A WORKING DRAFT OF
A MANUAL OF LAWS, REGULATIONS,
AND INSTITUTIONS FOR CONTROL OF GROUND WATER POLLUTION,
BEING PREPARED
BY THE NATIONAL WATER WELL ASSOCIATION
FOR THE U. S. ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
UNDER CONTRACT #68-01-2938
-------
A WORKING DRAFT OF
A MANUAL OF LAWS, REGULATIONS,
AND INSTITUTIONS FOR CONTROL OF GROUND WATER POLLUTION,
BEING PREPARED
BY THE NATIONAL WATER WELL ASSOCIATION
FOR THE U. S. ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
Prepared by the
National Water Well Association Model Law Task Force Committee:
JAY H. LEHR, Ph. D., Executive Director, National Water Well Association
WAYNE A. PETTYJOHN, Ph. P., LLB, Professor, Ohio State University
TRUMAN W. BENNETT, M. S., Consulting Ground Water Hydrologist
JAMES R. HANSON, LL.B., Attorney at Law, Ground Water Specialist
LAURENCE E. STURTZ, LL.B., Attorney at Law, Constitution Specialist
-------
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Chapter I
Chapter II
The Hydrologic Framework Blue
Survey of Regulatory Provisions Affecting
Ground Water Quality White
Chapter III
Proposed Statutory Provisions to Enable
a State to Protect Ground Water
.Yellow
Chapter IV
Regulations Designed to Prevent Pollution
of Ground Water Green
Chapter V
Manpower Requirements for a Model State
Ground Water Protection Program
.Melon
Chapter VI
Implementation Beige
- 11 -
-------
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
Tho authors wish to ijraLofully acknowledge the continuing contribution
of Mr. U. Kent Ballentine of USEPA, who has served as project officer
since the inception of this research. We wish also to thank Mr. Ed
Snyder who has represented USEPA at the monthly meetings of the Model
Law Task Force Committee. Special thanks are due the following named
individuals whose outstanding contribution of time and expertise in
reviewing the manuscript, is responsible for its clarity and compre-
hensiveness.
William B. Allen, Providence, RI
William R. Attwater, Sacramento, CA'
William S. Bartholomew, Salem, OR
Paul M. Beam, Tallahassee, FL
James G. Beste, Washington, D. C.
Richard Bissell, Lansing, MI
Vern W. Butler, Pierre, SD
David Butterfield, Montpelier, VT
Thomas A. Calabresa, Madison, WI
Roy Carlson, Dallas, TX
William B. Caswell, Jr., Augusta, ME
Kenneth Childs, Lansing, Ml
Lawrence Christensen, Cheyenne, WY
Alan H. Coogan, Kent, OH
Douglas 0. Craddick, Honolulu, HI
Charles DiBona, Washington, D. C.
Harold D. Donaldson, Salt Lake City, UT
Vincent H. Dreeszen, Lincoln, NE
Don A. Duncan, Columbia, SC
Harlan W. Erker, Denver, CO
Vern Fahy, Bismarck, ND
John B. Fernstrom, Atlanta, GA
John Halepaska, Lawrence, KS
Paul G. Haswell, Denver, CO
Gerald Hendricks, Columbus, IN
R. Keith Higginson, Boise, ID
George M. McGee, Sr., Concord, NH
Thomas C. McMahon, Boston, MA
Joseph W. Miller, Jr., Princeton, NJ
E. Douglas Kenna, Washington, D.C.
Ronald A. Landers, Morgantown, W. VA
- 11 a -
-------
Robert H. Lewis, Sacramento, CA
Nick Lialias, Washington, D. C.
John Logan, Tampa, FL
Leslie Mack, Vienna, VA
W. D. Maer, Washington, D. C.
George B. Maxey, Reno, NV
William Joe Melling, Phoenix, AZ
Gary L. Merritt, llarrisburg, PA
David W. Miller, Port Washington, NY
Gerald Moore, Bay St. Louis, MO
Richard Nalesnik, Washington, D.C.
Perry F. Nelson, Raleigh, NC
Gary Obberts, Hartford, CT
William Osborne, Billings, MT
John Osgood, Harrisburg, PA
Garald Parker, Tampa, FL
Harry M. Peek, Raleigh, NC
Paul E. Reed, Naugatuck, CT
Michael H. Remy, Sacramento, CA
Jessie Rudnick, Seabrook, MD
Arnold Schiffman, Annapolis, MD
Roger Schmid, Bismarck, ND
Ronald G. Schmidt, Dayton, OH
Ollie Smith, Nashville, TN
William J. Steen, Indianapolis, IN
Richard G. Stockdale, Cheyenne, WY
W. E. Steps, Topeka, KS
David E. Swanson, Atlanta, GA
George W. Swindel, Jr., University, AL
Ernest J. Taylor, Baton Rouge, LA
Sarah P. Tufford, St. Paul, MN
Samuel J. Tuthill, Iowa City, IA
Eugene G. Wallace, Tacoma, WA
William H. Walker, Urbana, IL
R. Timothy Weston, Harrisburg, PA
Douglas Whitesides, Louisville, KY
0. A. Wise, Little Rock, AR
J. A. Wood, Oklahoma City, OK
Kenneth D. Woodruff, Newark, DE
A. Wayne Wyatt, Austin, TX
Chester Zenone, Anchorage, AK
- ii b -
-------
INTRODUCTION
This manual is intended for use on the state and-local levels by people
concerned with ground water quality. It is not a report of problems;
its purpose is, rather, to supply a range of specific suggestions for
ground water pollution control, primarily in the form of regulatory
provisions.
Ground water is a vast, natural resource that can be expected to become
increasingly valuable as a water source throughout most states. The
recognized danger that stimulated the production of this manual is that
ground water, unattended, may become extensively polluted, resulting in
great loss of value. Unlike surface water, ground water quality cannot
be "corrected" by pollution controls applied after the pollution has
occurred. Also, unlike surface water, there is no single, simple
approach to prevent ground water pollution. Activities that pollute
ground water, and the regulatory techniques necessary for their control,
are many and highly varied.
The manual describes ground water resources and sources of pollution,
then surveys existing regulations that affect ground water quality.
This survey is organized according to "control points" at which regula-
tory effort may be directed to control ground water polluting activities,
For a bird's-eye view of the scope of regulatory activity affecting
ground water, the reader's attention is directed to this list of control
points on page II-2.
- iii -
-------
The manual proposes a number of statutory provisions that will enable
astate to protect ground water, and presents guidelines for the devel-
opment of regulations designed to prevent pollution of ground water. It
discusses manpower requirements and other aspects of implementation of
the statutes and regulations proposed by the manual. These chapters on
regulation of activities are the central feature of the manual. They
are offered as guides, or starting-points, for selection or modification
by a state according to its particular needs. Some are in the alter-
native, and some contradict other regulations proposed. They are pre-
sented in the belief that no single manual of regulations can be
written that would be applicable to all states, not only because of the
hydrologic complexity of this country, but also because of the economic,
social, legal, and political diversity that such regulations must
reflect in order to be workable in different settings.
Useful as it is hoped this manual may be to a state concerned about
protection of its ground water, it cannot address itself to all the
essentials for a good ground water program. Effective regulation pre-
supposes an adequate base of background water data and a continuing
program to collect it, which this manual does not presume to describe.
Neither does it attempt to instruct a state as to how its agencies
should be organized for optimum effect. Even in proposing regulations,
humility dictated that the manual address itself to regulation of
current operations, omitting correction of past faults, such as past
unsupervised Abandonment of water wells and oil and gas wells, unre-
claimed mines, and all the other historic trauma to the earth that
cause present ground water pollution but which will at best yield only
- iv -
-------
to special projects where technological solutions and a so.urce of
adequate funds tend to be the critical constraints.
This document is not a proposal to affect water-rights laws. Complete
ground water protection must include controls on the use of water under
particular circumstances — reference is made in the manual to the
propriety of such controls in effecting ground water pollution control.
However, control or withdrawal of water for the purpose of allocating
property rights in water is considered to be a separate subject best
considered by individual states, in accordance with their needs.
It will be evident to the ground water expert that the manual is not
highly technical. It does not purport to educate the expert, other
than to offer him a compendium of regulatory concepts. It assumes
that many people other than those professionally qualified to deal with
ground water are interested in its protection, and will be involved in
programs to protect it.
At the time of extensive new regulation of activities affecting the
environment, regulatory proposals such as those in this manual can
be expected to meet with considerable indifference or hostility. Those
responsible for industrial production, especially, cannot be expected
to welcome regulation; survival in the American economy, within
existing regulatory structures, is not easy. At the same time, care-
less pollution of ground water can have future effects that may be
unrecognized in their eventual extent and severity. It is hoped that
- v -
-------
the validity of both these positions will be recognized in application
of the materials in this manual.
The manual is timely for the fact that the effectiveness of other regu-
lations has made methods of waste disposal that endanger ground water
quality relatively more economical, increasing the likelihood that
ground water pollution will occur.
There is no intent in offering this manual to foster federal control
over ground water. To the contrary, the purpose of the manual is to
enhance knowledgeability in the states, and thus to enable establish-
ment cf adequate ground water protection programs on the state or
local level.
The manual is offered not in a spirit of eagerness to regulate, but
simply in the belief that ground water is a vital resource that is
especially susceptible to degradation because it is difficult to
protect and e.asy to ignore.
- vi -
-------
CHAPTER I
THE HYDROLOGIC FRAMEWORK
-------
CHAPTER I
THE HYDROLOGIC FRAMEWORK
This chapter describes the hydrologic cycle and the nature and char-
acteristics of ground water, with emphasis on water quality and the
various ways in which pollution of ground water occurs. It presents
the generalized physical aspect of ground water pollution in prepar-
ation for the discussion of existing and proposed guideline regula-
tions for the control of ground water pollution in subsequent chap-
ters.
The chapter begins with a presentation of misconceptions concerning
ground water. While this is not the usual textbook approach to in-
troducing the subject of ground water, it was felt to be pertinent
in this case, because the present status of regulation and the prob-
lems that exist concerning ground water are to a great extent at-
tributable to its inadequate perception, which results from the fact
that ground water cannot be directly observed. This is not intended
to suggest that existing regulations are based upon misconceptions
(although some court decisions have been so based); it is intended
only to underline the fact that in the case of ground water, as dif-
ferent from surface water, perception and recognition of facts, and
thus application of remedies, come slowly.
The information in this chapter was obtained from a variety of sour-
ces, some published, some unpublished, albeit only a few are cited
- 1-1 -
-------
in the bibliography. Many of the situations and hyd'rologic concepts
described are generalized, and their details thus may not be valid
for many specific applications. The chapter is not intended to be an
authoritative work in ground water hydrology, but rather an intro-
duction to the subject for individuals with little or no hydrologic
training.
MISCONCEPTIONS CONCERNING GROUHD 'HRTER
Ground water is neither mysterious nor occult, it does not occur in
underground lakes or rivers, and spring water is not synonymous with
purity. Nevertheless, there is widely-held popular belief to the
contrary. These and other misconceptions of the nature and behavior
of ground water are examined in the following material.
Misconception: Ground water often occurs in underground
lakes and rivers.
Fact: Bodies of ground water generally bear little
resemblance to surface water bodies.
The erroneous concept of huge underground lakes and rivers is based
upon fact: in areas where limestone forms the major aquifers, the
water may flow in large underground openings, such as caves and so-
lution channels. In one sense these large openings, which are rela-
tively rare, resemble rivers and lakes. In Mammoth Cave, Kentucky,
for example, blind fish inhabit a stream that flows through the cave.
In the vast majority of cases, however, ground water occurs in rock
- 1-2 -
-------
formations that have a sufficient number of interconnected openings
(permeable material) for the water to pass through them. Not uncom-
monly, these aquifers (water-bearing deposits) are connected for
hundreds or thousands of square miles. Along many river valleys,
the floodplain deposits consist of permeable sand and gravel. In
such cases, the ground water may flow generally in the same direction
as the surface stream. This large volume of slowly-moving ground
water adjacent to the stream may flow in a direction different from
the regional underground flow in nearby areas. This does not mean
that the flow characteristics of the ground water in the stream-side
deposits are in any manner similar to those of a surface stream.
During the last Ice Age, when glaciers advanced across the northern
part of the United States, many of the then existing stream channels
were filled and the streams were forced to develop other courses.
Many of these now-buried river valleys contain great quantities of
ground water, hut the enclosed water cannot be likened to an under-
ground river.
Misconception; Ground water is mysterious and occult.
Fact: Natural Laws control the occurrence and
movement of ground water and therefore
its behavior is predictable.
Before the development of scientific techniques of ground water
hydrology, the natural laws controlling water movement were unknown.
This led to the concept, preserved in case law, that the occurrence
- 1-3 -
-------
and movement of water in the ground is mysterious and occult — i.e.,
that the principles of its behavior cannot be known. In fact, using
well-established natural laws and the relevant hydrologic data, the
quantity and quality of ground water are subject to prediction both
in space and in time.
Misconception; Water rushes so rapidly underground that its
presence can be detected by listening.
Fact: In most cases ground water flows only a
few feet per year.
Some people believe they can detect the presence of large quantities
of water underground merely by placing an ear to the earth and list-
ening for the sound of rushing water. This is not possible because
ground water moves very slowly through the earth, in most cases only
a few feet per year. Locally, it may flow very rapidly in limestone
terrain characterized by large openings, such as caves, but such
conditions are rare. Ground water velocity is of particular impor-
tance in water-pollution problems. Due to its slow rate of movement,
an area once polluted may remain unusuable for years. It is primarily
for this reason that disposal of wastes on and in the ground must be
closely regulated.
Misconception; Ground water removed from the earth is never
returned.
Fact: Ground water is a renewable resource.
- 1-4 -
-------
In most parts of the country, water removed from the ground is con-
stantly replaced. Thus, ground water is a renewable resource, al-
though in some places the rate of replenishment is very slow. In
some arid and semiarid regions, a slow rate of replenishment is far
exceeded by the rate of ground water pumping, resulting in some cases
in serious problems of ground water mining.
Water constantly seeps into the ground. Areas where this occurs are
called recharge areas; they include virtually the entire land surface,
although recharge rates vary greatly. Some types of soil accept water
much more rapidly than others — for example, the rate of infiltration
(the rate at which water seeps into the ground) through sandy soil
will be much greater than through a heavy clay soil. Relatively high
rates of recharge (infiltration) may occur in sandy or gravelly areas
and along river flood plains where the water table has been lowered
by pumping.
Areas with high rates of recharge should be carefully managed for two
major reasons. First, they allow replenishment of underlying ground-
water reservoirs (aquifers) and, second, water-soluble waste products
stored in these areas may infiltrate and pollute the underground supply.
Consequently, areas of high recharge must be protected in order to
maintain the quantity of water in storage and to protect its quality.
Misconception; Ground water migrates thousands of miles
through the earth.
Fact: Most ground water is replaced in the near
vicinity of its withdrawal.
- 1-5 -
-------
Much of the water in a ground water reservoir infiltrates within a
radius of a few tens of miles of where it is found. It has not
travelled in the ground for thousands or even hundreds of miles. There
are no underground rivers transporting great volumes of pure water
from Canada to Minnesota, Virginia to Florida, or from the Rocky
Mountains to Iowa or other Great Plains states.
Misconception: Ground water is not a significant source
of supply.
Fact;_ The amount of ground water in storage
dwarfs our present surface supply.
Ground water is commonly considered an insignificant source of supply.
The fact is, however, that in the United States the quantity of water
in underground storage is 2,000 to 3,000 times larger than the amount
at any moment in all the lakes, streams, and rivers combined. At the
same time, ground water is usually cold, of a nearly constant
temperature, free of sediment, and of generally good quality. The
major feature of ground water is its widespread occurrence -- it
commonly provides a reliable and economical water supply for many
kinds of activities for which surface water supplies would be un-
economical or infeasible.
In 1970, the United States was using more than 370 billion gallons of
water per day. Of this amount, about 20 per cent was ground water.
About a third of all public supplies and about 96 per cent of all
rural domestic supplies are derived from wells. About 25 per cent of
- 1-6 -
-------
the water used for irrigation is ground water. Were it not for huge
underground reservoirs, many irrigation schemes in the arid and semi-
arid regions of the United States could not long continue. Ground
water makes possible agriculture and industry alike because commonly
it is available at the point of use and does not require transpor-
tation over long distances.
Misconception: There is no relationship between ground
water and surface water.
Fact; Ground water provides much of the flow of
streams; lakes and swamps are merely win-
dows in the water table.
It is commonly believed that ground water and surface water represent
isolated systems. Consider, however, a stream in late summer. Al-
though it may not have rained for several days or possibly even weeks,
there may still be a considerable flow in the stream. Obviously,
this water could not have been derived from the surface runoff of
rainfall. In large part the streamflow represents water that has
flowed from the ground into the stream channel. In other words,
the low flow of a stream may be derived entirely from ground water
discharge. In addition, wells located near a stream may cause water
to flow from the stream to the well thus depleting the surface flow.
During low-flow conditions, the chemical quality of the stream is
similar to that in adjacent aquifers, but during periods of surface
runoff and precipitation, the stream quality is considerably differ-
- 1-7 -
-------
ent. In some places, the quality of surface water deteriorates
during the late summer and fall because adjacent ground water reser-
voirs are polluted and these polluted ground waters provide the
stream flow. It is evident that one needs to consider not only
waste disposal directly into a stream but also the disposal of water-
soluble material on the land surface, particularly in recharge areas.
In other words, there is often a close interrelationship between
surface water and ground water and one cannot be managed without
consideration of the other.
Misconception; The water table is falling throughout the
country.
Fact; Although in a few areas the water table has
declined significantly, in most places the
water table rises and falls with climatic
vagaries.
Not uncommonly one hears that "the water table is falling". During
periods of drought, when water demands increase substantially and
withdrawals exceed the rate of natural recharge, the water table or
water-pressure surface may decline. In most cases, the decline is
temporary and the water level recovers when rainfall returns to nor-
mal. A similar problem of declining water levels exists in parti-
cular areas where municipalities or large industrial complexes use
ground water, and in areas of extensive irrigation. This is because
the rate of ground water pumping over long periods may far exceed the
natural rate of replenishment (recharge) within the area of supply.
Most of these areas are small and unmanaged although in some instances
- 1-8 -
-------
the declines are based on sound management concepts. Generally
throughout the country, ground water levels simply rise and fall with
the seasons in relation to precipitation, temperature, and local
land-use practices.
Misconception; The water level in a well remains constant.
Fact: The water level must decline in the vicinity
of a pumping well.
If the proud owner of a new well believes there is no water-level
lowering or drawdown when his pump is operating, he is mistaken.
There must be a water-level decline in the vicinity of a pumping
well in order to induce water to flow to the well. In highly permeable
formations, such as limestone caverns or sand and gravel deposits,
the amount of drawdown may be slight. With increasing withdrawal
rates, however, the drawdown increases — around high-yield wells,
water-level lowering in the area of influence may extend outward for
miles. Other phenomena also cause the water level in a well to
fluctuate, including seasonal influences on recharge and discharge,
and loading effects.
Misconception; Spring water is synonymous with exceptional
quality.
Facts; Springs are points where ground water is
discharging, but they are easily polluted.
Various product advertisements assert that spring water has except-
- 1-9 -
-------
ional taste, purity, and perhaps medicinal properties. They may also
imply that well water is of unacceptable quality. A spring, however,
is merely a point where ground water is discharging at the land sur-
face. It has nearly the same quality as nearby wells. On the other
hand, springs lack some of the protection afforded by wells and can
be easily polluted. Well water is biologically pure (free of patho-
gens) except when polluted by sewage or certain other wastes, the
sources of which generally lie in the near vicinity.
Misconception; All well water is naturally of drinkable
quality.
Fact; The natural mineralization of ground water
generally increases with depth; eventually a
point is reached where it is no longer
potable because of naturally-occurring miner-
als dissolved from the rocks through which
the water flows.
Not all ground water is drinkable. Lying at varying depths down to
several hundred feet is the fresh-saltwater interface, a zone of var-
iable thickness where the dissolved mineral content exceeds 1000 mg/1
Below this interface, the mineral content of the water increases sub-
stantially — at greater depths it may be so mineralized that it is
considered a brine. Wells whose total depth approaches the fresh-
saltwater interface eventually suffer from deteriorating quality due
to the upward migration of salt water as fresh water is removed. In
- 1-10 -
-------
coastal areas, overpumping or drainage of fresh water may cause migra-
tion of sea water into the aquifer. Adequate water-management pro-
grams can substantially reduce problems caused by migrating highly-
mineralized water.
Misconception; Since ground water can't be seen, nothing is
happening to it.
Fact; We do not know the extent of ground water
pollution, but from available information we
know that the threat of its widespread
pollution is substantial.
If an individual laid a raw sewage discharge line into a lake, it is
unlikely that he would decide to withdraw his drinking water from a
surface intake only 25 feet away. The potential health problem would
be easily recognized. Because ground water cannot be seen, however,
such an error may not be evident to the user of a well. Where a
cesspool or septic-tank drain lay within 25 feet of a well, the
potential health problem (effluent flowing directly into the well)
might not be recognized.
Karubian (1974) examined the petroleum, pulp and paper, and primary
metals industries in the United States in an attempt to estimate the
effect of these activities on ground water pollution. These indus-
tries produce a large quantity of waste water, much of which is
stored in unlined basins and lagoons. The liquids leak from the con-
tainment structures and pollute ground water. It was estimated that
- 1-11 -
-------
the total leakage during 1973 from these structures was 192,815 acre-
feet from primary metals industries, 76,335 acre-feet from petroleum
refining, and nearly 134,000 acre-feet from the pulp and paper indus-
try. Thus the total quantity of leakage from these three industries
alone amounted to more than 403,000 acre-feet* of waste water. The
pollution is occurring underground, is hidden from view, and is not
easily recognized. The problem is nonetheless significant, and for
the most part will be impossible to correct.
Leaky sewers in cities and septic tanks and cesspools in surburban
and rural areas probably add far more pollution on a national scale
than do the above-cited industries. One must also consider the
major contribution of pollutants from tens of thousands of sewage
^*»h ground jt'o'te'rj^^^^^^^W^J^j^^ ''!<
?T^V'V'V'V-':".:^^ '-
iHTTTi, 11 /. ^l^JT; '; ' ^' 7^ f 7^fr7-HFe>~>sa^---.yT r ^..^•-.••JV
Figure 1. Schematic Diagram of the earth's water cycle -- the hydro-
logic cycle.
(From Johnson, 1966, p. 16)
*An acre-foot of water equals 325,851 gallons or 43,560 cubic feet.
- 1-12 -
-------
lagoons at municipal or semi-public sewage-treatment plants through-
out the country, as well as the potential of similar polluted water
derived from irrigation using sewage sludge and effluent liquid.
THE HYDROLOGIC CYCLE
INTRODUCTION
The hydrologic cycle describes the movement of water from the atmos-
phere, to and into the ground and streams, and its eventual return to
the atmosphere. An intimate part of the hydrologic cycle is the geo-
chemical cycle, which determines the resultant quality of water that
will occur at any point in time or space. Some parts of the hydro-
logic cycle can be managed, others can be subdued to some extent, but
with others, man-made controls are not possible.
In order to understand the fundamentals of ground water hydrology and
water quality, a basic understanding of the hydrologic cycle is nec-
essary. Although complex in detail, the hydrologic cycle can be vis-
ualized as a water droplet taking any one of the several paths shown
in Figure 1. The following material describes the major parts of the
cycle, with emphasis on the ground water phase and its relationship
to surface water.
PRECIPITATION
The world's oceans and other major bodies of water serve as huge reser-
voirs from which large quantities of water are evaporated each day.
- 1-13 -
-------
Although much of this moisture immediately returns to its source as
precipitation, a large quantity is carried by the planetary wind sys-
tem to the land masses where it falls as precipitation.
Only part of this precipitation reaches the land surface because some
evaporates while falling. Some of the precipitation that reaches
land surface quickly returns to the atmosphere via evaporation, or
runs off to watercourses, some replaces the soil-moisture deficiency,
and the remainder "infiltrates" to become ground water. During or
immediately following a period of precipitation or snowmelt, stream
flows increase in response to the water added to the channel by sur-
face runoff; at other times streams may flow only because ground water
discharges into them. Variations in stream flow and the amount of
water that infiltrates into the ground are directly related to vari-
ations in precipitation.
Different types of hydrologic problems and, consequently, management
techniques, are directly related to the distribution of precipitation,
For example, much of the western half of the United States exclusive
of mountain ranges has less than 20 inches of precipitation annually,
yet the rate of potential evapotranspiration exceeds this amount,
causing a water deficiency. Therefore, the rate of replacement of
water pumped from the ground can be extremely slow, leading to severe
shortages of ground water, particularly in irrigated areas.
Another problem in arid and semiarid regions is that water resources
- 1-14 -
-------
tend to be more highly mineralized because of numerous soluble rocks,
a lack of dilution, and because evaporation, which leads to increased
mineralization, is generally great.
SOIL MOISTURE
Picturing the soil as a sponge, water will not flow downward through
it until nearly all of the interconnected open spaces are filled with
water. If the sponge is covered with a blotter, analogous to a layer
of clay overlying sandy material, most of the water falling on it will
flow off and very little will seep into the sponge. The amount of in-
filtration through the soil-sponge is dependent upon several primary
factors, including topography, rock type, and vegetative cover. The
greatest amount of infiltration occurs during long, low-intensity
rains on fairly level sandy or gravelly soil; the least amount on
steeply-sloping, bare, fine-grained soils such as clay (Figure 2).
Following a wet period, the soil-moisture content decreases as part
of the water moves deeper into the ground and much of that retained
in the soil is either evaporated or removed by plants (transpiration).
In arid regions, the water table may lie 2,000 feet or more below
land surface because of the low rate of precipitation and the high
rate of evapotranspiration, which use up the available precipitation
before it can percolate to the ground water reservoir. Consequently,
recharge to deep zones may be very small, occurring in relatively few
places or under unusual hydrologic conditions.
- 1-15 -
-------
Rain
Rain
Bare
Soil completely
wetted
Grass and
humus ~*
Soil completely
wetted
B
Runoff great
Runoff great -#
Rain
Bore soil
Wetted zone
shallow
c
Grass and ^
humus
Wetted zone
deep
Rain
D
Runoff moderate. *
Runoff
small -£
figure 2. Runoff from bare and vegetated surfaces under different con-
ditions of soil moisture.
(From Leopold and Langbein, 1960, p. 28)
Several techniques have been tried in an attempt to manage (either to
conserve or reduce) soil moisture; these have met with some success
on a regional scale. There are no legal controls dealing with soil
moisture; in law it is considered part of the land, and not a control-
lable water resource. From a hydrologic viewpoint, however, the soil-
moisture content is one of the most significant natural controls on the
availability of both ground water and surface water. It regulates the
amount and rate of natural replenishment of ground water reservoirs,
for until the soil-moisture deficiency has been satisfied no ground-
water recharge can occur. It affects streamflow, because moisture-
- 1-16 -
-------
deficient soil has first demand on much of the overland flow to
streams, and to the extent that soil-moisture deficiency deters
ground water recharge, ground water's function of supplying the base
flow of perennial streams may be impaired.
EVAPOTRANSPIRATION
The greatest share of the precipitation that reaches land surface is
returned to the atmosphere by evaporation, and transpiration by
plants. That quantity transpired by plants has been used during
their normal biologic processes (metabolism). The water is considered
to be "wasted" only if it is transpired by unwanted plants — even
then it is not used up, but is merely put back into the atmosphere
for later return as precipitation.
As is true with precipitation, water losses by evaporation range
widely in time and place. Unfortunately, the greatest amount of
evaporation occurs in arid and semiarid regions — regions that can
least afford the loss. Water lost by evaporation from surface reser-
voirs in arid regions amounts to millions of acre-feet per year, and
not only greatly reduces the quantity of water available, but also
leads to increased mineral content of the water remaining.
STREAMFLOW
The flow of water in streams ranges within wide limits, being largely
controlled by precipitation. Perennial streams are those that flow
- 1-17 -
-------
throughout the year; their discharge rates vary seasonally and with
precipitation. Intermittent streams generally flow only during that
part of the year when the water table is above the bottom of the
stream bed or when they receive surface runoff. As the water table
declines, streamflow decreases; eventually certain reaches of the
channel may become dry. Ephemeral streams — numerically the most
common — flow only during and immediately after precipitation or
snow melt. Water entering the dry or nearly dry channels of ephemeral
streams commonly seeps into the ground, resulting in ground water
recharge.
The largest amount of precipitation in the coterminous United States
occurs in the Pacific Northwest and in the eastern half of the country,
resulting in longer periods of high soil-moisture content, greater
prolonged rates of infiltration, and greater runoff into streams in
these areas. Here also lie the major perennial river systems, which
discharge to the surrounding oceans many times more water than do the
drainage ways in the arid and semiarid regions of the Midwest and
Western states.
Water in a stream originates as surface runoff, ground water discharge,
municipal-industrial-agricultural effluent, or direct precipitation
into the channel. Perennial streams occur in those areas where adja-
cent saturated deposits drain into the channels (Figure 3). It is
this release of ground water that provides much, or sometimes all, of
the stream's flow. As the adjacent ground water level declines, there
is a concomitant decrease in stream flow. Drier regions are charac-
- 1-18 -
-------
;WATER TABLE
A. Streamflow sustained by ground water inflow; high water table,
large stream discharge.
B. Stream during low-flow conditions; low water table, low stream
discharge.
TER TABLE
$^mi^3%$$$>
$&$$-M^£^y
C.
During periods of flooding, water may flow from the stream into
the ground.
D. A well pumping near a stream may cause water to flow from the
stream into the ground (induced ground water recharge).
Figure 3. Relation between ground water and surface water.
- 1-19 -
-------
terized by low sustained flows, or, if the water table is below the
stream, no flows except during periods of large snowmelt or heavy
rainfall. During high flows, such as floods, water may migrate from
the stream into the ground (Figure 3). Pumping wells may cause stream
water to infiltrate due to a lowering of the water table (Figure 3).
Because ground water is a major source, the quality of the stream
water reflects the quality of adjacent and upbasin ground water re-
sources. Most water-pollution control legislation is directed at
surface water, with ground water pollution being largely ignored.
Such legislation also fails to control surface water pollution that
results from the discharge or polluted ground water.
Surface water can be controlled by various engineering structures and
management techniques. At least to some extent the quality of surface
water can be managed by adequate effluent standards, by control over
ground water pollution, and by land-use management.
GROUND WATER
AQUIFER FRAMEWORK
Rocks that form aquifers can be divided into two major types: (1)
igneous and metamorphic and (2) sedimentary. Igneous and metamorphic
rocks, such as granite, slate and marble, are hard and dense earth
materials formed by the solidification of molten rock or by temper-
ature, pressure, and chemically-active fluids acting upon and changing
pre-existing rocks. Sedimentary rocks, such as shale, limestone, and
- 1-20 -
-------
sandstone, were formed by deposition of material by siltation, trans-
ported in suspension (generally by water) or in solution. Sedimen-
tary rocks are either consolidated or unconsolidated.
A. Igneous and Metamorphic Rocks
Ground water is commonly hard to find in those regions where igneous
and metamorphic rocks are at or near land surface, because there is a
general lack of open spaces in these rocks that could contain water.
Water supplies obtained from them are generally inadequate for large
municipal and industrial supplies. There are some exceptions; for in-
stance, large quantities of water may occur in fault zones. Water in
igneous and metamorphic rocks is commonly limited to fractures (joints
or faults) in the rocks, although in some places substantial quanti-
ties may be stored in a thick zone of weathered rock. Igneous and
metamorphic rocks are generally very hard and are both difficult and
expensive to drill.
Some volcanic rocks, particularly lava flows, contain a great number
of interconnected openings and hence are highly permeable. They may
enclose a weathered zone, a zone characterized by coarse-grained
sediments, or there may be permeable areas caused by fractures, lava
tubes, or vesicles created by gas bubbles when the lava was in its
liquid form.
The quality of water in igneous and metamorphic rocks is generally
excellent in that it has a very low dissolved-mineral content. On
- 1-21 -
-------
the other hand, it is easily polluted because the water-producing
fractures may be interconnected and open to the surface where little
or no filtering of the water through sediments can take place.
Filtering through soil or sandy material tends to remove biological
material and some, but certainly not all, chemicals. Special care
must be taken to preserve the natural quality of water found in ig-
neous and metamorphic rocks, particularly since large supplies are
difficult to locate.
B. Sedimentary Rocks
Sedimentary rocks not only provide the greatest amount of water to
wells, they also store huge volumes. Sedimentary rocks may be sub-
divided into consolidated and unconsolidated deposits. Consolidated
deposits (rocks) are relatively hard and dense due to compaction or
cementation of the grains. Typical examples include shale (compacted)
silt and clay), siltstone (compacted silt), sandstone (cemented grains
of sand), and carbonates, such as limestone and dolostone. Unconsoli-
dated sediments consist of uncemented material such as clay, silt,
sand and gravel. These deposits are generally neither hard nor dense.
Consolidated Rocks
Consolidated rocks, being hard and dense, in most cases provide only
small to moderate yeilds to wells. This is largely due to the small
storage capacity between the individual grains, the tendency for very
small grains to hold the water against the force of gravity, and to
- 1-22 -
-------
relatively poor connection between openings (low permeability). As
with igneous and metamorphic rocks, many consolidated sediments con-
tain an abundance of fractures or solution openings that store and
yield large supplies of water. Even though many of these rocks, for
example siltstone and shale, may not provide large yields to wells,
they are important hydrologically because large quantities of water
may slowly drain from them into adjacent aquifers, increasing the
potential for development. They also may serve as confining beds and
reduce the amount of leakage from one aquifer to another.
Deposits of shale commonly contain an abundance of openings (high
porosity) but they are not interconnected and thus have a low perme-
ability. They provide a vast storage space, but yield water only by
slow drainage. Moreover, the stored water is commonly highly miner-
alized.
Porosity and permeability of carbonate rocks such as some dense or
chalky limestones is generally very low. Openings that do exist may
be very large, occurring along fractures and solution openings along
bedding planes and joints. Solution openings may slowly migrate up-
ward, eventually leading to surficial collapse, the formation of
sinkholes, and sometimes the local disappearance of surface streams.
In carbonate terrain, ground water does not necessarily flow perpen-
dicularly to water-level contours since it tends to follow the solu-
tion openings. Yields of wells range from very high to extremely low
depending on the size and interconnection of openings penetrated by
the well bore.
- 1-23 -
-------
Unfortunately sinkholes, disposal wells, pits, and quarries in per-
meable limestone are used in many areas for the disposal of storm
waters, garbage, and other wastes. These disposal techniques permit
direct aquifer pollution. Because little or no filtering of the
water is available as it moves through the large openings in limestone,
it is highly susceptible to pollution. In coastal areas, overpumping
of aquifers has allowed sea water to intrude and pollute the ground
water. Drainage canals in coastal areas have allowed sea water to
migrate inland where it seeps into adjacent aquifers and in some
coastal areas, such as southwestern Florida, canals have done far
more to induce salt-water encroachment than pumping of wells.
Unconsolidated Deposits
Large quantities of water are stored and pumped from unconsolidated
aquifers. This is largely due to their high permeability, widespread
occurrence, and the relative ease of constructing wells in them.
Many of these deposits occur near sources of induced recharge, such
as lakes and rivers, resulting in relatively high sustained yields
because surface water is induced into the ground. In addition, the
water level in surficial unconsolidated deposits is commonly near
land surface and pumpings lifts are short.
Many unconsolidated deposits lie along river valleys, forming the
flood plain. They also originate as wind-blown deposits in coastal
areas and in deserts. A third major type is formed by materials,
generally coarse, that fill inter-mountain basins, such as those
- 1-24 -
-------
in parts of Arizona and southern California. These deposits may be
hundreds of feet thick; recharge to them is derived largely from
snowmelt and precipitation along surrounding mountains.
Much of the area lying north of the Missouri and Ohio Rivers, as well
as other areas including New York and New England, are covered by Ice
Age deposits. These consist of sand and gravel and glacial till —
a mixture ranging in grain size from clay to boulders that may include
interbedded layers of sand or gravel. In many places glacial deposits
now completely obscure the preglacial topography, hiding from view ex-
tensive sand and gravel-filled valleys — major sources of ground
water.
Unconsolidated deposits may receive great amounts of recharge directly
from precipitation and, consequently, generally contain water of ex-
cellent quality. Because they are permeable, however, they may be
readily polluted, particularly if they form the land's surface.
Fortunately, most disease-causing organisms (pathogens) are filtered
out of the water within a few tens of feet from the source and only
the highly-soluble chemicals continue to move through them. Dissolved
salt, for instance, is not filtered out of the water as it percolates
through permeable earth materials.
AQUIFER CHARACTERISTICS
A. Fundamental Principles
In order to understand and appreciate the occurrence and movement of
- 1-25 -
-------
ground water it is necessary to describe a few fundamental principles
that deal with the rock materials, the open spaces within these
materials, and with the contained fluids.
Any rock in which the interconnected spaces are filled with water can
serve as an aquifer (water-bearing stratum). Some rock materials are
better reservoirs than others. This is largely due to the shape and
size of the grains, the number of openings between them (porosity),
their interconnection (permeability), and the thickness of the deposit.
In order to properly manage a ground water reservoir, both technically
and legally, it is necessary to have an understanding of the various
properties of aquifers and how the water in an aquifer reacts to var-
ious stresses.
The Water Table
Earth materials below the land surface can be divided, for hydrologic
purposes, into two zones: the upper zone of aeration and the under-
lying zone of saturation. The zone of aeration contains a soil-water
belt, an intermediate belt, and the deeper capillary fringe (Figure 4).
These belts range widely in thickness, depending on topography, soil
type, and climate.
The zone of saturation, which may be several miles in thickness, is
characterized by all of the pores being filled with fluid, generally
- 1-26 -
-------
- §
o .,_
•4->
01 10
c i.
O QJ
M <
s ^
o £
t/>
So11 mols tjjre
Pore spaces not filled
with water
Capillary fringe
Water table
Pore spaces filled with ground water
Figure 4. Ground water is the part of subsurface water within the zone
of saturation.
water. Water in the zone of saturation is called "ground water". The
boundary separating the zones of aeration and saturation is the water
table, the position of which can be determined by noting the elevation
of the water level in shallow wells.
The position of the water table can also be determined by noting the
altitude of springs, seeps, marshes, lakes, water in excavations, and
streams, all of which are merely points where the water table inter-
sects land surface. The water table tends to follow the contours of
the land surface, but the depth is generally greater beneath hills
than it is beneath adjacent valleys (Figure 5).
- 1-27 -
-------
Surface of water
table
Arrow) show
direction of
flow
A.-SMALL STREAM WHERE IT FIRST HAS
WATER IN CHANNEL
B.-DRY ZONE LIFTED UP TO SHOW
SURFACE OF SATURATED ZONE
Figure 5. Relation of ground surface to water table. A stream chan-
nel or ril-1 has water flowing in it where the channel bot-
tom is at a lower elevation than the water table. (U.S.G.S.)
Types of Aquifers
Three major types of ground water reservoirs (aquifers) are commonly
recognized by hydrologists: unconfined, confined, and leaky. Their
recognition is important from technical, managerial, and legal points
of view since, hydrologically, they react in considerably different
manners. An unconfined or water-table aquifer has a free water sur-
face (water table) exposed to the soil atmosphere (Figures 4 and 5).
Water is released from an unconfined aquifer by gravity drainage.
A confined or artesian aquifer is enclosed by layers of such low
permeability that the water, confined to the more permeable inter-
- 1-28 -
-------
Woter-table wcl
Flowing
artesian wcH
Recharge area for
artesian aquifer
Figure 6. Subsurface and ground water phase of the hydrologic cycle,
(From Johnson, 1966, p. 17)
vening strata, is under hydrostatic pressure in a manner similar to
water in a tilted pipe (Figure 6). Withdrawal of water from a con-
fined aquifer may result in a pressure decrease over a wide area,
exemplified by widespread lowering of the water-pressure (piezometric
or potentiometric) surface.
A leaky artesian aquifer is closely related to a confined aquifer
except that water under higher hydrostatic head (pressure) may
slowly migrate into it through the confining beds, particularly
during periods of pumping. In the leaky case, pumping causes a de-
cline of the water-pressure surface, but generally it is of less
magnitude than in a confined aquifer.
A special case is a perched aquifer, which lies above the principal
aquifer or regional water table (Figure 7). The areal extent of
- 1-29 -
-------
Perched water table
pring
Regional water table
Figure 7. Perched water table occurs above impervious stratum and
above the main water table.
perched aquifers ranges within wide limits and, although generally
small, they may provide the principal source of water in a large
number of local areas.
B. Water in Rocks
Recharge
The major source of ground water is precipitation that infiltrates
aquifers (recharge). Recharge rates vary throughout the year because
they are dependent on vegetation, soil moisture, evaporation and tran-
spiration, frequency and rate of precipitation, and freezing of the
surface. Several techniques have been devised to measure annual
regional recharge rates, but rates differ considerably from place to
place as well as from time to time and, consequently, the amount of
- 1-30 -
-------
recharge measured in local areas could be much greater or smaller
than the regional rate.
In many areas it has been possible to increase recharge by artificial
means, thus providing larger quantities of ground water locally and
higher water levels. Some well fields (Figure 8) are constructed
along watercourses and pumping tends to induce water to flow from the
river into the adjacent streamside aquifer (induced infiltration). If
the rate of recharge to any aquifer system is greater than the total
outflow (discharge), water levels will rise; if less, they will de-
cline; and a relatively constant annual water level indicates a
balance between recharge and discharge.
Cone of ••.'•.'•:•.'•.'•.':
resiionV-'-'.'.'.
Figure 8. Cone of depression expanding beneath river bed creates a
hydraulic gradient between the aquifer and river. This can
result in induced recharge to the aquifer from the river.
Gradient
The difference between water levels in two wells tapping the same
aquifer is the hydraulic gradient (Figure 9). Ground water flows
down-gradient following the path of least resistance. A water-level
map, prepared by drawing lines of equal water-level elevation on a
base map, shows the regional gradient (Figure 10). From these maps
- 1-31 -
-------
Arrows show direction of ground-water
Figure 9. The water level gradient is the difference in water level
between two measuring points. In this case the difference
in water level between two wells a mile apart is 10 feet:
gradient is lOft/mile.
\
N
No
U—Ground-water
divide
„> .—
Legend:
100
Generalized water-level
contours at 25-ft intervals
Ground-water flow lines
River flood
plain
I .
\.
JT \
^Direction \
of \
s. ground-wate\
\ flow \
\ ^
\ \.—
\
x-^^
\
\
1
V
-^
\
Figure LO
Scale in miles
Water table contour map showing elevation of the upper
surface of the saturated zone. Ground water flows down
gradient at right angles to the contours as shown by the
two flow lines that have been sketched on the map.
(Modified from Johnson, 1966, p. 40).
2
_i
- 1-32 -
-------
one can determine, among other things, the direction of ground water
movement and places of recharge and discharge.
Artesian ground water is confined under hydrostatic pressure between
layers of low permeability. In such a case, the aquifer is full and
if a well is drilled into it, the water will rise to some position
above the base of the overlying confining bed. The imaginary surface
to which this water would rise in an infinite number of wells is
called the artesian, water-pressure, piezometric, or potentiometric
surface. It can be represented on a map. If a well is drilled into
an artesian aquifer in an area where the potentiometric surface is at
a higher altitude than land surface, the well will flow.
Water-level Fluctuations
Generally ground water levels fluctuate throughout the year in re-
ponse to changes in the aquifer system, such as seasonal changes in
recharge rates. These may change the levels several feet per year.
Fluctuations also occur due to pumping (Figure 11). Because pumping
from an artesian system does not dewater the aquifer but instead
lowers pressures, changes take place with great rapidity. In water-
table aquifers, pumping dewaters the pores, thus water-level changes
are much slower. If the rate of pumping exceeds the overall rate of
recharge, the water level will continue to decline. Monitoring of
ground water levels is necessary to obtain hydrologic data and to
evaluate aquifer performance information that can be used to develop
aquifer-management techniques.
- 1-33 -
-------
5
o
QJ
QJ ft)
Ol U
«4- 10
I/)
(U C
> 10
0» r-
i-
-------
Effects of Pumping
The non-pumping water level measured in a well is called the "static
level" (Figures 12 and 13). When pumping begins, the water surface
of the well rapidly declines. The amount of decline is termed "draw-
down"/ the water level in the well is called the "pumping level". The
water level declines not only in the well bore but also in surrounding
areas, forming a cone of depression (Figures 12 and 13). The steep
water-level gradient in the cone near the well is caused by removing
water from the well and the surrounding deposits. The cone of de-
pression spreads outward and deepens until a state of equilibrium
between inflowing ground water and outflowing well water is reached.
The cone of depression in an unconfined aquifer reflects the volume of
rocks dewatered; its radius of significance is slow to develop and
is generally less than a few hundred feet in diameter. In the confined
aquifer, the cone represents a decline in pressure and develops very
rapidly? it may have a significant radius of several miles.
tatic water lav*
• ••.'•• -t;.-.•••..V
.Vv.; i;-:>:-.-.'.V:--
"Gravel
Figure 12. Diagram of water table Figure 13. Diagram of artesian
well and cone of depression. well and cone of depression.
- 1-35 -
-------
1) Ground Water Management
Sustained Yield
The sustained yield of an aquifer system is that quantity of water
that can be withdrawn from it without creating a significantly unde-
sirable result. Parker (Parker and others, 1964) has called it the
"water crop". It is the acceptable long-term balance between natural
and man-made recharge and discharge. The sustained yield cannot be
determined accurately prior to or even in the early stages of develop-
ment, because the natural recharge rate is not known. It depends on
the interactions of the aquifer framework, the hydraulics of the
system, and methods of extraction, as well as social, legal, and
managerial concepts. Only after the sustained yield is determined
is it possible to optimize management of an aquifer system. The fact
that it might require years to determine the sustained yield of an
aquifer adds logic to the concept of issuing water rights that are
valid for only a limited time. Studies have indicated that with a
sufficient amount of data and a computer, a model can be constructed
to simulate and predict drawdown and discharge of an area, thus pro-
viding insight into the sustained yield even in the early stages of
ground water development.
Overdraft
Pumping which over a long period exceeds the recharge or defined sus-
tained yield of an aquifer can lead to substantial water-level decline
and dewatering of the system, possibly with unwanted results such
- 1-36 -
-------
as drying up of streams, lakes, shallow wells, and springs. When this
occurs, wells can no longer produce at their design capacity and oper-
ation and maintenance costs increase. In addition, the lower water
level may lead to interaquifer leakage of highly mineralized water or,
in coastal areas, encroachment of sea water into fresh-water supplies.
In several parts of the world, the withdrawal of fluids such as water
and petroleum has caused compaction of buried strata as the fluid
pressures decrease. Such compaction leads to subsidence of the land
surface, which may amount to several tens of feet. In turn, the sub-
sidence may break underground pipelines and cause buildings to sink
or be slowly torn apart. Areas suffering from extensive subsidence
due to ground water pumping include, among many others, Mexico City
and several areas in Arizona, California, and Texas, particularly in
California's San Joaquin Valley.
Aquifer Interactions
As the cone of depression around a pumping well spreads outward, the
entire area under its influence begins to interact in response to
changes in the water level. Water levels will decline in shallower
and deeper hydrologically-connected rocks because of the removal of
water, interaquifer leakage, and change in volume of the surrounding
rocks. Water will leak from adjacent deposits into strata with
lower hydrostatic heads.
The cone of influence may intercept a stream, causing some reduction
- 1-37 -
-------
in its flow. The streamflow reduction occurs because ground water,
which under natural conditions was flowing into the stream, is diver-
ted toward the pumping well. If the ground water level becomes lower
than the water level in the stream, the surface water may infiltrate
and flow toward the well. In fact, pumping of ground water adjacent
to a stream may cause not only a reduction in streamflow, it may
actually cause the stream channel to become dry. In cases such as
these, a pumping well is merely recapturing water from the stream that
previously was naturally released from the ground. Furthermore, the
water-level decline in the cone of depression around shallow water-
table wells tends to decrease water losses from evaporation and
transpiration and makes more underground storage space available.
Well Interference
The cone of depression surrounding a pumping we'll may extend outward
for a considerable distance, causing wide-spread water-level lowering.
Consequently, the water level in another well in the area of influence
will decline even though it is not pumping; a well tapping the upper
part of the aquifer system may go dry (Figure 14). When two nearby
wells are pumping, the cones of depression will overlap and the net
effect will be even more drawdown in each well (Figure 15). This
composite water-level lowering effect is called "well interference".
If the aquifer properties are the same at each well, but one is pumping
at a rate several times greater than the other, there may be so much
water-level decline in the second well that it can no longer produce
at its design capacity. This condition affects not only individual
- 1-38 -
-------
Figure 14. The cone of depression surrounding a pumping well may
decline so much that nearby wells become dry.
h— 2000ft—-t
Static wter lev*-
YY
Cones of depression, t- 10 minutes
Wellt pumpec
(a)
^\
individually, a
Static water leveK
r~
mes for 1 • 2 dayi
(b)
Static wol»rlev*l>.
^
CompatJM
r^\
con* of d»pr««i.
Ml after 2 day*
fc)
Figure 15.
Development of interference between adjacent wells
tapping the same artesian aquifer. Composite cone
is for both wells pumping simultaneously under the
assumed conditions.
(Modified from Johnson, 1966, p. 128)
- 1-39 -
-------
wells but may reduce the efficiency of entire well fields that are
too densely spaced. Well interference of this type caused a "water
war" to develop in the Upper Tampa Bay Area, Florida (Parker, 1975).
More commonly, such situations occur where the aquifer is of variable
thickness or the wells are of considerably different depths, resulting
in adverse effects on the water level in a shallow well or one tapping
a thin part of the aquifer.
Well Efficiency
Owing to ignorance or cost considerations, many wells are not ade-
quately designed and therefore are inefficient. Domestic wells, for
example, which commonly deliver only a few gallons a minute, may be
poorly constructed and generally only partially penetrate the aquifer.
High-yield wells usually are larger and deeper and are better designed
and constructed. A poorly-designed domestic well may have more draw-
down within the well than a nearby high-yield well even though the
pumping rate of the latter is 100 times greater. Thus, loss of water
in a given case may be the result of poor well design, where a prop-
erly designed well would not have been significantly affected by a
lowering of the water level.
- 1-40 -
-------
GROUND WATER REGIONS*
The United States exclusive of Alaska and Hawaii has been divided
into ten ground water regions (Figure 16). These regions are widely
recognized as the best broad classification of the ground water
situation of the coterminous states. The division is based princi-
pally on types of aquifers. Most of the major rivers drain one or
more of the regions.
Glaciated Central region
J Glaciated Appalachians
Unglaciated
Appalachians
Western Mountain Ranges
Alluvial Basins
Columbia Lava Plateau
Colorado Plateau
High Plains
| Coastal
• 7(33 Unglaciated Central region
Figure 16.
Ten major ground water regions of the United States,
excepting Alaska and Hawaii. (After Thomas and
McGuinness)
(From Johnson, 1966, p. 48)
*Material from this section is largely from Johnson, 1966, pp. 47-60.
- 1-41 -
-------
1. Western Mountain Ranges
The Western Mountain Ranges Region includes the Rocky Mountains, Cas-
cade Range, Sierra Nevada, the northern Coastal Ranges, and a few
other isolated mountains in the same general area (Figure 16). The
major rocks in this region consist principally of igneous, metamorphic,
and consolidated sedimentary rocks. These rocks are generally un-
favorable for the occurrence of ground water. Consequently, aquifers
in this region are of limited areal extent, generally small in volume,
and provide relatively small yields. Most of the ground water occurs
in fractures in the rocks. A few unconsolidated deposits, which
yield larger amounts of water, occur along streams and in a few small
valleys. The mountain ranges receive a large amount of precipitation
but most of it is released and the runoff recharges aquifers in ad-
jacent regions. Because the annual precipitation rate is high and
the population sparse, ground water demands, for the most part, are
small.
2. Alluvial Basins
The Alluvial Basins Region consists of valleys surrounded by mountain
ranges (Figure 16). The valleys represent large basins that are
nearly filled with unconsolidated material, such as silt, clay, sand,
gravel, and boulders, eroded from the adjacent mountainsides. With
the exception of the trough between the Coast Ranges and the Cascade
Range, this region typically is arid. Although precipitation ranges
from three to more than 60 inches per year, most of the region
- 1-42 -
-------
receives less than 15 inches annually. Much of the precipitation is
poorly distributed throughout the year and, unfortunately, inadequate
during the growing season. Throughout this region, huge quantities of
ground water are used, particularly for irrigation. The water is
drawn from valley-fill deposits that are generally a few hundred feet
thick but in some places are as much as several thousand feet thick.
At the turn of the century, it was assumed that the ground water
stored in the Alluvial Basins was inexhaustible. However, water
levels in many places have declined excessively due to nearly 70 years
of pumping*, and the quantity of water in storage has been signifi-
cantly reduced. Great volumes of water remain stored in some valleys
that are, as yet, untapped. The annual recharge to these underground
reservoirs is small; it consists primarily of seepage from streams
that originate along the mountain fronts. As pointed out by H. E.
Thomas:
"The principal residential, agricultural, and industrial sites of
the southwest are included in this region. There is an enormous
water demand with potential demand even greater because of rapid
population growth and the existence of fertile land waiting to
be irrigated. Available surface water is appropriated and, in
some cases, over-appropriated."
In view of the exceptionally large withdrawal of ground water, water
levels have declined significantly. This, in turn, has permitted the
intrusion of sea water into coastal aquifers and allowed salty deeper
water to migrate into the fresh inland water zones. Furthermore, re-
peated reuse has caused deterioration of the quality of both surface
*Heavy pumping for irrigation in the San Joaquin Basin began about 1905.
It increased dramatically following the end of World War II.
- 1-43 -
-------
water and ground water. In other areas the lands are characterized
by poor drainage, and irrigation has led to water-logging.
3. Columbia Lava Plateau
This region lies principally in eastern Washington, eastern Oregon
and adjacent parts of Idaho (Figure 16). It is underlain mainly by
lava flows, although a few basins are filled with hundreds of feet of
unconsolidated sediments, chiefly glacial-outwash detrital materials
(sand and gravel). The region is characterized by volcanic materials
that range from less than 100 to several thousand feet in thickness.
Water-bearing units occur in lava flows characterized by open frac-
tures and, in places, in permeable zones between successive lava
flows. In a few areas such as at Spokane, Washington, very permeable
layers of outwash sand and gravel provide extremely large yields to
wells. Along the Snake and Columbia Rivers, large quantities of sur-
face waters are used for irrigation and hydroelectric power. Some
irrigated areas have become waterlogged.
4. Colorado Plateau
This region consists of high, dry plateaus lyvng in adjacent parts of
Wyoming, Colorado, Utah, Arizona, and New Mexico (Figure 16). Here
the rocks consist largely of sedimentary strata, many of which are
broken into large blocks by faults. Most of the rocks consist of
shale and sandstone. This semiarid to arid region is sparsely popu-
- 1-44 -
-------
lated; the scarcity of productive aquifers will also limit future
development. Most of the major water-bearing zones consist of sand-
stone, although water does occur in limestone and unconsolidated sed-
iments in a few places. Generally, existing wells yield only a few
gallons per minute.
5. High Plains
The High Plains include an extensive semiarid to sub-humid region
lying east of the Rockies, extending from South Dakota to western
Texas and eastern New Mexico. The extensive surficial deposits con-
sist largely of sand and gravel; the water that is drained from them
is replenished primarily by rain and snow. Most of the unconsolidated
deposits comprise the Ogallala Formation, which in places is more than
500 feet thick. It is the principal aquifer over several thousand
square miles. The materials forming the Ogallala Formation range
widely from very fine to coarse, with abrupt variations in grain size
within short distances, both vertically and horizontally. Locally,
stream deposits constitute important aquifers along the larger stream
channels. Wells yield moderate to large quantities of water, but the
natural recharge rate ranges widely, being generally least in the
southern part and greatest in the north. Pumping of wells in the
river valley alluvium tends to deplete the stream flow, resulting in
usurpation of long-established downstream water rights. This has re-
sulted in court suits and in state water laws prohibiting the deple-
tion of stream flow by such wells.
