United States
Environmental Protection
Agency
Office of
Ground-Water Protection
Washington. D.C. 20460
December 1986
Ground - Water
Protection Update
EPA
813/
1986.1
The Ground-Water
Protection Provisions of the
SDWA Amendments of
1986
by Lawrence J. Jensen
Assistant Administrator,
Office of Water
Fifty percent of all Amer-
icans drink it. It supplies
80% of the nation's irri-
gation needs. In rural areas,
fully 90% of water needs are
supplied by it. Yet it has
been taken for granted and
abused. The "it" of which
I'm writing is, of course,
ground-water, one of this
nation's most valuable and
vital natural resources.
Its value is indisputable.
Sadly, its vulnerability is fast
becoming indisputable as
well. Today we know that all
of man's activities on or
beneath the earth can con-
taminate our ground-water
treasure. As this reality
becomes more and more ap-
parent, policy makers at
every level of government
have begun to address it.
While there have been and
continue to be several Con-
gressional proposals dev-
eloped and debated to
address the growing
ground-water challenges,
the ground-water protection
provisions in the Safe
Drinking Water Act (SDWA)
Amendments of 1986 are
the first of such proposals to
become law.
The ground-water provi-
sions of the recently passed
SDWA Amendments of
1986 introduce two new
programs that require in-
novative approaches to
ground-water resource as-
sessment and protection.
The first, the Wellhead
Protection Program (WHPP)
defines a Federal framework
for the protection of ground
water, while continuing to
recognize the unique
needs of Regional, State
and local governments.
The second, the Sole
Source Aquifer (SSA) Dem-
onstration Program, will
fund certain special projects
aimed at teaching us more
about ground-water pro-
tection in particularly sen-
sitive and valuable settings.
These new ground-
water provisions represent a
significant strengthening of
Federal, State and local gov-
ernments in their roles as
protectors of the ground-
water resource. The suc-
cess of our efforts will
depend largely on our ability
to adhere to four guiding
principles. We must:
• Implement the program
in such a way that State
creativity and flexibility
in program design and
implementation is max-
imized;
Recognize and appro-
priately address the
diversity of hydrogeo-
logic settings and sourc-
es of contamination;
Take into account the
concerns of the Cong-
ress, the States and
local governments re-
garding Federal involve-
ment in land use and
water allocation; and,
Administer these pro-
grams consistently with
each other and with
State ground-water pro-
tection strategies and
plans.
What exactly do these
programs entail? This ques-
tion is best answered by de-
scribing in more detail the
WHP program and the SSA
program.
Wellhead Protection
Program
The purpose of the Well-
head Protection Program is
to protect drinking water
wells that supply public
drinking water systems from
contaminants that flow into
the well from the surface
and sub-surface. It is in-
tended to be a State de-
veloped and administered
program with individual
States determining the ex-
tent of the area around the
wellhead to be protected.
EPA is required to issue
technical guidance to aid
States in making this
determination.
The statute requires
States to submit program
applications within three
years of enactment of the
SDWA Amendments. The
law sets forth seven
elements for inclusion in a
wellhead protection pro-
gram. If a State does not
1
-------
submit a program, there are no
penalties. The State simply will not
qualify for Federal assistance in
protecting the wellhead area. EPA
has no authority under the statute to
undertake a program in lieu of the
States.
The decision to approve or dis-
approve 3 State wellhead protection
program rests with the EPA Admin-
istrator. The Administrator may disap-
prove all or a portion of the program if
he considers it inadequate to protect
public water systems. If all or part of
the State's program is disapproved,
the Administrator must send the
Governor a written explanation of the
reasons for disapproval. States may
modify and resubmit a program if it is
disapproved.
EPA approval of a State's well-
head protection program is a pre-
requisite to consideration of providing
a grant for its implementation. The law
permits no less than 50% nor more
than 90% cost-sharing from EPA to
cover the costs of carrying out the
State wellhead protection program.
Funding will, of course, depend on
the availability of yearly appropria-
tions.
