aquifer
Napplag.
•to.
X
X
Grouad-
Hater
Quality
X
xh
X
•oil
Cooaer-
vation
Nialag
X«
X
"'
Protec-
tion
from
Road
Da-iclag
Oth
X
X
X
*UIC • Underground Injection Control.
bPWS * Public Water System.
CPE • Pesticides Enforcement.
dClass I, III, IV, and V programs.
*The Environmental Improvement Division handles all mining except coal.
fVaste water treatment regulations, radiation protection program, ground-water discharge programs, and emergency
response programs.
'Class II DIC program.
"The Oil Conservation Commission rules protect fresh water from oil and natural gas related discharges during drilling
and production, and delegated the Water Quality Control Commission the regulatory authority for discharges at oil
refineries and natural gas plants.
^Regulations applying to oil refineries, natural gas processing plants, geothermal installations, carbon dioxide
facilities, and natural gas transmission lines.
^Requires plugging of mine discovery or drill holes that encounter ground water.
^Limits quantity and rates of pumpage frca wells to prevent salt water encroachment.
37
-------
STATEI
in oo
.*. Inter-Agency
Topioa
Cheek if
Applicable
Description of
and Agenci
Protection of specific aquifer*
'ollcy and atrstegy development
j round-water discharges
odereround injection control
The Oil Conservation Division is the lead agency and regulatea
Class XX and geotnermal walla, tost other Class X, XX, XV, and
V wslls are regulated by the Environmental Improvement Division.
jround-water contamination incidents
Geological survey
Hher (specify):
Water Quality Conniasion
Cosl Surface Mining Commission
Oil Conservation Commission
This commission promulgates Mter pollution control regulations
and assigns administrative responsibility for its regulations to
its constituent agencies. The constituent agencies are: (1)
the Environmental Improvement Division; (2) the State Engineer
and the Interstate Stream Commission; (3) the Department of Came
and Fish; (4) the Oil Conservation Division; (5) the State Park
and Recreation Commission; (6) the Department of Agriculture;
(7) the Natural Resource Conservation Commission; and (6) the
New Mexico Bureau of Nines.
This commission adopts regulations pertaining to coal mining,
and consists of the following officials (or delegated staff
members): (1) the Director, Buresu of Mines and Mineral
Resources; (2) the Director, Department of Came and Fish;
(3) the Director, Environmental Improvement Division; CO the
Chairman, Soil and Water Conservation Commission; (5) the
Director, Agricultural Experiment Station; (6) the State
Engineer; and (7) the Commissioner of Public Lands.
This commission promulgates regulations and hears cases referred
de novo for appeals of Oil Conservation Division decisions, or
for cases referred by the Oil Conservation Division, and
consists of: (1) the Commissioner of Public Lands; (2) the
State Geologist; and (3) the Director of the Oil Conservation
Division.
.5. Status of Ground-Water Resource Assessment Activities
Activity
Ground -water resources assessment
aquifer mapping, etc.)
mblent ground-water quality
ssessaent at waste sites
Jther (specify):
Industrial sites
Check if
Applicable
X
X
X
X
Description of Activities
Assessment of aquifers is part of contract work for the
Environmental Improvement Division and the State Engineer
Office. DSCS has prepared numerous maps and maintains data
showing changes in ground-water levels and hydrographs of
selected wells, and estimated saturated thickness of fresh water
and slightly, moderately, and very saline ground water.
See discussion at 3.6.
See discussion at 3.6.
Discharge plans (permits) are required for a wide variety of
actlvites where effluent or leachate may impact ground water.
Sites are assessed before such plans are approved.
38
-------
STATE: IBV MKXICO
3.6. State
-Hater Monitoring Program
types of Monitoring
HoO-hasardOUa
waata SitS*
Hazardous waste sites
Salt water
Pesticides
Ambient monitoring
Other:
Site specific
investigations
Speciel studies
Check
I
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
Brief Description of Monitoring Program
Extensive self •monitoring is required by holders of
the Environmentel Improvement Division discharge
plans. Spot-checking is done by the Environmental
Improvement Division. The Oil Conservation Division
monitors Mater near approved disposal aites under its
authority.
Site-specific sampling occurs at the four Superfund
aites: AUSF, Homesttke Mining, United Nuolear
Corporation, and Albuquerque South Valley. Also,
self -monitoring and apot-oheoking of active RCRA
facilities.
The State Engineer maintains a ground-water quality
(conductivity) monitoring program in the Roawell
Artesian Basin and in Lea County.
The Department of Agriculture monitors in areas of
known or suspected problems.
The Environmental Improvement Division developed a
statewide monitoring program which included a
survey of all existing data sources.
Monitoring is also performed to support the ground-water
quality program.
The Environmental Improvement Division Investigates
imoedlate contamination problems involving health
and aesthetic parameters.
Studies are currently investigating potential for
nitrate contamination from dairy waste ponds, and
evaluating impacts of septic tanks on ground water
under various geologic and engineering conditions.
Mooltoriag
Btta
Computerised
(Cheek)
•ame of
Database
(Specify)
3.7. State Programs for Public Participation
Context
Approaches
Public hearings, meetings, workshops
Meetings with local officials
Citizens' advisory groups
Public notices
Handbook, other written materials
Other (specify)
General Specific
Ground- KegulatioD Ground -
*Ur Permit Adoption, Hater
Issues Issuance Changes Strategy
Other
X X
*•
X X
Xb
X6
'industry, citizens, and government atudy groups for the Oil Conservation Commission rule changes.
bAll commission meetings.
eWhen invited the state attends meetings with local officials or citizen groups.
39
-------
ST1T1: BH MtXXOO
. STATE XMUXMnTATIOM OF FIDKJUL HOOKAHS TO FBOTKCT 0100ID WiTKR
.1. frogrtm Status
Federal
Status of Procru Delegation
StaU
OfauMBl/VoUworthy
Ctenetwiatiea
1C
Oil Conaenratlon Division
(delegated 2/5/82)
Environmental laprovement
Division
(delegated 7/11/83)
Class XX wells and geotberaal.
Classes I, XII, IV, and V; New
Mexico requires aquifer
restoration after in altu
extraction (Class III wells).
ROM
Final authorization
effective 1/25/85
Hazardous Waate Section of
Environmental Improvement
Division
PUS
Delegated
(1/1/78)
Water Supply Section of
Environmental Improvement
Division
Pesticides
Enforoeoent
Delegated
(11/76)
Department of Agriculture
40
-------
8TATI: BV WZZOO
•.2.
Status
Oraat
1985
Specific Oroui»d-ltot«r
Projects/Tasks ead Budget
dean Hater Act
Section 106
$320(000 Work plan does not presently include ground-water
tasks. (Does not Include $100,000 supplemental
allocation for (round-water progress.)
Clean Hater Act
Section 205(J)
$119,160 Work plan does not presently include ground-water
tasks.
Clean Water Act
Section 205(g)
$417,000 Vork plan does not presently include ground-water
tasks.
RCRA
Section 3011
$395,767 Does not presently include specific items for
ground-water program development.
UIC
$226,700 Does not presently include specific ground-water
program development but UIC prog rani is essentially
a ground-water protection program.
FIFM
Section 23(a)(1)
$100,900 Work plan does not presently include ground-water
tasks, but will in the future.