- 1-45 -
-------
An extensive deposit of windblown sand and loess lies on the Ogallala
Formation between the Platte and Niobrara Rivers. These windblown
deposits form the well-known sandhills of Nebraska. Here precipita-
tion readily infiltrates and natural recharge is estimated to be
about five inches of water per year. Southward, in the High Plains
of Texas, the recharge rates are considerably less, ranging from an
inch to considerably less than an inch per year. Highly productive
wells have led to extensive irrigation. In Texas, more than 50,000
irrigation wells are in use; in Nebraska, there are more than 40,000,
most of them drilled within the past 30 years. In some heavily pumped
parts of the region withdrawals have far exceeded the natural recharge
rate and, consequently, the total quantity of water in storage is
being significantly reduced. Reduction of well yields has occurred in
some areas. Management schemes including ground-water mining, inte-
grated surface-water and ground-water use, artificial recharge, and
regulations are being employed or considered.
6. Glaciated Central Lowland
This huge ground water region, extending from Montana on the west to
New York on the east, is largely bounded in the United States by the
Missouri and Ohio Rivers, which generally mark the limits of glacia-
tion. Much of this region is covered with extensive deposits of gla-
cial drift, which in some areas contains highly permeable deposits of
sand and gravel. Lying on or bordering the drift are important water-
course aquifers consisting of sand and gravel. These are exemplified
by deposits along the Ohio, Missouri, and Mississippi Rivers, as well
- 1-46 -
-------
as their major tributaries. Directly underlying the drift are exten-
sive buried river deposits, which, although generally hidden from view,
provide large quantities of water to wells. Consolidated deposits
underlying the drift also serve as major ground-water reservoirs, such
as the extensive sandstone aquifers that underlie large parts of Iowa,
Minnesota, Wisconsin, Illinois, and Michigan. Elsewhere under the
drift are permeable carbonate rocks. Although local shortages do
exist throughout most of this vast region, adequate quantities of
ground water are widely available. In some of the heavily populated
and highly industrialized areas, many ground water supplies have been
overdeveloped or polluted, or both.
7. Unglaciated Central Region
This vast region consists of interior plains extending southward from
Montana to Texas and eastward to Pennsylvania (Figure 16). It also
includes a small unglaciated area that lies largely in southwestern
Wisconsin. Most of the rocks in this region are horizontal, or only
gently dipping, consolidated sedimentary rocks. Limestone and sand-
stone provide the major aquifers; yields are only low to moderate.
Highly permeable aquifers, however, occur as unconsolidated deposits
along the larger streams. Throughout this region, the adequacy of
water supplies is closely related to rainfall, which decreases con-
siderably from east to west. In general, ground water is adequate
for domestic supply but inadequate for irrigation and other large
uses. Most large-scale ground water developments depend upon induced
infiltration along the major streams.
- 1-47 -
-------
8. Unglaciated Appalachians
This region, extending from the border of the Coastal Plain in Alabama
and Georgia northeastward to Pennsylvania and New Jersey, is charact-
terized by mountains and rolling hills separated by linear valleys.
In the western part, extensive elongate deposits of limestone provide
large quantities of water to springs and wells. The Appalachian
Plateaus form the western-most part of the Unglaciated Appalachians.
Here the underlying bedrock consists chiefly of limestone, sandstone,
and shale of which only limestone and sandstone may provide fairly
high yields to wells. Because valleys are cut deeply into the pla-
teaus, the water level may lie at considerable depths. This region
is humid; it includes areas of the heaviest annual precipitation in
the eastern part of the United States, where streamflow is rather un-
iform throughout the year. Consolidated aquifers in this region gen-
erally are sufficient for domestic purposes, but, except for lime-
stone areas, inadequate for large water requirements. Large quanti-
ties of ground water can be produced, however, from sand and gravel
deposits along the major streams and rivers.
9. Glaciated Appalachians
Extending northeastward from eastern Pennsylvania and including all of
the New England states, is the Glaciated Appalachians ground water
region. The rocks and water-yielding characteristics are similar to
the Unglaciated Appalachians to the south. Sandstone and carbonate
strata as well as igneous and metamorphic rocks provide the major bed-
- 1-48 -
-------
rock yields, but less than ten per cent of the region is underlain by
productive bedrock aquifers. Throughout much of the region glacial
till mantles most of the surface. The most productive aquifers are
sand and gravel deposits that form outwash plains and fill valleys,
but many of these are of limited thickness. Valley-fill deposits
occur both in existing streams and as buried-valley deposits. In view
of the heavily populated and industrialized nature of this region,
many surface-water sources are polluted, which in turn may lead to
pollution of streamside aquifers.
10. Atlantic and Gulf Coastal Plain
This coastal region, extending from Massachusetts to Texas, includes
a sequence of rocks that dip gently seaward. There is an abundance
of both surface water and ground water. Many of the aquifers consist
of unconsolidated deposits of gravel, sand, silt, and clay. Else-
where, particularly in Florida and to a lesser extent in Alabama and
Georgia, aquifers consist of extensive deposits of highly permeable
limestone. The sediments forming the coastal plain range in thick-
ness from nearly zero to more than seven miles. Fresh-water aquifers
in some areas lie at depths in excess of 6,000 feet. The major aqui-
fers outside of Florida consist of sand and gravel. Consolidated
rock aquifers, however, include highly productive carbonates in
Florida, southeastern Georgia, and South Carolina. Supplies are not
abundant in a few localities in Texas, Louisiana, Mississippi, and
Alabama. In Florida, with extensions into Alabama and Georgia, is one
of the world's most prolifically yielding ground water reservoirs,
- 1-49 -
-------
the great Floridan Aquifer. Along the southeastern Florida coast is
the wedge-shaped Biscayne Aquifer, a water-table aquifer which, in
its capacity to produce well water, ranks with clean, well-washed,
well-graded gravel deposits.
WATER QUALITY
GENERAL CONSIDERATIONS
As water moves through the hydrologic cycle, its quality changes in
response to differences in the physical and chemical environments
through which it passes (Figure 17). The changes may be either nat-
ural or man-influenced; in some cases they can be controlled, in
others they cannot, but in most they can be managed in order to limit
adverse water-quality changes.
Water Quality Characteristics Due To Natural Causes
The physical, chemical, and biological quality of water may range
within wide limits even though there are no man-made influences. In
fact, it is often impossible or at least difficult to distinguish the
origin (man-made or natural) of many water-quality problems. The nat-
ural quality reflects the types and amounts of soluble and insoluble
substances with which the water comes in contact. Surface water gen-
erally contains less dissolved solids than ground water, although in
areas where ground water is the major source of streamflow the quality
of both types is similar except during times of floods, when surface
water in the stream dominates the ground water contribution. During
- 1-50 -
-------
Atmosphere
Condensation
Nitrogen, oxygen.
carbon dioxide
dissolved
i 11
Evaporation
Chlorides dnd
sulfates ol
sodium.
magnesium.
calcium, and
potassium
carried with
water vapor
i , I
Temporary retention in moun
tam areas es soil water
1 CO, dissolved in soil. Ca. Mg
Na bicarbonate! added to
water
2 SO4 dissolved in areas where
oxidation of sulfides is
occurring
3 Connate water or soluble
compound! of marine
sediments added
| Runoff j
Evaporation
Mineral
matter re
tamed in soil
L—If
Transpiration
Mineral matter
largely retained
in soil, pdrlly
carried off in
crop pldnis
1
Soil water
CO, added, forming carbonic
acid
Reaction of soil minerals with
carbonic and to form soluble
bicarbonate!
Precipitation of colloidal iron,
aluminum, and silica, of car
bonates as solubility limn 14
reached
Cation exchange
Dy
r
Outflow to ocean Effluent
' Carries mineral matter back^ seepage
Ocejn
Subsurface outflow to ocean
Ground water
1 Cation exchange
2 Sulfate reduction by
anaerobic bacteria
substituting bicar
bonate for the
— sulfate
"vl
Figure 17.
Geochemical Cycle of Surface and Ground Water
(Source: U.S.G.S.)
(From Todd, 1970)
- 1-51 -
-------
periods of surface runoff, streams may contain large quantities of
suspended materials and, under some circumstances, a large amount of
dissolved solids. Most commonly, however, during high rates of flow
the water has a lower dissolved-mineral concentration.
Ground water is characterized by nearly constant chemical and physical
properties, at least on a local scale. As a general rule, the dis-
solved-solids content increases with depth, and with the time and
distance the water has traveled in the ground. A few uncommon water-
quality situations exist throughout the country, reflecting unusual
geologic and hydrologic conditions. These include, among others,
thermal areas and regions characterized by high concentrations of cer-
tain elements, some of which may be health hazards.
Examples of anomalous water-quality areas include several playa lakes
and springs in Texas and Arizona. Playas are intermittent lakes
which occur throughout much of the arid-lands region west of the Mis-
sissippi River. Near Willcox, Arizona, salts have become highly con-
centrated in ground water under playas, due to evaporation. This has
led to extremely high concentrations of fluoride in the water, which
if consumed over a period of time can be toxic. Many springs in west
Texas and central Arizona are fed by ground water that has migrated
through evaporate (salt) deposits. Consequently, the springs and
many water courses are salty.
- 1-52 -
-------
Water Quality Influenced By Man's Activities
For centuries man has been disposing of his waste products by placing
them in streams, storing them on the ground, or by various methods
putting them in the ground. Man-made influences on stream-water
quality reflect not only waste discharge directly into the stream, but
also include highly mineralized or polluted surface runoff, which can
carry a wide variety of substances. Another major influence on sur-
face-water quality is related to the discharge of ground water into
the stream. If the adjacent ground water is polluted, stream quality
tends to deteriorate. Fortunately in the latter case, the effect in
the stream will not be as severe as it is in the ground, due to dilu-
tion and dispersion of the pollutant. In most cases, however, the
general quality of ground water is such that it actually serves as a
dllutant to man-caused surface-water pollution.
The quality of ground water, in addition to natural inputs, is most
commonly affected by waste disposal. Another major source of pollu-
tion is the storage of waste materials in excavations, such as pits
or mines. Water-soluble substances that are dumped, spilled, spread,
or stored on the land surface or in excavations may eventually infil-
trate to pollute ground water resources. Ground water is also pollu-
ted by the disposal of fluids through wells and, in limestone ter-
rains, through sinkholes directly into aquifers. Likewise, infiltra-
tion of highly mineralized surface water has been a major cause of
underground pollution in several places. Irrigation tends to increase
the mineral content of both surface and ground water. The degree of
- 1-53 -
-------
severity of pollution in cases such as these is related to the hydro-
logic properties of the aquifers, the type and amount of waste, dis-
posal techniques, and climate.
A major and widespread cause of ground-water quality deterioration is
related to pumping, which may cause the migration to the well of more
highly mineralized water from surrounding strata. The migration is
directly related to differences in hydrostatic head (pressure) between
adjacent water-bearing zones, and relative permeabilities. In coastal
areas pumping may cause sea water to invade a fresh water aquifer.
In parts of coastal west Florida, wild-flowing, abandoned artesian
wells have salted large areas of formerly fresh or slightly brackish
aquifers, ruining them.
Reclamation of Contaminated Aquifers
As pointed out previously, aquifers react in a manner similar to a
sponge. Visualize, for example, a bath sponge that has been liberally
injected with soap. Even though the soapy sponge is filled and the
water squeezed out of it many times, soap bubbles continue to appear
with each new flushing. It may require hours of flushing and
squeezing to remove all the soap.
The situation is similar in polluted aquifers—once polluted, they
may be exceedingly difficult or impossible to reclaim. The polluted
water in the aquifer can be treated, perhaps even economically, but
the earth materials forming the aquifer cannot be so treated.
- 1-54 -
-------
Several natural processes tend to degrade or remove certain substances
as polluted water flows through an aquifer. These natural renovation
processes include dispersion and dilution, in addition to several
geochemical reactions. Techniques to restore an aquifer include
pumping the ground water to waste and diluting it by artificial re-
charge —methods that are expensive and commonly of questionable eco-
nomic value. Obviously the most effective method of ground water
quality control is protection from pollution.
CONTROL METHODS
Ground water quality can be maintained by the development and enforce-
ment of surface water effluent standards; land-use regulations;
stringent controls over all types of disposal sites, land spreading
of fertilizers, pesticides and wastes, and storage of solid and liquid
materials; and by careful management of water level and pumping rates
in ground water systems, control of well construction and operation,
air quality control, and control of activities such as mining. Stat-
utes, rules, regulations, and guidelines must, however, be based on
sound geologic and hydrologic data and interpretations.
Ground Water Quality Problems
Man-influenced ground water quality problems are most commonly re-
lated Lo: (1) water-soluble products that are placed on the land
surface and in streams; (2) substances that are deposited or stored
- 1-55 -
-------
in the ground above the water table; and (3) disposal, storage, or
extraction of material below the water table. Many of the pollution
problems related to these situations are highly complex, and some are
not well understood. Technical solutions to many ground water quality
problems are straightforward and controls are easily implemented, at
least insofar as techniques are concerned. Legal and social con-
straints, however, may prevent effective control.
A. Ground Water Quality Problems That
Originate On the Land Surface
Many ground water quality problems are caused by the disposal of
wastes directly into streams and by the dumping, spreading, or stor-
age of soluble substances on the land surface. The following table,
although not all-inclusive, lists the major causes of ground water
pollution that originate on the land suface.
1. Infiltration of polluted surface water.
2. Land disposal of either solid or liquid waste materials.
3. Stockpiles.
4. Dumps.
5. Disposal of sewage and water-treatment plant sludge.
6. Salt spreading on roads, airport runways, and parking lots.
7. Animal feedlots.
8. Fertilizers and pesticides.
9. Accidental spills of hazardous materials, including atomic
wastes.
10. Particulate matter from airborne sources.
- 1-56 -
-------
Infiltration of Polluted Surface Water
The yield of many wells tapping streamside aquifers is sustained by
infiltration of surface water. In fact, more than half of the well
yield may be derived directly from induced recharge from the nearby
stream, which may be polluted (Figure 18). As the induced water mi-
grates through the ground, a few substances (although by no means all]
are diluted or removed by filtration and sorption. This is particu-
larly true where the water flows through filtering materials, such as
sand and gravel. Filtration is less likely to occur if the water
flows through large openings such as those that occur in carbonate
aquifers. Many pollutants, as for example chloride, nitrate, and sul-
fate, are highly mobile, move freely with the water, and are not re-
moved by filtration.
Contaminated
r^vCone of ;j:;£:i::
Figure 18. Induced infiltration of contaminated stream water
may lead to ground water pollution.
- 1-57 -
-------
Examples of ground water supplies being degraded by induced recharge
of polluted surface water are both numerous and widespread. In the
greatest number of cases, the pollution originates from the disposal
of municipal or industrial waste directly into the stream, which may
then infiltrate into adjacent aquifers. In hydrologic situations such
as these, months or perhaps years may be required for the pollutant to
advance from the stream to the well. Once at the well, however, the
aquifer between the well and the stream may be completely polluted,
requiring years to recover once the source has been eliminated. The
only realistic method of reducing ground water pollution of this type
is adequate surface water effluent standards, stringently enforced.
Land Disposal of Either Solid or Liquid Waste Materials
One of the major causes of ground water pollution is the disposal of
waste materials directly onto the land surface. Examples include ma-
nure, sludges, garbage, industrial wastes, etc. The waste may occur
as individual mounds or it may be spread out over the land. If the
waste material contains soluble products, they will infiltrate and may
lead to ground water pollution (Figure 19). Similar problems occur
in the vicinity of various types of stockpiles.
- 1-58 -
-------
00 00 00
O 00 00
oo eo oo
O O O 000
oo £ oo ° oo 0 oo
OO O 0 0 °0° O_O 0
Figure 19. Leaching of solids at the land surface. The possibility
of ground water pollution under these conditions is rarely
anticipated.
Stockpiles
Perhaps the prime example of ground water pollution caused by stock-
piles is related to salt used for highway snow and ice control. Not
uncommonly, tons of salt are simply piled on the land surface awaiting
use. The highly soluble material rapidly dissolves and either infil-
trates or runs off into streams (Figure 19). In recent years, many
highway officials have provided some protection for salt stockpiles
by covering them with plastic sheets or storing the salt in sheds.
This is not necessarily done for the protection of adjacent water
resources, but merely to preserve the salt.
Investigators recently have begun to take a serious look at the en-
vironmental effect of dumps. As rainwater infiltrates through trash
- 1-59 -
-------
in a dump, it accumulates a wide variety of chemical and biological
substances. The resulting fluid, or leachate, may be highly mineral-
ized and grossly polluted. As the leachate infiltrates, some of the
substances it contains are removed or degraded. Eventually the leach-
ate may reach the water table (in some places "sanitary fills" or
dumps are below the water table), where it flows in the direction of
the regional ground water gradient or toward a well (Figure 20). The
potency and degree of mineralization of the leachate-polluted ground
water is related to the size and age of the dump, the type of material
in the dump and surrounding areas through which the leachate flows,
the length of flow path before the water again appears at the surface,
and the climate. Pollution of ground water by leachate from dumps
Figure 20. Ground water contamination caused by leachate infiltration
from a dump.
can be reduced by regulation of the location, construction, and op-
eration of solid-waste disposal sites.
- 1-60 -
-------
Disposal of Sewage and Water Treatment Plant Sludge
The sludge from treatment plants presents not only a significant
waste disposal problem but one that is growing, quantitatively, by
leaps and bounds. The wastes include lime-rich sludge from water
treatment plants as well as sewage sludge from waste water treatment
plants. In recent years, municipal officials have attempted to solve
the sewage-sludge problem by spreading the sludge on the land surface
or filling strip mine pits with it. At first glance this may seem to
be an effective means of disposal, but a wide variety of exotic
chemicals, derived from domestic, agricultural, municipal, and indus-
trial wastes may exist in the sludge as soluble or relatively insol-
uble substances. When the sludges are used as fertilizers, the sol-
uble compounds may infiltrate while the more insoluble compounds,
many of which may consist of toxic metals, are removed and concen-
trated by plants. Existing knowledge of the chemical and biological
migration of numerous elements and compounds present in sludges is,
at best, slight. A great deal of research is needed before land dis-
posal of sewage treatment wastes should be permitted to become com-
monplace throughout the country.
Salt Spreading on Roads
In recent years, particularly since the construction of the inter-
state highway system, water pollution due to wintertime road salting
has become an increasing problem. The effect is becoming even more
severe as salt usage increases with a concomitant decrease in the use
- 1-61 -
-------
of sand. The salting brings about deterioration of stream quality
due to highly mineralized surface runoff, and the infiltration of
briney water causes ground water pollution. There appears to be a
direct relationship between degree of pollution, rock type, and amount
of salt used and storage techniques. Clearly, administrative controls
are needed to protect ground water supplies in the vicinity of major
highways and other heavily salted roads and near major points of salt
handling, storage, and distribution.
Accidental Spills of Hazardous Materials
A wide variety of toxic materials are transported throughout the
country by truck, rail, and aircraft; accidental spills of these
hazardous materials are not uncommon. Presently, there are practically
no controls on transportation of hazardous materials and virtually
no methods that can be used to quickly and adequately clean up an
accidental spill. Furthermore, immediately following an accident the
usual procedure is to spray the spill area with water in order to
wash the compounds from the road. The resulting fluid may then either
flow into a stream or infiltrate into the ground. In a few cases,
the fluids have been impounded by dikes, which lead to even greater
infiltration. In any case, water resources may be easily and irre-
parably polluted from accidental spills of hazardous materials.
Spills of atomic wastes constitute a special case because some are
not only highly toxic, but have half-lives of thousands of years.
- 1-62 -
-------
Fertilizers and Pesticides
An increasing amount of both fertilizers and pesticides are being used
in the United States each year. Many of these substances are highly
toxic. A wide variety, however, become quickly attached to fine-
grained sediment, such as clay and silt particles, a part of which is
removed by erosion and surface runoff. In many heavily fertilized
areas, the infiltration of nitrate, a decomposition product of ammonia
fertilizer, has grossly polluted ground water. The consumption of
nitrate-rich water leads to a serious disease in infants commonly
known as "blue babies" (methemoglobinemia).
Reportedly in Colorado automatic fertilizer feeders attached to irri-
gation sprinkler systems are becoming increasingly popular. When the
irrigation-well pump is shut off, water flows back through the pipe
system into the well. This creates a partial vacuum in the lines
that may cause fertilizer to flow from the feeder into the well. Even
more serious is the suspicion that some individuals are dumping fer-
tilizers directly into the well to be picked up by the pump and dis-
tributed to the sprinkler system. Such practices lead to direct
ground water pollution and should be prohibited.
Animal Feedlots
Animal feedlots cover relatively small areas but provide a huge volume
of animal wastes. These wastes have grossly polluted both surface and
ground water resources with large concentrations of nitrate. Even
- 1-63 -
-------
small feedlots and liveries have created significant problems. In one
situation infiltration of livestock wastes continued to pollute a pub-
lic well more than 40 years after the livery stable was abandoned
(Figure 21). In a few areas the liquid runoff from feedlots is col-
lected in lined basins and pumped onto adjacent grounds as irrigation
waters, providing a luxuriant growth.
u
^
—
1
X-
Figure 21. Many shallow wells have been contaminated by the infil-
tration of animal wastes.
Particulate Matter From Airborne Sources
A relatively minor source of ground water pollution is caused by the
fallout of particulate matter originating as smoke, flue dust, or
aerosols. Some of the particulate matter is water-soluble and toxic,
- 1-64 -
-------
and forms acid water. Long term environmental effects are unknown,
largely because they have not been investigated. An example of this
type of pollution is airborne chromium-rich dust that discharged
through the roof ventilators of a factory in Michigan, accumulating
on the downwind side of the plant. The highly soluble chromium com-
pounds rapidly infiltrated and polluted a local municipal drinking
water supply (Figure 22) .
Windblown chrome-laden dust
Figure 22. Air pollution can lead to ground water pollution.
(From Deutsch, 1961)
The means of reducing water pollution problems caused by fallout of
particulate matter is effective air pollution standards and control,
- 1-65 -
-------
B. Ground Water Quality Problems Which Originate in the Ground
Above the Water Table
Many different types of materials are stored, extracted, or disposed
of in the ground above the water table. Water pollution can origi-
nate from many of these operations. Some of these, discussed in the
following material, are:
1. Septic tanks, cesspools, and privies.
2. Holding ponds and lagoons.
3. Sanitary landfills.
4. Waste disposal in excavations.
5. Leakage from underground storage tanks.
6. Leakage from underground pipelines.
7. Artificial recharge.
B. Sumps and dry wells.
9. Graveyards.
Problems often originate in a water table aquifer from these sources
because local laws are lax, they are not enforced, or because they do
not exist.
Septic Tanks, Cesspools, and Privies
Probably the major cause of ground water pollution in the United
States is effluent from septic tanks, cesspools, and privies
(Figure 23). Individually of little significance, these devices are
important in the aggregate because they are so abundant and occur in
- 1-66 -
-------
Figure 23.
Percolation through zone of aeration. Most of the natural
removal or degradation processes function under these con-
ditions. (From Deutsch, 1965)
every area not served by municipal or privately owned sewage treat-
ment systems. The area that each point source affects is generally
small, since the quantity of effluent is small, but in some limestone
areas effluents may travel long distances in subterranean cavern sys-
tems .
Most of the health problems that arise from this type of pollution
are caused by the recycling of effluents through nearby water supply
systems. This recycling effect was vividly exemplified during an
investigation in Ohio in 1925 when several pounds of salt were poured
into a privy. Within two weeks the homeowner's well water turned
salty (Figure 24).
Water pollution problems related to septic tanks, cesspools, and
privies can be controlled only with regulation of construction and
- 1-67 -
-------
installation of this type of device, and with adequate land use reg-
ulation, including limitations on the number of septic tanks per unit
area.
Yi'iY:Vi;!;!;!;Vi!nY:YiY(Wate r tab le
Figure 24.
Shallow wells are commonly contaminated by effluent
originating at cesspools and privies.
Holding Ponds and Lagoons
The second major source of ground water pollution is holding ponds
and lagoons. These commonly consist of relatively shallow excava-
tions that range in surface area from a few square feet to many acres
In some places they are euphemistically called "evaporation" ponds.
Such ponds were commonly used to hold oil field brines, and when the
pond floors became impermeable, the operators would disc them to in-
crease infiltration. Holding ponds are also used to hold municipal
- 1-68 -
-------
sewage and to store large quantities of wastes including a wide var-
iety of industrial chemicals. The latter wastes are generally char-
acterized by highly concentrated solutions that may contain a wide
variety of toxic compounds.
Special problems develop with holding ponds and lagoons in limestone
terrain where extensive near-surface solution openings have developed.
In Florida, Alabama, Missouri, and elsewhere municipal sewage la-
goons have collapsed into sinkholes draining raw effluent into wide-
spread underground openings. In some cases the sewage has reappeared
in springs and streams several miles away. Wells producing from the
caverns could easily become polluted and lead to epidemics of water-
borne diseases.
Holding ponds are commonly considered to be liquid-tight but the vast
majority leak large quantities of fluids, leading to relatively large
polluted areas. Although rarely reported, at a large number of indus-
trial sites ground water pollution by leaking holding ponds has been
so extensive that all of the water supplies on the plant property are
grossly polluted and unusable for many purposes without treatment.
As a result, expensive treatment plants have been required. Moreover,
the ground water may be so polluted that it exceeds surface water
effluent standards and it cannot be pumped into adjacent streams.
Oil field brines, a highly mineralized salt solution, are particu-
larly noxious and without doubt they have locally polluted both sur-
face and ground water in every state that produces oil. The brine,
- 1-69 -
-------
an unwanted byproduct, is produced with the oil. In many states it
is disposed of by placing it in holding ponds from which it infil-
trates into the ground. Not uncommonly the oil well has been long
abandoned before it becomes apparent that the adjacent ground water
is polluted. This, in turn, may leave no possibility for recovery
for damages by the landowner.
< OUUI l*O U I
contaminants
rone :::::'.-':'.-'-::-'.:.•'.•:•'::•':•'::;
t'n •';';'-"''''''
^Jliss.-'.jjj;'••'••.'.•• :• '.-.:.
Original gradient
Figure 25. Schematic diagram showing percolation of contaminants
through the zone of aeration and in an isotropic aquifer.
(From Deutsch, 1965)
If adjacent ground water is not to be polluted, holding ponds and la-
goons should be prohibited unless it can be shown, beyond a doubt,
that fluids will not leak from them. In practice this would neces-
sitate use of an impermeable lining such as heavy plastic. Clay
linings have generally proved to be unreliable.
- 1-70 -
-------
Sanitary Landfills
Sanitary landfills generally are constructed by placing wastes in
excavations and covering the material with soil daily—thus the term
"sanitary", to indicate that garbage and other materials are not left
exposed to produce odors, smoke, vermin, and insects. Even though a
landfill is covered, however, leachate may be generated by the infil-
tration of precipitation and surface runoff. Fortunately many sub-
stances are removed from the leachate as it filters through the un-
saturated zone, but leachate may grossly pollute ground water and may
even pollute streams if it discharges at the surface as springs and
seeps.
At one site, rejected transformers and capacitors containing poly-
chlorinated bi-phenols from an industrial plant were disposed of in a
municipal landfill. A number of stillbirths and birth defects soon
occurred in cattle that drank water from a nearby stream. Analyses
of the water showed large concentrations of phenols, the origin of
which was, without question, the landfill.
Pollution of ground water by landfills can be prevented by proper
site location to prevent their use in places where leachate can read-
ily enter ground water reservoirs, by regulation of their construct-
ion and operation, and by prohibiting the disposal therein of highly
toxic wastes.
- 1-71 -
-------
Waste Disposal in Excavations
Following the removal of clay, limestone, sand and gravel, or other
material, the excavations created by removal of the material are com-
monly left unattended and often are used as unregulated dumps. The
quantity and variety of materials placed in dumps and excavations are
almost limitless. Excavations have been used for the disposal of a
wide variety of liquid wastes, such as oil-field brines and spent
acids from steel mills. Many also serve as disposal sites for snow
removed from surrounding streets and roads — snow that commonly con-
tains a large amount of salt. Disposal of these and other wastes in
excavations may lead to ground water pollution.
In the largest number of cases, waste disposal into excavations is
not controlled. Pollution of ground water by this practice can be
prevented by regulations similar to those for sanitary landfills.
Leakage from Underground Storage Tanks
A growing problem of substantial consequence is leakage from storage
tanks and pipelines leading to such tanks. Gasoline leakage has
caused severe hazardous pollution problems throughout the nation.
Gasoline, being less dense, floats on the ground water surface and
leaks into basements, sewers, wells, and springs, causing noxious
odors, explosions, and fires.
Obviously, a leaky underground storage unit is difficult to detect
- 1-72 -
-------
and locate. Ground water pollution from this source could be mini-
mized by periodic inspections of tanks, including pressure testing,
and careful monitoring of fluid levels. Metal tanks could be replaced
with tanks constructed or lined with noncorrodable material, such as
fiberglass. Furthermore, tank-supporting substructures must be cap-
able of sustaining the weight of loaded tanks in order to prevent
settling, which may cause rupturing of pipelines leading to or from
the tank.
Leakage from Underground Pipelines
Literally thousands of miles of buried pipelines crisscross the
United States. Leaks, of course, do occur, but it may be exceedingly
difficult to detect and locate them. They are more likely to develop
in transmission lines carrying corrosive fluids. An example occurred
in central Ohio where a buried pipeline carried oil field brine from
a producing well to a disposal well. The corrosive brine soon weak-
ened the metal pipe, which then began to leak over a length of several
tens of yards. The brine infiltrated, polluting the adjacent ground
water, then flowed down the hydraulic gradient and discharged into a
stream. During the ensuing months, nearly all of the vegetation be-
tween the leaking pipeline and the stream was killed. The leaking area
of the pipe was detected only because of the dead vegetation and salty
springs.
- 1-73 -
-------
A vexing problem of chromium compounds that polluted several shallow
wells in Michigan was traced to a leaky sewer transporting metal
finishing wastes. Radioactive materials have also leaked from pipe-
lines. The several leaks reported at the Hanford A.B.C. Works came
about as a result of loaded, underground tanks settling differential-
ly into the subjacent earth materials, causing the pipelines carrying
radioactive waste to break at joints. Such breaks are difficult to
recognize until considerable spillage has occurred.
Artificial Recharge
Artificial recharge includes a variety of techniques used to increase
the amount of water infiltrating to an aquifer. It consists of
spreading the water over the land or placing it in pits, ponds, or
wells from which the water will seep into the ground, or pumping
water directly into the aquifer. As water demands continue to in-
crease, there is no doubt that artificial recharge will become in-
creasingly more popular as a means of providing a sustained yield.
Waters used for artificial recharge consist of storm runoff, irriga-
tion return flows, stream water, cooling water, and treated sewage
effluent, among others. Obviously the quality of water artificially
recharged can have a major effect on the water in the ground.
Sumps and Dry Wells
Sumps and dry wells may locally cause some ground water pollution prob-
- 1-74 -
-------
lems and in places where these structures are adjacent to a stream,
bay, lake, or estuary, may pollute such surface water bodies and
cause eutrophication, leading especially to a proliferation of the
growth of algae and water weeds. These structures are commonly used
to collect runoff or spilled liquids, which will infiltrate through
the sump. Sumps and dry wells are typically installed to solve sur-
face drainage problems, so they may transmit to ground water whatever
pollutants are flushed into the well.
Graveyards
Leachate from graveyards may cause ground water pollution, although
cases are not well documented. In some of the lightly populated
glaciated regions in the north central part of the United States,
graveyards are commonly found on deposits of sand and gravel, because
these materials are easier to excavate than the adjacent glacial till
and, moreover, are better drained so that burials are not below the
water table. Unfortunately, these same sand and gravel deposits may
also serve as major sources of water supply. Graveyards are also
possible sources of pollution in many hard rock terr^QijXis where there
are sinkholes or a thin soil cover.
An example of the persistence of earlier problems of this nature may
be seen in the case of a gasworks on the south coast of England,
where the presence of hydrogen sulfide in the plant well in the early
1950's was attributed to drainage from a 17th century Black Plague
burial pit through which the well was bored.
- 1-75 -
-------
Hydrogen sulfide
t^Liz-y.-.^--..?^. "^
^T^SE;,; Black
ue burial
^pit (17th Century)
i ' i ' i ' i • i ' i • i • i i—r^
L.Water table
T~ I , I 7T".~r
Figure 26. h. well on the south coast of England produced hydrogen
sulfide originating from the leachate from an ancient
human burial pit.
C. Ground Water Quality Problems That Originate In The
Ground Below The Water Table
The following table lists a number of major causes of ground water
pollution produced by the use and misuse of space in the ground below
the water table.
1. Waste disposal in wet excavations.
2. Drainage wells and canals.
- 1-76 -
-------
3. Well disposal of wastes.
4. Underground storage.
5. Secondary recovery.
6. Mines.
7. Exploratory wells.
8. Abandoned wells.
9. Water supply wells.
10. Ground water development.
Waste Disposal in Wet Excavations
Following the cessation of various mining activities, the excavations
are commonly abandoned; eventually they may fill with water. These
wet excavations have been used as dumps for both solid and liquid
wastes. The wastes, being in direct connection with an aquifer, may
cause extensive pollution. Furthermore, highly concentrated leach-
ates may be generated from the waste due to seasonal fluctuations of
the water table. In the late 1960's at a lead-zinc mine in north-
western Illinois, processing wastes were discharged into an abandoned
mine working. The wastes, slowly moving in the ground water, polluted
several farm wells. Analyses of water from several of the polluted
wells showed high concentrations of dissolved solids, iron, hardness,
sulfate, and, more importantly, heavy metals and cyanide. The dis-
posal of water soluble waste materials in wet excavations clearly
should be prohibited.
- 1-77 -
-------
Drainage Wells and Canals
Where surficial materials consist of heavy clay, flat-lying land may
be poorly drained and contain an abundance of marshes and ponds.
Drainage of this type of land is generally accomplished with field
tiles and drainage wells. A drainage well is merely a vertical, cased
hole in the ground or in the bottom of a pond that allows the water
to drain into deeper, more permeable materials (Figure 27). The
pond water may be grossly polluted which, in turn, leads to deterior-
ation of water quality in the receiving aquifer.
Original surface of pond
Drained part of pond
—N«w pltiometnc aurfoce
Aqulclude
Or igin ol_qrod tent
_ Old plexom«tric »urfoce
o..o»•<• «•>« .<,.
o o o o 0-o.o**0o
* "
Figure 27. Diagram showing drainage of a pond into an aquifer through
a drain well.
(From Deutsch, 1965)
Deepening of stream channels may lower the water table. Where the
fresh-saltwater interface lies at shallow depths, lowering of the
water table (whether by channelization, pumping, or other cause) will
- 1-78 -
-------
induce upward migration of the saline water; it may even flow into
the deepened channel and pollute the surface water (Figure 28). Reduc-
tion of the depth of the fresh water under these circumstances can
result in a rise in the level of saline water several times greater
than the distance the fresh water level is lowered. The physical
principles that cause this are complex, and will not be explained here,
Figure 28.
Diagram showing migration of saline water caused by
lowering of water levels in an effluent stream and
streamside aquifer hydraulically connected to an un-
derlying saline water aquifer.
(From Deutsch, 1963)
In some coastal areas, particularly in Florida, the construction of
extensive channel networks has permitted tidal waters to flow consid-
- 1-79 -
-------
arable distances inland. The salty tidal waters infiltrate, increas-
ing the salt content of the ground water in the vicinity of the canal.
Well Disposal of Wastes
For decades, man has disposed of liquid wastes by pumping them into
wells. Since World War II, a considerable number of deep well dis-
posal projects have come into existence, usually at industrial sites.
Industrial disposal wells range in depth from a few tens of feet to
several thousand feet. The injection of highly toxic wastes into
some of these wells has led to several water pollution problems. The
problems are caused by the pollution of fresh water due to direct in-
jection into the aquifer as well as leakage of pollutants from the
well head, through the casing, or via fractures in confining beds.
Injection of liquid wastes near Denver by means of deep well disposal
apparently caused an increase in the frequency of local earthquakes.
Deep well injection in the vicinity of Sarnia, Ontario, caused sev-
eral long-abandoned brine wells in Michigan to flow because of the
greatly increased aquifer pressure (Figure 29). In many states in-
stallation of new disposal wells is closely regulated, but probably
thousands of abandoned wells are being used for waste disposal with
no controls applied.
Properly managed and designed deep well disposal systems can be ef-
fectively used for storage of wastes deep underground and may permit
recovery of the waste in the future. Before deep well disposal of
wastes is permitted, however, there must be an extensive evaluation
- 1-80 -
-------
. Liquid contaminants
" c « «
. -
» , Aquifer , ... c • «. • „ . » ^Vcin
^^A^.rVTrA
'original ;•',• ?^'&$ri$&&
gradient '. •&££&&%:??£
•e'f •? '1 • «V" ^«^?H^*'*X'
:..'. • &?3t*&&#m*w®
1 ° •*',"' * * *;;j — ^!-|<-^^
* v e^i'tS^^B^^
U- "» * ', (.;• J ..IT- « J. «. . « 0 .••-D-;—
e •» »;•*..».«*.*••*••«••••••* c..
e»• . . • • •.
'.. *. .««•«,•». • '.o * ° ••• « ',•**.'
."oosOr- • ' ° « « ' ' ' • c, o . 'e a
'
^.WATER-TABLE AQUIFER
- Aouiclude
• Liquid contaminants
- .New piezometric surface - •
•^ ~~ ~~ ~~~ ~~~ ~~~
- — Aquiclude -
5. ARTESIAN AQUIFER
Figure 29. Diagrams showing spread of contaminants injected
through wells into water table and artesian aquifers.
(From Deutsch, 1963)
of the well system, the waste fluids, and the rocks in the vicinity
of the disposal well.
- 1-81 -
-------
Underground Storage
The storage of material underground is attractive from both economic
and technical points of view. Natural gas is one of the most common
substances stored in underground reservoirs. However, the hydrology
and geology of underground storage areas must be well understood in
order to insure that the materials do not leak from the reservoir and
pollute adjacent water supplies.
Secondary Recovery
With increased demands for energy resources, secondary recovery, par-
ticularly of petroleum products, is becoming increasingly more impor-
tant. Methods of secondary recovery of petroleum products consist of
injection of steam or waters into the producing zone, which either
lowers the viscosity of the hydrocarbon or flushes it from the rocks,
enabling increased production. Unless the injection well is care-
fully monitored and constructed, fluids can migrate from a leaky cas-
ing and pollute fresh ground water. This can be most effectively
controlled by adequate secondary recovery design and operation regu-
lations. It should be noted, however, that petroleum reservoir
flooding may take thousands of gallons per minute of fresh or brackish
water out of the hydrologic cycle throughout the United States.
Mines
Mining has caused a wide variety of water pollution problems. These
- 1-82 -
-------
are caused by pumping of mine waters to the surface, by leaching of
the spoil material, waters naturally discharging through the mine, and
by milling wastes, among others. Literally thousands of miles of
stream and hundreds of acres of aquifers have been polluted by highly
corrosive mineralized waters originating in coal mines and dumps in
Appalachia. In many western states, mill wastes and leachates have
seriously affected both surface water and ground water.
Many mines are deeper than the water table, and in order to keep them
dry, large quantities of water are pumped to waste. If salt water
lies at relatively shallow depths, the pumping of fresh water for de-
watering purposes will cause an upward migration of the salt water,
which may be intercepted by the well (Figure 30). The mineralized
water most commonly is discharged into a surface stream. In order to
protect ground water and surface water resources, mining activities
must be regulated from their planning phase to final reclamation of
the land.
P««EUf.d ierp i , 1 , i , i ,-t-H
i i i i i III . I . i-
II .-i—i— — t-'-r- i II
Figure 30.
Diagram showing migration of saline water caused by
dewatering in a fresh water aquifer overlying a
saline water aquifer.
(From Deutsch, 1963)
- 1-83 -
-------
Exploratory Wells and Test Holes
Literally hundreds of thousands of abandoned exploratory wells dot the
country side. Many of these holes were drilled to determine the pres-
ence of underground mineral resources (seismic shot holes, coal, salt,
oil, gas, etc.). The open holes permit water to migrate freely from
one aquifer to another. A fresh water aquifer could thus be joined
with a polluted aquifer or a deeper saline aquifer, or polluted sur-
face water could drain into fresh water zones (Figures 31 & 32).
Abandoned Wells
Another major cause of ground water pollution is the migration of min-
eralized fluids through abandoned wells (Figures 31 & 32). In many
cases when a well is abandoned the casing is pulled (if there is one)
or the casing may become so corroded that holes develop. This per-
mits ready access for fluids under higher pressure to migrate either
upward or downward through the abandoned well and pollute adjacent
aquifers. In other cases, improperly cased wells allow high-pressure
artesian saline water to spread from an uncased or partly cased hole
into shallower, lower-pressure aquifers or aquifer zones, resulting in
widespread salt intrusion.
- 1-84 -
-------
Potentiometric surface of
saline-water aquifer
Abandoned
openjiol
Figure 31.
Upward leakage and flow through open holes. Some
important aquifers have been ruined by improper
drilling practices.
Potentioraetric
surface
Water table
Figure 32. Downward leakage. Contamination of one aquifer can
affect others in a multi-aquifer system.
- 1-85 -
-------
Water-supply Wells
Improperly constructed water-supply wells may either pollute an aqui-
fer or produce polluted water. Dug wells, generally of large diameter
and shallow depth, and poorly protected, are commonly polluted by
surface runoff flowing into the well. Other situations have been
caused by infiltration of water through polluted fill around a well,
and still others by barnyard, feedlot, septic tank or cesspool efflu-
ent draining directly into the well. A wide variety of pollution and
health problems can arise because of poor well construction. These
can be overcome, however, by the implementation of water well con-
struction standards and by the training and licensing of water well
drillers.
Ground Water Development
In certain situations pumping of ground water can induce significant
water quality problems. The principal causes include interaquifer
leakage, induced infiltration, and landward migration of sea water in
coastal areas. In these situations the lowering of the hydrostatic
head in the fresh water aquifer leads to migration of more highly
mineralized water toward the well site. Undeveloped coastal aquifers
are commonly full, the hydraulic gradient slopes towards the sea, and
fresh water discharges from them through springs and seeps into the
ocean (Figure 33). Extensive pumping lowers the fresh water potentio-
metric surface permitting sea water to migrate toward the pumping
center. A similar predicament occurs in inland areas where saline
- 1-86 -
-------
water is induced to flow upward, downward, or laterally into a fresh
water aquifer due to the decreased head (pressure) in the vicinity of
a pumping well (Figure 34). Wells drilled adjacent to streams induce
water to flow from them to wells. If the stream is polluted, induced
infiltration will lead to deterioration of the water quality in the
aquifer.
Sea level
X
Water level
water
Aquifor
Sea levu
r /
We 1
Water 1 e
Salt water
^A
Aquifer
A. NATURAL CONDITIONS
B. SEAWATER INTRUSION
Figure 33. Sea water intrusion is caused by overpumping of coastal
aquifers.
>'.'.•'•'."'.•'•'..- '/.••'.•'.•' '• .*'!•"•;'
epresson
Sandstone containing
"' water
»:-:sh a ie -:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-^^:-:-^
Figure 34. Diagram showing how a pumping well can induce highly
mineralized water to flow from a saline aquifer into
a fresh water aquifer.
- 1-87 -
-------
Selected References
Deutsch, Morris, 1963, Ground water contamination and legal controls
in Michigan: U.S. Geol. Survey Water Supply Paper 1691, 79 p.
Deutsch, Morris, 1965, Natural controls involved in shallow aquifer
contamination: Ground Water, v. 3, no. 3, pp. 37-40.
Johnson, E.E., 1966, Ground water and wells: Edw. E. Johnson, Inc.,
St. Paul, 440 p.
Karubian, J.F., 1974, Polluted ground water: estimating the effects
of man's activities: U.S. Environ. Protect. Agency, EPA 600 14-74-002,
99 p.
Leopold, L.B., and Langbein, W.B., 1960, A primer on water: U.S.
Geol. Survey, 50 p.
Parker, G.G., 1975, Water and water problems in the Southwest Florida
Water Management District and some possible solutions: Water Resources
Bull., v. 11, no. 1, pp. 1-20.
Parker, G.G., Ferguson, G.E., and Love, S.K., 1955, Water resources of
southeastern Florida with special reference to the geology and ground
water of the Miami area: U.S. Geol. Survey Water Supply Paper 1255,
965 p.
Pettyjohn, W.A., 1972, Water quality in a stressed environment:
Burgess Publ. Co., Minneapolis, 320 p.
Thomas, H.E., 1951, The conservation of ground water: a survey of the
present ground water situation of the United States: McGraw Hill, Inc.,
New York.
Todd, David K. 1970, The Water Encyclopedia: Water Information Center:
Port Washington, New York, 559 p.
- 1-88 -
-------
CHAPTER II
SURVEY OF REGULATORY PROVISIONS
AFFECTING GROUND WATER QUALITY
-------
CHAPTER II
SURVEY OF REGULATORY PROVISIONS AFFECTING GROUND WATER QUALITY
Control of water pollution logically includes both water in streams
and water in the ground; they are interconnected bodies of water that
affect and support one another. And yet these two phases of water
present largely different problems in water pollution control. A
polluted stream may be "cleaned up" by vigorous enforcement of laws
enacted after the problem is recognized. A ground water source, on
the other hand, in effect may be permanently spoiled if pollution is
not prevented.
Complicating the problem in ground water pollution is the difficulty
of monitoring and stopping pollution. A state agency can monitor
the streams of the state to determine where surface water pollution
is occurring, and can place limits on discharges into these streams.
A similarly direct monitoring and limitation of ground water pollution
is not possible. Ground water pollution can occur almost anyplace,
it can occur much more secretly, and measurement of its impact on
ground water is usually impossible within the time in which action
must be taken to avoid permanent damage.
Thus, unlike the thrust of the regulatory effort to control pollution
of streams (as in current federal and state water pollution control
laws), laws and regulations to prevent ground water pollution do not
center around a single permit system but are directed at a variety of
- II-l -
-------
activities each requiring a special type of expertise and administra-
tive structure. For example, prevention of ground water pollution
from solid waste or septic tank leachate requires an expert's know-
ledge of geology and soils and of their ability to absorb such leach-
ate, applied to regulation of the individual sites that produce it;
prevention of ground water pollution from water or oil well drilling
requires an expert's knowledge of those subjects, applied to regula-
tion of the individual activities that may cause it.
Statutes and regulations which protect ground water reflect the dif-
ficult and complex nature of ground water pollution control. In order
to give some order to a description of state controls, so that the
reader may more readily comprehend the subject, the material in the
following chapter is presented under the headings of ten "control
points", as follows:
1. Surface Water Standards II-6
2. Land Use Regulations 11-13
3. Control of Waste Disposal Sites n-17
a. Solid Waste Disposal 11-17
b. Individual Sewage Systems (septic tanks) 11-28
c. Animal Feedlots 11-36
d. Deep Well Disposal of Wastes 11-45
4. Management of Water Levels and Pumping Rates 11-56
5. Control of Well Construction and Operation 11-92
a. Water Wells 11-92
b. Oil and Gas Wells 11-99
- II-2 -
-------
6. Air Quality Standards 11-109
7. Control of Land Spreading of Potential Pollutants 11-110
a. Irrigation Using Waste Water 11-110
b. Land Disposal of Wastes 11-113
c. Other Substances 11-116
8. Control of Storage Areas 11-117
9. Control of Mining and Quarrying 11-120
10. Control of Transportation and Handling of Fluids H-122
a. Surface Pipelines 11-122
b. Sewers 11-122
c. Spills 11-123
One thing that the reader may perceive from this list is that control
points that can effect protection of ground water are typically not
primarily designed to do so. Surface water standards, for example,
which are established for streams and rivers, have a substantial ef-
fect on ground water quality by improving the quality of stream water
that infiltrates into adjoining aquifers. Likewise, control of air
pollution affects ground water because particulate matter (smoke) falls
to the ground over a wide area, to be dissolved by rainfall or snow-
melt and enter the soil and possibly an aquifer below. Land use reg-
ulations, as in local zoning, can be used to protect ground water by
preventing location of polluting activities in areas where ground wa-
ter pollution is likely—e.g., location of lagoons or solid waste dis-
posal sites in flood plains, or use of septic tanks where soils are
thin.
- II-3 -
-------
Even where a regulatory scheme is designed with ground water protection
in mind, it is usually only one of several objectives. Solid waste
disposal regulations typically have provisions specifically concerning
ground water, yet their primary purpose is a more general one of pre-
venting health hazards and nuisances—disease, rats, smoke, odors, un-
sightliness, etc. Septic tank regulations are primarily designed for
similar reasons—to prevent location or operation that can result in
pollution of nearby wells, or surface drainage that can cause disease
or nuisances. Some water well regulations bear no indication of an
intent to prevent pollution of ground water resources in the area of
the well, but appear designed solely to prevent entry of pollutants
into the water that the user receives from the well; nevertheless,
proper construction of a well may prevent pollution of an aquifer.
Even in regulation of deep well disposal of wastes, ground water pro-
tection is only one consideration—others are prevention of damage to
mineral deposits, prevention of the possibility of escape to toxic
pollutants to the surface, and prevention of earthquakes.
More subtle is the role of an activity such as management of water
levels and pumping rates. Generally, one thinks of this "control
point" as bearing only an allocation of rights to use water. However,
near a seacoast, uncontrolled pumping may cause salt water intrusion
into fresh water aquifers; inland, pollution may occur as heavy pumping
induces polluted water or highly mineral or saline waters to enter
unpolluted aquifers. In any area where ground water pollution has
occurred, from stream infiltration or from any of a number of sources,
pumping may cause pollutants to move into unpolluted aquifers, causing
- II-4 -
-------
damage to the water resource that, as a practical matter, may be ir-
reversible. To control this aspect of ground water pollution, a state
must be able to control water use where it needs to.
Under some of the control points, there is little or no regulation to
refer to. States have not generally begun to regulate land spreading
of potential pollutants (Control Point 7) or storage areas (Control
Point 8). These are areas in which the hazard to ground water is ex-
pected to increase as enforcement of stream standards improves under
the Federal Water Pollution Control Act Amendments of 1972—if a per-
son is stopped from discharging waste into streams, he is likely to
store or spread it on the ground as the simplest alternative in deal-
ing with it.
Other potential causes of ground water pollution that appear generally
to be unregulated include leakage from buried gasoline storage tanks,
spreading of chemicals (e.g., salt) on highways, leaching from storage
piles such as salt or industrial materials, leakage from sewer lines,
spreading of agricultural chemicals, and accidental spills of hazar-
dous materials. Information is lacking as to the seriousness of the
threat posed generally by these sources, although it is evident that
in a particular case, any of them could seriously affect an aquifer.
Such a list of unattended potential problems also suggests the variety
of agency involvement that may be required in preventing ground water
pollution. Gasoline storage is normally a responsibility of the State
Fire Marshal's Office; highway salting comes under a Department of
- II-5 -
-------
Highways; sewer lines under a Department of Health or an EPA; and
agricultural chemicals under a Department of Agriculture. The entire
list of control points (above) suggest involvement of other agencies—
an agency that regulates oil and gas production, another that regu-
lates mining, various state water resources and natural resources
agencies, an air pollution control agency, planning and zoning agen-
cies, and various local agencies and subdivisions of government.
The following description does not allude to all the regulations of
all the states, nor is it intended to set forth the best or even aver-
age examples of regulations of the various types presented. It is in-
tended only to illustrate the range of existing controls applicable to
ground water pollution and, by reference to principal types of existing
and proposed regulations, to suggest types of controls that are avail-
able.
Control Point 1: SURFACE WATER STANDARDS
Standards for control of the quality of water in streams, rivers,
lakes, swamps and other surface accumulations of water are controlled
by federal and state laws and regulations. Each state has a statute
directed at this type of control. Since the enactment of the Federal
Water Pollution Control Act Amendments of 1972 (Public Law 92-500),
however, the states have had to conform their statutes and regulations
to federal requirements.
- II-6 -
-------
The federal law declares a national goal of elimination of the dis-
charge of pollutants into navigable waters by 1985. A state that
wishes to handle issuance of water pollution control permits under the
federal system (the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System)
must enact a statute in compliance with the federal requirements.
A central aspect of the federal law, requiring an important change in
existing state laws, is the establishment of effluent standards. Thus,
rather than using effect of a particular pollution source on the re-
ceiving water as the measure for limiting discharges, it attempts to
enforce stream quality standards by setting limitations on all dis-
charges into navigable waters. By July 1, 1977, effluent limitations
for point sources other than publicly owned treatment works are to be
achieved which shall require the application of the best practicable
control technology currently available. (A "point source" under the
federal law is "any discernible, confined and discrete conveyance, in-
cluding but not limited to any pipe, ditch, channel, tunnel, conduit,
well, discrete fissure, container, rolling stock, concentrated animal
feeding operation, or vessel or other floating craft, from which pol-
lutants are or may be discharged.")1 For publicly owned treatment
works, effluent limitations are based on secondary treatment. There
are also effluent limitations on discharges into publicly owned treat-
ment works.
For a state program to be approved so that it may handle issuance of
water pollution control permits, it must have an approved planning
process, the program must conform to guidelines for minimum procedural
- II-7 -
-------
and other requirements for state programs, and the EPA Administrator
must approve the state's permit program. For a state program to be
approved, in addition to specified procedural and enforcement require-
ments, it must:
1. Authorize inspection, monitoring, entry, and reporting re-
requirements as extensive as those authorities of the EPA
Administrator;
2. Contain adequate authority to abate violations, including
civil and criminal penalties;
3. Require permits for publicly owned treatment works to con-
tain conditions requiring adequate notice of new introduc-
tions into the works of pollutants from any source and
notice of substantial changes in volume or character;
4. Ensure that industrial users of public treatment works are
paying the applicable user charges, complying with pretreat-
ment requirements, and with monitoring, reporting, and record
keeping requirements;
5. Through its permit program, ensure compliance with effluent
and other limitations, with national standards of performance,
and with pretreatment requirements.
A model law to enable states to participate in the National Pollutant
Discharge Elimination System has been proposed by the Council of State
2
Governments. The law prohibits discharge of pollutants other than in
compliance with the law, then authorizes the agency to issue permits
for the discharge of pollutants upon condition that the discharge
meets applicable state and federal water quality standards and efflu-
- II-8 -
-------
ent limitations. Two principal provisions of the act are:
General Terms and Conditions of Permits
a. The Director is authorized to require as conditions in
permits issued under this Act the achievement of:
1. effluent limitations based upon the application of
such levels of treatment technology and processes
as are required under the Federal Water Pollution
Control Act, as amended.
2. any more stringent effluent limitations necessary
to meet water quality criteria established pursuant
to any state or federal law or regulation.
b. Effluent limitations prescribed under subsection (a.)
of this section shall be achieved in the shortest rea-
sonable period of time consistent with state law and
the Federal Water Pollution Control Act, as amended,
and any regulations or guidelines promulgated there-
under.
c. The Director is further authorized to: (1) set and
revise schedules of compliance and include such sched-
ules within the terms and conditions of permits for
the discharge of pollutants; and (2) prescribe terms
and conditions for permits issued under this Act to
assure compliance with applicable state and federal ef-
fluent limitations and water quality criteria, including
requirements concerning recording, reporting, monitor-
ing, entry and inspection to the extent permissible
- II-9 -
-------
under sections 13 and 14 of this Act, and such other
requirements as are consistent with the purposes of
this Act.
