ASSESSMENT
OF
GROUND WATER MONITORING
FOR
LAND TREATMENT AND LAGOON SYSTEMS
AT
EPA CONSTRUCTION GRANT PROJECTS
Prepared for
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
Office of Municipal Pollution Control
Municipal Construction Division
Washington, D.C. 20460
March 26, 1985
by
ERM-Southeast, Inc.
Suite 201
2623 Sandy Plains Road
Marietta, GA 30066
-------
Page Intentionally Blank
-------
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
ERM would like to acknowledge and express our appreciation to
the state contacts for providing the information contained
herein. Upon completion of the first draft of this report,
all of the state contacts were sent copies of the appropriate
sections for review. ERM would, thus, also like to express
our appreciation to the contacts in Arkansas, California,
Connecticut, Delaware, Florida, Idaho, Indiana, Maryland,
Michigan, New Jersey, North Carolina, North Dakota, Ohio,
Virginia, Wyoming, and Wisconsin for their comments on that
draft.
The information in this document was prepared for the Office
of Municipal Pollution Control under contract number
68-01-6622. This document has not been subjected to the
agency's peer and administrative review and, therefore,•does
not necessarily reflect the views of the agency.
-------
ASSESSMENT OF
GROUND WATER MONITORING FOR
LAND TREATMENT AND LAGOON SYSTEMS AT
EPA CONSTRUCTION GRANT PROJECTS
Executive Summary
The appropriate regulatory agencies of each of the fifty
states were contacted to determine the status of their ground
water monitoring requirements for land treatment systems as
required for construction grant projects funded under Title 2
of the Clean Water Act. In addition, eight of the states
reported having requirements for ground water monitoring at
lagoons, while the majority of the states use seepage
limitations as a means of protecting ground water near
lagoons.
Thirty-seven states do have requirements for ground water
monitoring at land treatment systems. The thirteen states
with no requirements for ground water monitoring at land
treatment systems gave the following information regarding
their requirements. In three of these states (Alaska, Rhode
Island, and West Virginia), land treatment is not considered
to be either technically or economically feasible by the
state agency; Kentucky, Hawaii, and Ohio reported that no
land treatment systems have been built under the. construction
grants program in their states, while Mississippi and North
Dakota reported that the current systems were all located in
areas where ground water monitoring was hot believed to be
necessary. Two states, Indiana and Louisiana, are in the
process of developing ground water protection regulations
which may include monitoring requirements for land treatment
systems. Vermont, Texas and Colorado have land treatment
systems and consider ground water monitoring on a
case-by-case basis, but do not have ground water monitoring
programs in place.
Three categories were developed to delineate the type of
ground water monitoring requirements at land treatment
systems. The first category (Category 1) is composed of
states which have no guidelines or do not generally require
ground water monitoring. Category 2 includes states which
require ground water monitoring and have established certain
minimum requirements. Category 3 includes those states which
have site-specific requirements, or states with a geology so
diverse as to prevent development of uniform requirements for
the state. The states falling into each category are
summarized in Table 1.
-------
TABLE 1
SUMMARY OF STATE GROUND WATER
MONITORING REQUIREMENTS
FOR LAND TREATMENT AND LAGOON SYSTEMS
EPA REGIONS
Category I
1 RI
VT
2 CT
MA
ME
3 NH
II III
WV
NY MD
NJ PA
VA
DE
IV
MS
KY
AL
FL
GA
NC
SC
TN
_
V
IN
OH
IL
WI
•
MI
MN
VI VII
LA
TX
AR IA
MM KS
OK MO
NE
O — ""
VIII -IX
CO HI
ND
MT CA
SD
VT
WY AZ
NV
X Total
AR 13
WA 29
ID
OR 8
Category 1 - No guidelines for ground water monitoring or ground water monitoring is not generally required.
Category 2 - Guidelines for ground water monitoring exist.
Category 3 - Monitoring requirements are site-specific or state-wide guidelines cannot be formulated.
-------
Most of the states require some form of ground water
monitoring at land treatment sites, as is apparent from Table
1. The monitoring requirements of each state as reported by
the contacts listed in Appendix A are summarized in Tables 1
through 10 of the report. Briefly, however, one upgradient
and one or two downgradient wells is typical. Analyses for
nitrate-nitrogen, ammonia nitrogen, pH and conductivity, or
total dissolved solids, either on a quarterly or semi-annual
basis, is also typical. t,.Few states have any chain of custody
procedures for ground water samples, while approximately half
of the states have guidelines for the construction of the
monitoring wells.
-------
ASSESSMENT OF
GROUND WATER MONITORING FOR
LAND TREATMENT AND LAGOON SYSTEMS AT
EPA CONSTRUCTION GRANT PROJECTS
Introduction
In recent years, a considerable number of municipal land
treatment systems and wastewater lagoons have been
constructed and financed with federal funds under EPA' s
Construction Grants Program. Since both of these processes
can have an impact on ground water quality, it is important
that they be monitored for such impact. A first step toward
determining the adequacy of the present ground water
monitoring requirements for municipal land treatment systems
and lagoons is to review the present requirements.
Objectives
The objective of this investigation was to gather information
on the extent of the states' requirements for ground water
monitoring at municipal wastewater land application sites and
lagoons. The results of this effort combined with a
subsequent investigation of the availability of ground water
monitoring data from individual systems, can be used to
determine the adequacy of the present requirements.
Recommendations for improving the monitoring requirements can
then be made.
Scope of Study
In this study, the appropriate regulatory agencies of the
fifty states were contacted, primarily by telephone, to
determine their ground water monitoring requirements. United
States' territories and possessions as well as the District
of Columbia were not contacted in this effort.
Summary of State Requirements
The extent of the states' requirements were used as a basis
for classifying each state into one of three categories.
These categories are defined below and apply primarily to
land treatment systems and not to lagoon treatment systems.
Most states use seepage limitations as a means of protecting
the ground water beneath lagoons. Thus, only a limited
number of states require ground water monitoring for
wastewater lagoons.
Category 1; No specific requirements - The state has no
requirements for, or does not generally require, ground water
monitoring at land treatment systems.
-------
Category 2; Specific requirements exist - The state has
formal requirements or guidelines for ground water monitoring
which generally specify the minimum number of wells, the
placement of these wells, the sampling frequency, and the
analyses to be performed. States which determine the number
and placement of the wells on a case-by-case basis, but which
otherwise have general standards for the monitoring frequency
and analyses, are included in category 2.
.V*"
Category 3: Site-specific requirements ^- The state
generally requires ground water monitoring at land treatment
sites; however, this category differs from Category 2 in
that the number of wells, placement of these wells, the
sampling frequency and the analyses to be performed are
generally site-specific. To some extent, all states'
requirements are site-specific. Category 3 is intended to
include those states that require a hydrogeologic or similar
study to determine the specific monitoring requirements for a
land treatment system. States with a diverse geology that
precluds development of a general state-wide policy are also
included in category 3.
A summary of the ground water monitoring requirements for
each state, using the above classification system, is
presented below. Tables 1 through 10 present a summary of
the monitoring requirements for each state, listed according
to EPA.Regions. The information presented in, these tables
was reported by the state contact identified in Appendix A as
being representative of the typical monitoring requirements
for a land treatment system in their state. For ease of
reference, Tables 1 through 10 are presented at the end of
this section. A support document used to develop this report
is presented as Appendix B. The information presented in
Appendix B provides more detailed description of each state's
monitoring requirements.
Region I (Table 1, page 11)
No Specific Requirements - Two states: Rhode Island and
Vermont have no formal requirements for ground water
monitoring at land treatment sites. The Rhode Island
Division of Water Supply and Pollution Control, however, has
not funded any land treatment projects through the
construction grants program. The majority of the land
treatment systems in Vermont are leach fields, some of which
have monitoring wells to check primarily for mounding.
Vermont also has two municipal spray irrigation systems, one
of which .has monitoring wells. The wells at the monitored
system, however, were installed as part of a research
project, and the monitoring results are not sent to the
state. The other system is underdrained, and the discharge
-------
from the underdrains is monitored under the Vermont Agency of
Environmental Conservation's NPDES program. Both states will
evaluate the ground water monitoring requirements for future
systems on a case-by-case basis.
Specific Requirements Exist - The Connecticut Department of
Environmental Protection, Massachusetts Department of
Environmental Quality Engineering, and the Maine Department
of Environmentc."1. Protection require ground water monitoring
at land treatment and lagoon sites. Table 1 summarizes the
requirements for monitoring reported by each state.
Site-Specific Requirements - The New Hampshire Water Supply
and Pollution Control Commission's (NHWSPCC) requirements for
ground water monitoring at land treatment sites and lagoons
are site-specific. The NHWSPCC does, however, generally
require ground water monitoring.
Region 2 (Table 2, page 12)
Specific Requirements Exist - The New York State Department
of Environmental Conservation (NYSDEC) and New Jersey
Department of Environmental Protection (NJDEP) both require
ground water monitoring at land treatment systems. The NJDEP
also "requires ground water monitoring at municipal lagoons.