Sole Source Aquifer
Demonstration Program
The second of the new ground-
water protection provisions in the
SDWA Amendments of 1986 is the
Sole Source Aquifer Demonstration
Program. Since 1974, EPA has had
the authority to designate aquifers as
the sole or principal drinking water
source for an area and thereby pro-
vide for the review of all Federally
assisted projects that might contam-
inate the aquifer. The purpose of the
new SSA Demonstration Program is to
demonstrate special protective mea-
sures for critical aquifer protection
areas within a designated sole source
aquifer. This program attempts to test
innovative programs for controlling
ground-water contamination, includ-
ing ways of managing land use and
development.
To be eligible for the demon-
stration program, a jurisdiction must
meet the criteria for a critical aquifer
protection area (CAPA) within the
designated sole source aquifer. The
statute provides three specific ap-
proaches to defining a CAPA. To es-
tablish the boundaries of the CAPA,
EPA must issue a formal rule includ-
ing criteria on aquifer vulnerability;
population using ground water; the
economic, social and environmental
benefits of ground-water protection;
and the economic, social and environ-
mental costs of ground-water degrad-
ation.
A key criterion for eligibility for a
demonstration grant is that the ap-
plicant have jurisdiction over the
CAPA. States, municipal or local
governments, other political subdivi-
sions and designated planning
entities are eligible to apply for the
demonstration program. All appli-
cants other than the Governor must
submit the demonstration program
application jointly with the Governor.
The centerpiece of the demon-
stration program is the comprehen-
sive management plan designed to
maintain the quality of the ground
water in order to protect human
health, the environment and the
ground-water resources. The plan is
to identify those activities that have an
adverse impact on public health and
ground water, ways to prevent or
mitigate those impacts, and the legal
and institutional framework for carry-
ing out the plan. Mandatory and
optional components of the plan are
outlined in the law.
Approvable applications must
meet the criteria for CAPAs and the
proposed demonstration program
must be consistent with the objec-
tives of the comprehensive manage-
ment plan. Once an application is ap-
proved, the Administrator may enter
into a cooperative agreement with the
applicant to establish the program.
Some type of competition will be
needed to determine the most
innovative and useful demonstrations
to support. It is important to note that
the decision to provide Federal
financial assistance is separate from
the decision to approve a CAPA.
EPA may provide a 50 percent
matching grant to cover the costs of
implementing the comprehensive
management plan.
Conclusion
Both the Wellhead Protection
Program and the Sole Source Aquifer
Demonstration Program are designed
to protect ground-water sources while
allowing States the flexibility to tailor
these programs to specific conditions
and geologic settings. At the same
time, these new programs must be
implemented within the overall con-
text of Federal and State ground-
water protection strategies. The chal-
lenge facing EPA is to integrate these
programs into the existing institutional
framework and to provide clear, con-
cise guidance'to the States where
appropriate.
The Ground-Water Protection Up-
date reflects the Office of Ground-
Water Protection's (OGWP) develop-
mental activities in implementing the
SDWA Amendments of 1986 and the
Ground-Water Protection Strategy, as
well as other key events related to
ground-water. If you have any ques-
tions or comments on the information
contained in the Update, please
contact OGWP. We hope you find the
information useful.
Marian Mlay
Director
Office of Ground-Water Protection
U.S. EPA
401 M Street, S.W.
Washington, D.C. 20460
HEADQUARTERS UPDATE
Technical Information Publication
on Septic Systems
and Ground-Water Contamination
The Office of Ground-Water
Protection {OGWP) has developed
two publications that describe how
proper management of septic sys-
tems can help prevent ground-water
contamination. The primary docu-
-------
ment is "Septic Systems and Ground-
Water Protection: A Program Mana-
ger's Guide and Reference Book"
and the overview document is "Septic
Systems and Ground-Water Contam-
ination: An Executive's Guide."