Prohibition Against Issuing Permit in Certain Instances
No permit shall be issued authorizing any of the following dis-
charges:
a. The discharge of any radiological, chemical, or biological
warfare agent or high level radioactive waste;
b. Any discharge which the Secretary of the Army, acting through
the Chief of Engineers, finds would substantially impair an-
chorage and navigation of any waters of the United States;
c. Any discharge to which the Administrator of the U.S. Environ-
mental Protection Agency, or his designee, has objected pur-
suant to any right provided to the Administrator under the
Federal Water Pollution Control Act, as amended;
d. Any discharge which is in conflict with an area-wide waste
treatment management plan approved under the Federal Water
Pollution Control Act, as amended.
The federal law applies to "navigable waters" which are defined as
"waters of the United States". State laws typically apply to all wa-
ters of the state, including ground water; the extent to which the
federal law may be applied to ground water is not clear. In requiring
improvement of the quality of navigable waters, the federal law will,
in fact, have an effect on the quality of ground water because it will
- 11-10 -
-------
improve the quality of water entering the ground by infiltration from
the surface. The U. S. EPA has also identified some specific controls
on activities affecting the quality of ground water, as follows:-^
1. The EPA will establish ground water criteria for treatment
works it funds.
2. It will structure its permitting, planning, and research to
provide states with the maximum incentive to establish full
ground water regulatory programs of their own, including
ground water monitoring.
3. Effluent guidelines (applicable to point source discharges
into navigable waters) will be developed with appropriate
reference to the potential for ground water pollution that
may result from the use of a particular treatment technology.
4. Dischargers which contemplate a change from direct discharge
to land disposal or employ a combination of discharge and
land disposal, as part of a program to comply with the ef-
fluent limitations of a permit, will be given permits con-
taining conditions to minimize the damage to underground and
surface water resources. (It has been observed that the fed-
eral law was not intended to purify surface water at the ex-
pense of ground water.)
5. Municipal permits will require municipal regulatory controls
to protect ground water from facilities presently connected
into a municipal sewer system but which, because of pre-
treatment, user charge, or cost recovery requirements,
change to a land disposal technique. Conditions will also
- 11-11 -
-------
be set for pretreating industries which use publicly owned
treatment works.
6. Grants for construction of publicly owned treatment works
employing land disposal or aquifer recharge will be contin-
gent on the design of the project to meet specific ground
water quality standards. The same criteria may be applied
to industry.
7. The Act requires any areawide planning process to include a
process to control disposition of all residual waste gener-
ated in the area, including surface or subsurface disposal,
to protect ground water quality. (Currently, the EPA has
produced a draft of guidelines for land disposal of wastes.)
8. The Act requires that for a state to maintain federal ap-
proval of its program, it must either prohibit the disposal
of pollutants into wells, or control such disposal in order
to -prevent pollution of ground and surface water resources
and to protect the public health and welfare. (The EPA
adopted a "Policy on Subsurface Emplacement of Fluids by
Well Injection" on April 2, 1974. See also reference to the
Safe Drinking Water Act, below.
9. The EPA will conduct research on pathways of ground water
pollution; states will be required to report on ground
water under the requirement of the act that each state re-
port annually on non-point sources of pollution; states may
be assisted in establishing ground water monitoring systems.
In any examination of federal EPA authority concerning ground water,
- 11-12 -
-------
reference should be made to the Safe Drinking Water Act of 1974 (Public
Law 93-523) . Essentially directed at assuring that public water sys-
tems are adequately supervised by the states to assure safe drinking
water, the Act also gives the EPA Administrator the duty to adopt reg-
ulations for state underground injection programs, and authorizes him
in an emergency to take whatever action he deems necessary to protect
health where a contaminant is likely to enter a public water system.
Control Point 2: LAND USE REGULATIONS
Land use regulation involves making a determination as to a best allo-
cation of activities, prohibiting certain activities in areas where
they would tend to be detrimental to the public health, safety, and
welfare. Flood plain zoning is a natural resource related type of
land use regulation intended to preserve life and property by con-
trolling development in areas subject to flooding. Even in estab-
lishing conventional urban zoning, natural resources may be protected
or preserved for utilization if the plan upon which the zoning is
based takes into consideration the presence of water resources, scenic
areas, mineral deposits, etc. Water and air pollution problems may be
avoided by considered location of certain industrial activities, by
prohibiting unsewered development in areas where the topography or
soil types will be likely to result in water pollution if septic tanks
are used, or by prohibiting location of solid waste disposal sites or
waste lagoons in areas where the likelihood of their causing ground
- 11-13 -
-------
water pollution is unreasonably high. Zoning has been proposed as a
means of preventing especially critical ground water recharge areas
from being covered by buildings, parking lots, and roads.
A number of states have recently enacted statutes to regulate land use
to protect natural features such as shorelines and wetlands. Others
have enacted statewide land use laws with more general objectives of
requiring wise development and preserving natural resources. The
statutes typically include protection of water quality as one of their
objectives.
California's Coastal Zone Conservation Act is designed to protect the
coastal zone as "a distinct and valuable natural resource belonging to
"4
all the people and existing as a delicately balanced ecosystem. A
narrow part of the zone, extending from the seaward limit of the
state's jurisdiction to a line 1,000 yards landward from the mean
high-tide line, is designated the "permit area" in which one must ob-
tain a permit in order to subdivide, to build a structure, to grade,
dredge, etc., dispose of any waste, or change the intensity of use of
water, the ecology related thereto, or access thereto. To obtain a
permit, the applicant must show that the development will not have any
substantial adverse environmental or ecological effect, and that the
development is consistent with the declarations and objectives of the
law.
Under Florida's Environmental Land and Water Management Act of 1972, an
"area of critical state concern" may be designated for an area having a
- 11-14 -
-------
significant impact upon environmental, historical, natural, or archeo-
logical resources of regional or statewide importance; an area affected
by a major public facility; or a proposed area of major development po-
tential.5
In such an area, local land development regulations must comply with
principles for guiding development specified under the rule designating
the area. The law also controls "developments of regional impact"--any
development which would affect the health, safety, or welfare of citi-
zens of more than one county. One of the considerations required to be
used in adopting guidelines and standards for such a development is the
extent to which the development would create or alleviate environmental
problems such as air or water pollution or noise.
Another type of environmental land use law that can affect ground wa-
ter is the "wetlands" statute, such as those of Delaware, New York,
and Wisconsin. The Delaware statute, for example, identifies the
following needs for protecting wetlands:
1. The wetlands are sources of nutrients to marine life
of economic value;
2. The wetlands are habitats for plants and animals of signifi-
cant economic and ecological value necessary to marine com-
merce, recreation and aesthetic enjoyment;
3. Wetlands reduce flood damage and they absorb silt, thus pre-
venting silting of harbors and navigation channels.
- 11-15 -
-------
The statute defines wetlands as marshes, swamps, and other lowlands
along the coast that are subject to tidal action, and certain contigu-
ous areas where fresh water stands most of the time due to high water
table and which contribute significantly to ground water recharge.
Activities in the wetlands require a state permit, one of the factors
in issuance of which is the effect of site preparation and the pro-
posed activity on the quality and quantity of tidal waters, and sur-
face and ground water resources.
A few states have statewide land-use laws. Under the Maine Land Use
Law, for example, a commission appointed by the Governor establishes
three types of districts in the unorganized (non-municipal) portions
of the state: Protection (where development would jeopardize signif-
icant natural, recreational, and historic resources, including flood
plains, precipitous slopes, wildlife habitat, and other areas critical
to the ecology of the region or state); Management (forest, agricul-
ture); and Development (industry, residential areas, removal of min-
erals).7 A permit must be obtained from the state to sell lots or
perform construction in such areas.
Land use standards adopted by the commission are (among other things)
to encourage the most desirable and appropriate use of air, land, and
water resources consistent with the comprehensive land use plan; re-
duce water pollution and other environmental intrusions; and reflect
a consideration of the availability and capability of the natural re-
sources base. Criteria for approval of a permit application include
requirements that:
- 11-16 -
-------
1. Adequate technical and financial provision has been made for
meeting the state's air and water pollution control stand-
ards, for solid waste disposal, for controlling of offensive
odors, and for the securing and maintenance of sufficient
healthful water supplies;
2. Adequate provision has been made for fitting the proposal
harmoniously into the existing natural environment in order
to assure there will be no undue adverse effect on existing
uses, scenic character, and natural and historic resources
in the area;
3. Uses of topography, soils, and subsoils meet standards of
the current Soil Suitability Guide for Land Use Planning in
Maine, or which are adaptable to the proposed use pursuant
to said guide and will not cause unreasonable soil erosion
or reduction in the capacity of the land to absorb and hold
water.
Control Point 3: CONTROL OF WASTE DISPOSAL SITES
A. Solid Waste Disposal
Most states have statutes that prohibit disposal of solid waste with-
out a permit from either a local or state agency. The statutes typi-
cally authorize a state agency to adopt regulations, and leave it to
the adopting agency to set requirements for the varying conditions
that may exist.
- 11-17 -
-------
An example of brevity is the Minnesota statute, which requires the
pollution control agency to adopt standards for the control of the
collection, transportation, and disposal of solid waste for the pre-
vention and abatement of water, air, and land pollution, "recognizing
that due to variable factors, no single standard of solid waste con-
trol is applicable to all areas of the state".8 The agency is in-
structed to take into consideration physical conditions, topography,
soils and geology, climate, transportation, and land use; the stand-
ards are to be "premised on technical criteria and commonly accepted
practices". A similar provision authorizes adoption of regulations
relating to collection, transportation, disposal, equipment, location,
procedures, methods, systems, or techniques.
Other statutory provisions typically relate to inspection and enforce-
ment authority, penalties, and appeals. The statute also will contain
definitions so that the scope of the agency's authority is defined,
including specification of the types of waste included (garbage, rub-
bish, demolition materials, etc.).
Typical regulations cover information and other requirements for ob-
taining a permit, site selection, specifications concerning proximity
of water resources, prohibited types of disposal, and construction,
equipment, operation, reporting, monitoring, and closing requirements.
Information and Other Requirements for Obtaining a Permit
The regulations typically require, as a condition for issuance of a
permit:
- 11-18 -
-------
1. Plans and specifications for the proposed site and facility;
some states require that these be prepared by a registered
professional engineer.
2. A map or aerial photograph of the area showing land use
within the adjoining area. Locations of water wells may be
required. Delaware requires wells within one mile of the
site to be identified, but the requirement in other regula-
g
tions is usually less than this, down to 500 feet.
3. A report on geologic formations and soil conditions (the
Wisconsin regulation specifies three borings for a site up
to five acres in size, one boring for each additional five
acres up to 50 acres, and one boring for each additional
50 acres),10 including depth to ground water. The Florida
regulation additionally requires a hydrologic survey.
Illinois requires data describing soil classification,
grain size distribution, permeability, compactability, and
ion-exchange properties of the subsurface materials for
those strata essential to design of the landfill; compre-
hensive analysis of water samples from on-site and nearby
wells; and a description of ground water conditions in-
cluding flow below and adjacent to the proposed site, with
an appraisal of the effect of the landfill on ground and
12
surface waters.
4. A description of surface drainage patterns. The California
regulation requires calculations for the flooding frequency
of streams within or adjacent to the site.
5. A report of:
- 11-19 -
-------
a. Population and area to be served by the facility;
b. Anticipated type, quantity, and source of wastes;
c. Source and characteristics of cover material;
d. Type and amount of equipment, and operating plans;
6. Information concerning measures proposed for prevention of
water pollution and for control of drainage, leachate, and
gases.
Frequently, the statute or regulation will require that a representa-
tive of the regulating agency inspect the site prior to issuance of
license.
Some regulations also require a statement or plan as to ultimate use
of the site after closing.
The Michigan statute requires that the applicant for a license be a
14
"responsible and suitable person to conduct the business". That
statute also requires a surety bond of $500 per acre for the proposed
site, with a minimum of $2,500.
Statutes often exemp£ dumping by a person of his own wastes on his
own property.
Site Requirements
California's regulation classifies sites according to types of waste
that are acceptable.15 A "Class II" site, for instance, is for gar-
- 11-20 -
-------
bage, rubbish, construction and demolition materials, street refuse,
etc. Such a site overlying usable ground water must be "naturally
capable of preventing lateral and vertical hydraulic continuity be-
tween liquids and gases emanating from the waste in the site and us-
able surface or ground waters, or the disposal area has been modified
to achieve such capability"; or, if the site does have vertical and
lateral continuity with usable ground water, then "geological and
hydraulic features such as soil type, artificial barriers, depth to
ground water, and other factors will assure protection of the quality
of usable ground water."
Such a site must also meet the following criteria:
1. Protected by natural or artificial features so as to assure
protection from any washout and from inundation which could
occur as a result of tides or floods having a predicted
frequency of once in 100 years.
2. Surface drainage from tributary areas shall not contact
wastes in the site during disposal operations for the
active life of the site.
3. Gases and leachate emanating from waste in the site shall
not unreasonably affect ground water during the active life
of the site.
4. Subsurface flow into the site and the depth at which water
soluble materials are placed shall be controlled during
construction and operation of the site to minimize leachate
production and assure that the waste material will be above
- 11-21 -
-------
the highest anticipated elevation of the capillary fringe
of the ground water.
Class I sites, for toxic wastes, are subject to considerably more se-
vere restrictions. Class III sites, for inert materials, are much
less restricted.
Some site restrictions in regulations are phrased as prohibitions.
The Florida regulation, for example, prohibits disposal (unless ap-
proved by the department):
1. In a body of water or in the watershed of a surface public
water supply where runoff or leachate may result in viola-
tion of pollution control laws or regulations;
2. On the banks of a stream connected to the Floridan aquifer;
3. In a sinkhole;
4. In a limestone or gravel pit;
5. In an area subject to flooding (unless approved drainage
is installed);
6. Where the water table is less than five feet below the
normal ground surface;
7. In an area immediately adjacent to or within the cone of
influence of public water supply pumping;
8. Within 200 feet of a habitation or place of business served
by a public water supply, or within 1,000 feet of one that
depends upon a shallow well supply.
The Michigan guidelines provide minimum setback distances from bodies
- 11-22 -
-------
of water. They specify also that in permeable soils, at least 2,000
feet isolation should be maintained, in the direction of ground water
movement, from properties where domestic wells exist or may be drilled.
For large capacity wells, additional isolation may be required. The
Michigan guidelines, as do regulations of other states, contain sev-
eral specifications for various types of soil, bedrock, and water
situations. The Minnesota regulation prohibits location of a solid
waste disposal site within one mile of a municipal well or water in-
18
take. A number of regulations require a minimum vertical distance
1 Q
to ground water, ranging from two feet in Delaware to ten feet in
Minnesota and Wisconsin.
Hazardous Wastes
The regulations contain special provisions for disposal of hazardous
wastes, such as toxic substances. Generally, the statute or regula-
tion defines the category and prohibits disposal in a solid waste site
without specific approval of the agency. They frequently require that
such wastes be disposed of in a separate area, or that they be neutral-
ized, if possible.
The California regulation controls disposal of hazardous wastes by its
system of categorizing types of disposal sites, wherein only the
21
"Class I" site may receive such wastes. Requirements for such a site
are strict, requiring in effect that there be no possibility of liq-
uids reaching water resources either downward or through inundation
or washout.
- 11-23 -
-------
The Wisconsin regulation applies special provisions to toxic and haz-
ardous wastes, including quarterly reports of the quantities and types
of such wastes disposed of at the operation during the previous cal-
endar quarter, the requirement that wells be provided at locations
specified by the department, and that samples from these wells be col-
22
lected and analyzed quarterly. This regulation requires as a condi-
tion for obtaining a permit to dispose of toxic or hazardous wastes
that the applicant (among other things) provide a list of chemical and
trade names of all wastes, names and addresses of initial sources and
transporters, and a report of the average quarterly waste quantities
in both pounds and gallons to be disposed of at the site.
The Oregon statute requires that an applicant for a permit to operate
a waste disposal site to receive "environmentally-hazardous wastes"
must as a condition of issuance of the permit, convey the land to the
state. The statute prohibits disposal of hazardous wastes other than
upon real estate owned by the state.
Other Requirements in Solid Waste Laws and Regulations
The regulations contain requirements for operation of disposal sites,
such as the amount and frequency of covering and compaction as wastes
are deposited, method of filling, placement of impermeable barriers,
grades, method of confining windblown material, and requirements for
fences, roads, signs, and screening by vegetation.
The statutes or regulations typically prohibit open burning and open
- 11-24 -
-------
dumping without covering. They require that dust, insects, and vermin
be effectively controlled, and that fires be prevented.
The regulations frequently require that surface drainage be diverted
from the working area. Some regulations require that surface runoff
from a site be treated to comply with water pollution control standards.
A number of regulations require installation of monitoring wells, but
leave to the administering agency the decision as to when and where
this is required, on an individual site basis. Pennsylvania requires
24
at least one well in each dominant direction of ground water movement.
The Florida regulation requires that where the gas generated by the
decomposition of wastes cannot readily be dispersed into the atmo-
25
sphere, a gas control system shall be provided.
Upon closing a sanitary landfill, some regulations require seeding,
contouring, and other reclamation-type work. The Wisconsin regulation
authorizes the department to require installation of monitoring wells
26
and water quality sampling and analysis after the site is closed.
The Model State Solid Waste Management and Resource Recovery Incen-
tives Act of the Council of State Governments (1972) proposes a re-
quirement that all persons operating under permit be required, upon
completion of a sanitary landfill, to file a plat of the site with .
the county recorder, together with a description of the waste placed
therein.
- 11-25 -
-------
The Model Act contains some broader approaches to avoiding solid waste
disposal problems by requiring that each municipality develop a solid
waste management plan, by enabling inter-municipal cooperation in
solid waste disposal, and by establishing tax incentives to encourage
recycling in order to reduce the volume of solid waste.
Federal Guidelines
The Administrator of the U. S. Environmental Protection Agency has
prepared Solid Waste Management Guidelines for the disposal of muni-
cipal waste under directive of the 1970 amendments to the Solid Waste
Disposal Act of 1965 (Public Law 89-272). The guidelines represent
the judgment of the EPA regarding what is necessary to assure both
environmental protection and satisfactory and acceptable design and
operation of land disposal facilities. They are intended to be achiev-
,able using current technology, while providing flexibility for unique
and specific climatological, geological, geographical, and related
conditions.
The guidelines are recommended for adoption by state and local gov-
ernmental agencies; they are mandatory for federal agencies and for
solid waste disposal on any federal lands.
The following is a brief description of the guidelines.
Selection of Wastes and Special Handling. The guidelines suggest con-
.sultation between responsible agencies, the designer, and the owner-
- 11-26 -
-------
operator as to what wastes will be accepted; and specification in the
plans for procedures to be employed for wastes requiring special
handling. They specify procedures for handling bulky wastes, dead
animals, water treatment plant sludges, and incinerator and air pollu-
tion control residues (sludges and residues to be placed on the work-
ing face of the fill). The following wastes require specific approval
of the agency:
Hazardous wastes (toxic, corrosive, infectious, explosive, etc.)
Infectious institutional wastes
Bulk liquids and semi-liquids
Sludges containing free moisture
Highly flammable or volatile substances
Raw animal manure
Septic tank pumpings
Raw sewage sludge
Certain industrial process wastes
Site Selection and Development. Site development plans should be pre-
pared or approved by a professional engineer. They should include
initial and final topographies at contours of five feet or less; land
use and zoning within a quarter mile of the site including locations
of all buildings, roads, wells, weatercourses, etc.; all airports with-
in five miles (the site should not be located where the attraction of
birds would pose a hazard to low-flying aricraft); projected use of
the completed land disposal site (the guidelines indicate criteria for
cultivation or structural use). Also to be performed are an evaluation
- 11-27 -
-------
Cover material
Compaction
Equipment
Safety
Records
B. Individual Sewage Systems (septic tanks)
While prevention of ground water pollution is a major purpose of solid
waste disposal regulations, it has not been a major purpose in the
regulation of individual sewage systems such as septic tanks. The
latter regulations are directed primarily at protecting the health of
the septic tank user and his near neighbors.
The "Manual of Septic Tank Practice" of the U. S. Department of Health,
Education, and Welfare, generally followed by states in the adoption
of septic tank regulations, illustrates this emphasis in setting out
?7
the objectives of septic tank regulations in its suggested ordinance.
Such regulations are to establish minimum standards that will insure
that the wastes discharged:
1. Do not contaminate any drinking water supply.
2. Are not accessible to insects, rodents, or other possible
carriers of disease which may come into contact with food
or drinking water.
3. Do not pollute or contaminate the waters of any bathing
beach, shellfish breeding grounds, or stream used for public
or domestic water supply purposes or for recreational purposes,
- 11-28 -
-------
of hydrogeology of the site to minimize impact on ground water resouc-
sources, and evaluation of soil characteristics.
The guidelines state that "the location, design, construction, and op-
eration of the land disposal site shall minimize environmental hazards
and shall conform to the most stringent of applicable ground and sur-
face water quality standards and requirements." They then specify that
plans shall include current and projected use of water resources, in
the potential zone of influence of the site; facts concerning water
resources including initial quality; proposed location of observation
wells; description of soil to a depth adequate to allow evaluation of
water quality protection provided by it; provision for surface water
runoff control; and potential of leachate generation and proposed
control systems. If in a flood plain, the site should be protected
against at least the 50 year design flood.
Surface watercourses and runoff are to be diverted from the site, by
trenches, grading, and manner of construction. Leachate collection
and treatment systems should be used where necessary.
Operation. The guidelines contain provisions concerning:
Dust and litter control
Open burning (prohibited)
Decomposition gases
Vectors (carrier capable of transmitting pathogens)
Aesthetics
- 11-29 -
-------
4. Are not a health hazard by being accessible to children.
5. Do not give rise to a nuisance due to odor or unsightly
appearance.
6. Will not violate any other laws or regulations governing
water pollution or sewage disposal.
Statutory authority for control of septic tanks is usually contained
in some basic authority of a state agency. Their control is speci-
fied in regulations. Administration is primarily through local health
officers, with state supervision.
Typically, regulations contain the following elements:
1. A requirement that the owner obtain a permit. (In Wisconsin,
one must have a permit in order to purchase a septic tank;
28
sale to any person who has no permit is also prohibited.
In Ohio, one cannot sell lots in a subdivision until he has
approval of plans showing that septic tank regulations can
29
be met. In Vermont, one must have a permit from the Agency
of Environmental Conservation prior to subdividing the
land.30)
2. A condition that a permit will not be issued if the land-
owner could feasibly tap into a public sewer.
3. Requirements that the landowner furnish a soil report and
results of a percolation test. The regulations vary as to
assurances that these tests are thorough and that they are
competently conducted.
- 11-30 -
-------
4. Minimum lot size, maximum slope.
5. Specification of capacity of equipment and minimum total
linear feet of leaching tile for installation in particular
types of soil, for the various quantities of waste antici-
pated. Other constraints applied are lot size, ground
slope, percolation rate, soil type and depth, and depth to
ground water.
6. Submission of a detailed plan of the septic tank (or other
system) design and proposed location of the tank and leaching
beds, location of structures, property lines, water re-
sources, and water lines and wells. A legal description of
the property may also be required.
7. Equipment specifications, such as construction of the tank,
size and length of tile in leaching beds, and method of in-
stallation.
8. Installation requirements concerning distance to water or
bedrock, distance from wells and water resources, bedding,
backfill, etc.
9. A requirement that abandoned septic tanks be filled with
earth and covered.
10. A requirement that inspection be allowed.
The regulation also may specify requirements for constructing and lo-
cating cesspools or privies (some states prohibit these devices), and
for aerobic treatment systems and sand filters. The Maryland regula-
tion contains specifications for deep seepage pits, which some states
prohibit. The regulations for private sewage disposal may also
- 11-31 -
-------
include regulations for holding tanks and chemical toilets.
Some prohibitions found in private sewage disposal regulations are
that such devices may not:
1. Cause a nuisance;
2. Discharge into wells, sink holes, onto the ground, or into
surface drainage courses;
3. Discharge off the lot upon which it is located (except under
special conditions);
4. Be located in a flood plain;
5. Be constructed or situated so that "clear" water may drain
into the septic system — i.e., roof drainage, other non-
sewage sources.
Wisconsin allows denial of a permit simply on the basis of soil type,
"when a property consists entirely of soils having a very severe lim-
32
itation for on-site liquid waste disposal". The applicant may, how-
ever, using results of percolation tests and other data, offer evidence
to support his application. The proposed Maine regulation (June 17,
1974) eliminates the percolation test, permitting or denying any par-
ticular type or size of system on the basis of soil groups and bed-
rock and ground water conditions.
The California Regional Water Quality Control Board, Central Valley
Region, in its "Guidelines for Waste Disposal From Land Developments",
after stating certain minimum criteria for allowing use of a septic
- 11-32 -
-------
tank, uses a "point system" which it describes as follows:
A number of factors affect the capability of individual septic
tank - leaching systems to provide safe continuous disposal of
wastes. Those factors which come within the purview of the
Board, in that the Board may specify conditions or areas where
the discharge of waste will not be permitted, are soil absorption
capability, soil depth, depth to ground water, and slope.
Any of these factors may in itself limit the system capabil-
ity; however, the general case is that system capability is af-
fected by all factors acting simultaneously. The preceding min-
imum criteria establish conditions which will eliminate undue in-
fluence of a single factor upon system reliability but do not
recognize the interplay among all factors. Compliance with only
minimum criteria, therefore, will not necessarily result in an
acceptable system.
The following procedure has been formulated to recognize the
interplay among the factors listed above. The procedure utilizes
the minimum criteria contained herein as a base, and credits
those factors which are in excess of the minimum criteria. Com-
pliance with the following point system should minimize problems
which occur due to concentrating large quantities of waste in
limited areas.
Point allowances are calculated for each factor. The sum of the
- 11-33 -
-------
point allowances establishes the suitability of the system. A
suitable disposal area for a septic tank - leaching system from
a single family residence must total a minimum of 45 points.
I. Soil Absorption Capacity
Minimum
Usable
Percolation Rate Disposal
(minutes per inch) Area (ft2)
41-60
21-40
11-20
Less than 10
12,000
10,000
8,000
6,000
Point Allowance for
Expansion Area
2/1,000 ft^ over 12,000 ft^
2/1,000 ft; over 10,000 ft^
2/1,000 ft; over 8,000 ft;
2/1,000 ft* over 6,000 ft2
II.
Depth of Soil or Ground Water, whichever is more restrictive
Depth in feet* Point Allowance
5-10
11-15
16-20
Greater than 20
5
15
20
25
III. Slope in Disposal Area
Slope, %
21-30
11-20
10 or Less
Point Allowance
0
15
30
*Depth below the bottom of the leaching trench or seepage pit to
water, rock or first impervious layer.
- H-34 -
-------
An additional dimension in septic tank control is provided by the
Pennsylvania Sewage Facilities Act which requires that each municipal-
ity prepare a detailed plan for waste disposal, then requires denial
of a permit for installation of a septic tank if the installation is
not consistent with the plan. ^ The Act requires that permits be issued
by state certified municipal sewage enforcement officers who pass a
rigorous training course and test.
Still another dimension may be seen in a regulation such as Ohio's
which requires that septic tank installers and sewage tank cleaners
be registered. Registrations may be revoked for violation of septic
tank regulations.
Some regulations are directed at nraintenance and at sludge disposal.
A number of states specifically allow revocation of a permit if the
system does not perform according to requirements. The Wisconsin
regulation contains a requirement that a septic tank be cleaned when-
ever sludge or scum occupies one-third of the tank volume. The stat-
ute then specifies that sludge may be disposed of in a public sewer,
an approved site, by burial on the premises on which produced under
certain conditions, or by spreading on land not used for pasturing
livestock or growing vegetables. Maine has adopted guidelines for
septic tank sludge disposal on land, covering the following alterna-
tives:
Total recycling of nutrients through green manure crops in a
conservation rotation;
- 11-35 -
-------
Disposing of septic tank sludge on the land by spreading;
Lagoon treatment and liquid disposal;
Disposal by spray irrigation;
•JO
Dewatered sludge disposal;
The Oregon regulation prohibits spreading of septic tank sludge on
land without approval of the state or local health agency having jur-
isdiction, and in any case prohibits its use as fertilizer on root
crops/ vegetables, low-growing berries, or fruits that may be eaten
raw; and use on grass in public parks or other areas in a way that
•in
persons could unknowningly come in contact with it. That regulation
contains specifications for sludge lagoons and sludge spreading areas.
Another approach to prevention of water pollution from septic tank use
is limitation of materials placed in them. Prohibition of use of cer-
tain types of household water-softening units has been suggested. In
Suffolk County, New York, an ordinance was passed prohibiting the sale
of certain types of laundry and dishwashing detergents.40
C. Animal Feedlots
Animal feedlots are "concentration animal feeding operations" under
Section 502(14) of the Federal Water Pollution Control Act Amendments
of 1972, and thus may be required to have a permit as a "point source"
under the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System. The EPA
Administrator under his authority to use discretion has limited this
requirement to large operations. Feeding operations consisting of the
- 11-36 -
-------
following number of animals, or smaller, are excluded, although such
an operation may be required to obtain a permit if it is in fact a
significant source of pollution:
1,000 slaughter steers and heifers
700 mature dairy cattle
2,500 swine weighing over 55 pounds
10,000 sheep
55,000 turkeys
100,000 laying hens and broilers if the facility has contin-
uous flow watering
30,000 laying hens and broilers if the facility has a liquid
manure handling system
5,000 ducks41
State animal feedlot regulations apply both to the larger lots to
which the NPDES requirements apply, and to the smaller lots that do
not come within that system.
State animal feedlot regulations typically apply to the situation
where the ratio of the number of animals to land area is so high that
concentrations of waste threaten to cause water pollution. They re-
quire a permit and certain information for obtaining a permit. Basic-
ally, the regulations require that water be diverted above the lot,
and that below the lot a settling pond and lagoon be provided, with
additional treatment if necessary. Some also specify the manner in
which waste from the lot may be stored or disposed of on land. The
- 11-37 -
-------
regulations vary in detail. Montana's regulation is brief, and gen-
42 43 44
eral in statement. The Iowa and Oregon regulations are relatively
detailed.
The Model State Confined Animal Feeding Environmental Control Act sug-
gested by the Council of State Governments (1973) contains definitions,
permit authority and procedures, right to enter and inspect, authority
to adopt regulations, and provisions for enforcement, penalties, and
appeal. The substantive proposals are contained in two Annexes, one
covering Criteria for Permit Application and Issuance, the other cov-
ering Guidelines for Standards Criteria for the Design, Construction,
and Management of Confined Animal Feeding and Holding Facilities.
Operations Subject to Regulation. The Iowa confined feeding regula-
tion includes an open feedlot only where the animal population exceeds
a specified number and the square feet of lot area per animal is less
than a specified number. For instance, the regulation applies to beef
cattle where animal population exceeds 100 and lot area per animal is
less than 600 square feet. For sheep, the figures are 1,200 popula-
tion and 60 square feet. The Iowa regulation separately treats a
"confinement feeding operation" — one having a roofed or partially
roofed enclosure where wastes are removed as liquid or semi-liquid.
In such a case, area is not involved and the regulation applies by
number of animals — e.g., for beef cattle, 50; for sheep, 600.
Registration of an open feedlot is required if one or more of the fol-
lowing conditions exist:
- 11-38 -
-------
1. The number of animals exceeds (beef cattle: 1,000);
2. The feedlot contributes to a watercourse draining more than
3/200 acres of land above the lot and the distance from the
feedlot to the nearest point on the watercourse is less than
(beef cattle: 200 feet per 100 animals);
3. The runoff water from the feedlot (or collection facility)
flows directly into a tile line or other buried conduit,
well, hole, pit, lake or pond.
Registration of a "confinement feeding operation" is required if:
1. The number of animals exceeds (beef cattle: 100);
2. Overflow contributes to a watercourse;
3. The runoff water from the feedlot (or collection facility)
flows directly into a tile line or other buried conduit,
well, hole, pit, lake or pond.
Other states: Kansas — 300 or more head of cattle, swine, sheep, or
horses, any operation using a lagoon, or any operation having a water
pollution potential; Minnesota, Montana, ' Nebraska — feeding
any livestock in a confined area not normally used for raising crops
or as pasture; Oregon — feeding or holding areas in buildings, pens,
or lots where the surface has been prepared with concrete, rock, or
fibrous material to support animals in wet weather or where the con-
centration of animals has destroyed the vegetative cover and the nat-
49
ural infiltrative capacity of the soil.
- 11-39 -
-------
The Model Act requires a permit for any confined feeding facility upon
which animal units are confined for more than 30 days in a cal-
endar year, and to any confined feeding area which violates a law or
regulation. An Annex to the Act suggests relative animal unit numbers
based on Biochemical Oxygen Demand (in which the beef cattle number is
1, feeder pigs 35, laying hens 180, etc.). The law is applicable to
feeding or holding animals in enclosures that are less in area than is
necessary for the soil assimilation of animal wastes generated on the
land without violating any law or regulation (e.g., water pollution
control laws). The agency is directed to adopt regulations specifying
areas to be included in terms of quantitative animal densities rela-
tive to land area.
The Iowa regulation and an Annex to the Model Act contain factors to
be considered in determing whether a facility will constitute a pol-
lution problem, such as location relative to other water, type of sur-
face, soil and slope, hydrological and geological conditions, permea-
bility of retention structure to excessive seepage, control of dis-
charge in proportion to stream flow, animal density, anticipated waste
load, distance to structures occupied by humans, direction of pre-
vailing winds, applicable water quality standards, and factors con-
cerning waste disposal. Despite other criteria in the law or regula-
tions, the law will be applied or waived in a particular situation
depending upon these factors.
Information Required for a Permit. Iowa requires the location to be
sketched on an aerial photograph, to include:
- 11-40 -
-------
Building and lot areas
Lagoons or waste holding pits
Direction of surface drainage from site
Location of wells and dwellings within 1,000 feet of site
Adjacent land owned
Land area set aside for waste disposal
Minnesota and Oregon have similar requirements, but Minnesota also
requires a description of geologic conditions, soil types, and ground
water elevations, a plan of operational procedures, location of treat-
ment works, and quantity and type of effluent to be discharged; Oregon
requires climatological data and details of feed preparation and hand-
ling, and a location map showing ownership, zoning, and use of adja-
cent lands and location of the proposed operation in relation to res-
idences and domestic water supply sources.
Prohibited Locations
The Nebraska regulation prohibits location of a livestock waste con-
trol facility (e.g., a detention pond) within 100 feet of any well
used for domestic purposes, or within 1,000 feet of a municipal water
supply well unless the operator can show that it will not result in
ground water pollution.
Minnesota prohibits location of new livestock feedlots within shore-
land or a floodway (protected under other statutes), within 1,000 feet
of a public park, in sinkholes or areas draining into sinkholes, or
- 11-41 -
-------
within one-half mile of the nearest point to a concentration of ten or
more private residences.
An Annex to the Model Act suggests prohibition of confined feeding
facilities within 500 feet from waters edge, within a floodplain,
within 1,000 feet of public property, or within 1,000 feet of an ac-
cumulation of ten or more private residences.
Facility Requirements
Subject to waiver when not necessary, or additional requirements when
necessary, the Iowa regulation specifies that the minimum water pol-
lution control facilities for an open feedlot shall be terraces or re-
tention basins capable of containing four inches of runoff. Diversion
of surface drainage above the feedlot is required. A settling basin
is to be provided where necessary. For a "confinement feeding oper-
ation" , the minimum facility is a tank or basin capable of holding
120 days' waste.
The Kansas regulation works in a similar manner, requiring facilities
if a potential water pollution problem exists. For cattle, the re-
tention pond must hold three inches of runoff.
The Nebraska regulation requires a detention structure capable of
holding runoff from a ten year, 24-hour storm. For "housed" opera-
tions, the requirement, as in Iowa, is the capacity to hold 120 days'
accumulation.
- 11-42 -
-------
The Oregon regulation is considerably more detailed, consisting not
only of capacity requirements, but method of diking, requirement of
overflow relief structures, prevention of erosion, and other regula-
tions including solids handling systems and conveyance and disposal
facilities.
An Annex to the Model Act suggests design of holding structures on
the basis of peak runoff from a ten-year frequency, 24-hour duration
storm.
Operation of Facilities
The regulations also contain certain operating requirements, which in
essence require that water pollution be prevented. Montana requires
that the operator provide personnel with adequate skill and time to
maintain and operate the facility consistent with the approved appli-
cation. The Nebraska regulation states: "Caution should be exercised
to insure that a thin layer of manure remain on the lots during scrap-
ing and that the soil manure interface not be disturbed." That regu-
lation also instructs the operator in keeping the feedlot surface
aerobic so that production of odors is curtailed. The California Wa-
ter Resources Board has issued guidelines specifically addressed to
the protection of ground water; among these is the recommendation that
salt in animal rations be limited to that required to maintain animal
health and optimum production.
- 11-43 -
-------
Storage, Transportation, and Disposal
The regulations also may apply to storage, transportation, and dispos-
al of collected wastes. In essence, the regulations state that these
activities shall be conducted so that water pollution does not occur,
and pollution control laws are complied with.
The Oregon regulation contains requirements for liquid manure spread-
ing, including requirements for: a plan of uniform coverage, plan of
rotation for liquid manure irrigation systems, selection of equipment,
provision of adequate land for year-round disposal, type of land to
use, harvesting of vegetative cover, livestock grazing, and prohibi-
tion of seepage basins except where the operator can demonstrate that
ground water pollution will not result.
The Iowa Water Quality Commission has adopted a policy on land disposal
of animal wastes, concerning maximum average nitrogen application rate
(250 pounds per acre), phosphorus limits, waste disposal on snow-
covered land, on land subject to flooding, and on land near water-
courses, and odor control.
An Annex to the Model Act emphasizes the need for systematic removal
of wastes from holding structures, and for proper storage and disposal
of such wastes. It describes practices to be followed in storing,
transporting, and disposing of wastes.
- 11-44 -
-------
D. Deep Well Disposal of Wastes
States have enacted statutes and have adopted regulations specially
directed at the disposal of wastes in deep formations where such wastes
will be permanently isolated from contact with fresh water resources
and from human activity. Some states specifically prohibit the prac-
tice. State water pollution control laws that apply to ground water
may also, by their general provisions, prohibit the practice without a
permit where the disposal would affect a water resource.
The federal Safe Drinking Water Act of 1974 (Public Law 93-523) re-
quires states to adopt programs prohibiting underground injection
without a permit, and requires the federal EPA to adopt regulations
for state underground injection control programs, to ensure that such
injection will not endanger drinking water sources. The federal reg-
ulations had not yet been adopted as the present manual was written.
In emergencies, the law authorizes the EPA to take such actions as the
Administrator may deem necessary to protect the health of persons if a
contaminant is likely to enter a public water supply system from any
source.
Since enactment of the Federal Water Pollution Control Act Amendments
of 1972, states have been under the constraint of Section 402(b) of
that act which makes approval by the EPA Administrator of a state's
water pollution control law under the NPDES program conditional upon
a finding by him that adequate authority exists in the state to "con-
trol the disposal of pollutants into wells". The EPA Administrator by
- 11-45 -
-------
Decision Statement No. 5 (April 2, 1974) adopted a policy statement on
Subsurface Emplacement of Fluids, the goals of which are stated to be
to protect the subsurface from pollution, ensure that enginnering and
geological safeguards are adequate to protect the integrity of the
subsurface environment and are adhered to, and to encourage develop-
ment of alternative means of disposal which afford greater environ-
mental protection. To accomplish these goals, the Administrator de-
clared his policy to be as follows:
1. The EPA will oppose emplacement of materials by subsurface
injection without strict controls and a clear demonstration
that such emplacement will not interfere with present or
potential use of the subsurface environment, contaminate
ground water resources or otherwise damage the environment.
2. All proposals for subsurface injection should be critically
evaluated to determine that:
a. All reasonable alternative measures have been ex-
plored and found less satisfactory in terms of en-
vironmental protection;
b. Adequate preinjection tests have been made for pre-
dicting the fate of materials injected;
c. There is conclusive technical evidence to demon-
strate that such injection will not interfere with
present or potential use of water resources nor re-
sult in other environmental hazards;
d. The subsurface injection system has been designed
- 11-46 -
-------
and constructed to provide maximal environmental
protection;
e. Provisions have been made for monitoring both the
injection operation and the resulting effects on
the environment;
f. Contingency plans that will obviate any environ-
mental degradation have been prepared to cope with
all well shut-ins or any well failures;
g. Provision will be made for supervised plugging of
injection wells when abandoned and for monitoring
to ensure continuing environmental protection.
3. Where subsurface injection is practiced for waste disposal,
it will be recognized as a temporary means of disposal until
new technology becomes available enabling more assured en-
vironmental protection.
4. Where subsurface injection is practiced for underground
storage or for recycling of natural fluids, it will be rec-
ognized that such practice will cease or be modified when a
hazard to natural resources or the environment appears
imminent.
5. The EPA will apply this policy to the extent of its author-
ities in conducting all program activities, including regu-
latory activities, research and development, technical as-
sistance to the States, and the administration of the con-
struction grants, State program grants, and basin planning
grants programs and control of pollution at Federal facil-
ities in accordance with Executive Order 11752.
- 11-47 -
-------
Elements meeting the requirements cf the policy statement may be seen
in a number of state laws and regulations on this subject. Some states
have met the requirements without specific provisions, by setting
requirements administratively on a case-by-case basis under general
statutory authority (e.g., Texas, Ohio).
Statutes and regulations include definitions, permit requirements, in-
formation and pre-testing requirements, standards for allowing injec-
tion, logging, monitoring, and reporting requirements, financial re-
sponsibility requirements (Michigan requires a $15,000 bond), and
requirements concerning casing, back-up facilities, operation, and
abandonment.
Waste well disposal regulatory provisions are often closely associated
with, or a part of, oil and gas well regulatory requirements. Some of
the statutes are directed only at protection of water resources; others
specify water resources and oil and gas, other resources, or public
health. Multiple approvals are sometimes required, as in Kansas where
the State Corporation Commission gives approval concerning oil and gas
protection, and the Department of Health gives approval concerning
water resources. In Ohio, the Division of Oil and Gas may disapprove
a permit application if the proposed injection would present an unrea-
sonable risk that waste or contamination of oil or gas in the earth
will occur; the Division of Geological Survey may disapprove if an un-
reasonable risk of loss or damage to valuable mineral resources would
occur; and the Environmental Protection Agency may disapprove if the
52
proposed injection would cause water pollution. In addition, the
- 11-48 -
-------
permit may be conditioned to protect health, safety, or the conserva-
tion of natural resources.
Alternative Measures
A prohibition against deep well disposal if alternative methods are
feasible may be contained in a regulation (e.g., Oklahoma), but more
often it is implemented in administrative policy. Kansas, for example,
adopted the following policy in 1970:
The use of industrial waste disposal wells will be considered
only for those wastes that cannot be treated and disposed of by
other methods. On this basis, we will require that each appli-
cation for the disposal of substances other than salt water be
accompanied by a report giving the results of studies of alter-
nate methods of *aste disposal and a justification of why sub-
surface disposal is considered the least hazardous method so far
as environmental protection is concerned.
Information
Accompanying the EPA Administrator's Decision Statement No. 5 was a
statement of parameters describing the information that should be pro-
vided by the injector. These include requirements for considerable
detail as to location of the proposed well and other features around
it, property ownership, wells (including statement cf deepest forma-
tion penetrated within twice the calculated zone of influence of the
proposed well), maps of water supplies, mineral resources, and geo-
- 11-49 -
-------
logic structure, description of fluids to be injected, potentiometrie
maps, volume, rate, and injection pressure of the fluids, detailed
information on geological and physical characteristics of the injection
interval and confining beds, and engineering data describing the pro-
posed well, casing, installation, testing, logging, injection proce-
dure, monitoring, and contingency plans. The Administrator's state-
ment advises:
Preparation of a report thoroughly investigating the effects of
the proposed subsurface injection well should be a prerequisite
for evaluation of the project. Such a statement should include a
thorough essessment of: (1) the alternative disposal schemes in
terms of maximum environmental protection; (2) projection of
fluid pressure response with time both in the injection zones and
overlying formations, with particular attention to aquifers which
may be used for fresh water supplies in the future; and (3) prob-
lems associated with possible chemical interactions between in-
jected wastes, formation fluids, and mineralogical constituents.
The statement advises an injector to contact the regulating agency to
determine what will be required, stating that the agency will specify
the exact data requirements en a case-by-case basis.
Nebraska and Colorado require a legal description of the area within
a radius of two miles, and a map including the same area showing sur-
face and mineral ownership, water and oil wells, mines, and test
holes.54 These states also require:
A description of local topography, industry, agriculture, popu-
- 11-50 -
-------
lation densities, culture, wildlife, and fish and other aquatic
life within the area of the proposed system with a projection as
to the probable effects of the system upon industry, agriculture,
population, culture, wildlife, and fish and other aquatic life.
These and other state regulations also contain many of the require-
ments contained in the Administrator's statement. The Nebraska regu-
lation requires an evaluation of geologic and hydrologic conditions
that demonstrate:
Geologic:
a. The disposal well shall be located in an area known to
contain geologic structures capable of containing the
proposed injected effluent.
b. The injection zone shall have sufficient porosity, per-
meability, thickness, structural configuration, and
areal extent to act as a safe storage reservoir.
c. The injection zone shall be isolated vertically by for-
mations that are, for practical purposes, impervious to
the effluent.
d. The injection zone should not contain natural resources
in the same geologic structure which may be affected by
said injection.
Hydrologic:
a. The injection zone should contain interstitial water
having a concentration of at least 5,000 milligrams per
- 11-51 -
-------
liter total dissolved solids.
b. The rate and direction of ground water movement in the
injection zone should be evaluated.
c. If the injection zone is known to contain ground water
subject to protection in other areas, the direction and
distances from the injection well to the brackish water
or saline water interface shall be estimated within rea-
sonable limits.
d. An estimation of the fluid chemistry of the interstitial
water in the injection zone shall be made.
The regulation also requires an evaluation of the injection zone for
porosity, permeability, chemical constituents of interstitial waters
and the chemical and physical characteristics of the injection zone
rocks, temperature of the injection zone, static-bottom-hole pressure,
permeable thickness of the injection zone, and injection profile. The
applicant must also demonstrate that the proposed effluent is compa-
tible with the injection zone and its interstitial water and that no
undersirable chemical or physical reaction will occur.
Design of Well
The Texas Water Quality Board states: "The type of construction for
injection wells is quite variable because of the different composi-
tions and volumes of waste injected. The Board has not adopted stand-
ards on we.ll construction, but prefers to consider each proposal on an
individual basis."55
- 11-52 -
-------
The Nebraska regulation is detailed, but it specifies that design must
be "within but not limited to" its specifications. These include
casing requirements, safety factors for collapse, tension, and inter-
nal pressure, cementing procedures, logging, transport of effluent to
the well by injection tubing, manner of fixing the injection tubing,
safety-valve requirements, and surface equipment design. The regu-
lation requires surface equipment shall be designed so that the system
can te safely shut down in the event of component failure, and that a
secondary facility be maintained in the event of a temporary well
failure. The latter may consist of a lined, impermeable retention pond
or a treatment process.
Some states rely upon provisions in their oil and gas drilling laws
and regulations for basic regulation of disposal well design, con-
struction, and operation, and enforcement of regulations, but require
specific practices on a case-by-case basis.
Other Regulations
Other regulations include those for pre-testing the well, monitoring
and reporting, operation practices, and requirements for abandonment.
The Michigan regulations are detailed in these respects. Michigan
requires at least one observation well within 100 feet of the disposal
well for each well used for disposal of radioactive materials. The
Michigan regulation also requires performance testing of each disposal
well at least once each calendar quarter.
- 11-53 -
-------
Some states limit permit duration (e.g., Oklahoma, five years). The
EPA Administrator in his Decision Statement No. 5 indicated that the
meaning of his statement that subsurface injection will be recognized
as a "temporary means of disposal" was that it would be approved only
for the life of an issued permit, and that should more environmentally-
accepted disposal technology become available, a change to such tech-
nology would be required.
Regulatory Proposals
The Council of State Governments suggested a Model State Toxic Waste
Disposal Act in 1973. By definition, it would apply to:
any substance or combination of substances which, in the judge-
ment of the director, consistent with any applicable federal law,
may pose a substantial present or potential hazard to human
health because such substances are non-degradable or persistent
in nature, or because they can be biologically magnified, or be-
cause they can be lethal, or because they otherwise cause or tend
to cause detrimental cumulative effects.
Under present state regulations, wastes that may be injected vary, but
by definition some could include any type of waste whether hazardous
or not, including sewage. In practice, the states limit waste types
by following a policy of allowing disposal only if there is no feasi-
ble alternative. The Model Act provision makes the limitation expli-
cit.
- 11-54 -
-------
The Model Act provides for a State Toxic Waste Disposal Plan, to in-
clude regulations, classifications by type of waste and disposal loca-
tions and procedure, and guidelines for procedures, standards, and for
the distribution and proximity of disposal or storage sites in speci-
fied geographic areas and types of geologic formations. Any disposal
project would have to be consistent with this State Plan.
The Model Act requires compliance with the law and regulations and
certain approvals of the director; monitoring and reporting; inspection
and entry by the director or his representatives; and public access to
information. It contains provisions concerning emergency orders, fi-
nancial responsibility of the operator, and enforcement. An Annex
contains suggested information requirements similar to those discussed
in the foregoing material.
The Ohio River Valley Water Sanitation Commission (ORSANCO) in 1973
adopted "Recommendations for the conduct of regulatory actions inclu-
ding the scope and sequence of administrative procedures and the eval-
uation of geological and technological factors." It identified
seven steps as essential in the administration of a state program.
Briefly, these are:
1. Preliminary assessment by the applicant of the geology and
geohydrology;
2. Application to the state agency to drill and test a well,
with supporting documents;
3. Drilling and evaluation of the well;
- 11-55 -
-------
4. Request by the applicant for approval to inject waste water;
5. Evaluation of the proposal by the state agency;
6. Issuance of instructions for operation; and
7. Procedures for abandonment.
Where the system is to be located within five miles of a state border,
the appropriate agency in the adjoining state is to be given an oppor-
tunity to review and comment on the application.
The ORSANCO proposal contains suggested forms, and an outline of scope
and content of a feasibility report.
Control Point 4: MANAGEMENT OF WATER LEVEL AND PUMPING RATES
Most states have enacted statutes that determine the right to take
water from lakes, rivers, streams, and underground sources. These
statutes make it possible for public agencies to manage water levels
and pumping rates, although the existence of a water allocation statute
does not necessarily signify that a state can "manage" its resource.
The basic purpose of water rights statutes is the same as with any
property law — security of interest. A state statute establishes an
orderly system of water use, so that if one obtains a permit, he has
some protection of his water source.
States that have no such statute rely upon the courts to determine
water rights. Even states with water permit statutes have exempted
certain uses, such as minimum quantities, or their statutes do not
- 11-56 -
-------
apply to certain waters or certain areas, and to this extent the com-
mon law still is the determinant of water rights in those states.
The Eastern states, some Midwestern states, and even some Western
states follow "riparian" rules of water use insofar as the common law
determines their water rights. Arid states follow "prior appropria-
tion" rules of water use, but typically follow riparian principles
where ground water is concerned. Essentially, the riparian law at-
taches water rights to the ownership of land abutting (or overlying)
the water, requires that uses be reasonable, and does not assure a
right to a definite supply. Appropriation law does not require owner-
ship of land, establishes rights by priority in time, and assures a
right to a definite supply, in perpetuity, except as shortages may cut
off the right of appropriators who are junior in time.
In those states that follow riparian rules, two principal rules may be
isolated as dividing the states into "absolute rule" and "reasonable
use" categories.
Under the "absolute" or "English" rule, an owner of land may pump what-
ever water he can from the ground that he owns. If his pumping dries
up that of a prior user, the prior user has no remedy. If his neigh-
bor excavates for construction or mining purposes, cutting off the
pumper's ground water supply, the pumper has no remedy. Each owner is
said to have an "absolute" right to use his land in whatever way he
desires. The principle is not quite that broad, however, since it is
- 11-57 -
-------
applied only to "percolating" waters and not to identifiable "under-
ground streams". Also, a person may not injure his neighbor by digging
or pumping that is malicious in intent.
Two policies underlie this rule: (1) the occurrence and behavior of
ground water is not known, and thus a court should not attempt to ad-
judicate rights to it; and (2) protection of one person's right to a
ground water supply would prevent development by interfering with
mining, building of roads, and other works.
A number of states follow this rule without statutory control, includ-
ing heavily populated industrial states such as Pennsylvania, Ohio,
Illinois, and Texas.
The "reasonable use" or "American" rule is a modification of the
"absolute" rule. Under this rule, the owner of land may be restricted
to the amount of water he needs to reasonably benefit his land. New
York, Michigan, and Missouri, for example, are classified as "reason-
able use" states.
A variation of the "reasonable use" rule is the "correlative rights"
rule. While under the former rule, when a shortage occurs the law
does not allocate available water, under the "correlative rights" rule
it does. Landowners are limited to amounts equal in proportion to the
proportionate area of land over the water supply concerned. This des-
ignation is applied to a line of California cases.
- 11-58 -
-------
Permit Systems
When states have adopted permit systems of water allocation, whether
surface or ground water, they have in effect adopted the Western prin-
ciple of "prior appropriation". This principle minimizes state in-
volvement by requiring essentially factual determinations, namely, of
who began using the water/ in what quantity, and of how much water the
source will yield. When permits have been issued to the extent that
the source will yield water, no more permits are issued.
The statutes contain numerous variations on this basic principle, as
can be seen in the following material describing some of the major
features of state water permit statutes.
Coverage. All but a few statutes apply to both surface and ground
water. A number apply to ground water only, others to surface water
only.
A minority of states with permit statutes limit controls authorized by
the statute to those areas designated as critical, or otherwise espec-
ially requiring control. Examples of criteria for designation of such
areas are:
Arizona; an area not having sufficient ground water to provide a
reasonably safe supply for the irrigation of cultivated
lands located within the basin at the then current
58
rates of withdrawal.
- 11-59 -
-------
Montana; withdrawals are, or are likely to be, in excess of re-
charge or significant disputes regarding priorities
and amounts of use exist. 9
Oregon; (1) water levels are declining excessively;
(2) substantial interference is developing between
users;
(3) the ground water supply in the area is being
overdrawn;
(4) the water quality is deteriorating;
(5) there is no "unappropriated" water in the
ground water reservoir.*®
New Jersey: diversion of ground water exceeds or threatens to
exceed, or otherwise threatens or impairs, the natural
replenishment of such waters. ^
North Carolina; uses of water
(1) have developed or threatened to develop to a degree
which requires coordination and regulation or
(2) exceed or threaten to exceed, or otherwise threat-
en to impair, renewal or replenishment of such
fi2
waters.
Exemptions from the requirement that a permit be obtained can also
greatly affect the coverage of a law. For instance, Western statutes
almost universally exempt uses in existence at the time of enactment.
Some Eastern statutes do not. Almost all states exempt domestic
uses — the superior right under the riparian law — either specifi-
cally or by use of a quantity exemption large enough to allow domestic
- 11-60 -
-------
use without regulation. A common practice is to exempt uses less than
100,000 gallons per day. Iowa uses a 5,000 gallon-a-day limit;63 some
states make no exemption by amount. A common exemption is for agri-
cultural uses, even to include irrigation. Some states exempt noncon-
sumptive uses, or require that a permit be issued for such uses with-
out further showing.
Criteria for Issuing a Permit. Every statute contains some specifica-
tion of the nature and effect of use that must be shown in order for a
permit to issue. The most common of these specifications is that the
use be "beneficial". This is one of the requirements of the Western
case law, where it meant that the use could not be wasteful or detri-
mental. Iowa, a state that follows the riparian law, when it adopted
a permit system in 1957, added this requirement to its law in the
following language:
"Beneficial use" means the application of water to a useful pur-
pose that inures to the benefit of the water user and subject to
his dominion and control but does not include the waste or pollu-
tion of water.