The monitoring requirements of seach state are summarized in
Table 2. .
Region 3 (Table 3, page 13)
No Specific Requirements - The West Virginia Department of
NaturalResources(WVDNR) does not have any requirements for
ground water monitoring at land treatment or lagoon sites.
Given West Virginia's mountainous terrain and the requirement
for secondary treatment prior to land application, the WVDNR
does not believe land treatment is. a cost-effective treatment
technology in West Virginia.
Specific Requirements Exist - The Maryland Department of
Health and Mental Hygiene, the Pennsylvania Department of
Environmental Resources, and the Virginia Wastewater Control
Board, all require ground water monitoring at land treatment
sites. In addition, Virginia also requires ground water
monitoring of wastewater lagoons. Table 3 summarizes the
requirements of each state.
-------
Site-Specific Requirements - The Delaware Department of
Natural Resources and Environmental Control (DNREC) requires
a hydrogeologic study on any land treatment site before
determining the monitoring requirements.
Region 4 (Table 4, page 14)
No Specific Requirements - The Mississippi Department of
Natural Resources (MDNR) and Kentucky Department of Natural
Resources and Environmental Protection (KDNREP) have no
specific requirements for ground water monitoring at land
treatment sites. The hydrogeology of most land treatment
sites in Mississippi is such that ground water monitoring is
not believed to be necessary. No land treatment projects
with a ground water monitoring system are believed to have
been constructed in Kentucky.
Specific Requirements Exist - The remaining states in Region
4(Alabama,Florida,Georgia, North Carolina, South Carolina,
and Tennessee) all have requirements for ground water
monitoring at land treatment sites, and these requirements
are summarized in Table 4.
Region 5 (Table 5,. page 15)
No Specific Requirements - Neither the Indiana State Board of
Health(ISBH)northeOhio Environmental Protection Agency
(OEPA) have any specific requirements for ground water
monitoring at land treatment sites. Ohio state law does,
however, mandate ground water monitoring if a potential
health hazard exists. The ISBH is in the process of
developing a ground water protection strategy which may
include ground water monitoring requirements for land
treatment and lagoons.
Specific Requirements Exist - The Illinois Environmental
Protection Agency and the Wisconsin Department of Natural
Resources have specific monitoring requirements which are
summarized in Table 5.
Site-Specific Requirements - The Michigan Department of
Natural Resources and the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency
generally requires ground water monitoring; however, the
monitoring requirements are established on a case-by-case
basis.
-------
Region 6 (Table 6, page 16)
No Specific Requirements - The Texas Department of Water
Resources (TDWR) does not have any requirements for ground
water monitoring at land treatment sites. A review of the
site hydrogeology is conducted by the TDWR; however,
monitoring wells are not generally required. The TDWR does
require that the ground water quality be determined before
start-up of a land treatment system. In this manner, the
background water quality data will be available should
contamination occur after start-up. T'..-e Louisiana Department
of Natural Resources (LDNR) does not have any requirement for
ground water monitoring at either lagoons or land treatment
systems. Applicable regulations, however, are currently
being drafted.
Specific Requirements Exist - Arkansas, New Mexico, and
Oklahoma require ground water monitoring at land treatment
sites (Table 6). The Arkansas Department of Pollution
Control and Ecology (ADPCE) does not require treatment
systems to submit monitoring data to the ADPCE for review.
The Oklahoma Department of Health (ODH) requires ground water
monitoring and requires the treatment systems to submit the
data to the ODH. The ODH, however, does not currently have
any data on file.
Region 7 (Table 7, page 17) f
Specific Requirements Exist - The Missouri Department of
Natural Resources (MDNR) and the Nebraska Department of
Environmental Quality (NDEQ) consider ground water monitoring
at land treatment sites. The NDEQ requires ground water
monitoring at approximately half of the land treatment
systems in Nebraska. The MDNR generally only requires ground
water monitoring at rapid infiltration systems. The Iowa
Department of Environmental Quality (IDEQ) and the Kansas
Department of Health and Environment (KDHE) both generally
require ground water monitoring at land treatment sites, and
these requirements are summarized in Table 7.
Region 8 (Table 8, page 18)
No Specific Requirements - The Colorado Department of Health
(CDH)does not have any regulations requiring ground water
monitoring at land treatment sites; although, the CDH does
encourage treatment systems to install monitoring wells. The
North Dakota Divison of Water Supply and Pollution Control
(NDDWSPC) generally does not require ground water monitoring
at land treatment sites. Soil and geologic conditions in
-8
-------
North Dakota are such that ground water monitoring is thus
not generally believed to be necessary by the NDDWSPC. At
systems where ground water monitoring is believed to be
necessary, the ground water monitoring requirements are
site-specific.
Specific Requirements Exist - The Montana Department of
Health and Environmental Sciences (MDHES), the South Dakota
Department of Health and Natural Resources Management
(SDDHNRW) and the Utah-Bureau of Water Pollution Control
(UBWPC) generally require ground water monitoring at land
treatment sites. Typical monitoring requirements for these
states are presented in Table 8.
Site-Specific Requirements - The Wyoming Department of
Environmental Quality's(WDEQ) requirements are site-specific
and are dependent upon factors such as the depth and
classification of the aquifer.
Region 9 (Table 9, page 19)
No Specific Requirements - The Hawaii State Department o'f
Health (HSDH) has no requirements for ground water monitoring
at land treatment sites. According to HSDH officials, there
are no municipal land treatment systems in Hawaii.
Specific Requirements Exist - The California State Water
ResourcesControlBoard(CSWRCB) generally requires ground
water monitoring at land treatment systems unless there is no
known beneficial use for the ground water. The CSWRCB is
composed of nine regional offices, and each regional office
establishes the ground water monitoring requirements for the
region. Table 9 summarizes the typical requirements for the
nine regions.
Site-Specific Requirements - The Arizona Department of Health
Services(ADHS) andtheNevada Department of Environmental
Protection (NDEP) require ground water monitoring at land
treatment sites. The specific requirements, however, are
based upon the site conditions.
Region 10 (Table 10, page 20)
No Specific Requirements - The Alaska Department of
Environmental Conservation (ADEC) does not have any
requirements for ground - wate-r monitoring at land treatment
-------
sites. Given the climatic conditions, land treatment is not
considered by the ADEC to be a feasible treatment technology
in Alaska.
Specific Requirements Exist - The Washington Department of
Ecology (WDE) and the Idaho Department of Health and Welfare
(IDHW) generally require ground water monitoring at land
treatment sites, and these requirements are summarized in
Table 10.
Site-Specific Requirements - The Oregon Department of
Environmental Quality's (ODEQ) requirements for ground water
monitoring are based upon the site conditions. Typical
monitoring requirements for systems with a ground water
monitoring program are summarized in Table 10.
10
-------
TABLE 1
SUMMARY OF GROUND WATER MONITORING REQUIREMENTS BY STATE*
EPA REGION I
CT
ME
MA
NH
RI
VT
Monitoring wplls
required for:
Land treatment
Lagoons
Minimum No. of Wells:
upgradient
on-site
downgradient
Sampling Frequency:
first year
thereafter
Monitoring Parameters:
.
Guidelines for
Monitofng Well
Construction:
Disposition of
Monitoring Data:
Chain of Custody
Procedures
Routinely Used:
yes
yes
1
-
2
4-12/year
4-12/year
NO3-N,NH3-N.
TKH.C1, Total P,
fecal coliform
formal
state
permit
file
no
yes
yes
-
1-2
-
site-specific
2-4/year
2-4/year
NH,-N.NO-.-N,
Total P.C1,
Total & fecal
coliforms
None, EPA
guidelines
used
state permit
file and
computer data
storage system
yes, by
state
only
yes
yes
1
-
3
depends upon
flow rate
pH.BOD,
SS.NO..-N,
NH3-N7TKN
formal
state
permit
file
no
yes
yes
site-
specific
site-
specific
N03-N.pH.
Total P, BOD
or COD, metals
Cond.
formal
state
permit
file
yes
** no
no no
NA NA
NA NA
NA NA
NA NA
NA informal
NA state
permit
file
NA no
•Requirements apply generally to land treatment systems
**Land treatment is not considered a cost-effective technology due to insufficient land availablility.
-------
TABLE 2
SUMMARY OF GROUND WATER MONITORING REQUIREMENTS BY STATE
EPA REGION II
NJ
NY*
Monitoring wells
required for:
Land treatment
Lagoons
Minimum No. of Wells:
upgradient
on-site
downgradient
Sampling Frequency:
first year
thereafter
Monitoring Parameters:
yes
yes
4/year
4/year
NH -N,NO -N,
TKH, pH, TDS
yes
no
site-specific
12/year
12/year
NO3-N,others
on a case-by-
case basis
Guidelines for
Monitoring Well
Construction:
Disposition of
Monitoring Data:
formal
state
computer
data storage
file
none
state
permit
file
Chain of Custody
Procedures
Routinely Used:
yes
no
*The regional offices of the New York Department of Environmental
Conservation develop specific- requirements for
ground water monitoring.