These two documents were pro-
duced in response to a growing
concern that septic systems are one
of the major sources of ground-water
contamination, and that this contam-
ination can be a health hazard. The
OGWP believes that strengthening
State and local management pro-
grams for onsite waste disposal is the
best way to prevent future contam-
ination. Thus, OGWP convened a
panel of experts from State and local
governments and other organizations
to define the most important manage-
ment considerations for septic tank
use and maintenance. It is the judg-
ment of this panel of experts that
attention should be paid to the
following:
* Requiring site and soil
evaluations
Adopting comprehensive
regulations
Instituting educational programs
Promoting water conservation
and waste reduction
Assuring proper operation and
maintenance
• Controlling septage disposal
• Controlling cleaning solvents and
hazardous chemicals
Managing commercial, industrial,
and large flow systems
Strengthening compliance efforts
The Guide and Reference Book and
the Executive's Guide provide "real
world" examples of how these consid-
erations should be used in various sit-
uations and suggestions for applying
the regulations to proper manage-
ment practices.
Both documents are available
from the Government Printing Office:
The Executive's Guide is GPO No.
055-000-00257-6, the Guide and
Refer-ence Book is GPO NO. 055-
000-00256-8. Lee Braem in OGWP
can be contacted at (202) 475-8507
for more information.
University of Oklahoma Symposium
In March.1987 OGWP will spon-
sor a symposium on "Agricultural
Sources of Ground-Water Pollution."
The symposium will focus on specific
case studies of ground-water contam-
ination by agricultural chemicals, and
State programs that have been de-
veloped for managing the agricultural
sector to protect ground-water
quality. This is the fifth in a series of
symposia on public policy issues
facing State and local decision makers
as they develop and implement
ground-water protection programs.
The series is being conducted by a
consortium of universities consisting
of the University of Oklahoma,
Oklahoma State University, and Rice
University. For more information on
the agenda and symposium, contact
Saul Rosoff in OGWP at (202) 382-
7077.
Ground-Water Data Management
Requirements Analysis
Currently, ground-water data
needed by environmental managers
at EPA, the Regions or the States, for
the most part, do not exist. Where
the ground-water data exist, they are
quite often incomplete, and incom-
patible with other systems, and,
therefore, not readily accessible to
the managers for decision making on
ground-water issues.
As part of the implementation of
EPA's Ground-Water Monitoring
Strategy, the Office of Ground-Water
Protection (OGWP) and the Office of
Information and Resources Manage-
ment are conducting a ground-water
data management requirements anal-
ysis. The purpose of this analysis is to
determine:
• Who needs ground-water data?
What ground-water data do they
believe they need?
• How do they expect to use th is
data?
• What agencies have data that can
be used for these purposes?
Mow accessible is the data and
how can it be made more acces-
sible?
This ground-water data manage-
ment requirements analysis was
initiated in February 1986, and is
expected to be completed by the end
of this calendar year. The study will
define the needs of EPA head-
quarters, the Regions and the States
concerning ground-water data and
recommend an approach to address
these needs. A Policy Committee of
office directors at EPA, State rep-
resentatives and senior EPA regional
managers, has been established to
provide overall study direction. The
Committee met twice early in the
study and most recently in August to
review its progress. The study in-
cludes background review of data
requirements and sources, interviews
with data users and generators, eval-
uation of current data management
practices, and a detailed require-
ments analysis and implementation
plan. To date, information on ground-
water data needs has been collected
from over 30 EPA headquarters staff,
six EPA regions, 18 States and
various Federal agencies. At the pres-
ent time, this information is in the
process of being evaluated to
determine the requirements neces-
sary to meet these needs.
As a result of this analysis, a
report will be prepared showing the
relationship between the ground-
water information needs and the
decision makers involved in ground-
water protection. In addition, options
will be prepared for Agency consid-
eration to determine the approach
that should be followed in managing
ground-water data. After the Agency
has selected an approach, a plan or
strategy will be developed for its
implementation. For more information
on this data management require-
ments analysis, contact Caryle Miller in
OGWP at (202) 382-7097.
EPA Agricultural Chemicals In
Ground-Water Strategy
In EPA's Ground-Water Pro-
tection Strategy, issued in 1984, the
use of pesticides and fertilizers was
recognized as a potentially significant
source of ground-water contam-
ination that needed additional
national attention. Shortly after the
-------
Strategy was released, the Office of
Ground-Water Protection (OGWP)
began collaborating with EPA's Office
of Pesticides and Toxic Substances
(OPTS) to see how the Agency's
authorities and existing activities
under the Federal Insecticide, Fung-
icide and Rodenticide Act (FIFRA)
and Toxic Substances Control Act
(TSCA) could be better used to
address the problem of agricultural
chemicals in ground water.