The Minnesota statute gives a list of "beneficial public purposes"
which are given as examples but which do not limit the meaning of the
65
term:
a. Water supply for municipal, industrial, agricultural, or
other purposes;
- 11-61 -
-------
b. Recharge of underground water strata;
c. Retention of water to prevent or reduce downstream flooding,
thereby minimizing erosion and resultant property damage;
d. Entrapment and retention of nutrients and other materials
which impair the quality of natural resources;
e. Recreational activities such as swimming, boating, fishing,
and hunting;
f. Public navigation other than for recreational purposes;
g. Wildlife habitat such as fish spawning and rearing areas,
waterfowl nesting and feeding areas, and areas for the rear-
ing, feeding, and protection of other wildlife;
h. Areas designated as scientific and natural areas.
Mayyland expresses this in the obverse, by denying a permit for a use
that is inadequate, wasteful, dangerous, impracticable, or detrimental
to the public interest.
Florida has improved upon the requirement, by requiring that a use be
"reasonable-beneficial".67 California requires this standard by its
CO
constitution.
Another common requirement in the statutes, which derived from the
Western law of prior appropriation, is that the use be "in the public
interest". The statutes make various interpretations. In Kansas, the
chief engineer, in determining whether an application will adversely
affect the public interest, is to:
take into consideration the area, safe yield and recharge rate of
- 11-62 -
-------
the appropriate water supply, the priority of existing claims of
all persons to use the water of the appropriate water supply, the
amount of each such claim to use water from the appropriate water
69
supply, and all other matters pertaining to such question.
Alaska requires:
In determining the public interest, the Commissioner shall con-
sider:
1. the benefit to the applicant resulting from the proposed
appropriation;
2. the effect of the economic activity resulting from the
proposed appropriation;
3. the effect on fish and game resources and on public
recreational opportunities;
4. the effect on public health;
5. the effect of loss of alternate uses of water that might
be made within a reasonable time if not precluded or
hindered by the proposed appropriation;
6. harm to other persons resulting from the proposed appro-
priation;
7. the intent and ability of the applicant to complete the
appropriation; and
8. the effect upon access to navigable or public waters.
Other statutory criteria for issuing a permit which bear on nature and
effect of use include:
- 11-63 -
-------
— will not unduly affect those who already have permits.
(or, there is unappropriated water available.)
the applicant's means of taking the water is adequate.
(Idaho requires sufficient financial resources to com-
plete the project.)
— Mot inconsistent with adopted water plans (Maryland,
Iowa, Idaho, Florida.)
— will not cause salt water intrusion or violate water
quality standards (Maryland, New Jersey.)
— reasonable, practical (Minnesota), necessary (New Jersey),
equitable (Delaware, , New Jersey)
Maryland requires that a permit be issued if the proposed use is the
greatest practicable utilization of the water resource. North Carolina,
•j-3 -I A
South Carolina, and Georgia have similar laws which state that the
agency must issue a permit for nonconsumptive uses; where the use is
consumptive, the agency must deny it if its effect would be "contrary
to the public interest". The statute then directs the agency to con-
sider numerous factors in adopting regulations and in issuing permits,
including:
The number of persons using an aquifer or stream and the object,
extent and necessity of their respective withdrawals or uses;
Nature and size of the stream or aquifer;
The nature of any impairment of the aquifer or stream;
The injury to public health, safety or welfare which would result
if such impairment were not prevented or abated;
- 11-64' -
-------
The kinds of businesses or activities to which the various uses
are related;
The importance and necessity of the uses claimed, the extent of
any injury or detriment expected to be caused to other water
uses; and
Reduction of flows in other watercourses or aquifers.
Another type of criterion for issuing a permit is the priority or pref-
erence. The most common, either express or implied, is "first in time,
first in right". Examples of other priorities are public use (Alaska,
Arizona), domestic use (Colorado ), most beneficial use (Alaska), and
uses designated by the Department of Natural Resources as "undesirable"
or "preferred" (Florida). The Florida statute also instructs the
administering agency, in cases of competition, to choose those which
"best serve public interest". Arizona, when there are two or more
conflicting applications for the use of available water, gives pref-
erence in the following order:
1. Domestic and municipal uses;
2. irrigation and stock watering;
3. Power and mining uses; and
4. Recreation and wildlife, including fish.
Duration of Right. Western states in enacting statutes adopted the
rule of their common law that a right can be extinguished by non-user
or waste. Eastern states have also adopted this rule, but many have
also set a limit, typically ten years, on the life of a permit. In
- 11-65 -
-------
some states the user must then reapply as for a new permit.
Some statutes also allow cancellation of a permit for various reasons,
such as violation of the law or a regulation. Some allow reduction in
the quantity allowed to be taken by the permit, when it is found that
part of the amount permitted is not needed by the user.
Other Provisions. Several of the states require the administering
agency to protect minimum flow or other "in-stream" benefits in issuing
permits; the Florida statute requires the Department of Natural Re-
sources to give "careful consideration to the requirements of public
recreation and the protection and procreation of fish and wildlife",
and to prohibit inconsistent uses. Statutes commonly contain suffi-
cient controls to limit use of an over-pumped aquifer, although stat-
utes have been identified as lacking this authority (Arizona, Iowa).
Statutes may also contain specific authority for control of water lev-
els, or to control or carry out recharge operations.
One of the implied effects of all the statutes, to the extent that
they set up a system which replaces the common law system of allocating
water, is to do away with the riparian-law limitation that water be-
longs to the owner of riparian land, for use primarily upon that land,
and in the case of surface water to be returned to the stream from
which it came. With a view to possible constitutional objections,
some states have included a declaration that waters of the state are
public waters. Most states have also included a legislative finding
of a problem, and a declaration of policy.
- 11-66 -
-------
Common provisions give the agency power to investigate water resources,
establish requirements for information in applying for a permit (or
authorize the agency to adopt regulations to do this), require notice
to affected persons and a hearing, provide appeal procedures for those
denied a permit or affected by issuance of a permit, and provide for
sanctions such as injunction and penalties. Penalties vary from state
to state, but the more severe penalties for violation of the water
permit law authorize imprisonment for one year, and fines as high as
$25,000 per day.
Usually, the permit-issuing agency has other functions affecting water
management. Typically, these include water resource information gath-
ering and planning, and regulation of water well drilling and con-
struction, sometimes to include licensing of drillers. Another common
activity of this agency is inspection and approval of dams and other
water control works. A few are given construction powers, including
power to construct projects for water supply and flood control, for
distribution of water, or for recharge of ground water aquifers. The
permit-issuing agency may also be the flood control coordinating agency
and the flood plain regulatory agency, or it may also be the state's
water pollution control agency.
Selected Statutes
Following are brief descriptions of the water permit statutes of six
states in various parts of the country — New Mexico, Kansas, Iowa,
Maryland, North Carolina, and Florida. They are presented here to
- 11-67 -
-------
illustrate types of systems and the manner in which the features dis-
cussed above fit into specific statutory procedures.
NEW MEXICO
New Mexico's permit system grew out of its prior appropriation system
of water rights. Under an earlier statute, one perfected a water
right by first making use of the water, then filing a notice of this
use. In 1907, the state enacted a law requiring a permit for use of
surface water; its present ground water statute was enacted in 1931.
The ground water statute applies only to uses in areas in which the
State Engineer has determined that the waters of an underground stream,
channel, artesian basin, reservoir, or lake have "reasonably ascer-
tainable boundaries".76 As of 1973, he had declared 25 such areas
covering more than a third of the state. In such an area, one must
obtain a permit to use ground water. Also, a well driller to drill a
well in such an area must be licensed by the State Engineer. Not
subject to these requirements are domestic wells with casings not
larger than 2 3/8 inches in diameter.
To approve an application, the State Engineer must find that there is
unappropriated water in the designated ground water source, that the
proposed appropriation would not impair existing rights, and that it
is a beneficial use. The Engineer may approve an application subject
to conditions that he finds necessary to protect rights of others,
both surface and underground.
- 11-68 -
-------
A hearing is required for larger uses, at which anyone may protest who
believes the granting of the permit will impair his water right. Ap-
plications for domestic and stock watering purposes, and for non-
commercial irrigation not to exceed one acre, are not subject to this
procedure, but the State Engineer by rule limits such appropriations
of water to three acre-feet annually.
A water-right holder loses his right if he fails to apply the water to
a beneficial use for a four year period and then continues to fail to
use it for one year after notification and declaration of non-use by
the State Engineer.
KANSAS
Ground water in Kansas belonged to the landowner under the "absolute
rule" until enactment in 1945 of a statute converting the state's water
rights law to an appropriation system. To acquire a right to con-
tinued use, other than for domestic purposes, one must obtain a permit
from the Chief Engineer of the Division of Water Resources of the
Board of Agriculture. Riparian uses being made at the time of enact-
ment of the statute were preserved, if the use was "beneficial".
An application for a permit must describe the nature and extent of the
proposed appropriation in detail. The Chief Engineer is directed to
approve the application if he finds that the proposed use is beneficial
and will not impair use under an existing right or unreasonably affect
the public interest. Guidelines given the Chief Engineer to determine
- 11-69 -
-------
"public interest" include factors of area, safe yield, recharge rate,
and existing claims. The permit may contain conditions as necessary
to protect the public interest.
In determining whether a proposed use will impair use under an existing
right, the Chief Engineer is given a statutory definition of "impair-
ment" which includes:
The unreasonable raising or lowering of the static level or unrea-
sonable increase or decrease of the streamflow or the unreason-
able deterioration of the water quality at the water user's point
of diversion beyond a reasonable economic limit.
Priority of right dates from the time of filing an application. Rights
may be transferred, with or without a conveyance of land. One may
lose his right if he fails to beneficially use his water for three
successive years "without due and sufficient cause", and after he has
been notified by the Chief Engineer and has had an opportunity to ap-
pear and show cause why his right should not be.terminated.
The statute is specific in stating that a right to use of ground water
does not give the applicant a right to the existing water level. It
specifies that approval of each appropriation of ground water is sub-
ject to the express condition that such right must allow for a reason-
able raising or lowering of the static water level, and that in deter-
mining what is reasonable, the Chief Engineer is to "consider the eco-
nomics of diverting or pumping water for the water uses involved".
- 11-70 -
-------
IOWA
Iowa, another riparian state, enacted a comprehensive statewide water
78
permit law in 1957. The act exempts domestic uses, uses of less
than 5,000 gallons per day, uses from rivers bordering the state, uses
within the boundaries of a municipal corporation on May 17, 1957 (in-
dustrial users lose this exemption when their use increases by three
per cent), and municipal uses until they increase their use in excess
of 100,000 gallons or three per cent, whichever is greater, more than
their highest per day beneficial use prior to May 16, 1957.
Permits are valid for ten years, but are renewed without hearing if no
objection is filed.
A permit must be issued if it is found that the requested withdrawal
is for a beneficial use and will not be detrimental to the public in-
terests or to the interests of property owners with prior or superior
rights who might be affected, and the use is found to be "compatible
with the state comprehensive plan". Priority is accorded to applica-
tions in the order in which applications are received. The commis-
sioner hearing the application is directed to use his judgement con-
cerning the quantity of water for which a permit may be granted, but
he is instructed by the statute that water for ordinary household pur-
poses, for poultry, livestock, and domestic animals shall have priority
over other uses. A person with an existing irrigation system in use
prior to enactment of the statute must be issued a permit to continue
unless some other riparian user is damaged thereby. The statute,
- 11-71 -
-------
declaring that "nothing in this chapter shall impair the vested right
of any person", instructs the commissioner to follow the principles and
policies of beneficial use declared by law. "Beneficial use" is de-
fined as the application of water to a useful purpose that inures to
the benefit of the water user and subject to his dominion and control,
but does not include the waste or pollution of water.
A permit may not be issued that does not preserve the established min-
imum flow of a watercourse, that impairs the effect of the pollution
control laws, or that impairs the navigability of a navigable water-
course.
By regulation, use of water for irrigation of farm crops is limited to
18 inches per year, and for specialty crops to 36 inches per year.
The amount for industrial use "shall be consistent with industry-wide
usage for the same or similar purposes", and for municipal use not
more than 200 gallons per day per capita; in both cases, however, the
amount is to allow for growth where the need exists.
If a permittee ceased to use his permit for three consecutive years
for the authorized purpose, his permit may be terminated. It may also
be modified or cancelled upon breach of its terms and conditions, or
for violation of the water permit law, or in case the commissioner
finds modification or cancellation necessary to protect the public
health or safety or public interest in lands or waters, or to prevent
substantial injury to persons or property. He may also suspend a
permit in an emergency.
- 11-72 -
-------
MARYLAND
Maryland was a pioneer among the Eastern "riparian" states in enacting
a water permit statute in 1934. The statute applies to surface and
ground water, statewide, but exempts domestic and farming uses, uses
existing at the time of enactment, municipal uses in effect July 1,
1969, and rights granted by the General Assembly to the City of
79
Baltimore.
The Department of Natural Resources may reject a ground water permit
application if the proposed use:
— is inadequate, wasteful, dangerous, impracticable, or detri-
mental to the best public interest;
— would violate water quality standards;
— would jeopardize the natural resources of the state.
A permit must be issued if:
The plans of the applicant provide for the greatest practicable
utilization of the waters of the state and will adequately pre-
serve public safety and will promote the general public welfare.
Permits are limited to ten years (or the time required to amortize
investment), and renewal is the same as application for a new permit.
The statute allows the Department to "correct" any permit where the
total quantity permitted to be used is either not used or not needed.
- 11-73 -
-------
Recently proposed regulations contain provisions for comprehensive
control of Maryland ground water resources. The regulations establish
priorities, establish total average withdrawal limitations for partic-
ular areas, establish criteria upon which issuance of permits is based
(including limitation of use according to amount of land owned by the
applicant), regulates drilling and construction of wells, authorizes
well spacing requirements, and establishes three zones according to
aquifer type and depth and requires use of such zones according to
rate of withdrawal.
Priorities. The regulation states that when it becomes necessary to
allocate water among competing uses whose total demand exceeds the
dependable supply, the Administration shall give greater consideration
to the needs of users in the following order:
1. Water supply for individual domestic and farm use, and muni-
cipal supplies which are publicly owned and operated;
2. Irrigation of crops used directly or indirectly for human
consumption;
3. Industrial and commercial users who obtain ground water from
privately owned wells and use it in their processing or dis-
tribute the water for sale;
4. Other, including irrigation of recreation areas, heating and
air conditioning.
Another provision states that use of water by a private water company
is not considered a beneficial use, and no new permit may be issued
- 11-74 -
-------
for that purpose except where a public agency cannot or will not pro-
vide the water.
Total Average Withdrawal Limitations. The regulations identify four
areas east and west of the "fall line", according to non-carbonate
rocks, carbonate rocks, unconfined aquifers, and confined aquifers,
and state that average withdrawals of ground water may not exceed per-
missible yield judged by specified criteria based on stream flow, pre-
cipitation, or water levels.
Criteria for Issuance. The regulations state six criteria for issuance
of a permit:
1. The State Ground Water Management Plan;
2. Amount of land owned by the applicant for which, or on which,
the water is to be used;
3. Impact on ground water rights of other appropriators;
4. Ultimate recharge to aquifers based on precipitation (see
below);
5. Reasonable needs of the applicant;
6. Satisfactory proof that issuance of the permit will not vio-
late the State's Water Quality Standards or jeopardize its
natural resources (e.g., will not cause intrusion of salt
water).
The regulation states that maximum allowable pumpage for the consump-
tive use of ground water is limited to that quantity needed for
- 11-75 -
-------
reasonable use and will be allowed up to a yearly average for the daily
pumpage of 780 gallons of water per acre of land owned if in accordance
with the State Ground Water Management Plan. Withdrawal in excess of
this amount may be allowed if it provides for the greatest feasible
utilization of the waters of the state, adequately preserves public
safety, and promotes the general public welfare. (The 780 gallon-per-
acre figure is intended to approximate the "usable portion of precip-
itation that may eventually percolate into the ground".) Exception is
made for public agencies if they compensate affected users.
The regulation also states that the Administration will consider water
levels as a right in common among all appropriators. West of the fall
line, declines up to permissible yield of a basin will be allowed (see
"total average withdrawal limitations" above); east of the fall line,
rights to water levels will be based on the management water levels
established by the State Ground Water Management Plan.
The state may also, in order to provide for the optimum development of
the ground water resource, control the number, location, spacing,
depth, and construction of wells or well fields by the conditions
placed upon the permit. The regulations contain detailed requirements
for well construction permit issuance, reporting requirements, well
construction standards (according to geologic areas), and testing.
Aquifer Management Areas. The regulation establishes three zones ac-
cording to aquifer type and depth for confined aquifers of the Mary-
land Coastal Plain and requires that users of less than 10,000 gallons
-'11-76 -
-------
per day use a Zone I aquifer if available (aquifers with a transmis-
sivity of less than 5,000 gallons per day per foot and a maximum depth
to top of the aquifer of 300 feet below sea level); if not, then a
Zone II aquifer (aquifers with a transmissivity of more than 5,000
gallons per day per foot and a maximum depth to the top of the aquifer
of 300 feet below sea level). Users of more than 10,000 gallons per
day must use a Zone II aquifer or a Zone III aquifer (aquifers with a
depth of more than 300 feet to the top of the aquifer).
(Ground water quality standards adopted by Maryland in 1973 describe
three aquifer types based on transmissivity, permeability, and dis-
solved solids concentration, which are used to regulate discharge of
water into ground water. The regulation establishes quality standards
to be maintained in each type of aquifer — e.g., discharges into Type
I aquifers may not exceed constituent limits under federal drinking
water standards.)
NORTH CAROLINA
North Carolina is one of the Eastern states that enacted a law to ap-
ply to areas delineated by a state agency. It applies to both surface
and ground water, but exempts from permit requirements uses of 100,000
80
gallons per day and smaller.
Under the statute, which was enacted in 1967, the Board of Water and
Air Resources may delineate "capacity use areas" where uses of water
- 11-77 -
-------
(1) have developed or threatened to develop to a degree which requires
coordination and regulation, or (2) exceed or threaten to exceed, or
otherwise threaten to impair, the renewal or replenishment of such
waters.
The law also allows the Board, without delineating an area, if it
finds use or pollution will result in water depletion or pollution, to
prohibit or limit withdrawals in excess of 100,000 gallons per day,
and to prohibit facility construction of capacity in excess of 10,000
gallons per day or more.
In a "capacity use area", the Board must issue a permit for nonconsump-
tive uses; where the proposed use is consumptive, the Board must deny
it if its effect would be "contrary to public interest". Uses in
existence prior to delineation are to have priority, to the extent
that they are reasonably necessary. The Board is also authorized to
modify or revoke a permit on 60 days' notice. Permits are issued for
a ten year period; renewal is the same as applying for a new permit.
In issuing permits or adopting regulations, the Board is directed by
the statute to consider:
1. The number of persons using an aquifer or stream and the ob-
ject, extent and necessity of their respective withdrawals or
uses;
2. The nature and size of the stream or aquifer;
3. The physical and chemical nature of any impairment of the
aquifer or stream, adversely affecting its availability or
- 11-78 -
-------
fitness for other water uses (including public use);
4. The probable severity and duration of such impairment under
foreseeable conditions;
5. The injury to public health, safety or welfare which would
result if such impairment were not prevented or abated;
6. The kinds of businesses or activities to which the various
uses are related;
7. The importance and necessity of the uses claimed by permit
applicants or of the water uses of the area and the extent
of any injury or detriment caused or expected to be caused
to other water uses (including public use);
8. Diversion from or reduction of flows in other watercourses
or aquifers; and
9. Any other relevant factors.
The Board is also directed to adopt regulations for capacity use areas
concerning timing of withdrawals, prevention of salt water encroach-
ment, protection against "unreasonable adverse effects", and concern-
ing well spacing, pumping levels, and rates. Permits must contain
conditions to implement these regulations.
The Board has established one "capacity use area", including all or
part of eight counties along the Atlantic Coast. Regulations adopted
by the Board require that any person drilling a well in the area
(whether or not they must obtain a use permit, but exempting domestic
wells) must obtain a well construction permit and file a report con-
taining specified information when completing or abandoning a well.
- 11-79 -
-------
Where a water use permit is required, the regulation requires the
Board to establish in the permit the maximum total quantity that may
be withdrawn daily, allows the Board to specify the timing of with-
drawals, maximum rates of withdrawal, lowest water level that may be
produced in a well, and in addition allows the Board by the terms of
the permit to:
a. Require that the applicant cooperate with the Department of
Water and Air Resources, and with other users of water in the
affected area, in determining and implementing reasonable and
practical methods and processes to conserve and protect the
water resources while avoiding or minimizing effects on the
quantity and quality of water available to persons whose water
supply has been materially reduced or impaired as a result of
withdrawals made pursuant to Water Use Permits.
b. Require that any portion of the water withdrawn be returned
to the source or to any other stream or aquifer as approved
by the Board.
c. Require the holder of a Water Use Permit to obtain the
Board's approval of the locations and distribution of indi-
vidual surface water intakes and wells, and of the depths,
zones, aquifers or parts of aquifers from which withdrawals
may be made.
d. Require that each well or surface water intake be equipped
with an approved metering device that will provide a contin-
uous record of withdrawals within an accuracy of plus or minus
five percent.
- 11-80 -
-------
e. Require that observation stations or wells be installed and
maintained for monitoring-water levels and water quality.
The regulation also requires that the quantity of water be justified
for each purpose for which it is requested.
The regulation requires that specific information be supplied the
Board on well construction and abandonment, monthly withdrawals and
use, and monthly water levels. The permit holder is also required to
notify the Board of any major changes in usage, and is told that he
may have to justify his continuing needs and to document water conser-
vation measures. A permit may ,not be transferred withput approval of
'the Board.
The regulations also specify that no construction or installation of
works of improvement which significantly affect the quantity or qual-
ity of the water resources shall be undertaken without prior approval
of the Board, including surface and subsurface drainage projects
(exempting small projects), well mining projects, and excavation pro-
jects.
FLORIDA
Florida has had some water use control laws, for- a number of years, but
in 1972 it enacted a comprehensive statute which is. notable in a num-
ber of respects, one of these being its division of the state into six
"water management districts" by metes -and bounds description contained
- 11-81 -
-------
81
in the statute. The water permit system may be administered by the
state Department of Natural Resources; in the alternative, the statute
allows the Department to delegate this authority to the board of gov-
ernors of a district, which can then issue permits under regulations
which it adopts to carry out a water management program for the dis-
trict. (Governing boards are composed of nine residents of the dis-
trict appointed by the Governor. In 1974, one district had adopted
82
regulations, and one was in the process. The other four had not
initiated regulation making procedures.)
The department or the governing board:
. . . may require such permits for consumptive use of water and
may impose such reasonable conditions as are necessary to assure
that such use is consistent with the overall objectives of the
district or department and is not harmful to the water resources
of the area.
Domestic uses and "nonconsumptive" uses are exempted from permit re-
quirements. Permits are issued for 20 years, or 50 years if necessary
to retire bonds. Considerations on renewal are the same as those for
initial issuance. A permit may be revoked for non-use or for viola-
tion.
An applicant for a permit must establish that the use he proposes:
1. Is a "reasonable-beneficial use" (i.e., "the use of water in
such quantity as is necessary for economic and efficient
utilization, for a purpose and in a manner which is both
- 11-82 -
-------
reasonable and consistent with the public interest");
2. Will not interfere with any presently existing legal use of
water; and
3. Is consistent with the public interest.
In adopting a program for an area, under which permits are to be is-
sued, the Department or the governing board is to establish minimum
flow for all surface watercourses ("the limit at which further with-
drawals would be significantly harmful to the water resources or ecol-
ogy of the area") and the minimum levels for both ground and surface
waters. The law allows the board or Department to provide for the
protection of nonconsumptive uses in the establishment of minimum flows
and levels.
The Department is instructed to give careful consideration to the re-
quirements of public recreation and the protection and procreation of
fish and wildlife. It is authorized to prohibit or restrict other
uses on designated bodies of water which may be inconsistent with
these objectives. The governing board or the Department may by
regulation:
reserve from use by permit applicants water in such locations and
quantities and for such seasons of the year as in its judgement
may be required for the protection of fish and wildlife or the
public health and safety. Such reservations shall be subject to
periodic review and revision in the light of changed conditions;
provided, however, that all presently existing legal uses of
- 11-83 -
-------
water shall be protected so long as such use is not contrary to
the public interest.
The Department is also authorized to designate certain uses in con-
nection with a particular source of supply which may constitute an
undesirable use for which the governing board may deny a permit, and
certain uses in connection with a particular source of supply which
would result in an enhancement or improvement of the water resources
of the area, which uses shall be preferred over other uses.
Where two or more applications are for a quantity of water that is in-
adequate for both or all, the board or Department may approve or mod-
ify the applications which best serve the public interest. If the ap-
plications are equally in the public interest, a renewal has preference
over an initial application.
For purposes of water shortages, the board or Department is allowed to
classify permits according to source of supply, method of extraction
or diversion, or use of water, and to impose restrictions on the per-
mits as necessary "to protect the water resources of the area from
serious harm and to restore them to their previous condition". If
this is not sufficient to protect "the public health, safety, or
welfare, or the health of animals, fish, or aquatic life, or a public
water supply, or recreational, commercial, industrial, agricultural,
or other reasonable uses", the board or Department may issue orders
necessary to meet the emergency, including apportioning, rotating, lim-
iting, or prohibiting use of the water resources of the district.
- 11-84 -
-------
The regulations adopted by the Southwest District, in addition to the
constraints imposed by the statute, prohibit any withdrawal that will:
— Cause the flow of a stream or other watercourse to be lowered
below the minimum flow established by the Board.
— Cause the level of the potentiometric surface to be lowered
below the regulatory level established by the Board, or below
sea level.
— Cause the level of the surface of water to be lowered below
the minimum level established by the Board.
— Significantly induce salt water encroachment.
— Cause the water table to be lowered so that the lake stages or
vegetation will be adversely and significantly affected on
lands other than those owned, leased, or otherwise controlled
by the applicant.
— Exceed the water crop of lands owned, leased, or otherwise
controlled by the applicant. (Except where determined other-
wise, the water crop (precipitation less evapotranspiration)
throughout the District will be assumed to be 365,000 gallons
per year per acre.)
— Cause the level of the potentiometric surface under lands not
owned, leased, or otherwise controlled by the applicant to be
lowered more than five feet.
— Cause the level of the water table under lands not owned,
leased, or otherwise controlled by the applicant to be
lowered more than three feet.
— Cause the level of the surface of water in any lake or other
impoundment to be lowered more than one foot unless the lake
- 11-85 -
-------
or impoundment is wholly owned, leased, or otherwise controlled
by the applicant.
Model Proposals
Some of the major features of three proposals for enactment by states
are described in the following material. These are the Model Water
Use Act of the National Conference of Commissioners on Uniform State
Laws, after which the Iowa statute was fashioned; the recommendation
of the National Water Comission; and the Model Water Code of the Uni-
versity of Florida, after which the Florida statute was fashioned.
Model Water Use Act. The National Conference of Commissioners on Uni-
form State Laws approved a Model Water Use Act in 1958. This proposal
consisted of a permit system to allocate use of ground and surface wa-
ter based on the standard of "beneficial use" (a use that is "reason-
able and consistent with the public interest in the proper utilization
of water resources, including, but not limited to, domestic, agricul-
tural, industrial, power, municipal, navigational, fish and wildlife,
and recreational uses"). Existing uses and domestic uses would be
exempted. A permit could be issued if "the most beneficial use and
development of the water resources of the state will not be impaired
by granting the permit", and it will not substantially and materially
interfere with preserved uses, domestic uses, or earlier permits. A
"preserved" use is a use existing at the time of enactment, for which
the user filed a declaration within three years.
- 11-86 -
-------
Maximum duration of a permit could be 50 years, or less by regulation.
Permits could be revoked for non-use, violation of law, or, if a
source could not yield enough water for all, and a person applied for
a more beneficial use than some existing use, the existing user could
be required to relinquish his permit for reasonable compensation.
One of the features of this proposal which has not appeared in any
significant way in any of the existing statutes is a mechanism which
is in effect the reverse of the "delineated area" system — the law
is enacted to apply to all uses statewide, but the agency may then
exempt quantities or types of use for specified areas and periods if
it finds this would not be an "unreasonable impediment to the most
beneficial use of the water resources of the state".
The agency would also be authorized, if it found a shortage or threat-
ened shortage in any area of the state, to establish regulations for-
bidding construction of new diversion facilities or wells, initiation
of new water uses, or the modification of existing uses in the area.
Unlike the existing statutes, the Model act proposed a specific pro-
vision to overcome the riparian law, as follows:
Permits may be granted without regard to whether, under the law
operative in this State prior to the effective date of this Act,
the use made under the permit could have been maintained only in
connection with the specific lands, a particular natural water-
shed, or otherwise.
- 11-87 -
-------
National Water Commission Recommendation. In its Final Report in 1973,
the National Water Commission recommended that the states consider en-
actment of comprehensive water allocation laws, suggesting basic fea-
tures that such a statute should incorporate. The following excerpt,
describing the features of this proporal, is from the Commission's
Final Report, p. 281.
The basic approach is to establish minimum flows to protect such
social and ecological values as aesthetics, recreation, and the
biosphere. The water remaining is subject to development for use
in producing goods and services. The Commission would rely more
on market forces to reallocate water to more valuable uses, and
less on administrative allocation. Thus, it seeks to give per-
mittees certainty in legal tenure and as much certainty in phys-
ical supply as the nature of the resource allows — for the twin
purposes of encouraging original investment in the quantity of
water committed to development and of facilitating the transfer
of water to more productive uses by means of buying and selling
water rights permits.
The basic features of the Commission design are the following:
1. The permit system should apply to withdrawals existing at the
time the legislation is enacted as well as to future with-
drawals.
2. The permit system should apply to withdrawals of ground water
- 11-88 -
-------
as well as surface water, whether or not the supplies are
interrelated.
3. Any person or organization should be eligible to apply for
and receive a permit for use of water at any location. Ri-
parian restrictions on who may use water at what locations
should be abolished.
4. The following information should be contained in each permit:
a. the source of supply
b. the point of diversion or well location
c. the place of use
d. the nature of use
e. the volume of the withdrawal and of consumptive use, on
an annual or seasonal basis, as may be appropriate
f. the rate of withdrawal
g. the times of use, and
h. if practicably ascertainable, the amount of return flow
and the point at which it re-enters the hydrologic system.
5. After enactment of the legislation, no new withdrawal should
be allowed unless a permit has been issued; all existing
withdrawals should be subject to termination unless a permit
has been obtained for them within a stated period of time
(e.g., 5 years).
6. Permits granted for withdrawals of water, from either surface
bodies or underground aquifers, should be subject to cancel-
lation for prolonged non-use and to modification for pro-
longed underuse.
7. Appropriate State administrative agencies should be delegated
- 11-89 -
-------
authority to establish and maintain minimum flows for surface
streams, and minimum water levels for lakes, to promote the
public health, safety, and welfare, to safeguard private in-
vestment made in reliance on streamflow and lake levels, and
to protect the public interest in fish, wildlife, recrea-
tional, aesthetic, and ecological values.
8. Water should be allocated in periods of shortage as follows:
a. Water users who initiated their withdrawals after enact-
ment of the permit system should be curtailed in the in-
verse order of the date of their permits.
b. Water users whose withdrawals antedate enactment of the
permit system should be curtailed only when supply is in-
sufficient after all post-enactment permit holders have
been curtailed; the available supply should be pro-rated
among pre-enactment permittees according to volume of use.
c. Pre-enactment permittees should be curtailed when neces-
sary to preserve essential minimum flows.
9. Permits should be made transferable to facilitate private
bargaining for the reallocation of water to more productive
uses, subject to administrative restrictions to protect the
interests of other permittees and the public interest in min-
imum streamflow.
Model Water Code, University of Florida. A Model Water Code drafted
at the University of Florida was the basis for the Florida statute en-
acted in 1972.
- 11-90 -
-------
The Model Water Code (a-.i' the Florida statute) allow a permit to issue
only for a "reasonable-benefi-ial use", defined as "the use of water
in such quantity as is necessa::-/ for economic and efficient utiliza-
tion, for a purpose and in a manner which is both reasonable and con-
sistent with the public interest." This incorporates the "beneficial
use" of the Model Water Use Act, but adds a value judgement as to its
economic and efficient utilization. The difference in operation would
be as follows; under the Model Water Use Act, if there were enough
water to supply the use, a permit would have to be issued unless it
were shown that for some reason it would impair the "most beneficial
use and development of the water resources of the state"; under the
Model Water Code, and the Florida statute, even though there were
enough water for all uses, the proposed use would have to be "for a
purpose and in a manner which is both reasonable and consistent with
the public interest," and be limited in amount to the quantity
necessary for "economic and efficient utilization."
By contrast, the National Water Commission's proposal would include
none of these judgements. It would allow the agency to protect cer-
tain in-stream values by regulating stream and other water levels, but
would include no judgment as to the beneficial nature of the use ap-
plied for, the public interest, or proper utilization of water.
- 11-91 -
-------
Control Point 5: CONTROL OF WELL CONSTRUCTION AND OPERATION
A. Water Wells
Most states regulate installation and abandonment of water wells, and
license water well drillers. Regulations may have three functions,
one a public health function to assure that wells are so constructed
as to provide a safe drinking water supply, another the "consumer pro-
tection" function of ensuring an efficient well, and another being to
prevent pollution of ground water through entry of surface water or
polluted or mineralized ground water into aquifers containing better
quality water. Older regulations tend to emphasize the public health
function; a number of recent regulations are clearly directed at pro-
tection of ground water resources.
Statutes authorizing control of water well activities typically re-
quire that a permit be obtained by anyone who drills or re-opens a
well, authorize an agency to adopt regulations, authorize inspection,
and specify enforcement and appeal procedures. Regulations, some of
which go into considerable detail, may include requirements concerning;
Information to obtain a permit
Location
Well design and construction
Well drilling equipment and materials
Pump and other equipment
Testing
Maintenance
Abandonment
- 11-92 -
-------
Records
The following material examines water well regulations with emphasis
on provisions applicable to prevention of ground water pollution.
Well Design and Construction
The Michigan regulation states that a water well shall be constructed
"in such a manner as to maintain, insofar as practicable, existing
natural protection against pollution of water bearing formations and
83
to exclude pollutants from known sources". The regulation then re-
quires that a well be located (among other things) at least 150 feet
from a preparation or storage area of spray materials, fertilizers, or
chemicals that may result in pollution of the soil or ground water,
and 50 feet from a buried sewer, septic tank, animal yard, etc. A
well may not be located in an area subject to flooding unless special
protections are provided. The regulation then provides that the
ground surface shall be graded so that surface water is diverted away
from the casing. Following these requirements, the regulation speci-
fies the type of material, weight, and dimension of casing that may be
used, and method of grouting in detail. It requires that casing shall
extend at least 25 feet below the established ground surface and where
possible below the pumping level in a sand or gravel well; it states
that a well obtaining water from a depth of less than 25 feet shall
not be used without written approval of the health officer. It re-
quires a well casing or extension thereof to extend vertically at
least 12 inches above ground surface. It specifies requirements for
well casing seals and connections, pump installation, platforms, water
suction and pump discharge lines, pressure tanks, and vents.
- 11-93 -
-------
The Michigan regulation is typical in content of other state water
well regulations, which vary in specifications and degree of detail.
The model regulation proposed by the Ground Water Resources Institute,
for example, contains more detail.84 It first states the following
objectives for determining the type of well to be constructed:
Construction should seal off, insofar as practicable, water
bearing formations that are or may be polluted.
The well shall be constructed so that no unsealed opening will be
left around the well.
The materials that are to be a part of the permanent well shall
conform to the requirements of .... these Regulations.
The model regulation contains a table of the prescribed diameter and
depth of the drillhole for grouting, well and well screen diameters,
minimum casing length and depth, liner diameter, and construction con-
ditions for various combinations of water bearing formation and
overburden.
(In May, 1975, the National Water Well Association had in process a
final draft of a publication for the U. S. Environmental Protection
Agency on water well standards containing a substantially more detailed
treatment of this subject than any state regulations or guidelines
extant. Subjects included test holes, well construction procedure,
casing, grouting, well screens and perforations, well filter construc-
tion, plumbness and alignment, well development, testing, disinfection,
water samples and analyses, permanent well abandonment, and temporary
capping.}
- 11-94 -
-------
Regulations of a number of states contain requirements specifically
directed at prevention of inter-aquifer movement of water to prevent
pollution of one aquifer by another, in addition to preventing pos-
sible pollution from the surface.
The North Carolina regulation, for example, in its construction stand-
ards requires that all water bearing zones containing polluted or
nonpotable mineralized water shall be adequately cased and cemented
off so that pollution of underlying or overlying water bearing zones
85
will not occur. It specifically prohibits multi-screened wells that
connect aquifers or zones which have differences in water quality that
would result in deterioration of the water quality in any aquifer or
zone, or which have differences in static water levels that would re-
sult in depletion of water from any aquifer, or zone, or significant
loss of head in any aquifer or zone.
The Texas regulation contains the following provisions concerning "un-
desirable water" overlying fresh water, and underlying fresh water:
When undesirable water is encountered in a zone overlying fresh
water, surface casing or other blank casing with a cement basket
or packer shall be set at the top of the fresh water zone, or at
some distance below the base of the undesirable water zone, and
the annular space between the outside wall of the casing and the
wall of the borehole shall be filled with cement from the base of
the surface casing, or the top of the cement basket or packer to
the land surface, or throughout the entire undesirable water zone,
- 11-95 -
-------
The necessary vertical (uphole and downhole) extent of the ce-
menting operations in respect to an undesirable water zone will
depend upon the condition of the borehole, lithology of the sec-
tion penetrated or the hydrostatic pressures within the aquifers;
however, all cementing programs must prohibit the contact of
highly corrosive fluids with the wall of the casing.
When undesirable water is encountered in a zone beneath but in
hydraulic contact with the overlying fresh water zone, the part
of the well opposite the undesirable water zone and lower portion
of the overlying fresh water zone shall be filled with cement in
order to prevent the entrance of the undesirable water into the
pumping well. The lower half or the bottom 25 feet of the fresh
water saturated interval, whichever is lesser, shall be sealed
off.
When undesirable water is encountered in a zone beneath but not
in hydraulic contact with a fresh water zone, the wellbore shall
be filled with cement to the base of the lowermost fresh water
zone, or the wellbore below the fresh water zone may be filled
with fine sand, clay or heavy mud to form a base for a cement
plug to be placed between the lowermost fresh water zone and the
undesirable water to form a permanent seal to prevent the upward
86
migration of undesirable water into the fresh water zone.
The Florida regulation states that in areas where, as a result of con-
struction of a well, an interchange of water between water bearing
- 11-96 -
-------
zones may occur and may result in deterioration of the quality of
water in one or more zones, or loss of artesian pressure, the inter-
change shall be prevented through proper design or construction of the
well; and that if it cannot thus be prevented, the well shall be aban-
R7
doned and plugged.
Maintenance
In addition to design and construction requirements, some regulations
specifically require that the well be maintained in a condition to
prevent pollution of ground water. The North Carolina regulation con-
tains several specifications for this purpose, including a requirement
that "broken, punctured, or otherwise defective or unserviceable cas-
ing, screens, fixtures, seals, or any part of the well head, shall be
repaired or replaced, or the well shall be properly abandoned."
Abandonment
The Oregon regulation is an example of a brief form:
Any well that is to be permanently abandoned shall be filled in
a manner so as to prevent the well from being a channel allowing
the vertical movement of water and a possible source of contami-
00
nation of the ground water supply.
The Texas regulation specifies that the well be filled with cement to
the land surface, but also specifies alternatives depending upon
- 11-97 -
-------
whether there is undesirable water above or below the fresh water
zone.89
The North Carolina regulation contains several specific requirements,
including one that in the case of gravel packed wells in which casings
and screens have not been removed, the casing shall be perforated op-
posite the gravel pack at intervals not exceeding ten feet. It spe-
cifically allows casing and screen to be salvaged. It requires that
bored wells be completely filled; for wells in unconsolidated forma-
tions, it requires that this filling be done by introducing cement
grout through a pipe extending to the bottom of the well which can be
raised as the well is filled.
A regulation of the San Joaquin Local Health District, California (in
that state regulations are local, adopted under state recommended
standards), requires "destruction" of any well that no longer serves a
useful purpose, or has fallen into such a state of disuse or disrepair
90
that it may become a source of impairment to ground water quality.
The regulation is thorough, requiring that the interior of the casing
first be cleaned to eliminate obstructions that might interfere with
sealing procedures. It specifies filling of the well, with the fol-
lowing additional requirement:
If there is no annular seal or if occurrence is unknown, the cas-
ing shall be perforated upward beginning just above the filler
material for a distance of approximately five (5) feet. Grout
shall be applied above the filler material in such a manner that
- 11-98 -
-------
the grout will be forced out of the holes, forming a barrier to
the vertical movement of water.
The regulation also requires, for the protection of the seal and to
facilitate future use of the land site, that a three foot hole be ex-
cavated around the drill casing, the casing cut off six inches above
the bottom of the hole, and that during the sealing operation the
grout used to fill the well be allowed to spill over into the excava-
tion and fill it for a thickness of one foot and form a cap which has
a diameter of at least one foot greater than the diameter of the orig-
inally drilled hole. The excavation is then filled with soil.
A San Joaquin County ordinance authorizes the district health officer
to destroy any well that is polluted or so located as to become pollu-
ted or is a safety hazard, and to recover the cost of destruction from
91
the owner of the property on which the well is located.
B. Oil and Gas Wells
Regulation of the drilling of wells and other operations in connection
with oil and gas production has been primarily motivated by a recog-
nition by oil and gas producers of the need for orderly development of
oil fields in order to prevent waste of the resource and the economic
waste which results from unregulated competition for the resource.
Many of the provisions directed at prevention of waste, such as well
construction and abandonment requirements, also work to prevent water
- 11-99 -
-------
pollution. Each oil and gas law also contains specific provisions for
the protection of water resources.
The terms of state water pollution control laws generally apply to
pollution of surface and ground water from oil and gas operations.
Provisions in oil and gas laws to prevent water pollution are in addi-
tion to those of the water pollution control laws, providing in effect
special requirements that are inherent in other oil and gas regulatory
activities.
A typical law regulating oil and gas production activities requires
that an operator prior to drilling submit certain information in order
to obtain a permit, post a bond to ensure compliance with the law, and
that he follow the statute, regulations, and orders of the administer-
ing agency in drilling, casing, cementing, producing, waste disposal,
reporting, fluid injection, and abandonment and plugging. The law
will contain provisions for minimum acreage and minimum distance con-
cerning location of wells, procedures for pooling and unitization,
safety requirements, and inspection. It will contain general prohi-
bitions against pollution of water resources, and some specific pro-
visions affecting water pollution.
General Requirements Concerning Water Pollution
The Kansas regulation is an example of a general requirement:
Fresh water, whether above or below the surface, shall be pro-
- n-100 -
-------
tected from all avoidable pollution, whether in drilling, plug-
go
ging, or producing.
This type of general statement or prohibition is common in the state
statutes and regulations governing oil and gas well drilling. As in
the Kansas regulation, it is accompanied by various specific provis-
ions directed at prevention of water pollution.
Regulation of Specific Practices Affecting Water Pollution
The Interstate Oil Compact Commission recently made a survey of state
requirements concerning prevention of water pollution resulting from
oil and gas operations. The survey covered, in part:
1. Protection of fresh water aquifers penetrated by oil and gas
drilling operations.
2. Salt water pollution resulting from oil and gas operations,
and monitoring of salt water disposal and secondary recovery
water injection wells for leakage.
3. Plugging of wells where leases have been abandoned and no
responsible parties can be found or where individuals are
financially unable to plug the well.
These three subject headings represent the three major potential
sources of ground water pollution from oil and gas well drilling opera-
tions. The following material refers both to the results of the sur-
vey and to specific regulations.
- 11-101 -
-------
1. Protection of fresh water aquifers penetrated by oil and gas
drilling operations. The survey found that all but a few states re-
quire installation of surface pipe to protect all known fresh water
aquifers penetrated by oil and gas drilling operations, and that this
"string" be cemented to the surface.
"Surface pipe" is the outside casing of a well that is primarily de-
pended upon to support and protect the well. Other casing is set in-
side this casing. It runs from the surface to various depths, depend-
ing upon the type of well, geological formations, presence of water,
and other considerations. Cement is required to be placed in the
space between the outside of the casing and the sides of the borehole
to prevent fluids or gases from moving up or down outside the casing.
An example of a regulation stated in general terms is that of Kansas:
Every person, who shall drill, or cause to be drilled a well or
test hole, for any purpose, that penetrates formations containing
oil, gas, fresh water, mineralized water, or valuable minerals,
shall case or seal off such formations as may be necessary to
effectively prevent migration of oil, gas, or water from or into
strata that would be damaged by such migration. The effective-
ness of such casing or sealing off shall be tested in such manner
and by such methods and means as may be necessary, or as may be
prescribed or approved by the commission, or its authorized rep-
resentatives.93
- 11-102 -
-------
An example of a relatively detailed regulation is that of Texas:
RULE 13. CASING
A. (1) The operator of any well drilled in any field or
area shall be required to set and cement a sufficient amount of
surface casing to properly protect fresh water sands which are
now, or may be, a source of water supply for the area or field.
Cementing shall be by the pump and plug method and sufficient
cement shall be used to fill the calculated annular space back of
the casing to the surface of the ground or to the bottom of the
cellar. In areas where pressure conditions are unknown, or are
known to be high, a blowout preventer, control head, and other
connections to keep the well under control at all times shall be
installed as soon as surface casing is set. The blowout preven-
ter shall be of such type of construction and operation as to
satisfy any test which may be required by the Commission or its
duly accredited agent.
2. (a) Exception to the cementing requirements called for in
this rule may be granted by the Commission on application. An
operator shall, before drilling and setting casing in his first
well in a field or area, obtain from the Texas Water Development
Board a letter stating where the fresh water sands are found in
the area or field in question. Such operator must set the sur-
face casing to the depth recommended by the Texas Water Develop-
ment Board to protect all fresh water sands. However, in lieu of
setting the full amount of surface casing required to protect
fresh water sands in the area or field in which there are no
- 11-103 -
-------
field rules in effect, and in fields wherein special rules re-
quire the setting of a specific amount of surface casing to pro-
tect all fresh water sands an operator may, upon written applica-
tion to the Commission, use the multi-stage cementing process.
When an operator wishes to use the multi-stage cementing process,
he must outline in his application to the Commission the minimum
amount of surface casing desired to be set before operations are
commenced, and permission must be obtained from the Commission.
After the operation is completed, he must then.file with the
Commission an affidavit made by the cementing company's repre-
sentative showing where the stage cement tool was set and the
94
number of sacks of cement used in the operation.
The Texas regulation also contains general requirements for casing,
requiring that the program include at least three strings of pipe in
addition to the drive pipe. It includes test pressures which the pipe
must withstand.
According to the IOCC survey, most states conduct tests to determine
the adequacy of the cement job, but a minority require that the tests
be witnessed by state inspectors.
Almost all states require that when the well is abandoned, a cement
plug be made at the bottom of the surface pipe. Typical size of such
a plug is 50 feet, but Florida requires a 200 foot plug. Almost all
states also require that a cement plug be placed at the top of the
surface pipe.
- 11-104 -
-------
A typical regulation requires notification of intent to plug and aban-
don a well, so that the administering agency may give instructions for
plugging. The Michigan regulation states that these instructions
shall:
. . . specify the type and amount of plugging material to be
used, the depths at which bridges are to be set, the depths and
lengths of cement plugs, and any special requirements which may
95
be necessary for the proper plugging of the well.
That regulation also states:
All oil, gas, brine, and fresh water shall be confined to the
strata in which they occur by the use of mud-laden fluid, cement,
other suitable material, or combinations thereof. The amount,
type and kind of material and the method of placement shall be
prescribed or approved by the supervisor.
The Texas regulation is more detailed. The part of it that refers
specifically to protection of water is as follows:
(d) When insufficient surface pipe is set to protect fresh
water horizons and they are exposed when production casing is re-
moved from the well, or as a result of production casing not being
run, a cement plug shall be placed from fifty (50) feet below the
base of the deepest fresh water sand to fifty (50) feet above the
top of the sand. This plug shall be proven by tagging with the
drill string and respotting if necessary. A one hundred (100)
- 11-105 -
-------
foot cement plug shall also be placed from fifty (50) feet below
the shoe of the surface casing to fifty (50) feet above it.
(e) Additional cement plugs shall be placed to adequately
cover and contain any high pressure gas or water sands OR AS MAY
BE REQUIRED BY THE DISTRICT DIRECTOR. (Emphasis in the
96
regulation.)
2. Salt water pollution resulting from oil and gas operations,
and monitoring of salt water disposal and secondary recovery water
injection wells for leakage. The survey indicated that most states
allow use of earthen pits or lagoons for storage or disposal of brine
produced in connection with oil or gas; however, a number of these
states severely restrict their use.
States control brine in various ways. Those that allow pits may re-
quire that they be impermeable, or that they be used in limited situ-
ations, or not be used where they might cause pollution.
Colorado has a detailed regulation on retaining pits for the storage
of produced water which states general requirements and a special per-
mit procedure. It requires:
Pits shall be kept free of surface accumulations of oil;
Each operator shall file an Affidavit of Condition of Operator's
Retaining Pits on the 10th day of each month;
If the waters to be contained in any retaining pit are of such
salt, brackish or other quality as to cause pollution if they
- 11-106 -
-------
were to reach other waters of the state the pit shall be con-
structed, maintained and operated so as to prevent any surface
discharge that directly or indirectly may reach the waters of
the state and also lined so as to prevent seepage where the
underlying soil conditions are such as to permit such seepage
97
reaching subsurface fresh waters.
The regulation then states that no statewide rule governing construc-
tion and lining of pits is adopted due to the varying conditions that
may be encountered, but that early planning for non-polluting disposal
must be inaugurated. Following is a summary of provisions applicable
to retaining pits constructed after August 1, 1971:
1. Except for temporary storage and disposal of substances pro-
duced in the initial completion and testing of wells, no
retaining pit may be constructed without a permit.
2. Application shall include legal location, plan showing com-
plete battery for storage, map of surface water resources
and ditches, plan for the pit including proposed lining, a
detailed log describing soil in which the pit to be con-
structed and strata between the bottom of the proposed pit
and top of the nearest fresh water source below the pit
(including percolation studies if required), statement of
proposed final disposition and amount of produced water,
chemical analysis of water to be stored and of the fresh
water next below the bottom of the pit and all other fresh
water strata that might be affected, and any other pertinent
- 11-107 -
-------
information showing that anticipated operation of the pro-
proposed retaining pit will not violate the intent of the
Colorado Water Pollution Control Act.
3. A hearing will be held after notice to all interested parties.
4. The Commission may require lining or other water proofing of
treatment and retaining pits, chemical or other water treat-
ment, installation of monitoring systems and provisions for
reporting requirements.
The regulation also states that as soon as practicable and economically
feasible after production is established in any field, all produced
water shall be disposed of underground.
A new Ohio regulation requires that all water produced from a well be
98
stored in steel tanks before disposal by injection. Wells completed
prior to the effective date of the regulation may continue to use pits
for storage.
The survey found that almost all states have a system of inspection or
monitoring of injection well or other disposal systems; however, the
regulations typically require only periodic reports by the operator,
and that the administering agency make annual inspections. Texas re-
quires that all wells be equipped so as to permit observation of pres-
sure between the two strings of casing at the wellhead, so that new
99
casing may be required if necessary.
3. Plugging of wells where leases have been abandoned and no
- 11-108 -
-------
responsible parties can be found or where individuals are financially
unable to plug the well. Almost all states require that an applicant
for a permit to drill an oil or gas well file a performance bond, but
the survey found that most states do not provide funds for the plug-
ging of wells where no responsible person can be located.
Most regulations require periodic reporting of all wells, including
those whose production operations or use as a service well have ceased,
until the wells are actually plugged. Most states also set a time
limit for plugging wells after they are found to be dry or have no
further utility, varying from 30 days to a year.
Control Point 6: AIR QUALITY STANDARDS
The states have enacted statutes and adopted regulations to control
air pollution, primarily in response to the 1970 Amendments to the
Federal Clean Air Act, which required states to meet federal standards.
The statutes do not by their terms relate to pollution of ground water.
Effect on ground water would result from control of pollutants which
by being washed into streams or by falling on the ground could pollute
ground water by infiltration or leaching, by affecting vegetation, or
possibly by affecting ground water recharge by sealing stream bottoms
or land areas through which recharge occurs.
A typical statute authorizes the state agency to adopt regulations for
the control of air pollution, prescribing ambient air quality stand-
ards (the air outside of buildings, stacks, etc., which surrounds
- 11-109 -
-------
human plant or animal life, or property, and emission standards for the
purpose of achieving ambient air-quality standards.
The statute may require that a permit be obtained for installation or
operation of polluting equipment, and enable the agency to issue vari-
ances, the purpose of which is to establish conditions and deadlines
for compliance with standards.
The statute enables the agency to require that monitoring devices be
installed and that certain records be maintained, and reports filed,
and enables the agency to make inspections and investigations, install
monitoring equipment, and otherwise to enforce the law and regulations.
The Council of State Governments proposed a Model State Air Pollution
Control Act in 1973.
Control Point 7: CONTROL OF LAND SPREADING OF POTENTIAL POLLUTANTS
A. Irrigation Using Waste Water
A number of states regulate the use of treated sewage for irrigation
purposes, generally for public health purposes. These regulations are
primarily designed to prevent human contact with bacteria, either by
touching or by consumption of food that has been produced by irriga-
tion. The California regulation, for example, governs use of "re-
claimed waste water" for various purposes including irrigation of pro-
•duce and of fodder, fiber, seed, and processed food crops, and land-
scape irrigation.100 For spray and surface irrigation of produce, the
regulation specifies a standard for disinfection in terms of coliform
bacteria count. It allows surface irrigation of orchards, vineyards,
- 11-110 -
-------
fodder, fiber, seed, and processed food crops with water having qual-
ity equivalent to that of primary effluent. Spray irrigation of food
crops and any irrigation of jasture, golf courses, lawns, etc., must
meet coliform count standards.
Some regulations show a cognizance of potential ground water effect.
The Idaho regulation governing "land treatment and/or disposal of
liquid waste material" requires monitoring the quality of ground vrater
in proximity of the disposal area. It states that such practices
"shall not create a ground water mound or result in a salt build-up
on another person's property". It requires that the waste water used
be biologically degradable, but allows use of other waste water if it
can be shown that it will have no adverse effect on underlying ground
water. An applicant for a permit must "provide reasonable assurance
that the earth material underlying the proposed disposal site will not
allow direct rapid movement of pollutants into the underlying ground
water."
The Delaware regulation requires one ground water quality monitoring
well in each direction of ground water movement away from the disposal
field, plus establishment of background ground water quality monitor-
ing wells.102 That regulation specifies that "at no time may the
ground water mound built by the added infiltration reach vithin two
feet of the ground surface in any section of the spray irrigation
field". The regulation requires a minimum of secondary treatment of
water to be used.
The Bureau of Water Quality Management of the Pennsylvania Department
of Environmental Resources has published a Spray Irrigation Manual
- 11-111 -
-------
directed primarily at prevention of water pollution. An intro-
duction to the manual states:
Since roughly 50 percent of waste waters discharged to the land
surface in Pennsylvania will infiltrate and recharge ground water,
all spray irrigation installations are considered discharges to
the waters of the Commonwealth. As such, each installation will
require a Department of Environmental Resources permit under the
Clean Streams Law.