41
-------
CTATB: BV ttZXCO
RATB-OBZQTJUTBB QIOOB1MIATH MOnCTIM FBO01AJB
Jatar Strategy
(including (round-water quality atandarda and classification)
icription: The state has adopted a classification system and 35 numerical ground-water quality standards.
itional standards are proposed for adoption aa the need arises. Resources devoted to the enforcement of the
tndards are included in Sections 5.2. and 5.5. below.
198* Finding:
riing Source: State funds
:. Qround-feter Hooitoriat
icriptioo: A statewide monitoring program developed by the Environmental Improvement Division includes a survey
all existing data sources. Monitoring is conducted to support ground-water quality programs. The state does
sited apot check sampling of approved discharge sites. The State Engineer maintains a ground-water quality
xxJuctlvity) monitoring program in the Jtoawell Artesian Basin and in Lea County.
19B1 Funding: Environmental Improvement Division — $200,000; State Engineer funding included in Section 5.3.
ading Source: Environmental Improvement Division: State
3. Ground-Hater Beaouroe AaaeaamflOt/Aquifer Study/Mapping
scriptlon: Assessments of aquifers have been conducted as part of contract work for the State Engineer
'ice. The USGS has prepared numerous maps and maintains data showing changes in ground-water levels and
Irographs of selected wells, and estimated saturated thickness of fresh water and slightly, moderately, and very
line water.
1961 Funding: $1,200,000
ndlng Source: State funds: $600,000; USGS: $600,000
I. Agricultural Contamination Control
scription:
1984 Funding:
nding Source:
42
-------
STATE: DV IffXI00
5.5. FtTBlta/Cootrol of Dl*onarg*a to OrooBd Mat«r
Description: Ground-water discharge plana (permits) are required under the Utter Quality Control Commission
regulations and are administered by the Environmental Improvement Division of the Health and Environmental
Department to »a In tain ground-water quality standards. Discharge plana for petroleum refineries and natural gas
plants arc administered by the Oil Coosenratloo Division
PT 1984 funding: $542,000 (Environmental Improvement Division: $450,000 and Oil Conservation Division: $92,000)
Funding Source: State funds
5.6. Septic IfcnmgeacBt Program
Description: Permits are required under Liquid Waste Disposal Regulations for all domestic sewage, septic tank
leach field systems with flows under 2,000 gpd. Larger systems are controlled under the Water Quality Control
Commission regulations referred to in Section 5.5. above.
FT 1984 Funding: $450,000
Funding Source: State funds
5.7. Bulk Storage/Underground Storage Tank Programs
Description: A study of ground-water pollution problems from refined hydrocarbon fuels was completed in December
1984. Program for 1985 will concentrate on recommendations coming out of the study.
FT 1964 Funding: $50,000
Funding Source: State funds: $30,000; Federal (from the last extensions of grants under
CWA section 208): $20,000
5.8. Contamination Response Program
(other than RCRA/Superfund)
Description: The Environmental Improvement Division of the Health and Environmental Department handles emergency
contamination response programs.
FT 1981 Funding: $30,000 (rough estimate)
Funding Source: State funds
5.9. Other: The State Engineer's Office regulates water withdrawals in declared underground basins, licenses
drillers, and imposes plugging and abandonment requirements in certain instances.
43
-------
gTATI OBOOaTP-WATBl PtOCKAM 8CMUHT
8TATB: OKLAHOMA
. BATOXE OF THE GBODKMUTBI BB3001CB
.1. Oeologle and Rjdrolagie Oarmateriatloa. Describe central geological and hydrological characteristics
(I.e. formations, rook types, areal extent and thickness, tranamiaaivity, aquifer interconnection, extent
of contamination).
Qaraoteriatloa
Fbjalocrapblo
Begion/ProTiBee A:
High Plains Araa
Phyaiographlo
BagioB/ProTlace B:
Western Oklahoma Araa
RijalQcrmpbie
Beglon/Provlaoe C:
Baataro Oklahoma Araa
>aro«Bt of staU oorarad
if thla provlooa (wtiaatcd)
Approxiaately
10*
Approximately
Approziaataly
»OJ
ooooflaad Aqulfar(a)
Thla region oovera almost
all of the 3 panhandle
counties and extends a
abort distance into
adjacent counties of
northwestern Oklahoma.
The area la underlain
by deposits of aand,
gravel, and minor
amounts of clay, and in
Borne areas la capped by
a limey rock called
caliche.
The deposits are com-
posed primarily of the
Ogallala Formation,
which la the best
aquifer In the state
due to its area, thick-
ness, and high permea-
bility. This formation
is only partially
saturated with water
and is several hundred
feet thick.
This region includes
the western half of
Oklahoma, excluding
the High Plains area.
Zt Includes the following
•ajor aquifers: Rush
Springs Sandstone, Dog
Creek Shale, and Elaine
Gypsum (fractured), Rush
Springs Sandstone, Elk
City Sandstone, Arbuckle
Group (aandatone and
carbonates), Oscar Group
(sandstone and shale),
Garber-Vellington Aquifer
(sandstone and shale),
and several important
alluvial aquifers and
associated terrace
deposits. Aquifer thick-
nesses range from about
50-600 feet.
Eastern Oklahoma has
aeveral main formations.
Their characteristics
are roughly the same
and include a depth of
between 250-700 feet of
Interbedded aand stone,
shale, and conglomerate.
Major aquifers Include
the Antlers Sandstone,
Vamoosa Aquifer, Slap3on
and Arbuckle Groups, the
Roubidoux Formation
(confined), and aeveral
alluvial aquifers.
Confined Aqulfar(a)
44
-------
STATIt
1.2. Primary OMB of Ground Water •* Peroeat of Total
CM
Public Water Systems
(including Municipal)
Induetrial*
(except Bunlcipal)
Agricultural*
Domestic/Rural
Other (specify):
Recreation, fish,
wildlife
Mining
Total
% of Total $ Ground Mater
Ground Utter of Total Hater
15.6 7.0
4.2 1.3
76.9 35.0
0.2 0.1
0.9 0.0
100.0 43.6
'includes: industrial—3-2>; power—0.6J; coHnercial—0.1J.
Irrigation.
1.3. Population Reliance on Ground Water for Drinking Water for Tear I960
Percent of population relying on
ground water for drinking water
Number of people relying on
ground water for drinking water
Public Water
ft/stew
21 .9J
662,000
DoMStlO
Hells
11. 4»
313,615
Total
33. 3*
1,005,615
Notes: Of in estimated 550,365 acre feet of ground water used per year, 62J is used by domestic users and k% is
used for private supplies.
45
-------
8TATK: OKUBOMA
1. 5ouroe* (CbMk aajor aoui'oea of
2 • ant Mat aerioua, ate.)
itlOB
rank top four — 1 • anat aer:
flooroe Cfaeok Kaidc
Septic tanks
Municipal landfill*
On-ait* industrial
land f Ilia (excluding
pita, lagoons, aurfaoe
lapoundaenta)
Other land fill*
Surface iapoundaenta
(excluding oil and
gas brine pita)
Oil and gaa brine pita
Ond erg round atorage Xb
tanks
Other (apecify)
Soon* Cheek Bank
Injection wella
Abandoned hazardoua
waste aitea
Regulated hazardoua
waste aitea
Salt water intrusion X*
Land application/
treatment
Agricultural
Road salting
alt water intrusion (upconlng) fron unplugged wella (oil and gaa related activities): aerious in less than 50
solated incidences.
nderground gasoline atorage tanks (poor sealing or outdated atorage tank types): serious in leaa than 25
ncidences.