As a result of these initial efforts,
the issues and potential solutions as
well as the variety of statutory auth-
orities that could be used became
better understood. Last fall, the
Agency selected the problem of
agricultural chemicals in ground water
for a major strategy development
initiative. Led by OPTS, the effort
includes all EPA offices and has top
management support and involve-
ment.
The strategy will address:
Sources of contamination and the
statutory and program authorities
available to prevent and respond
to contamination incidents
Environmental fate and health
effects assessment tools
Policy regarding registration and
re-registration of pesticides found
to have leaching potential
• Roles of EPA, States, and other
Federal agencies in addressing
various aspects of the problem
Research needs in environmental
fate assessment and cleanup
technologies.
In June, the OPTS held a work-
shop in Coolfont, West Virginia, with
key representatives of Federal and
State agencies, environmental organ-
izations, and the agricultural chemical
industry to obtain their views and
insights on the development of
EPA's Agricultural Chemicals in
Ground-Water Strategy. The Agency
is now in the process of evaluating
the ideas and suggestions that
emerged at the conference, and is
refining options for addressing the
problem with regulatory and non-
regulatory actions. These options will
be presented to the Administrator this
fall and a draft strategy will be widely
circulated for public review by the end
of the year.
For information about the strat-
egy, contact Bob Barles, OPTS, [202)
382-2892. Copies of the background
document on pesticides in ground
water, which contains the findings of
the initial pesticides review effort, can
be obtained by writing to OGWP at
U.S. EPA, 401 M Street, S.W.,
Washington, D.C. 20460.
'National Survey of Pesticides In
Drinking Water Wells
The presence of pesticides in
drinking water can pose serious
threats to public health. While there
are indications that pesticide contam-
ination of drinking water wells does
exist, the degree and types of well
contamination are not fully known.
Some analyses of pesticides in
ground water have been completed,
but they were limited to a small
number of pesticides and specific
geographic areas. EPA currently is
planning a two-year nationwide sur-
vey of pesticides in drinking water
wells to assess the severity of pest-
icide contamination, estimate the
potential population at risk and under-
stand the relationship between
pesticide use and hydrogeology in
preventing contamination.
The Office of Pesticide Programs
(OPP) and the Office of Drinking
Water (ODW) are jointly sponsoring
this survey. The initial planning stag-
es for this project are nearly complete.
Additional work is still needed in
refining the research design and in
coordinating the activities of the var-
ious survey participants. The survey
design includes four major steps:
• Determine a representative
sample of drinking water wells: A
complex, three-stage statistical
design will be used to identify and
select representative community
and private drinking water wells
for sampling.
* Develop analytic methods for
measuring type and amount of
potential pesticide contamination:
Water samples will be analyzed for
the presence of over 70 pesticide
analytes, chosen based upon
their leaching potential, occur-
rence, production volume and
other considerations. Six multires-
idue methods for detecting and
quantifying the presence of pes-
ticides are currently under devel-
opment.
• Establish health advisories for
pesticide concentration levels
that may pose a health problem:
Advisories for 60 priority pesti-
cides will be developed from infor-
mation collected on physiochem-
ical properties, uses, chemical
fate, health effects, treatment and
existing criteria and guidelines.
Develop a data collection ques-
tionnaire to analyze additional
factors affecting pesticide con-
tamination: The questionnaire is
being designed to collect info-
rmation on the location of wells,
use and construction charac-
teristics, pesticide use in relation
to wells, available water samples
and hydrogeologic, demo-
graphic, economic and crop
characteristics.
These four components of the survey
are at various stages of development
and will be tested in a pilot survey later
this year. A full-scale survey will be
conducted approximately six to nine
months following the pilot survey of
50-100 wells from a total of three to
five states.
It is anticipated that the data gen-
erated through this survey will help
EPA's regulatory program to target
pesticides of concern and to develop
further regulatory initiatives. If certain
pesticides are shown to pose po-
tential hazards through leaching into
ground water, further regulatory
actions under FIFRA may result
including labelling changes, use
restrictions or registration suspension
or cancellation. New maximum con-
taminant levels and monitoring re-
quirements for pesticides under the
SOWA may also be established as a
result of this survey.