The manual provides guidelines for locating and evaluating sites, and
in designing spray irrigation systems. Factors include soils, geology,
hydrology, weather, the agricultural practice involved, and adjacent
land use. The guidelines set standards for treatment, storage, screen-
ing, controls, piping, sprinklers, distribution diameter (not in ex-
cess of 140 feet), spacing, and application rate. Following is the
instruction on application rate:
The hydraulic application rate must be selected to not exceed the
infiltration capacity of the soil. The waste load applied must
be adjusted to assure proper residency within the soil mantle at
the hydraulic loading rate in order to achieve the desired degree
of treatment. Proposed application rates will not be accepted
without substantiating data. Application rates in excess of 1/4
inch per hour and 2 inches per week for each section of the field
will be considered only under extremely extenuating circumstances
supported by detailed substantiating data. Under usual conditions
the ground water mound which will be built by the added infiltra-
tion should not reach within 10 feet of the ground surface. For
- 11-112 -
-------
municipal/domestic type sewage systems it will usually be advan-
tageous to lay out the field in seven lines or sections to facil-
itate daily rotation of the irrigated sections. For industrial
plants the number of sections is usually determined by the number
of working days and/or shifts.
The Center for the Study of Federalism of Temple University in 1972
published a report on "The Beneficial Use of Waste Water Through Land
104
Treatment" which analyzes numerous state regulations on this subject.
B. Land Disposal of Wastes
Land spreading of particular wastes is occasionally included as a sub-
ject of regulations concerning particular types of waste. For example,
Maine has regulations and guidelines for septic tank sludge disposal
on land; Oregon has regulations on land spreading of septic tank pump-
ings and raw sewage sludge (see part 3.B. above). Oregon regulates
spreading of animal wastes as part of its animal feedlot regulation
(see part 3.C. above).
Maine has issued guidelines for manure and manure sludge disposal on
land.105 These are detailed for various operations as follows:
Recycling Entire Manure Application Through Crops. Conditions refer
to slope, limitation on total nitrogen, placement in relation to water,
and periodic testing.
Repeated Annual Disposal Spreading of Manure or Manure Sludge. Re-
quirements are similar to the foregoing. A table is provided for
- 11-113 -
-------
types of soils; maximum total annual rate is 500 pounds of nitrogen
per acre, with an additional amount varying with type of crop.
Piling Manure or Manure Sludge. Conditions refer to site, time limit,
and placement in relation to water and places of habitation.
Burying Manure or Manure Sludge. Conditions refer to suitable soils,
placement in relation to water, slope, diversion channel, burial
trench, method of filling, and limitations on nitrogen. One require-'
ment is that the burial area be provided with irrigation facilities so
that the soil can be kept sufficiently moist to encourage denitrifica-
tion.
Composting Manure. Conditions refer to soils, slope, placement in re-
lation to water, manure-soil mix, method, diversion of surface drain-
age, diking run off, and removal of material.
Lagooning. Conditions refer to soils, placement in relation to water,
design and disposal of liquids and sludge.
Irrigation of Liquid Manure or Lagoon Effluent on Land. Conditions
refer to soils, limitation on nitrogen, testing, spraying in relation
to water, and rate and conditions of application.
Dehydrated Manure. A table is provided for maximum pounds of nitrogen
for application on land.
- 11-114 -
-------
Although the federal law does not require it as a part of the National
Pollutant Discharge Elimination System, some states have included dis-
charge of pollutants onto land within the discharges which require a
permit under their water pollution control laws. Delaware, for exam-
ple, requires a permit. In addition, it specifies effluent limitations
for land disposal of liquid wastes, including spray irrigation. It
requires controls for runoff and erosion, precautions when freezing
'may be expected, monitoring wells (at least one for each direction of
ground water movement away from the disposal field, plus background
ground water quality monitoring wells), protection of adjacent land,
limits on application rate and the ground water mound, hydrologic and
soils investigations, minimum of secondary treatment for sewage used,
and equipment. It prohibits spraying of toxic wastes, and irrigation
of barren fields.
The regulatory mechanism for disposal of solid wastes, such as stat-
utes and regulations requiring permits and establishing standards for
location, construction, and operation of sanitary landfills, also may
contain requirements which refer to liquid wastes and to spreading on
land. (See part 3.A. above.) Under the California regulation, for
instance, "disposal site" for purposes of this type of regulation in-
cludes both solid and liquid wastes.
The U. S. Environmetnal Protection Agency in its 1974 "Water Quality
Strategy Paper", acknowledging the limited authority given it concern-
ing ground water under the 1972 Federal Water Pollution Control Act
Amendments, listed its incidental powers to affect ground water
- 11-115 -
-------
quality. Among these is the following:
Grants for the construction of publicly owned treatment works
employing land disposal or aquifer recharge will be contingent
on the design of the project to meet specific ground water
quality standards in the zone of saturation for heavy metals,
dissolved salts, nitrates, and organic pollutants. These criteria
are contained in the definition of best practicable waste treat-
ment technology (BPWTT).
C. Other Substances
A Massachusetts statute authorizes the Pesticide Board to adopt regu-
lations governing pesticides, including regulations concerning appli-
cation to land, as necessary to protect the public health and the pub-
lic interest in soils, waters, forests, wetlands, etc. The regula-
tions require that any user obtain a permit; the Board conditions per-
mits on an individual basis as may be required for particular applica-
tions. The regulation states:
Pesticide applications made for agricultural purposes shall be
conducted in such a manner that hazardous concentrations on adja-
cent lands and in adjacent waters is avoided.
The regulation prohibits pesticide application on the watershed of a
public water supply unless approved by the Pesticide Board with
- 11-116 -
-------
approval of the Department of Public Health, but it does not relate
specifically to ground water.
Control Point 8: CONTROL OF STORAGE AREAS
Various types of laws affecting waste disposal may refer to storage as
distinct from disposal, such as solid waste disposal laws (part 3.A.
above) and animal feedlot regulations (part 3.C. above). Deep well
disposal regulations may require surface storage areas to be used in
the event of malfunction of the deep well disposal system (part 3.D.
above). Oil and gas drilling laws regulate surface pits used for the
storage of oily wastes, water, mud, and brine from drilling and pro-
duction of oil and gas (part 5.B. above). Coal strip mine reclamation
laws affect storage of refuse during mining operations (part 9.A.
below).
Pennsylvania requires that impoundments for storage of industrial waste
be structurally sound, impermeable, protected from unauthorized acts
108
of third parties, and that they maintain a two foot freeboard.
Some regulations are directed at storage of liquids, whether or not
they are wastes. Delaware's regulation, for example, requires a per-
mit for any "bulk storage", which is defined to include "any facility
for the express purpose of storage of 40,000 or more gallons of any
109
hazardous material, petroleum product or liquid waste in bulk form.
The permit allows control of methods so that water pollution is pre-
vented.
- 11-117 -
-------
Maryland has a regulation to prevent oil pollution which requires that
a person obtain a permit to handle oil, including storage of any quan-
tity of oil in excess of 10,000 gallons. It requires that above-
ground oil storage be surrounded with a continuous dike capable of
holding the total volume of the largest container within the dike,
sufficient to prevent movement of oil into the waters of the state. The
regulation states that the nature of the soil and the ground water
conditions at the site shall be taken into consideration in the design
and location of the area. The regulation also contains requirements
for equipment, and drainage of oil contaminated water.
The Maryland regulation also requires any buried tank to be protected
from external corrosion by standard techniques such as coating, wrap-
ping, cathodic protection, etc., stating that the type of protection
will be determined by the nature of the soil and ground water condi-
tions .
Minnesota has a regulation for storage of "liquid material", which
prohibits storage without reasonable safeguards adequate to prevent
the escape or movement of the substance whereby pollution of any wa-
ters of the state might result. It requires a permit for such
storage from the Water Pollution Control Commission. That regulation
also requires a continuous dike to contain the liquid in case of con-
tainer failure. It requires a "reasonably impervious bottom" under
the entire site to prevent movement into the underlying ground in
such quantity that substantial pollution of the waters of the state
might reasonably be expected to result therefrom.
- 11-118 -
-------
The Montana statute specifies that the provisions of its water pollu-
tion control law, including permit requirements, apply to:
drainage or seepage from all sources including that from artific-
ial, privately owned ponds or lagoons if such drainage or seepage
may reach other state waters in a condition which may pollute the
112
other state waters.
Highway Salt. A 1973 Massachusetts statute prohibits storage of deic-
ing chemicals in a manner that might affect water supply, including
ground water. Anyone using more than a ton in a calendar year is re-
quired to file reports. The Commissioner of Public Health is author-
ized to adopt regulations.
Underground Storage in Cavities. Where natural gas is stored under-
ground, state statutes regulate the activity, largely for the purpose
of protecting the gas storage operation from intrusion by other activ-
ities such as oil well drilling and other subsurface excavations.
Kansas regulates "underground storage reservoirs" (natural or artific-
ial subsurface cavities) containing petroleum products, acids, radio-
114
active materials, or fluid or gaseous products. The regulation re-
quires submission of plans and specifications to the State Board of
Health for approval, a record of products stored and injection pres-
sures, and requires the operator to immediately report any failure or
defects.115
- 11-119 -
-------
Control Point 9: CONTROL OF MINING AND QUARRYING
State water pollution control law provisions typically apply to pollu-
tant discharges from mining operations. However, states also have pro-
visions specifically directed at mining, and water pollution from this
source is controlled as an incident of mining activity.
Illinois has detailed regulations applicable to all types of mines,
requiring that the operator obtain a permit from the state Environ-
mental Protection Agency. The applicant must show that the activ-
ity for which the permit is sought will not cause, threaten or allow
pollution of the air or waters of the state during or after active
mineral production. One of the requirements for obtaining a permit is
that the applicant describe the proposed method of mining and mine re-
fuse disposal, and the procedures which will be integrated into said
methods and procedures which will be taken upon abandonment to prevent
air and water pollution. An operator under such a permit is specifi-
cally required to notify the EPA of any emergency situation at the
mine which causes or threatens to cause a sudden discharge of contam-
inants into waters, and to undertake necessary corrective measures.
The regulations contain sections on mine operations, including re-
quirements for plugging all holes; mine refuse disposal, including
requirements for subsoil so that leachate will not pollute water;
abandoned areas; and monitoring and reporting.
The Pennsylvania statute prohibits operation of a mine or allowing a
discharge from a mine into waters of the commonwealth unless authorized
- 11-120 -
-------
or under permit. It authorizes the state to require the oper-
ator to post a bond insuring compliance with the law and regulations,
and conditions of the permit, including provisions insuring that there
will be no polluting discharge after mining operations have ceased.
Surface mining reclamation laws commonly contain provisions directed
at preventing water pollution as one of several objectives of carrying
on strip mining operations with minimal damage to the environment.
Provisions include the requirement that the operator obtain a license
for the area to be mined, and that he first obtain approval of a plan
for reclaiming the area. For the administering agency to approve the
plan, it must find (among other things) that the plan does not pose a
threat of water pollution. The statute will also require the operator
to prevent pollution while mining and reclaiming, and condition
approval of reclamation and release of his bond upon proper reclamation
including prevention of water pollution.
Surface mining law and regulations also contain provisions requiring
certain practices in handling of coal, soil and wastes to prevent acid
production. The Wyoming statute requires to be submitted with the
application for a license to mine:
A plan for insuring that all acid forming, or toxic materials,
or materials constituting a fire, health or safety hazard uncov-
ered during or created by the mining process are promptly.treated
or disposed of during the mining process in a manner designed to
prevent pollution of surface or subsurface water or threats to
- 11-121 -
-------
human or animal health and safety. Such method may include, but
not be limited to covering, burying, impounding, or otherwise
containing or disposing of the acid, toxic, radioactive or other-
118
wise dangerous material.
Ohio, whose coal strip mining procedure is similar to that of Wyoming,
in 1974 enacted a law applicable to surface mining of other minerals
119
such as sand and gravel, clay, and limestone. That statute re-
quires that the plan filed by the operator include a statement of the
measures the operator will perform during mining and reclamation to
insure that contamination of underground water supplies is prevented.
Control Point 10: CONTROL OF TRANSPORTATION AND HANDLING OF FLUIDS
A. Surface Pipelines
Interstate pipelines are under the jurisdiction of the federal Depart-
ment of Transportation.
Pipelines under a state's jurisdiction may be controlled by its public
utilities regulatory agency, or under a specific statute such as that
of Delaware which requires a permit for construction of any pipeline
facility.
B. Sewers
State regulations may require that sewer lines be located or construct-
- 11-122 -
-------
ed in a manner to prevent pollution of nearby water supply facilities,
such as water mains or wells. States also have the ability adminis-
tratively to require sewer construction methods that will prevent
ground water pollution where a permit for sewer construction must be
obtained under public health regulations or water pollution control laws.
C. Spills
Various programs exist for coping with spills. These are not directed
specifically at ground water protection. Ground water will not neces-
sarily benefit from a spill response, depending upon choices made —
ground water might be better protected, for example, if a chemical
were allowed to drain into a river and be diluted, rather than held
behind a temporary embankment where it can infiltrate into the ground.
The National Oil and Hazardous Substances Pollution Contingency Plan
provides for federal interagency response, including the Environmental
Protection Agency and other federal agencies. (See Federal Register
Vol. 38, No. 155, August 13, 1973.) The EPA has established ten re-
gional Hazardous Materials Offices throughout the country to provide
spill response. Spills into navigable waters are the responsibility
of the U. S. Coast Guard.
The Chemical Transportation Emergency Center (CHEMTREC), a public ser-
vice of the Manufacturing Chemists Association, provides 24 hour ad-
vice on chemicals that may be involved in spills. The National Agri-
cultural Chemicals Association works through CHEMTREC in furnishing
- 11-123 -
-------
personnel, equipment, and expertise for cleanup of Class B poison pes-
ticides.
The American Water Works Association has published an Emergency Manual
on Hazardous Materials Spills to advise water utilities how to prepare
for spills that may endanger water supplies.120 The Manual contains
material that would be equally useful to a state considering estab-
lishment of a state spill plan, including a "vulnerability survey" and
a detailed checklist for preparation for spills.
Some states have adopted spill procedures as requirements. A Pennsyl-
vania regulation, for instance, requires individuals responsible for a
spill to immediately notify the regional office of the Department of
Environmental Resources.121 If the spill may affect ground water, the
Regional Geologist of the state's Ground Water Section attempts to re-
spond within a maximum of two hours to make a technical appraisal and
enable prevention of ground water effects, if possible. Certain in-
dustries in Pennsylvania are required to develop a Pollution Incident
Prevention Program which establishes a specific procedure for informing
the state of spills or other major pollution problems.
_ II-124 -
-------
REFERENCES CITED
1. Federal Water Pollution Control Act Amendments of 1972, Public
Law 92-500, Sec. 502.(14).
2. Council of State Governments, 1973, "A Model Law to Enable
States to Participate in the National Discharge Pollutant Elimi-
nation System Established Under the 1972 Federal Water Pollution
Control Act".
3. U. S. Environmental Protection Agency, 1974, "Water Quality
Strategy Paper, Second Edition"; 82 pp.
4. California Public Resources Code, Division 18, California Coastal
Zone Conservation Commission, Section 27000 et seq.
5. Florida, Laws of, Chapter 72-317
6. Delaware Code, Title 7, Chapter 66, Wetlands
7. Maine Revised Statutes Annotated, Title 12, Chapter 206-A, Land
Use Regulation.
8. Minnesota Statutes, Sec. 116.07
9. Delaware Water Pollution Control Regulations
10. Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources, Regulations Chapter
NR 151, Solid Waste Management.
11. Rules of the Florida Department of Pollution Control, Chapter
17-7, Solid Waste Control.
12. Illinois Pollution Control Board Rules and Regulations, Chapter
7, Rule 316.
13. California State Water Resources Control Board, Waste Discharge
Requirements for Waste Disposal to Land.
14. Michigan Stats. Ann. Sec. 325.294
15. California, op. cit.
16. Florida, op. cit.
17. Michigan, op. cit.
18. Minnesota Pollution Control Agency, Division of Solid Waste
Regulation SW 1 et seq.
19. Delaware, op. cit.
- 11-125 -
-------
20. Minnesota, op. cit.; Wisconsin, op. cit.
21. California, op. cit.
22. Wisconsin, op. cit.
23. Oregon Rev. Stats. Sees. 459.210, 459.590.
24. Pennsylvania Department of Environmental Resources, Rules and
Regulations, Chapter 75. Solid Waste Management.
25. Florida, op. cit.
26. Wisconsin, op. cit.
27. U. S. Department of Health, Education, and Welfare, 1967, "Manual
of Septic Tank Practice", 92 pp.
28. Wisconsin Statutes, Sec. 144.03
29. Ohio Sanitary Code, Home Sewage Disposal Regulation HE-29-01
et seq.
30. Vermont Health Regulation 5-901 e_t seq.
31. Maryland State Department of Health and Mental Hygiene, Regula-
tion 10.03.27.
32. Wisconsin Administrative Code, Regulation H 62.20.
33. Maine, Department of Health and Welfare, Proposed Private Sewage
Disposal Code, Final Draft June 17, 1974.
34. California Regional Water Quality Control Board, Central Valley
Region, "Guidelines for Waste Disposal From Land Developments".
35. Pennsylvania Statutes Annotated (Purdon's), Title 35, Sec. 750.1
et seq.
36. Ohio, 0£ cit.
37. Wisconsin, O£ cit.
38. Maine Soil and Water Conservation Commission, et al., "Maine
Guidelines for Septic Tank Sludge Disposal on the Land", Misc.
Report 155, April 1974.
39. Oregon Department of Environmental Quality Regulations Pertaining
to Solid Waste Management.
40. Described in "Ground Water Contamination in the Northeast States",
David W. Miller, Frank A. DeLuca, and Thomas L. Teseier, for the
Office of Research and Development, U. S. EPA, 1974, p. 177.
- H-126 -
-------
41. EPA 40 CFR Pt. 124
42. Montana Board of Health and Environmental Sciences Regulation
for the Control of Water and Air Pollution from Confined Live-
stock Feeding, June 24, 1972.
43. Iowa Department of Environmental Quality, Water Quality Commis-
sion Regulation 1.3(455B).
44. Oregon Department of Environmental Quality Regulations Relating
to Water Quality Control in Oregon, Oregon Administrative Rules,
Chapter 340, Div. 5.
45. Kansas Board of Health Regulations 28-18-1 et seq.
46. Minnesota Pollution Control Agency, Regulations for the Control
of Wastes from Livestock Feedlots, Poultry Lots and Other Animal
Lots, March 8, 1971.
47. Montana, O£ cit.
48. Nebraska Department of Environmental Control, Rules and Regula-
tions Pertaining to Livestock Waste Control, June 22, 1972.
49. Oregon, pjj> cit.
50. California State Water Resources Control Board, Minimum Guide-
lines for Protection of Water Quality from Animal Wastes,
March 1, 1973.
51. Michigan Department of Natural Resources, Geological Survey Di-
vision, General Regulations Governing the Mineral Well Act.
52. Ohio Revised Code Sec. 1509.081.
52. Oklahoma Water Resources Board, Pollution Remedies, Regulation
530.
54. Nebraska Environmental Control Council Rules and Regulations for
the Control of Disposal Wells to Protect Ground Water and Other
Subsurface Resources of the State of Nebraska, August 30, 1972;
Colorado Department of Health, Water Quality Commission, Rules'
for Subsurface Disposal Systems, July 1, 1970.
55. Texas Water Quality Board, "Subsurface Waste Disposal in Texas",
Agency Publication No. 72-05, 40 pp..
56. Michigan, op. cit.
57. Ohio River Valley Water Sanitation Commission (ORSANCO), 1973,
"Underground Injection of Wastewaters in the Ohio Valley Region",
63 pp.
- 11-127 -
-------
58. Arizona Revised Statutes, Sec. 45-301 et seq.
59. Montana Revised Codes, Sec. 89-2911 et seq.
60. Oregon Revised Statutes, Sec. 537.515 et seq.
61. New Jersey Statutes Annotated, Sec. 58:4A-1 e_t seq.
62. North Carolina General Statutes, Sec. 143-215.11 et. seq.
63. Iowa Code Chapter 455A
64. Ibid
65. Minnesota Statutes Annotated, Sec. 105.37 et seq.
66. Maryland Code Annotated, Article 96A
67. Florida Statutes, Sec. 373.013 et seq.
68. California Constitution, Article XIV, Section 3.
69. Kansas Statutes Annotated, Sec. 82a-701 et seq.
70. Alaska Statutes, Sec. 46.15.030 e_t seq.
71. Idaho Code, Sec. 42-101 et seq.
72. Delaware Code Annotated, Sec. 7-6101 et seq.
73. South Carolina Code, Sec. 70-31 et seq.
74. Georgia Code Annotated, Sec. 17-1101 et seq.
75. Colorada Constitution, Article XVI, Section 6.
76. New Mexico Statutes, Sec. 75-11-1 et seq.
77. Kansas, op. cit.
78. Iowa, op. cit.
79. Maryland, op. cit.
80. North Carolina, op. cit.
81. Florida, op. cit.
82. Southwest Florida Water Management District, Brooksville, Fla.,
Rules and Regulations on Consumptive Use of Water, 16G-4.201
e_t seq.
- 11-128 -
-------
83. Michigan Department of Public Health, Ground Water Quality Con-
trol Rule 325.1621.
84. Ground Water Resources Institute, Chicago, Illinois, 1966.
85. North Carolina Board of Water and Air Resources, Well Construct-
ion Regulations and Standards, 1971, p. 9.
86. Texas Water Development Board Rules, Regulations and Modes of
Procedure Relating to Water Well Drillers Registration, Comple-
tion and Plugging of Wells, Rule 305.2.
87. Florida Department of Natural Resources, Division of Interior
Resources, Chapter 16C-8, Rules and Regulations Governing Water
Wells in Florida.
88. Oregon, Rules and Regulations of the State Engineer Prescribing
General Standards for the Construction and Maintenance of Water
Wells in Oregon, Rule 73-004.
89. Texas, op. cit., Rule 405.
90. San Joaquin Local Health District Rules and Regulations, Stock-
ton, California, 1973.
91. Ordinance Code of San Joaquin County, California, Ordinance No.
1862, 1971.
92. Kansas, State Corporation Commission of, General Rules and Regu-
lations for the Conservation of Crude Oil and Natural Gas.
93. Ibid.
94. Texas, The Railroad Commission of, Rules Having Statewide General
Application to Oil and Gas Operations Within the State of Texas.
95. Michigan Department of Natural Resources, Geological Survey Di-
vision, General Regulations Governing Oil and Gas Operations
in the State of Michigan.
96. Texas, op. cit.
97. Colorado, Oil and Gas Conservation Commission of the State of,
Rules and Regulations With Respect to the Conservation of Oil and
Gas.
98. Ohio Division of Oil and Gas Regulation NRo-3-11.
99. The Railroad Commission of Texas, General Conservation Rules and
Regulations of Statewide Application, Rule 8.
100. California Administrative Code, Title 17, Sec. 8025.
- 11-129 -
-------
101. Idaho Board of Environmental and Community Services, Rules and
Regulations for the Establishment of Standards of Water Quality
and for Wastewater Treatment Requirements for Waters of the
State of Idaho.
102. Delaware Water Pollution Control Regulations, Section 9.
103. Pennsylvania Department of Environmental Resources, Bureau of
Water Quality Management, 1972, "Spray Irrigation Manual"; 49 pp.
104. Center for the Study of Federalism, Temple University, "Green
Land — Clean Streams: the Beneficial Use of Waste Water Through
Land Treatment", Philadelphia, Pa., 1972.
105. University of Maine at Orono and the Maine Soil and Water Conser-
vation Commission, 1972, "Maine Guidelines for Manure and Manure
Sludge Disposal on Land"; 21 pp.
106. Delaware, op. cit., Sections 3, 4, and 9.
107. Massachusetts General Code, Chapter 94B, Sec. 21C.
108. Pennsylvania Department of Environmental Resources, Rules and
Regulations, Chapter 101.
109. Delaware Water Pollution Control Regulations, Sec. 2.
110. Maryland Water Resources Administration Regulation 08.05.04.07,
Part IV.
111. Minnesota Regulation WPC 4, Regulation Relating to Storage or
Keeping of Oil and Other Liquid Substances Capable of Polluting
Waters of the State.
112. Montana Revised Code, Sec. 69-4804.
113. Massachusetts, op. cit., Chapter 85, Sec. 7A.
114. Kansas Statutes, Sec. 65.17Id.
115. Kansas Board of Health Regulation Chapter 28, Art. 13, Under-
ground Storage, Disposal Wells and Surface Ponds.
116. Illinois Pollution Control Board Regulations, Chapter 4, Mine
Related Pollution.
117. Pennsylvania Act of June 22, 1937, Public Law 1987, as amended,
Sec. 315.
118. Wyoming 1973 Cumulative Supplement, Sec. 35-502.24(b)(ix).
- 11-130 -
-------
119. Ohio Revised Code Chapter 1514.
120. American Water Works Association, 6666 West Quincy Avenue, Den-
ver, Colorada, 80235., December, 1974.
121. Pennsylvania Department of Environmental Resources, Rules and
Regulations, Chapter 101.
- 11-131 -
-------
CHAPTER III
PROPOSED STATUTORY PROVISIONS TO ENABLE
A STATE TO PROTECT GROUND WATER
-------
PROPOSED STATUTORY PROVISIONS TO ENABLE A STATE TO PROTECT GROUND WATER
Preamble
The following proposal contains provisions that a state might enact if
it were to be well equipped to protect ground water resources. The
proposal does not require that a new agency be created, although that
is one possibility. Many of the functions in the proposed statute
might be assigned to the state's water pollution control agency, al-
though they could be assigned to the state's water resources agency,
its department of natural resources, department of health, or to its
water use allocation agency if the state controls water use by a per-
mit system. The "statute" could simply be used as a checklist.
This is not a proposal for a water rights law. The proposal does re-
fer to controls on withdrawal of water, but it does not relate to al-
location of water in a water rights sense.
The main thrust of the proposal is to enable state government to be
sensitive to ground water quality problems, and to be sufficiently
well informed that it may provide solutions to these problems. It as-
sumes that in the case of ground water, numerous other agencies may be
involved. In one alternative, it would allow a ground water agency
simply to make recommendations to other agencies concerning regulations
to protect ground water — e.g., regulations controlling solid waste
disposal, oil and gas well drilling, septic tank installation, and the
many other activities that may affect ground water quality. The
- III-l -
-------
proposal's emphasis on information, the right to inspect and monitor,
and assisting other agencies, stems from the nature of ground water
problems — the difficulty of finding out what is happening to ground
water, and the multiplicity of controls and agencies that are needed
in order to protect it.
If nothing else, the proposal suggests a means by which protection of
ground water quality might be emphasized, as a cure for the present
situation in which ground water protection generally is simply an in-
cident to some other activity, and is frequently overlooked.
It would be impractical to place all functions affecting ground water
quality in one agency; however, unless there is some central responsi-
bility at least for the subject of ground water quality, it may have
no competent defender.
In addition to the provisions set forth in the following material, a
basic provision for state ground water programs is one that requires
that a report be filed by all well drillers for each well drilled,
identifying the location of the well and containing (as appropriate
for the type of well drilled and the drilling method employed) infor-
mation on the character and depth of formations encountered, depth at
which water is encountered, static water level of the completed well,
a copy of the record of pumping tests, water quality data, and con-
struction details of the well including lengths and sizes of casing,
screening, gravel packing, grouting intervals, and surface sealing.
- III-2 -
-------
A statute might also require that drillers of any wells, including
exploratory holes, be licensed. One of the conditions of holding such
a license would be compliance with requirements of the well log stat-
ute. Licensing of a commercial service is a control technique appli-
cable to any activity where proper installation is important to pro-
tect ground water. Other activities that a state might want to con-
sider licensing would be pump installation, septic tank installation,
and tank inspection (for storage of liquids such as gasoline).
States that have enacted statutes to enable them to participate in the
National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System would still need to
enact a number of provisions in order to fully implement the following
proposal because problems in ground water pollution are significantly
different from those of stream pollution. Even the definition of
"pollutant" used in the federal law and adopted by the states is in
many ways inapplicable to ground water problems. That definition con-
sists of a listing of types of materials that are not to be discharged
into waterways without a permit. While there is some tolerance in
dealing with surface water as to degree of pollution (hence, varying
water quality standards), generally pollution of ground water of any
sort cannot be tolerated because correction of ground water pollution,
once it has occurred, is rarely feasible. Thus the ground water defi-
nition of "pollutant" (below) covers anything that could cause pollu-
tion of ground water; should exceptions need to be made, this may be
controlled by conditions in a permit.
- III-3 -
-------
Provisions for notice and hearing, and for enforcement and penalties,
can be virtually identical to those that a state may already apply to
surface water pollution control, or that it may apply to administra-
tive actions under its administrative procedure act.
An aspect of ground water pollution that may not yield to treatment in
a state statute such as this proposal is pollution of interstate aqui-
fers. Pollution problems of this nature probably can be solved effect-
ively only by adoption of an interstate compact by the states affected.
The proposal does not address itself to this aspect, but it could
nonetheless serve as the basis for consideration by adjoining states
of provisions that would be needed in such a compact.
In examining the provisions which follow, the reader should bear in mind
that one cannot draft a ground water pollution control statute as one
can draft a surface water pollution control statute. Surface water
pollution is a problem that can be effectively approached by creation
of an agency with regulatory powers over all surface water pollution
sources. Ground water pollution is too complex for such an approach.
At the same time, information is a much more important ingredient for
success in controlling ground water pollution. A state may very well
want to keep its water data collecting program isolated from its reg-
ulatory agencies; on the other hand, if the state is to have an effect-
ive statewide program to protect the quality of ground water, an agen-
cy that is especially knowledgeable about ground water should be able
to exert some influence on the many avenues of ground water pollution
that exist in the state and the regulatory efforts that affect or might
be made to affect them.
- III-4 -
-------
Thus the primary function of the following proposal is not for inser-
tion in its entirety into a state's statutes, but rather for use by a
state as an aid in analyzing or modifying its existing statutes. The
provisions of the proposal are nonetheless written as statutory pro-
visions, and can be used as such. A number owe their origin to re-
quirements in Public Law 92-500 (the "Federal Water Pollution Control
Act Amendments of 1972") and the Model Law to Enable States to Parti-
cipate in the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System suggested
by the Council of State Governments to facilitate compliance with
Public Law 92-500. Some provisions derive from elements of the Council
of State Governments' Model State Air Pollution Control Act — in a
number of ways the problems of ground water pollution are more closely
akin to those of air pollution than they are to surface water pollu-
tion. Provisions in the proposal also may resemble those of various
state laws reviewed in considering this subject.
The reader who is aware of the statutory provisions in his state con-
cerning ground water will recognize many of the following provisions
and will be able to associate them with various agencies in his state.
For a state that is so well equipped statutorily that the proposal ap-
pears to offer nothing new, it is hoped that the proposal might none-
theless serve as the occasion for "taking inventory" of ground water
functions and appraising the effectiveness of state agencies and pro-
grams in protecting ground water.
Section 1. DECLARATION OF PUBLIC POLICY AND LEGISLATIVE INTENT
(1) It is hereby declared to be the public policy of this State and
- III-5 -
-------
the legislative intent of this Act to protect, preserve, and enhance
the quality and quantity of ground water in the State consistent with
the best available technology in order to protect human health and
welfare, and to promote the economic and social development of this
State.
(2) To this end it is the purpose of this Act to provide for a state-
wide program of ground water pollution prevention, abatement, and con-
trol, and management of withdrawal and recharge of ground water, in
coordination with other state, federal, and local programs for pro-
tection of human health and welfare including the State Environmental
Protection Act.
This Act is in addition to Sections of the statutes of this
State controlling the discharge of pollutants into surface water and
is supplemental to that Act as it affects the ground water of this
State.
Section 2. DEFINITIONS
(1) The term "ground water" means water beneath the surface of the
ground, other than soil moisture.
(2) The term "pollution" means the man-made or man-induced alteration
of the chemical, physical, biological, and radiological integrity of a
substance.
- III-6 -
-------
(3) The term "pollutant" means a substance which causes or could
cause pollution of ground water.
(4) The term "source of ground water pollution" means an activity,
process, or function which causes or enables a pollutant to enter the
ground, or to be likely to enter the ground, in such an amount or in
such a concentration as to cause pollution of ground water.
(5) The term "person" means an individual, corporation, partnership,
association, the State or a political subdivision thereof, state agen-
cy, municipality, commission, or interstate body.
Section 3. POWERS AND DUTIES
The (agency) has the following powers and duties in addition to those
otherwise provided in this Act:
(1) Encourage and conduct studies, surveys, research, and investiga-
tions relating to pollution of ground water and its causes, effects,
prevention, abatement, and control.
(2) Collect, compile, analyze, and interpret data concerning ground
water.
(3) Prepare and disseminate information concerning ground water for
use by public and private agencies and individuals.
(4) Study the hydrologic characteristics of aquifers of the State and
- III-7 -
-------
identify those areas in which ground water is most readily polluted,
and those areas that should be given special consideration because
they perform a significant function in allowing recharge of aquifers;
report its findings to all public agencies with jurisdiction to affect
or protect ground water quality or land use in such areas, and to per-
sons within such areas by public notice reasonably designed to inform
such persons of the manner in which their interests may be affected.
(5) Prepare, develop, and maintain a plan or plans for the prevention,
abatement, and control of ground water pollution in coordination with
or as components of state plans concerning land use, water, and other
natural resources, area-wide waste treatment management, and other
planning activities by which ground water may be affected.
(6) Undertake and carry on monitoring as a continuing activity. The
(agency) shall establish and maintain a statewide ground water moni-
toring program which shall consist of a network of ground water qual-
ity monitoring stations sampled in a systematic manner and designed to
determine base-line conditions and provide early detection of pollu-
tion, and shall, to complement such network, establish and maintain a
program of identification and surveillance of existing and potential
sources of ground water pollution. Ground water quality monitoring
shall be conducted at representative points relative to sources of
ground water pollution and in areas of high utilization of ground water.
(7) Expend funds, enter into agreements, and acquire interests in
real property by purchase, gift, or eminent domain, for the purpose of
- III-8 -
-------
establishing monitoring wells and other facilities for carrying out
the purposes of the Act.
(8) Hold public hearings relating to any aspect or matter in the ad-
ministration of this Act, and in connection therewith, compel the at-
tendance of witnesses and the production of evidence.
(9) Require the person owning or operating any source of ground water
pollution to establish and maintain such records; make such reports;
install, calibrate, use, and maintain such monitoring equipment or
methods; sample such discharges (in accordance with such methods, at
such locations, intervals, and procedures as reasonably may be re-
quired, including but not limited to the nature, composition, and
quantities of materials produced, handled, stored, or -discharged that
cause or may cause ground water pollution if not properly handled,
stored, or disposed of); and provide such other information relating
to pollution of ground water, as the (agency) may reasonably require.
Comment: "Source of ground water pollution" is defined in Section 2,
above.
(10) Require any person who causes or contributes to pollution of
ground water, in any case in which correction or repair of damage to
the ground water resource is feasible, to correct or repair such dam-
age or to pay the cost or an equitable share of such cost of correction
or repair; and bring suit for the amount of such costs.
- III-9 -
-------
(11) Engage in action that would insure the use of the appropriate
technology and effective techniques or devices for the prevention and
control of ground water pollution in all areas within the State's jur-
isdiction.
(12) Consult with any person proposing to construct, install, or other-
wise acquire a source of ground water pollution or device or system
for the control thereof, concerning the efficacy of such device or
system, or the ground water pollution problem which may be related to
the source, device, or system.
(13) Make recommendations to state and local agencies, to the governor,
and to the legislature, concerning policy, administration, and legis-
lation affecting ground water.
(14) Establish training and educational programs to implement the de-
claration of public policy and legislative intent contained in Section
1 of this Act.
(15) Secure necessary scientific, technical, administrative, and oper-
ational services, including laboratory facilities, by contract or
otherwise.
(16) Employ personnel and consultants as may be necessary for the ad-
ministration of this Act. Subject to any applicable restrictions con-
tained in law, any department or agency of the State may from its
available resources provide the (agency) with personnel and services,
- 111-10 -
-------
with or without charge, and the (agency) may compensate other agencies
for services.
(17) Provide for the establishment of advisory committees, appointment
of membership, scope of investigation, and other duties, periods of
duration, and terms of members.
(18) Accept, receive, and administer grants or other funds or gifts
from public or private agencies, including the federal government, for
the purpose of carrying out any of the functions of this Act.
(19) Institute and prosecute actions to enforce this Act.
(20) Perform other acts and duties as may be necessary to implement the
declaration of public policy and legislative intent contained in Sec-
tion 1 of this Act.
(21) Delegate such of its powers and duties as it may find advantageous
to delegate, but it shall make public the extent of such delegation and
shall retain full responsibility for the proper execution of the power
or duty delegated.
Section 4. REGULATIONS
The (agency) shall adopt, amend, and repeal rules and regulations nec-
essary to implement the provisions of this Act.
- III-ll -
-------
Comment: In addition to a general provision such as the above, a
state will need various types of statutory authorizations to enable it
to perform the complete range of activities necessary to protect ground
water. Courts have frequently stricken broad delegations of regulation
making authority as unconstitutional attempts to delegate legislative
power — thus if a state agency's power to adopt and enforce regula-
tions is to be secure, the agency should be able to point to statutory
standards or requirements that contain the legislative expression for
which its regulations provide the detail. Statutes such as those that
regulate oil and gas drilling, for example, provide numerous substan-
tive controls and in addition authorize the administering agency to
adopt and enforce regulations to implement these controls. The stat-
ute may require that a driller follow drilling procedures adequate to
prevent pollution of water resources; the regulation adopted pursuant
to such a statute specifies such things as casing, cementing, and well
completion requirements. To be secure against constitutional attack
on the ground that the statute itself attempts an improper delegation
of legislative power, there should be enough language in the statute
to make clear the types of controls that the legislature wants the ad-
ministrative agency to effect by its rules and regulations. The degree
of detail required in the statute will vary according to the practices
and case law of the state concerned.
Authority to adopt regulations concerning accidental spills might read
as follows:
The (agency) shall provide by rules and regulations for notifica-
- 111-12 -
-------
tion and emergency abatement procedures for accidental discharges
of substances that may cause ground water pollution, and to re-
quire establishment of a system of notification and emergency
abatement procedures by persons engaged in activities that are
likely to result in accidental discharges.
Some powers require explicit statutory statement because of their po-
tentially broad effect on property rights. A permit system, for in-
stance, should be based upon a statutory prohibition against the reg-
ulated activity; the activity would be allowed only under a permit
from the agency delegated to administer the law. Limitation of with-
drawal of water, either to allocate use or to protect fresh water
aquifers from salt water intrusion, requires clear statutory authority.
Regulatory authorities affecting health have traditionally been given
wide latitude by the courts, but if septic tank use is to be controlled
by devices such as requiring agency approval prior to subdivision of
land, such power should be contained in the statute. Similarly, regu-
lations to control the cumulative effect of fertilizers or pesticides
by limiting their use require clear statutory authority because such
regulations could broadly affect farming practices that traditionally
have been unregulated.
Statutes prohibiting activities without a permit should also contain
authority to adopt certain administrative requirements such as types
of information to be submitted with an application for permit, author-
ity to place conditions in a permit, etc. (See Section 8, below, on
"Permit Procedure".)
- Hl-13 -
-------
Of course, a legislature may wish to give more specific instructions
than are necessary to meet constitutional requirements, in order to
adequately communicate its policy decisions to those who will be ad-
ministering the law.
It goes without saying that a state's statutes should provide proced-
ural safeguards affecting the process of adoption of regulations, such
as requirements of notice that regulations are to be adopted, a public
hearing with opportunity for those regulated to give testimony concern-
ing desirability of the proposed regulations, and a method for those
regulated to question the reasonability of the regulations in court.
Section 5. RECOMMENDATIONS AND ASSISTANCE TO OTHER AGENCIES
The (agency) shall:
(1) Prepare and recommend to the appropriate agencies the adoption of
standards or regulations to protect ground water in connection with
the following activities, and, upon request of another agency, perform
any services on behalf of such agency in connection with the following
activities, that the other agency itself has authority to perform inso-
far as protection of ground water is concerned:
a. Disposal of solid wastes
b. Installation, operation, and maintenance of individual sewage
systems
c. Operation of animal feedlots
d. Disposal of wastes or surplus waters in wells or sumps
e. Construction and abandonment of water wells
- 111-14 -
-------
f. Construction, operation, and abandonment of oil and gas wells
and oil and gas production
g. Drilling and abandonment of exploratory holes
h. Spreading, disposal, and storage on land of substances that
may cause ground water pollution, including placement in
holding structures
i. Discharge of polluting substances into water and air
j. Mining, quarrying, and other excavating activities
k. Handling and storage of liquids, including installation a
operation of tanks, pipelines, and sewers
1. irrigation
m. Artificial recharge
n. Management of ground water levels and pumping rates
o. Storage of solids, liquids, and gases underground
p. Adoption of zoning and building ordinances and regulations
q. Accidental spill reporting and cleanup
Alternate addition to division (1);
If an agency to which the (agency) has recommended adoption of stand-
ards or regulations to protect ground water does not adopt standards
or regulations implementing such recommendations within six months of
the transmission of such recommendations, the (agency) shall request
the governor to grant it authority to adopt the standards or regula-
tions. If the governor determines that the recommended standards or
regulations are authorized by law and are reasonably designed to carry
out the policies declared in Section 1 of this Act, he shall by
- 111-15 -
-------
executive order authorize the (agency) to adopt the standards or regu-
lations. Under such an order, the (agency) may adopt and enforce the
standards or regulations in the same manner, with the same authority,
and with the same effect as if it were the agency to which it trans-
mitted the recommendations. Standards or regulations thus adopted may
be amended or repealed only by the (agency).
Second alternate;
Same as above, except eliminate the governor, require the (agency) to
adopt any standards or regulations authorized by law that are reason-
ably designed to carry out the policies declared in Section 1.
Comment: As a legal matter it would not be necessary to itemize the
activities (a through q, above) for which the agency could recommend
regulations. However, as a principle of comity, a state agency may be
reluctant to inject itself into the affairs of another state agency.
The purpose of the itemization is to reassure the ground water agency
that it is expected by the legislature to involve itself in the regu-
latory activities of other agencies insofar as ground water is con-
cerned because only in this manner can an effective program of ground
water protection be implemented. The alternatives go farther — the
first requires the ground water agency to impose its ground water reg-
ulations where applicable, by intervention of the governor; the second
gives the agency direct authority to adopt ground water regulations
concerning any subject. The thrust of all the provisions is to com-
municate to the agency that the subject of ground water is its special
area, in which it has primary responsibility.
- 111-16 -
-------
(2) Review permit applications for activities that may pollute ground
water, and develop and recommend provisions for permit applications to
enable protection of ground water in the issuance of permits for ac-
tivities and facilities that may pollute ground water.
(3) Encourage voluntary cooperation by persons and affected groups to
achieve the purposes of this Act.
(4) Encourage local units of government to handle ground water pollu-
tion problems within their respective jurisdictions and on an inter-
governmental cooperative basis, and provide technical and consultative
assistance therefor.
(5) Advise, consult, contract, and cooperate with other agencies of
the State, local governments, industries, other states, interstate or
interlocal agencies, and the federal government, and with interested
persons or groups.
(6) Advise and consult with the agencies of other states, and with
other agencies, concerning problems in control of pollution of inter-
state aquifers, and prepare and encourage the adoption of interstate
compacts for the protection of such aquifers.
(7) Assist public agencies, including counties, municipalities, plan-
ning commissions, and other bodies that make planning and zoning de-
cisions, in adopting planning and zoning schemes that protect ground
water quality and prevent reduction in the efficiency of ground water
recharge areas.
- 111-17 -
-------
Section 6. PERMITS
No person shall, without a valid permit from the (agency), do any of
the following:
(1) Operate, maintain, or allow the operation or maintenance, of a
source of ground water pollution.
Comment: This provision states a principle of broad control of activ-
ities that can pollute ground water. ("Source of ground water pollu-
tion" is defined in Section 2, above.) In a particular state, however,
numerous permit systems may already exist that are directed, albeit
incidentally, at prevention of ground water pollution. For instance,
a state's existing permit system for prevention of pollution of streams
and rivers affects ground water quality by improving the quality of
streams that feed aquifers. A permit must be obtained to install a
septic tank in many states; a permit must be obtained to drill an oil
or gas well, and in many states to drill a water well; common also are
permit requirements to dispose of solid wastes. While the provision
as set forth would apply to these activities, each state would need to
determine whether any new permit authority was needed to prevent ground
water pollution. It would be appropriate, for example, for a ground
water agency (or a ground water function within a state EPA) to admin-
ister a permit system for any lagoon disposal or storage, or land
spreading of wastes. These activities, which are widely unregulated,
appear to pose the major current threat to ground water quality. Be-
cause of this special threat, the ground water agency might be the
- 111-18 -
-------
state's specialist in use of lagoons and land disposal. Unlike some
other activities that may be difficult to separate from other regula-
tory functions (e.g., well casing requirements), lagooning or land
spreading could be isolated for regulation by a ground water agency.
Even brine storage pits for oil and gas wells, normally regulated by
the state's oil and gas agency, could be made the primary responsibil-
ity of the ground water agency on the theory that the ground water
agency is the state's expert on lagoons and their potential effects.
Also, the ground water agency would be an appropriate agency to admin-
ister procedures applicable to accidental spills. Generally, the agen-
cy could fill the gap in any case where a source of ground water pol-
lution called for regulation and there was no other agency with author-
ity to regulate the activity. Where another agency had such authority,
the ground water agency's functions might be simply those of investi-
gation, advice, and recommendation contained elsewhere in this propos-
al.
(2) No person shall, without a permit, withdraw ground water.
Comment: It is beyond the scope of the present report to suggest or
even to discuss the enactment by a state of a law establishing a stat-
utory system of water rights. For a description of existing water use
permit systems in various states, and model proposals that have been
made, the reader is referred to Control Point 4 in Chapter II.
However, a statute covering all aspects of ground water quality control
would not be complete without reference to the use of permits to
- 111-19 -
-------
control withdrawal. Coastal states must control ground water withdrawal
to prevent intrusion of sea water that can ruin a fresh water aquifer.
Inland, prevention of migration of any type of contamination may re-
quire restrictions on pumping. Such controls require establishment of
a permit system so that quantities, times, and other conditions may
be specified as necessary to allow optimum use of ground water resour-
ces without causing contamination of the resource being pumped.
A permit system for ground water withdrawals may be useful in ground
water management even without a control function. Periodic reporting
by permit holders enables production of a body of information on water
use and water quality which a state may use to observe trends in water
use and quality, and thus to anticipate problems.
{3} No person shall, without a permit, significantly interfere with
the natural recharge of ground water aquifers.
Comment: Preservation of recharge capability does not necessarily
protect ground water quality, but it is one aspect of ground water
protection since it preserves the function of a ground water aquifer
as a water supply reservoir. An alternative is to provide artificial
recharge to replace lost natural recharge capacity or to augment the
natural capacity of an aquifer.
A permit system for protection of recharge areas is essentially a type
of zoning intended for those limited areas such as flood plains above
valley-fill aquifers which are critical to the continued recharge of
- 111-20 -
-------
large volume aquifers, but which under usual practices are gradually
covered with buildings, parking lots, and roads without any recognition
of the effect on water supply. A permit system lends itself to the
imposition of conditions, such as requirements that a land use that has
a covering effect be designed to prevent loss of infiltration by use
of permeable materials where feasible, by a type of construction that
minimizes covering, or that such uses be required to compensate for
loss of infiltration by alternative recharge facilities, or by contri-
bution to a central recharge facility. The effect of such requirements
on ground water quality (whether beneficial or adverse) would be a
consideration in designing permit conditions, and in considering alter-
natives to natural recharge.
Section 7. PROHIBITION AGAINST ISSUING PERMIT IN CERTAIN INSTANCES
No permit shall be issued authorizing any activity that is a source of
ground water pollution or is a discharge of a pollutant as defined in
the Federal Water Pollution Control Act, as amended, and the activity
involves:
(1) The disposition of any radiological, chemical, or biological war-
fare agent or high-level radioactive waste;
(2) Any discharge to which the Administrator of the U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency, or his designee, has objected pursuant to any right
provided to the Administrator under the Federal Water Pollution Control
Act, as amended.
- 111-21 -
-------
(3) Any discharge which is in conflict with an area-wide waste
treatment management plan approved under the Federal Water Pollution
Control Act, as amended.
Comment: This section reflects the specific prohibitions contained in
Public Law 92-500 (The Federal Water Pollution Control Act Amendments
of 1972) that restrict issuance of permits for discharges into surface
water.
Section 8. PERMIT PROCEDURE
Comment: No specific provisions are suggested here because the permit
procedure should be based upon other existing permit procedures in the
state. Following is a list of elements to be considered for inclusion
in state permit procedures, in addition to other elements the drafts-
man may find necessary or desirable to place in the statute:
1. Automatic initial issuance
2. Maximum duration
3. Denial, suspension, revocation
4. Appeals
5. Bond, charge against property, insurance
6. Administrative authorities
1. Automatic initial issuance. In order to allow for delays in
the initial implementation of a regulatory provision, a state may
choose to grant a permit to anyone who applies, as a matter of right,
during the first 180 days (for example) after enactment of the law.
Such an initial permit might be valid for a maximum period of two
- 111-22 -
-------
years, during which the agency would have power to give notice of rev-
ocation if its regulations took effect within that time and the per-
mitted activity was in violation. This would enable the agency to
achieve compliance with the regulations within the two year period but
at the same time not force blanket compliance without proper tailoring
to avoid specific hardships. Thereafter, all renewals should be made
pursuant to regulations adopted under the Act.
Such a mechanism is in a sense a two year "grandfather clause", but it
should be clear that there is no suggestion here that timely compliance
will not be required for all persons who pollute or may pollute. Be-
cause the effects of ground water pollution tend to be permanent, de-
lay in requiring compliance should be kept to a minimum.
2. Maximum duration. Permits should be limited by statute to a
maximum period before requiring renewal, not to exceed five years (for
example) or such additional period as may be necessary to amortize the
cost of improvements and to retire bonds issued to finance improvements,
3. Denial, suspension, revocation. The statute should contain
authority for the agency to deny, suspend, or revoke permits. It
should state grounds therefore, such as a finding that the activity is
likely to cause pollution of ground water, and the standard grounds
for suspension or revocation including violation of a law, regulation,
or condition of the permit; obtaining a permit by misrepresentation
or failure to fully disclose relevant facts; and change in circum-
stances or knowledge that requires either a temporary or permanent re-
duction or cessation of the permitted activity. A hearing on denial,
- 111-23 -
-------
suspension, or revocation should be required; typically, this require-
ment will already exist in the state's administrative procedure act.
If a statute forbids issuance of a permit to any person who has had a
permit revoked, as for instance in the case of forfeiture of a surety
bond, special language will be required to apply to corporations where
a former permit holder may attempt to change identity by formation of
a new corporation.
4. Appeals. The appellate procedure for denial of a permit
should likewise refer to the existing state administrative procedure
act for appeals, with one major exception that is suggested here.
Traditional appellate statutes relating to the granting or denying of
a permit provide that the only party who may appeal a permit decision
is the applicant for the permit, and only if the permit is denied. It
is the intent of this Act to provide for appeal by any person adverse-
ly affected by the granting of a permit to an applicant, but such an
appeal must be clearly circumscribed to prevent abuse through delay.
It is suggested that any person who is a resident of the state have
the power to object to the granting of a permit on the basis that the
granting was based upon an arbitrary or capricious ruling of the agen-
cy, or that it is contrary to law or regulations. An appeal of the
granting of a permit should be taken to the appropriate judicial body
according to state law within ten days of the granting of a permit.
Upon the filing of a notice of appeal and a petition for affirmative
relief, the effectiveness of the permit should be suspended for a per-
iod of ten days. No further suspension of a granted permit should
occur without a preliminary injunction being issued by a court of
- 111-24 -
-------
competent jurisdiction. If a preliminary injunction is issued by the
court, a hearing on a permanent injunction should be required to occur
within 30 days, or the preliminary injunction should become vacated by
operation of law.
5. Bond. Specific situations for permits may entail the collat-
eral use of a mandatory statutory surety bond. In the permitting of a
lagoon, for instance, the agency would be given authority to adopt
regulations, among others, concerning construction and operation of
lagoons, and their abandonment. The statute might also state the duty
of the applicant to return polluted water to its original condition.
As a condition of requiring the permit, a surety bond could be required
in the minimum amount of $ , plus additional amounts required
by the agency that would cover the cost to the state to properly aban-
don the pit if the applicant fails to do it, and to repair damage to
the ground water system (or other types of damage one would want to
specify). The amount of the bond should be high enough to cover costs
that may be incurred, but not so high as to be an unreasonable burden
to carrying on the activity which the lagoon is to serve. Revocation
of the permit would cause forfeiture of the bond. The bond would be
released upon the lagoon properly being abandoned and the abandonment
being approved by the agency.
Charge against property. Another type of authority used for the
same purpose is the authority for the agency to do the work of aban-
donment itself and charge the landowner for the cost, adding the amount
to the real estate taxes to be charged against the property.
- 111-25 -
-------
Insurance. Requirement of a liability insurance policy might also
be appropriate for protection of specific or general members of the
public where there is a high probability of potential violation, either
intentional or inadvertent.
6. Administrative authorities. In connection with the authority
to adopt substantive regulations, the statute should also provide ad-
equate authority for the agency to adopt necessary administrative reg-
ulations to enable it to operate the permit system effectively. This
would include statements that the agency may adopt regulations con-
cerning information required for application (including reference to
plan of restoration if that is to be required), conditions of the per-
mit (including requirements for keeping records, making reports, and
maintaining monitoring wells), bond, and fees. The statute might
state that technical information required by the agency must be pro-
vided by professionally qualified persons.
Section 9. INSPECTION — RIGHT OF ENTRY.
(1) Upon reasonable evidence of a violation of this Act or rules and
regulations pursuant thereto, the duly authorized officer, employee,
or agent of the (agency) may, at reasonable times, enter upon any pri-
vate or public property, excluding any federal building, installation,
or other property, for the purpose of investigating the violation al-
leged. No entry shall be made upon private property without consent
and without a warrant unless prior issuance of a warrant is unreason-
able under the circumstances. An application for a permit is an
- 111-26 -
-------
expressed consent to an entry without a.warrant for any purpose under
this Act during the pendency of such application and during the period
a permit is issued and in effect.
(2) Any duly authorized officer, employee, or agent of the (agency)
charged pursuant to this Act with powers or duties involving inspection
for purposes of ground water pollution control may present himself
before the (court) to obtain an inspection warrant. Upon a showing by
affidavit of the officer, employee, or agent that there is need for
entry for purposes of inspection, warrants may be issued by the court
authorizing entry for the purposes of this Act and for no other pur-
pose, without notice to the owner or operator of the premises.
(3) A person entering premises under authority of this section:
a. Shall first notify the person in apparent authority on said
premises of said entry, if such a person can reasonably be
found. If the entrant is unable to locate anyone in author-
ity on the premises, entry may be made without such notice.
b. Shall be given access to review and copy any records required
to be maintained for the purposes of this Act or rules and
regulations pursuant thereto.
c. Shall enter for the purpose of conducting investigations and
inspections authorized by this Act and for no other purpose.
Such person shall not relate to any person, law enforcement
agency, prosecutorial authority, or court, information gained
- 111-27 -
-------
while making such investigation or inspection which is not
directly related to the investigation and inspection pursuant
to this Act.
d. May conduct tests, measure flow of liquids, drill holes into
the ground, and install monitoring equipment as reasonably
necessary to determine the nature, amount, and extent of ex-
isting and potential ground water pollution. Upon request of
the (agency), the person responsible for the premises shall
provide access for sampling, testing, drilling, and installa-
tion of equipment as may be necessary to enable the making of
tests and measurements, and, upon good cause shown by the
agency, shall drill test holes as required by the (agency) at
the person's expense.
