Geographic Information Systems
Applications Notebook
United States
Environmental Protection Agency
Region III - Philadelphia
September, 1991
Produced by
The Geographic Information Center
Information Resources Management Branch
-------
Contents
Introduction
Water Management Division
1. Non-point Source Pollution From Agricultural Practices
2. Targeting Areas for Wellhead Protection
3. Underground Injection Control - Site Discovery
4. Ground Water Pollution Potential Assessment
5. Regional Ground Water Risk Assessment
6. Sub-Regional Ground Water Risk Assessment
7. Federal Facilities Compliance Initiative
Water Management and Hazardous Waste Management Divisions
8. CERCLA Site Discovery
9. CIS Automation of Hazard Ranking System, Ground Water
Migration Pathway
Environmental Services Division
10. Delaware River Water Trends Report
11. Assessing Toxicological Impacts
Air, Radiation and Toxics Division
12. Monitoring Radon Levels
13. Air Quality Monitoring
Hazardous Waste Management Division
14. Superfund Applications
15. Oil Spill Emergency Response
Regional Initiatives
16. Regional Strategic Planning
-------
Contents (continued)
Regional Projects
Building Regional Geographic Databases
List of GIS Personnel
List of Project Leads
-------
Introduction
Geographic Information Systems (CIS) is a rapidly developing
technology that allows users the capability of collecting, managing,
displaying, and analyzing large volumes of data from various
environmental media. By better understanding the spatial relationship
between natural resources, human populations and potential sources
of contamination, the Region can more effectively accomplish the
Agency's mission.
Region III obtained CIS capabilities in December of 1988. The
Geographic Information Center (GIG) was established within the
Information Resources Management Branch (IRMB) to provide GIS
expertise and support to EPA programs, and to manage GIS related
hardware and software. Since that time, GIS projects have been
completed in almost all EPA program areas. This document contains
brief descriptions and sample GIS output from some of the Region's
most successful GIS efforts. Unless stated otherwise, GIS technical
and cartographic support was provided by Region Ill's GIG.
The maps contained in this document are color xerox reproductions
of originals produced on a Calcomp 5800 series color electrostatic
plotter. The majority of the maps were originally designed to be
printed at a 40 inch by 34 inch format, and were reduced prior to
xeroxing. As a result, there may be some loss of resolution and
readability. We hope this document will provide an insightful
overview of GIS activities in Region III.
-------
Non-point Source Pollution
From Agricultural Practices
EPA Region Ill's Ground Water Protection Section is using GIS to
assist Jefferson County, West Virginia and the State Department of
Agriculture in developing their Pesticide in Ground Water
Management Plan, An interagency workgroup of federal, state, and
local agencies was established to help in this effort. Each agency has
contributed important data layers to the project and a detailed
agricultural practices survey of 118 farmers was conducted by EPA
and the County Planning Council.
Several different types of analysis are being conducted by EPA staff
using GIS. The maps on the following pages were created to identify
areas where pesticides are being applied to vulnerable ground water
areas. Vulnerability was determined by the State Department of
Natural Resources using EPA's "DRASTIC" methodology (see map on
the following page). "DRASTIC" is an acronym representing the most
important factors controlling ground water pollution potential. GIS
will allow EPA to further refine the vulnerability model by considering
soil leaching properties, pesticide leaching properties, ground water
flow directions, and the locations of sink holes, cavernous zones, and
faults. The second map displays pesticide usage in pounds per farm
as determined from by the agricultural practices survey. In the third
map, the vulnerability and the pesticide usage maps were combined
in GIS to identify where large amounts of pesticides are being applied
to areas of high ground water vulnerability.
EPA is seeking funds to compare predictions regarding the effects of
agricultural practices on ground water quality made using GIS with
actual ground water monitoring data. The USGS National Water
Quality Assessment of the Potomac River Basin is a potential source
of funding for this proposed validation effort.
-------
18 30 00 -
GROUND WATEB
POLLUTION POTENTIAL
Jefferson County
Wes t Virginia
-------
JEFFERSON COUNTY
Ground Water Vulnerability
Analysis Project
Pest if ids Use - 1989
Total Lbs. i Farm
Priority Leaders
-------
POTENTIAL GROUND WATER RISK
FROM PESTICIDES
Yen: 11 a?
JEFFERSON COUNTY
WEST VIRGINIA
PE 5 I I C I D E BANK I "-&S
Hl|-i III! I
D
-------
Targeting Areas
for Wellhead Protection
In the interest of assisting Region III states in developing Wellhead
Protection Programs, the Ground Water Protection Section (GWPS)
is using CIS technology to gather data and produce high quality CIS
maps designed to stimulate interest in wellhead protection on the part
of state and local officials. As seen in the following example, GWPS
and the Geographic Information Center (GIG) produced an intriguing
map that targeted areas in Anne Arundel County, Maryland for
wellhead protection. The map shows the spatial relationships
between potential sources of contamination and public water supply
wells. These features were overlaid with a relative ground water
vulnerability assessment map. The relative vulnerability was based
on the weighted ranking of seven key hydrogeologic factors, referred
to as DRASTIC by the National Water Well Association (NWWA).
Maps showing potential for ground water contamination were
provided to state and county officials along with data necessary for
delineating wellhead protection areas. CIS served as the catalyst in
bringing together key state and local officials. They have now formed
a workgroup to delineate wellhead protection areas using GIS as one
of the primary tools.
-------
TAR
WE L
ANN E
GET ING ARE
LHEAD PROT
ARUNDE L
MARYLAND
AS FOR
ECT ION
COUNTY
* DOM me WE in N
* tui ic 1,'tEi itipru -tin ..
N
* INC • it • > wins
* tEl LA
•-" «r
A Itl IIORACf 1ITEJ
« Ui onroiAL iiltt
® SI
LEGEND
• ITT l9UIBjllT D f j i 1 i c S t g r t s
• IL 10*1!
H IKfTAfll ^ in i t
. . llCIIHi
Mr— "^1,
-------
Underground Injection Control
Site Discovery
The Underground Injection Control Section is responsible for
regulating the discharge of waste to the subsurface through injection
wells. CIS was used to identify certain industrial facilities for
inspection that are not regulated by EPA but that may be
contaminating ground water. Sewered and unsewered areas were
compared with locations for industrial facilities, gasoline service
stations, and automobile related businesses. Since those located in
unsewered areas are not discharging to publicly owned treatment
facilities, it is possible that some of them may be discharging waste
through Class V injection wells into shallow aquifers.
Seven counties in southeastern Pennsylvania that rely heavily on
ground water as a drinking water source were selected for this study.
For each county, maps of sewered and unsewered areas were obtained
from the county planning commissions and digitized. Data from EPA's
FINDS database and from a Dun and Bradstreet database were used
to identify the locations of certain types of industries, and gasoline
service stations.
Six maps were created for each county: industrial facilities, industrial
facilities with twenty or more employees, industrial facilities with
sales of $1,000,000 a year or more, gasoline service stations,
automobile related industries with twenty or more employees, and
automobile related industries with sales of $1,000,000 or more.
These maps were used by inspectors to prioritize the facilities that
they inspected. The two maps on the following pages are included as
examples. The first identifies gasoline service stations located in
unsewered areas. The second identifies industrial facilities for
selected SIC codes that are located in unsewered areas.