-------
For more information on the
National Survey of Pesticides in Drink-
ing Water Wells, contact Jerry Kotas,
ODW, at (202) 382-7176.
EPA's Underground Storage Tank
Survey
On June 24, 1986, the EPA
released a new study on leaking
underground storage tanks. The
study, a sample survey of under-
ground motor fuel storage tanks, is
one of several studies used by EPA's
Office of Underground Storage Tanks
(OUST) to develop a regulatory pro-
gram for underground tanks auth-
orized by Congress in the 1984
Amendments to the Resource Con-
servation and Recovery Act. This
new study, along with other sources
of information, will give EPA important
data on problems associated with
underground tanks in the United
States.
The survey, "Underground Motor
Fuel Storage Tanks: A National Sur-
vey," was conducted with a national
probability sample of 890 establish-
ments with 2,400 tanks on the prem-
ises. A random subsample of 218
establishments was selected for phys-
ical tank testing, and at those 218
sites, 433 tank systems and piping
were tested for leaks with a carefully
selected analytical method. Major
findings of the survey include:
An estimated 35 percent of the
tank systems failed the tightness
test. This conclusion must be in-
terpreted with caution, however,
as the tests involved elevated
operating pressures. Failing the
tightness test does not neces-
sarily mean the tank is actually
leaking. The Agency currently
estimates that anywhere from 10-
25 percent of all tanks may be
leaking.
The average rate for leaking
tanks, adjusted for typical operat-
ing conditions, was 0.31 gallons
per hour. Half the leaks were
0.25 gallons per hour or less.
In the statistical analysis of this sur-
vey, EPA could not identify any
single variable (such as type of
material or fuel type) that strongly
correlated with test failure.
Fourteen percent of the establish-
ments have one or more aban-
doned tanks on site.
Twenty-one percent of the tanks
are installed partially or completely
below the water table (the depth
below which the ground is satura-
ted with water).
By early next year, OUST plans to
rules °n new ar)d already
installed petroleum and chemical
tanks that will include provisions on
leak detection, tank design and
construction, installation, compat-
ibility, repair and closing of tanks.
These rules will deal only with
products like petroleum, gasoline and
chemicals, not with wastes. (Final
rules for hazardous waste tanks will be
issued by EPA soon). The recently
completed survey will serve as an
important source of data for devel-
opment of rules for petroleum and
chemical tanks. For more information
on the survey or EPA's underground
storage tank program, contact Helga
Butler (OUST) at (202) 382^799.
REGIONAL/STATE UPDATE
Cooperative Ground-Water
Management Effort Initiated
In May, the Cape Cod Aquifer
Management Project was initiated in
Region I. This project is designed to
coordinate ground-water manage-
ment efforts among the various
Federal, State and local environ-
mental agencies in the Region. The
focus of the project is to improve
coordination of information ex-
change, pooling of technical exper-
tise and determination of institutional
roles and responsibilities. This will be
achieved through clearly identifying
the extent of the resource to be
protected (i.e., the zone of contri-
bution to the public water supply well)
and ensuring proper management
and regulation of all sources of
contamination impacting the well. For
more information, write Robert
Mendoza, Office of Ground-Water
Protection, U.S. EPA Region I,
Boston, Massachusetts, 02203.
Two-Day Data Management
Workshop Held
As a result of concerns in Region
III states over handling of ground-
water data, a two-day data manage-
ment workshop was held in
Philadelphia in February. This work-
shop provided explanations and
demonstrations of existing data
systems a& well as informal
discussions on issues of concern.
Participants included personnel from
EPA's Washington Information Cen-
ter who demonstrated STORET
capabilities; EPA Headquarters who
discussed the Agency's evolving data
management policy; EPA Region III
who demonstrated a PC application;
and several USGS districts that
demonstrated their PR1 ME computer
system, utilizing the ground-water site
inventory data gathered in West
Virginia, the Survey's State Water
Users Data System (SWUDS) and the
geographic information system
known as ARC/INFO.