-------
TABLE 3
SUMMARY OF GROUND WATER MONITORING REQUIREMENTS BY STATE
EPA REGION III
DE*
MD
PA
VA
WV*
Monitoring wells
required for:
Land treatment
Lagoons
Minimum No. of Wells:
upgradient
on-site
downgradient
Sampling Frequency:
first year
thereafter
Monitoring Parameters:
Guidelines for
Monitoring Well
Construction:
Disposition of
Monitoring Data:
Chain of Custody
Procedures
Routinely Used:
site-specific
no
site-specific
-
site-specific
2/year
site-specific
formal
state
permit
file
no
yes
no
2
-
2
variable
4/year
NO -N.
Total
PO., TDS
C17. feca.1
col i form;
metals &
chlorinated
organics on
annual basis
formal
state
permit
file
no
yes
no
1
-
1
4/year
4/year
NH -N.NO -N,
Total PO;:,
MBAS. others
on an annual
basis .
an
formal
state
permit
file
no
yes
yes
1
-
2
12/year
NO -N,C1,TOC
pHTTotal P
Hardness,
• Alk . , cond . ,
total coliform,
others on a
case-by-case
basis
none
state
permit
file
no
NA
no
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
*There are no municipal land treatment systems in West Virginia or Delaware. West Virginia does
not consider land treatment to be cost-effective given the mountainous terrain. Delaware
requries a hydrogeologic study before setting monitoring requirements.
-------
;TABLE 4
SUMMARY OF GROUND WATER MONITORING REQUIREMENTS BY STATE
EPA REGION IV
AL
FL
GA
KY
MS
NC
SC
TN
Monitoring wells
required for:
Land treatment
Lagoons
Minimum No. of Wells:
upgradient
on-site
downgradient
Sampling Frequency:
first year
thereafter
Monitoring Parameters:
Guidelines for
Monitoring Well
Construction Exist:
Disposition of
Monitoring Data:
Chain of Custody
Procedures
Routinely Used:
yes
no
0
0
2
4/year
4/year
drinking
water
standards
informal
state
permit
file
no
yes
yes
1
1
1
4/year
4/year
drinking
water
standards,
toxics.
others
formal
state
computerized
data storage
system
no
yes
no
1
1
2
varies
with
influent
flow rate
N03-N,pH,
cond . ,
Cl
.
formal
state
permit .
file
yes, by
state only
no no yes
no no yes
NA NA 1
-
1
NA NA 3 /year
NA NA 3/year
:
NA NA NO^-N,NH3-N
NA NA TDS, Cl,
total coli-
form
pH, cond.
water level
NA NA formal
NA NA state
permit
file
NA NA no
yes
yes
1
-
2
4/year
biannual
NO^-N.NH -N
Total P, pH,
Cl.Na, TDS,
TOC, fecal
coliform,
alkalinity
formal
state
computerized
data storage
system
no
yes
no
1
-
1
4/year
4/year
pH,NO3-N
cond . , TOC
total N,
total
coliform,
water level
informal
state
permit .
file
no
-------
TABLE .5
SUMMARY OF GROUND WATER MONITORING REQUIREMENTS BY STATE
EPA REGION V
IL
IN*
MI
MN
OH
WI
Monitoring wells
required for:
Land treatment
Lagoons
Minimum No. of Wells:
upgradient
on-site
downgradient
Sampling Frequency:
first year
thereafter
Monitoring Parameters:
Guidelines for
Monitoring Well
Construction:
Disposition of
Monitoring Data:
Chain of Custody
Procedures
Routinely Used:
yes
no
1
1 '
2/year
2/year
NO,-N,NH,-N
C1TSO ,pH
TDS, PO4, fecal
coliform
formal
state
permit
file
no
no yes
no site-
specific
NA site-
specific
NA site-
specific
NA site-
specf ic
NA formal
NA . . state
compliance
file
yes, by
NA state only
site-specific no
site-specific no
site- NA
specific
site- NA
specific
NO^-N.NH,-N NA
TKH.C1,
Cond . , pH
formal NA
state NA
permit
file
no NA
yes
no
1
1
flow dependent
2/year
(NO^+NO )-N,NH3-N,
BODTorg.N
cond.,Cl
COD, TDS, pH,
SO4, Alk.,hard
formal
state
permit
file
no
•Indiana has only recently established a ground water section in the Division of Water Pollution Control.
-------
TABLE 6
SUMMARY OF GROUND WATER MONITORING REQUIREMENTS BY STATE
EPA REGION VI
AR
LA.
NM
OK
TX
a\
Monitoring wells
required for:
Land treatment
Lagoons
Minimum No. of Wells:
upgradient
on-site
downgradient
Sampling Frequency:
first year
thereafter
Monitoring Parameters:
yes no
no no
i N'A
1
1
4/year NA
4/year
NO -N.C1,
fecal coliform,
others on a
case-by-case
basis
yes
yes
site-
specific
3/year
3/year
Total N
NO,-N, Cl
TDS, fecal
coliform
yes
no
1
1
1
12/year
12/year
NH.-N
metals (annual)
no
no
NA
NA
NA
Guidelines for
Monitoring Well
Construction:
Disposition of
Monitoring Data:
Chain of Custody
Procedures
Routinely Used:
informal
kept at
facility
no
NA
NA
NA
informal
state
permit
file
no
none
state
permit
file
no
NA
NA
NA
In general, Texas does not require monitoring wells at land treatment or lagoon systems.
-------
TABLE 7
SUMMARY OF TYPICAL GROUND WATER MONITORING REQUIREMENTS BY STATE
EPA REGION VII
IA
KS
MO
NE
Monitoring wells
required for:
Land treatment
Lagoons
Minimum No. of Wells:
upgradient
on-site
downgradient
Sampling Frequency:
first year
thereafter
Monitoring Parameters:
Guidelines for
Monitoring Well
Construction:
Disposition of
Monitoring Data:
Chain of Custody
Procedures
Routinely Used:
yes
no
1
-
2
flow
dependent
Total N.TKN,
NH-.-N.NO--N
TOC.TDS.pH.Alk
hard., metals,
total coliform
informal
state
permit
file
no
yes
site-specific
1
-
site-specific
2-4/year
2-4/year
NO--N.NH..-N
Total P Sr
PO , SO.
T "»
informal
state
permit
file
.
yes, by
state only
yes*
no
1
-
1
4-12/year
4-12/year
BOD.TSS
NO3-N
informal
state
permit
file
yes, by
state only
yes
no
1
-
2
12/year
site-
specific
NH,-N,NO,-N
NO,-N,Clf
Total P.COD
TDS.pH, alk
hard.
formal
state
permit
file
no
•Monitoring required' usually only at rapid infiltration systems.
-------
TABLE 8
SUMMARY OF GROUND WATER MONITORING REQUIREMENTS BY STATE
EPA REGION VIII
CO*
MT
ND
SO
UT
WY
Monitoring wells
required for:
Land treatment no
Lagoons no
Minimum No. of Wells:
upgradient NA
on-site
downgradient
Sampling Frequency:
first year NA
thereafter
Monitoring Parameters: NA
Guidelines for NA
Monitoring Well
Construction:
Disposition of
Monitoring Data: NA
Chain of Custody
Procedures
Routinely Used: NA
yes
no
1
-
2
4/year
2-4/year
(N0a+N0 )-N
cond., Cl
water level
informal
state
permit
file
no
site-specific
no .'
site-specific
12/year
site-specific
NO..-N, NH..-N
BOD.SS, pH
fecal coliform
formal
state
permit
file
no
yes
site-specific
2
-
2
12/year
12/year
NO -N,NO.-N,
NH^-N.Cl
Cond. , TDS,
fecal coliforms,
others
formal
state
permit
file
no
yes
no
1
-
1
monthly
during
application
NO,-N, total
P, total
coliform •
informal
state
permit
file
no
site-specific
site-specific
. 1
-
2
I/year
I/year
NH--N,
pHT Cl,
Boron,
formal
state
permit
file
yes
NO -N,
TDS
Selenium
*Colorado does not have regulations requiring groundwater monitoring at land treatment sites, but wells are encouraged.