The results were very favorable and numerous violations were
encountered. Prioritizing the facilities for inspection allowed the
Underground Injection Control Section to achieve significant cost
savings and they are currently repeating the process for additional
counties. In addition, they are using CIS to determine the spatial
relationship between the identified injection wells and municipal and
residential wells.
-------
GASOL I NE SERVICE S TAT IONS
IN LANCASTER COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA
D Irtu Illktil Stitit
I Irin till lit liiirtl
ii . Itiim.j tiri •,. tlti
il|ii.fW fit. Jilimtki le
tfUltd f Irtm !«•• *
' •
i ii» Hi • Ml Udtliftfi
• Hit ItiMMM lit«f>mtftl
-------
INDUSTR 1 AL FACILITIES
IN LANCASTER COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA
B lien Ikil Ire Stittti
Q Iren II Iktil Stftri
Pit! I I tier Ie|iliLei • ; in
l«l-ltfiliU< titt
trfi
fioi
ilit
4rm
TTPI
ile ChCBUll lit.
e ChcBieaLt. Plutlci
iie Ckeiicili
e ti I i ei 1 1
MtUlif »4 PorilDi
I • -; D nd Steel
He til III I I B( nt Ciitlij
Ntiftrini Itlii F*rali|
fail Co. (ill
lUclriilttTif
Force J • i • Kniie 1 i •[
Eleclrieil k El«etroi
ic ~*mi
SIC CODIS
5005-301!
SJ01-JU9
"" !?!8-y{f«f"f.JfHIt
sustsi^jif.'i'.fjiif:!
Prltttlllm: BTk fill II
ftillri: iirll. pll)
fr.l.c.i I, IFl In. Ill - •l.l.l.ifl.l
f«/ii- ^ MII liimrtti l«l|«»l
Inittti FIT. IP"!I||I> III - 'I. Uiil.lii
Pmlirfrivkrf /*/*:!'.• Cnfr*I
-------
Ground Water Pollution
Potential Assessment
The Ground Water Protection Section is charged with assisting states
in developing Wellhead Protection Programs. Limited funding has
been appropriated to the states for these activities and the Region
needed a technical assistance vehicle. CIS filled this void and was
used to gather data and stimulate interest on the part of state and
local offices by providing a management tool that would be useful in
wellhead protection programs.
The project also sought to demonstrate an application on a county-
level scale. New Castle County, Delaware was selected and areas in
the county that are at high risk for ground water contamination were
identified and prioritized for further action. Over sixty data layers
were converted from New Castle County Water Resource Authority's
(NCC WRA) CIS system to Region Ill's system. Locations of potential
sources of contamination were obtained from various EPA databases.
These data were used to produce the maps on the following pages.
The first map illustrates the location of potential sources of
contamination with respect to wellhead protection areas and ground
water recharge areas. In the second map the DRASTIC index was
used to identify areas of high ground water vulnerability. CIS was
used to identify areas of high vulnerability within recharge protection
areas or within two miles of a public water supply well. These areas
were further prioritized by using GIS to identify and attach weighing
factors to potential sources of contamination located in proximity to
these vulnerable ground water areas. The third map shows the
algorithm used to prioritize the areas and the results of the analysis.
Maps and databases produced for this project were provided to NCC
WRA officials. They have since modernized their own GIS capabilities
and are using GIS for a wide variety of environmental activities,
including the passage of a Wellhead Protection Ordinance. The
methodologies developed were later used by the Ground Water
Protection Section to conduct a regional ground water risk
assessment.
The GIS Project resulted in both tangible and intangible benefits to
the Region and the NCC WRA:
• A true federal/local partnership was developed to work towards
a common goal - with little money involved.
-------
• EPA provided a technical assistance vehicle for states/locals
in a program where resources are limited.
• The development of a management tool to assist managers in
determining environmental program priorities.
• The Region's understanding and assessment of the scope and
nature of environmental problems was dramatically improved.
-------
LOCATION OF POTENTIAL SOURCES OF CONTAMINATION
RELATIVE TO GROUND WATER RECHARGE AREAS AND WELLHEAD PROTECTION AREAS
NEW CASTLE COUNTY, DELAWARE
'Ifl IEI CHILE C
-------
POTENTIAL VULNERABILITY BASED ON DRASTIC INDEX
-------
TARGETING OF HIGH RISK GROUND WATER AREAS
RANKING OF HICH RISK AREAS
Ttiose portions of the Wellhead and Recharge Protection Areas
determined by DRASTIC Index to be highly vulnerable lo ground
water polution were selected for analysis. These areas were
evaluated relative to each other by the equation shown below.
The equation incorporates a range of risk-related factors
including potential sources and known incidents of contamination.
This map shows the 10 areas at highest risk for groundwater
contamination. Their characteristics are summarized in the table
below.
RATING • 2(MCL VIOLATIONS) • 2(RCRA RELEASES)
• 2(USTs 15 YEARS OR OLDER)
. CERCLA . 2(RCRA) . 3(USTs)
TEN GEOGRAPHIC AREAS
AT HIGHEST RISK FOR GROUND WATER CONTAMINATION
RECMRCC FTOIKT10N «B£*S
«T>il»mef uul H. «• if ul nnl»lal_l
UIIK tl
JIL.
••••" "SB
KALE 1:11.000
-------
Regional Ground Water
Risk Assessment
One of the earliest CIS projects in Region III, this study's purpose was
to collect various program-related data and to combine them in such
a way as to reveal the spatial variation of existing or potential ground
water quality problems. The project was accomplished by Temple
University Lab for Geographic Information Systems under an FY89
grant from the Drinking Water/Ground Water Branch. The entire
region was examined using counties as the basic study units to
identify particular problem areas or "hot spots" needing further
attention.
To prioritize those counties in need of the greatest EPA effort and
resources, various layers of the USGS 1:2,000,000 Digital Line Graph
data were combined with retrievals made from a variety of EPA
program databases associated with drinking water quality and
potential sources of contamination. For each database, summary
statistics were generated by county and related to the digital county
map in ARC/INFO. Program data included in the GIS were:
• Public Water Supply (PWS) systems primarily dependent
on ground water
• Population Served by each system
• Maximum Contaminant Level Violations for
each system
• DRASTIC score (to estimate vulnerability to
contamination)
• Soluble Pesticides Usage value for each county
• Superfund NPL Sites
• RCRA Treatment, Storage and Disposal Sites
• Class V Underground Injection Wells
• Known ground water contamination incidents
To estimate each county's relative degree of risk to ground water
contamination, a weighted ranking scheme was developed to combine
all of these factors into a single summary score. The map on the
following page shows those counties determined to be at greatest
potential risk to ground water contamination.
-------
FY '89 RANKING OF EPA REGION III COUNTIES,
BASED UPON GROUND WATER CONTAMINATION RISKS
US EPA Re
FV '19 County
Ground W
Thi
deltrmined bj tSli ant
m o i ! llflslllcilll gi o u n i
pa I en I 111 ID I he iesloi
cntilled Ihe i d* n I ifi £3(
Segioit III, VHth J
o ! i h
The result is Ih is p r i o
legion's ground # * 1 e r
tufnfrabililf to con Urn
illmed II*M.
fa conduct this 31
)l lit Ai t-5 (men ! M p I h g d
employed to p 11 o r i i ii f
jcca ral n g la I^i e f a I! o*
Population Dependency
total imffibeTj of
high field, modenlrd
Cheraloi '(MCI) Violiii
f I e i s t !• re i ill j I n g In g
United St
evleu
Drmlmg Wi K r/C rou n d Wner ProiecHon Brjnck
-------
Sub-Regional Ground Water
Risk Assessment
As in the Regional Ground Water Assessment, a grant from the
Drinking Water/Ground Water Protection Branch was issued to the
Temple University Lab for Geographic Information Systems. Building
on the experience gained in the Regional Assessment, this effort
examined the state of Pennsylvania in greater detail. The goal of the
project was to synthesize various EPA program data and to identify
areas with existing or potential ground water quality problems.