This workshop was a success in
providing a constructive forum for
States. EPA and the USGS to ex-
change ideas on data handling, future
data needs and near-term policy
decisions. Participants expressed an
interest tn conducting similar work-
shops on a periodic basis as policy
evolves in this area. For more infor-
mation on this workshop, write
Thomas Merski or Ben Lacy, Office of
Ground Water, U.S. EPA Region III,
Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 19107.
Region IV Reorganizes
Region IV recently implemented a
new organizational structure that both
strengthens the Region's ability to
protect ground-water resources and
provides for better coordination of the
many groups involved. This structure
was conceived by Jack E. Ravan,
Regional Administrator and former
Assistant Administrator for Water.
-------
The new Ground-Water Protec-
tion Branch includes all the ground-
water related programs - Ground-
Water Protection, Underground
Injection Control, Underground
Storage Tanks, Wellhead Protection
and Sole Source Aquifer. Strong
links to other programs such as RCRA
and Superfund also are built into the
reorganization. There has been a
high level of interest in the operations
of the 42 member Branch. The Re-
gions and Headquarters will conduct
assessments of its operations over
the next year. Write James Kutzman,
Chief of the Ground-Water Protection
Branch, U.S. EPA Region IV, Atlanta,
Georgia, 30365 for more information
on this new Regional organization.
Glacial Sedlmentology Seminar Held
The Office of Ground Water in
Region V sponsored a two-day semi-
nar on glacial sedimentology, which
included theory, applications and
case studies relating to ground-water
protection. This issue is particularly
critical in Region V since 90 percent
of the region is glaciated. The com-
plex geology created by the glaciers
is the most important factor in
protecting the Region's ground water
from contamination. Over 100 people
attended the seminar including
representatives from each State in
the Region, other Regions and
Canada. The USGS was instrumental
in organizing and providing instruc-
tors for the seminar. For more
information on this seminar, write Jerri-
Anne Garl, Office of Ground Water,
U.S. EPA Region V, Chicago, Illinois,
60604.
Landmark Legislation
Passed In Washington State
In response to growing concern
over Washington State's ground-
water resources, the 1985 Legis-
lature passed a bill to assist State and
local governments in effectively
managing the public's ground water.
The bill specifically directs the
Department of Ecology to establish a
process for identifying and desig-
nating ground-water management
areas and for developing compre-
hensive groundwater management
programs.
The process developed by the
Department of Ecology is designed to
be a team effort utilizing resources
from interested ground-water user
groups and various local and State
agencies. The process also allows
issues and concerns from all inter-
ested parties to be incorporated into
the planning process in an effective
and efficient manner. This type of
coordination should facilitate a wider
acceptance of the program and pro-
vide a broader authority to implement
and enforce the program. The 1986
Clean Water Bill authorizes the Depar-
tment of Ecology to contribute up to
50 percent in matching funds for the
development of the ground-water
management programs. Bill Mullen,
Office of Ground Water, U.S. EPA-
Region IX Seattle, Washington,
98101 may be contacted for more
information.
Hawaii to Submit
Ground-Water Protection
Strategy
The State of Hawaii recently
passed legislation requiring the
Director of Health to submit to the
Legislature a draft ground-water pro-
tection strategy and plan by January,
1987. As part of this plan, the Direc-
tor must develop and implement a
program for predicting, monitoring,
and preventing ground-water contam-
ination by 1988. An appropriation of
$150,000 was provided to support a
ground-water planner, who will man-
age the Section 106 ground-water
grant, and three environmental health
specialists, who will be responsible for
implementing a ground- water mon-
itoring program. James Thompson,
Office of Ground Water, U.S. EPA
Region IX, San Francisco, California,
94105 may be contacted for addition-
al information.
Arizona Enacts
Several Environmental Bills
In Spring 1986, Arizona's 37th
Legislature enacted several pieces of
environmental and health legislation
designed to protect ground water.