Comment: Right of entry without a warrant is limited by this section
to the case where the officer has reasonable evidence of a violation
of the act or regulations, for the purpose of investigating the viola-
tion, and only if prior issuance of a warrant is unreasonable under
the circumstances. If the premises is under a permit, however, no
warrant is required because the statute allowing entry without a war-
rant is an implied condition of the permit, and thus the permit holder
has consented to this type of entry.
The right to enter under this section does not depend upon proof that
ground water pollution has occurred. A violation of the act occurs
when one operates or maintains a "source of ground water pollution"
- 111-28 -
-------
without a permit (Section 6). This phrase is defined (by Section 2)
to mean "an activity in which a pollutant enters the ground or is like-
ly to enter the ground in such an amount or in such a concentration as
to cause pollution of ground water." What the definition does, thus,
is to make "pollution" in effect "potential pollution" and thus allow
regulation to prevent ground water pollution rather than merely to
stop it once it has begun.
The limits of entry and search may be broader in a state that has de-
clared its ground water to be the property of the state, on the theory
that the state should not be required to obtain a warrant in order'to
inspect its property. The theory is analogous to that which pertains
to wildlife, where statutes authorize game protectors to go-on lands
for the purpose of making investigations, even where no violation of
law is suspected. Such entries would still have to be reasonable under
the circumstances, however, and limited to the outdoors, specifically
excluding entrance into buildings without a warrant.
The exemption of federal properties is normally included in proposals
for right-of-entry provisions by the states to reflect the supremacy
given to the federal government by U.S. Supreme Court interpretations
of the United States Constitution. There has been considerable protest
from the states that federal installations are significant offenders
in the case of all types of pollution, and should not be exempted from
state pollution control requirements. Although the exemption in this
section is not necessary to prevent entry by state officers onto fed-
eral lands, it is included here to call attention to the actual status
- 111-29 -
-------
of the law, for the application of whatever remedy a state may wish
to propse.
Section 10. CONFIDENTIALITY OF RECORDS
Any record, report, or information obtained under this Act shall be
available to the public, except that upon a showing satisfactory to
the (agency) by a person that a record, report, or information, or par-
ticular part thereof, other than data concerning pollutants, to which
the (agency) has access under this Act, if made public would divulge
production of financial data or methods, processes, or production
unique to the person, or would otherwise tend to affect adversely the
competitive position of the person by revealing trade secrets, the
(agency) shall consider the record, report, or information or partic-
ular portion thereof confidential in the administration of this Act.
For purposes of this section, "pollutants" includes pollutants entering
the ground and pollutants above the ground surface which are likely to
enter the ground.
Nothing herein shall be construed to prevent disclosure of any report,
record, or information to federal, state or local agencies that may be
necessary for purposes of administration of any federal, state or local
pollution control laws, or when relevant in any proceeding under this
Act.
- 111-30 -
-------
Section 11. COMPLIANCE ORDERS
Whenever on the basis of reasonable evidence available to it, the
(agency) finds that any person has failed to comply with a provision
of this Act, or rule or regulation adopted under it, or that a person
by his act or omission is preventing the (agency) from performing its
powers and duties under this Act, it may issue an order (1) specifying
the provision of this Act, or rule or regulation, with which the person
has failed to comply or which contains the power or duty which the
(agency) is prevented from performing and the facts alleged to consti-
tute such failure to comply, or act or omission, and (2) prescribing
the necessary corrective action to be taken.
Section 12. INJUNCTIVE RELIEF
The (agency) may commence a civil action for appropriate relief, in-
cluding a permanent or temporary injunction, for any failure to comply,
or act or omission, for which the (agency) is authorized to issue a
compliance order under Section 11 of this Act. Such action shall be
brought in the (court) and such court shall have jurisdiction to re-
strain illegal actions and to require compliance.
Section 13. CIVIL PENALTIES
Any person who violates any provision of this Act, or any permit, rule,
regulation, or order issued hereunder, shall be subject to a civil
penalty not to exceed $10,000 per day of such violation.
- 111-31 -
-------
Section 14. CAUSE OF ACTION
Any person who is damaged by violation of any provision of this Act,
or of any permit, rule, regulation, or order issued hereunder, shall
have a cause of action for damages against the person who committed
such violation.
A municipality or other public agency that conducts an activity under
authority of a permit issued pursuant to this Act, which activity
would otherwise be prohibited, consents to suit by any person who in-
•curs damage as a result of the permitted activity.
Section 15. CRIMINAL PENALTIES
(1) Any person who willfully or negligently violates a provision of
this Act, any permit condition or limitation, or any rule or regulation
adopted under this Act, shall be punished by a fine of not less than
$50 nor more than $25,000 per day of violation, or by imprisonment for
not more than one year, or both. If the conviction is for a violation
committed after the first conviction of such person under this subsec-
tion, punishment shall be by a fine of not less than $500 nor more
than $50,000 per day of violation, or by imprisonment for not more
than two years, or both.
(2) Any person who knowingly makes any false statement, representa-
tion, or certification in any application record, report, plan, or
other document filed or required to be maintained under this Act or
- 111-32 -
-------
who falsifies, tampers with, or knowingly renders inaccurate any
monitoring device or method required to be maintained under this Act,
shall upon conviction be punished by a fine of not more than $10,000
or by imprisonment for not more than six months, or both.
(3) Any person who willfully or negligently hinders a duly authorized
officer, employee, or agent of the (agency) acting under authority of
this Act shall be punished by a fine of not less than $2,500 nor more
than $25,000 per day of violation. If the conviction is for a viola-
tion committed after a first conviction of such person under this sub-
section, punishment shall be by a fine of not less than $5,000 nor
more than $50,000 per day of violation.
For purposes of this section, the term "person" means, in addition to
the meaning given in Section 2 of this Act, any responsible corporate
officer.
Section 16. ENFORCEMENT BY CITIZEN'S SUITS
(1) Except as provided in subsection (2) of this section, any citizen
may commence a civil action on his own behalf:
a. Against any person who is alleged to be in violation of a
provision of this Act, a regulation adopted pursuant to this
Act, or an order issued by the (agency) with respect to such
provision or regulation.
- 111-33 -
-------
b. Against the (agency) where there is alleged a failure of the
(agency) to perform any act or duty under this Act which is
not discretionary with the (agency).
The (court) shall have jurisdiction to enforce such a provis-
ion or regulation or to order the (agency) to perform such
act or duty, as the case may be, and to apply any appropriate
civil penalties under Section 13 of this Act.
(2) No action may be commenced under subsection (l)a. of this section
prior to ten days after the plaintiff has given notice of the alleged
violation to the (agency).
(3) The court, in issuing any final order in any action brought pur-
suant to this section, may award costs of litigation (including rea-
sonable attorney and expert witness fees) to any party, whenever the
court determines such award is appropriate. The court may, if a pre-
liminary injunction is sought, require the filing of a bond or equiv-
alent security.
(4) Nothing in this section shall restrict any right which any person
(or class of persons) may have under any statute or common law to seek
enforcement of any standard or limitation or to seek any other relief.
Section 17. REMEDIES CUMULATIVE
Nothing contained in this Act in any way abridges or alters rights of
- 111-34 -
-------
action or remedies existing upon the effective date of this Act or
thereafter, under the common or statutory law, but remedies provided
in this Act shall be deemed cumulative to such other remedies.
Section 18. SEVERABILITY
The provisions of this Act are severable. If any provision of this
Act shall be held to be unconstitutional or invalid for any reason,
such unconstitutionality or invalidity shall not affect the remaining
provisions of this Act.
- 111-35 -
-------
CHECKLIST OF POWERS AND DUTIES NEEDED BY STATE GROUND WATER AGENCIES
1. Conduct studies and perform research
2. Collect data
3. Disseminate information
4. Identify critical ground water areas
5. Prepare and maintain plans
6. Conduct monitoring
7. Hold hearings
8. Require reporting by persons having ground water pollution
sources
9. Require persons who pollute ground water to correct or pay
cost of correction
10. Encourage technology to prevent ground water pollution
11. Consult with persons concerning ground water pollution
sources and prevention techniques
12. Make recommendations concerning policy and legislation
13. Establish training and educational programs
14. Provide for advisory committees
15. Adopt regulations
16. Assist other agencies; make recommendations to other agencies
for adoption of regulations affecting ground water; review
permit applications for activities that may pollute ground
water.
17. Prepare and encourage the adoption of interstate compacts to
protect ground water.
18. Grant and revoke permits for potential sources of ground wa-
ter pollution, withdrawal of ground water, and interfering
with recharge.
19. Enter and inspect premises where pollution may occur.
20. Enforce law and regulations through compliance orders, in-
junctions, penalties, actions.
- 111-36 -
-------
21. Exercise auxiliary powers: expend funds, make agreements,
acquire property interests, employ personnel, secure tech-
nical services, accept grants, sue and be sued, delegate
powers, etc.
- 111-37 -
-------
Legal and Constitutional Basis
The right of a state to enact provisions such as the foregoing is un-
disputed. The general duties of the state to provide for and protect
the health and welfare of its citizenry has been firmly established
since the founding of the Republic.
The proposed statutory provisions and the suggested regulations pursu-
ant thereto (see following chapter) were drafted with care having been
taken to meet the justifiable ends of the state while avoiding viola-
tion of any requirements of the United States Constitution. The stat-
utory provisions also were drafted with a view to avoiding violation
of limitations or standards of the constitutions of the several states,
The provisions were prepared to be in concert with the Federal Water
Pollution Control Act Amendments of 1972 (Public Law 92-500) , with
special attention being directed to Sections 106, 202, 208, 303, 308,
402, and 405, and with the Safe Drinking Water Act (Public Law 93-523)
Because of the time which may elapse between publication of the fore-
going provisions and their adoption by a state, the state should care-
fully examine any "right of entry" provisions with reference to the
federal constitutional requirements as set forth in the then current
United States Supreme Court rulings. Section 9 of the proposed statu-
tory provisions (above) provides for a right of entry by agency en-
forcement personnel into private and public properties at reasonable
times for the purpose of investigating violations of the Act. This
- 111-38 -
-------
section has been drafted with particular care to be in compliance with
recent interpretations of the United States Supreme Court in light of
the Fourth Amendment search requirements and Fourteenth Amendment due
process requirements. However, at the time of adoption of this section
by a state, the State Attorney General's Office should review the re-
quirements of the Supreme Court as they exist at that time.
Two other areas will require legal review by the State Attorney Gener-
al prior to adoption.
The first involves Section 4, providing for the authority of the agen-
cy to adopt, amend, and repeal rules and regulations necessary to im-'
plement the provisions of the law. In a particular state, such an en-
abling statute providing rule and regulation-making authority in the
base form set forth may be adequate to authorize the adoption of en-
forceable rules and regulations. However, state courts have frequently
found particular regulations to be invalid on the ground that the stat-
utes under which they were adopted were improper delegations of legis-
lative power because the specific authority sought to be used in the
rule or regulation was not adequately spelled out in the statute. As
a result, attention must be directed to the question of what specific
statutory language must be used to enable the adoption of valid regu-
lations.
The other area requiring specific consideration in each state is Sec-
tion 6, subsection 2, which provides for a permit system for the with-
drawal of water. As the reader has been made aware, the proposal does
- 111-39 -
-------
not indicate a preference for an order of priority which should be
followed if the state regulates the withdrawal of ground water. Con-
trol Point 4 in Chapter II provides an extensive discussion of the
various common-law and statutory rules observed by various states in
ground water management. Should a state enact a law regulating with-
drawal, care must be taken to review state case law and constitutional
requirements to be certain that the chosen method can be carried out
as desired.
Case citations are not included in this chapter because the variations
in state court decisions, and lapse of time, make it difficult to pro-
duce a useful statement of the law in some vital aspects. It was felt
that there being no adequate substitute for individual state review of
its legal and constitutional constraints at the time legislation is
being considered, case citation might prove more misleading than useful
- 111-40 -
-------
CHAPTER IV
REGULATIONS DESIGNED TO PREVENT POLLUTION
OF GROUND WATER
-------
CHAPTER IV
REGULATIONS DESIGNED TO PREVENT POLLUTION OF GROUND WATER
INTRODUCTION
The following regulations, or guidelines, are intended to provide state
agencies with a list of requirements that may be useful to them in
determining whether their existing regulations contain adequate pre-
cautions against pollution of ground water, and in determining the
scope and nature of regulations that they might wish to adopt con-
cerning activities as yet unregulated in their states. They are
regulations in that they are stated in terms of requirements, but they
are guidelines in that for the most part, they are performance-oriented
and are not the technical regulations that an agency would also need
in order to effect detailed control of potentially polluting activities,
Neither is the list all-inclusive. The hydrologic situations and types
of wastes and activities that can cause pollution of ground water are
almost limitless; special precautions and safeguards will need to be
developed for special situations.
With each set of regulations is a statement of the rationale behind it.
The reason for each regulation is not described in detail, because its
purpose is generally self-evident.
From one subject to another, the regulations vary substantially in
degree of detail. In some cases, no regulations are provided. The
- IV-1 -
-------
editorial judgment in each case was based upon a consideration of the
potential usefulness of presenting, in this report, detailed regulations
affecting the subject. Highway salting, for example, is more a matter
of management than application of regulations. Disposal of wastes in
deep wells requires detailed regulation, but because each operation of
this nature requires specifications applicable to the particular loca-
tions, types of waste, and other circumstances of the operation, only a
textbook could contain sufficient detail to be useful. This latter ob-
servation also applies to regulations to prevent pollution from ground
water development — important as this type of control may be, it was
felt that within the scope of the present manual, an attempt to propose
generally applicable regulations would not be feasible because of the
variety of situations and management decisions for which such regula-
tions must be designed. For activities such as surface water pollution
control, and to some extent other activities, regulations in reference
to ground water are not needed since ground water will be protected if
regulation of the primary activity meets its intended objectives.
In conjunction with the following regulations, the reader should
examine the Proposed Statutory Provisions for a State Ground Water
Agency in the preceding chapter, to gain a perspective as to what might
best be enacted by statute and what is contained in implementing regu-
lations. This decision will vary from _• late to state. Some of the
following regulatio s era Id thi.-.selves be usec as statutory provisions.
It should be borne in mind by the reader that this r^prrt does not
recommend that all the iollowinc "regulations" ^,3 adopted by all
- IV-2 -
-------
states. In a number of the following sets, regulations are alternative
or they may be inconsistent with one another. A few are listed in order
of decreasing stringency, from complete prohibition to general guide-
lines. In some states, a particular regulation may appear extreme or
unreasonable (as for instance, quantities, times, or amount of informa-
tion required) while another state may find it inadequate. In any
state, effective prevention of pollution of ground water will depend
primarily upon the knowledgeable people whose talents are brought to
bear upon the problem; the regulations which follow are offered in the
hope simply that they will be useful aids to these people in fashioning
a program that is appropriate for their state.
Reference to "National Drinking Water Standards" in the following
material is to standards to be established by the U. S. Environmental
Protection Agency pursuant to P.L. 93-523, the "Safe Drinking Water
Act of 1974".
CONTENTS
1. LANDFILLS, DUMPS, AND EXCAVATIONS
Regulations for Installation, Operation, and Abandonment in
Order to Protect Ground Water
2. HOLDING PONDS AND LAGOONS
Regulations for Installation, Operation, and Abandonment in
Order to Protect Ground Water
3. WATER AND WASTE WATER SLUDGES AND EFFLUENTS
Regulations for Utilization and Disposal in Order to Protect
Ground Water
- IV-3 -
-------
4. WASTE PILES AND STOCKPILES
Regulations for the Protection of Ground Water
5. ANIMAL FEEDLOTS
Regulations for the Protection of Ground Water
6. FERTILIZERS
Recommendations for the Protection of Ground Water
7. PESTICIDES
Recommendations for the Protection of Ground Water
8. SURFACE WATER INFILTRATION
Commentary on Protection of Ground Water
9. SEPTIC TANKS
Regulations for the Protection of Ground Water
10. STORAGE AND TRANSMISSION FACILITIES
Regulations for the Protection of Ground Water
11. ACCIDENTAL SPILLS
Regulations for the Protection of Ground Water
12. HIGHWAY SALTING
Regulations for the Protection of Ground Water
13. AIR POLLUTION
Commentary on Protection of Ground Water
14. DRAINAGE WELLS AND SUMPS
Regulations for the Protection of Ground Water
15. ARTIFICIAL RECHARGE
Regulations for the Protection of Ground Water
16. DISPOSAL WELLS
Commentary on the Protection of Ground Water
- IV-4 -
-------
17. WATER SUPPLY WELLS
Regulations for the Protection of Ground Water
18. EXPLORATION HOLES AND ABANDONED WELLS
Regulations for the Protection of Ground Water
19. OIL AND GAS - ADDITIONAL RECOVERY
Regulations for the Protection of Ground Water
20. MINING
Commentary on Protection of Ground Water
21. GROUND WATER DEVELOPMENT
Commentary on Protection of Ground Water
1. LANDFILLS, DUMPS, AND EXCAVATIONS
Regulations for Installation, Operation, and Abandonment in Order
to Protect Ground Water
Sanitary landfills are generally considered to be those disposal land-
fills, or dumps, which are covered with soil, usually simultaneously
with deposition, in a manner sufficient to minimize nuisance and health
problems such as unpleasant odors, blowing papers, and vermin. These
landfills are located as mounds, on top of the ground; beneath the
surface of the ground, but above ground water; and beneath the surface,
but below the ground water level. In many instances they present a
potential hazard to ground water quality.
The significance of this hazard, in specific instances, is dependent
upon the physical and chemical nature of the waste material being
- IV-5 -
-------
deposited; the geologic and hydrologic conditions prevailing at the
proposed site, including their relationship to the ground water; and
the economics of installation and operation.
Generally it has been the practice to dispose of toxic wastes, includ-
ing pesticides, industrial by-products and residues, brines, acids,
and other chemical compounds; municipal garbage; and inert or nearly
inert, insoluble substances, such as masonry demolition wastes, all in
a common landfill. The only protection against the obvious hazard to
health has been due to fortuitous dilution — that is, the volume of
toxic products has been low enough as compared to apparently non-toxic
products to prevent any widespread pollution of the ground water body.
In some states (e.g., California) waste disposal sites are classified
according to the materials that may be placed in them, with toxic
wastes being relegated to specific disposal sites where their disposi-
tion can be more strictly regulated and monitored.
When soluble materials in a landfill come into contact with water, the
resultant leachate presents a threat to ground water quality. The
source of water within the landfill may be water that was buried with
the material when disposed, as in the case of a municipal or industrial
sludge, or ground water that is in contact with the buried refuse.
Most commonly it is simply rainfall that enters the disposal site
during burial, and rainfall that infiltrates through the surface cover
after kurial. It appears nearly impossible to economically eliminate
the percolating water from most disposal sites.
- IV-6 -
-------
These regulations are not intended to cover all aspects of the design,
construction, and operation of a sanitary landfill. They are intended
only to protect ground water quality sufficiently to preserve the
quality to the limits prescribed by National Drinking Water Standards
and to prevent further deterioration of ground water that does not
meet the Standards in its natural state.
To this objective the regulations that follow require that a permit
system be initiated for all landfill operations. The most important
conditions imposed by the permit requirement are:
1. A commitment as to the type of material that will be
accepted at the proposed site. This includes pro-
jection of the quantity and chemical quality of
leachate that is expected to be produced from the
fill.
2. A complete evaluation of the geologic and hydrologic
conditions existing at the proposed site.
3. A monitoring program sufficient to establish that
the landfill site is performing as projected.
4. A finding that the leachate generated will not cause
the indigenous ground water to exceed the level of
concentrations of chemicals, including pesticides,
as described in the National Drinking Water
Standards. Where the indigenous quality already
exceeds acceptable levels of concentration, no
increase in concentration will be approved.
- IV-7 -
-------
5. A remedial action plan, prepared in advance,
available in the event leachate escapes from a
landfill.
Fulfillment of these conditions will contribute substantially to the
safe and economical operation of sanitary landfills.
REGULATIONS
1. Every public or private agency or individual owning, constructing,
or operating a landfill facility shall obtain a permit from the
appropriate agency.
2. The term of the permit shall be for a maximum period of three
years. The permit shall be automatically renewed every three
years for the full life of the proposed facility, providing
that at the end of each three-year interval restoration is current;
all data and records are complete and filed with the agency, as
required; and the facility is performing as projected at the time
originally designed, without causing adverse effect upon local
ground water conditions in excess of the National Drinking Water
Standards in effect at the end of the permit period.
In all instances the best available practicable technology shall
be utilized.
3. The permit application shall contain an economic and environmental
analysis of the proposed system and comparative consideration of
- IV-8 -
-------
one or more alternative solutions.
4. The permit application shall identify the location of the proposed
disposal site on the latest available topographic quadrangle map
or maps of the United States Geological Survey, on a scale of
1:24,000. If no such maps are available, equivalent alternatives
shall be supplied with the application.
5. The permit application shall include a detailed map, on a scale
of one inch equals 200 feet, or larger, showing:
(a) topography within the area of the disposal site, with a
contour interval not exceeding two feet,
(b) the area at least one-half mile beyond the site limits,
which shall show contours on five-foot intervals,
(c) detailed survey boundaries and dimensions of the proposed
project,
(d) cultural features, streams, springs, sinkholes, swamps,
mines, pits, quarries, and other natural and man-made
features as may be pertinent to ground water quality,
(e) existing wells, test borings, excavations, percolation
test sites, etc.,
(f) roads, pipelines, power lines,
(g) location of proposed monitoring wells,
(h) details of ground water flow,
(i) location and thickness of glacial, colluvial, alluvial,
and lacustrine deposits,
(j) bedrock depth, or outcrop, and lithology; depth to highest
impermeable clay.
- IV-9 -
-------
6. The permit application shall include a description of regional
and local structural geology. Regional information shall
include an area of five miles by five miles centered on the
proposed site.
7. The permit application shall include a complete and detailed
description of the hydrology, geology, and soils at the proposed
site. This shall include, but not be limited to, description of
ground water conditions; rock types, structural conditions such
as faulting, folding, jointing, etc.; type and thickness of
materials overlying bedrock, including soil classification;
permeability and percolation rates of soils; flooding frequency;
soil ion exchange capacity; gradation analyses to a depth five
feet below the lowest proposed fill; and other existing condi-
tions such as may be present at the site. A cored soil sample
shall be taken and permanently retained to show initial soil
characteristics.
8. The permit application shall include complete data establishing
the background, or indigenous, ground water quality, including
analyses for at least the following constituents:
(a) temperature, pH, specific conductance,
(b) hardness, alkalinity,
(c) BOD 5 day,
(d) COD 25 w K2Cr207,
(e) dissolved solids, suspended solids,
(f) total iron (Fe),
(g) manganese (Mn) ,
(h) sulfate (S04),
- IV-10 -
-------
(i) chloride (Cl),
(j) fluoride (P),
(k) Nitrogen - Kheldahl (N),
(1) nitrogen - ammonia (NH^),
(m) nitrogen - nitrate (NC^) ,
(n) chromium (Cr),
(o) nickel (Ni),
(p) zinc (Zn),
(q) copper (Cu),
(r) mercury (Hg) ,
(s) phosphorus (P),
(t) aluminum (Al),
(u) lead (Pb),
(v) methylene blue active substances (MBAS),
(w) other constituents as indicated by the nature of the
material being disposed.
The permitting agency may require additional samples before issuing
the permit.
9. No permit shall be issued that will result in the indigenous
ground water quality becoming inferior to the physical, biologi-
cal, and radiological levels for raw or untreated drinking water
supply sources as specified in the National Drinking Water
Standards, including future cdditions and modifications. If the
indigenous quality is inferior to the recommended level, or
- IV-11 -
-------
levels, for drinking water, the proposed disposal shall not
degrade the naturally existing quality.
If it is determined, after issuance of a permit that the permitted
activity is resulting in ground water pollution, the permit may be
suspended or revoked.
10. No permit shall be issued for a landfill, dump, or excavation
within the area of a floodplain covered by the 100-year flood.
11. Seasonal water level fluctuations shall be determined prior to
permit approval. The maximum water table elevation shall not
be within five feet of the lowest elevation of the proposed
landfill unless special circumstances exist that specifically
demonstrate that the proposed landfill will not adversely affect
ground water quality, i.e., exceed standards.
A minimum of two monitoring wells shall be established downgradient
(water table or piezometric surface) from the proposed landfill to
assure compliance with the regulations and permit conditions. These
wells shall be completed so as to provide samples from that portion
of the aquifer most likely to receive pollutants from the sanitary
landfill, usually the upper ten feet of the aquifer.
A regular monitoring program shall be established. Samples shall
be collected at least quarterly and analysed for the components
indicated under preceding Regulation 8, and other critical items
- IV-12 -
-------
that might be present as a consequence of the type of materials
deposited in the fill.
An additional monitoring well shall be installed and maintained in
such a location as to provide comparative data on the background
ground water quality. This well shall be sampled, and the sample
analysed, as above, at least annually.
All monitoring wells shall be maintained and tested for the period
of the active life of the landfill, plus a minimum of three years.
If the design of the landfill or other factors indicates that the
possibility of pollution extends beyond the prescribed three-year
period, the monitoring period may be extended by the responsible
agency.
12. If pollution of ground water is suspected or proven during
operation, the operator may be required to install such addi-
tional monitoring wells as designated, for both design and lo-
cation, by the agency.
13. The permit application shall include a complete and detailed
description of the chemical and physical character of the
materials that are to be spoiled in the proposed fill. A pro-
jection shall be included of the chemical character and quantity
of the leachate that will be produced.
14. The type of materials to be spoiled, and the local hydrologic
and geologic materials, control the requirements for leachate
handling.
- IV-13 -
-------
(a) Where the geologic and hydrologic data required in Regu-
lation 9 indicate that the naturally occurring soils are
capable of preventing the leachate from entering the local
ground water, collecting the leachate for treatment is not
required to protect ground water. For example, where the
disposal site is located in thick glacial clays, or in an
impermeable shale, above the water table, the leachate will
saturate the disposal site and appear as seeps or saturated
spots on the surface. This leachate must, however, be
collected and treated to prevent surface water pollution.
(b) If the disposal site is located in a permeable soil, and
if the quantity and quality of the leachate is such that
the quality of the ground water will be affected in ex-
cess of the acceptable standard, the disposal site shall
be provided with either an underdrain system or an imper-
meable barrier.
(1) Underdrain systems shall provide for collection of
leachate, and either treatment to prescribe standards
or direct recycling of the leachate insofar as tech-
nically feasible. When leachate is to be recycled,
the ultimate disposition of the leachate, at the
end of the useful life of the landfill, shall be
provided.
(2) When impermeable barriers are utilized, the useful
life of the barrier shall be indicated, with pro-
vision made for assuring the continued preservation
of the ground water quality.
- IV-14 -
-------
15. The permit application shall include a detailed remedial action
plan which shall be utilized in the event it is determined that
leachate is escaping or has escaped from the fill site.
16. The permit application shall include the final proposed restor-
ation plan for the site. The restoration shall be such that the
restored site is compatible with the surrounding area, both
aesthetically and with regard to utility.
Restoration shall be performed concurrently with landfilling. At
no time shall restoration be delayed more than ninety (90) days
after active filling. Cover and drainage shall be provided daily.
17. Reports shall be submitted to the responsible agency quarterly.
These reports shall include all the data obtained from the moni-
toring program, plus a daily record of the quantities and types
of materials deposited in the landfill. Where pesticides, agri-
cultural by-products, paint sludges, biological sludges, oils, or
any similar water-soluble manufactured chemical product is being
dumped separately from normal municipal rubbish, the manufacturer
shall provide a complete analysis of the material dumped. No
permit shall be renewed unless all reporting requirements are
complied with promptly and fully.
18. The landfill operator shall provide, with the permit application,
a performance bond in the amount of at least $100,000.00, or
such additional amount as required by the agency as a consequence
of the magnitude of the project and the wastes accepted. The bond
shall be forfeited for violation of a regulation or permit condition,
- IV-15 -
-------
19. The bond, if forfeited, will be used to restore the site. In
the event of forfeiture of bond, the operator shall not be eli-
gible for future permits.
20. In the event of violation of a regulation or permit condition,
the agency may issue an order to temporarily cease operations
until corrective action is taken, in lieu of bond forfeiture.
Corrections must be undertaken immediately and completed within
six months, without additional billing, or bond will be
forfeited.
2. HOLDING PONDS AND LAGOONS
Regulations, Installation, Operation, and Abandonment in Order to
Protect Ground Water
The major cause of ground water pollution in the United States, other
than the use of septic tanks, is leakage of wastes from holding ponds
and lagoons. These holding structures range greatly in size and are
used to impound a wide variety of waste substances. In nearly all
cases, unlined holding ponds and lagoons leak. This does not necess-
arily result in significant ground water pollution, because surround-
ing earth materials may be of such low permeability that the pollutants
migrate only short distances, the water table may lie at depths of
several tens of feet and the infiltrating wastes do not reach it, or
in a few cases, pits or lagoons may be constructed in brackish or salt
water areas and the waste water is less mineralized than the adjacent
ground water.
- IV-16 -
-------
Ground water pollution problems that have resulted from infiltration
from holding ponds and lagoons include a broad spectrum. The most
serious problems occur where underground strata are highly permeable
and the wastes stored contain very mobile chemicals, such as chloride.
A great number of holding ponds have been excavated in permeable sand
or gravel zones, which permit the waste to infiltrate at a rapid rate.
In other cases, wastes have infiltrated to nearby field drainage tile
through which they have moved in relatively undiluted states to points
of discharge in ditches or streams. Pollution problems such as these
can be alleviated if the holding structures are lined with an imper-
meable membrane, such as heavy gauge plastic. Throughout the country,
experience has shown that clay liners are only partially effective
at controlling infiltration.
Surface runoff into holding ponds and lagoons may cause them to over-
flow a highly mineralized fluid that spreads cut over the ground and
pollutes not only the ground water, but the soil as well. The
potential for this problem can be reduced by building retaining walls
around each structure to prevent surface water from entering. The
retaining walls, however, must be protected from erosion which could
lead to catastrophic dumping during a heavy rain. Moreover, the re-
taining walls may be sufficiently permeable to allow waste fluids to
migrate through them. This can be controlled by protecting the re-
taining wall with an impermeable membrane.
Studies have shown that the quality of polluted ground water in the
vicinity of holding ponds varies both with depth and time. Consequently,
- IV-17 -
-------
monitoring ground water quality is not always a simple matter. Monitor-
ing wells must be constructed in such a way that they can be used to
trace the movement of fluids from a holding pond if the need arises.
The number of monitoring wells needed per impoundment is dictated by
the area and volume of each site, as well as the local geologic con-
ditions. In areas where the rocks are relatively permeable and the
water table near land surface, at least two adjacent monitoring wells
should be installed; one should be screened near the water table, the
other several feet deeper. The actual arrangement must be designed on
the basis of the local geohydrologic conditions, but the well screens
should be placed at a depth that will intercept a potential pollution
plume.
Investigations have also shown that holding ponds and lagoons may
continue to pollute ground water long after their abandonment, even
though the structures have been filled with earth materials. This is
largely due to collection of surface water in the vicinity of the
abandoned site, where it infiltrates. Infiltrating water may leach
pollutants from the former impoundment or from the fill material.
This source of pollution can be controlled by means of adequate
abandonment procedures.
The following regulations were developed with the above thoughts in
mind. It is obvious that the regulations provided cannot solve all of
the problems that might arise from the use of holding ponds and lagoons,
Individual parts along with various modifications can be developed,
however, into realistic management tools for the protection of ground
- IV- 18 -
-------
water resources in any geohydrologic situation. Holding ponds and
lagoons can be either prohibited, or allowed through a permit procedure.
A public policy statement should be developed that discourages their
use, but if the proposed system is technically and economically
feasible and other realistic methods are not, they may be advisable,
at least temporarily. As an additional safeguard, the agency could
require treatment prior to placement of waste in the holding structures,
REGULATIONS
1. Every public or private agency or individual owning, construc-
ting, or utilizing a holding pond or lagoon for the storage of
waste substances that contain water soluble materials shall
obtain a permit from the appropriate agency.
2. The term of the permit shall be for a maximum period of
year(s), subject to renewal.
3. The permit application shall contain an economic and environ-
mental analysis of the proposed system, including the methods
of construction and maintenance, type and quantity of waste
(including chemical, physical, and biological properties),
proposed duration of use of the site, technical justification
for the use of the proposed system in contrast to other dis-
posal or storage techniques, and a description of the entire
waste handling and disposal system.
4. The permit application shall include a complete and detailed
description of the hydrology, geology, and soils at the proposed
site. This shall include, but not be limited to, a description
- IV-19 -
-------
of regional and local rock types and structural conditions, such
as faulting, folding, jointing, etc.; type and thickness of
materials overlying bedrock, including soil description; per-
meability and percolation rates of soils; soil ion exchange
capacity; gradation analyses to a depth of 5 feet below the
lowest proposed fill; and other existing conditions such as may
be present at the site. A cored soil sample shall be taken and
permanently retained to show initial soil characteristics.
5. The permit application shall identify the location of the pro-
posed holding pond or lagoon on the latest available topographic
quadrangle map or maps of the United States Geological Survey
covering the site, on a scale of 1:24,000. If no such maps are
available, equivalent alternatives shall be supplied with the
application.
6. The permit application shall include a detailed map of the site
and surrounding area within one-half mile in all directions,
on a scale of one inch equals 200 feet, or larger, showing:
(a) topography, with a contour interval not exceeding
5 feet,
(b) detailed survey boundaries and dimensions of the proposed
project,
(c) cultural features, streams, springs, sinkholes, swamps,
mines, quarries, pits, and other natural and man-made
features as may be pertinent to ground water quality,
(d) roads, pipelines, power lines,
(e) existing wells, test borings, excavations, percolation
test sites, etc.,
- IV-20 -
-------
(£) locations of proposed monitoring wells,
(g) details of ground water flow,
(h) location and thickness of glacial, colluvial, alluvial
and lacustrine deposits,
(i) depth to bedrock, or outcrops, and lithology; depth to
highest impermeable clay,
(j) faults, lineaments, fracture traces, joints.
7. Samples of ground water, in a number prescribed by the permitting
agency, shall be collected for background information at the
proposed holding pond or lagoon site and analyzed chemically by
a qualified laboratory prior to issuance of a permit. The
analysis shall include, but not be limited to, identification of
specific elements, chemicals, and compounds that are present or
presumed to be present in the material to be stored in the
structure.
8. No permit shall be issued that will result in the indigenous
ground water quality exceeding the chemical levels for raw or
untreated drinking water supply sources as specified in the
National Drinking Water Standards, including future additions
and modifications. If the indigenous quality exceeds the
recommended level or levels for drinking water, the proposed
methods shall not increase the naturally existing levels.
9. A permit shall not be issued if the agency determines the
information supplied indicates any hazard to the public interest.
10. A holding pond or lagoon (other than a municipal sewage lagoon)
may be used only for the temporary storage of liquid, semi-liquid,
or water soluble solid material.
- IV-21 -
-------
11. Holding ponds and lagoons used for the storage of waste sub-
stances that contain water soluble materials are prohibited
unless they are properly lined with leak proof material. The
lining material must consist of heavy gauge plastic, compacted
clay, or similar impermeable material.
12. If a clay lining is used in a holding pond or lagoon, it shall
be designed in accordance with the latest technology, including
consideration of the thickness, permeability, ion-exchange
capacity, and life of the liner, as well as the type of waste
and waste loading.
13. Fluids to be discharged into e holding pond or lagoon shall be
pre-treated to remove any toxic or hazardous materials.
14. In order for a permit to be issued, an embankment or barrier that
will serve as a retaining wall must surround the proposed
structure. The purpose of the retaining wall is to prohibit
inflow or outflow of surface water to or from the site. The
retaining wall shall be of sufficient height to contain the
materials involved and in addition, prevent submergence during
the 100-year flood. The lagoon side of the retaining wall and
the upper surface shall be protected by an impermeable liner,
such as heavy gauge plastic sheeting. The level of fluid in the
holding pond or lagoon shall not rise above the ground surface
at any time.
15. Failure to maintain the retaining wall and liner shall be
ground for revocation or suspension of the permit.
16. Pipes of any kind that penetrate or partially penetrate the
retaining wall, which would permit fluids to leak from the im-
- IV-22 -
-------
poundment, are prohibited, except where the fluids would flow
into an overflow pit or facilities of equal construction
designed to collect the overflow.
17. The construction of a holding pond or lagoon over field drainage
tile is prohibited.
18. A holding pond or lagoon shall not be installed within the area
of any floodplain encompassed by a 100-year flood.
19. A monitoring well network shall be established at each holding
pond or lagoon, to assure compliance with regulations and permit.
conditions. The number and location of wells shall be prescribed
by the agency based upon the size and volume of the holding pond
or lagoon and the subsurface hydrologic characteristics. The
wells shall be located strategically to provide maximum informa-
tion, but in any case within feet of the holding pond or
lagoon in the regional down gradient direction.
20. Samples of ground water shall be collected from the monitoring
wells at regular intervals, not to exceed six months. Each
sample shall be chemically analyzed by a qualified laboratory.
The analysis shall include, but not be limited to, identification
of specific chemicals, elements, and compounds that are present
in the substances stored in the adjacent holding pond or lagoon,
as specified in the permit procedure.
21. If specific chemicals, elements, or compounds known to be pre-
sent in the holding pond or lagoon appear in the monitoring
well samples at concentrations significantly exceeding the back-
ground concentration in the adjacent ground water, the holding
pond or lagoon operation shall cease or alternative containment
- IV-23 -
-------
procedures shall be initiated. The structure shall not be used
until the repairs are completed and so certified by the operator.
Within thirty (30) days, the owner or operator of the structure
shall be required, at his own expense, to initiate action to
return the polluted ground water to its original chemical,
physical, and biological condition. The renovation work shall be
completed within a time deemed appropriate by the agency.
22. The permit application shall be accompanied by a proposed plan
or alternative plans of action to be followed in the event the
proposed facility results in ground water pollution.
23. The operator of the holding pond or lagoon shall make an annual
report to the agency on the condition of the facility. The
agency may require additional reporting.
24. The permit application shall be accompanied by a performance
bond, the amount of which is based upon the type, concentration,
toxicity, and volume of materials to be stored.
25. The bond, if forfeited, will be used to restore the site. In
the event of forfeiture of bond, the operator will not be
eligible for future permits.
26. When a holding pond or lagoon is abandoned, the retaining walls
shall be removed and the excavation filled with compacted fill
material. The compacted fill shall be mounded at least feet
above the adjacent land surface, and in such a manner that with
future subsidence and compaction a mound will remain. The purpose
of the mound is to reduce the collection of precipitation, and
resultant infiltration at the site.
- IV-24 -
-------
27. An abandoned and filled holding pond or lagoon shall be surrounded
by a drainage system, such as a ditch or drainage tile, so that
surface runoff will not flow through the site. The ditch shall
be constructed in such a manner that surface runoff will flow to
adjacent drainage systems.
28. Following abandonment of the pit of the holding pond or lagoon
and its subsequent filling, compaction, and drainage, and prior
to the release of the bond, the site shall be inspected and
approved by the agency.
3. WATER AND WASTE WATER SLUDGES AND EFFLUENTS
Regulations for Utilization and Disposal in Order to Protect
Ground Water
There are three primary sources of significant quantities of water and
waste water sludges and effluents. These are sludges resulting from
municipal water treatment plants; sludges from municipal sewage treat-
ment plants and processes; and industrial sludges.
Historically water treatment plant sludges which are predominantly
lime magnesium residues resulting from water softening processes, have
been discharged directly to surface streams and lakes. Recent restric-
tions upon this discharge have resulted in broad consideration of
technological and economic alternatives. Most often, at present, the
lime sludges are stored in lagoons from which the liquid effluent is
decanted or evaporated. When the lagoons are filled, the sludge is
allowed to &ir dry, and is ultimately hauled to landfill sites.
- IV-25 -
-------
Since the moisture content of this air-dried sludge generally exceeds
50 per cent, it is difficult and expensive to haul, unsuitable for
spreading, and difficult to utilize as landfill. Sludges high in
magnesium content create even greater problems due to their tendency to
retain even more moisture.
By utilizing vacuum filtration or centrifuge techniques it is possible
to reduce the water content of the sludge to 10 to 20 per cent, making
the sludge more easily utilized but at substantial expense. By firing,
or recalcination, of lime rich sludge the resultant product, calcium
oxide or "quicklime", can be reused in the water softening process,
or utilized as agricultural lime. This procedure is of marginal value
both economically and environmentally for several reasons that cannot
be elaborated upon at this time. In any event, recalcination is not
effective where the magnesium content of the sludge is high.
Spray irrigation and spreading or overland techniques are effective
means of water treatment sludge disposal and utilization. They appear
to be particularly appropriate when combined with sewage sludges and
utilized for soil reclamation in areas such as strip mines. The pro-
posed regulations provide for this mode of utilization.
Sewage sludges are commonly stored by lagooning, with the effluent
discharged to surface streams. When the lagoons are full the sludge
is air dried, and then hauled to waste in a landfill. As with the
lime sludges, the solids content of the sludge can be increased by
- IV-26 -
-------
heat drying, vacuum filtration, and similar means. These make the
sludge roore amenable to utilization as landfill.
Sewage sludges that are most frequently to be dealt with are the
residues of secondary treatment processes. As with other residual
sludges, they must ke stabilized, either chemically or biologically,
prior to disposal.
Alternative methods involving incineration and land spreading of
various types are being utilized with increasing frequency. Inciner-
ation reduces the quantity of the sludge that must be disposed, to
three to five per cent of the initial sludge volume. This, of course,
reduces problems of hauling and disposal. In addition, the ash is
biologically inert, which makes it a very suitable landfill material.
The most serious problems associated with incineration are cost and
air pollution.
Land spreading can be utilized either with or without simultaneous
application of effluent. Agricultural benefits are apparently greater
when both stabilized sludge and effluent are applied. Land application
techniques usually involve either irrigation by spray or surface
application; overland flow by spray application; or infiltration
percolation by means of spreading basin application. (USEPA, March
1974, Alternative Waste Management Technique for Best Practicable
Waste Treatment.)
- IV-27 -
-------
The advantages of land application, in addition to disposal, are,
under proper circumstances: effective advanced treatment, with a
high level of removal of nutrients, BOD bacteria and suspended solids;
crop fertilization; and raising of ground water levels. Disadvantages
include: potential ground water pollution; nitrate build-up in the
soils; and possible concentration of toxic elements and compounds in
the crops which may be returned directly to the food chain.
Traditionally the treatment of industrial wastes has involved only
lagoons, sedimentation basins, and "evaporation" ponds. The effluent
from these ponds, usually of very unsatisfactory quality, have in many
instances infiltrated into the local ground water, as well as dis-
charged into local streams directly. The polluted ground water
continues to discharge into the stream, but in a diffuse manner which
is often very difficult to identify. Among the worst offenders in the
past have been the chemical industry, paper industry, metal processing
industry, and food processors.
For the most part industrial wastes are treatable by technology similar
to that of the public sewage treatment plants. Often the treatment is
relatively simpler, since the waste product is specific, as compared
to the broad range of substances treated in a public facility.
The variables that must be evaluated in making a determination of the
appropriate technology that should be applied in a particular circum-
stance are numerous. The factors that must be considered include:
the chemical and biological nature of the water and waste water that
- IV-28 -
-------
is to be treated; climatic factors of temperature and rainfall;
geologic factors of soils and types of bedrock; hydrology and topo-
graphy; and demographic and sociological factors of population,
economics, land availability, and cultural features. Each of these
factors involves a wide range of variable conditions, all of which
cannot be rigorously defined in a set of detailed and specific
regulations.
As a consequence it is considered that regulations necessary to protect
ground water must be directed toward procedure and performance, rather
than being detailed, specific standards, with a few exceptions. This
necessitates the establishment cf a permit system for the disposal
or utilization of all municipal and industrial sludges and related
effluents.
It is recognized that there is some redundancy or overlap between these
regulations and some others. This is particularly the case with the
use of holding ponds and lagoons. However, the universality of prob-
lems with the storage, utilization, and disposal of sludges, and
the specificity of the problems related to them is considered to be
adequate justification for treating these separately herein.
REGULATIONS
1. Every public or private agency or individual utilizing or dis-
posing of water treatment or waste water treatment sludges shall
obtain a permit from the supervising state agency.
- IV-29 -
-------
2. The term of the permit shall extend for the effective life of the
proposed facility. The permit may be revoked at any time by the
issuing agency for violation of a regulation or a condition of
the permit.
3. The permit application shall contain an economic and environmental
analysis of the proposed system, including a description of the
biological and chemical character of the sludge and effluent;
proposed duration of use of the site; a description of the entire
waste handling and disposal system; and comparative consideration
of one or more alternative solutions.
4. The permit application shall contain a complete end. detailed
description of the geology, hydrology, and soils at the proposed
site. This shall include, but not be limited to, a description
of regional and local rock types and structural conditions, such
as faulting, folding, jointing, etc.; type and thickness of
materials overlying bedrock, including soil classification; per-
meability and percolation rates of soils; soil ion exchange
capacity; gradation analyses to a depth of 5 feet below the
lowest proposed fill; and other existing conditions such as may
be present at the site. A cored soil sample shall be taken and
permanently retained to show initial soil characteristics.
5. The permit application shall include a detailed map of the site
and surrounding area within one-half mile in all directions, on
a scale of one inch equals 200 feet, or larger, showing:
(a) topography, with a contour interval not exceeding 5 feet,
(b) detailed survey boundaries and dimensions of the proposed
project,
- IV-30 -
-------
(c) cultural features, streams, springs, sinkholes, swamps,
mines, quarries, pits, and other natural and man-made
features as may be pertinent to ground water quality,
(d) roads, pipelines, power lines,
(e) existing wells, test borings, excavations, percolation test
sites, etc.,
(f) location of proposed monitoring wells,
(g) details of ground water flow,
(h) location and thickness of glacial, colluvial, alluvial,
and lacustrine deposits,
(i) depth to bedrock, or outcrops, and lithology; depth to
highest impermeable clay,
(j) faults, lineaments, fracture traces, joints.
6. Samples of ground water, in a number prescribed by the permitting
agency, shall be collected for background information at the
proposed site and analyzed chemically by a qualified laboratory
prior to issuance of a permit. The analysis shall include, but
not be limited to, identification of specific elements, chemicals,
and compounds that are present cr presumed to be present in the
sludge and effluent.
7. No permit shall be issued that will result in the indigenous
ground water quality exceeding the chemical or pesticide levels
for raw or untreated drinking water supply sources as specified in
the National Drinking Water Standards, including future additions
and modifications. If the indigenous quality exceeds the recom-
mended level or levels for drinking water, the proposed disposal
or utilization method shall not increase the naturally existing
- IV-31 -
-------
levels. If there is any projected deterioration of indigenous
water quality the disposal proposed shall be based upon the best
available technology.
8. A permit shall not be issued if the permitting agency determines
the information supplied indicates any hazard to the public
interest.
9. A minimum of two monitoring wells shall be established in a down
gradient (water table or piezometric surface) position from the
proposed disposal site. These wells shall be completed so as to
provide samples from that portion of the aquifer judged most
likely to receive contamination from the disposal site, usually
the upper 10 feet of the aquifer.
A regular monitoring program shall be established, with sampled
collected at least quarterly, and analyzed for critical components,
The monitoring wells shall be maintained for the life of the la-
goon or pond, plus a minimum of three years.
An additional monitor well shall be installed and maintained in
such a location as to provide continuing data on background
ground water quality.
Seasonal water table fluctuations shall be determined prior to
permit approval. The maximum water table elevation shall not be
within 5 feet of the lowest elevation of the proposed disposal
site, unless it can be demonstrated that the operation proposed
will not result in ground water of unacceptable quality, i.e.,
exceed standards.
- IV-32 -
-------
10. The permit application shall be accompanied by a proposed plan
or alternative plans of action to be followed in the event the
proposed facility results in ground water pollution. This shall
include cessation of operation until the necessary corrections
are completed.
11. No disposal site for sludges and effluents shall be installed
within the area of any floodplain encompassed by a 100-year flood.
Within any watershed the proposed site for disposal shall be pro-
tected from flooding created by the record 100-year storm.
12. For the following disposal and utilization techniques the infor-
mation indicated shall be included in the permit application.
Where appropriate, specific procedures and regulations are in-
cluded and must be observed by the permit holder. It is strongly
suggested that qualified experts in civil sanitary engineering,
soils engineering, geology, and ground and surface water hydrology
be utilized to supply the required data, and advise regarding the
regulatory procedures:
A. Holding Ponds and Lagoons (temporary storage only)
(1) Type of liner. If the proposed liner is of an impervious
material such as PVC plastic, a complete description of
the weight and thickness of the liner, the method of
installation, and the projected life of the installation
shall be supplied.
If a clay liner is to be used, the effective life of
the liner, and the quality and quantity of contaminants
- IV-33'-
-------
expected to penetrate the liner shall be determined.
This determination shall involve the type and thickness
of clay, its permeability, exchange capacity and such
other factors as may be required to make this a valid
determination.
With any design of lining material, the data shall
clearly indicate that the effect of any leakage from the
storage site shall not cause the ground water quality
to exceed the previously specified water quality
standards.
B. Landfill of Sludge and Ash (permanent)
(1) The design of the landfill may be based upon either a
requirement for collection and treatment of leachate,
as with an underdrain system or peripheral drainage
system, or a detailed evaluation indicating that the
leachate will have no detrimental effect upon the
naturally occurring ground water, in excess of National
Drinking Water Standards.
It is recognized that in some instances the effect of
leachate can be beneficial rather than detrimental, not
only to existing ground water but also to biotic forms.
This is particularly evident in some agricultural appli-
cations and in strip mine reclamation. In all instances
the permit application shall contain a detailed analysis
of existing conditions and projection of the changes
anticipated as a result of the proposed project. It
shall also establish monitoring procedures adequate to
- IV-34 -
-------
test the accuracy of the projections after the proposed
project is in construction and operation.
(2) Landfilling may be conducted by cellular containment,
or by burial in layers sufficiently thin to permit
continuous daily cover and compaction.
(3) Sewage sludges that are filled in thin layers shall be
covered and compacted daily. If filling is by the
cellular method the cell shall be sized such that all
sludge within each cell can be covered weekly. If odors
from the site become objectionable beyond the boundaries
of the disposal site, covering shall be conducted
continuously, and daily cover shall be required.
(4) Water treatment sludges need not be covered until
filling of the site is complete, unless odors develop
from the site that are objectionable beyond the
boundaries of the disposal site. In this event the
water treatment sludge shall be covered as with sew&ge
sludge.
(5) Industrial sludges shall be evaluated individually on
the basis of their specific objectionable characteris-
tics. Any time they become offensive by odor to sur-
rounding properties the material being disposed shall
be treated as sewage sludge.
(6) The permit application shall provide for the restoration
of the site upon completion of the landfill project.
This restoration plan shall include: final grading of
the site on two-foot contour interval; vegetative cover,
- IV-35 -
-------
type and location; quantity, quality, and location of
leachate that will continue to discharge from site;
provision for continued monitoring, and treatment of
leachate, if required.
Land Application Techniques - Irrigation, Overland Flow,
Infiltration/Percolation and Sludge Spreading
(1) In designing land application techniques the following
(adopted from the Pennsylvania Department of Environ-
mental Resources, Bureau of Water Quality Management,
Publication No. 31) shall govern design criteria:
(a) TREATMENT:
All wastes must be made amenable to treatment by
the earth material prior to application. In
general, the equivalent of secondary treatment will
be required for all organic waste prior to spraying.
Higher degrees of treatment or lower hydraulic
loading may be required of wastes having high BOD
or COD concentrations. Care should be taken to
insure that wastes containing greases and emulsions
which can clog the soils and coat vegetation, pre-
venting adequate evapotranspiration, are not dis-
charged to the spray irrigation field. Wastes
which are toxic to vegetative cover or remain toxic
in the environment or are non-biodegradable or non-
exchangeable with the soil materials will not be
acceptable for spray irrigation. All wastes con-
taining sewage or pathogenic organisms must be
disinfected prior to spraying.
- IV-36 -
-------
(b) STORAGE:
Storage will have to be provided where the irriga-
tion facilities are not designed to handle surge
flows or to operate in winter conditions. The size
of the storage facility will depend on the volume
of flow, temperature of the effluent, design of
the disposal field and expected low temperature in
the area. Storage facilities must be designed to
handle the maximum reasonable variation in flow.
These facilities are considered part of the waste
treatment system and must be included in the permit
application and, where applicable, must meet all
department regulations with respect to impoundments
(lagoons).
(c) SCREENING:
Screening should be provided in all cases where
solids are expected. The screen should be designed
to prevent clogging of the nozzles. The applicant
must agree to establish e procedure of inspecting
and cleaning the sprinklers on a routine basis.
Where a solid build-up on the field may become a
problem, other solid removal devices should be
considered or a plan presented for incorporating
the solids into the soils. Special care must be
taken with greases and other liquids which can pass
through the system and coagulate on the soils. The
disposal of these substances through spray irri-
- IV-37 -
-------
gation is very severely limited by the soil's
ability to renovate the pollutants.
(d) CONTROLS:
Sufficient controls should be provided to indicate
any malfunction of the disposal system, and to
allow the field operation to be varied with ease.
The minimum control system which will be allowed
is a pressure gauge. An allowable variance of
head will have to be established around the normal
operating head.
(e) PIPING:
The piping should be so arranged as to allow the
irrigated sections to be varied easily. Stationary
(solid-set) systems are much preferred, but if a
movable system is proposed, one main header must be
provided with individual connections for each field
section and sufficient numbers of spare equipment
must be available to insure non-interrupted irri-
gation. Where pipe drains are necessary (partic-
ularly where winter operation is anticipated),
the drains must be so arranged as to discharge only
within the spray field or to return the effluent
to a storage facility.
(f) SPRINKLERS:
Sprinklers should be elevated on risers high enough
to insure uniform distribution with the lowest pos-
sible trajectory. They must be clear of vegetation
- IV-38 -
-------
and snow. Experience has shown that high, easily
visible sprinklers are also less susceptible to
destruction by farm machinery. The selection of
sprinkler heads depends on the application rate,
the design and distribution diameter, and the spac-
ing of the sprinkler heads. They must be so located
as to give a non-irrigated buffer zone around the
irrigated area to protect against runoff. Design
of the buffer zone should also consider wind trans-
port of the waste water and odors. The revolving
kicker-type sprinkler is recommended. Others will
be accepted only upon submission of information
showing satisfactory distribution patterns and
operational ability during freezing temperatures
for winter systems.
(g) DISTRIBUTION DIAMETER:
This must be selected to allow even distribution.
It is dependent on the type of vegetation sprayed
and is severely affected by winds and topography.
The diameter should not exceed 140 feet on any
type application. Generally smaller diameters are
desirable in wooded areas and steeper slopes.
Large distribution diameters usually involve higher
trajectories and greater distortion of the distri-
bution pattern by winds.
(h) TYPE SPACING:
The spacing must be selected to prevent overloading
- IV-39 -
-------
any part of the field. A uniform distribution of
the effluent is usually most satisfactory, and will
require overlapping of the spray stream in most
areas. Spacings used depend on the distribution
pattern of the individual sprinklers, slope, wind,
and type of vegetative cover.
(i) APPLICATION RATE:
The hydraulic application rate must be selected to
not exceed the infiltration capacity of the soil.
The waste load applied must be adjusted to assure
proper residency within the soil mantle at the
hydraulic loading rate in order to achieve the
desired degree of treatment. Proposed application
rates will not be accepted without substantiating
data. Application rates in excess of 1/4 inch per
hour and 2 inches per week for each section of the
field will be considered only under extremely
extenuating circumstances supported by detailed
substantiating data. Under usual conditions the
ground water mound which will be built by the
added infiltration should not reach within 10
feet of the ground surface. For municipal/domestic
type sewage systems it will usually be advantageous
to lay out the field in seven lines or sections to
facilitate daily rotation of the irrigated sections.
For industrial plants the number of sections is usu-
ally determined by the number of working days or
shifts.