Many layers of data were included in the analysis. Political
boundaries and Land Use/Land Cover data layers were built from the
USGS 1:250,000 digital data. Program data included in the CIS were:
• Public Water Supply (PWS) systems primarily
dependent on ground water
• Population Served by each system
• Maximum Contaminant Level Violations for each
system
• DRASTIC score (to estimate vulnerability to
contamination)
* Soluble Pesticides Usage value for each county
• Superfund NPL Sites
• RCRA Large Quantity Generators and Treatment,
Storage and Disposal Sites
• Groundwater and Land Ban Violations
• Sites reporting to the Toxic Release Inventory System
SARA Title III)
• Class V Underground Injection Wells
• A select set of businesses from the Dun &
Bradstreet Conquest File
Another objective of the project was to try to analyze the data on a
site-by-site basis, rather than aggregated by county. Wherever
possible, attempts were made to retrieve program data at a more
detailed level than was done in Regional Assessment. Although the
regional level of analysis was considered better than county
aggregates, the quality of the locational data contained within the
various program databases proved to be inadequate for the intended
analysis. Therefore, zipcode areas were chosen as the basic unit of
analysis.
-------
Although a weighted ranking (similar to the Regional Assessment) has
not been completed, the data sets and resulting maps created for this
project have supported various management-level investigations into
existing or potential ground water problems within Pennsylvania.
Several different agencies within the state will be receiving the digital
data sets to support their own program needs.
The map on the following page shows maximum contaminate level
(MCL) violations in drinking water supplies aggregated by zipcode
areas and is representative of various maps produced for the project.
-------
AREA-WIDE GROUND WATER RISK SOURCES:
MAXIMUM CONTAMINANT LEVELS IN PUBLIC WATER SUPPLIES
SCAl! 1:500,11110
f ii vioiini) f »s rluu fa Zip Cc
fiqn.tr "I «Cl V.BlltlOBi bt CMtUillll
rl»-li [fcn *. ,,^,-l....j ir *• TIBKIIDlb ai'lff Illi
....•i. .....
O.I. IIM'll: Ul IM Fl*.l>l lfp*lli!*| Ol=. *T<>" .'(E'V
m
C.MKf VltBtMl £,*.'. k...,.' .. !>«• 1161 I l,«l».«ll CIC
U. S. Environm«n'jl Proleclion Aoency
«ej:on II!
Drinking WnerlGroun'i Witer Frclsction Branch
and
The laboratory lor Geographic Information Systems
Temple University
St;itibtr mi
hlm I;
-------
Federal Facilities
Compliance Initiative
The Permits Enforcement Branch of the Water Management Division
created a series of Chesapeake Bay Watershed maps. These maps
show the locations of all facilities encompassed by the Chesapeake
Bay Watershed. The accompanying maps were used in various
executive briefings and public meetings. The first presents status of
compliance for federal facilities. The second shows the locations of
all NPDES permitted facilities in the Chesapeake Bay Watershed.
-------
EPA
REGION III
PEPMTS BFQRCaENT
BRANCH
Chesapeake Bay
FEDERAL FACILITIES
COMPLIANCE INITIATIVE
F«4«ri 1 FidI 11 I
Altlimu MOYINS CIQIlMp . [DUiSWMU
I
1
J
t
•
!*
II
HTtvuil WtKULtVI
IH Of Illl Iflk1! • LI
0»T IE LVD It U.J. *l"
fM!«Al HIVICil ACKI
tiMm iiiviL-et lUJxl
iiMHlY All fOIfl f^f
i>i«n or coNciiji
D» - IMhKLE* ItitAI
M hOWM t.\VAL HCOlCA
AV(U All STAIIOM-OCJ
(MTAL AVIATION OIFCT
M-1L BMI • MQIFOil
fiVAL 'IH 1C WOtKf '
rt**L ItJ|J,ltH LU01A
IV/.L iirrir CCNH* •
***L «E* Mil SrjJIGM
AVY )HI> r«lU Ml
. . HOf W* AH Hi It
'„ '. IIIY - Tl. t>(1iH
. , IMY . vmr HILL
. . IMV (UHIISW: fO
, IK* T(4INII*1 CJ
, . If [Ml CEHK4L
- , IM, 01 tlMl W
, , I»T. o», ladCATu
. MAIIY BMVOHD LA
. MVA1 ACJDIMV
. WH/*5 Ml S1A1IW
. H*VM tKHOJlVl t
1 C1HTII
Hi CIIIK HAI
icmwEicE ILBSI
iHlOQLI 11-611
(«**1 THID>
> I!/NFTON
r IM
X CE«ril
HEAITH
cim»
H* VJISINU IIACtl
DlY
CNIATMAM
ClfcBiT I1LAHD
VO**TWH
CTI HECNAKICiltt,
1 NlWfOlI NEM
T KTCHn'
Tit - WMt-FMTOn
UlflT CdTTI
;o(i iiiAEiE
14 |914 iioa ft]
OIA70KV
. 1,1! U1 INT
'DWA'iCl OlifOUi
. MVC . IIWILLI fj.
I-IMC oivu,of, t « oy.ttui.jo • KMIVIPI
IMMC BiviiBf^a (O.oufttiirwfiNBUi.ruyin
IMLlifM IEIJ AlUr PlIDICAl CtMltf
W.IHItHgroS AOtllBWCT - JjHIKfllllA
a Department of Defense facilities
&Non-Department of Defense Facilities
>. • Or i g j na I ly Out of Compliance
t • Returned to Comp Nance Since Dec.
tgRecen! Non-compliance
ONPDES Major Dischargers
-------
Ches apeake Bay
NPDES ENFORCEMENT INITIATIVE
-------
CERCLA
Site Discovery
The Ground Water Protection Section (WMD) and the Site Assessment
Section (HWMD) with CIS technical support from the Geographic
Information Center (GIG) are conducting a joint effort in Allegheny
County, Pennsylvania to assist in the CERCLA Site Discovery process.
The methodology uses aerial photography for the Allegheny County
area interpreted by the Environmental Photographic Interpretation
Center (EPIC) to identify potential hazardous waste disposal sites.
EPIC examined aerial photography as far back as the 1930's and
1940's up to the present and interpreted the photography for the
signature patterns typically associated with the disposal of hazardous
waste. The locations for the waste disposal areas were transferred
from the aerial photographs to topographic basemaps and digitized
into ARC/INFO. Since EPIC identified over 800 areas of possible
hazardous waste disposal a ranking scheme will be applied to
prioritize sites for further investigation. This prioritization
methodology, based conceptually on the Superfund Hazard Ranking
System (HRS), calculates the number of people who rely on ground
water for their source of drinking water supply, living within a four
mile radius of each of the EPIC-identified sites.
The following map of the Allegheny County area displays
locations of EPIC-identified sites and CERCLA sites from the CERCLIS
database. The locations will be compared to determine if any EPIC-
identified sites are already represented in the CERCLIS database.