2. Contaad.nating Substances
(check)
Organic chemicals:
Volatile
Synthetic
Inorganic chemicals:
Nitrates
Fluorides
Arsenic
Brine salinity
Other
Metals
X*
_^_
xb
x°
___
X*
Radioactive material ___
Pesticides
Other (specify)
'race levels of volatile organics have been found in the Garber-Vellington Aquifer at Tinker Air Force Base.
hallow wells in Woodward County.
one portions of the Roubidoux (Craig County) and Dog Creek Shale and Blaine Gysua (Harmon County) ground-water
>aaina have high sodium chloride levels. The Vamoosa Formation (central Oklahoma) has had problems with brine
Afiltration.
.round water at the Tar Creek NFL Site has excessive levels of iron, lead, zinc, cadmium, and manganese.
46
-------
STATB: OKLAHOMA
3. ftXATB C100TO-WAT11 MA1AOBMUT 8T1DCTOU
3.1. StaU Statutes Pertaining to Ot-orod fcter Quality and Pollution Oootrol
Subject Monitored by Statute
Statute IIM/IO.
Description of Authority Psrtalnli«
to Omnnrt Mater Protection
General water pollution
control
Ground-water quality
(including public health
standards)
Pollution Remedies Aot
(Titlt 62, QtapUr 9)
Powara and dutiea of tba Vater Resources
Board, the Department of Health, and the
Pollution Control Coordination Board
(includes Statute 932. below).
Solid waste
Title 63, Public Health and Safety
Code
Chapter 47, Oklahooa Solid Waste
Management Aot
Title 63. Article 9
Provides authority for the regulation of
solid waste.
Waste and sewage provisions.
Hazardous waste
Title 63, Chapter 57
Provides authority to the Department of
Health, Industrial Waste Management
Division to regulate industrial waste
disposal.
Mining
Coal Reclamation Act, 1979
Oil and gas
Title 82, Oklahoma Statute 1020
Provides authority to the Corporation
Commission.
Other (specify):
Agency organization
Pesticides
Feedyard discharge
Title 82, Oklahoma Statute 932
Oklahoma Pesticides Law,
Sections 3.61-3.70
Oklahoma Pesticide Applicator Laws
and Rules and Regulations
Oklahoma Feed Xard Act
Provides authority to the Pollution
Control Board.
Addresses, among other subjects, disposal
of pesticide containers to reduce the
potential for ground-water contamination.
Requires applicators to follow label
instructions.
Owners and operators are required to
take necessary action to avoid pollution
of any state waters.
Motes:
3.2. State Orouad-*ater Policy
3.2.1. Status
Ground water oovered under
general state statutes
Specific state statutes for
ground water
Policy in existence for
protecting ground-water quality
Policy under development
Check
X
I
X
47
-------
mnti
.2. •ev*lope«Bt of Omnrt Hater PoUoy
.2.1. Is there a ground -water policy or strategy development process?
:.2.2. Lead agency/steering committee: Pollution Control Coordinating Board and Department
of Pollution Control
Taa
•o
.2.3. Describe development prooaaa (inter-agency agreements, progress to data, target completion datt, ate.):
A program development strategy was Jointly completed by tha Vatar Raaouroaa Board, tba Department of
iltn, toe Corporation Coanlaaloo, and tha Dapartaant of agriculture in December, 1983.
.3. Omrmoteristlea of Poliey Developed
Tjpe of Protection
General language
Ron -degradation
Llaitad dagradation
Differential protection
Cbaok
X
taa: Currant practice ia baaed on reasonable uae policy.
2.4. Poliey Classification
2.1.1. Does atate have a ground-water classification system or other aysteta for distinguishing
among types of ground water (e.g. use, quality, or other contamination potential)? las X No
2.4.2. If yes, give brief description of classes:
State Department of Health recommended initiating aqulfer-apecific drinking water quality standards;
ineflcial uses have been designated for 21 ground-water basins and formations by the Water Resources Board.
.2.5. Qtality Standards
.2.5.1. Has the atate adopted ground-water quality standards?
.2.5.2. Bow are the atandarda uaad?
Tea X Mo
State has both primary and secondary numerical standards for drinking water supplies. Violations of
•iaary standards may preclude particular raw water sources for use as a public water aupply. If treated water is
wnd in violation of primary standards, the public is notified and a compliance schedule ia arranged. The
loondary standards are not mandatory rejection levels; secondary standards are used as guidelines for selecting
iw Mater sources. When applying for permits for new systems or for revisions, applicants Bust show compliance
,th primary standards and feasibility of meeting secondary standards. The state's Water Quality Standards
action 6) establishes existing beneficial uses of major ground-water basins. The Water Resources Board is
;tempting to establish criteria to protect these uses in the 1985 standards review.
.2.5.3. Describe briefly the range of contaminants covered.
Primary standards include ten inorganic chemicals and five radiological contaminants. Secondary
-andards include chloride, color, copper, eorroaivity, foaming agents, hydrogen sulflde, iron, manganese, odor,
1, aulfate, IDS, and zinc.
48
-------
STATS: OKLAHOMA
3.3. State Agency Reaponalbllitles for Ground-Hater Protection
Beaponalble
State
Agency
Department of
Health4
Water Resources
Board*
Corporation
Commission^
Department of
Agriculture
Department of
Pollution Control
Department of
Kims
Conservation
C omission
Department of
Wildlife
Conservation
Ground -
mater
Policy/
«ule/
Standard
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
Federally-AelegBted Program
KRA
X
Xh
OIC*
X
X
MB*
X
n*
X
Other
X1
xJ
tat*
Collec-
tion,
Aquifer
Mapping,
•te.
X
X
X
Ground-
Miter
Quality
X
X
X
X
Soil
Conser-
vation
X
X
Mining
X
Protec-
tion
fro.
load
De-icing
Other
Xf
*U1C = Underground Injection Control.
bPKS = Public Water System.
°PE = Pesticides Enforcement.
^Responsibilities include: administration of drinking water standards, approval of public water supply sources,
regulation of public water supplies, permitting of municipal waste water discharge, administration of Individual drinking
water well construction, regulation of solid and hazardous waste facilities, approval of septic tank systems,
Involvement in emergency spill response, and regulation of Class I, III, IV, and V injection wells.
'Responsibilities Include: administration and revision of water quality standards, approval of ground-water usage,
Industrial waste water discharge permitting, and administration of well construction standards; Board also conducts
hydraulic surveys.
Industry standards. '
^Responsibilities include: permitting of oil and gas waste water discharge, regulation of oil and gas well drilling pits,
regulation of Class II injection, regulation of oil and gas, plugging of seismic holes, and regulation of off-site
disposal of oil and gas, salt water, and sludge.
"The governor has designated the Corporation Commission as the lead agency for the RCRA LOST program.
^eedlota, NPDES.
issues mining permits. .
-------
KATEs OKLAHOMA
Topics
oteotion of specific aquifers
iliogr «Bd strategy development
•ound-water discharges
jderground injection control
•ound-water contamination Incidents
eologioal «urrey
ther (specify)
Cbeok If
Applicable
X
DMoriptioo of Acrwaanta
sad Agencies
The Pollution Control Coordinating Board includes seven state
agencies. The Department of Health, Water Resources Board, the
Corporation Conmlaaion, and the Department of Agriculture
jointly developed a "Framework for Ground -Water Protection."
See "Policy and strategy development."