-------
TABLE 9
SUMMARY OF GROUND WATER MONITORING REQUIREMENTS BY STATE
EPA REGIONS IX
AZ
CA
NV
HI
Monitoring wells
required for:
Land treatment
Lagoons
Minimum No. of Wells:
upgradient
on- site
downgradient
Sampling Frequency:
first year
thereafter
Monitoring Parameters:
Guidelines for
Monitoring Well
Construction :
Disposition of
Monitoring Data:
site-
specific
site-
specific
site-
specific
site-
spefific
site-
specific
none
state
permit
file
site-
specific
site-
specific
1
1
2-4/year
2-4/year
NO,-N. Tot. N,
CITTDS.Na
none
state
permit
file
yes
no
site-
specific
site-
specific
NO ,r-N, others
case-by-case
basis
none
state
permit
file
no
no
MA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
permit
file
Chain of Custody
Procedures
Normally Used:
no
no
yes
NA
-------
TABLE 10
SUMMARY OF GROUND WATER MONITORING REQUIREMENTS BY STATE
EPA REGIONS. X
AK
ID
OR
WA
to
O
Monitoring wells
required for:
Land treatment no
Lagoons no
Minimum No. of Wells:
upgradient NA
on-site NA
downgradient
Sampling Frequency:
first year NA
thereafter
Monitoring Parameters : NA
Guidelines for
Monitoring Well NA
Construction:
Disposition of NA
Monitoring Data:
Chain of Custody
Procedures NA
Normally Used:
yes
no
1
• •
1
12/year
12/year
N03-N,Tot. N
COD,
Total P,
and total
col i form
none
state
permit
file
no
site-
specific
no
site-
specific
4/year
4/year
NO-.-N.NH..-N,
SO^.Cl,
cond . , total
& fecal coli-
form, water
level
none
state
permit
file
yes, by
state only
yes
yes (if
unlined)
1
-
1
flow
dependent
NP--N,
total
col i form
EPA
guidelines
used
state
permit
file
no
-------
STATE CONTACTS
EPA REGION I
Con .ecticut
Rar>dy May
Cc lecticut Department of
Environmental Protection
165 'Japital Avenue
He?, ford, Connecticut 06115
C ;) 566-3654
Ma Lne
N cman Marcotte
E partment of Environmental
Protection
I spital Street
. gusta, Maine 04333
.07) 289-3355
) \ssachusetts
Dbert Cady
! Lvision of Water Pollution
Control
assachusetts Department of
Environmental Quality
Engineering
100 Cambridge Street
Boston, Massachusetts 02202
(617) 292-5713
Rhode Island
Pierce Klazer
Rhode Island Division of Water
c'upply and Pollution Control
75 Davis Street
Providence, Rhode Island 02908
(401) 277-2243
Vermont
Edward Leonard
Environmental Engineering
Division
Vermont Agency of Environmental
Conservation
State Office Building
Montpelier, Vermont 05602
(802) 828-3345
New Hampshire
Michael Sills
New Hampshire Water Supply and
Pollution Control Commission
P. O. Box 95, Hazen Drive
Concord, New Hampshire 03301
(603) 271-2755
21
-------
STATE CONTACTS
EPA REGION II
New Jersey
Brenda Jogan
New Jersey Department of
il'ivironmental Protection
P. O. Box CN-029
Trenton, New Jersey 08625
(609) 292-2482
New York
John Marschilok
I/A Processes Section
New York State Department of
Environmental Conservation
50 Wolf Road
Albany, New York 12233
(518) 457-3810
22
-------
STATE CONTACTS
EPA REGION III
Pennsylvania
Terry Killian
Pennsylvania Department of
Environmental Resources
Bureau of Water Quality
Management
P. O. Box 2063
Harrisburg, PA 17120
(717) 787-3481
Delaware
Michael Apgar
Delaware Department of Natural
Resources and Environmental
Control
Division of Environmental
Control
Tatnall Building
Dover, Delaware 19901
(302) 736-5742
Maryland
Ching-Tzone Tien
Office of Environmental
Records
Department of Health and
Mental Hygiene
201 W. Preston Street
Baltimore, Maryland 21201
(301) 383-2054
Virginia
Scott Alexander
Virginia State Water
Control Board
P. O. Box 11143
Richmond, Virginia 23230
(804) 257-6397
West Virginia
Michael Johnson
West Virginia Department of
Natural Resources
Division of Water Resources
1201 Greenbrier Street
Charleston, West Virginia 25311
(304) 348-0637
23
-------
STATL CONTACTS
EPA REGION IV
Alabama
Robert Bretzer
Alabama Department of
Environmental Management
1751 Federal Drive
Montgomery, Alabama 3613C
(205) 271-7700
Florida
James McNeal
Groundwater Section
Florida Department of
Environmental Regulation
Twin Towers Office Bldg.
2600 Blair Stone Road
Tallahassee, Florida 32-301
(904) .488-8163
Georgia
Paul S. Dickens
Environmental Protection
Division
Georgia Department of
Natural Resources
270 Washington Street, S. W.
Atlanta, Georgia 30334
(404) 656-4769'
Kentucky
Vince Borres
Construction Grants Section
Kentucky Department of Natural
Resources and Environmental
Protection
Century Plaza
1065 U. S. 27 South
Frankfort, Kentucky 40601
(502) 564-3410
Mississippi
Louis Montgomery
Municipal Facilities Branch
Mississippi Department of
Natural Resources
Bureau of Pollution Control
P. O. Box 10385
Jackson, Mississippi 39209
(601) 961-5171
North Carolina
Robert Cheek
Division of Environmental
Management
North Carolina Department of
Natural Resources and
Community Development
P. O. Box 27687
Raleigh, N.C. 27611
(191) 733T-4984
South Carolina
Clyde Livingston
Ground Water Protection
Division
South Carolina Department of
Health and Environmental
Control
2600 Bull Street
Columbia, S. C. 29211
Tennessee
Hari Akunuri
Tennessee Department of
Public Health
Terra Building
150 Ninth Avenue, N.
Nashville, Tennessee 37203
(615) 741-7883
24
-------
STATE CONTACTS
EPA REGION V
Illinois
Bruce Yurdin
Illinois Environmental
Protection Agency
2200 Churchill Road
Springfield, Illinois 62706
(217) 782-0610
Indiana
Steve W. Kim
Division of Water Pollution
Control
Indiana State Board of Health
1330 West Michigan Street
Indianapolis, Indiana 46206
(317) 633-0706
Michigan
Scott Ross
Michigan Department, of
Natural Resources
P. O. Box 30028 .
Lansing, Michigan 48909
(517) 373-8147
Minnesota
Lawrence Zdon
Facilities Section
Division of Water Quality
Minnesota Pollution Control
Agency
1935 West County Road, B-2
Roseville, Minnesota 51133
(612) 296-7214
Ohio
Sanut K. Barua
Division of Construction
Grants
Ohio Environmental
Protection Agency
P. O. Box 1049
Columbus, Ohio 43216
Wisconsin
Rebecca Wallace
Municipal Wastewater Section
Wisconsin Department of
Natural Resources
P. O. Box 7921
Madison, Wisconsin 53703
(608) 267-7611
25
-------
STATE CONTACTS
EPA REGION VI
Arkansas
Martin Roy
Arkansas Department of Pollution
Control and Ecology
8001 National Drive
Little Rock, Arkansas 72209
(501) 562-7444
Louisiana
Ken Fledderman
Louisiana Department of
Natural Resources
P. O. Box 44066
Baton Rouge, Louisiana 70804
(504) 922-0529
New Mexico
Maxine Goad
New Mexi.co Environmental
Improvement Agency
P. O. Box 968, Crown Building
Santa Fe, New Mexico 87501
(505) 984-0020
Oklahoma
Dr. H. J. Thung
Oklahoma Department of Health
Environmental Health Services
3400 North Eastern Avenue
P. O. Box 53551
Oklahoma City, Oklahoma 73152
Texas
Milton Rose
Texas Department of Water
Resources
P. O. Box 13087
Austin, Texas 78711
(512) 475-3926
26
-------
STATE CONTACTS
EPA REGION VII
Iowa
Tim O'Connor
Iowa Department of
Environmental Quality
Henry A. Wallace Building
900 E, Grand
Des Moines, Iowa 50319
(515) 281-8911
Kansas
Larry Knoche
Kansas Department of Health
and Environment
Division of Environment
Bureau of Water Quality
Forbes Field
Topeka, Kansas 66620
(913) 862-9360, ext. 331
Missouri
Donald Barnett
Missouri Department of
Natural Resources
Program Support Environment
Section
P. O. Box 1368
Jefferson City, Missouri 65102
(314) 751-3241
Nebraska
Rick Bay
Nebraska Department of
Environmental Control
Engineering Division
P. O. Box 94877
State House Station
301 Centennial Mall South
Lincoln, Nebraska 68509
(402) 471-2186
27
-------
STATE CONTACTS
EPA ' "REGION VIII
Colorado . Wyoming
Mary Gearhart Mike Hackett
Water Quality Control Division Water Quality Division
Colorado Department of Health Department of Environmental
4210 E. llth Avenue Quality
Denver, Colorado 80220 Hathaway Building
(303) 320-8333 Cheyenne, Wyoming 82002
(307) 777-7085
Montana
Scott Anderson
Water Quality Bureau
Environmental Sciences Division
Cogswell Building
Helena, Montana 59620
(406) 444-2406
»
North Dakota
Rodney Beck
Division of Water Supply and
Pollution Control
North Dakota Department . .
