[From the U.S. Government Printing Office, www.gpo.gov]
United States Robert S. Kerr Environmental Research EPA-600/9-79-029 Environmental Protection Laboratory August 1979 Agency Ada OK 74820 Research and Development ^EPA Proceedings of the Fourth National Ground Water Quality Symposium COASTAL ZONE INFORMATION CENTER TD 403 .N37 S~~~~ RESEARCH REPORTING SERIES Research reports of the Office of Research and Development, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, have been grouped into nine series. These nine broad Cate- gories were established to facilitate further development and application of en- vironmental technology. Elimination of traditional grouping was consciously planned to foster technology transfer and a maximum interface in related fields. The nine series are: 1 . Environmental Health Effects Research 2. E'nvironmental Protection Technology 3. Ecological Research 4. Environmental Monitoring 5. Socioeconomic Environmental Studies 6. Scientific and Technical Assessment Reports (STAR) 7. Interagency Energy-Environment Research and Development 8. "Special" Reports 9. Miscellaneous Reports This document is available to the public through the National Technical Informa- tion Service, Springfield, Virginia 22161. EPA-600/9-79-029 August 1979 PROCEEDINGS OF THE FOURTH NATIONAL GROUND WATER QUALITY SYMPOSIUM Cosponsored by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency and the National Water Well Association September 20-22, 1978 Minneapolis, Minnesota . S. DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE NOAA COASTAL SERVICES CENTER 2234 SOUTH HOBSON AVENUE CHARLESTON SC 29405-2413 Project Officer Jack W. Keeley Robert S. Kerr Environmental Research Laboratory Ada, Oklahoma 74820 Property of CSC Library ROBERT . KERR ENVIRONMENTAL RESEARCH LABORATORY OFFICE OF RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT U.S. ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY ADA, OKLAHOMA 74820 4'F DISCLAIMER This report has been reviewed by the Robert S. Kerr Environmental Research Laboratory, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, and approved for publication. Approval does not signify that the contents necessarily reflect the views and policies of the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, nor does mention of trade names or commercial products constitute endorsement or recommendation for use. FOREWORD The Environmental Protection Agency was established to coordinate administration of the major Federal programs designed to protect the quality of our environment. An important part of the Agency's effort involves the search for information about environmental problems, management techniques, and new technologies through which optimum use of the Nation's land and water resources can be assured and the threat pollution poses to the welfare of the American people can be minimized. EPA's Office of Research and Development conducts this search through a nationwide network of research facilities. As one of these facilities, the Robert S. Kerr Environmental Research Laboratory is responsible for the management of programs to: (a) investi- gate the nature, transport, fate, and management of pollutants in ground water; (b) develop and demonstrate methods for treating wastewaters'with soil and other natural systems; (c) develop and demonstrate pollution con- trol technologies for irrigation return flows; (d) develop and demonstrate pollution control technologies for animal production wastes; (e) develop and demonstrate technologies to prevent, control or abate pollution from the petroleum refining and petrochemical industries; and (f) develop and demonstrate technologies to manage pollution resulting from combinations of industrial wastewaters or industrial/municipal wastewaters. This report contributes to that knowledge which is essential in order for EPA to establish and enforce pollution control standards which are I0 ~~~ reasonable, cost effective, and provide adequate environmental protection for the American public. William C. GalegarU Director ABSTRACT The Fourth National Ground Water Quality Symposium was held in Minneapolis, Minnesota, September 20-22, 1978, in conjunction with the annual convention of the National Water Well Association. The Symposium was dedicated to the late George Burke Maxey and the keynote address was given by Courtney Riordan, Associate Deputy Assistant Administrator, Office of Air, Land & Water Use, Office of Research and Development, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. A debate format on "The Issues of Our Time" featured national authorities presenting neutral, pro, and con views followed by audience4 reaction, and addressed nine topics: � GROUND WATER POLLUTION--AN IMMINENT DISASTER OR LIMITED PROBLEM � GROUND WATER QUALITY STANDARDS--NECESSARY OR IRRELEVANT � LAND APPLICATION OF WASTE--AN IMPORTANT FUTURE ALTERNATIVE OR AN ACCIDENT WAITING TO HAPPEN � THE FEDERAL GROUND WATER PROTECTION PROGRAM--TODAY'S HOPE OR TOMORROW'S UNDOING � STATE GROUND WATER PROTECTION PROGRAMS--ADEQUATE OR INADEQUATE � THE 208 PLANNING APPROACH TO GROUND WATER PROTECTION--A TERRIBLE JOKE OR A FOOT IN THE DOOR � CONTROLLED DEGRADATION AND/OR PROTECTION ZONES--SENSE OR NONSENSE � GROUND WATER MODELS--PRACTICAL TOOLS OR INTELLECTUAL TOYS � WATER BORNE DISEASE--A CURRENT THREAT OR A THING OF THE PAST The Transactions of this Symposium are submitted in fulfillment of Grant No. R-805747 by the National Water Well Association under the sponsor- ship of the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency.4 i v TABLE OF CONTENTS 2 EPA's New Emphasis on Ground-Water Research ......................... Courtney Riordan 5 George Burke Maxey: A Lasting Influence on the Course of Modern Hydrology ................................. Gilbert F. Cochran 9 Ground-Water Pollution - A Status Report ............................. David E. Lindorff 18 Ground-Water Pollution - An Imminent Disaster ........................ Wayne A. Pettyjohn 25 Ground-Water Pollution - A Limited Problem ........................... D. Theodore Clark 28 Audience Response to Session I - Ground-Water Pollution 30 Ground-Water Quality Standards - A Neutral View ........................ Donald K. Keech 35 Ground-Water Quality Standards - Relevant .......................... James H. McDermott 39 Ground-Water Quality Standards - Irrelevant .............................Frank A. Rayner 45 Audience Response to Session II - Ground-Water Quality Standards 47 Land Application of Waste - State of the Art ..................... K. R. Wright & C. K. Rovey 62 Land Application of Waste - Important Alternative ........................ John R. Sheaffer 69 Land Application of Waste - An Accident Waiting to Happen ............. Charles C. Johnson, Jr. 73 Audience Response to Session III - Land Application of Waste 75 The Federal Ground-Water Protection Program - A Review ................... Victor J. Kimm 80 The Federal Ground-Water Protection Program - Today's Hope ................. Charles W. Sever 83 The Federal Ground-Water Protection Program - Tomorrow's Undoing . ........... Dale C. Mosher 87 Audience Response to Session IV - The Federal Ground-Water Protection Program 89 State Ground-Water Protection Programs - A National Summary .............. Richard E. Bartelt 94 State Ground-Water Protection Programs - Adequate ......................... Edwin H. Ross 102 State Ground-Water Protection Programs - Inadequate ...................... James W. Dawson 109 Audience Response to Session V - State Ground-Water Protection Programs 110 The 208 Planning Approach to Ground-Water Protection - A Program Overview ......... ......... ...................... Merna Hurd 116 The 208 Planning Approach to Ground-Water Protection - A Foot in the Door ....................................... Donna Wallace 122 The 208 Planning Approach to Ground-Water Protection - What Is Wrong and What Can Be Done About It? ....................... Kenneth D. Schmidt 128 Audience Response to Session VI - The 208 Planning Approach to Ground-Water Protection 130 Controlled Degradation and/or Protection Zones - The Way It Looks ......... .... David W. Miller 133 Controlled Degradation and/or Protection Zones - Sense ................... Ronald A. Landon 136 Controlled Degradation and/or Protection Zones - Nonsense ................... Herman Bouwer 139 Audience Response to Session VII - Controlled Degradation and/or Protection Zones 141 Ground-Water Computer Models - State of the Art ....................... Thomas A. Prickett 148 Ground-Water Computer Models - Practical Tools .......................... Russell E. Darr 151 Ground-Water Computer Models - Intellectual Toys ......................... Henry A. Baski 154 Audience Response to Session VIII - Ground-Water Computer Models 157 Waterborne Disease - A Status Report Emphasizing Outbreaks in Ground-Water Systems .................................. Gunther F. Craun 166 Waterborne Disease - Current Threat .................................. Robert C. Cooper 171 Waterborne Disease - Historical Lesson ................................ Ira M. Markwood 172 Audience Response to Session IX - Waterborne Disease V PROCEEDINGS OF THE FOURTH NATIONAL GROUND WATER QUALITY SYMPOSIUM September 20-22, 1978 Reprinted from GROUND WATER, Vol. 17, Number 1, January-February,, 1979, and Vol. 17, Number 2, March-April, 1979, with permission of Water Well Journal Publishing Company, Jay H. Lehr, editor. EPA'S NEW EMPHASIS ON GROUND-WATER RESEARCHa by Courtney Riordanb It's a pleasure to be in Minneapolis with the country's leading ground-water authorities as you meet to discuss the pressing issues which we are likely to face during the coming decade. The timing for this Symposium is auspicious. It comes at a time when EPA is accelerating its efforts to protect the quality of the country's ground-water resources under both the Safe Drinking Water Act and the Resources Conservation and Recovery Act. For those of you who have spent professional careers in the ground-water development and protection field, this must be an exciting time. Over the years you have persisted in telling the world of this valuable resource and of the need for protecting its quality. You have tried to place our underground water in proper perspective as a valuable renewable resource. Your efforts and words sowed the seeds that are now bearing fruit. The 1977 Report to Congress on Waste Disposal Practices and Their Effect on Ground Water pointed out that there are at least 17 million waste disposal facilities placing over 1.7 trillion gallons of contaminated liquid into the ground each year. While the expansive nature of ground water makes it available in various quantities at almost any location, it is also subject to contamination from a wide variety of sources distributed widely throughout the country. Moreover, restoration of underground-water quality is difficult, time consuming, and expensive. In almost every situation, the cost of restoring the integrity of ground water once contaminated exceeds its marginal value in use. It follows that our goals must focus primarily on the protection of ground-water quality rather than its restoration. This is in fact the mandate that has been given to EPA by the Safe Drinking Water Act enacted in December 1974 and the Resources Conservation and Recovery Act of 1976. As we have gone about implementing these Acts, we have discovered how little we actually know about our vast underground- water reservoirs, particularly in light of the potential stresses posed apresented at The Fourth National Ground Water Quality Symposium, Minneapolis, Minnesota, September 20-22, 1978. bAssociate Deputy Assistant Administrator, RD-682, Office of Air, Land and Water Use, Office of Research and Development, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 401 M Street SW, Washington, D.C. 20460. 