,5. Status of Ground-Hater Besourcc Assesaaent Activities
Activity
Check if :
Applicable !
Description of Activities
5round-water resources assessment
(aquifer mapping, etc.)
The Department of Health has prepared maps depicting recharge
areas for major aquifers and alluvial and terrace deposits of
the state.
Ambient ground-water quality
The Water Resources Board conducts an ongoing ground-water
sampling program to define the chemical characteristics of water
in 21 major basins, in order to generate water quality
criteria. In 1963, the Board sampled 506 wells statewide.
Assessment at waste sites
Other (specify)
50
-------
8TATB: OKLAHOMA
3.6. State Oround-«ater Monitorial Program
Typee of Monitoring
Non-hazardous
mate site*
Hazardous waste sites
Salt water
Pesticides
Ambient monitoring
Other:
Cteck
X
X
X
Brief Description of Monitoring Program
The Department of Agriculture will conduct an
exploratory study in 1985 to examine the likelihood
and extent of ground-water contamination from
agricultural pesticide usage.
The Department of Health program calls for monitor-
ing every three years each public water supply that
uses ground water. The Department of Health also
monitors major aquifers.
The Department of Agriculture continues monitoring
on a quarterly basis of selected wells and springs.
Sampled under Section 206 Task 1101 — Animal Waste
Study — Delaware County.
Monitoring
Data
Computerized
(Check)
X
X
X
•ame of
Database
(Specify)
STORET
Aquarius
(automated
data
processing
analysis
system)
STORET
3.7. State Programs for Public Participation
^~"~~~"----^^_^ Context
Approaches " ^_^_^
Public hearings, meetings, workshops
Meetings with local officials
Citizens' advisory groups
Public notices
Handbook, other written materials
i Other (specify)
General Specific
Qround- legulatlon Ground -
B*t«r Permit Adoption, Mater
Issues Issuance Changes Strategy Other
X*
I
^Ground-water applications.
51
-------
STATS: OKLAHOMA
STATE XHPLSHKCTATXOI Of FIWtlAL PIOOIAKS TO FJIOTICT OtOOID BATBB
1. rrocru Status
Federal
Frocraa
Status of Frogru Delefatioa
StaU
tauaual/Ioteworthy
Ageaoy Progw Omcterlstios
1C
Dclsgatcd
Class I, XII, IV, and V
delegated to Department
of Health
Class II delegated to
Corporation Coonlssion
Class II application process
requires base-line water quality
data.
Authorization effective
1/10/85
Department of Health
PUS
Delegated
Department of Health
Pesticides
Enforcement
Delegated
NPDES — not delegated
Department of Agriculture
Feed lots (technical evaluations
for EPA NPDES permits).
52
-------
STATEt OKLAHOMA
».2. Qraat 8tetoa>
1985 Allocation
Specific
FroJecU/Task* sad Budget
dean Mater Act
Section 106
•610,000 The work plan has DO specific ground-utter protection
tasks. (Does not include $100,000 aupplaaenUl
appropriation for fround-mtar prograaa.)
Claan Hater Aot
205(j)
1197,610 The work plan presently baa no specific fround-water
protection taaka.
Clean Water Act
Section 205(g)
$791,000 The work plan has no specific ground-water protection
tasks.
RCRA
Section 3011
$359,300 plus
potential for
additional
$56,100
The work plan has no specific ground-water protection
tasks.
QIC
$313,800 The work plan has no specific ground-water protection
tasks.
FIFRA
Section 23(a}(1)
$153,500 The work plan has no specific ground-water protection
tasks.
53
-------
STATB: OKLAHOMA
STATl-ORlOnUTID QROOBlMfATBI P10TICTIOI PROGRAMS
1. Qround-*ater Strategy
(including ground-water quality standard a and classification)
icrlptlon: The Water Resources Board la authorized to develop ooajirehensive programs for tha prarantlon,
itrol, and abatement of new or existing pollution of state waters. The board alao promulgates atandards of
illty and olaaaifloatloo for state water*.
Oklahoma developed a ground-Mater management atratagy baaed on the •Task 832" Report: Ground-Water
aageaent Authorities and Recommendations. The atratagy essentially calls for oontinued review, evaluation and
atiag of hydrologic data for each ground-water basin, the review and evaluation of existing regulations for
talble revisions, and public awareness. Protection combined with prevention la the goal of the ground-water
>teotlon prograa.
196* Funding:
idlng Source:
'. Ground-Hater Monitoring
icriptlon: The Department of Health conducts aonitoring programs every three yeara at each public water supply
* with ground-water aources. Major aquifers are alao aonltored. The Department of Agriculture will conduct an
Moratory study.
1984 Funding: $30,000
xJlng Source: EPA — proposed Section 205CJ)
J. Oround-Water Resource Aaaesaaent/Aqulfer Study/Mapping
icriptlon: The Water Resources Board conducts hydrologic surveys and investigations of fresh ground-water
sins. The chemical characteristics of water in 21 major basins are assessed in order to establish water quality
.teria. All data has been entered in the Board's computer system.
1984 Funding:
nding Source:
I* Agricultural Cootaadnation Control
script!on: (1) The Department of Agriculture has jurisdiction over pesticide applicators and feedlots.
ofessional pesticide applicators Bust take a written examination In order to ascertain if they can aafely use
stlcides before receiving a permit. (2) Pesticide levels are monitored for compliance to EPA standards in
odatuffs destined for animal or human consumption. (3) In addition, with the Department of Health, they
ordlnate activities in the area of generation, storage, treatment, and disposal of pesticide waste by the
sticide applicator. (4) Such laws help limit the amount of contamination reaching ground water.
Animal feedlot operators, also under the jurisdiction of the Department of Agriculture, are required to
ovide reasonable methods for the disposal of animal excrement, and take actions necessary to avoid pollution of
e state waters.
1984 Funding:
nding Source:
54
-------
•TlTEi QJUIOIU
5.5. •endtm/Centrol of Mmonargem to Oroand Mater
Description: The Corporation Commission has jurisdiction to regulate the drilling of or oooveraion to • aalt
tatter disposal or Injection Mil, mad any related activity.
The Department of Health promulgates rules and regulation* for the proper operation of Claaa 1, XIX, XV. aad
f Injection well*.
peradta are issued for the disposal of industrial, suniolpal, and oil and «ea wste Haters.
Industrial and Municipal Total Retention Lacoons profraaa are under the Vater Xesouroes Board, and the Department
of Health.
the Department of Mines requires a permit for any mining operations, and a plan which assures the protection
of the surface and (round-Mater systems in the region; each plan must be backed up by a bond.
FT 1984 Funding:
Funding Source;
5.6. aeptio Management Program
Description: Septic tank approval Is the responsibility of the Department of Health.
FT 1964 Funding:
Funding Source:
5.7. Bulk Storage/Underground Storage Tank Program*
Description: The Corporation Ccanlasion is the designated agency for underground storage tanks, with the
exception of hazardous waste storage tanks, which are the responsibility of the Department of Health. The Water
Resources Board has conducted a search and eliminate program for leaking underground storage tanks since 1977.
This program is In response to citizen complaints of contaminated water wells.
FT 1981 Funding:
Funding Source:
5.8. Contamination Response Program
(other than RCRA/Superfund)
Description: The Department of Health, Department of Pollution Control, Corporation Commission, Mater Resources
Board, Department of Wildlife Conservation, and the Department of Agriculture are all involved in an Emergency
Spill Response program.