The second map covers the Pittsburgh East Quadrangle in
Allegheny County. It includes census tract shaded by population and
public water supply well locations with associated population served.
As mentioned previously, this information will be used to calculate the
number of people residing within a four mile radius of each of the
EPIC-identified sites who rely on ground water as their drinking water
source.
-------
CERCLA LOCAT IONS
ALLEGHENY COUNTY
LEGEND
*'•**
Scitrtl
fttnl It I In trin i
Ti.li Si Ki
CIICU
!«•;«• iiiiaip ini it** lilt Hi i in t*i
Pftttfliti: jlllttitl trflflffrltl liriil.i, I.II l>
^t»4ir*i f** P«i| ••'»' mtwllM MtlUi
S.fitl.tl PMIIMB
fitiicti ki: (•lif**n«t IMMIM •••it»«ii ittitk
-------
PITTSBURGH EAST
QUADRANGL E
CINStTS TIACT PQULUIOH
• III
II Illl
Ill • till
Ill - III*
111 - inn
PUBLIC SlPPl ? WHLS
• III ii .. imii
IOHUIICI. Illl
flu limit >i
**•-
»Hl kMlkMKlua^
B&BSBE&i*'
jjw* ^S!^SW«M
-------
GIS Automation of Hazard Ranking System
Ground Water Migration Pathway
The purpose of this project was to evaluate the feasibility of using GIS
as a support tool in the Hazard Ranking System (HRS) scoring
process. This project was a joint effort between the Ground Water
Protection Section of the Water Management Division and the Site
Assessment Section of the Hazardous Waste Management Division.
The Temple University Laboratory for Geographic Information
Systems was given a grant to perform all CIS-related work over the
summer of 1990.
The Hazard Ranking System is a scoring system used to assess the
relative threat associated with actual or potential releases of
hazardous substances at sites (Federal Register. 40 CFR Part 300,
December 14, 1990). To assist a user with little GIS experience in
characterizing the potential for contamination from a particular site,
a series of programs and graphical menus, written in Arc Macro
Language, allow the user to interact directly with the data stored in
the GIS. Individual procedures from the Ground Water Migration
Pathway scoring process were automated so that the user could access
them all in their proper order in the scoring process, or individually,
so that the user could examine the effect a particular variable has on
the overall score. The controlling procedures keep track of all
variables that affect the flow of operations within the scoring process,
thus keeping the user from improperly scoring a site.
The Targets section of the scoring process accounts for the
populations and resources potentially at risk from contamination at
the site being considered. Given that the Targets tend to have the
greatest influence on the overall pathway score, the GIS data layers
focused on the data needed to characterize populations at risk from
a given site. As this was a demonstration project with limited
funding, data sets were built for Bucks County, Pennsylvania.
Included in the GIS analysis are the following layers:
• Updated locations of sites from the CERCLIS database
• 1980 Census tracts and associated total population values
• Public Water Supply (PWS) Intake locations
- Populations served by Public Water Supply systems
* PWS Service Area Boundaries
• Associated Wellhead Protection Areas
-------
Waterbodies and roads data layers (at an input scale of 1:24,000]
from the Pennsylvania Department of Transportation were
incorporated for the purpose of providing the user with some regional
context for each site during a scoring session.
The graphic on the following page represents a "snapshot" of the
computer display at one point in a typical user scoring session. In this
image, four different graphic elements perform specialized functions.
The largest window is a map displaying the location of the site and
all potential targets within four miles. The bottom window is a
dialogue area where the user responds to various prompts throughout
the session. The large blue 'Text Window" is the Scoresheet which
summarizes all sub-scores within the Pathway score. This is accessed
by choosing the appropriate option from the forth graphic element,
the main "Pulldown Menu" .
-------
verall _Score j PI ot | Detai! Data j Qui t j
.r Categori.es and Factors
•'..'• '•"'.• !
Likelihood of. Rel ease to.an flquifer
1. Observed fiel ease:
2. Potential to Release
2a, Cental nment
2bi Net; Praci pi t ati on
2c, Depth to flquifer
2d, Travel Time
2e, Potenti al to Rel ease
(lines 2a x (2& * 2c > 2ct»
'•""t i hood of Rel ease (hi gher of
Si or 2e
Maxi mum Value'.. Val ue flssi gned
-
36 101241-010 PERKASIE
37 100133-003 MO PENN
38 101241-008 PERKASIE
39 101243-014 SELLERSV
40 100496-002 GROUSE G
Is the above Information co
PLEASE SELECT AN OPTION FRO
Hast a; Char act eri si i os
\ •'..;;' •- '' . - ' ' ' "'
Toxi city/J1obi It ty ;
K Hazardous Haste Quantity
6. Waste: Char act eri sties j
Target s
/. Nearest ttel f
8. Popui ati on
8a. Level I Concentrations
8b, Level II Concent rat t ons
8c. Potenti al Contami nati on
8d. Population (li:nas 8a + 8b + So)
Resources
lie!) head' Prot ecti oin flrea
.,.,. Target s < I i nes 7 +. 8d * 9 + 10)
Ground Mater )1i grati on Score for an Rqui fer
12. flqutfer Score
1223. 7
1223.7
5
1298. 7
-------
Delaware River Water Trends Report
The Environmental Services Division (BSD) initiated an assessment of
water quality, sediment quality and biological integrity of the
Delaware River as a pilot to a regional Water Quality Trends Report.
GIS was used to display monitoring stations along the Delaware
River and the level of their dissolved oxygen, fecal coliform bacteria,
and the water quality trends for each monitoring station.
For the purposes of the Water Trends Report, the Delaware River was
divided into two sections; the Delaware Bay to Trenton, NJ and
Trenton, NJ to Hancock, NY. For each of these sections, Two maps
were created and included in the Water Quality Trends Report. One
displayed the readings for fecal conform, the second dissolved oxygen.
Both indicate trends in water quality.
-------
TRENDS IN FECAL COL I FORM DENSITY
Trenton. NJ to Hancock NY
t Increasing levels
Decreasing levels
Coliform
Hancock
Delaware
l Less than
100 - 500
•501 - 900
•Greater than
Percentile*
Values
Mercer ^Middlesex
^J8
PA Vv NJ
-------
DISSOLVED OXYGEN CONCENTRATION TRENDS
Delaware Bay to Trenton, New Jersey
t Increasing level;
4 Decreasing level;
Dissolved Oxygen
10th Pe rcen t i 1 e
s Greater than or
equal to 5.00
•4.0 - 4.99
• Less than 4.00
Station Percenlile*
5 .30
« .30
6 .80
6 .30
8.30
5.10
30
00
4.30
4.20
3.70
3.50
3.70
5.00
4.80
5.60
7.90
* 10% of Val ue s 1
Mercer
I3t (^ Burlington
Delaware ; •Camden
Glouchester 1 Camden
Sussex
-------
Assessing Toxicological Impacts
The Emergency Planning Community Right-to-Know Act (EPCRA)
requires that certain industries report their emissions and off-site
transfers for specified chemicals each year. This data is contained in
the Toxics Release Inventory (TRI) database. Region III utilized the
information in TRI and the available information regarding the
lexicological impacts of these chemicals to provide a "weighted"
emission for each of the sites. Based on the results of this approach,
the accompanying maps were generated using the Region's CIS
capabilities.