2 by the millions of waste sources which threaten their quality. It is appropriate therefore that our initial efforts be directed toward the collection of information to form a foundation for future action, particularly in the development of rules and regulations called for in the Acts. In this way, we hope that the intent of these Acts can be carried out giving adequate consideration to the full range of social, economic, and technical implications involved. The 1977 Report to Congress was an example of these efforts. It was an attempt to collect all of the available information on the impact of waste disposal practices on ground water in order to place the problems in proper perspective. Nothing raises the quality of the level of discussion about a problem more than hard data. My experience is that in technical discussions we have something like the reverse of Gresham's law, i.e., good data chases out bad opinion. Another study is just now getting under way which is aimed at describing the nature of the drinking water of the Nation's rural population. Still another study has recently been completed which describes the effects of the abandonment of wells-oil, gas, water, and others on ground-water quality. A major project has begun to evaluate the effects of pits, ponds, and lagoons on our Nation's ground water. It is a five million dollar effort being carried out by EPA's Office of Drinking Water in cooperation with our Regional Offices and the States. An inventory of these impoundments will be determined for a great many using a method developed by one of your distinguished associates, Harry LeGrand. Although the Office of Research and Development has had a role in each of these projects, our efforts have been hampered by limited resources in the ground-water research area. About two years ago we became convinced that ORD must expand these efforts as a primary means of improving our technical capability to deal with ground-water quality problems. We decided to accomplish this by adding to our existing program at the Robert S. Kerr Environmental Research Laboratory at Ada, Oklahoma. I think many of you are familiar with this group, particularly since they have worked with the National Water Well Association in presenting this series of ground-water quality symposia. Our plans for developing this Center have been thoroughly prepared and we expect will be carefully executed. Plan preparation began two years ago'by asking a selected group of your peers to p ~~~advise us on the goals of this new initiative so that they would fill the needs of EPA's Operating Programs and the non-federal user 3 community, yet not duplicate or compete with the research of other Federal agencies. We developed a research strategy based on the suggestions and recommendations by broad user groups and professional participation. -this strategy was adjusted after considerable consultations within the Agency, our Science Advisory Board, the Drinking Water Advisory Council, and the Subcommittee on the Environmental and Atmosphere of the House Committee on Science and Technology. Our actions have followed a deliberate step-by-step progression to assure that this important initiative willI, to the greatest extent possible, be directed toward the needs of the user while maintaining scientific integrity and quality. Our research efforts will address the development of monitor- ing and measurement methods and transport and transformation characteristics of contaminants in the subsurface environment. This will allow us to prepare guidance documents for use by other parts of the Agency in developing sensible waste source control criteria. Of course, a considerable part of our activities will continue to be in the form of technical assistance to the Agency and others. This year we have supported the establishment of a center for ground-water information at the offices of NWWA in Columbus. We are confident that this center willI provide computer Iliterature search services on specific topics to all of you in the ground-water industry. We have also worked with the U.S. Geological Survey to establish a clearinghouse for ground-water models at the Holcomb Research Institute in Indianapolis. This effort is aimed at assisting water resource managers and others in selecting the proper models for their particular needs while sponsoring worldwide workshops to bring the managers and modelers closer together. This Fourth National Ground Water Quality Symposium is another example of our efforts to assure that information, ideas, and opinions are made available to you in public forum. Each of the symposia has been constituted with a different format geared to the needs of the time. I find this year's format particularly timely and exciting. The time could not be better suited in light of the growing nationwide interest in our valuable ground-water resources. The issues for debate have been wisely selected. They will undoubtedly serve as our constant companions for at least the next decade. I am confident that, by working together and sharing our knowledge, we can do a creditable job in providing the best technical and scientific advice that is available. 4 George Burke Maxey: A Lasting Influence on the Course of Modern Hydrology' by Gilbert F. Cochranb it is difficult to summarize in these few pages a life of nearly 3 score years that began April 3, 1917 in Bozeman, Montana and ended so suddenly and unexpectedly on February 6, 1977, in Reno, Nevada, a life that encompassed a professional career spanning nearly 3 5 years. All I can hope to do is portray a little of what George Burke Maxey did and maybe something of who he was, because the latter is what remains for so many of us in hydrology. Each of us as we go through life will leave some mark upon the world, however small. Some will be remembered for what they did, others for what and who they were. Few, I think, will have a greater or more lasting impact on a field of science than did George Burke Maxey on hydrology and water resources. He touched a great many lives and was many different things to so many different people. To some of us he was Burke, to many more he was George and to even more, Dr. Maxey. Born a Memorial address presented at The Fourth National Ground Water Quality Symposium, Minneapolis, Minnesota, in Bozeman, Burke grew up and attended school September 20, 1978. i eryLvnsoapcueqeltl oni bResearch Professor, Water Resources Center, Desert stimularbygivingoron, an pituesqutifuletonvirnment Research institute, Reno; and Nevada State Science Advisor, Halystiemuatined vingoveu with thautifoulnviryondet Governor's Office of Planning Coordination, Carson City, H lasrmie nlv ihta onr n Nevada. throughout his life returned often, drawn back by family, friends, the people and the country itself. ground water under Nevada water law. This early Burke began his academic career at the work in Nevada also laid the foundation for a University of Montana at Missoula where in 1939 paper Burke was to write nearly a quarter of a he received a B.A. in Geology. It was there also century later and for which he was presented the that he met Jane Clow who later in 1941 became 0. E. Meinzer award in 197 1. The title of that Jane Maxey, his lifelong companion and supporter. paper was "Hydrogeology of Desert Basins" He continued his education at Utah State (Ground Water, V. 6, No. 5, 1968). Agricultural College in Logan, receiving an M.S. in In 1948 Burke took leave of the Geological Geology in 1941. Survey to complete his academic training at Like so many prominent hydrologists, Burke Princeton University where in 1950 he received an began his professional career with the U.S.