FT 19814 Funding:
Funding Source:
5.9. Other
55
-------
8TATI OKOUro-WATKR HOOKAH SPMMAKT
STATE: TEXAS
. aUTOTE W IBS OBC-OID-VATI! U300BC*
.1. Geologic and Bydroloclo OwraeUrlstio*. Deaorlbe general geological and hydrologioal characteristics
(i.e. formations, rook typea, areal extent and thlokneaa, tranamiaalvlty, aquifer iatarooanaotion, axtent
of contamination).
Gteraeteristlea
Pbyalocrapnie
Beglon/yroTlnoe At
Plain*
•aftioa/FroTlapa B:v
Iio Orand* and Nortb-
Mcsteri) Plataaua and
Bolaona
tfaysiocraphlo
•afioa/ProTlBoa
Edwards Plataau
Ct
'•rout of atata ooverad
y tola proYlnoe (aatiwtad)
•confined Aquifar(a)
Saa Mota A balow.
Saa Mota B balov.
Saa Kota C balov.
Sonflaad Iqulfar(a)
ate A: The Ogallala Formation of Pliocane aga occurs at or naar tha aurfaca ovar Buch of the High Plains area of
arthvest Texas. The formation consists of alternating bads of silt, clay, sand, gravel, and caliche, reaching a
ixinum known thickness of more than 900 feat in southwestern Ochiltraa County. Tha High Plains Aquifer consists
rlnarily of the Ogallala Fornation, and includes all water-bearing units, nainly Cretaceous and Triasslc
edlaents, with which it is in hydraulic continuity. However, the Canadian River has cut through the formation,
Ivlding it into two parts, tha North Plains and tha South Plains. The thickest saturated aections occur in the
ortheastern part of the South Plains.
>te B; Deposits of alluvium occur in aany parts of Texas, and generally oonaiat of alternating and discontinuous
eds of silt, clay, sand, and gravel of recent geologic age. In BOB* areas, these deposits contain comparatively
arge volumes of water, and tha five largest and Boat productive of these local aquifers collectively make up a
ijor aquifer. These aquifers are located: (1) in El Paso and local valley area a; (2) in tha region extending
rom northwestern Hudspeth County to northern Presidio County; (3) along tha upper part of the Pecoa River
rainage system; (4) in isolated areas of alluvium in north and west central Taxaa; and (5) along the Brazos
ivar.
ote C; Tha Edwards-Trinity (Plateau) Aquifer underlies the Edwards Plateau and extends westward into the Trans-
ecoa region of Texas. The aquifer consists of watar-aaturatad sand and aandstone of the Trinity Group and
ineatone of the overlying Frederlcksburg and Vashlta Croups of Cretaceoua age. These water-bearing units range
o more than 800 feet in thickness. Large capacity wells completed in fractured and cavernous limestone locally
an yield large quantities. Portions of the aquifer are confined.
56
-------
STATE: TEXAS
1. BAT0KE W THE GBODnMUTEl 1KSOOBCE
1.1. Geologic and Bydrolocle Cnaraeteriatica. Describe general geological and hydrologlcal characteristics
(i.e. forutiona, rock types, areal extent and thickness, trensmissivity, aquifer interconnection, extent
of contamination).
tariatioa
Physiographic
Eeclon/ProYiaoe D:
Baloones Escarpment
Physiographic
•agion/Prcrlnoe I:
Central Lowlands
Physiographic
Baglon/?roTlB0e F:
Lower Central Lowlands
Percent of atate wrered
by this province (estimated)
ObeoofiaBd aquifer(a)
Confined iquifer(a)
See Note D below.
See Mote E below.
See Note F below.
Note D; The Edwards (Balcones Fault Zone) Aquifer extends from central Kinney County east and northeast into
southern Bell County. It Includes the Edwards Limestone and stratlgraphlcally associated limestone beds of
Cretaceous age. Conditions favorable for the development of extensive solution channels and cavities and the
consequent accumulation of large volumes of water in these formations have resulted from faulting along the
Balcones Fault Zone. Much of the aquifer is confined except in outcrop areas.
Note E! The Trinity Croup Aquifer (of Cretaceous age) extends over a large area of north and central Texas. The
thickness of the aquifer ranges from a few feet along its western edge to more than 1,200 feet in the eastern
part. Yields of large-capacity wells range up to several thousand gpm. Most of the aquifer is confined except in
the outcrop areas.
Hote F; The Carrizo-Vilcox Aquifer, one of the most extensive in Texas geographically, furnishes water to wells
in a wide belt extending from the Rio Grand northeastward into Arkansas and Louisiana. The aquifer consists of
hydrologically connected sand, sandstone, and gravel of the Wllcox Group and overlying Carrizo Formation. In the
East Texas structural basin the formations form a trough and are exposed at the surface on both sides of the
trough's axis. The net thickness of the aquifer ranges from a few feet in the outcrop to more than a 3,000 feet
downdlp. Much of the aquifer Is confined except in the outcrop areas.
Note: All three aquifers, (see notes D, E, and F) are recharged by precipitation and storm runoff on the outcrop
areas and by streams which cross the outcrop area. The water-bearing beds dip beneath the land surface towards
the Gulf.
57
-------
8TATI: WHS
1. IsTOBE Off IHI OIOOH>-IUTIB IBSOOlOt
1.1. Oeologle sad Rydrologlo CtersotwlBties. Describe general geological and hydrological characteristics
(i.e. formations, rock typaa, araal extant and thickness, transmlssivlty, aquifer interconnection, extent
of contamination).
Characteristics
nqrslogrspale
Uclon/ProriBoe 0:
Qulf Coaatal Plains
RqralQgrepbio
•eglon/ProTiiioe I:
Oulf Coast Aquifer
Pbyslograpolc
X:
Peroeot of state covered
by this proriaoe (estlMted)
OboonflMd sgoifer(s)
CcofiBSd squlfsr(s)
Bee Note 0 below.
Mote C; The Gulf Coast Aquifer underlies »oet of the Coaatal Plain from the Lower Rio Grande Valley northeastward
into Louisiana, extending about 100 Biles inland from the Gulf. The aquifer consists of alternating clay, silt,
sand, and gravel beds belonging to the Catahoula, Oakville, Lagarto, Goliad, Willis, Lissle, and Beaumont
Formations, which collectively fora a regional, hydrologically connected unit. There are, however, extensive
aquitards within the various formations. Much of the aquifer la confined. Fresh water occurs in the aquifer to
depths of more than 3,000 feet. The aquifer la recharged by precipitation on the surface and seepage from streams
crossing outcrop areas of the permeable units.
58
-------
ST1TZ: nZAS
1.2. Primary Oaea of Ground Hater mm Pcroent of Total ttaage
0-
Public Hater Syateas
(Including •unloipal)
Industrial*
(except Municipal)
Agricultural
Domestic/Rural0
Other (apeeify):
Mlolns
ToUl
% of Total f Ground Hater
Oround Hater of ToUl Hater
11.9 7.2
2.8 1.7
82.6 50.2
1.1 0.7
1.6 1.0
100 69.8
•including:
Manufacturing
Steam-electric
b
Ground water Total
1.H
2.3
0.5
0.3
Irrigation.
°Livestock and domestic/rural.
1.3. Population Reliance on Ground Hater for Drinking Hater for Tear,
Percent of population relying on
ground water for drinking water
Number of people relying on
ground water for drinking water
Public Hater Domestic
Syateaa Hella Total
59*
9,300,000
59
-------
STATE: TEXAS
Source* (Owok major aouraas of oootuimtioB and rank top four
2 * next Boat Mrlflua, «to.)