of Health
Missouri Office Building
1200 Missouri Avenue
Bismarck, North Dakota 58505
(701) 224-4856
South Dakota
Larry Van Hout
South Dakota Departent of Water
and Natural Resources
Management
Joe Foss Building
Pierre, South Dakota 57501
(605) 773-3351
Utah
Roger Bishop
Utah Bureau of Water Pollution
Control
150 W. North Temple Street
Box 2500
Salt Lake City, Utah 84110
(801) 533-6146
28
-------
STATE CONTACTS
EPA REGION IX
Arizona
Calvin Nowack
Arizona Department of
Health Services
1740 W. Adams
Phoenix, Arizona 85007
(602) 255-1258
California
Betty Meyer
California Reginoal Water
Resources Control Board
6154 Mission Gorge Road, Suite 105
San Diego, CA 92110
(714) 265-5114
Hawaii
Hiram Young
WTW Construction Grants Program
Hawaii State Department of Health
P. O. Box 3378
Honolulu, Hawaii 96801
Nevada
James Williams
Nevada Department of
Environmental Protection
201 S. Fall Street
Carson City, Nevada 89710
(702) 885-5870
29
-------
STATE CONTACTS
EPA REGION X
Alaska
Richard Marcum
Alaska Department of
Environmental Conservation
Division of Water Programs
Pouch O
Juneau, Alaska 99811
(907) 465-2611
Idaho
Robert Braum
Idaho Department of
Health and Welfare
Division of Environment
State House
Boise, Idaho 83720
(208) 334-4169
Oregon
Kent Ashbaker
Oregon Department of
Environmental Quality
P. O. Box 1760
Portland, Oregon 97207
(503) 229-5257
Washington
Chris Haynes
Department of Ecology
Office of Water Programs
Olympia, Washington 98504
(206) 459-6101
30
-------
APPENDIX B
INFORMATION FURNISHED BY INDIVIDUAL STATES
Alabama
In the state of Alabama, wastewater treatment systems which
discharge into ground water are regulated under the Alabama
Department of Environmental Management's (ADEM) NPDES
program. All land treatment systems are thus regulated under
this system. Specific ground water monitoring requirements
at a site are established by state geologists. In general,
land treatment systems are required to have a minimum of two
downgradient wells (1 deep and 1 shallow). Before a system
begins operation, the downgradient wells are used to collect
background water quality data for the aquifer. The
monitoring data are collected and sent to the state
(quarterly), and drinking water standards are used as the
monitoring criteria. The treatment systems' monitoring data
and operating procedures are examined during periodic
inspections at which time the state collects and analyzes
samples. The state's results are. then compared with the past
monitoring data collected by the treatment system. The ADEM
does not have ground water monitoring requirements for
lagoons. Instead, the lagoons are required to be lined.
Alaska
Due to climatic conditions in Alaska, land treatment is not
considered a feasible treatment technology. Therefore, the
Alaska Department of Environmental Conservation (ADEC) has
not developed any requirements for ground water monitoring
for land treatment systems.
Arkansas
The Arkansas Department of Pollution Control and Ecology
(ADP"CE) does not require ground water monitoring for lagoons.
At land treatment sites, the ADPCE requires that wells be
located upgradient, on-site, and downgradient. The exact
number of wells at each location, however, will depend upon
the site geology. Quarterly analyses for nitrate-nitrogen,
chloride and fecal coliform are required, and analyses for
BOD or TOG, COD, total Kjeldahl nitrogen, total phosphorus,
total coliform, . total dissolved solids, alkalinity,
temperature, pH, and water level are considered on a
case-by-case basis. Most of the treatment systems use
contract laboratories to perform their analyses, and the
results are kept on file by the treatment plant. Finally,
guidelines for the construction of monitoring wells exist.
31
-------
Arizona
The Arizona Department of Health Services (ADHS) is in the
process of developing regulations for the protection of
ground water. These proposed regulations require that any
wastewater treatment facility which could impact the ground
water must develop a monitoring plan containing a description
of a monitoring system adequate to characterize the effects
of the facility operation on ground water quality. The plan
may be required to specify monitoring location and type,
monitoring frequer.;:y, and procedures for sample collection
and analysis. Thus, the monitoring requirements at lagoon or
land treatment systems are site-specific.
California
The state of California is divided into nine water quality
regions, each of which is regulated by a Regional Water
Quality Control Board. Each Regional Board can establish
independent ground water monitoring requirements. Four of
the nine Regional Boards were contacted to determine their
monitoring requirements, and the individual regions'
requirements were similar. Ground water monitoring at land
treatment or lagoon sites is generally not required if there
is no known beneficial use of the ground water. Otherwise,
ground water monitoring is required.. The number of wells
required is site-specific, but generally one upgradient well
and one downgradient well for each d.irection of flow is
required. Typical ground water monitoring parameters include
TDS, sodium, nitrate-nitrogen, total nitrogen, and chlorides.
Other parameters may be required depending upon the type of
system and the use of the ground water (e.g., boro'n, if the
treated wastewater contains'a significant boron concentration
and if the aquifer is used for irrigation) . The monitoring
frequency ranges from semi-annual to quarterly, and the data
are sent to the appropriate Regional Water Quality Control
Board. At one time, the state did require the use of
certified laboratories for performing the analyses. The
funding for the laboratory certification program, however,
has been eliminated from the state budget.
Colorado
The Colorado Department of Health (CDH) does not have any
regulations requiring ground water monitoring at land
treatment sites; although, the CDH does encourage treatment
systems to install monitoring wells. There are also no
requirements for ground water monitoring at lagoons.
Instead, lagoons are limited to a seepage loss of 1/32-inch
per day.
32
-------
Connecticut
The Connecticut Department of Environmental Protection (CDEP)
generally requires ground water monitoring at both lagoons
and land treatment systems. Leach fields and rapid
infiltration systems are the predominant form of land
treatment in Connecticut. The CDEP uses a
pollutant/hydrogeology model to deterine the specific
monitoring requirements. Typical monitoring requirements
specify a minimum of one upgradient and two downgradient
monitoring wells. Samples are generally collected monthly to
quarterly and analyzed for nitrate- and ammonia-nitrogen,
total Kjeldahl nitrogen, chlorides, fecal coliforms, and
total phosphorus. The CDEP has formal guidelines for the
construction of monitoring wells. Chain of custody
procedures for samples, however, are not generally used
unless an enforcement action is planned.
Delaware
The ' Delaware Department of Natural Resources and
Environmental Control (DNREC) requires a hydrogeologic study
of a proposed land treatment site (and sometimes at a lagoon
site) before a permit is granted. The results of this study
are used to determine the potential for and impact of ground
water contamination; the number, location, and design of.the
monitoring wells, and the monitoring parameters and
frequency. (The DNREC requires that a registered profes-sional
geologist supervise the hydrogeologic investigation and sign
the hydrogeologic report. Construction of all monitoring
wells must be done by a licensed well contractor who must
obtain state permits to construct all monitoring wells. The
monitoring data is briefly reviewed when received by the
DNREC and is reviewed in more detail when the permit is
subject to renewal. There are no chain of custody
requirements for either the state or facility, nor is there a
quality assurance program.
Florida
Ground water monitoring regulations for municipal wastewater
treatment facilities that use land treatment are covered
under Section 17-4.245 FAC. Ground water monitoring is only
required by the Florida Department of Environmental
Regulation (FDER) for those facilities which treat greater
than 100,000 gallons per day. Any facility treating less
than this amount is not routinely required to monitor the
ground water. Any facility with holding ponds or
percolation ponds that treat over 100,000 gallons per day,
but do not use land treatment methods, are still required by
the FDER to develop a ground water monitoring plan.
33
-------
The ground water monitoring requirements foj. these facilities
have only been in effect since February 1984. At this time,
most facilities have only submitted one or two analyses of
ground water samples. Data are still being collected on the
first year data base to compare with background levels. The
data will be stored in the FDER computer system and tracked
over several years to determine if more monitoring parameters
are needed, if the ampling frequency should be increased, or
if more wells may be needed. Some facilities may have the
frequency of sampling reduced from fie current quarterly
sampling interval if no deviations from background are noted
for several sampling periods.
Permits are renewed every five years. At each permit
renewal, a complete review of the ground water monitoring
plan and the water quality data will be required to determine
if permit modifications are warranted. EPA standards are
used for sample collection, analysis, and quality control.
Florida does not have any sample chain of custody procedures.
The FDER requires that the ground water be monitored
quarterly for the primary and secondary drinking water
standards as well as for several volatile organic compounds.
A list of these volatile compounds is shown, below.
Additional monitoring parameters may be required depending
upon the wastewater characteristics.
* *. *
List of Florida Drinking Water Standards
for Volatile Organic Compounds
Parameter Standard
(ug/L)
Trichloroethylene 3.
Carbon Tetrachloride 3.
Vinyl Chloride 1.
1,1,1-Trichlorethane 200.
1,2-Dichlorethane 3 .
Benzene 1..
Ethylene Dibromide 0.02
Tetrachlorethylene 3.
Georgia
The Georgia Environmental Protection Division (GEPD) does not
currently have any requirements for ground water monitoring
for lagoons, nor are any such standards under development.
The current standards for land treatment systems require at
least one upgradient or background well, one on-site well
(within the application area of the system) , and two
34
-------
downgradient wells. These wells are to extend to a depth
sufficient to sample seasonal variations in the unconfined
water table. The frequency of sampling varies with the
wastewater flow rate of the treatment system, and samples are
to be analyzed for nitrate-nitrogen, pH, specific
conductivity, and chlorides. Drinking water standards are
also generally applicable for the ground water beneath a land
treatment system. All systems built after 1978 are required
to have a monitoring system as described above.