- A.M. in Geology and in 1951 his Ph.D. Geological Survey. He started out in 1941 as a The Princeton decision was a turning point in Student Aide in the Water Resources Division in Burke's career, for from that time on except for Salt Lake City and in 1942 became junior Geologist some brief interludes, he became a member of the working in Utah's Pavant Range and Flowell areas. academic community. In 1949 he joined the From Utah he was assigned for a brief period to faculty of the University of Connecticut at Storrs Louisville, Kentucky before being promoted to as an Instructor of Geology advancing to Associate Assistant Geologist and reassigned in 1944 to Professor bdfore leaving in 1955. Burke was always Las Vegas, Nevada. This assignment was the start a builder and collector of things. He built programs of a long and intimate relationship in that beautiful and organizations. He collected everything-stamps, - and arid State. Burke remained'in Las Vegas from books, coins, friends and students, to name only a 1944 to 1946, and during that time conducted a few. And it was at Connecticut that Burke began hydrologic evaluation of the Las Vegas Valley collecting and building from rough stock one of that was to lay the foundation for Nevada's the things he most dearly loved-graduate students eventual development of its Colorado River with ability and an interest in water. It was also allotment through the Southern Nevada Water while at Connecticut that Burke became involved Project. with water resources and hydrogeology at the During the 1940's the entire population of international level. Nevada was less than 150,000 people and it was From 19 52 to 19 54 Burke took leave from known that the State's 160-odd valleys were dry the University to accept foreign assignments with but no one knew how dry or how much water there the U.S. Geological Survey and what is now the really was. While in Las Vegas, Burke became fast U.S. Agency for International Development in friends with the Assistant State Engineer of Nevada Tripoli, Libya. He served as Geologist and then as who was then on his way to becoming "Mr. Water" Acting Chief of the Natural Resources Division of in the State, Hugh A. Shamberger. Burke worked the Point 4 program. with Hugh and promoted the concept of a State- In 1955 Burke left the University of USGS cooperative ground-water reconnaissance Connecticut to join the Illinois Geological Survey program to determine a first estimate of the State's as Geologist and Head of the Division of Ground- water resource-a massive undertaking. Burke's Water Geology and Geophysical Exploration and to study of the Las Vegas Valley formed the basis also become Professor of Geology at the University and the starting point of that program through of Illinois. Several of Burke's students followed his formulation of a methodology to deal with him to Illinois, and while there he found and the tremendous paucity of hard data and to attracted additional talent to add to his growing squeeze the last possible drop of information from collection of students. general hydrologic principles and relationships. Burke remained at Illinois until 1962 when In 1946 Burke was promoted to Associate he was sought out to head up the Hydrology Geologist and transferred to Ely, Nevada where he Department of the newly created Desert Research worked with Tom Eakin and others on a series of Institute at the University of Nevada, and to reconnaissance studies of 13 valleys in eastern assume the position of Professor of Geology. At Nevada. In these studies he and Tom refined that time Burke returned to Nevada and Reno to Burke's Las Vegas approach to estimating natural begin creating a successful and innovative hydrologic ground-water recharge and formulated a set of research program. And again, as when he left relationships that are used yet today (and virtually Connecticut, several of Burke's students followed unchanged) to determine the limit of appropriable him to both study and work in Nevada. 6 Though Burke did not return to live in Nevada Association of Petroleum Geologists, Visiting until 1962, he had never lost contact with the State, Geoscientist for the American Geological its problems or its people. Through his good friend, Institute, Visiting Professor of Hydrogeology at Hugh Shamberger, and those many others he had Indiana University, and Visiting Scientist in befriended in the '40's, Burke had been retained Geophysics (Hydrology) for AGU. since 1951 as a consultant to the Nevada Depart- Burke was a U.S. Delegate to many inter- ment of Conservation and Natural Resources. In national symposia, Vice President and President this capacity he had helped to shape and direct of the Commission on Groundwater of the IUGG, the reconnaissance program he had promoted consultant on ground-water problems to the U.S. while with the Geological Survey. Atomic Energy Commission, and American One of his first activities at the University of Editor of the Journal of Hydrology. And in his Nevada was to begin building an interdisciplinary spare time, Burke was author or coauthor of over graduate program in hydrology and hydrogeology. 