— 1
Souroe
Septic tanks
Municipal landfills
On-aite industrial
landfills (excluding
pits, lagoons, surface
Impoundments)
Check Bank
X
X*
x°
Other landfills
Surface impoundments X°
(excluding oil and
gas brine pits)
Oil and gas brine pits
Underground storage
tanks
Other (specify):
Natural mineralization
Heavy pumpage
Improper construction
of water wells
X
X
X
X*
Bouro* Cbeok Bank
Injection wells
Abandoned hazardous Xb
waste sites
Regulated hazardous
waste sites
Salt water intrusion X^
Land application/
treatment
Agricultural Xf
Road salting
ere are 950 active Bunicipal solid waste sanitary landfills and several hundred closed or abandoned municipal
lid waste sites which constitute potential sources of ground-water contamination. The Texas Department of
alth has evaluated 163 municipal landfills against RCRA open dump inventory criteria, and four of these were
asslfled as open dumps on the basis of ground-water criteria. Of the 71 sanitary landfills that have ground-
ter monitoring facilities, three sites have evidenced contaminent levels in excess of background
ncentraticns.
andoned hazardous waste disposal sites constitute local problems. Thus far, 20 sites have been identified for
e Superfund program, and 11 sites are currently on the National Priority List. Ground-water contamination has
curred at several of these sites; however, such problems are generally confined to the immediate areas of the
tea.
rrently, there are approximately 1,000 active industrial waste management facilities in operation in the state,
which about half involve the use of landfills and/or surface impoundments. Ground-water contamination
oblems have been documented at a number of these sites, and corrective actions are underway or are being
anned at almost all sites where problems have been identified. To date, these localized problems have not
riously Impacted drinking water supplies.
is type of contamination is caused by completing a fresh water pumping well near a saline water zone. The
oblem is serious and has historically caused the abandonment of several well fields completed in the Gulf Coast
uifer near the coast. Saline water encroachment has been detected in Ogallala aquifer wells located near
line playa lakes. Also, saline water encroachment baa been detected in Vest Texas in alluvial wells located
ar the Pecos River, which contains undesirable saline waters in the upper reaches. Slow deterioration of
ound-water quality has been detected in the Hueco Bolson aquifer in El Paso County due to the mining of fresh
ound water adjacent to saline ground water.
roughout the state, there are water wells that were Improperly constructed and completed when drilled or that
ve developed problems since being drilled, causing the mixing of fresh ground water with undesirable saline
ound water or fresh ground water with undesirable surface water runoff. These problems are not acute, but have
en documented in the Gulf Coast, Trinity Group, Carrizo-Vilcox, and Edwards-Trinity (Plateau) aquifers.
e state of Texas is third in the nation In agricultural production and la first in use of agricultural
emicals. Rural water supplies are not being monitored for pesticide or heavy metal contamination. Isolated
cldents of ground-water contamination by pesticides have been documented. The Texas Department of Agriculture
working with the Department of Water Resources to identify areas of potential contamination and to initiate
sting to assess the seriousness of the problem.
60
-------
8TATB: WHS
2.2.
ABlaatlac aub_ta\MM
(check)
Organic obamicala:
folatile
Synthetic
Inorganic obemieala:
Mitrates
Fluorides
Arsenic
Brine salinity
Other
HeUls
Radioactive material
Pesticides
Other (specify)
•tooalized problems at some active waste disposal sites and abandoned (Superfund) sites.
*Jf a pumping well completed in a fresh rater tone la eoopleted near a saline water cone, it «ay be contaminated
by the adjacent saline waters. The migration of the saline rater to the pumping well oan be both horizontal and
vertical. This type of ground-water contamination is serious and hat historically caused the abandonment of
several well fields completed in the Oulf Coast aquifer near the coast. Saline rater encroachment has been
detected in Ogallala aquifer wells located near saline playa lakes. Also, saline water encroachment has been
detected in West Texas in alluvial wells located near the Peoos River, which contains undesirable saline raters
In the upper reaches. Slow deterioration of ground-water quality has been detected in the Hueoo Bolaon aquifer
in El Paso County due to the mining ef fresh ground water adjacent to saline ground water.
°The state ef Texas is third in the nation In agricultural production and is first in use ef agricultural
chemicals. Rural rater supplies are not being monitored for pesticide or heavy metal contamination. Isolated
incidents of ground-water contamination by pesticides have been documented. The Texas Department ef Agriculture
is working with the Department of Water Resources to identify areas of potential contamination and to initiate
testing to assess the seriousness ef the problem.
61
-------
STATS: TEXAS
. STATI GBOUMD-WATB1 HABAGEMBVT 5THUCTUM
.1. State Statute* Pertaining to Ground-Water Quality and Pollution Control
ubjeot Honltored by Statute
Statute Baa*/Vo.
Description of Authority Pertaining
to Ground Mater Protection
Jeneral water pollution
iontrol
Ttxaa Water Coda, Chapter 26
Ragulates tha discharge of wastes into or
adjacent to the waters of the state,
including prohibition of unauthorized
discharges; the development and use of
regional and areawlde collection,
treataent, and disposal systems; the
development of state water quality plans;
and the promulgation of water quality
standards for water in the state.
Ground-water quality
[including public health
itandards)
olid waste
Solid Waste Disposal Act, Article
H477-7, V.I.C.S.
Divides responsibility for solid waste
management between the Departnent of
Health and the Department of Water
Resources.
azardous waste
Texas Water Code, Ch. 26 and Ch. 27
Relates to injection wells used for
disposal of hazardous waste.
inlng
Texas Natural Resources Code, Ch. 131
Texas Natural Resources Code, Ch. Ill
Texas Rev. Civ. Stat. Ann., Art.
5920-11
Texas Water Coda, Ch. 26 and Ch. 27
Relates to the aurface mining of uranium
and uranium ore.
Relates to the development of geothermal
energy and associated resources.
Relates to the surface mining of coal
and iron ore.
Relates to the in situ mining of uranium,
brine, and sulfur.
11 and gas
Texas Water Code, Ch. 27
Texas Water Code, Ch. 29
Texas Natural Resoures Code, Ch. 81
and 85
Texas Natural Resources Code., Ch. 66,
87, and 88
Texas Natural Resources Code, Ch. 89
Texas Natural Resources Code., Ch. 91
Texas Natural Resources Code., Ch. Ill
Relates to injection wells.
Relates to salt water haulers.
Relates to various aspects of regulation
of oil and gas exploration and production
including procedures for taking certain
enforcement action regarding the
Commission's pollution control rules and
permits.
Relates to various aspects of regulation
of oil and gas exploration and production
Relates to well plugging.
Relates to pollution control rulemaklng
authority and the regulation of certain
pits.
Relates to the development of geothermal
energy and associated resources.
ther (specify):
Herbicide/pesticide
>tes:
Texas Agriculture Code, Ch. 75
(Herbicide Laws), Ch. 76 (Pesticide
Laws)
62
-------
RaTB: TtXiS
3.2. auu
3.2.1.
-Vater Pellc?
Ground wtar oovarad tadcr
(•naral state lUtuU*
Sptoific state statutM for
ground wt*r
Folioy in •xiatano* for
protaotiag (round-watar quality
Policy uodar davalopaant
CbKdc
63
-------
nus
.1 . BaralopBaot of Grand -Vater Polio?