- IV-40 -
-------
(j) Spray irrigation may be considered an all-season
operation only in areas kept in permanent vegeta-
tion, preferably in established forest cover.
Where sub-freezing operation is anticipated, drains
to prevent pipe freezing should be installed and
adequate temporary storage should be provided for
flows that cannot be irrigated during severe weather
conditions. Pipe drains must discharge only to the
permitted spray field or to storage facilities.
Dikes or other controls for runoff from ice build-
ups must be included in the plans.
Wind is also a consideration in some sections.
Where strong prevailing winds are experienced a
provision should be made for a windbreak or adequate
buffer zone to protect downwind adjacent land usage.
The trajectory of the spray should be kept as low
as possible since wind velocity increases rapidly
with height. Wind is also a serious consideration
in distribution system design and location for
uniform application of waste water.
(k) AGRICULTURAL PRACTICE:
Idle fields, forested areas, grasslands, and
cultivated crop areas are acceptable for spray
irrigation. The choice of vegetative cover is
important both to waste renovation and water
utilization through evapotranspiration. Reed
canary grass has been particularly good for many
- IV-41 -
-------
sites because of its high tolerance for wet condi-
tions end low maintenance, needing only occasional
mowing. There are ro restraints on the choice of
vegetation, except that the vegetative cover should
provide high evapotranspiration and prevent erosion
from runoff. When agricultural use of the crop is
anticipated, the species to be used and the har-
vesting frequency must be indicated. Certain crops
are tolerable of wet conditions only during portions
of their life span and irrigation on the barren
field is unacceptable.
Acceptable slopes for the field are closely related
to the agricultural practices intended. Most
standard agricultural practices are acceptable for
spray irrigation fields with slopes up to a maxi-
mum inclination of 4 per cent. Slopes on sodded
fields are limited to 8 per cent. Forested slopes
are limited to 8 per cent for year-round operation,
but in some seasonal operations slopes up to 14
per cent may be acceptable.
Wastes high in nitrogen will require special care
of the spray field. Nitrogen is concentrated in
the growing vegetation and may build up to toxic
levels in the field if the vegetation is not cut
and physically removed. All fields should be
mowed and the crop residue removed at least once
a year. Those receiving high nitrogen loading will
- IV-42 -
-------
require more frequent cropping end removal. Mowing
and removal of the crop en grassland areas will
maintain better vegetative cover and improve the
renovation capacity of the site for nitrogen and
phosphorus.
If the spray field will be routinely disrupted for
any reason (such as establishing or reestablishing
a crop or cover, harvesting, field maintenance, or
interment of solids) the operator must provide
additional land, storage, or otherwise show in
the design report that the remaining field has
adequate capacity for the increased loading during
the interim period. This is especially important
where agricultural crops are to be grown on the
spray field.
(1) ADJACENT LAND USE:
Adjacent land must be considered as it may be
affected by blowing spray, odor, or other aspects
of spraying. Where doir.estic housing is one of the
neighboring land uses, the plans should include
screen barriers or buffer zones to prevent blowing
spray from entering residential land. Particular
attention should be paid to adjacent ground water
users, assuring that downgradient users of ground
water have adequate protection or monitoring to
prevent the use of any ground water which may be-
come polluted. The present and anticipated use
- IV-43 -
-------
(including expansion of the spray fields) of
adjoining land within 200 feet of the spray field
should be considered and entered in the design
report.
(2) Stabilized sludge and associated effluents may be applied
by spray, ridge and furrow or other procedures, following
the same general design requirements as spray irrigation,
as defined under the preceding section.
(3) Where the site is to be utilized for agricultural crops
the permit application shall also include the following
information:
(a) type of crops to be utilized,
(b) estimation of concentration of heavy minerals,
nitrates, or other potentially harmful constituents
anticipated in the planned crops,
(c) method of utilizing or disposing of crops.
(4) The permit application shall include the proposed loading
rates of organic pollutants, including pesticides and
pathogenic materials, heavy metals, dissolved salts,
nitrates, and any other polluting materials that iray
have an adverse effect on the soils, crops, or ground
water quality.
The permit application shall also project the effect,
or tuild-up, that will result in the soils, crops, or
ground water quality.
The monitoring program that is submitted with the permit
application shall be adequate to test the eccuracy of
- IV-44 -
-------
the projection of these changes. In the event monitor-
ing indicates the projections were not reasonably
accurate, the permit shall be reviewed, and revoked,
unless it can be established that the continued oper-
ation of the system will not result in deterioration of
the ground water quality in excess of National Drinking
Water Standards.
13. No new permit shall be issued to any operator who is in current
violation of any permit condition or regulation.
4. WASTEPILES AND STOCKPILES
Regulations for the Protection of Ground Water
Many waste materials are piled on the ground and abandoned, or stored
to await final disposal. Nearly all wastepiles are uncovered and
exposed to the atmosphere and precipitation, thus allowing production
of leachate that may flow over the land or infiltrate. Unregulated
wastepiles that contain pollutants can not only cause ground water
pollution, but produce offensive odors and breed insects and other
disease-carrying or disease-producing organisms.
The infiltration of water soluble substances in milling or refining
wastes has caused ground water pollution. Likewise, a severe ground
water quality problem arose after a soil saturated with chemical wastes
was used for road grade material. The highly soluble organic wastes
in the soil infiltrated, grossly polluting a nearby well.
- IV-45 -
-------
Stockpiling of raw materials or products may inadvertently lead to
ground water pollution. Many of these valuable resources may contain
materials that to varying degrees are water soluble. Prime examples
of stockpiles that have caused ground water pollution include salt for
winter road spreading, manure for fertilizer, and certain ores.
In many instances, it is possible to control or reduce ground water
pollution from wastepiles and stockpiles by providing facilities to
alleviate or reduce infiltration and control surface runoff. There is
such a wide variety of materials and methods used for outside stock-
piling, and to a lesser extent waste disposal, that a great number of
regulations will need to be developed for specific situations. All
encompassing regulations are beyond the scope of this document and are
left to the discretion of the agency for development.
REGULATIONS
1. Every public or private egency or individual that has or intends
to have a wastepile (stockpile) of any material containing water
soluble or other substances that are likely to be a source of
ground water pollution shall obtain a permit from the agency.
The term of the permit shall be three (3) years subject to
renewal.
2. The application for a permit shall include a map cr aerial photo-
graph of the site at an appropriate scale, and describe the pur-
pose and location of the wastepile (stockpile) site, geologic and
hydrologic description of the proposed site (including rock types,
- IV-46 -
-------
permeability, infiltration rates, description of bore hole used
for examination, depth to water table, and quality of the under-
lying ground water), type and quantity cf waste (including
chemical analysis, and physical and biologic properties), proposed
duration of use of the site, technical justification for the use
of the proposed system in contrast to other disposal and storage
techniques, and e-bandonment procedures.
3. Samples of ground water, the number of which shall be prescribed
by the permitting agency, shall be collected for background in-
formation at the proposed wastepile (stockpile) site and analyzed
chemically by a qualified laboratory prior to the issuance of a
permit. The analysis shall include, but not be limited to,
identification of specific elements, chemicals, and compounds
that are present, or may reasonably be presumed to be present in
the material to be stored in the wastepile (stockpile).
4. No permit shall be issued that will result in the indigenous
ground water quality exceeding the chemical or pesticide levels
for raw or untreated drinking water supply sources as specified
in the National Drinking Water Standards, including future addi-
tions and modifications.
5. Disposal of waste materials on the land surface is prohibited,
unless exempted. Exemptions will be automatically granted for
relatively inert substances as follows: sand and gravel, quarried
stone (others as appropriate).
6. Wastepiles that contain water soluble materials are prohibited
unless the leachate is collected and treated in a manner to meet
the conditions of the permit.
- IV-47 -
-------
7. Stockpiled material containing substances that are likely to be
a source of ground water pollution shall be placed on a surface
that prohibits or significantly retards infiltration.
8. Stockpiles of materials containing substances that are likely to
be a source of ground water pollution may not be stored in an
unprotected condition. The stockpile must be covered by an
impermeable membrane or placed in a storage facility.
9. An applicant can comply with this regulation by submitting de-
tailed construction plans for a covered, enclosed, or containerized
nonpermanent facility, which indicates, beyond a reasonable doubt,
that the accumulative effects of the operation are such that no
leachate is generated.
10. In order for a permit to be issued, an embankment or barrier that
will serve as a retaining wall must surround the proposed struc-
ture. The purpose of the retaining wall is to prohibit inflow or
outflow of surface water to or from the site. The retaining wall
must be a minimum of feet higher than the surrounding land
surface. The lagoon side of the retaining wall and the upper
surface shall be protected by an impermeable liner, such as
heavy gauge plastic sheeting. The level of fluid in the holding
pond or lagoon shall not rise above the ground surface at any
time. Failure to maintain the retaining wall and liner will
result in revocation of the permit.
11. Wastepiles (stockpiles) within the area of any floodplain covered
by a 100-year flood are prohibited.
12. The permit application shall include emergency procedures that
will be followed in the event ground water pollution occurs.
- IV-48 -
-------
These shall include cessation of operation until the necessary
corrections are completed.
13. A monitoring well network is required at each disposal site to
assure compliance with the discharge permit. The number of wells
required, which depends on the size and volume of the wastepile
(stockpile) and the subsurface hydrologic characteristics, shall
be proposed by the applicant for approval by the agency. The
wells shall be located strategically to provide maximum informa-
tion, but in any case within feet of the wastepile (stock-
pile) in the downgradient direction.
14. Samples of ground water shall be collected from the monitoring
wells at intervals not to exceed six months. Each sample shall
be chemically analyzed by a qualified laboratory. The analysis
shall include, but not be limited to, identification of specific
elements and compounds that are present in the substances stored
in the adjacent wastepile (stockpile).
15. In any area where ground water pollution is suspected, due to
poor or inadequate operations, or any cause, the agency may re-
quire the operator to install additional monitoring wells.
16. If specific elements, chemicals, or compounds known to be present
in the wastepile (stockpile) appear in the monitoring well samples
at concentrations greater than those in the adjacent ground water
before the operation began, the operation shall cease or alter-
native containment initiated. Within 30 days, the owner or
operator of the wastepile (stockpile) shall be required to initi-
ate action, at his own expense, based on plans submitted to and
approved by the agency, to return the polluted ground water to
- IV-49 -
-------
its original chemical, physical, and biological condition. The
renovation work shall be completed within a time deemed appro-
priate by the agency.
17. If the wastepile (stockpile) is found to be discharging polluting
fluid to the ground water, corrective action shall be taken. The
agency may require the owner or operator of the wastepile (stock-
pile) to move it to an area which will meet the requirements of
the permit.
18. The permit application shall be accompanied by a performance bond,
the amount of which will be determined by the type, concentration,
toxicity, and volume of materials to be contained in the wastepile
(stockpile).
19. Following abandonment of a wastepile (stockpile) and prior to the
release of the bond, the site shall be covered with compacted clay,
seeded, and properly drained, and the site inspected by the agency.
20. The bond, if forfeited, will be used to restore the site. In the
event of forfeiture of bond, the operator will not be eligible
for future permits.
5. ANIMAL FEEDLOTS
Regulations for the Protection of Ground Water
All participating states are required to have a permit system to meet
NPDES requirements, which is surface water oriented. The following
regulations are mainly for the protection of ground water. A number of
states already have adequate administrative controls on animal feedlots
and dairy farms. Many of these contain criteria similar to those of
- IV-50 -
-------
the Council of State Government's model Confined Animal Feeding Act.
In general, existing rules and regulations prescribe various permit
procedures and pay particular attention to pollution of surface water
by feedlot runoff. The model act calls for a permit, the application
for which requires a considerable amount of information, including the
number of livestock and poultry, and maps or aerial photographs show-
ing land use and cultural features, soil characteristics, topography,
drainage pattern, depth to the water table, and the location of the
proposed confined feedlot relative to receiving waters. It prohibits
operations within specified distances of water courses, on floodplains,
or within s.pecified distances of parks, private property, or ten or
more private residences.
In general, most regulations are written in broad language permitting
a fairly wide latitude in interpretation. For example, "the storage
of animal feedlot wastes is required to be conducted in such a manner
as to prevent the creation of a potential pollution hazard to land, air,
or water, and to minimize generation of objectionable odors and the
accumulation of insects or other potential disease vectors". Commonly,
the soil is required to be relatively impermeable in order to prohibit
infiltration of pollutants. Requirements generally call for dikes or
curbs of sufficient size to prevent entry of runoff from surrounding
storage areas. Generally, regulations prohibit the storage of unpro-
cessed wastes for more than one year. The use of waste-storage
facilities as a means for permanent disposal of dead animals is pro-
hibited.
- IV-51 -
-------
There is no question that infiltration of animal feedlot wastes can
cause substantial ground water quality problems, although case histories
are not well documented. Infiltration of these wastes can lead to
excessive concentrations of nitrate, a health hazard, as well as
chloride, organic carbon, and ammonia, in addition to bacteria. For-
tunately, the unsaturated zone with its high sorption, filtration, and
oxidizing potential, attenuates many, but certainly not all, of the
waste substances that are potential ground water pollutants. For
example, both nitrate and chloride are highly mobile and are not re-
moved from the ground water. The potential for pollution decreases
with increasing depth to the water table, where there is sufficient
clay to serve as retention and sorption media, where the water table
gradient, especially during pumping, is away from wells, and where
there is a great distance between wells and deposits of wastes.
In order to reduce ground water pollution from confined feedlots an
application for a permit to construct or modify existing feedlot oper-
ations should include, in addition to the normal requirements, data on
soil type, permeability, land slope, depth to water table, ground water
quality data, and detailed plans for the construction, storage, treat-
ment, and disposal of wastes. Holding ponds or disposal facilities
should also be provided in order to collect polluted drainage where
large accumulations of manure are stored during winter months but they
should be constructed, operated, and maintained in a manner that will
not contribute to ground water pollution. In certain hydrologic situ-
ations, they should be lined. Furthermore, the operation plan should
include alternate storage techniques or methods that would be used to
- IV-52 -
-------
handle overflow amounts and to provide for annual removal of accumu-
lated solids. Regulations that could be used in the vicinity of feed-
lots, and in particular storage facilities, are found elsewhere in
this manual.
REGULATIONS
1. Every public or private agency or individual that has or intends
to have a feedlot for animals, the cumulative number of which
exceeds the acceptable limit as established by the responsible
State agency, shall obtain a permit.
2. The term of the permit shall be for a period of year(s),
subject to renewal.
3. Manure end polluted surface runoff shall be stored, collected,
and treated in such a manner so as to minimize infiltration of
these wastes to the water table.
4. Where practical, a relatively impermeable surface should form
the floor of the feedlot. The soil manure interface should not
be disturbed during cleaning operations.
5. Confinement facilities shall have adequate surface drainage to
prevent the accumulation of surface water in corrals and feedlots.
Embankments shall be constructed to prevent surface runoff into
or out of the feedlot.
6. Application of manure and wastewater to croplands shall be at
rates that are reasonable for the crop, soil, climate, local
situation, management system, and type of manure.
- IV-53 -
-------
7. The salt in animal rations should be limited to that required to
maintain animal health and optimum production.
8. No livestock waste control facility shall be located within
feet of any well used for domestic purposes or within feet
of any well or wells constituting part of a municipal water supply.
9. All storage areas shall be designed so as to restrict infiltration
or other movement of animal wastes to ground waters. The water
pollution control facilities shall be operated and maintained r.o
as to prevent ground water pollution and to protect the public
health and beneficial uses of the waters of the state.
10. Waste materials removed from retention basins, waste treatment
facilities, or confined feeding operations shall be disposed of
or stockpiled in a manner that will not contribute to ground
water pollution.
11. The permit application shall be accompanied by a proposed plan
or alternative plans of action to be followed in the event the
proposed facility results in ground water pollution.
12. Samples of ground water, in a number prescribed by the permitting
agency, shall be collected for background information at the pro-
posed waste holding pond, lagoon, or collection sump and analyzed
by a qualified laboratory prior to issuance of a permit.
13. A monitoring well network shall be established at each waste
holding pond or lagoon to assure compliance with the regulations
and permit conditions. The number and location of wells shall be
prescribed by the agency, based upon the size and volume of the
holding pond or lagoon and the subsurface hydrologic character-
istics. The wells shall be located strategically to provide
- IV-54 -
-------
maximum information, but in any case within feet of the
holding pond in the regional downgradient direction.
14. Samples of ground water shall be collected from the monitoring
wells at regular intervals not to exceed six months. Each sample
shall be chemically analyzed by a qualified laboratory.
15. If specific chemicals, elements, or compounds known to be present
in the waste in the holding pond, lagoon, or collection sump
appear in the monitoring well samples at concentrations signifi-
cantly exceeding the background concentration in the adjacent
ground water, the holding pond, lagoon, or collection sump oper-
ation shall cease or alternative containment procedures shall be
initiated. The structure shall not be used until the repairs are
completed and so certified by the operator. Within 30 days the
owner or operator of the structure shall initiate action, at his
own expense, to return the polluted ground water to its original
chemical, physical, and biological condition. The renovation
work shall be completed within a time deemed appropriate by the
agency.
16. The agency shall issue a cease and desist order to the owner and
operator of the feedlot collection, holding pond, lagoon, or
collection sump until the pollution or cause of pollution is
eliminated.
17. The operator of a waste holding pond, lagoon, or collection sump
used to collect feedlot runoff shall report on the operation,
including the size of feedlot, cumulative number of animals,
cumulative volume of waste handled, and water quality monitoring
data, to the agency twice each year.
- IV-55 -
-------
18. The permit application shall be accompanied by a performance bond,
the amount of which shall be determined by the permitting agency.
19. The bond, if forfeited, will be used to restore the site, or in
the case of pollution, to restore the ground v?ater to its original
state. In the event of forfeiture of the bond, the operator will
not be eligible for future permits.
6. FERTILIZERS
Recommendations for the Protection of Ground Water
The application of fertilizers, primarily for agricultural purposes,
has created a threat to ground water quality as well as to surface
waters. Until recently, ground water pollution was not as universally
recognized, for several reasons. Although relatively soluble, ferti-
lizers are applied on the surface and, because of the economics in-
volved, extremely high concentrations are rare. Thus excess quantities
are usually dispersed by surface runoff or absorbed by the soil, leaving
a minimum amount penetrating to ground water.
However, several recent discoveries of ground water pollution from
fertilizers prove that surface runoff and soil absorption do not always
effectively eliminate pollution. An additional problem occurs when
fertilizer pollutants infiltrate from surficial streams. For this
reason, the cumulative effect of multiple contributors throughout a
drainage basin must also be controlled.
- IV-56 -
-------
To ensure ground water protection, it is recommended that the cppro-
priate agency in each State establish:
1. A network of surface water quality monitoring stations to isolate
areas contributing an unacceptable level of fertilizer pollutants
(i.e., in excess of National Drinking Water Standards).
2. An adequate network of wells to detect areas where ground water
quality is being detrimentally affected by the infiltration of
fertilizer pollutants.
3. The right to ban the use of specific chemicals for specific periods
of time, or specify maximum loading, as required to restore an
acceptable level of water quality.
4. A program for the registration of all fertilizers, or formulations
thereof, which are sold within the State.
7. PESTICIDES
Recommendations for the Protection of Ground Water
The Federal Environmental Pesticide Control Act provides for labeling
and registration of pesticides; certification of applicators? restric-
tion and regulation of use where deemed necessary; and a national
monitoring program, among other provisions. The Act also provides for
State operation of the certification and regulation program, if the
State prefers.
The organic residues and derivatives of many pesticides are extremely
toxic and often very stable. Once these stable organics enter the
- IV-57 -
-------
water supply, whether surface or underground, they tend to recycle in
the food chain with an increasing concentration in time. Thus they
have enormous capacity for serious environmental, including health,
damage.
Ground water supplies, by the nature of their occurrence, are less
susceptible to pesticide pollution than surface supplies. Nevertheless,
without awareness of the potential pollution problem ground water
supplies will be ruined. Once contaminated, cleanup is very difficult,
ancT expensive.
Very little is known about the specific capacity of soils to assimilate
known quantities of various pesticides without polluting the underlying
ground water. However, it appears at present that the problems of
stable organic chemical concentrations become serious in vegetation
and c'djacent surface water bodies, and often in the food cycle of
animals, prior to becoming a problem in the ground water supply. There
will undoubtedly be many exceptions to this, but it seems certain that
the obvious control point for ground water protection from pesticide
pollution is on the surface.
It is recommended that every State adopt a stringent pesticide control
plan, in accordance with the federal statute, and add to it the
following provisions:
1. Monitoring of ground water in areas of pesticide application for
the specific pesticides being applied, and their derivatives.
- IV-58 -
-------
2. Delineation of areas, by appropriate geologic mapping, where
shallow aquifers are recharged; where internal drainage causes
ponding, and subsequent infiltration of pesticides that are
applied; and areas saturated by high permanent water tables.
3. No pesticides shall be applied within 300 feet of any well,
borehole, excavation, septic system (including absorption field),
within the confines of any floodplain except by special permit,
or within five feet of the highest known seasonal fluctuation of
the water table, except for domestic and noncommercial applica-
tions where there is no evidence of pollution. The State still
reserves the right to ban all applications where pollution has
reached critical concentrations, in the judgment of the appro-
priate agency.
If these provisions are enforced, in conjunction with the other condi-
tions of the law, the damage due to pesticide application will be
minimized.
8. SURFACE WATER INFILTRATION
Commentary on Protection of Ground Water
Because the means by which ground water may be protected from infil-
tration of polluted surface water is to maintain surface water quality
standards that are sufficiently high that ground water is not adversely
affected, no special regulations are set forth here concerning that
subject. The Federal Water Pollution Control Act Amendments of 1972
(P. L. 92-500) and state water pollution control laws and regulations
are directed at maintenance cf surface water quality standards, and
- IV-59 -
-------
thus as a practical matter at maintenance of ground water quality.
It should be borne in mind, however, that surface water quality
standards may not be as restrictive as those desirable for the pro-
tection of ground water quality, and this should be considered Jn
establishing surface water standards.
9. SEPTIC TANKS
Regulations for the Protection of Ground Water
In the interest of public health, as well as ground water protection,
septic tanks and related subsurface sewage disposal systems should not
be utilized unless population density or the unavailability of public
facilities makes them economically feasible. This rule is Generally
observed throughout the United States, although there is little uni-
formity as to the nature of conditions that require the installation
of a public system.
Historically, local boards of health, in one form or another, have
adopted regulations to protect the public health from the adverse
effects of heavy concentrations of septic systems and faulty design
and construction. These have often taken the form of minimum lot
sizes and spacing requirements and minimum design standards or indivi-
dual installations.
Fortuitously, these health regulations have served, in many instances,
to protect ground water supplies. Failures have generally been related
to lack of understanding of local geological and ground water conditions.
- IV-60 -
-------
Particularly, problems can be anticipated in areas where soils are
thin and are directly over fissured, open rock such as some limestone,
granite, and sandstone formations. In general it can be noted that
problems develop at both ends of the spectrum — in tight, impermeable
soils where proper infiltration cannot occur, and at the other extreme
in loose, highly permeable conditions where the soil lacks adequate
absorptive capacity to provide treatment of the sewage material.
For these reasons the following regulations are intended to be directed
toward reinforcement of current good practices in septic tank design
and construction.
In addition, it is here proposed that each state shall develop and
utilize sufficient soils and geologic data to make it possible for
local governing bodies to provide sound local practices, both for
septic tank design and use, and for septic sludge disposal, where no
treatment facilities are possible.
In any area where the density of homes exceeds 100 units per square
mile, and no public sewers are provided, the appropriate agency should
develop and operate a monitoring network sufficient to determine whether
or not the aggregate effect of all subsurface sewage disposal systems
is having an adverse effect upon ground water quality. If ground water
quality is deteriorating from this cause, the agency should have the
authority to stop all further construction in the area until a public
sewer system or equivalent alternative can be provided.
- IV-61 -
-------
These regulations are not intended to cover all aspects of subsurface
disposal systems, but only those aspects important to the protection
of ground water quality standards.
REGULATIONS
1. The construction and use of any subsurface sewage disposal system
is prohibited if such construction or use results in the signifi-
cant deterioration of ground water quality.
2. Every public or private agency or individual using or intending
to utilize any type of subsurface sewage disposal system shall
apply for a permit from the agency. A permit application shall
include the following information:
(a) accurate, detailed location of the proposed system,
(b) percolation test data, in accordance with following pro-
cedures for percolation tests,
(c) design details of both the spetic tank and soil absorption
system in accordance with minimum design requirements, as
follows in these regulations,
(d) maximum seasonal elevation of ground water, as certified by
a qualified ground water geologist, or the appropriate
geological agency of the state.
3. Septic tank installers and pumpers (cleaners) shall be licensed
by the appropriate agency. No septic tank shall be installed
without the required permit.
4. Multi-housing, commercial, and institutional applications shall
be evaluated and permitted or rejected upon the basis of indivi-
- IV-62 -
-------
dual design. In all instances the design shall at least meet the
comparable minimum standards prescribed for individual or single
family homes. No permit shall be issued where ground water
quality will be adversely affected.
5. The maximum seasonal elevation of the ground water table shall be
at least 4 feet below the lowest portion of the proposed soil
absorption system.
6. Seepage pits and cesspools are not permitted.
7. Percolation tests shall be performed in accordance with procedures
developed at Robert A. Taft Sanitary Engineering Center, as
follows: (Source: U.S. Dept. of Health, Education, and Welfare,
"Manual of Septic Tank Practice", 1967)
A. Number and location of tests. - Six or more tests shall be
made in separate test holes spaced uniformly over the pro-
posed absorption field site.
B. Type of test hole. - Dig or bore a hole, with horizontal
dimensions of from 4 to 12 inches and vertical sides to the
depth of the proposed absorption trench. In order to save
time, labor,and volume of water required per test, the holes
can be bored with a 4 inch auger. (See Figure 1)
C. Preparation of test hole. - Carefully scratch the bottom and
sides of the hole with a knife blade or sharp pointed instru-
ment, in order to remove any smeared soil surfaces and to
provide a natural soil interface into which water may perco-
late. Remove all loose material from the hole. Add two
inches of coarse sand or fine gravel to protect the bottom
from scouring and sediment.
- IV-63 -
-------
Figure 1.
METHODS OF MAKING PERCOLATION TESTS
.....
. WHEN MAKINO PIICOUTON
TESTS MAIK UNES HUE AT
IEOULAI TIME WniVAlS
•ATTEI BOAID
Ol OIHEI NXED
IEFEIENCS fOMT
- IV-64 -
-------
D. Saturation and swelling of the soil. - It is important to
distinguish between saturation and swelling. Saturation
means that the void spaces between soil particles are full
of water. This can be accomplished in a short period of
time. Swelling is caused by intrusion of water into the
individual soil particle. This is a slow process, especi-
ially in clay-type soil, and is the reason for requiring a
prolonged soaking period.
In the conduct of the test, carefully fill the hole with
clear water to a minimum depth of 12 inches over the gravel.
In most soils, it is necessary to refill the hole by supply-
ing a surplus reservoir of water, possibly by means of an
automatic syphon, to keep water in the hole for at least
four hours and perferably overnight. Determine the percola-
tion rate 24 hours after water is first added to the hole.
This procedure is to insure that the soil is given ample
opportunity to swell and to approach the condition it will be
in during the wettest season of the year. Thus, the test will
give comparable results in the same soil, whether made in a
dry or in a wet season. In sandy soils containing little or
no clay, the swelling procedure is not essential, and the test
may be made after the water from one filling of the hole has
seeped away.
8. Septic tanks shall be of the minimum capacities indicated in
Table 2. The design of the septic tank shall be in accordance
- IV-65 -
-------
Figure 2.
SUBSURFACE DISPOSAL FIELD
Distribution Bo>
Tight Joints
"Tor Popor Coll
PLAN VIEW
L-24--42' - ]
OPEN JOINT DETAIL
CROSS SECTION
DISTRIBUTION BOX
CROSS SECTION
DISPOSAL FIELD LAYOUT FOR
SLOPING GROUND
"A" * "BM
THE LENGTH OF ALL FIELD TILE
TRENCHES MUST BE EQUAL.
"x
»-O
£
l!
?I
ii
O UJ
"<
IU*
?8
_JUJ
- IV-66 -
-------
TABLE 1.
Absorption-Area Requirements For Individual Residences (a)
[Provides for garbage grinder and automatic clothes washing machines]
Percolation rate (lime
required for water to
{all one inch,
in minutes)
1 or less
2
S
4
5
Required absorp-
tion area, in
sq ft pci
bedroom (b).
standard trench
(c). seepage beds
(c), and seepage
pits (d)
70
85
100
115
125
Percolation rate (lime
required for water to
Call one inch,
in minutes)
10
15
S0(e)
45 (e)
60 (e).(f)
Required absorp-
tion area msq It.
per hrdroom (b).
standard trench
(c). and seepage
beds (c).
165
190
250
SCO
530
(a) It is desirable to provide sufficient land area for entire
new absorption system needed in future.
(b) In every case sufficient land area should be provided for
the number of bedrooms (minimum of 2) that can be reasonably
anticipated, including the unfinished space available for
conversion as additional bedrooms.
(c) Absorption area is figured as trench-» tottom area and includes
a statistical allowance for the vertical side wall area.
(d) Absorption area for seepage pits is figured as effective
side wall area beneath the inlet.
(e) Unsuitable for absorption systems if over 60.
1 Section 5.1(b) (2) (A) Page 20 of Recommended State Legislation and
Regulations: Urban Water Supply and Sewerage Systems Act and Regula-
tions, Water Well Construction and Pump Installation Act and Regula-
tions, Individual Sewerage Disposal Systems Act and Regulations.
U.S.D.H.E.W., Public Health Service, July 1965.
- IV-67 -
-------
with the design recommendations of the Manual of Septic Tank
Practice, pages 29 to 40.
9. Subsurface seepage fields (leach fields or absorption trenches)
if found to be applicable by percolation test, should be designed
and constructed in accordance with Tables 1, 2, 3, and Figure 2,
and the following items A through E.
A. Disposal Field. The layout, size, and minimum spacing requirements
for disposal fields should conform to those given in Figure 2 and
Table 4.
B. Disposal Trenches. Disposal trenches should be designed and con-
structed on the basis of the required effective percolation area
determined by percolation tests and Table ]. The bottom of the
trenches should be at least 4 feet above the normal ground
water level.
C. Absorption Lines. Absorption lines should be constructed of farm
tile, perforated tile, bituminized fiber pipe, asbestos cement or
semirigid plastic pipe with suitable perforations. Farm tile
should be laid with open joints. The tile sections should be
spaced not more than 1/4 inch apart, and the upper half of the
joint should be protected by asphalt treated paper while the tile
is being covered.
D. Bedding Material. The bedding material should extend the full
width of the trench and should be not less than six inches deep
beneath the bottom of the tile. After the tile has been laid,
the bedding material should be brought up to a level of 2 inches
above the top of the tile. The bedding material should be washed
gravel, crushed stone, slag, or clean bank-run gravel ranging in
- IV-68 -
-------
TABLE 2.
MINIMUM CAPACITIES FOR SEPTIC TANKS SERVING AN
INDIVIDUAL DWELLING
NuffiDAi*
or
Bed.
rooms
2
3
4
5
6
7
Maximum
Number
_°f
Persons
Served
PERSONS
4
6
8
10
12
15
Liquid
Cap. of
Tank (No
auto, wash-
ing machine
no garb.
grinder)
GALLONS
750
900
1200
1500
1800
2250
Liquid
Cap. of
Tank (with
auto, wash-
ing ma-
chine only]
GALLONS
938
1125
1500
1875
2250
2813
Liquid
Cap. of
Tank (with
garb.
grinder
only)
GALLONS
1125
1350
1800
2250
2700
3375
Liquid
Cap. of
Tank (with
both auto.
washing
macb.&garb.
grinder)
GALLONS
1313
1575
2100
2625
3150
3938
NOTE: The minimum allowable liquid depth shall be 4 feet. Tenks in
esceaa of 1200 gallon opacity shall be designed on the basis of I Vi times
the daily flow of 100 gallons per person per day up to 1500 gallons per
day. Plows greater than 1500 gallon per day the minimum effective tank
capacity should equal 1500 gallons plua 75% of dally sewage now. This
formula V • 1500 * .75Q may be used. V - Volume and Q • Daily aewage
Bow la gallons.
TABLE 3.
MINIMUM STANDARDS FOR DISPOSAL FIELD CONSTRUCTION
Disposal-field construction Standard
Lines per field, minimum number 2
Individual lines, maximum length 100 ft.
Trench bottom, minimum width 18 In.
Trench bottom, maximum width 36 in.
Field tile, minimum diameter 4 In.
Field-tile lines, maximum slope 6 in. in 100 ft.
Field trenches, minimum separation (1)
Effective absorption area, minimum per
dwelling unit (2)200 aq. ft
See Table V
) See Table ttl
an bo* ihouU »• caual.
- IV-69 -
-------
TABLE 4.
SIZE AND SPACING FOR DISPOSAL FIELDS
Width of Trench
•t Bottom
Inches
18
24
30
36
(1) A greater
Rawommended
Depth of
Trench
Inches
18 to 30
18 to 30
18 to 36
24 to 36
spacing is dealrsble
Spacing Tile
Lines (1)
Feet
6.0
6.0
7.6
9.0
where available area
Effective
Absorption Area
per Lineal Foot
of Trench
Square Feet
l.S
2.0
2.5
3.0
permits.
size from 1/2 to 2-1/2 inches. The bedding material should be
covered by a 2-inch layer of pea gravel or straw to support the
backfill as the laying of the tile drain proceeds. (Plastic
should not be used as a barrier between the seepage line and the
earth fill for the trench.)
E. Distribution Box. A distribution box should be provided to re-
ceive the effluent from the septic tank to assure equal distribu-
tion to each individual line of the disposal field, as shown in
Figure 3, in accordance with the following items:
(1) Connection. The distribution box should be connected to
tht septic tank by a watertight sewer line and be located
at the upper end of the disposal field.
(2) Invert Level. The invert of the inlet pipe should be located
6 inches above the bottom of the box. The invert of the
- IV-70 -
-------
outlets to each distribution line should be located 4 inches
above the bottom of the box and set at the same elevation.
(3) Inspection. The sides of the box should extend to within a
short distance of the ground surface to permit inspection.
The box should be kept to the minimum size necessary to
accommodate the inlet and outlets.
10. In areas having dense soil with & percolation test time greater
than 60 minutes which precludes the use of subsurface absorption
lines, sand filters may be used. The filters should be designed
in accordance with Figure 3, and the following sub-paragraphs A
through H.
A. Size. The size should be such to provide 100 square feet of
filter area per person served, or 200 square feet of filter
area per bedroom. In systems serving an automatic washing
machine, the size should be increased to provide 250 square
feet of filter area per bedroom. It is recommended that the
size be based on a filter 20 feet square for a two-> ted room
home, with an additional 10 feet of length added for each
additional bedroom. Enginners should design larger sand
filters on the bases of one gallon/square foot.
B. Minimum Filtering Depth. The minimum filtering (sand) depth
should be 24 inches.
C. Cover Material and Depth. The filter may be covered with a
maximum depth of 12 inches of porous soil or medium to coarse
gravel.
- IV-71 -
-------
FIGURE 3.
BURIED SAND FILTER
Distribution
C-
Oiitribulion Lin«»
~o
>e=3
G-Oittribiilion
1-2
US
z i
o <»-
:><*§)
'""U1Z
Ul > o
3t@ Collection 2»-
U 30
PLAN VIEW
.Vent
!2"Mo«. Covtr
jKz'Hk-z'-jh-z'-H
liiiSwill
Ma« Soil Cover
IQ'CoarM Grovel
P*o Grovel
10'Min. Coorit Grovel
END VIEW
- IV-72 -
-------
D. Filter Media. The filter media (sand) should have an effec-
tive size of 0.6 to 1.0 millimeters and a uniformity coeff-
ient of less than 3.5. It should be washed and free from
clay or silt.
NOTE: The following buried sand filter design can be expected to
function properly only if it is installed in exact accordance with
design criteria. The effective size and uniformity coefficient of
the sand are of the utmost importance. Mortar sand and most
natural (pitrun) sands are not satisfactory and their use will re-
sult in an early failure of the filter. If antural sand having
the correct specifications is not available, graded sand should be
used. No sand should be used in the basence of a sieve analysis
report; sand effective size should be 0.6 to 1.0 mm.
E. Distribution and Collection Lines. The distribution and
collection lines should conform to the requirements for
absorption lines as given in paragraph C in the seepage
field section. The distribution lines should have a slope
of two inches per 100 feet and should be spaced two feet
apart, center-to-center. The collection lines should have a
slope of six inches per 100 feet and one collection line
should be provided for each 10 feet of width, or fraction
thereof. The lower end of the distribution lines should be
vented as required in paragraph G, and the upper end of the
- IV-73 -
-------
collection lines should be completely plugged. Automatic
siphons should be considered for installations serving more
than four bedrooms.
F. Bedding Material. The bedding material for the distri-
bution and collection lines should be placed and should
consist of washed gravel, washed crushed stone, or slag.
The coarse gravel may range in size from 1/4 to 1-1/2
inches in diameter. The collection lines should be
laid directly on the cut, without placing gravel beneath
the line.
G. Venting. Vents should be placed on the downstream end of
each of the distribution lines. The vents should extend to,
or slightly above the ground surface and the outlet should
be screened with 1/4 inch mesh screen.
H. Drainage. Adequate drainage must be provided to prevent
ponding of surface water above the filter, and adequate
drainage must also be available to insure free drainage of
the effluent from the filter.
11. Septic tank sludges shall be disposed of by hauling to regional
sewage treatment facility whenever this is possible.
12. Septic tank sludges, when no treatment facilities are available,
may be disposed by sludge spreading or spraying, in permitted
sites only, by licensed pumpers.
Permits for sludge spreading or spraying sites shall be obtained as
defined under regulations for wastewater sludge disposal. In addi-
tion to these requirements, the permit application shall state
- IV-74 -
-------
procedures to be utilized for:
(a) cropping the land, and disposal of crops,
(b) preventing public nuisance and health hazards (?ue to the
presence of the disposal site,
(c) the capability of the soil to utilize nitrogen without ex-
cessive concentrations. Attention is directed to "guidelines"
of the State of Maine which note that 37,000 gallons of sludge
contains 300 pounds of nitrogen, which is the maximum appli-
cation to a moderately well drained loamy soil.
It is recognized that septic tank sludges are very liquid, malodor-
ous, unhealthful materials. If at all possible they should be
directed to a sewage treatment plant. Under no circumstances,
except full treatment, should they be directly disposed in landfill,
compost, subsurface injection, or land reclamation outside of a
licensed site.
10. STORAGE AND TRANSMISSION FACILITIES
Regulations for the Protection of Ground Water
Serious instances of ground water pollution occur when transmission or
storage facilities are ellowed to discharge onto or into the ground.
Among the most striking, yet insidious, examples of pollution from
this source are leakage from sanitary sewers, and leakage from buried
gasoline tanks for service stations.
- IV-75 -
-------
These are typical examples of a wide range of related hazards including
leakage from surface storage tanks, transmission lines, underground
storage tanks and pipelines for many types of chemicals, biological
products, and petrochemicals. As a result of the variety and complexity
of this problem it is not practical to attempt to specifically regulate
all occurrences. As a consequence these regulations are directed at
proper design, periodic inspection, and ground water quality monitoring
in certain instances.
Since the usual occurrence of pollution from this source would be
unplanned, or accidental, the correction of problems that occur will
be as indicated under "Accidental Spills."
REGULATIONS
1. Every storage and transmission facility except gravity sewers
shall be designed and constructed to withstand all shocks, forces,
and pressures to which it is expected to be subjected plus a
safety factor cf at least 100 per cent.
2. Gravity sanitary sewers shall meet the current prescribed standard
for exfiltration and infiltration. All sanitary sewers shall be
inspected or tested for leakage eit least once every five years.
3. All storage tanks and transmission facilities shall be pressure
tested when installed, and at intervals thereafter not to exceed
once every five years. Hydrostatic pressure testing shall be
conducted at 150 per cent of the design operating pressure. In
- IV-76 -
-------
the event of a leak, the facility shall be removed from service
until repairs are made.
4. Records of every inspection or test shall be maintained for
periodic review by authorized State personnel. The record r.hall
include the date of the inspection, equipment used, results
obtained, and the sworn, notarized statement of the person
making the inspection as to the accuracy of the report. Inspectors
shall be licensed by the State.
5. Surface storage and transmission facilities shall be visually
inspected for leaks annually. All surface storage tanks shall be
surrounded by an impermeable base and dike enclosing sufficient
volume to contain at least the entire storage capacity of the
tank. Shut-off valves for the transmission line supplying each
tank shall be located in an accessible location, adjacent to
each tank.
6. In the event of a spill the procedures for immediate reporting,
cleaning-up, etc., all as detailed in the handling of "accidental
spills," shall be observed.
7. In any area where ground water pollution is suspected, due to
poor operations, frequency of spills, or any cause, the supervis-
ing State agency may require the operator of the storage or
transmission facility to install monitoring wells to check ground
water quality.
If the agency determines from the monitoring wells that the ground
water quality is being adversely affected, a bond and liability in-
- IV-77 -
-------
surance may be required of the operator, as specified in the
statutes.
If tests confirm that ground water is being affected, in excess of
National Drinking Water Standards, the use of the facility shall be
discontinued until complete repairs are made. Immmediate steps
shall also be taken by the operator to restore the ground water to
an acceptable quality. This restoration must be completed within
six months, or the State will undertake the restoration at the
expense of the operator. This time may be extended by the State
only if the operator is vigorously attempting to perform the
restoration and additional time is required by circumstances beyond
his control.
11. ACCIDENTAL SPILLS
Regulations for the Protection of Ground Water
Accidental spills of hazardous materials, whether toxic or merely un-
pleasant, present an imminent possibility of seriously polluting both
surface and ground water supplies. Since they are "accidental", no
amount of preplanning will completely eliminate these problems.
However, a system which makes those involved responsible for correcting
the resultant damage can do two things. It can reduce the number of
"accidents", and it can minimize the damage done to the public as a
consequence of accidental spills.
- IV-78 -
-------
REGULATIONS
1. Whenever, because of an accident or other activity or incident,
any toxic or taste- and odor-producing substance, or any other
hazardous substance which is discharged into waters or is so
placed that it might discharge, flow, be washed, or fall into
them and which, if in contact with such waters, would endanger
their use or in any way adversely change the quality of that
water, it shall be the responsibility of the person or establish-
ment owning or in charge of such substance or the facility or
vehicle from which it was discharged, to immediately notify the
proper State agency, by telephone, of the location and nature of
such substance, and where reasonably possible to do so, notify all
potential users of the waters.
2. In addition to the notices set forth in Regulation 1, such person
or establishment shall immediately take or cause to be taken all
necessary steps to prevent injury to property and to users of
said waters, and to protect said waters from pollution or a danger
of pollution; and shall within 15 days of the incident remove from
the ground and from the affected waters, to the extent required by
the State agency, the residual substances contained thereon or
therein.
3. Any oil or oil products; radioactive materials; materials trans-
ported in large commercial quantities which are very soluble
acids or bases, cause abnormal growth of organs or organisms, or
are highly biodegradable, exerting a severe oxygen demand; bio-
logically accumulative poisons; lethal substances; or any other
- IV-79 -
-------
4.
5.
substance which might cause water pollution or in any way adversely
affect water quality shall be considered hazardous to water quality.
The State agency shall provide a continuous operator service to
handle emergency telephone calls. Telephone numbers for pertinent
State agencies are listed as follows:
Should additional information or notification be recessary, re-
gional and national emergency telephone numbers with continuous
service are listed as follow:
HAZARDOUS MATERIALS EPA REGIONAL HEADQUARTERS
Boston, Mass.
New York, N. Y.
Philadelphia, Pa.
Atlanta, Ga.
Chicago, 111.
Dallas, Texas
Kansas City, Mo.
Denver, Colo.
San Francisco, Cal.
(617) 223-7265
(201) 548-8730
(215) 597-9898
(404) 526-5062
(312) 353-6188
(214) 749-3840
(816) 374-3778
(303) 837-3880
(415) 558-6254
(206) 442-4343
Seattle, Wash.
FDA POISON CONTROL CENTER
(202) 963-7512
CHEMTREC (Chemical Transportation Emergency Center)
(800) 424-9300
- IV-80 -
-------
Except Alaska, Hawaii and Washington, D.C.
(202) 483-7616
6. All persons and establishments engaged in an activity which in-
cludes the impoundment, production, processing, transportation,
storage, use, application, or disposal of polluting substances
shall take all necessary measures to prevent such substances from
reaching natural waters, directly or indirectly, through accident,
carelessness, maliciousness, hazards of weather, or from any
other cause.
7. Any person or establishment engaged or planning to engage in any
of the activities described in Regulation 6 shall submit to the
activity and all substances involved, the preventative measures
which are taken or will be taken to comply with Regulation 6,
the remedial actions to be initiated in case of accidents, and
such other information as the State egency may require.
8. Compliance with these regulations does not affect the civil or
criminal liability to which said person or establishment may be
subject as a result of such activities or incidents.
12. HIGHWAY SALTING
Regulations for the Protection of Ground Water
Serious problems have resulted in areas where chemicals have been used
in excessive quantities for the control of ice and snow on highways.
These problems cannot be entirely eliminated without endangering the
- IV-81 -
-------
public safety. The following regulations will serve to assist in
minimizing the pollution problem.
A specific plan shall be developed for ground water problems caused
by ice and snow control on streets and highways. This plan shall in-
clude the keeping of specific records on the quantities and rate, and
frequency of application of chemicals to specific sections of roads
and streets.
As an alternative to the following each state may wish to adopt a
monitoring program for chemical contamination as part of their Section
303E Continuing Planning Process.
REGULATIONS
1. Whenever possible inert abrasives, such as sand, shall be used in
place of chemicals. Chemical quantities shall be the minimum re-
quired for safety.
2. In areas of heavy application of chemicals, shallow monitoring
wells shall be established within 50 feet of the right of way.
Samples shall be collected from each monitoring well and analyzed
for chemical content at least quarterly.
Sufficient monitoring wells shall be utilized to define the area
where the application of chemicals is occurring. The number, de-
sign, and location of monitoring wells shall be determined as part
of the plan, and shall be determined by qualified geological per-
- IV-82 -
-------
sonnel, who shall also provide for record keeping of salt loading
as required.
3. Where unavoidable chemical pollution occurs the plan shall pro-
vide for corrective action to be undertaken. This action may
include one or more of the following, or any other activity that
proves effective:
(a) cessation of application of chemicals,
(b) drainage control to intercept chemicals prior to contact
with the ground water,
(c) pumpage to reduce chemical level,
(d) injection of unpolluted water to flush and dilute chemicals.
4. If it becomes evident that pollution of ground water is occurring
as a consequence of highway de-icing, the responsible agency
shall provide for full public notification of the problem, and
information as to the proposed course of corrective action.
This notification shall utilize at least three locally prominent
newspapers, plus such other local agencies as are necessary to
make the public aware of the problem.
13. AIR POLLUTION
Commentary on Protection of Ground Water
Ground water quality can be affected by air pollution because it is
in effect a form of land spreading of waste — particulate matter falls
to the ground and if water soluble and in sufficient concentrations,
- IV-83 -
-------
it may find its way into adjacent ground water supplies. Regulations
concerning air fDilution control are not presented here because there
is no ground water aspect to such regulations that is separate from
regulation for any other purpose. The states have enacted statutes
and adopted regulations to control air pollution, primarily in response
to the 1970 Amendments to the Federal Clean Air Act, which required
states to meet federal standards. The Council of State Governments
proposed a model State Air Pollution Control Act in J973.
14. DRAINAGE WELLS AND SUMPS
Regulations for the Protection of Ground Water
Drainage v,-ells are commonly used to drain wet areas, such as swamps
and potholes, by allowing the excess water to flow into underground
storage. In some regions the word "sump" is used synonymously with
"drainage well". Elsewhere, however, the term "sump" is used to des-
cribe a dry excavation used to collect spilled materials, such as
hydrocarbons, as well as surface runoff. They are also called "dry
wells."
It is probably administratively impossible to regulate domestic sumps,
which contribute but slightly to ground water pollution. At industrial
and commercial sites, however, sumps may provide a sizeable quantity
and wide variety of pollutants.
A realistic means of controlling ground water pollution from drainage
wells and sumps is by use of permits, bonds, and fines, and making
- IV-84 -
-------
the operator liable for damages. Local geohydrologic conditions, in
conjunction with the type and quantities of wastes that will or may
infiltrate, will dictate the feasibility of permitting sumps and drain-
age wells in selected areas.
The collection of storm runoff water in drainage wells and sumps pre-
sents a special problem that must be examined in the light of the local
hydrologic situation and needs. During the early part of a storm, the
runoff is generally grossly polluted, but it improves in quality with
time as the wastes are flushed away and diluted. In many areas it is
advantageous to collect the runoff in various types of structures for
two purposes: (1) to reduce the potential for flooding, and (2)
to provide ground water recharge. Whether the early runoff should be
allowed to infiltrate through wells or sumps, or controlled in some
manner so that it cannot infiltrate is a question that must be care-
fujly evaluated. In many situations, it is much more advantageous to
allow it to infiltrate, despite its chemical and biological nature,
than it is to waste it.
REGULATIONS
1. The construction and use of wells (exclusive of storm runoff
collection wells) for drainage of surface water from lands into
the ground shall be prohibited if the chemical, biological, or
physical properties of the surface water would cause the ground
water quality to exceed National Drinking Water Standards.
2. Every public or private agency or individual using or intending
- IV-85 -
-------
to use, corstruct, modify, or maintain a drainage well shall
apply for a permit from the agency. The permit application shall
contain a map or aerial photograph of the site at a scale of
1:24,000; justification for the drainage well; location, well
diameter, proposed depth, depth and length of casing, and depth
and length of screen or perforations; depth of the receiving
aquifer, its thickness, permeability, and water level; the chemical,
physical and biological quality of the receiving water and of the
waters to be discharged; the quantity to be discharged and its
seasonal variation in quantity and quality; and the location of
all water supply wells and springs within a mile radius of
the drainage well.
3. The construction and use of sumps for collection and disposal of
any type of liquid, semi-liquid, or water soluble solid material,
exclusive of domestic or household use (and storm runoff), is
prohibited unless a valid permit has been issued by the agency.
4. Every public or private agency or individual using or intending to
use, construct, modify, or maintain a sump shall apply for a permit
from the agency. The permit application shall contain a map or
aerial photograph of the site at a scale of 1:24,000; justification
for the sump; location, sump diameter, proposed depth, and depth
and length of casing; depth of receiving strata, receiving strata
rock type, thickness, permeability, and water level; the chemical,
physical and biological quality of water in the receiving strata;
the types and the chemical, physical, and biologic properties of
all materials that might be flushed into the sump; and the location
- IV-86 -
-------
of all water supply wells and springs within a mile radius
of the sump.
5. The term of a permit for a drainage well or sump shall be
year(s), subject to renewal.
6. Samples of ground water in a number prescribed by the permitting
agency shall te collected for background information at the pro-
posed (drainage well) (sump) site and analyzed chemically by a
qualified laboratory prior to issuance of a permit. The analysis
shall include, but not be limited to, identification of specific
elements, chemicals, and compounds that are present cr presumed to
be present in the water or water soluble material that may flow
into the structure.
7. No permit shall be issued that v»ill result in the indigenous
ground water quality exceeding the chemical levels for raw or un-
treated drinking water supply sources as specified in the National
Drinking Water Standards, including future additions and modifi-
cations.
8. The permit application shall be accompanied by a proposed plan
or alternative plans of action to be followed in the event the
proposed facility results in ground water pollution.
9. A monitoring well network may be required at each (drainage well)
(sump) . The number and location of monitoring v/ells shall be
prescribed by the agency, based upon the diameter and storage
volume of the (drainage well) (sump), and the subsurface hydro-
logic characteristics. The wells shall be located strategically
to provide maximum information, but in any case within
- IV-87 -
-------
feet of the (drainage well) (sump) in the regional downgradient
direction.
10. If monitoring wells are required by the agency, samples of ground
water shall be collected from them at regular intervals, not to
exceed six months. Each sample shall be chemically analyzed by
a qualified laboratory. The analysis shall include, but not be
limited to, identification of specific chemicals, elements, and
compounds that are present or presumed to be present in the water
or water soluble material that may flow into the (drainage well)
(sump) as specified in the permit procedure.
11. If specific chemicals, elements, or compounds known to be present
or assumed to be present in the water or water soluble material
that flows into the (drainage well) (sump) appear in the monitor-
int well samples at concentrations significantly exceeding the
background concentration in the adjacent ground water, the oper-
ation shall cease or alternative containment procedures shall be
initiated. Within 30 days the owner or operator of the structure
shall be required to initiate action at his own expense, to return
the polluted ground water to its original chemical, physical, and
biological condition. The renovation work shall be completed
within a time deemed appropriate by the agency.
12. The agency shall order the operator of the (drainage well) (sump)
to cease and desist until the pollution or cause of pollution is
eliminated.
13. Should the (drainage well) (sump) be the cause of any pollution of
the ground water or significantly alter the natural quality of
the ground water in such a manner to damage another ground water
- IV-88 -
-------
user, the owner and operator of the (drainage well) (sump) shall
be liable to the injured user for damages.
14. The operator of the (drainage well) (sump) shall make an annual
report to the agency on the condition of the facility.
15. The permit application shall be accompanied by a performance bond,
the amount of which is based upon the (drainage well) (sump)
diameter, the chemical, physical, and biologic quality, and the
volume of solutions that will or may flow into the structure.
16. The bond, if forfeited, will be used to restore the site, or, in
the case of pollution, to restore the ground water to its original
state. In the event of forfeiture of bond, the operator will not
be eligible for future permits.
17. When the use of a (drainage well) (sump) has been terminated, it
shall be abandoned according to aquifer sealing criteria contained
in Recommended Water Well Construction Standards (see Water Supply
Wells, below).
18. Following abandonment of the (drainage well) (sump) and its
subsequent plugging, and prior to the release of the bond, the
site shall be inspected and approved by the agency.
15. ARTIFICIAL RECHARGE
Regulations for the Protection of Ground Water
As loca] ground water overdrafts and sea water intrusion continue to
occur throughout the country, artificial recharge techniques will
become more widespread. The use of artificial recharge techniques
are to be encouraged as long as they are accomplished in a sound
- IV-89 -
-------
technological manner, coupled with adequate water management programs.
The most important aspects of artificial recharge that need to be
considered are (1) control and monitoring of the chemical, biological,
and physical properties of the recharging water in order to insure
that it does not lead to pollution or impairment of the ground water
reservoir, and (2) control and monitoring of the water level so that
adverse effects do not occur.
Artificial recharge facilities can best be managed by means of permits.
The permit should be issued on the basis of the engineering design and
the quality of the receiving water, the water to be recharged, and a
mixture of the two. It might also be necessary to predict the chemical
reactions that could occur between the recharging water, the aquifer
framework, and the aquifer fluids. Since surface water is commonly used
as a source of recharge water, information concerning the seasonal
variations in water quality must be available.
The water level may rise significantly in the vicinity of an area being
artificially recharged. In many situations, this rise would need to
be carefully monitored and controlled in order to reduce adverse effects
that might occur, such as the formation of new springs, seeps, flowing
wells, and flooded foundations in the vicinity of the site. Furthermore,
a water level rise could cause polluted ground water, if any existed,
to flow in a new direction leading to deteriorating quality in affected
wells.
- IV-90 -
-------
REGULATIONS
1. Every public or private agency or individual shall obtain a permit
prior to engaging in artificial ground water recharge. The appli-
cation for a permit shall include a map or aerial photograph of
the site at a scale of 1:24,000, and describe the techniques and
methods of artificial recharge, the amount of v»ater proposed to
be recharged, source of water to be recharged, type of treatment
of recharge water proposed, the purpose of the artificial recharge,
the period of operation of the facility, chemical, biological,
and physical data concerning the quality of the water to be artifi-
cially recharged, and the existing quality of the ground water.