60 published articles, papers and reports dealing His activities resulted in this land grant school's first with hydrogeology, hydrology and water Ph.D. program and its first Ph.D. degree recipient, resources planning. His individual accomplish- Roger Morrison. Since that time there has been ments and activities are too extensive to enumerate a steady outpouring of M.S. and Ph.D. recipients here. Suffice it to say he was busy and productive. well schooled and trained in the hydrological One activity that Burke especially enjoyed sciences-not geologists, not engineers, not was that of being a water resource planner. This economists, but hydrologists with varying was a job he did well, not only in the U.S. but undergraduate academic training. worldwide. This role took him from Montana and At the Desert Research Institute, Burke Nevada to Poland, Kenya, Mexico, the Sudan and simultaneously built a water research program that Egypt. Burke's foreign assignments left behind a first focused on his love-ground water-but that spirit of goodwill and international cooperation in F ~~broadened to one encompassing surface water, water each of these countries and resulted in the coming chemistry, water resources engineering and water of many foreign students to study in the United resources planning-a true center for study and States. research in hydrological sciences. These are only some of the things Burke Burke came back to Nevada at a time when Maxey did; they are not who he was. To have this nation was awakening to the fact that a more known him was an experience, and to each who vigorous and far reaching program was needed in did I am certain that experience was different. water research and training. This was the period Burke was a man of great compassion, who had of time that saw the creation of Universities undying faith in the ability, of young people to Council on Water Resources (UCOWR), the produce. His true lasting legacy and contribution to Federal Interagency Committee on Water Resources hydrology grew from that compassion and faith in Research (COWRR), the passage of the Water the form of the large number of students, under- Resources Research Act of 1964 and the Water graduate and graduate, that he trained. Resources Planning Act of 1965. In each of these Burke liked to refer to his graduate student Burke played a significant role as an active academic progeny as his "sons," and when some of proponent and instigator. them began teaching he was blessed with "grand- Burke's professional career was full and active. sons" and even eventually "great-grandsons." This He was a member of, and in several instances reference was not empty but rather reflected the helped to establish, over 16 professional organiza- true feeling of kinship that Burke developed with tions and societies, and in each he vigorously worked his students, a feeling that was mutual. Burke was to promote advances in hydrology and enlighten- an excellent teacher who continually challenged ment in water resources management. He also his students and through this and his own served as chairman or member of over a dozen knowledge, opened doors to knowledge. But important national or regional committees equally important was the fact that Burke forced including those of the American Geophysical his students to think and act for themselves. Union, International Union for Geodesy and However, not only did Burke produce excellent Geophysics, Geological Society of America, scientific minds, he helped to develop men of National Academy of Sciences, and compassion and understanding through his own the International Hydrological Decade. Burke example. Burke was always ready to share what he was Distinguished Lecturer for the American had, to give a student money to get home on, to 7 provide a place to eat and sleep. His home was directly influenced by Burke or one of his students. always open. These students that Burke inspired, Burke left a lasting and indelible imprint on his cajoled and pushed to succeed are now spread adopted State of Nevada and through his many throughout this country and the world in students, has left his mark on the course of modern prominent positions and as leaders in the hydrology, a mark that will last, I think, for a very hydrological sciences. long time. I do not know the full number of students Burke made people think, whether it was in a Burke trained, let alone the number of "grandsons" classroom, in the field, or in a meeting such as this. and "great-grandsons," but at the risk of offending He was always perceptive and offered up difficult many, I mention some few whom I know and who questions-not infrequently of one word-why? are proud to have known Burke: Bob Farvolden, Often Burke would team up with friends such as Pat Domenico, John Bredehoeft, Martin Mifflin, Ray Kazmann and Jim Warman to let a speaker Bill Back, Dave Stephenson, Richard Parizek, know when he was off-base. Those were exciting Richard Cooley, Jerold Behnke, Art Ziezel, Bill meetings for everybody-except the speaker. It Dudley, Bill Greenslade, Jim Hackett . .. and the seems that many meetings are quieter now. There list goes on and on. In fact it is difficult to go to is a need for someone to step forward to help fill any meeting where there are hydrologists, and not that role to ensure that we keep trying to answer find a significant number of them who have been the question of "why." Ground-Water Pollution - A Status Report'a by David E. Lindorffb ABSTRACT INTRODUCTION Recent research has expanded our understanding of M~ore than 170 documented case histories of the suitability of waste disposal in various hydrogeologic ground-water contamination or pollution were settings. Although more research is needed, our knowledge studied to develop an understanding of the status of can provide a basis for preparing guidelines for action thatgrudwtrpltinThcaeisoesniae will protect ground water from waste disposal practices. It gon-ae olto.Tecs istoisndct is impossible, however, to prevent accidental spills, unlawful that once ground water is contaminated, remedial dumping, and ground-water contamination or pollution action is time consuming and expensive. Therefore, resulting from some old, unregulated waste disposal protection of ground water from contamination is practices. Therefore, more than 170 case histories of essential. For this reason, extensive research in subsurface contamination or pollution were studied to rcn er a oue ntemvmn n evaluate the effectiveness