The above requirements are currently being revised to include
specifications for the construction of monitoring wells and
to include additional chemical parameters. The revised
standards, if implemented in their present form, would
require that monitoring wells be screened and the borehole
backfilled to prevent seepage from the surface along the
casing. Monitoring of the unsaturated zone using lysimeters
is also strongly recommended. The additional analyses which
would be required under the proposed system include fecal
coliform, metals, and priority pollutants.
The monitoring data from existing systems are currently being
collected by the GEPD. These data, however, are not
routinely reviewed. Within the next year, the GEPD hopes to
prepare reporting forms for use by the treatment systems and
to implement a review procedure. The GEPD does maintain a
chain of custody for samples collected by GEPD compliance
inspectors. The treatment systems, however, are only
required to show that a contract laboratory (if used)
received and analyzed'the samples.
Hawaii
There are currently no municipal land treatment systems in
the state of Hawaii; thus, there are no requirements for
ground water monitoring. Lagoons are not required to have a
ground water monitoring system.
Idaho
Although the Idaho Department of Health and Welfare's (IDHW)
requirements for ground water monitoring at land treatment
sites are made on a case-by-case basis, at least one
monitoring well is generally required. When ground water
monitoring is required, the monitoring parameters are to
include biochemical or chemical oxygen demand,
nitrate-nitrogen, total nitrogen, total phosphorus, total
coliforms, and chemical oxygen demand. Monthly sampling is
typical. For routine sampling, the IDHW does not require the
use of a chain of custody procedure. The analyses, however,
35
-------
must be performed by a certified laboratory. Monitoring
wells are not generally required at lagoons.
Illinois
The Illinois Environmental Protection Agency (IEPA) requires
ground water monitoring at all land treatment sites except
those using overland flow. A minimum of one upgradient well
and one downgradient well for each direction of ground wate./
flow is required. Quarterly analyses for nitrate- and
ammonia-nitrogen, chlorides, sulfates, pH, total dissolved
solids, phosphates, and fecal coliform are generally
required.
Indiana
The Indiana Division of Water Pollution Control (IDWPC) has
recently established a ground water section. As of December
1984, this new group had not yet had sufficient time to
develop a ground water protection strategy. Currently, there
are no requirements for ground water monitoring at either
land treatment or lagoon sites.
Iowa • •. . •
The Iowa Department of Environment Quality (IDEQ) requires
ground water monitoring at land treatment sites. A minimum
of one upgradient and one downgradient well is required, and
the frequency of sampling varies with the flow rate of the
system. An extensive list of parameters is required for
monitoring unless a parameter is absent from" the influent.
These are:
Total Organic Carbon Beryllium
Total Dissolved Solids Boron
Sodium Absorption Ratio Cadmium
Electrical Conductivity Chromium
Nitrogen Cobalt
Total Copper
Organic Fluoride
Ammonia Iron
Nitrate Lead
Chloride Lithium
Alkalinity Manganese
Hardness Molybdenum
Coliform Bacteria Nickel
Aluminum Selenium
Arsenic Zinc
36
-------
Kansas
The Kansas Department of Health and Environment (KDHE)
generally requires ground water monitoring at land
treatment systems. Depending upon the wastewater quality,
monitoring wells at lagoons may also be required. The
specific requirements for monitoring, however, depend upon
the site conditions. For a spray irrigation system, the KDHE
uses a "rule-of-thumb" requirement for one well for every
twenty acres irrigated. The location of these wells would
depend upon the site conditions. For other types of land
treatment or for lagoons, at least one upgradient and several
downgradient wells would typically be required. The
monitoring frequency would range from quarterly to
semi-annually, and typical analyses would consist of ammonia
and nitrate-nitrogen, total phosphorus or phosphate, sodium,
and sulfate. The KDHE does have guidelines for the
construction of monitoring wells. The KDHE inspectors do
utilize a chain of custody procedure for samples, while the
treatment system is not required to use such a system. All
analyses, however, must be performed by a certified
laboratory.
Kentucky
.The Kentucky Department of Natural Resources and
Environmental Protection has no requirements for ground water
monitoring at either lagoon qr land treatment systems. To
date, no land treatment systems have not been constructed in
Kentucky under the construction grants program.
Louisiana-
At present, the Louisiana Department of Natural Resources has
no requirements for ground water monitoring at either land
treatment or lagoon sites. Regulations for ground water
protection which may include requirements for monitoring at
land treatment or lagoon systems.are currently being drafted.
Maine
Ground water monitoring is generally required at land
treatment sites and at new lagoon systems. The number of
wells required by the Maine Department of Environmental
Protection (MDEP), however, depends upon the site conditions.
Typical monitoring parameters include ammonia- and
nitrate-nitrogen, phosphorus, chlorides, total and fecal
coliform, and sometimes metals. The MDEP does not have any
guidelines for well construction, but instead uses EPA
37
-------
guidelines. The monitoring wells, however, must be
constructed to a depth sufficient to sample the upper three
to four feet of the aquifer of concern. The monitoring
frequency required depends upon site conditions, but
quarterly to semi-annual sampling is typical. The monitoring
data is kept both in the permit file and in a computer data
storage system. The data is routinely reviewed when received
by the MDEP and when the permit is subject to renewal (at
five-year intervals). The treatment system is not required
to utilize a chain of custody procedure nor is there a
requirement to use a certified laboratory for the analysis.
The MDEP inspectors, however, do use a chain of custody
procedure for their samples.
Maryland
The Maryland Department of Health and Mental Hygiene (MDHMH)
requires monitoring wells at land treatment systems, but not
for lagoons. The number of wells required is site-specific;
however, two upgradient and two downgradient wells are
generally considered the minimum acceptable number. Typical
monitoring parameters consist of nitrate- and
nitrite-nitrogen, total Kjeldahl nitrogen, total phosphate,
total dissolved solids, chloride, and fecal coliform. For
the first three months .prior to and after start-up, samples
are collected monthly for analysis; 'thereafter, semi-annual
sampling is required. Annual analyses for . metals and
chlorinated organics are also required. The MDHMH also has
guidelines for monitoring well construction.
Massachusetts
The Massachusetts Department of Environmental Quality
Engineering (MDEQE) generally requires ground water mentoring
at both lagoon and land treatment systems. One upgradient
and three downgradient wells are considered the minimum
acceptable number of wells. In addition, the MDEQE also
encourages the use of multi-level well systems capable of
withdrawing samples at several depths within the aquifer of
concern. The monitoring frequency depends upon the
wastewater flow rate. Samples are analyzed for pH,
biochemical oxygen demand, suspended solids, nitrate- and
ammonia-nitrogen, and total Kjeldahl nitrogen. Currently,
the data goes into the facility's permit file. Eventually,
the MDEQE anticipates using a computer for data storage and
analysis.
38
-------
Michigan
The Michigan Department of Natural Resources' (MDNR)
requirements for ground water monitoring at land treatment
sites and for lagoons are site-specific. Permits for the
construction of monitoring wells over 25 feet deep must be
obtained from the Michigan Geologic Survey Division (MGSD).
Any monitoring data are currently kept in the facility's
compliance file; however, the MDNR is hoping to develop a
computer data storage system. The MDNR uses and requires
treatment systems to use accepted analytical procedures (i.e.
ASTM, EPA, or AWWA/WPCF analytical methods) for ground water
samples. MDNR inspectors also use a chain of custody.
Minnesota
The requirements for ground water monitoring at land
treatment systems are site-specific; whereas, ground water
monitoring is not required at lagoon treatment systems if the
lagoons meet maximum seepage limitations. The number and
location of monitoring wells is site-specific; however, when
ground water monitoring is required, the Minnesota Pollution
Control Agency typically requires one upgradient and two
downgradient wells. Typical analyses required are total
Kjeldahl nitrogen, ammonia- and nitrate-nitrogen, ^chloride,
conductivity, and pH. The monitoring frequency is also
site-specific/ but three times per year is typical, and the
monitoring data is kept in the facility's permit file. An
exception to these typical monitoring' requirements would
occur if the wastewater were applied to privately-owned land.
In such cases, no ground water monitoring is required. The
Minnesota Department of Health has developed guidelines for
monitoring well construction, while the MPCA has guidelines
for ground water monitoring procedures.
Mississippi
The Mississippi Bureau of Pollution Control (MBPC) currently
does not have any requirements for ground water monitoring at
land treatment systems, nor are any such standards under
development. Currently, none of the land treatment systems
in Mississippi have a ground water monitoring system. The
ground water flow patterns beneath the existing sites are
such that ground water monitoring is not believed to be
necessary, but future systems may be required to have a
ground water monitoring system. If so, parameters .for
monitoring would be determined at that time. According to
MBPC personnel, fecal coliform and nitrites are the analyses
most likely to be required. Any ground water monitoring data
collected at future land treatment systems would be required
. 39'
-------
to be kept by the owner of the treatment system and to be
available for inspection upon request.