The first map indicates the location of facilities in New Castle County,
Delaware, that reported to the TRI database for 1987, and their
relationship with other EPA programs. The pie charts indicate the
relative importance of the emissions for one of the facilities. Similar
charts can be created for all of the facilities using a program that was
written to interface the TRI database with CIS.
Using 1988 TRI data, the top fifty facilities in terms of weighted
emissions for air and land disposal were identified. The weighting
factor took into consideration the toxicity of each of the chemicals
emitted at the individual facilities. The second map in the series
shows the air facilities in Pennsylvania with population density to
indicate risk to human health. The legend contains the name of each
facility and the reported emission for each chemical. The third map
shows the land disposal facilities with ground water vulnerability to
indicate potential threat to drinking water supplies.
-------
TRI SITES IN
NEW CASTLE COUNTY, DELAWARE
1987 DATA
• TRI
. TRI AND RCRA
• TRI AND SUPERFUND
- TRI, RCRA, AND SUPERFUND
FACILITY *14 DATA
Total C h emi r i1 Emissions {Ibs} Air [missions i Relative B f D
isssr
• I1II1B Cllflllll
111 II 111
'! '! IS
I • 'ii
Totll Chemical Emissions
i S* 1 i I i ve I fD
Land ind 0(f s i t e Emissions
i lelitive 8 (D
g:;:::;:..
s:;:;:^..,,,.,,,., :::::;
Water Emissions i Kelative KID
• fmtnuMmum i i.n
tiau""1111 ""-' „:.:::
RfD = Reference Dote
I
-------
1988 TR I AIR EMISSIONS
IN PENNSYLVANIA
FOR CANCER POT ENCY
FACILITY
3. AMERICAN ZINC COBP.
4. BASF CORP.
I. BETHLEHEM STEEL CORP.
10. CORKING ASAHI VIDEO PBODU
18. GRIFFITH MICRO SCIENCE IN
20. INTERNATIONAL PAPER CO,-I
::. IT? STEII co.INC.
23. UEINS STEEL CO.
27. OCCIDENTAL CBII1CH CORP.
28. OI-NEG T? PRODUCTS INC.
36. USS CLAIBTON IORI3
37. IEST CO.
CHEMICAL NAME
CADMIUM COMPOUNDS
I ,3-BUTADlENE
BENZENE
ARSENIC COMPOUNDS
ITBYL8NB OIIDE
CBLOBOFOBM
IENZKNE
A1SENEC
T1NYL CHLORIDE
ARSKNK COMPOUNDS
BENZENE
ETBYLENI OIIDE
CHEMICAL IN
IBS/YEAR
3
tB
540,
90,
US,
S5J
400,
38
010
920
000
590
700
506
500
BIO
7SO
770
800
POPULATION DENSITY
ii pe r i 011/15 . m' •
SI - Sit
$tt - 1.10*
frtattf that I.OtO
ItU frtm:
f«ti:
UCJ t ;«. tfl.MI I1C.
?»i«ltli»i 4*»i< t| <•
dtrittJ frt« fJ(J Ct *•••««
dittUn' ftt <•!« /rr» t**
Itll T*fin l*ti«ti
Off I*»t tl
Jm|mtl, ftfl
f» Itfi** /// - f*
rir *
-------
1988 T RI AIR EMISSIONS
IN PENNSYLVANIA EOR CANCER POTENCY
-------
N
1988 TR1 LAND RELEASES
PENNSYLVANIA FOR CANCER POTENCY
rt c i L i T T
i . imiCA ZINC
2. iKmCAN Z i N
3. iRMCO ADVANC
S. BETHLEHKM ST
8. BETBLEBEM ST
1. BETHLEHEM ST
10. CUPENTER TE
12. EMPIRE STEEL
14. GRINNELl COR
15. LATBOBE STEE
IS. LENOI CRYSTA
IB. LOfER IORIS
::. UK HITUS c
:;. OCCIDENTU c
25. PENNSYLVANIA
If. PENNTRCE PAP
11. RAYMARI FRIC
2i. RENEEB FILMS
21. ST. GEOiGl C
!0. STANDAID STg
;i. STANDAID STi
J2. TELEDYNE INC
33. TELEDYNE US
CORP.
C COIP.
ED MATERIALS
EEL CORP.
EEL COiP.
EEL COBP,
CBNO LOGY CORP
CASTINGS INC
P.
L CO.
L
- BAR ROD * f
ORP.
BEMICAL CORP.
STEEL FOUNDS
ERS INC.
TION CO.
CORP.
BYSTAL LTD.
EL
EL
CO
CHEMICAL NAME
LEAD COMPOUNDS
CADMIUM COMPOUNDS
N1CIEL
LEAD COMPOUNDS
NICIEL COMPOUNDS
NICIRL COMPOUNDS
NICIIL
NICEEL
rORMALDEIYDE
mm COMPOUNDS
LEAD COMPOUNDS
LEAD COMPOUNDS
BimLlUM COMPOUNDS
MSH CHLORIDE
NICKBL
CHLQROPOBM
LEAD
CADMIUM COMPOUNDS
LEAD COMPOUNDS
NICKEL
NICEEL
NICIEL
NICIEL
CBEMICA
LBS/1
120
2
75
1
20
1 1
187
310
t
1C
1
12
1
23
22
1
•
to
, IN
fR
000
400
000
300
000
000
700
7SO
000
700
000
too
000
«30
260
750
S91
10
320
431
DIB
250
000
httiiiil Ti]i*riki!itr t* C*i t IB! n i i *l . ImJ •• UlSTtC
Hit ••» iiJieitti tkt ftlttitt iili*riH)ttj »( Ik*
li(!ti, VT ttntj. t* irinl *tttr ciitiBlait 1 11
kj i -IliJTiC- (UlUlTlC) iBtrt. Tbi ittrii rt
i|(rt(«u< itititBtit *l tteh tuilj'i ••liirtbi
rtml n
n*|i,
trt
l i tj
lit I113TIC •ttk»4*l*|t
Mil
fit
tTilnit (riii4 wit*r t*
rtprtititlif lit atil it
liltr ptllillii ptltillll. . r
ill Iicktri*. Iqiiftr Ii4ja, Itil ••til. T*p*(rtpkj
tit iiim nit, ill kj4tiille C»il*eti»ltj »? tki
IPA til tkt III!
fittiliil'. 'II11TIC* ll
' ' ftctiri t*ilr*lliii
: liptk ti fltlf.
'••let if
tfir.
Dl* lit*
• II - 1*1
• 111 - 141
• Grtitir tkti Ml
««i« /fi»: oses i:i.tn.ttt ne.
P*ym(«lii» dt*»ilf it
dtrittd /r»« fflfJ (»*«•« I
<«UI«lt. fl/ lift /rf» I«t
fill Tt«i»i liticti 7»»»»l«r|.
ff«i*.n*»: irri i**t (i
*.(,. i«f*ii. tin
frtlnffl ti: m lt|i*m /// -
rir omci«iit»
-------
1988 TR I LAND RELEASES
IN PENNSYLVANINA FOR CANCER POTENCY
-------
Monitoring Radon Levels
The Air, Radiation and Toxics Division has been using CIS as the
centerpiece of their radon outreach program for the last two years.
Radon levels are collected as home owners voluntarily place sampling
canisters in their homes. This data has been assembled by several
private radon testing firms who have made the information available
to EPA aggregated by zipcode area.
