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

-------