The location of all wells within a mile radius shall be shown
on a map. The application shall include a report of reactions
that may be anticipated due to mixing of the natural and artifi-
cially recharged water. The mixed waters shall be of acceptable
quality for the use intended but they shall not exceed National
Drinking Water Standards if the native ground water is potable.
All information used to determine the technical feasibility of
artificial recharge at the proposed site shall be made available
to the agency.
2. Information concerning quality of the water to be recharged and
receiving waters shall include chemical, biological, and physical
data. Chemical analyses and data shall include all specific
elements, chemicals, and compounds that are or might be detri-
mental to health, including heavy metals as well as those that
might impair the quality of the receiving water.
- IV-91 -
-------
3. Quality of water data shall include changes that occur due to
seasonal variations of the recharge water.
4. No permit shall be issued that will result in the indigenous
ground water quality exceeding the chemical levels for raw or
untreated drinking water supply sources as specified in the
National Drinking Water Standards, including future additions
and modifications.
5. A permit shall not be issued if the agency determines that the
information supplied indicates any hazard to the public interest.
6. Monitoring wells shall be established to measure water levels in
the ground water reservoir receiving artificial recharge. Water
levels shall be measured monthly and reported to the agency.
7. Monitoring wells shall be established to determine the ground
water quality in the receiving reservoir. Water quality data
shall be submitted to the agency bi-monthly.
8. At least two monitoring veils shall be placed in the vicinity of
the artificial recharge system. The wells shall be at different
depths, with the shallower well screened in the upper part of the
aquifer and the deeper well screened in the lower part of the
aquifer. The wells shall be located in a regional hydraulic
downgradient direction from the recharge facility, but at a dis-
tance of no more than feet from the recharge well or pit.
9. Records describing the quantity of water artificially recharged
each month shall be submitted to the agency annually.
10. Water artificially recharged to the ground water in any manner
by any methods shall meet the requirements of the state water
- IV-92 -
-------
quality standards in all respects at the time the recharge water
intercepts the ground water.
11. Water quality data relative to the artificial recharge facility
shall be submitted to the agency annually. Water quality data
shall be collected and analyzed by the operator on a schedule
established by the agency, but in any case no less than bi-monthly.
The records shall include the chemical, physical, and biological
quality of the water being recharged and the chemical, physical,
and biological properties of the ground water in the vicinity of
the facility that has been mixed with the recharging water.
12. Deterioration of the chemical, physical, or biological quality of
the receiving ground water will necessitate either the closing of
the system or corrective engineering. The degree of deterioration
of the ground water reservoir that will be permitted will be esta-
blished by the agency.
13. The permit application shall be accompanied by a proposed plan or
alternative plans of action to be followed in the event the
proposed facility causes ground water pollution.
14. The owner and operator of the artificial recharge works shall be
liable for any ground water pollution caused by dissolution of
any toxic or hazardous material in the soil which are transported
to the ground water during the process of artificial recharge,
even though there is no knowledge of the toxic or hazardous
materials in the soil prior to the recharge.
- IV-93 -
-------
16. DISPOSAL WELLS
Commentary on the Protection of Ground Water
Many different types of wells, ranging widely in depth, have been used
to dispose of waste materials underground. These include oil field
formation water return wells, solution mining wells, and industrial
and municipal waste injection wells. For many years, wells have been
used for the injection of sewage and desalinization plant brine. Wells
are also used for reinjection of brine originating at geothermal energy
plants. Radioactive wastes, which are extremely toxic and generate
heat, are pumped underground either as a liquid or mixed with a
cement slurry.
For scores of years, huge quantities of liquid wastes have been in-
jected underground and presently more than a billion gallons a day are
pumped into subsurface strata. The vast majority of these wastes
consist of oil field brines and, although there have been several
reported cases of fresh ground water pollution caused by their injec-
tion, the techniques ere reliable and well established. Within the
past 30 years, there has been an increasing number of other types of
wastes injected. The techniques used are similar to the older, more
established oil field brine disposal methods. The return of an oil
field brine to the original producing zone, however, may differ con-
siderably in hydrodynamics and geochemistry from deep well disposal
of certain other wastes.
- IV-94 -
-------
Within the past ten years, deep well disposal techniques have become
more sophisticated and regulations more demanding. The number of
industrial disposal wells has slso increased significantly in the past
few years — from about ten in 1953 to more than 275 in 1972. Their
inc rease is largely due to the recognition by industry that they
represent an attractive and, in most cases, less expensive means of
disposing of highly toxic or noxious liquid waste products. In addi-
tion, these wastes are believed to be stored in a confined reservoir
system that is far removed from topographic and climatic influences
and in which vertical migration is insignificant. In many situations,
however, these assumptions have proved to be invalid.
Local ground water pollution problems related to waste disposal through
wells have been reported in Florida, New York, Oregon, Idaho, Ohio, and
elsewhere. Perhaps the most widespread problem is the gravity feed
injection of raw sewage into relatively shallow wells that tap porous
limestone deposits. Another potential for pollution occurs in areas
where abandoned and unplugged wells connect the disposal zone vith
shallower aquifers. Pressure injection may cause a considerable rise
of the potentiometric surface. In Florida, pressure effects spread
out more than 25 miles from the disposal well. In southeastern Michigan
and adjacent areas in Ontario, several abandoned wells began to flow
highly mineralized or polluted water in response to increases in reser-
voir pressure brought about by deep well disposal.
Well injection of waste materials can modify the ground water flow
system and pressure distribution. It can also lead to mixing of waters
- IV-95 -
-------
of perhaps vastly differing chemical and physical properties. Well
injection could also degrade fresh ground water supplies; contaminate
other resources, such as oil, gas, coal, brines, or other minerals;
provide the triggering mechanism for the generation of earthquakes;
and could also lead to adverse chemical reactions between the waste
water and the ground water or between the waste water and the aquifer
framework.
Several states including Alabama, Louisiana, Oklahoma, Nebraska,
Illinois, Kansas, Ohio, Michigan, and Pennsylvania, among others, have
well disposal laws, regulations, or policy statements. A report by
ORSANCO recommended policy for deep well disposal for those states
lying within the Ohio River Basin. Deep well disposal of wastes is
now controlled by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency under
PL 93-523, the Safe Drinking Water Act of 1974. At the time of publi-
cation of this manual, federal regulations were in preparation. Model
guidelines have been proposed for the well injection of wastes that
are hazardous to human health in the Model State Toxic Waste Disposal
Act published in 1973 by the Council of State Governments.
In order to control or prevent pollution of ground water by disposal
wells, a considerable volume of information is required. Only after
careful and detailed evaluation of the data should a permit be issued.
An evaluation should begin by development and understanding of the
regional hydrologic framework of the disposal zone and adjacent strata.
Information required includes thickness of strata, permeability, areal
extent, fractures, and other geologic features. Secondly, the local
- IV-96 -
-------
hydrologic situation should be examined and immediately followed by
an evaluation of the effects of waste fluids on the aquifer framework
and the contained water. There must be an acceptable compatibility
between any waste fluids and those fluids native to the aquifer.
A permit should require suitable well construction and adequate hydro-
logic testing of the disposal zone during the construction and the
testing phase of disposal well installation. Aquifer characteristics
and responses to injection, as well as the direction and rate of waste
movement, must also be determined. Generally, some restrictions on
the operating programs for the wells will be required. Each site should
have equipment and programs for emergency procedures in the event of
malfunction, including rapid shutoff, standby, and decontamination
facilities. Strict guidelines should be established for disposal
well abandonment and plugging.
A waste monitoring system must be carefully maintained and managed.
In most cases, disposal wellhead pressure should be continuously
recorded, with alarm systems and observation wells installed in the
injection zone or in adjacent aquifers. In addition to the guidelines
in PL 93-523, information that should accompany a permit application
as outlined by ORSANCO is shown below.
A great deal of technical knowledge is required to adequately examine
the data in an application for a permit and to determine the feasibility
of well disposal. For these reasons, among many others, it is more
feasible to issue a permit based on the consensus of several state
- IV-97 -
-------
agencies such as the state geologist, state health officer, the
director of the state Environmental Protection Agency, Department of
Natural Resources, Water Commission and other appropriate agency.
Each permit must be handled on a case-by-case basis.
OUTLINE OF SCOPE AND CONTENT OF A FEASIBILITY REPORT
TO ACCOMPANY AN APPLICATION TO DRILL AND TEST AN
INDUSTRIAL DISPOSAL WELL (AFTER ORSANCO, 1973)
I. WELL LOCATION
A. General map and description of well location showing cultural
and geographic features and boundaries of property owned or
leased by the applicant.
B. Detailed plat showing proposed injection well site and lo-
cation of all types of existing wells within two miles of
injection well site. Plat should also include all wells
penetrating the proposed injection horizon and its confining
beds, within five miles.
C. Records of wells shown in detailed plat, including ownership,
available subsurface information, and well plugging data.
II. GEOLOGY AND GEOHYDROLOGY
A. Structural geologic features in the immediate and general
vicinity of the well location. Provide a surface geologic
map.
B. Geologic and engineering description of subsurface rock units,
1. General types end characteristics including a geologic
column.
- IV-98 -
-------
2. Potential injection horizons and confining beds with
reference to: lithology; thickness; areal distribution;
porosity; permeability; reservoir pressure and temper-
ature; chemical characteristics of reservoir fluids;
formation breakdown or fracture pressure; hydrodynamics.
C. Geohydrology of fresh water aquifers at the site and in the
vicinity with respect to depth; thickness; general character;
and usage.
D. Mineral resources and their occurrence at the well site and
in the immediate area such as: oil and gas; coal; brines;
and any other deposits of significance.
E. Seismicity - Location and intensity of earthquakes recorded
in area.
III. RESERVOIR RESPONSE AND WASTEWATER MIGRATION
A. Estimated pressure build-up with time (at the well bore and
at 100, 1,000, and 10,000 feet from the well bore).
B. Predicted rate and direction of wastewater movement.
IV. PROPOSED WELL DESIGN, CONSTRUCTION AND TESTING PROCEDURES
A. Drilling, coring, and testing program
B. Casing and tubing - size, grade, type, weight, setting depth
C. Cement - type including additives and amount
D. Other subsurface equipment
E. Wellhead equipment
- IV-99 -
-------
V. PROPOSED SURFACE EQUIPMENT
A. Holding tanks, flow lines, filters and pumps
B. Flow, pressure, and other monitoring devices
C. Other equipment or control devices
VI. CHARACTERISTICS OF UNTREATED WASTES
A. Industrial process from which waste is derived
B. Physical and chemical description of waste - including
variations
C. Volume - including variability in rate of production
D. Compatibility with subsurface fluids
VII. ALTERNATIVE DISPOSAL METHODS
A. Description of alternative disposal strategies with respect
to both economic and environmental considerations, and
justification for decision to use underground injection.
B. Comparison of alternatives.
VIII. PROPOSED PREINJECTION WASTE TREATMENT
A. Settling
B. Filtration
C. Chemical Treatment
D. Concentration or Dilution
E. Other
- IV-100 -
-------
IX. PROPOSED OPERATING PROGRAM
A. Injection schedule including average and maximum rates, and
estimated yearly total for each year through projected well
life.
B. Injection pressures including average and maximum
C. Monitoring techniques
X. PROPOSED CONTINGENCY PLAN IN EVENT OF UNANTICIPATED WELL FAILURES
(from ORSANCO Advisory Committee on Underground Injection of
Wastewaters, 1973, Recommendations for underground injection of
waste waters in the Ohio River Region: Ohio River Valley Water
Sanitation Commission, Cincinnati)
17. WATER SUPPLY WELLS
Regulations for the Protection of Ground Water
Water well regulations have a dual purpose: they are intended to
prevent contamination of the water taken from the well for human con-
sumption, and at the same time to prevent pollution of the water re-
source upon which the well depends. If a well is adequately constructed
and maintained to accomplish the first purpose, which is the emphasis
of most state regulations, the second will also be likely to be served.
It is when a well is abandoned that the second purpose is likely to
be neglected, since the effect of improperly abandoned wells on the
quality of water in the aquifer usually will not be perceived for
many years.
- IV-101 -
-------
Improper construction of a well may consist of improper seals that
permit inflow of highly mineralized or polluted water, or it may con-
sist of casing that is unsufficient in length, corroded, or broken,
thus providing a pathway for entrance of pollutants. In other cases,
the ennulus or open space between the casing and the outer wall of
the drilled hole may not be properly grouted or there may be no grout
at all. Wells have also been affected by backfilling the annular space
with polluted fill. A great number of water supply wells are construc-
ted in low areas that are subject to flooding; highly polluted flood
waters may leak into the well because of inadequate protection. Any
time a well is constructed or serviced, it should be disinfected.
Improper technique or lack of disinfection has caused severe problems.
Most states have at least some well construction standards, although
authority may be scattered in several agencies. Well construction
codes range from none to highly sophisticated concepts. Model standards
need to describe, in considerable detail, a wide variety of geohydro-
logic situations and adequately outline the best technology for each
case. A report will soon be published by the U. S. EPA that describes,
in creat detail, model water well construction standards.* The techni-
cal standards of the report describe:
1. Test holes and samples
2. Well construction
3. Well casing selection and installation
4. Well grouting
*Recommended Water Well Construction Standards, National Water Well
Association - U. S. Environmental Protection Agency, 261 pages.
- IV-102 -
-------
5. Well screens and perforations
6. Well filter construction (artificial)
7. Well plumbness and alignment
8. Well development
9. Well testing for performance
10. Well disinfection
11. Water samples and analyses
12. Permanent and test hole abandonment and temporary capping
It is strongly recommended that state agencies desiring to develop new
or to modify existing water well standards consult the above cited
report when it becomes available.
In addition to specific well construction standards, a number of states
have required drillers to either become registered or to obtain a well
drilling license and file a surety or cash bond in order to drill water
wells. The license is issued on the basis of education, drilling
experience, and examination.
The licensee is required to submit to the control agency a well drilling
report and log of each well constructed by him within the State. A
driller's license may be revoked for noncompliance or for the submission
of false or erroneous data.
Geologic and hydrologic conditions are so varied throughout the United
States, or for that matter within a single state, that it would be
impractical to present here a single set of well construction standards
- IV-103 -
-------
adequately describing every condition that may be encountered. For
this reason only, a few generally broad model regulations are provided.
The reader is also referred to regulations on the abandonment of wells
found elsewhere in this report.
REGULATIONS
1. Every person, prior to construction or modification of a water
well, shall obtain a permit from the agency.
2. Every water well shall be constructed in a manner to avoid waste
and ground water pollution.
3. Every water well shall be maintained in c condition and manner so
as to conserve and protect ground water quality.
4. Well casing shall be installed in every water well and shall
extend a minimum of feet above the land surface and to £
minimum depth of feet below land surface.
5. Well casing shall be sealed to prevent downward movement of surface
water in the annular space around the casing and to prevent upward
movement cf artesian waters that could result in waste or pollution.
6. Every well shall be disinfected upon completion of construction,
maintenance, repairs, pump installation, and testing, as pre-
scribed by the agency.
7. Every well that flows under natural pressure shall be equipped
with a valve that will completely shut off the flow, or the
well shall be plugged by the methods required for plugging per-
manently abandoned wells as established by the agency.
- IV-104 -
-------
8. On completion, every water well shall be tested for yield and
drawdown by the methods prescribed by the agency. Yield and
drawdown data shall be submitted to the agency within days
of completion of the test.
9. Every well shall be equipped with a usable access port installed
and maintained to prevent entrance of foreign materials snd to
permit ready access for water level measurements.
18. EXPLORATION HOLES AND ABANDONED WELLS
Regulations for the Protection of Ground Water
The leakage of contaiminated or highly mineralized water through long
abandoned wells and unplugged exploration holes has led to insidious
ground water pollution problems. The greatest share of these problems
was not discovered for years, until wide areas were adversely affected.
In Michigan, for example, thousands of holes were drilled for explor-
ation of oil, gas, and coal resources before the turn of the century.
Over the past 80 - 100 years, leakage of billions of gallons of highly
mineralized solutions through these open abandoned holes has created
problems that encompass vast areas. Unquestionably, many other areas
throughout the country have been affected by similar practices. It
should be pointed out, however, that for the past several years oil and
gas tests and wells must be adequately plugged in order to meet state
regulations. Leakage of acid mine drainage through ancient oil and
gas wells and other open holes has allowed extensive ground water
- IV-105 -
-------
pollution in the coal fields of Pennsylvania and elsewhere in Appa-
lachia - a region where water resources are already greatly stressed
by the discharge of acid waters from the mines.
Since World War II, deep well disposal systems have increased greatly
in popularity and utilization, particularly in industrial regions.
Injecting waste solutions into the underground, however, may tend to
repressure the reservoirs causing the water pressure surface to rise
several tens of feet. Particularly in Ontario and southeastern Michi-
gan, the increased pressure has caused brine to flow from long abandoned
unplugged oil and gas holes and wells, the locations of many of which
were previously unrecorded and unknown.
In many cases, it is neither technically nor economically feasible to
plug all ancient abandoned wells snd exploration holes. Steps must be
taken, however, to insure that wells and exploration holes drilled or
abandoned in the future will be properly plugged in order to protect
ground water resources and public health as well.
Several techniques could be used to develop some administrative controls
over the drilling of exploration holes. The simplest and most straight-
forward technique might consist of special drilling licenses and permits
to prospect. A special driller's license, necessary for all types of
drilling, could be issued by an agency of state government. The
special license concept is attractive because it is not feasible to
issue permits for all exploration holes, as for example thousands of
seismic shot holes. Noncompliance with the regulations could be handled
- IV-106 -
-------
with a fine or revocation of the driller's special license. Permits to
prospect could also be required. A permit could be required to drill a
single exploration hole or a block of holes as in the case of seismic
work. Special licensing of drillers for this type of drilling would
give the states some control over both drilling and plugging of wells
and exploration holes.
Unsealed abandoned wells and exploration holes constitute a hazard to
public health, safety, and welfare, and to the preservation of the
ground water resource. The sealing of such wells presents a number
of problems, the character of which depends upon the construction of
the well, the geological formations encountered, and the hydrologic
conditions.
The basic concept of proper sealing of abandoned wells is the restor-
ation, insofar as feasible, of the controlling hydrologic and geo-
logic conditions that existed before the veil was drilled and
constructed.
Any permanently abandoned well should be completely filled in such a
manr.er that vertical movement of water within the well bore, including
vertical movement of water within the annular space surrounding the
well casing, is effectively and permanently prohibited and the water
is permanently confined to the specific strata in which it was origin-
ally encountered.
- IV-107 -
-------
A well should always be checked before it is sealed in order to insure
freedom from obstruction that may interfere with effective sealing oper-
ations. Removal of casing from some wells may be necessary to assure
placement of an effective seal. If casings opposite water bearing
zones cannot be readily removed, they should be split with a casing
ripper to assure the proper sealing of these water bearing zones. At
least the upper portion of the casing should be removed to prevent
surface water from entering the water bearing strata by flowing down
the casing. This operation is not necessary if the annular space
around the outside of the casing was cemented when the well was
completed.
Grout of any type, when used as a sealing material below the water
level in the well, should be placed from the bottom up by methods that
will avoid segregation or dilution of material.
Every effort should be made to disinfect wells prior to abandonment.
Also, all materials, such as water, sand, and gravel to be used in the
abandonment process should be disinfected.
(Detailed well abandonment and plugging techniques are described in
EPA-NWWA Recommended Water Well Construction Standards)
REGULATIONS
1. Every person intending to drill, bore, or in any manner excavate
an opening in the earth for the purpose of evaluation of under-
- IV-108 -
-------
ground resources, including but not limited to metallic and non-
metallic deposits, oil and gas, coal, water, and brine shall
apply for a permit from the agency. The permit application shall
describe the location of the hole or block of holes, their purpose,
estimated depth, type and amount of casing, if any, procedures
proposed for plugging, hole diameter, water level, type, perme-
ability, thickness and quality of water of any aquifers that will
or might be penetrated, and emergency containment procedures to
be initiated in case of abnormal bore hole fluid or gas pressures.
2. The term of the permit shall be months, subject to renewal.
3. The permit application shall be accompanied by a performance bond
or other surety, the amount of which is based upon the number of
exploration holes to be constructed, their proposed depth, and
geologic and hydrologic conditions.
4. The bond, if forfeited, will be used to restore the site, or in
the case of pollution, restore the ground water to its original
state. In the event of forfeiture of bond, the operator will not
be eligible for future permits.
5. Every person who drills a hole, boring, or excavation to be
used for the exploration for underground resources, including but
not limited to metallic and nonmetallic deposits, oil and gas,
coal, water, brines, and engineering properties, must possess a
valid special drillers license issued by the agency.
6. The special drillers license may be revoked by the agency for
failure to comply with a regulation contained in this section.
7. The owner of an exploratory well, boring, or excavation shall not
allow leakage that causes ground water pollution.
- IV-109 -
-------
8. A boring, well, or excavation used for the exploration of under-
ground resources, including but not limited to metallic and non-
metallic deposits, oil and gas, water, and brines, shall be ade-
quately sealed within months of its construction. The method
of sealing shall be based on the geologic formation penetrated,
but in such a manner as to prevent the exploratory hole from
acting as a channel for the migration of mineralized waters into
potable zones, or the escape of subterranean cases. A proposal
for sealing methods shall be submitted to the agency for approval
prior to plugging.
9. The emplacement of grout or sealing material shall adequately shut
off all permeable formations.
10. An abandoned well shall be filled and sealed in accordance with
the geological formations penetrated, in such a manner as to
prevent it from acting as a channel for pollution, or the escape
of subterranean gases. A proposal describing the method of seal-
ing shall be submitted to the agency for approval prior to plugging.
11. Abandonment of wells containing subterranean cases requires
special precautions and a casing in such a well shall be sealed
with neat cement grout or concrete grout.
19. OIL AND GAS - ADDITIONAL RECOVERY
Regulations for the Protection of Ground Water
There are two primary risks for ground water aquifers related to the
development of oil and gas, and particularly to the additional recovery
- IV-110 -
-------
of oil and gas. The most common of these is poor well design or con-
struction, resulting in pollution of the fresh water aquifer by a brine
solution due to casing or grout failure. The second of these is the
possibility of a change in the natural pressure system causing a leak
or "bleed-through" along z fault or fracture plane forcing brine into
the fresh water aquifer.
These risks can be minimized, if not entirely eliminated by: careful
planning, including good well design, thorough analysis of reservoir
conditions, mapping of all potential fresh water aquifers and aqui-
cludes, and identification of potential fault planes, etc.; good
construction of wells and thorough grouting and sealing of the aquifers
present; monitoring of the fresh water aquifers throughout the period
of the operation to be certain that they are not being polluted; and
a prepared plan of action in the event pollution does occur.
REGULATIONS
1. Every person undertaking an additional recovery project for the
production of oil or gas shall obtain a permit from the respon-
sible State agency.
2. The permit application shall include a detailed description of
all geologic and hydrologic conditions present, including con-
solidated and unconsolidated deposits, and streams and other
surface features. The application shall map and describe the
oil and gas reservoir, and all known and potential fresh water
aquifers within one mile of the proposed project. This map shall
- IV-111 -
-------
include the locations of all unsealed abandoned wells within
2,000 feet. Known and suspected fractures of any nature shall
be indicated.
3. No pollution of fresh water aquifers by the secondary recovery
operation is permitted.
4. The permit application shall include a complete description of
casing and grouting procedures that will be observed, the working
pressures to be used, and shall certify that no pollution of
fresh water aquifers will occur.
5. The permit application shall include emergency procedures that
will be followed in the event pollution does occur. These shall
include cessation of operation until the necessary corrections
are completed.
6. Each water flood operator shall notify every owner of a fresh
water well within one mile of the water flood project with regard
to the nature of the project. The fresh water well owners shall
be given, in writing, the address and telephone number of the
responsible State agency to which they may report if problems
develop in their water supply wells.
7. A monitoring program shall be conducted throughout the life of
the project to verify that pollution of the fresh water aquifers
is not occurring.
A minimum of four monitoring wells, one in each quadrant of the
project site, shall be established and monitored for each known or
potential fresh water aquifer. The location of each of these wells
shall be included in the permit application. Multiple aquifers
- IV-112 -
-------
may be monitored by a single observation well. If an increase in
chloride content occurs, the specific zone affected must then be
determined and corrective action taken.
These wells shall be sampled weekly for the first two months of
the project and monthly thereafter. Samples shall be analyzed
for chloride content, and such other constituents as may be signi-
ficant in establishing pollution.
Additional monitoring wells or sampling frequency may be estab-
lished by the agency if determined to be necessary for monitoring
the project.
8. Upon completion or abandonment of the project all holes shall
be grouted shut to their full depth. For minimum grout specifi-
cations see EPA-NWAA Recommended Well Construction Standards.
9. The water flood operator shall provide, with the permit applica-
tion, a performance bond in the amount of at least $100,000.00,
or such additional bond as required by the agency as a consequence
of the magnitude of the project.
10. Any violation of the permit conditions or these regulations,
without full observance of the emergency procedures as submitted
with the permit application, shall result in forfeiture of bond.
11. The bond, if forfeited, will be used to restore the site. In
the event of forfeiture of bond, the operator will not be eli-
gible for future permits.
- IV-113 -
-------
20. MINING
Commentary on Protection of Ground Water
A wide variety of mining techniques are utilized in the United States.
Existing methods, as well as newly emerging techniques, have caused
water pollution problems, particularly of surface water. In many
situations, pollution problems are attributed to on-site mineral pre-
paration plants rather than to the mining process itself.
Mining techniques include underground methods, surface mining, mining
by solution, leaching, and in-situ combustion. Although techniques
differ widely from one resource to another, underground mining methods
consist of removing ore through some type of opening such as shafts,
drifts, or slopes. Surface mining includes strip and open pit, auger,
dredging, and hydraulic. During solution mining, hot fluids are
injected into the deposit, dissolving it and then the pregnant liquid
is withdrawn through wells. Leaching methods consist of the dissolu-
tion of the ore by solvents, which are distributed over dumps, heaps,
in vats, or undisturbed ore bodies, where it infiltrates. The enriched
leachate is then collected and processed. Although used only slightly
in the past, in-situ combustion is being carefully examined as s means
for processing oil shale. In this process the oil shales will be
fractured and then ignited. The heat will decrease the viscosity of
the hydrocarbons permitting released liquids and gases to migrate to
collection points, such as wells.
- IV-114 -
-------
The major water pollution problems in mining regions are c?ue to leakage
of water through the mines, slime ponds, spoil piles, or mill wastes.
The leachate, which consists of highly mineralized, commonly acidic
fluids, may be generated long after the mining operation has ceased.
Mining activities almost always disrupt both the regional and local
ground water flow systems. Since many mines extend below the water
table, they must be dewatered. In addition to a substantial decline
of the water level, this may lead to induced infiltration of stream
flow, interaquifer leakage, or flow through open holes. Water pumped
directly from the mine may also contain large concentrations of dis-
solved solids. Acid solutions formed by the infiltration of water
through mines and waste and milling piles may lead to the accumulation
of significant concentrations of heavy metals. During leaching and
solution mining, the reacting fluids may pollute adjacent ground
water resources. In-situ combustion has caused great increases in the
dissolved mineral content of adjacent water. Furthermore, evaporation
of the mine waters leads to increased mineralization. A relatively
minor problem is caused by wind removing fine particles from tailings,
and mill wastes that settle out downwind. Although not a part of the
mining activity, a future potential source of ground water pollution
looms on the horizon as administrators look to abandoned mines as a
depository for waste products.
Several manuscripts are available that describe methods for controlling
ground water pollution from mining activities. Four excellent reports
- IV-115 -
-------
of this type include:
1. Processed, procedures and methods to control pollution
from mining activities, 1973, U. S. EPA Publication,
EPA-430/9-73-011.
2. Rationale and methodology for monitoring ground water
polluted by mining activities, 1974, U. S. EPA Publication,
EPA-600/4-74-003.
3. Mine drainage manual, 1966, Pennsylvania Department of
Health.
4. Environmental protection in surface mining of coal, 1974,
U. S. EPA Publication, EPA 670/2-74-093.
Additional guidelines will need to be developed for new mining techni-
ques and areas, such as those in the Great Lignite Fields and the vast
oil shale deposits.
Ground water pollution problems caused by mining activities can be
controlled, at least to some extent, by:
1. Existing reclamation laws
2. Surface water quality standards
3. Air pollution standards
4. Holding pond and lagoon regulations
5. Wastepile and stockpile regulations
6. Abandoned well and exploration hole regulations
7. Detailed permit procedures.
- IV-116 -
-------
Before a permit is issued to develop a new mining activity, detailed
planning and hydrologic studies should be conducted, including deter-
mination of the hydrologic framework, flow-patterns, and ground water
quality. In the past, the ground water phase of the hydrologic cycle
was largely ignored in planning and premining surveys, as well as
subsequently in reclamation. Permits should also require examination
of potential effects on mining, not only during the premining phase
but also during the operation and following abandonment. The hydro-
logic data should be used in the design of the mine and the operation
should be based, at least in part, on it.
Ground water quality in mining areas can be monitored by means of wells,
springs, seeps, and streams. Water levels should be measured. Moni-
toring of both quality and water levels should be continued throughout
the mining and postmining phases.
21. GROUND WATER DEVELOPMENT
Commentary on Protection of Ground Water
The primary problems resulting in ground v?ater pollution due to devel-
opment, or production, of aquifers are caused by (a) poor well con-
struction or condition, resulting in pollution from t.he surface or
intermining between aquifers; (b) overdraft, causing local reductions
in head and "coring" or intrusion of brines or salt water; and (c)
pressure reductions in one artesian aquifer and infiltration from
another of inferior quality.
- IV-117 -
-------
The first of these problems is related to well standards, and is
treated in that section of these regulations.
The latter two problems are the direct consequences of production
and can only be prevented by planning and management. In some in-
stances it may be permissible to accept a certain level of salt water
intrusion, in order to effectively utilize the available ground water
on an economical basis. In many other instances this is completely
unacceptable, and either reduced draft must be accepted or a barrier
must be established to prevent the salt pollution.
The significant factors here are comprehensive evaluation, planning,
and effective ground water management. There are no specific regu-
lations that can be enforced that will lead to the type of management
that is required. Rather, each State wherein this problem exists, or
potentially exists, must establish a comprehensive management plan,
with enabling legislation to permit the State to limit withdrawals,
and establish recharge programs or other management tools in critical
areas, when required.
These requirements are important in coastal areas, but also throughout
large areas of the interior, where shallow aquifers are polluted by
contiguous mineralized deposits.
- IV-118 -
-------
CHAPTER V
MANPOWER REQUIREMENTS FOR A MODEL STATE
GROUND WATER PROTECTION PROGRAM
-------
CHAPTER V
MANPOWER REQUIREMENTS
FOR A MODEL STATE
GROUND WATER PROTECTION PROGRAM
The effective utilization of ground water is attainable only by the
commitment of adequate manpower to prevent, or at least control, its
pollution. The regulations, guidelines, and commentary presented in
Chapter IV create manpower demands in five major categories. These
are: a) Planning and Coordination b) Permitting and Licensing c) Moni-
toring and Data Collection d) Enforcement and e) Research.
Due to the complexity of the occurrence of ground water, in addition
to the complexity of its physical and chemical nature, its management
can only be attained by persons with specialized knowledge of both its
physical properties and its occurrence. Expertise is required not
only with respect to the various technical disciplines that are invol-
ved, but also with regard to specific locations. To illustrate, a
person highly qualified to deal with problems of ground water quality
and quantity in Florida may require substantial new experience before
solving equivalent problems in Montana. Effective utilization can only
be attained by persons with expertise in the bacteriological and chem-
ical nature of water.
Considerable inter-disciplinary knowledge is thus required, involving
on the one hand geology, hydrology, and geochemistry, and on the other
- V-l -
-------
hand civil and sanitary engineering, with health requirements always
being of a high level of importance.
In general it can be stated that the geological sciences are primarily
involved in the occurrence, movement, and management of ground water
resources; the engineering sciences are primarily involved in the util-
ization of ground water resources; the chemical sciences are involved
in the evaluation of water quality; and health sciences have an over-
riding involvement when there Js a public health issue. Additional
technological knowledge is required from many other disciplines, such
as: agricultural engineering, particularly with regard to problems re-
lated to fertilizers, pesticides, and feedlot operations; petroleum
engineering with regard to problems related to gas and oil production;
land planning with regard to the protection of critical ground water
recharge areas; and many others.
PERSONNEL REQUIREMENTS
Table I shows the 21 major activities requiring regulation in order to
protect ground water. Vertically, at the left of the chart, are plot-
ted the five major work categories, or Manpower Functions, that are
required for each proposed ground water regulatory activity and the
level of expertise that is required.
The manpower requirements identified in Table I are related solely to
the ground water protection program, and are in addition to any other
pollution control effort that may be in effect regarding the proposed
- V-2 -
-------
21 Regulated Activities. For example, many health departments already
effectively regulate septic tank design. Table I only shows the input
required for protecting ground water, not the many other aspects of
septic tank regulation. Not included in the table are requirements
for auxiliary services, such as laboratory services, legal services,
and non-professional administrative personnel. It should also be noted
that the manpower identified herein are not adequate to evaluate or
correct old, pre-existing problems, such as those related to abandoned
wells, abandoned mines, etc.; such corrections will require special
programs.
The restriction of Table I to the consideration of ground water should
not be construed as a failure to recognize the relationship of ground
water to surface water nor of its proper perspective regarding the
hydrologic cycle nor the environment as e whole. These points have
been stressed throughout the earlier chapters of this document. The
objective of this presentation is to identify the level of effort nec-
essary to raise the present low level of ground water awareness to a
position commensurate with its actual importance in the national
economy.
The manpower requirements shown are based upon the collective exper-
ience of the task force committee that prepared this manual. Critical
areas have been verified by comparison with ongoing programs in selec-
ted parts of the country. They are felt to be sufficiently reliable to
provide a basis for starting or evaluating operations in any state.
Each state must then make specific adjustments for its own conditions.
- V-3 -
-------
A state with a high incidence of any particular regulated activity
should acquire greater efficiency than indicated in the table. On the
other hand, a state investigating its first disposal well will certainly
require more time than is indicated.
An important point to note here, however, is that throughout the pro-
posed regulations the burden of preventing pollution, and project just-
ification, is placed upon the potential polluter. The state controls
activities by permits and licenses; accumulates knowledge by monitoring,
data collection, and research; protects the public by enforcement; co-
ordinates the activities of ground water with those of other areas of
public interest, and, through planning, attempts to be prepared for the
future activities that will be required.
It is intended that strict enforcement will be effected by moderately
severe penalties and "spot" checking, thus avoiding the extreme costs
of continuous, close inspection.
AREAS OF TECHNICAL SPECIALIZATION
Table II, constructed on the same basis as Table I, indicates the spec-
ialized expertise that is required in each portion of the Regulated Ac-
tivity/Manpower Function matrix. Capital letters indicate that input
from the specific specialty referred to is mandatory. Lower case indi-
cates that the actual quantity of this input is not considered, but is
rather left to individual discretion. This is necessary since the im-
portance of some disciplines, such as health, is often not a function
- V-4 -
-------
of time. In some instances, input from several disciplines is required
with the bulk of the work done by still another.
The intent of Table II is to identify mandatory areas of specialization
for an adequate program, and to identify auxiliary disciplines that
will prove not only compatible but beneficial.
A description of the general responsibilities of each of the Manpower
Functions follows. The only significant difference, considered to be
between professional and senior professional personnel, are advanced
academic degrees and experience. Most governmental agencies have the
mechanics for this differentiation already in effect.
Grouping by function does not indicate an organizational arrangement.
Whether all responsibilities listed under one of the following "func-
tions" are placed in one section or agency will depend upon a state's
agency structure.
Planning and Coordination Function
Responsibilities for planning and coordination include but are not lim-
ited to:
1. Identify critical ground water areas.
2. Prepare and maintain cround water development and management
plans.
3. Encourage technology to prevent ground water pollution and
rehabilitate polluted aquifers.
- V-5 -
-------
4. Consult with persons concerning ground water pollution sources
and prevention techniques.
5. Make recommendations concerning policy and legislation.
6. Establish training and educational programs.
7. Provide for advisory committees.
8. Make recommendations to other agencies for adoption of regu-
lations affecting ground water.
9. Disseminate information.
10. Anticipate ground water problems.
11. Coordinate activities and personnel with other agencies.
12. Investigate and evaluate sites to be used for future ground
water development.
Positions require a wide range of administrative ability coupled with
both practical and theoretical experience. It is essential that these
positions be filled by individuals with backgrounds in science and en-
gineering as well as the social sciences.
The professional staff is visualized as consisting of several individ-
uals with specialized fields of expertise but with the ability to grasp
the significance and importance of interrelated specialties. Duties
and fields of expertise of several of the professional staff would over-
lap and complement each other. A prime duty of this staff is coor-
dination and cooperation with other state, federal, and local agencies.
- V-6 -
-------
Permit and License Function
Permit and license personnel examine permit applications and supplemen-
tary data provided by the applicant and the agency staff in order to
approve or disapprove sites or plans for activities 1-3, 7, and 11-20
in Table I. Responsibilities also include, in consultation with other
personnel in the agency, the development of written examinations re-
quired for the issuance of licenses for persons constructing, drilling,
or plugging wells, or persons involved in the drilling of exploration
holes.
These personiiel examine permit applications and supplementary data, in
conjunction with field site investigations, in order to recommend
approval or disapproval of a permit application for activities 1-3, 7,
and 11-20 in Table I.
The professional background of personnel performing this function is
designated in Table II. However, due to the complexity of the informa-
tion submitted by applicants, each state should take steps to insure
that the person finally approving any application has adequate exper-
ience to make the judgments involved.
Monitoring and Data Collection Function
Responsibilities include the development of data acquisition, storage,
and retrieval systems; and monitoring of water withdrawal and activities
- V-7 -
-------
that may lead to ground water pollution. Also included are data col-
lection and monitoring of potential sites that may later be required
for waste disposal or ground water use activities. Reports will be pre-
pared at regular intervals and distributed throughout the agency, to
other appropriate state agencies and commissions, and be made available
to the general public. If a ground water quality problem appears immi-
nent as determined from monitoring activities or by other means, a
report will be submitted immediately to Enforcement personnel for fur-
ther investigation. It is envisioned that all of the data collected
will be stored in a computer bank for quick retrieval and evaluation.
Furthermore, this function requires digital computer techniques for
hydrologic and water quality modeling.
Individual responsibilities include site investigations for the pur-
poses of locating monitoring wells and data collection points, install-
ing monitoring systems and providing technical aid to permit applicants
so that other than agency monitoring sites can be located and operated
in such a manner as to provide maximum information. Agency monitoring
sites and equipment will be operated and maintained by these personnel.
In addition to general administrative duties and general clerical work,
the staff will be responsible for key punching data for computer stor-
age and retrieval. Computer time must be provided on a pre-defined
time basis.
- V-8 -
-------
Enforcement Function
The major responsibilities under this heading are inspection and data
collection in order to require compliance with the terms established in
permitting procedures. Some of the senior professionals will be re-
quired to possess legal or paralegal training in order to initiate
compliance orders, injunctions, and actions. Coincidental duties in-
clude technical evaluation of data submitted to the agency by the per-
mittee as well as those collected by the agency. The major responsibil-
ity is to ensure compliance with terms of the permit so that ground
water pollution or ground water withdrawals in excess of allowable
amounts do not occur. In the event the terms of a permit have been ex-
ceeded, it is the responsibility of the senior professional staff to
initiate action to remedy the offense through consultation, advice, per-
mit modification, or legal action.
This professional staff would also conduct field inspections to insure
that violations do not occur and that inefficiencies are corrected.
Field investigations will include onsite examination and sample col-
lection. A knowledge of the techniques of sample collection, storage,
and transportation relative to the rules of evidence are mandatory.
Legal expertise in hydrological problems should be developed on a full-
time, permanent basis, and work coordinated, in most states, with the
office of the Attorney General.
- V-9 -
-------
Research Function
The major responsibilities of the research staff are to investigate
means for reducing water quality problems, including development of
improved techniques for monitoring, and education. Responsibilities,
in addition to conducting studies and performing research, include data
collection, information dissemination, consultation, making of recom-
mendations concerning policy and legislation, establishment of training
and educational programs, acting on advisory committees, and soliciting
research. Research activities, including both pure and applied studies,
should be largely dictated by the activities and needs within the par-
ticular states. The senior staff will be responsible for evaluating
and establishing priorities of research needs, conducting research, and
directing activities of the professional staff. The staff will also
have the responsibility of developing and conducting educational short
courses, seminars, and lectures.
Duties include laboratory and field investigation research activities.
The professional staff will be largely responsible for the actual re-
search, which will be directed by the senior staff. The professional
staff will also be involved in the preparation of educational materials
and reports that will be used in short courses, seminars, and lectures.
In view of the different fields of expertise among the research profes-
sionals, close cooperation and communication both within the section
and the agency is a necessity.
- V-10 -
-------
Duties will include general clerical work, but laboratory and field
technicians, and draftsmen, are essential.
A Ground Water Training Program
Table I attempts to identify the manpower required to address the var-
ious activities that pollute ground water. These manpower estimates
are generally geared to one million population increments and thus al-
low an extrapolation of the estimates to the needs for a state program
based on its population or, in fact, the needs of the entire country.
Using a figure of 220 million for population of the United States, an
extrapolation of Table I shows a need of approximately 5,250 man years
of effort to adequately permit, license, monitor, collect data and en-
force whatever regulations a state might develop for the 21 activities
that affect ground water. Recognizing that certain activities are not
universal problems, such as highway salting in southern climates and
landfills in arid climates, and that estimates in this manual may re-
flect a conservative bias toward protection of ground water, an estimate
of 5,000 man years would appear to provide a workable figure to use in
attempting to arrive at some cost estimates for a training program.
If, in fact, 5,000 man years of effort are needed for a nationwide pro-
gram, exclusive of the planning and research functions, it should be
obvious that considerably more than 5,000 individuals with some training
in ground water will be needed. This is so because, as the next chapter
will indicate, it is expected that the ground water protection program
- V-ll -
-------
will be divided among a number of state agencies which also have a wide
variety of non-ground water activities. It seems reasonable, therefore,
to assume that the average state employee assigned to some ground water
protection activity would spend only half his time in this work cate-
gory. Thus, to achieve 5,000 man years of input per year, a total of
10,000 individuals must become involved in the national program. This
would be an average involvement of 200 persons per state. When one con-
siders that to some extent, county health officials will comprise part
of the manpower for a number of ground water functions, a number of
200 persons per average state does not seem unobtainable from a train-
ing standpoint.
Working from this premise, a basic training program could be developed,
the purpose of which would be to give the 10,000 persons in the above
estimate a familiarity with the nature and occurrence of ground water,
and the problems in protecting its quality, that they do not now pos-
sess. It is not proposed as a substitute for education of specialists
in the various fields related to ground water protection. It assumes
that there is a considerable lack of awareness of ground water, its
value, and the effects upon it from various common activities, among
those persons now working in public agencies whose programs relate to
health, natural resources, and the environment.
The training program envisioned would attempt to assure that four "key
men" from each state, regardless of size, would have sufficient training
to enable them to conduct training programs in their states. These 200
professionals would be trained by means of an intensive two week course
- V-12 -
-------
drawing upon the knowledge of the nation's leading ground water experts.
In order to establish the necessary close rapport of a workshop training
program, a limit of 50 students should be enrolled in each two week
training program — thus four such programs would be needed. These
could be held in four regions of the country and keyed to the problems
peculiar to the region.
Those chosen for the regional two week training programs would be ex-
pected to have college degrees in scientific disciplines broadly related
to ground water geology or hydrology. Such related disciplines as Agri-
cultural Engineering, Civil or Sanitary Engineering, Petroleum Engi-
neering, or Soil Science (see Table II) would supply individuals with
the basic training to grasp the specialized concepts of ground water
protection technology which would be taught. These people would most
likely be individuals in existing programs of Health, Environmental Pro-
tection, or Natural Resource Conservation who have shown particular
promise as leaders, planners, and perhaps educators.
It is estimated that a curriculum development project for such an inten-
sive course would cost approximately $30,000. Included in this cost
would be the development of variable one week course curricula which
those trained in the regional courses could in turn offer to appropriate
personnel in their states. Instruction on how to present their own ed-
ucational programs would be included in the regional two week program.
Each two week program for 50 students is estimated to cost $85,625 as
shown in Budget Schedule I for a total cost of $30,000 + 4 x $85,625 =
$372,500 for these "key man" programs.
- V-13 -
-------
It is anticipated that the graduates of these regional courses will
establish education programs in their own states for an average, per
state, of 200 individuals w:th some responsibility for protecting
ground water resources. Budget Schedule II shows a projected budget
for a sample state training program for 200 public employees to be
$87,700 with the bulk of the costs covering travel, room, board and
materials.
Nationally, this training effort by the states could be underwritten
at a cost of 50 x $87,700, or $4,385,000. Adding the cost of regional
"key man" courses, the total would be about $4.75 million.
It should again be emphasized that the student-state employees included
in these training courses are not neophytes in state environmental
protection programs. They would each be expected to have the back-
ground education identified in Table II and be actively engaged in some
related facet of the work through their state Environmental Protection
Agency, or Department of Health, Natural Resources, Geological Survey,
etc.
As an additional aid in establishing a viable state ground water pro-
tection program, states might consider establishing voluntary short
course programs for individuals not directly involved with ground water
cases but who are peripheral to it. Legislators, municipal officials,
supervisors, attorneys, and others who become involved in decisions
that affect ground water could be invited to training courses designed
specifically for non-ground water personnel.
- V-14 -
-------
BUDGET SCHEDULE I
REGIONAL "KEY MAN" TWO WEEK TRAINING
COURSES ON GROUND WATER
Personnel
Principal school administrator - 1 month * I'nnn
Junior school administrator - 2 months
Secretary - 2 months 12 500
Permanent Faculty (5 man task force) '
50 man days @ $250/day
Guest expert lectures '
(5 people, 2 days each @ $250/day)
Travel
50 students air fare and ground transportation 15,000
@ $300/each
50 students per diem 14 days each @ $44/day
5 guest experts air fare and ground transportation
6 $300/each
5 guest experts per diem 2 days each @ $44/day
Materials
Books, manuals and reference books 0,000
$200/student x 50
Audio-visual equipment rental 'inn
General office supplies for workshop planning
Support Cost
Telephone
Postage . Q
Meeting facility — lyUUU
Direct Costs $83,140
Indirect costs (35% of inhouse personnel-??, 100) 2,485
PER REGION $85,625
Four regions: 4 x $85,625 = $342,500
Plus curriculum development: _H
Total (all regions) $372,500
- V-15 -
-------
BUDGET SCHEDULE II
SAMPLE STATE TRAINING PROGRAM ON GROUND WATER
Average of approximately 200 people per state
200 students @ $100 travel $20,000
Subsistance @ $40/day for 5 days 40,000
Facility free at state university
Training materials $100/student 20,000
Faculty 4 state experts who attended
regional 2 week program; travel
and subsistance @ $300/each 1,200
Guest lectures - 5 @ $250/day - 2 days 2,500
Guest lecturer travel plus per diem 2,000
5 x $400/each
Audio-visual 2,000
PER STATE $87,700
Total for all states: 50 x $87,700 = $4,385,000,
- V-16 -
-------
PAGE NOT
AVAILABLE
DIGITALLY
-------
CHAPTER VI
IMPLEMENTATION
-------
CHAPTER VI
IMPLEMENTATION
The requirements for implementation of the regulations and statutory
provisions proposed herein will vary widely from state to state. Ena-
bling legislation, such as is proposed, is already in effect in some
states, as are many of the proposed regulations. However, even states
with strong current programs may be benefited by evaluation of their
existing structure and operation in view of the recommendations in this
presentation.
The proposed statutory provisions are written in such a manner that a
state with no existing program could adopt them in their entirety. On
the other hand, it is anticipated that most often the proposed opera-
tions will be integrated into the existing state administrative struc-
ture without the formation of a new "super agency" directed specifical-
ly toward ground water. In either event it is imperative that ground
water be given well defined, specific stature in on-going programs and
that its protection and management be given priority commensurate with
its importance as a resource.
Perhaps the best way to provide this emphasis, in many states, is by
accentuating the planning and coordination function. This will be es-
pecially important in instances where the other functions of permitting,
monitoring, and enforcement are diffused through several agencies. By
concentrating the planning and coordination effort, and by giving it
- VI-1 -
-------
adequate administrative stature, it can assure that the other manpower
functions (Table I) are properly conducted even though diffused.
Ideally, at least superficially, it appears that all manpower functions
related to ground water should be concentrated in a single state agency.
While this has obvious administrative advantages, it would likely be a
technological blunder in many states. The regulations proposed herein
recommend that permit or license procedures be instigated, or continued,
in 15 of the 21 proposed Regulated Activities (Table I). Some of these
are already permitted or licensed activities in many states, although
it is doubtful that any state currently operates all of the recommended
programs. While the importance of ground water historically has been
neglected, and ground water should now be given a top priority in regu-
latory activity, it cannot be considered an overriding concern in every
instance. All technological, economic, and social factors should be
considered in the administration of the regulated activities being con-
sidered. This manual stresses the priority that should be given ground
water, and its importance as a resource. It is imperative that it be
given either special agency stature or strong technological, economic,
and social consideration within existing agencies.
A very basic point that deserves special emphasis here is that it is
difficult to administer the activities of permitting, monitoring, and
enforcement in the same agency with research. Probably the primary
reason for this administrative incompatibility is psychological. Never-
theless, in practice either the research function or the other functions
tend to compete and the end result is over-balance in one direction or
- VI-2 -
-------
the other, or apathy. It is, therefore, recommended that research be
implemented in a separate state agency. Often this will b«= best per-
formed through state universities, state departments of natural re-
sources, and combined state/federal programs, but in any event specific
and adequate funding should be directed to this activity.
In any state where there is no single agency responsibility for ground
water management, utilization, and protection, the activities included
under the Planning and Coordination function (Table I) become of extra-
ordinary importance. Otherwise there will be permits issued or denied
without reasonable basis, data collected without specific objectives,
planning without implementation, and so on.
Where manpower functions indicated in Table I are quite thoroughly dif-
fused throughout the governmental structure it may be necessary for the
legislature to give some special legislative "muscle" to the planning
and coordination function in order to attain the objectives of the
ground water program.
Illustration of Ground Water Activities in a State
Organization, Using the Personnel Table
The following illustration shows how ground water functions of a typical
state organization may appear on the table of Regulated Activities and
Manpower Functions. Tables III, IV, and V show a typical organizational
structure of the three state agencies usually charged with the responsi-
bility for water related programs — an Environmental Protection Agency,
- VI-3 -
-------
a department of health, and a department of natural resources. These
tables are not intended as models, but simply as illustrations of
fairly common types of state organizations.
Table VI, which is a modification of Table I, shows, by texture, the
portions of the Regulated Activities vs. Manpower Function matrix that
are actually dealt with by the existing agency structure. Those activ-
ities performed by the EPA are a light dot pattern (" • . ), those of
the Department of Health are a blotch pattern (if,: .:'.' ), and those of
Natural Resources are a dark dot pattern (- ,|_-» ) .
The specific department, unit, section, or division doing the work is
identified by a matrix designation at the appropriate place in the
responsible agency organizational chart. Thus the ground water pro-
tection responsibility for the permitting of a sanitary landfill, matrix
designation B-l, is found under the Water Permits Section of the chart
in Table III; similarly, the data collection for water supply wells,
C-18 on the chart, is found in the Department of Natural Resources
under Division of Geological Survey in Table V; etc.
A person familiar with the details of actual agency authority and
operation in a state might fill in additional squares. For instance,
ground water aspects of animal feedlots, sludge disposal, holding ponds
and lagoons, and drainage wells and sumps might in fact be regulated
under general provisions of the state's water pollution control law, at
least to some degree. In the example, disposal wells, oil and gas op-
erations, and mining regulatory functions undoubtedly cover some ground
- VI-4 -
-------
water protection activities not shown in the table. The illustration
is intended only to show how the table night be used as a device to
"inventory" state ground water activities. Each state, through an
analysis of its own agency responsibilities in this manner, can
identify its own specific areas of inadequacy in providing regulation
and personnel for the protection of ground water.
- VI-5 -
-------
GOVERNOR
Exomple of o common existing Stote E.P.A. Orqonizotion Structure.
(Not intended to be used as as a model), showing where the regulated
activities in table ~SL are being performed
DIRECTOR
DEPUTY DIRECTOR
OFFICE OF
POLICY
DEVELOPMENT
OMBUDSMAN
ASSISTANT
DIRECTOR
mvtSlON
RESOURCE PLANNING 8
CONTRACT MWASEMENT
SECTION
ENVIRONMENTAL
ASSESSMENT
SECTION
TECHNICAL
PLANNING
SECTION
OF
IMTER80VERNNEN1AL
AOttlNISTRATiOtt
LOCAL
SECTION
FEDERAL SECTION
STATE
SECTION
OFFICE OF
MANAGEMENT
ANALYSIS
DEPUTY DIRECTOR
OFFICE OF
REGULATION
DIVISION OF
FINANCE AND
ADMINISTRATION
FISCAL
SECTION
PERSONNEL
SECTION
PROPERTY
CONTROL
SECTION
DIVISION OF
WASTE MANAGEMENT
AND ENGINEERING
TRAINING
COORDINATOR
DIVISION OF
SURVEILLANCE
ENVIRONMENTAL
EVALUATION
SECTION
BCBTtON
WirtB 8BTOLY
DIVISION OF
AUTHORIZATION
AND COMPLIANCE
AIR
PERMITS
SECTION
HEARINGS
SECTION
TEAM
06,06
CD
|-
m
N
-------
TABLE
EKomple of o common existing Stote Deportment of HEALTH Orgonizotion Structure.
(Not intended to be used ma model), showing where the regulated activities in table SI are being performed.
BOARDS
PUBLIC HEALTH COUNCIL
WATER POLLUTION
AIR POLLUTION
EXAMINERS OF NURSING HOME ADMINISTRATORS
HEARING AID DEALERS AND FITTERS LICENSING
BUREAU OF
GENERAL
SERVICES
BUREAU OF
PREVENTIVE
MEDICINE
OFFICES
COMPREHENSIVE HEALTH PLANNING
HEALTH INSURANCE BENEFITS PROGRAM
NURSING HOME PROGRAM
DIVISION OF
ADMINISTRATION
DIVISION OF
LEGAL
SERVICES
DIVISION OF
MEDICAL
FACILITIES
DIVISION OF
VITAL
STATISTICS
-
DIVISION OF
CHRONIC
DESEASES
DIVISION OF
COMMUNICABLE
DESEASES
-------
DEPUTY DIRECTOR
OFFICE OF
MANAGEMENT
AND BUDGET
ADMINISTRATIVE
AND SYSTEMS
MANAGEMENT
DIVISION
Example of a common existing State Deportment of
NATURAL RESOURCES Organization Structure.
(Not intended to be used as a model), showing
where the regulated activities in table "SI are
being performed.
Partial responsibility shared
with other agendas.
DEPUTY DIRECTOR
OFFICE OF
PLANNING
AND RESEARCH
REAL ESTATE
DIVISION
INTER-
BOVERNMENTM.
COORDINATION
UNIT Ad-Ztl-P
ENVIRONMENTAL
ASSESSMENTS
UNIT
AII-2U-P
DEPUTY DIRECTOR
OFFICE OF
ENVIRONMENTAL
ENFORCEMENT
AND LEGAL AFFAIRS
DEPUTY DIRECTOR
OFFICE OF
RECREATION AND
MANAGEMENT
RESOURCES
DIVISION
OF RESEARCH
00
I-
m
M
-------
PAGE NOT
AVAILABLE
DIGITALLY
------- |