The Region III Geographic Information Center has produced regional
maps with radon levels by county (see map on the following page),
county maps with radon levels by zipcode, and radon levels by
congressional districts (see second map). Congressmen were provided
with radon level maps for their districts to make them aware of
environmental conditions in their districts. The maps have been
effective in media presentations and as visual aides in testimony
before state legislatures.
-------
PERCENTAGE OF
RADON READINGS ABOVE 4 pC
IN REGION III
PERCENTAGE OF RADON READINGS
ABOVE 4 pCi/l
• 70S to BOX
• 60S to 70S
• 50J to BOX
• 40X to SOX
D 301 to 40X
D 2 OX to SOX
O 10X to 20X
• OX to 10%
O Insufficient Data
Total Number of Readings
Delaware 4
lukliftoi B.C. 5
Marjland 68
PeDD sjITan i a 68
fiit inj a 39
lest Virginia 3
1,1.
frfittlioi.
fi.ntt.
ll
I]
cr
:|
;rs.';'/,ii™ilr
cut r»i. i"< rti
i»*t tt
imttr 1. Illl
»!(ii» "1 - fli
[im« ( i •• Imiri i
}«Jf-!'l«.«'
S t : t 1
Itill '
,"'"',}(
a , tti sic,
, Tilttj-.,
!)..!.
(»l IrlUfh
= 190,24
,376
,304
,771
,419
,889
.502
-------
PERCENTAGE OF RADON READINGS ABOVE 4 pCi/1
PENNSYLVANIA CONGRESSIONAL DISTRICT 9
REPRESENTATIVE BUD SHUS T E R
PERCENTAGE OF RADON READINGS
ABOVE 4 pC i/l
D
Over 60%
4 0 % to 6 0 Z
20% to 40%
07. to 20%
D Insufficient Data
Halo.
Projection:
Pi Hi let:
Produced By:
Produced for: IPi
Sudan dull /rom fey fr c kit o I o ay ,
ftledjne, ilirCfttJc Inc. mi The
RaAt/n P r o i * c I
Bfl Zone 19
July 1S36
(Pi Rtjien 111-- fhllltflfkia
fn/ormation Resources Vana^emrnt
Branch
-------
Air Quality Monitoring
CIS has been used over the last two and a half years to monitor air
quality in the region. Data from the AIRS database is periodically
downloaded into the CIS and ARC/INFO's contouring capabilities are
utilized to create concentration isopleths for various pollutants. The
maps on the following two pages were created for ozone
concentrations and total suspended particulates (TSP) and were
included in the Air Quality Trends Report. The next map in this series
identifies counties in the northeastern United States that are
designated as non-attainment and do not meet minimum ozone
standards.
The New Source Review Section of the Air Enforcement Branch used
CIS to help visualize the impact of SO2 from recently permitted or
proposed sources in Virginia. The fourth map in this series shows the
locations of proposed or permitted sources indicated by a colored
circle. The diameter of the circle indicates the amount of proposed
S02 emissions in tons per year.
ARC/INFO was used to display the output from air dispersion models
by the Technical Assessment Section of the Air Programs Branch. SO2
emissions from two General Services Administration power plants
were modeled under various atmospheric and operational scenarios.
The final map in this series shows the dispersion plume for the worse
case scenario. This project successfully used CIS running on a mini-
computer as a preprocessor and post processor for a PC air dispersion
model.
-------
1986 - 1988 OZONE DESIGN VALUES FOR REGION III
Ozone Design Values
A tI a i nrne nI Areas
Less than ,895
.095 to .104
.IDS to .114
.115 to .124
No n a 1 1 a i nine n t Areas
.125 to
.135 to
.145 to
.155 to
.165 to
.175 to
Greater than .164
rn Ozone Monitoring
— Locations
-------
SUSPENDED PARTICULATE CONCENTRATIONS IN REGION III
1988 GEOMETRIC MEAN
SUSPENDED PARTICULATE CONC
UG/CU METER (25 C)
Less than 25
25 to 30
30 to 35
35 to 40
40 to 45
45 to 50
50 lo 55
55 lo 60
60 to 65
65 to 70
Greater to an 70
[71 Su s p e nd e d P a r t i e u 1 a 1
—Monitoring Locations
-------
1986 1988 NORTHEAST OZON E PROFILE
EPA REGIONS I II AND I I I
Ozone Design Values (ppm)
.125(0.129
.13010.135
.140 to .149
.150 to .159
.110 to .1119
. no to . 179
.IBO lo .It!
.190 tad |teiter
iddilionil Areis
NODIt liiameot
f~j lit tts DCS i gmted
1-1 ttliiintnl
i«flp rialt I am USSS I J.I&J.06B DIG
Illl II
II. nn
cl
-------
NEW MAJOR SOURCES
RECENTLY PROPOSED OR PERMITTED
IN VIRGINIA
*••
150H
• •M
-------
HEALTH RELATED 302 STANDARD
MAXIMUM AL LOWAB L E EMISSIONS
(ALL ELEVEN BOILERS OPERATING)
I of Standard
• 0% - IOOJ
D1001 - 200%
D 200% - 300%
m s o n - no:
• greater than 400!!
S02 «on i tor i n{ Sites
BI IP s I End L i b r s r j
BITbe Garrison School
S I earn Heating P I SDts
£GSi l«i I Plant
CS* Central PUat
1 Km Recept°r c ' > ^
(360 RECE p to r Points per
Grii)
U.S. EPA Re. i OD I I 1
Air, Toiics & Radiation
Mao a j eme n t Division
-------
Superfund Applications
The Hazardous Waste Management Division (HWMD) has used CIS
mapping capabilities for a variety of applications. Seven maps
representing these applications are contained on the following pages.
Numerous maps have been produced to display data contained in
CERCLIS and HWDMS databases. The first map shows all of the NPL
sites in the region. In addition to this map the Geographic
Information Center (GIC) has produced maps of NPL by state,
Regional CERCLA, RCRA TSD, and RCRA large and small quantity
generators. The second map was prepared for the Regional
Administrator and shows all of the hazardous waste sites in the
Philadelphia area.
The Eastern Pennsylvania Section of the Superfund Remedial Branch
is using CIS to assist in the RD/DA process. ARC/INFO was used to
display ground water contaminate concentration data for five
Superfund sites in the North Perm area of Montgomery County, PA.
The two accompanying maps display TCE for North Perm Area 2 and
PCE concentrations for North Perm Area 1. These maps were used to
graphically display some of the data contained in the RD/DA
workplan. The maps were use in Headquarters briefings and will be
used in future public meetings to convey the nature of the problem to
the general public.
CIS was an integral part of the RD/RA process at the Berks Sand Pit
Superfund Site, PA. An initial GIS map was created from detailed
engineering drawings and contains precise well locations, surface
water quality monitoring data and analytical results from residential
and monitoring wells: This map was use by EPA staff in the field to
locate additional monitoring wells and was updated over the course
of the sampling phase of the project to reflect new data. By
integrating residential, monitoring well, and surface water data on the
GIS map, EPA staff were able to base decisions regarding the location
of ground water extraction wells. This eliminated the need for an
interim report, thereby saving the agency significant resources. The
map included in this document contains all of the above data, as well
as, the location of the treatment plant (shown in brown) required by
the remedial action. The map was also used during a community
outreach television broadcast and will continue to be updated as new
information becomes available.