.1.1* !• tbtrt a (round -Mttr policy or strategy developoent process?
.fit* Laad agency/steering
Tas
Me
,2.3. Dasoribe development process (latar-ajeney agreeBenti, progress to data, target completion date, tte.)i
.3. Ctaraeteriaties of PaUey Developed
Typ« of Protection
Oeneral language
Men-degradation
Limited degradation
Differential protection
Cbaok
Z
es: It Is the policy of the state to maintain the quality of water in the state, Including drinkmblc water,
sletent with the public health and enjoyment, the propagation and protection of terrestrial and aquatic life,
operation of existing industries and the economic development of the state, and to require all reasonable
hods to implement this policy.
.*.. Policy Classification
.4.1. Does state have a ground-water classification system or other system for distinguishing
among types of ground water (e.g. use, quality, or other contamination potential)? Yes X
.4.2. If yes, give brief description of classes:
No
.5. Quality Standards
.5.1* Has the state adopted ground-water quality standards?
.5.2. Bow are the standards used?
Yes X
No
A key element of the monitoring and response program for hazardous waste land disposal facilities is the
ablishaent of a ground-water protection standard for the waste Banagenent unit. The principal purpose of this
ndard la to indicate the level of ground-water contamination that triggers the need for corrective action
surea. The ground-water protection standard also defines the constituents that oust be addressed in the
pliance monitoring program. Where possible, the ground-water protection standard is based on environmental
ndards that establish numerical concentration limits for individual contaminants; for example, the National
erim Primary Drinking Water Regulations establish maximum contaminant limits for a particular aet of toxic
als and pesticides. Where such standards are not available for chemical constituents that are known to be
ardoua, the triggering mechanism for corrective action will be any statistically significant increase over the
kgrouad level of the constituent in the ground water below the waste management units. Restoration of ground-
er quality in host aquifers of in situ uranium Bines is required to preliminary parameter levels (non-
radatlon), although tradeoffs of certain parameters are allowed provided the baseline and post-restoration
els are below recognized standards.
.5.3. Describe briefly the range of contaminants covered.
Site specific determination (see above discussion).
64
-------
STATE: TEXAS
3.3. State Agency Responsibilities for Ground-Utter Protection
Responsible
SUte
Agency
Department of
Water Resources
Department of
Health6
Railroad Commission
of Texas
Departaent of
Agriculture
Department of
Health, Division
of Water Hygiene
Ground-
Hater
Policy/
Rule/
Standard
Federally-Delegated Program
RCRA
X
X
me*
X
X
fWSb
X
n°
X
Other
Data
Collec-
tion,
Aquifer
Mapping ,
etc.
X
Ground-
Water
Quality
Soil
Cooseir—
vatlon
Mining
X
Protec-
tion
fro*
load
De-icing
Other
UIC s Underground Injection Control.
bPWS < Public Water System.
ePE i Pesticides Enforcement.
^Responsible for industrial solid waste regulations, Implementation of water quality chapter of the Texas Water Code, and
Implementation of the Injection Well Act.
•Consults with the Department of Water Resources on water quality aspects of solid waste management and public health
aspects of industrial solid waste management, and implements ground-water protection programs through its control of
municipal solid waste. The Department also establishes standards for public drinking water, monitors the quality of
drinking water, and maintains records on the chemical and bacteriological analyses of public water supplies.
Solely responsible for the .control and disposition of waste and the abatement and prevention of pollution of surface and
subsurface water resulting from activities associated with the exploration, development, and production of oil or gas or
geothermal resources, or from uranium exploration activities.
65
-------
arm:
Topics
roteotion of specific aquifers
olioy «nd strategy development
round-water dischargee
nderground injection control
round-rater contamination incident*
eologlcal survey
ther (specify):
Regulation of oil and gas-related
activities
Industrial solid waste transport
n^f>^ \f
Applicable
Z
X
X
Description of Agreeavnta
and Agencies
Memorandum of Understanding between the Department of Water
Resources and the Health Department to coordinate regulation of
in situ uraniuB lining.
Memorandum, of Understanding between the Railroad Commission,
the Departaent of Water Resources , and the Department of
Health relative to regulations of waste materials resulting
from activities associated with the exploration for and the
development, production, and refining of oil or gas.
Memorandum of Understanding between the Departaent of Water
Resources and the Departaent of Public Safety to coordinate
enforcement and investigations.
5. Status of Ground-Water Bascuroe ISM
it Activities
Activity
round-water resources assessment
aquifer mapping, etc.)
jnbient ground-water quality
issessment at waste sites
Hher (specify):
Well-drilling data
Arsenic contamination
Cbeck if
Applicable
X
X
X
X
X
Description of Activities
The state conducts an active ground-water resource assessment
program. To date the boundaries and various characteristics
for all of the state's seven major and 16 minor aquifers,
including water availability, recharge, structural contours, and
other geological information, have been identified. For a
limited number of the aquifers, the estimated recoverable
storage has slso been estimated. In addition, the major user of
ground water in each aquifer has been identified. The
categories of use are municipal, manufacturing, steam-electric
generating, irrigation, mining, and livestock.
See Section 3.6. — Ambient monitoring.
See Section 3.6.
State assessment activities are enhanced by a collection of
270,000 logs furnished by water well drillers in compliance with
the Texas Water Well Drillers Act; and the more than 97,000
geophysical logs obtained from the petroleum industry are
located in the files of the Department of Water Resources.
The Departaent of Agriculture is currently assessing the
source and extent of arsenic contamination in ground water in
West Texas.
66
-------
STATB: ttXAS
3.6. State Ground-Hater Monitorial Program
Tjptf of Monitoring
Non-hazard oua
Mate altea
Hazardous waste sites
Salt water
Pesticides
Ambient monitoring
Other:
Class III ground-
water quality
monitoring
Cheek
X
X
X
X
X
X
Brief Description of Monitoring Program
The Department of Health rules for municipal aolid
waste management require ground-water monitoring
at Type I landfills (those serving a population
equivalent of 5,000 or Bore).
Intensive but localized monitoring is also carried
out by the Department of Water Resources as a part
of permitting and enforcement activities associated
with holding or treatment of surface impoundments,
solid waste disposal sites, and Class I CIC injection
well operations. The Department of Hater Resources
also co-samples RCRA ground-water monitoring wells
once a year with each facility which has monitoring
requirements.
Included in ambient monitoring.
The Department of Agriculture is currently assessing
the source and extent of arsenic contamination in
ground water in Vest Texaa. It is also attempting to
expand its laboratory services and environmental
monitoring plan to include monitoring of ground water
in areas susceptible to contamination by pesticides.
The Department of Water Resources collects 750 ground-
water samples per year from 5,800 routine monitoring
wells. The samples are analyzed for standard inorganic
parameters and the results are compared to the 45,000
sample analyses contained in the Department's
computerized database to Identify trends in water
quality in the various major and minor aquifers.
Uranium, brine and sulfur solution mines monitor
ground-water quality to assure containment of mining
fluids.
Monitoring
Data
Computerized
(Check)
lame of
Database
(Specify)
3.7. State Programs for Public Participation
^^~~~~^^^^ Context
Approaches "* -^^_^
Public hearings, meetings, workshops
Meetings with local officials
Citizens' advisory groups
Public notices
Handbook, other written materials
Other (specify)
General Specific
Ground- Regulation Ground -
v*t*r Permit Adoption, Mater
Zmsues Issuance Changes Strategy Other
XXX
X
X
X X
X
Note: The state has comprehensive public education and public participation programs.