Missouri
The Missouri Department of Natural Resources (MDNR) requires
ground water monitoring for rapid infiltration systems, but
not for other forms of land treatment or for lagoons.
Typical monitoring requirements for a rapid infiltration
system conL.'st of one downgradient and one upgradient well
sampled monthly or quarterly for BOD, TSS, nitrate-nitrogen,
and perhaps heavy metals. Monitoring data is kept in the
MDNR permit file. MDNR inspectors use a chain of custody
procedure; however, the treatment facilities are not required
to maintain a chain of custody. Informal guidelines for the
construction of monitoring wells are in existence.
Montana
The Montana Department of Health and Environmental Sciences
(MDHES) does require ground water monitoring at land
treatment sites. One upgradient and two downgradient wells
are generally required. At some systems, however, an on-site
well may be substituted for one of the downgradient wells.
In addition, existing private-wells may also be used instead
of installing dedicated monitoring wells. Nitrate- and
nitrite-nitrogen, conductivity, and chlorides are the
principle monitoring parameters. For the first two years,
quarterly monitoring is required. Then, semi-annual sampling
is required for two years. If no contamination is found
during this four-year period, then annual monitoring is
required.
Nebraska
The requirements for ground water monitoring at land
treatment systems or lagoons in Nebraska is site-specific.
Currently, the Nebraska Department of Environmental Control
(NDEC) requires approximately one-half of the land treatment
systems in Nebraska to have a ground water monitoring system.
Generally, a minimum of three monitoring wells (one
upgradient and two downgradient) are required at land
treatment systems. Existing private wells may sometimes be
substituted for dedicated monitoring wells. Several samples
are required to be collected from the wells prior to system
ctart-up. After start-up, monthly samples are required for a
period of two years. The data are then used to determine the
frequency of monitoring after two years. The parameters
considered for monitoring include: chlorides; total dissolved
40
-------
solids; pH; total hardness; alkalinity; ammonia-, nitrate-,
and nitrite-nitrogen; total phosphorus; biochemical oxygen
demand; chemical oxygen demand; heavy metals; and fecal
coliform. All or only a portion of these parameters may be
required, and the data is kept in the permit file. The NDEC
does have guidelines for monitoring well construction.
Nevada
The Nevada Department of Environmental Protection (NDEP)
requires ground water monitoring at land treatment sites, but
not for lagoons. The number of wells, the monitoring
parameters, and the monitoring frequency required are
site-specific. The NDEP does not, however, have any
guidelines for monitoring well construction.
New Hampshire
The New Hampshire Water Supply and Pollution Control
Commission (NHWSPCC) requirements for ground water monitoring
at land treatment sites and for lagoons are site-specific.
The number and location of wells will, depend upon the site
conditions such as the local geology. Monitoring criteria
typically include nitrate-nitrogen, total phosphorus-, metals4
conductivity and .either biochemical or chemical oxygen
demand, and the monitoring frequency is site-specific.
Monitoring data is kept in the facility' s permit; file. The
NHWSPCC does have final guidelines for well installation.
Both the NHWSPCC inspectors and treatment systems use a chain
of custody as part of their NHWSPCC quality assurance
procedures.
New Jersey
Ground water monitoring is required at both lagoon and land
treatment systems by the New Jersey Department of
Environmental Protection (NJDEP). The monitoring
requirements of all facilities, however, are site-specific.
The permittee may submit a proposed monitoring plan with the
permit application, and this plan may include the location
and number of wells, the monitoring parameters and frequency,
and the quality assurance/chain of custody procedures to be
used. Based upon the past and present discharge activities,
the NJDEP will determine if the proposed plan is adequate, or
will specify a monitoring plan. A minimum of three wells is
required (one upgradient, two downgradient). Effluent
monitoring is also used either to replace, or in conjunction
with, ground water monitoring. Sampling frequency for both
effluent and ground water monitoring varies on a case-by-case
41
-------
basis, but is usually quarterly for che five year life of the
permit. The data is sent to the state for review and is
computerized for ease of retrieval.
New Mexico
The New Mexico Environmental Improvement Division (NMEID) has
a very broad ground water protection policy that applies to
any waste treatment system whic?- may adversely affect ground
water. The monitoring requirements at a land treatment
system or a lagoon are determined on a case-by-case basis and
depend upon factors such as the site geology and the
aquifer(s) potentially affected. Monitoring wells are
generally sampled twice a year, usually in April and October;
although, treatment systems located above critical aquifers
may be required to sample quarterly. Typical analyses
required for municipal land treatment systems or lagoons are
total nitrogen, nitrate-nitrogen, total dissolved solids, and
chlorides.
For routine sampling, the NMEID does not maintain a sample
chain of custody. On the other hand, chain of custody
procedures are used during compliance inspections or for
enforcement actions. The treatment systems are not required
to maintain a sample chain of custody.
The data from the monitoring systems are currently sent' to
the NMEID for review. These monitoring reports are examined
to determine if any of the data appear "out-of-the-ordinary."
Currently, statistical analysis of the data are not
conducted. By 1985, however, the NMEID expects to begin
development of a computerized tracking system, and it is
anticipated that this system will be used to detect any
trends in the data which may be indicative of contamination.
Specific requirements for the construction of monitoring
wells do not exist; however, the NMEID does have "suggested
guidelines" which must be equaled or exceeded.
New York
For land treatment systems treating more than 30,000 gpd, the
New York Department of Environmental Conservation (NYDEC)
requires ground water monitoring. The specific monitoring
requirements, however, are established by the regional
offices of the NYDEC. Monthly analyses for nitrate-nitrogen
are typical and the monitoring data are kept ' in the
facility's permit fij.e. There are no state guidelines for
monitoring well construction. Monitoring requirements at
lagoon systems are site-specific; generally, the NYDEC
requires lagoons to be lined. Unless an enforcement action
42
-------
is planned, the NYDEC does not utilized a chain of custody
procedure for samples, nor are the treatment systems required
to maintain a chain of custody.
North Carolina
The North Carolina Environmental Management Commission
(NCEMC) standards requiring ground water monitoring have only
recently become effective, and the North Carolina Department
of Natural Resources and Community Development (NCDNR) is
responsible for implementing these regulations. These
standards require monitoring wells for both lagoons and land
treatment systems. The number and location of monitoring
wells required is site-specific and is determined in
conjunction with state ground water specialists. However,
two wells (one upgradient and one downgradient) are
considered the minimum acceptable number. Monitoring wells
are to be sampled three times a year, in March, July, and
November; these months are believed to be critical periods
for ground water quality. Analyses for nitrate- and
ammonia-nitrogen, total dissolved solids, total organic
carbon, pH, total coliform, chloride, conductivity, and water
levels are required.
For a lined lagoon, analyses for nitrate- and
ammonium-nitrogen, chloride,, total dissolved solids, pH,
'specific conductivity, total col-iform, total organic carbon,
and water level measurements are required. Unlined lagoons
are required to monitor for iron and chromium in addition to
the parameters for lined lagoons. All analyses must be
performed by a certified laboratory. Standards for the
construction of the monitoring wells are also in existence.
Quarterly monitoring reports are currently sent to the NCDNR
regional office for review. In general, neither the NCDNR
inspectors nor the treatment system personnel are required to
maintain a chain of custody for any ground water samples. If
ground water contamination is found and an enforcement action
is planned, then the NCDNR would implement a chain of custody
procedure.
North Dakota
The North Dakota Division of Water Supply and Pollution
Control (NDDWSPC) does not generally require ground water
monitoring around lagoons, while the requirements for ground
water monitoring at land treatment systems are site-specific.
Since ground water recharge at many of the land treatment
systems in North Dakota is believed to be minimal, ground
water monitoring is not generally required. The discharge
from the treatment systems is monitored for biochemical
43
-------
oxygen demand, ammonia- and nitrate-nitrogen, suspended
solids, fecal coliforms, and pH under the NPDES program. The
monitoring frequency is monthly for the first year, then
after the first year, the monitoring frequency is
re-evaluated based upon the flow rate and effluent quality.
Ohio
The Ohio Environmental Protection Agency does not have
specific guidelines for ground water monitoring L •:. land
treatment sites; however, state law mandates that ground
water monitoring is required if a potential health hazard
exists. The ground water monitoring requirements for lagoons
are made on a case-by-case basis. In general, lagoons are
required to be lined and are designed in conformance with
"GLUMRB Recommended Standards for Sewage Works."
Oklahoma
Ground water monitoring is generally required by the Oklahoma
Department of Health (ODH) at land treatment sites, but not
at municipal lagoons. A minimum of one upgradient, one
on-site, and one downgradient well is required at land
treatment systems; Monthly analyses for ammonia-nitrogen and
annual analyses for metals are required. . The monitoring data
is submitted to the state; however, the data are not
routinely reviewed. There are no chain of custody or quality
assurance requirements for ground water samples collected at
land treatment systems. The ODH also does not have any
guidelines for monitoring well construction.