The Technical Support Section of the Superfund Programs Branch is
conducting an in-house Remedial Investigation at the Berkeley
-------
Products NPL Sites. The CIS system is being utilized to illustrate and
aid in the analysis of data collected at the site. Site base maps,
derived from the interpretation of aerial photography, as well as,
magnetometer and soil gas survey data have been assembled to date.
Monitoring well, soil trenching, and ecological characterization data
will also be evaluated with the CIS. The last two maps in this series
of Superfund applications display magnetometer and soil gas survey
data contoured using the CIS.
-------
NP L SITES
REGION III
Site N ame s by S : a t e
•
,
;'!•::•'•• :..
. :'."
.
.
; „,„
V
:'
'
.
, • •
:;.:• ;i;,. :.•
lots! Sites
per C o u n t r
-------
PHILADELPHIA A1EA
SUPIEFDND SUES AND
HAZARDOUS WAS IE FACILITIES
IPL IITIS
IIIITIl IITtS
in in mini mis
rti rtnimii
in n» TSI ricimii!
-------
NORTH P ENN AREA 2 SUP ERFUND SITE
TRICHLOROETHENE CONCENTRATIONS
LEGEND
• mien PIP picitirits
THIS
• suriti IILI iiciTiiis
caicinTiiTiois or Tticiutomm
I i - S IC/L
i • 25 IC/L
Si - III It/I
III - ill IC/L
ill - I .III IC/L
1.III - 9,111 IC/L
5.Ill - II.Ill IC/l
Crcittr Ikn II.Ill DC/L
Illl /rim
ists
ill!
Illlr
foil
tirv l
*»•' ?". '
a.Ill lie <•!•. lill i..,: .r
in i«.l|iii i| lit ».rli F»U
llUlrltj liuIH 1m Iinlf»cr|
MC 'I"''
f'll'lll - Pill.i.l,I,I
)
-------
NORTH PENN AREA 1 SUPERFUND SITE
TETRACHLOROETHENE CONCENTRATIONS
LEGEND
•ALLEGED PRP FACILITIES
TANKS
SAMPLED im LOCATIONS
CONCKNTKATIONS OF TETRACBLOROETBEHE
SAMPLED ON FEBKUIKY 28, IMS
• 25 UC/l
• 15 UG/L
D 5 BG/l
0.5 UG/L
50 UG/L
25 DG/L
15 UG/L
5 UG/L
)>(( Jr
«SCS 1,24. Ill Ht tt
ttlt ctri imtl|ii< t
tmltT lilfciriti Ifcfl
Clliily, ^i •aii]T«ni«
(If* lime II
r>lr»r( 7. IIM
IP1 Kilt* flf - Pti
I'll
it l.
iff
l»|
rU P
limf
HI
/if.
ftrfcrtt f tftftif 1 vtiii*
-------
BERKS SAND PIT - RI/FS
Longswamp Township, Berks Co., PA
-------
250
200
150
100
-100
-150
BERKLEY DUMPSITE MAGNETOMETER STUDY
Vertical Gradient (gammas)
IG r e a t e r
D
a
a
200
000
800
600
400
- 1
than
400
200
000
, 400
600
D 200
D 0
B-200
• -400
• -600
400
200
0
-200
-400
250
300
350
400
450
500
550
600
650
700
-------
250
200
150
1 00
-50
-100
-150
BERKLEY DUMP SITE SO I LGAS SURVEY
HNU Readings
(Greater than 60
150 - 60
140 - 50
130 - 40
D20 - 30
DID - 20
D 0 - 10
100 150 200 250 300 350 400 450 500 550 (00 S50 700 fett
lf;
-'
-------
Oil Spills in the Chesapeake Bay
The Oil and Title III Section of the Hazardous Waste Management
Division is using GIS to evaluate the impact of oil shipping on
sensitive environmental areas in the Chesapeake Bay. A basemap for
the Chesapeake Bay was created and information from various tabular
reports were input in the GIS and the following data layers were
created:
• Shipping ports,
• Refineries,
• Facilities that receive petroleum products by barge or ship,
• Oil spills (vessel related only).
These data layers are being used for planning and presentation
purposes and eventually, may be developed as an emergency response
tool. The map on the following page shows the locations of oil
shipping facilities and oil spills in the Chesapeake Bay.
A second phase of the project will map sensitive environmental areas
and analyze their proximity to oil spills, refineries, and shipping
facilities.
-------
CHESAPEAKE BAY OIL FACILITIES & SPILLS
Baltimore H a rb o r
SPILLS ttpotm TO m me
msu. tiiiTti i ptiv
Kit - 111?
1C.lot - 11,111 ,.:l.n
i
I.M« - «.»»» Slll.l.
501 - »«i culm
IM - IM CitUx
iHt tkll Itl tl !•>«
ffl Oi/ Pipeline
• /ri» IM t.t.
-
J....F,. Illr
rf I, IN t.fi.. Jir . fi.i.j.[r*i.
-------
Regional Strategic Planning Initiative
The overall goal of this project is to support EPA Region Ill's on-going
Strategic Planning efforts by using CIS technology to identify
geographic areas representing the greatest potential single-program
and cross-program environmental risks. Senior management has
charged a multi-disciplinary, multi-program task team with identifying
the risks to the environment and to human health. The team is
interpreting EPA's program data, to define and rank areas for purposes
of program resource targeting and environmental indicator selection.
Data from a variety of sources are being retrieved and integrated to
determine the current condition of both the natural resources (air,
land and water) and the public health in Region III. Data are being
displayed on a geographic basis, by county, zipcode and point
locations, depending on the data georeferencing. To date, over
twenty data layers have been assembled representing a wide range of
environmental conditions and risks.
The RISC project's first phase will identify threatened geographic
areas for more concentrated evaluation. Seven data layers (TRI-
Water, TRl-Air, 3041, Superfund, RCRA, Radon, Ozone) have been
selected for thirteen overlay combinations so as to spatially define
areas of risk. Later phases will focus on further analyzing the
relationship between sources and receptors of environmental risk,
both ecological and human health.
Project results will be used by managers to target: pollution
prevention initiatives, intensive monitoring and enforcement, priority-
setting within programs, multiple-program initiatives, areas of highest
multi-media risk, and risk communication and outreach.
This GIS project is significantly fostering cross-program teamwork in
developing holistic environmental solutions, is improving data
collection and management, and is helping set regional environmental
priorities. GIS is an essential tool for managing enormous amounts
of data, in a variety of formats, from a large number of EPA
programs. Automated data retrieval and analysis enable the project
team to perform sophisticated assessments. This project has also
directed attention towards helping implement the Agency's Locational
Data Policy, which states that by 1995 locational data will be accurate
to within twenty-five meters.
-------
Population Growth
1980 to 1988
II
C i r t o | r I p « i i F t o j < c 1
-------
Building Regional Geographic Databases
The Region III Geographic Information Center (GIC) of the
Information Resources Management Branch is actively building
Region-wide geographic databases. The most time consuming part of
most projects is data collection and many potential users become
discouraged when they learn that significant time and resources are
required to collect the data that they will need. It is also anticipated
that as GIS hardware become less expensive and a graphic user
interface to ARC/INFO becomes available; the GIS user community
will need, and expect, immediate access to commonly needed
databases.
The GIC is therefore working to build the following Region-wide
databases:
• soils,
• land use,
• wetlands,
• geology,
• edgematched 1:100,000 transportation,
• RF3 hydrology,
• population,
• and political boundaries.