67
-------
STATE: TEXAS
j. STATS nVLEMECTATIM Of FEDERAL PROGRAMS TO PROTECT G100ID WATER
J.I. Fro«ra» Status
Status of Program Delegation
State Impleawotiog Agency
Obuaual/lotcMorthy
Program Characteristics
QIC
Delegated
Department of Water
Reaourcea, Classes I,
III, IV, V"
Railroad Commission,
Classes II, Vb
One program characteristic which
is unusual la a mandatory area of
review requirement of a 2.5 Bile
radius from the well for Class I
systems. In addition, Class I
injection well permits normally
contain both construction and
operating requirements.
There are approximately 48,000
Class II injection wells regulated
under the program that contains
technical elements more
restrictive than Federal
requirements.
RCRA
Delegated, Phase 1 and
2 interim program
Department of Water
Resources, Department of
Health jointly
Noteworthy aspects of the program
Include a review of all industrial
•olid waste management activities,
Including hazardous waste
management, and a required
manifesting of all industrial
hazardous waste regardless of the
amount generated.
PWS
Delegated
Department of Health,
Division of Water Hygiene
Pesticides
Enforcement
Delegated
Department of Agriculture
Primary aspects of this
cooperative EPA enforcement
agreement include equipment
inspections, dealer Inspection
record checks, complaint
investigations, and manufacturer
inspections. The TDA has twelve
regional offices to implement the
enforcement agreement statewide.
Class V Injection wells not associated with the exploration, development or production of oil and gas resources.
'Class V Injection wells not regulated by the Department of Water Resources.
68
-------
4.2. frut Statue
STATEt TBZA8
fl 1965 AllOOatlOB
specific oround-
•rojeota/Tufcs and
itar
Own Utter Act
Section 106
$2,200,100 $49,200 — Ground-t*ter Mse»*Mnt for total
retention pooda.
$200,100 — Oround-wtt«r profrai funds fro*
•uppl*Bental funds.
Clean Hater Aot
Section 205 (J)
$929,430
Clean Hater Aot
Section 205(f)
$3,717,710
RC1U
Section 3011
$4,387,757
$40,000*
DIG
$339,650
FIFRA
Section 23(a)(1)
$476,000
Enforceaent
'Amount of FX 1984 grant which viU be unobligated at end of fiscal year.
69
-------
STATE: TtliS
STITI-OlIGDIiTED CBOOiD-WATM PIOTBCTIOM PROGRAMS
1. Oround-Vater Strategy
(Including ground-water quality standards and classification)
scription: The Texas Departaent of Vater Resources has primary responsibility for protecting and planning the
e of the state's ground water. Mine other state agencies (primarily the Texas Departaent of Health and the
ilroad Commission of Texas) and nine underground water conservation districts also have soae responsibility to
nage, control, and protect the ground water. The Departaent helps Insure maintenance of the state's ground-
ter quality by (1) conducting in-depth investigations of alleged ground-water contamination or conditions which
reaten to oause deterioration of ground-water quality, (2) Baking recommendations to the Railroad Coomisslon of
xas for protection of usable-quality ground water during exploration, production, and operation of oil, gas, or
her mineral and surface mining activities, as well as disposal of applicable wastes, and (3) providing
mlnlstrative and investigative support to the Texas Water Well Drillers Board, which has responsibility for
veloping and enforcing standards for the state'a water well drillers, Including licensing.
1984 Funding:
nding Source:
2. Ground-Water Monitoring
scription: See Ground-Water Resource Assessment.
I960 Funding:
nding Source:
3. Ground-Water Resource Assessment/Aquifer Study/Mapping
scription: The Departaent of Water Resources collects basic data on the occurrence, quantity, and quality of
e state's water.
1984 Funding: About $1,432,500 of state funds were expended in FT 1962 (ended August 3D and $1,550,400 in ft
83 for basic data collection activities. In FY 1982 and FY 1983, an estimated $415,500 and $462,400,
spectlvely, was expended for data collection, mapping, and monitoring activities.
inding Source:
4. Agricultural Contamination Control
Ascription:
1984 Funding:
inding Source:
.5. Permits/Control of Discharges to Ground Hater
iscrlption: The Department of Health regulates municipal solid waste management facilities in compliance with
le Texas Solid Waste Disposal Act. The TDH has rules governing the design and operation of these facilities that
•ovide for the protection of ground water. The management of VWTA sludges, grease trap waste, grit trap waste,
td septage are regulated by the Department of Health and it has rules that incorporated ground-water protection.
Other programs for the protection of ground water that were originated by the Railroad Commission of Texas
xJ which are not regulated at the Federal level include Statewide Rules on Casing, Cementing, Drilling, and
mpletlon Requirements (Rule 13), Plugging (Rule 14), and Water Protection (Rule 8). While Rules 13 and 14, also
inction to prevent the- waste of oil and gas resources, their primary purpose is to protect water resources from
>llution. Rule 8 encompasses the regulation of pits and other impoundments associated with oil and gas waste and
»e surface discharges of oil and gas waste.
1984 Funding:
jncling Source:
70
-------
•mi* mis
9.6. Mptio
Descriptions
fl 1964 Fund ing i
Pundiai Souro*!
9.T. Butt fteraf«/OBd*rsrauad Staraf* Taak Pi
Description:
FT 1984 Funding!
Funding Source:
5.8. Contamination Response Procru
(other than RCRA/Superfund)
Description:
FY 1964 Funding:
Funding Sourot:
5.9. Other:
DIG:
Description: The state began regulation of deep well waste injection under the Texas Disposal Well Act in 1962.
In the early 1970s, the Department of Water Resources also began regulating in-aitu uranium leach mining under the
Water Quality Act. Both of these activities are now included in the Department's Underground Injection Control
programs as well as the regulation of the solution mining of brine, sodium sulfate, and sulfur. The Department of
Water Resources' annual budget for enforcement of DIG activities is approximately $50,000 to $100,000, FJf 1985
1113,218, although auch of the enforcement activities are carried out as a part of the UIC permitting function.
Solid Waste:
Description: Since the 1960s, the State Department of Water Resources has regulated by permit the majority of all
operations which used surface Impoundments for storage, treatment, or disposal of aqueous wastes. Zn the early
1970s, regulation of industrial solid wastes was added. Much of the regulation under these programs was
specifically aimed at ground-water protection. With the passage of RCRA, most of the regulation of these
activities came together under the Department's industrial solid waste and hazardous waste programs. The
Department of Water Resources' annual budget for enforcement of these programs is approximately $870,000.
Protection of Specific Aquifers:
Description: The Department of Water Resources has Imposed special rules on certain activities in the area of the
Edwards Aquifer recharge zone. These rules require review and approval of certain projects by the Department. An
example of a project which would receive Department approval la the construction and operation of an underground
hydrocarbon storage tank auch as those associated with gasoline service stations. State funding information for
this particular activity is not readily available. The Edwards Aquifer has been designated as a sole source
aquifer by toe U.S. Environmental Protection Agency.
71
-------
EPA/CN-68-C9-0019
A
__ Analytical methods for the national
Tl sewage sludge survey
DATE
LOANED
BORROWER'S NAME
DATE
RETURNED
EPA/CN-68-C9-0019
Analytical methods for the national
sewage sludge survey
------- |