of remedial action in different attenutiyear has fcusdontaeminamntsi variusnd geologic environments. The case studies indicate that theateuioofcnmnnsinvrushd- severity and extent of ground-water contamination is geologic settings. We have come a long way in determined by (1) the hydrogeologic setting, (2) the nature understanding the behavior of contaminants in the of the contaminant, and (3) the effectiveness of regulafory subsurface and in understanding the suitability of action. Industrial wastes are the most common sources of waste disposal in various geologic environments. ground-water contamination. The most serious incidents Although more research is needed, we now have a are those that pollute or threaten water supplies and those basis for preparing guidelines that will protect that cause a fire or explosion. Once ground water is ground water from waste disposal practices. Ground- contaminated, remedial action is time consuming and water contamination or pollution can be reduced, expensive. Each incident must be handled as a separate but cannot be totally eliminated. Accidental spills problem. Although prompt action is essential to limit adulwu upn ilcniu oocr contamination and minimize remedial action, no strategies adulwu upn ilcniu oocr have been established for rapid response to contamination This paper will examine the status of ground-. or pollution problems. water pollution through examples of ground-water Ground-water contamination will continue, but its contamination and pollution and by summarizing impact can be reduced. The role of hydrogeologists in some of the research in recent years. Finally, some regulatory agencies should be strengthened to provide otosaecniee o iiigftr rud proper evaluation of potential sources of contamination and watiosere contaeefrlmintiong futrobemgrund to aid in remedial action when ground water is contaminated, wtrcnaitonpblm. Cooperative efforts to develop strategies will ensure proper Before proceeding further, the terms handling of future emergencies. contamination and pollution require definition. Contamination of water is defined as the alteration of water quality in an undesirable manner and pollution as the contamination of water to the point where it is unfit for a particular use. aPreseted at The Fourth National Ground Water Quality Symposium, Minneapolis, Minnesota, September LESSONS FROM CASE HISTORIES 20-22, 1978. Contaminants may reach ground water from billinois State Geological Survey, Urbana, IL 61801. a variety of sources (see Table 1). Some wastes are by design discharged to the subsurface; examples 9 Table 1. Classification of Sources of Ground-Water Contamination (after USEPA, 1977) Wastes Non-Wastes Sources designed to discharge Sources that may discharge Sources that may discharge a waste to the land and waste to the land and contaminant (not a waste) to the land ground water ground water unintentionally and grou'nd water Spray irrigation Surface impoundments Buried product storage tanks and pipelines Septic systems, cesspools, etc. Landfills Accidental spills Land disposal of sludge Animal feedlots Highway deicing salt stockpiles Infiltration or percolation basins Acid mine drainage Ore stockpiles Waste disposal wells Mine spoil piles and tailings Application of highway salt Brine injection wells Product storage ponds Agricultural activities include septic systems, spray irrigation, and land potentially may move a great distance and may disposal of sludge. Other wastes may reach ground affect a major portion of an aquifer. This is water unintentionally. Wastes may, and often do, especially true in areas underlain by coarse-grained migrate to ground water from impoundments, sediments or fractured rocks, where contaminants landfills, animal feedlots, leaky sewer lines, and may move rapidly through the subsurface with little other sources. or no attenuation. Not only wastes may adversely affect ground In Nassau County on Long Island, pollution water, however. Petroleum products may enter the of a well in the 1940s was traced to disposal of ground-water flow system from a leak in a pipeline or storage tank. Ground water also may be con- taminated from the storage or 4pplication of highway salt. POLLUTANT increased regulation may reduce but not totally RECHARGE ZONE eliminate the potential for ground-water contamina- tion. To identify the most critical factors for pro- tection of ground water, examples or case histories of ground-water contamination must be evaluated. Over the past three years, 17 3 case histories of subsurface contamination or pollution were studied (Lindorff and Cartwright, 1977). A few cases came from environmental agencies and personal experience. Zone of ground-water contamination The information presented in the case studies found in the literature varied considerably, partly because the articles were written for a variety of DISCHARGE ZONE purposes. Many contained little or no documenta- tion of geologic and ground-water conditions. Some incidents were well documented, however, and they provide a useful base of information. The case studies indicate that the severity and extent of ground-water contamination is determined by: (1) the hydrogeologic setting, (2) the nature of the contaminant, and (3) the Zone of ground-water contamination effectiveness of regulatory action. The ground-water setting determines the potential extent of contamination or pollution. Fig. 1. Extent of ground-water contamination from As shown in Figure 1, contaminants introduced into pollutant entering recharge and discharge zones (Bergstrom, the subsurface on an upland recharge site 1968; Lindorff and Cartwright, 1977). 