6
The most important, the Environ-
mental Quality Act, establishes a
Department of Environmental Quality
(DEQ) which will have responsibility
over many existing environmental
programs. The new DEQ must also
develop new programs to establish
aquifer classifications, aquifer water
quality standards, ground-water dis-
charge permits, pesticide regulations
including no discharge to ground
water, data requirements, registration
and cancellation, agricultural Best
Management Practices, expanded
ground-water monitoring and increas-
ed enforcement. For more informa-
tion on Arizona's new environmental
legislation, write James Thompson,
Office of Ground Water, U.S. EPA
Region IX, San Francisco, California,
94105.
Texas Water Commission
Designates Critical Ground-Water
Areas
On July 2 of this year, the Texas
Water Commission issued a list of 17
areas in the State that have been
designated as critical ground-water
areas. Delineation of the areas is the
first official action of a newly created
Ground-Water Conservation Section
of the Water Commission.
The listing of the critical ground-
water areas is in response to House
Bill 2, passed by the 1985 Legis-
lature. The Water Commission has
been gathering information on areas
considered for inclusion on the list
since September. Under the legis-
lation, a critical area means an area
that is experiencing or is expected to
experience critical ground-water pro-
blems. These are areas that are
characterized by ground-water over-
draft problems due to extensive use
of underground water for drinking,
irrigation or industrial uses. Many of
the areas' problems are complicated
because other situations, such as
subsidence or contamination, are also
present.
The next step for the Commission
will be to hold public hearings to
receive information, discuss bound-
aries of the areas and identify prob-
lems and potential solutions in the
-------
critical areas. Don Draper, Office of
Ground Water, U.S. EPA Region VI,
Dallas, Texas, 75270 may be
contacted for more information.
Nebraska Establishes
Controls Over Nonpolnt
Sources
The Nebraska Legislature re-
cently enacted a precedent-setting
statute which provides for mandatory
Best Management Practices on the
use of agricultural chemicals in areas
of ground-water degradation or spe-
cial vulnerability (called special protec-
tion areas). Under the new law, a
farmer who violates a mandatory Best
Management Practice in a spe-
cial protection area can be fined or
jailed. The legislation passed with
strong support from the rural comm-
unity, where ground- water protection
is a special concern. Write Timothy
Amsden, Office of Ground Water, U.S.
EPA Region VII, Kansas City, Kansas,
66101 for more infomation.
Super Act Passes
in Florida
The Florida Legislature recently
passed the State Underground Petro-
leum Environmental Response Act of
1986, also known as Super Act.
Super Act provides protection of
ground-water and inland surface
waters of the State by enabling Flo-
rida's Department of Environmental
Resources to quickly restore or re-
place residential drinking water sup-
plies contaminated by leaking petro-
leum tanks. A trust fund is established
under the Act for cleanup actions.
The fund will be derived from taxes
imposed on barrels of pollutants pro-
duced in the State or imported and on
tank registration fees. For more infor-
mation on the Florida Super Act, write
Mike Williams, UST Coordinator, U.S.
EPA Region IV, Atlanta, Georgia
30365.
Robert Mendoza
Water Management Division/
USEPA-Region I
Boston, MA 02203
(FTS8-835-3600
(COMM) 617-565-3600
John S. Malleck
Water Management Division/
USEPA-Region II
New York. NY 10278
(FTS) 8-264-5635
(COMM) 212-264-5635
A. Thomas Merski
Water Management Division/
USEPA-Region III
Philadelphia, PA 19107
(FTS) 8-597-2786
(COMM) 215-597-2786
Key Regional Ground-Water Representatives
James S.Kutzman
Water Management Division/
USEPA-Region IV
Atlanta, GA 30365
(FTS) 8-257-7731
(COMM) 404-881-7731
Jerri-Anne Gael
Water Management Division/
USEPA-Region V
Chicago, IL 61604
(FTS) 8-886-1490
(COMM) 312-353-1490
Don Draper
Water Management Division/
USEPA-Region VI
Dallas, TX 75270
(FTS) 8-729-2656
(COMM) 214-767-2656
Timothy L. Amsden
Water Management Division/
USEPA-Region VII
Kansas City, KS 66101
(FTS) 8-757-2815
(COMM) 913-236-2815
Richard Long
Water Management Division/
USEPA-Region VIII
Denver, CO 80295
(FTS) 8-564-1543
(COMM) 303-293-1543
James Thompson
Water Management Division/
USEPA-Region IX
San Francisco, CA 94105
(FTS) 8-454-8267
(COMM) 415-974-8267
William A. Mullen
Water Management Division/
USEPA-Region X
Seattle, WA. 98101
(FTS) 8-399-1216
(COMM) 206-442-1216
-------
Recent OGWP Publications
The following is a list of guidance 6.