Oregon
The Oregon Department of Environmental Quality's (ODEQ)
requirements for ground water monitoring at land treatment
systems are site-specific. The number of wells, the
monitoring frequency, and the monitoring parameters are
selected based upon the site conditions. Quarterly
monitoring for nitrate-nitrogen, ammonia-nitrogen, sulfates,
chloride, conductivity, total and fecal coliforms, and water
level are typically required. Any monitoring data collected
are sent to the ODEQ for review. There are no guidelines for
monitoring well construction. The ODEQ inspectors do utilize
a chain of custody procedure for their samples; however, the
treatment systems are not required to use a chain of custody
procedure. The ODEQ does not, as yet, have a certification
requirement for the laboratories which perform the analyses.
Lagoons, in general, are not required to have a ground water
monitoring system. Instead, lagoons can have a maximum
seepage rate of 1/4-inch per day.
44
-------
Pennsylvania
The Pennsylvania Department of Environmental Resources (PDER)
requires ground water monitoring at land treatment systems.
The number of wells required will depend upon the site
conditions; however, the PDER requires at least one
background well and one well in each direction of ground
water flow from the site. Quarterly analyses for total
phosphate, ammonia- and nitrate-nitrogen, and methyl blue
active substances are required. Annual analyses for the
following parameters are also required.
Alkalinity
Biochemical Oxygen Demand
Chemical Oxygen Demand
Chloride
Total Iron
Total Kjeldahl Nitrogen
pH
Sulfates
Total Solids
Settleable Solids
Suspended Solids
Specific Conductance
Temperature
The sample results are submitted to the PDER and are kept in
the facility's permit file. The PDER does have guidelines'
for the construction of monitoring wells.
Rhode Island
The availability of land in Rhode Island is too limited to
permit the development of land treatment systems. The need
for ground water monitoring requirements at land treatment
sites is, thus, not applicable to Rhode Island.
South Carolina
The South Carolina Department of Health and Environmental
Control (SCDHEC) requires a minimum of three monitoring wells
at both land treatment sites and lagoons; however, site
conditions may require a greater number of wells. Well
construction guidelines exist and require that the wells be
screened in the aquifer of concern and that the borehole be
backfilled to prevent seepage along the casing from the
surface. The wells are to be sampled for total phosphorus,
chloride, ammonia- and nitrate-nitrogen, alkalinity, pH,
sodium, total dissolved solids, and fecal coliform. All of
the wells must be sampled before the system begins operation
to determine the background water quality. During the first
year of operation, the wells must be sampled quarterly, and
than bi-annually thereafter.
Most of the existing treatment systems use state certified
contract laboratories to perform their analyses. The data
45
-------
are then sent to the SCDHEC for review and for entry into a
computerized tracking system. With this tracking system, the
data can be examined statistically. Chain of custody
procedures are not used by SCDKEC unless an enforcement
action is anticipated. Treatment systems are not required to
maintain a sample chain of custody.
South Dakota
The South Dakota Department of Water and Natural Resources
Management (SDDWNRM) generally requires ground water
monitoring wells at land treatment sites. Although the
actual number of wells is site-specific, two upgradient and
two downgradient wells is generally the minimum number of
wells required. The monitoring requirements for lagoons, if
any, are site-specific. The monitoring parameters considered
for routine analysis (typically monthly). include:
conductivity, chlorides, total dissolved solids, ammonia-,
nitrate-, and nitrite-nitrogen, fecal coliform, sulfates,
biochemical oxygen demand, phosphorus, suspended solids, and
pH. The monitoring data are kept in the facility's permit
file.
,Tennessee
The Tennessee Division of Water Quality Control (TDWQC)
requires ground water monitoring at land treatment sites, but
not at lagoon treatment systems. The number of monitoring
wells required depends upon the size of the system, with two
monitoring wells considered the minimum acceptable number.
Guidelines for the construction of the wells exist, and it is
recommended that the wells be constructed similar to the
wells used at solid waste disposal sites. For the first year
of operation, quarterly analyses for pH, specific
conductance, total organic carbon, total nitrogen,
nitrate-nitrogen, and water level are required. Thereafter,
the nitrate-nitrogen analysis may be omitted. Data from the
monitoring wells are kept in the facility's permit file.
Texas
Before a land treatment system begins operation, the Texas
Department of Water Resources (TDWR) requires that the
background ground water quality be determined. Existing wells
near the site are to be used for this determination. Total
dissolved solids, chloride, nitrate-nitrogen, sulfate, pH,
and coliform bacteria are to be monitored. Requirements for
ground water monitoring after start-up for both lagoons and
land treatment systems are made on a case-by-case basis;
46
-------
however, in general, monitoring wells are not required at
either lagoon or land treatment systems. Exceptions to this
general policy occur when the treatment system is located
near private wells, or in the case of a lagoon, if seepage is
suspected. In such cases, parameters which might be
monitored could include nitrate-nitrogen, sodium, chloride,
or sulfate." Any data collected from a monitoring system are
reviewed and placed in the facility's permit file. Standards
for the construction of monitoring wells do not currently
exist.
Utah
The Utah Bureau of Water Pollution Control (UBWPC) generally
requires monitoring wells at land treatment systems, but not
for lagoon treatment systems. Although the monitoring
requirements are site-specific, most land treatment systems
have two monitoring wells and are required to sample monthly
dur'ing the period of wastewater application. Total
phosphorus, nitrate-nitrogen, and total colifbrm are the
analyses most frequently required, and the monitoring data
are kept in the facility's permit file.- The UBWPC does have
general guidelines for well construction.
Vermont
The Vermont Agency of Environmental Conservation (VAEC) does
not, in general, require monitoring wells for either land
treatment systems or lagoons. In general, lagoons are
required to be lined. Leach fields comprise the major form
of land treatment in Vermont, and any ground water monitoring
requirements for these systems would be developed on a
case-by-case basis. Guidelines for well construction are in
existence should wells be required. Any monitoring data
collected would be kept in the facility's permit file.
Virginia
The Virginia Water Control Board (VWCB) evaluates and
approves ground water monitoring systems for land treatment
and lagoon systems on a case-by-case basis. In general,
however, such systems are required to have one upgradient and
two downgradient monitoring well at land treatment sites.
Prior to system start-up, the VWCB generally requires that
six months to one year of background data be collected. A
more extensive list of monitoring parameters is required
during this phase of the project. After start-up, several
indicator parameters are selected from this list for analysis
at a quarterly monitoring frequency. Unless an enforcement
47
-------
actioi. is anticipated, neither the VWCB inspectors nor the
treatment facility are required to utilize a chain of
custody.
Washington
The Washington Department of Ecology (WDE) generally requires
a minimum of one upgradient and one downgradient monitoring
well at both land treatment and unlined lagoon systems.
To-al coliform and nitrate-nitrogen are the monitoring
parameters most frequently required. While the monitoring
frequency depends upon the size of the treatment system, the
monitoring frequencies currently required range from
bi-weekly to semi-annually, and the monitoring data are
placed in the facility's permit file. The WDE uses EPA
guidelines for monitoring well construction. There are no
chain of custody requirements.
West .Virginia
The West Virginia mountainous terrain combined with the
requirement for secondary treatment prior to land treatment
has, to date, prevented the use of land treatment in West
Virginia. Thus, the West Virginia Department of Natural
Resources has not developed requirements for ground water
monitoring at land treatment sites.
Wisconsin
The Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources' (WDNR)
requirements for ground water monitoring at land treatment
sites are dependent upon the flow rate to the treatment
system. In general, the greater the flow rate, the more
extensive are the monitoring requirements. Treatment systems
receiving less than 50,000 gpd are generally not required to
have a ground water monitoring system, while systems treating
greater than 50,000 gpd must have a ground water monitoring
system. If the wastewater flow rate exceds 1.0 MGD, the
monitoring system must monitor the aquifer at two levels.
The location and number of wells required will depend upon
the site conditions. For the first three months, monthly
samples must be collected. Thereafter, semi-annual samplng
is required. Analyses for BOD, specific conductance, COD,
organic nitrogen, ammonia-, nitrate-, and nitrite-nitrogen,
chloride, sulfate, dissolved solids, alkalinity, hardness,
and pH in both filtered and unfiltered samples are required.
The WDNR does have guidelines for the construction of
monitoring wells.
48 U.S. Envirormental Protection A&aaoy
Library, Room 2404 P14-211-A
401 a Street, S.W.
on, DC 20460
-------
Wyoming
The Wyoming Department of Environmental Quality's (WDEQ)
requirements for ground water monitoring at either land
treatment or lagoon systems are site-specific and depend upon
factors such as the depth and uses of the aquifer. One
upgradient and two downgradient wells and analyses for
ammonia- and nitrate-nitrogen, pH, chloride, and total
dissolved solids are typical minimum monitoring requirements.
The monitoring frequency is also site-specific and dependi,
upon factors such as the proximity of the system to private
wells. Monthly grab samples are typical. General guidelines
for well construction do exist. The treatment systems are
not required to use a chain of custody procedure for their
samples; however, the WDEQ inspectors do utilize a chain of
custody procedure for any samples they collect.
49
------- |