10 plating wastes in three unlined lagoons overlying a Table 2. Summary of Ground-Water Contamination sand and gravel aquifer. As of 1970, the plume of Incidents - Contaminants and Impacts contaminants was 4,000 feet long, 1,000 feet No. of Water Fire or wide, and up to 70 feet thick (Perlmutter and Contaminant incidents supplies (%) explosion (%) Lieber, 1970). If the source of contamination is in or near a Industrial wastes 50 31 (62) 2 (4) discharge zone (Figure 1), the potential extent of Landfill leachate 46 7 (15) 0 ground-water contamination is much more limited. Petroleum products 27 18 (67) 10 (37) This was noted in northeastern Illinois (Hughes, Organic wastes 21 15 (71) 0 Landon, and Farvolden, 197 1) and later in Iowa Chlorides 16 13 (81) 0 (Palmquist and Sendlein, 1975) in studies of the Radioactive wastes 7 2 (29) 0 migration of leachate from landfills located in or Pesticides 4 2 (50) 0 near discharge zones. Leachate discharged to an Fertilizer 3 3 (100) 0 adjacent river in each case. If a stream or river is Mine drainage 3 1 (33) 0 unable to assimilate the leachate by dilution, the17 9(5)2() quality of surface water may be adversely affected. 1 7 3 9 5) 2 (7 In fine-grained environments adsorption and filtration and low hydraulic conductivity limit the extent of contamination. In southeastern Illinois, percentage of cases that threatened or produced a train derailed in 1969 and spilled 15,000 gallons fires or explosions. of cyanide. The fine-grained surficial material The most common category of contaminant limited the penetration of the cyanide to a depth was industrial wastes. This category includes a of 3 to 4 feet [Illinois Environmental Protection wide spectrum of wastes from all types of Agency (IEPA) files] . The contaminated soil was industries, such as acids, various solvents, excavated; this may be the most effective option plating wastes, and others, including some in similar environments. Fine-grained environments unidentified wastes. Most but not all of the reduce the spread of contaminants, but also limit contaminants were waste products. Various the options for recovery of contaminants if this chemicals were discharged to the subsurface from action becomes necessary. accidental spills. Industrial wastes reached ground The extent of ground-water contamination water from impoundments or lagoons, spills, or pollution is likely to be more extensive in areas pipeline breaks, land disposal of wastes, and underlain by coarse-grained materials or fractured improper disposal. Impoundments were the most bedrock. Contaminants may move a great distance common sources of contamination. In the past, in fractured bedrock with no attenuation. Earlier industrial lagoons and impoundments typically this year in southern Missouri, the collapse of a have been monitored poorly If at all. sinkhole beneath a sewage lagoon permitted Landfill leachate was the second most common thousands of gallons of sewage to enter the contaminant. Only about 15 percent of the landfills dolomite aquifer and to migrate some 20 miles that were studied produced well pollution, however; before discharging to the surface (James Williams, this suggests that landfills are a less serious hazard Missouri Geological Survey, personal communica- than other sources of contamination. Many of the tion). The hydrogeologic setting, therefore, case studies were research investigations concerned determines the potential extent of contamination. with the migration of leachate from landfills. In The severity of a pollution incident also is most cases the extent of ground-water contamina- dependent on the volume and nature of the tion was limited to the site itself or to a small area contaminant. Table 2 lists the contaminants for adjacent to the landfill. The geologic materials each of the case studies and the environmental have generally been able to attenuate the con- impact. Of the 173 case histories, 116 were studied taminants or to reduce leachate concentrations by in an initial investigation (Lindorff and Cartwright, dilution. 1977), and the remaining 57 were studied later. An exception is a landfill in northern Delaware The first column indicates the total number of that has contaminated a major regional aquifer cases involving each contaminant. The number and and has threatened municipal and industrial supplies. percentage of incidents affecting or threatening The refuse was placed in an abandoned sand quarry ground-water supplies are tabulated in the second separated from the regional alluvial aquifer by a column. The third column lists the number and thin clay layer. Excavation of the clay for cover 1 1 material permitted leachate movement to the shallow wells when road salt was stored in an area underlying aquifer with little or no attenuation nearby. The affected wells were all finished in a (Apgar and Satterthwaite, 1975). highly permeable carbonate aquifer within a zone Of 27 cases involving petroleum products, 18 located 1,500 feet downgradient of the salt pile polluted or threatened water supplies and 10 (Wilnioth, 1972). produced a fire and/or explosion. Although the The other four contaminants in Table 2 were contaminant in only a few cases, petroleum products involved in significantly fewer incidents. Radio- potentially are a more serious environmental threat active wastes, pesticides, fertilizers, and mine than landfill leachate or most industrial wastes. leachate were detected collectively in 17 cases, 8 of Early in 1978, a number of explosions and fires which affected or threatened water supplies. resulted from extensive gasoline pollution of an Some contaminants pose a potentially serious alluvial aquifer along the Mississippi River near hazard just because of their character. The most East St. Louis. Although three refineries are present dangerous contaminants are petroleum products in the area, the source of pollution has never been and toxic and/or explosive chemicals and industrial identified. The gasoline apparently has been in the wastes that can threaten or produce fires or ground for many years. Heavy rainfall this spring explosions. and reduced pumpage of the sand and gravel The case histories indicate two categories of aquifer raised ground-water levels and forced ground-water contamination incidents. Some explosive concentrations of gasoline into several problems such as accidental spills are detected within basements and sewers in the area (IEPA files). a short period of time. In such situations, quick Petroleum products may enter the subsurface response is necessary to limit ground-water as a result of pipeline breaks, storage tank leaks, contamination and to minimize the remedial spills, and from unknown sources. In nine cases, the action. Only six of the case histories were detected source of contamination was never