documents, strategies and status re-
ports issued by the Office of Ground-
Water Protection. Copies of these
documents may be obtained by con-
tacting OGWP, WH 550-G, U.S. EPA,
401 M Street, S.W., Washington D.C.,
20460.
1. EPA Ground-Water Protec-
tion Strategy (August 1984): 7.
presents EPA's strategy for
building State institutions,
assessing the extent of con-
tamination, issuing guide-
lines and strengthening EPA
management of ground-water
resources
2. EPA Journal: Protecting 8.
Ground-Water: The Hidden
Resource (July/August1984):
presents overviews of the
impacts of ground-water con-
tamination, the Ground-Water
Protection Strategy, the
EPA/State partnership and
protection efforts
3. Resource Document for the
Ground-Water Monitoring
Strategy Workshop 9.
(March 1985): summarizes
Federal and State ground-
water monitoring activities and
technical ground-water mon-
itoring issues
4. Planning Workshop to De- 10.
velop Recommendations for a
Ground-WaterMonitoring Stra-
tegy (March 1985): provides
background on workshop
topics including objectives of
a ground-water monitoring
strategy, monitoring app-
roaches and roles and
responsibilities in monitoring
5. State Ground-Water Program
Summaries (March 1985):
describes significant State
ground-water contamination 11.
problems, protection pro-
grams and accomplishments
Selected State and Territory
Ground-Water Classification
Systems (May 1985): de-
scribes eleven state and
territory classification systems 12.
to define levels of protection
and to maintain designated
use and quality of ground
water
13.
Public Information Brochure
on Ground Water (September
1985): prepared jointly with
Office of Public Affairs, pre-
sents important facts on
ground-water resources, con-
tamination sources and pro-
tection activities
Proceedings of a National
Symposium on Institutional 14.
Capacity for Ground-Water
Pollution Control (September
1985): symposium held in
Denver, Colorado, on June
20-21, 1985, provides dis-
cussions of policy issues re-
lating to the development of
institutional capacity for
ground-water pollution control
Ground-Water Monitoring
Strategy (December 1985):
provides an EPA cross-
agency analysis on the need
for ground-water monitoring
data
15.
Proceedings of a National
Symposium on Institutional
Coordination for Ground-
Water Pollution Control
(January 1986): symposium
held on October 21-22, 1985,
in Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, 16.
provides discussions of key
policy issues associated with
institutional coordination be-
tween levels of government
and among agencies within
one level of government
Ground-Water Data Manage-
ment With STORET (March
1986): outlines methods for
entering and retrieving data
from the computerized water
quality data base
1985 Ground-Water Status
Report (April 1986): summ-
arizes major activities in the
OGWP during 1985
Pesticides in Ground Water:
Background Document (May
1986): describes sources
andextent of ground-water
contamination by pesticides,
status of scientific and tech-
nical information on causes
and potential human impacts
and available authorities to
address the issue
Proceedings of a National
Symposium on Local Gov-
ernment Options for Ground-
Water Pollution Control (June
1986): symposium held in
Atlanta, Georgia on January
16-17, 1985, provides dis-
cussions of key policy issues
and options available for
addressing problems asso-
ciated with well field pro-
tection, agricultural practices,
underground storage tanks,
wastewater, urban nonpoint
sources and solid and hazard-
ous wastes
SDWA Amendments Infor-
mation Package (June 1986):
fact sheet and press release
on the new Wellhead Pro-
tection Program and SSA
Demonstration Program
Septic Systems and Ground-
Water Protection: A Program
Manager's Guide and Refer-
ence Book and Septic Sys-
tems and Ground-Water
Contamination: An Exec-
utive's Guide (June 1986):
describe proper management
of septic systems to assist in
preventing ground-water con-
tamination
------- |