The land use map of southeastern Pennsylvania on the following page
represents a portion of the data that will be included in the region-
wide land use database. It was created for USGS GIRAS land use
data.
The GIC is also working on methodologies for periodic updates of
ARC/INFO coverages created from EPA programmatic data, such as
NPL and RCRA site locations.
-------
LAN D U S E AND
LAN D C 0VE R
IN SOUTHEAST
P E N NSYLVAN I A
COUNTV NAMES
LEGEND
I
URBAN Ofi BUILT-UP LAND
RESIDENTIAL
COMMERCIAL
INDUSTRIAL
TRANSPORTATION. COMMUNICATIONS,
AND UTILITIES
INDUSTRIAL AND COMMERCIAL COMPLEXES
MIXED URBAN 01 BUILT-UP LAND
0 T H!I URBAN 01 BUILT-UP LAND
AGRICULTURAL LAND
•CROPLAND AND PASTURE
ORCHAIDI, GROVES, VINEYARDS, NURSERIES
AND ORNAMENTAL H 0 III I C » L TU R * L A(£«5
I CONFINED FEEDING OPERATIONS
CTHEI AGRICULTURAL LAND
FOI.EST LAND
DECIDUOUS FOREST LAND
EVERGREEN FOREST LAND
MIIED FOREST LAND
WATER
I WATER EDDIES
WETLANDS
IFORiSTED IYETLANDS
NONfORESTED WETLANDS
BARREN LAND
SANDV AIEAS OTHER THAN BEACHES
S SHIP MINES. OUAIRIES. AND
CSAVEL PITS
• 1 HANSiriONAL AREAS
Dm ! ran: U 5 . G S Gi BM 1 ; IS
Seine Dl! < : 1)72
rejection-. UTU If-i, II
t I o I IH: Api I I I 11)1
lr.dK.4 »,: in I,,!.. Ill . r
«ri Ur: EM lin'oi Ml •
SCALE 1 : T 50 .000
3 4 t> 8 H11 E« % <
\
-------
GIS Personnel
All Addresses:
United States
Environmental Protection Agency
841 Chestnut Street
Philadelphia, PA 19107
Information Resources Management Branch
Edward Kratz, Chief
Programming Applications and Support Section
Mail Stop 3PM53
FTS 597-9855
Geographic Information Center
David West, GIS Team Leader
Environmental Scientist
MaH Stop 3PM53
FTS 597-1198
Brian Burch
Environmental Scientist
Mail Stop 3PM53
FTS 597-1157
Doug Freehafer, CSC
Senior Mini-Computer Specialist
Mail Stop 3PM53
FTS 597-1198
Nancy Coleman, CSC
Technical Information Specialist
Mail Stop 3PM53
FTS 597-1595
Don Evans, CSC
Mini-Computer Specialist
Mail Stop 3PM53
FTS 597-9769
-------
GIS Personnel (continued)
Mike Perpiglia, CSC
Mini-Computer Specialist
Mail Stop 3PM53
FTS 597-1198
Water Management Division
Peter Weber
Environmental Protection Specialist
Division GIS Coordinator
Mail Stop 3WM42
FTS 597-4283
Sumner Crosby
Environmental Scientist
Ground Water Protection Section
Mail Stop 3WM42
FTS 597-3424
-------
Project Leads
1. Non-point Source Pollution from Agricultural Practices
Cindy Greene
Environmental Scientist
Ground Water Protection Section
Mail Stop 3WM42
FTS 597-8399
2. Targeting Areas for Wellhead Protection
Virginia Thompson, Chief
Ground Water Protection Section
Mail Stop 3WM42
FTS 597-2786
3. Underground Injection Control - Site Discovery
Ronnie M. Davis
Environmental Engineer
Underground Injection Control Section
Mail Stop 3WM43
FTS 597-2923
4. Ground Water Pollution Potential Assessment
Stuart Kerzner, Deputy Chief
Drinking Water/Ground Water Protection Branch
Mail Stop 3WM40
FTS 597-8826
5. Regional Ground Water Risk Assessment
Peter Weber
Environmental Protection Specialist
Ground Water Protection Section
Mail Stop 3WM43
FTS 597-4283
-------
Project Leads (continued)
Suitmer Crosby
Environmental Scientist
Ground Water Protection Section
Mail Stop 3WM42
FTS 597-3424
6. Sub-Regional Ground Water Risk Assessment
Peter Weber
Environmental Protection Specialist
Ground Water Protection Section
Mail Stop 3WM43
FTS 597-4283
Sumner Crosby
Environmental Scientist
Ground Water Protection Section
Mail Stop 3WM42
FTS 597-3424
7. Federal Facilities Compliance Initiative
Koge Suto
Environmental Engineer
General Enforcement Section
Mail Stop 3WM52
FTS 597-4462
8, CERCLA Site Discovery
Fred Sturniolo
Hydrogeologist
Ground Water Protection Section
Mail Stop 3WM42
FTS 597-9388
Lorie Acker
Environmental Engineer
Site Assessment Section
Mail Stop 3HW13
FTS 597-3165
-------
Project Leads (continued)
9. CIS Automation of Hazard Ranking System, Ground Water
Migration Pathway
Fred Sturniolo
Hydrogeologist
Ground Water Protection Section
Mail Stop 3WM42
FTS 597-9388
Sumner Crosby
Environmental Scientist
Ground Water Protection Section
Mail Stop 3WM42
FTS 597-3424
10. Delaware River Water Trends Report
Maggie Passmore
Environmental Scientist
Philadelphia Operations Section
Mail Stop 3ES11
FTS 597-6149
11. Assessing Toxicological Impacts
Jeffrey Burke
Regional Total Quality Coordinator
Office of Deputy Regional Administrator
Mail Stop 3DAOO
FTS 597-7808
Susan McDowell
Ecologist
Wetlands Section
Mail Stop 3ES43
FTS 597-0355
-------
Project Leads (continued)
12. Monitoring Radon Levels
Lewis Felleisen, Chief
Technical Assessment Section
Mail Stop 3AT12
FTS 597-8326
13. Air Quality Monitoring
David L. Arnold, Chief
Program Planning Section
Mail Stop 3AT13
FTS 597-4556
Virginia SO2
Dennis M, Lohman, Chief
New Source Review Section
Mail Stop 3AT22
FTS 597-3024
Washington D.C. - SO2 Modelling
Alan Cimorelli
Environmental Scientist
Technical Assessment Section
Mail Stop 3AT12
FTS 597-6563
14. Superfund Applications
Berks Sand Pit Superfund Site
Christopher Corbett
Remedial Project Manager
Central Pennsylvania Section
Mail Stop 3HW27
FTS 597-6906
-------
Project Leads (continued)
North Perm Areas
Patrick McManus
Environmental Engineer
Eastern Pennsylvania Section
Mail Stop 3HW22
FTS 597-1265
Berkeley Superfund Site
Bruce Rundell
Hydrogeologist
Technical Support Section
Mail Stop 3HW15
FTS 597-1268
15. Oil Spill Emergency Response
Linda Ziegler
Environmental Protection Specialist
Oil and Title III Section
Mail Stop 3HW34
FTS 597-1395
16. Regional Strategic Planning Initiative
Alvin R. Morris, Director
Water Management Division
Mail Stop 3WMOO
FTS 597-9410
Peter Weber
Environmental Protection Specialist
Ground Water Protection Section
Mail Stop 3WM43
FTS 597-4283
------- |