identified as a spill, however, and less than 10 percent were positively. In 1968 a large volume of gasoline was discovered within the first 24 hours (Lindorff and discovered on a relatively flat portion of a water Cartwright, 1977). table between two pumping cones for municipal Most contaminants are detected some time ground-water supplies in the Los Angeles- after entering the subsurface. Weeks, months, or Glendale area. Preliminary estimates suggested as years may pass before a problem is noted. The much as 250,000 gallons of gasoline were present contaminant may travel a great distance and may in the subsurface. Again the exact source was never affect a large portion of an aquifer before pollution identified positively (American Petroleum Institute, is recognized. In Colorado, industrial wastes were 1972; Williams and Wilder, 1971). discharged to unlined lagoons for about 11 years Organic wastes were the fourth most common before ground-water pollution was detected. contaminant (Table 2). Of the 21 cases involving Several square miles of a shallow aquifer were various organic wastes, 15 resulted in ground-water affected (Walton, 1961; Walker, 1961). supplies being affected or threatened. Sources of Even if the source is identified and removed, contamination included sewage impoundments, and no further contaminants enter the ground-water septic tanks, feed lots, and improper waste disposal. flow system, contaminants can continue to adversely Some problems develop over a long period of time. affect ground water for a long time. With no For example, the use of septic tanks and cesspools remedial action, tens, hundreds, or thousands of since 1910 in Nassau County, Long Island, has years may be necessary to flush the contaminants resulted in the widespread deterioration of ground- out of the ground-water flow system. In Arkansas, water quality and the subsequent abandonment chloride contamination of a sand and gravel aquifer of the upper glacial aquifer as a source of water was traced to a brine disposal pit in an oil field. supply (Sulam and Ku, 1977). About one square mile of the aquifer was affected. Chlorides are a potential threat to ground An evaluation of possible renovation techniques water because they generally are not attenuated in concluded that an estimated 250 years would be the subsurface. Of the 16 cases involving chlorides, needed for natural flushing to remove the chlorides 13 contaminated or threatened water supplies. from the aquifer (Fryberger, 1975). Chloride entered ground water from salt storage When contamination is detected immediately areas, oil-field brine ponds, brine injection wells, after the incident, prompt response is important. and improper land disposal. In West Virginia, When contaminants have been in the subsurface a chloride concentrations rose steadily in several long time, however, quick action may not be 12 warranted. Conditions will not change dramatically, variety of other State agencies, such as the Illinois so more effort can be devoted to an evaluation of State Geological and Water Surveys, the State Fire the extent of contamination and determination of Marshal, the Illinois Department of Public Health, the proper remedial action. Alternatives may include and the Illinois Emergency Services and Disaster ground-water renovation, identification and elimina- Agency. Although Illinois does have many pertinent tion of the source of contamination, efforts to resources, they are not organized to respond to alleviate the problem for those affected, or perhaps ground-water contamination problems. This is no action at all. Time is available to gather the probably true of most States. necessary expertise to fully consider all the options. Responding too hastily may create more RECENT RESEARCH serious problems. In Rockford, Illinois, contamina- The best way to minimize ground-water tion was initially detected in an industrial well near contamination is to prevent it. Therefore, the a landfill. Use of the well was ordered discontinued; regulation of waste disposal to protect ground water this permitted the contaminants to migrate to is especially important. To effectively regulate other wells in the area, including a municipal supply potential sources of contamination, we must well and several private wells. These ground-water understand the behavior of contaminants in the supplies then had to be abandoned (Illinois State subsurface. Then we can predict the environmental Geological Survey files). Perhaps an early technical impact. Recent research can now provide much of evaluation in response to the initial contamination the needed information. would have resulted in successful remedial action The following discussion of research is not and minimal ground-water degradation. meant to be complete but to highlight some of Regulatory agencies, therefore, should be the information regarding the movement and equipped to respond promptly in those instances attenuation of contaminants in the subsurface. where contamination is detected at an early stage. Much of the research has concentrated on The agency must also be able to draw together all landfills in various geologic environments. necessary expertise to evaluate long-term pollution California has researched landfills since the early problems. Environmental agencies in the United 1950s. Several studies investigated the generation States and Canada were surveyed in 1975 to and movement of leachate and gases (California discover what procedures had been developed for State Water Pollution Control Board, 1952, 1954, dealing with ground-water pollution emergencies 1961). The research suggested that, in a dry climate, (Lindorff and Cartwright, 1977). The responses landfilling above the water table would not impair indicated that no established strategies had been ground-water quality but that subsurface con- developed for rapid response to ground-water tamination is very likely when refuse is in contamination or pollution problems. The survey continuous or intermittent contact with ground also suggested that not all States have available the water. We know now that leachate forms even in technical expertise to offer advice and assistance landfills above the water table; however, because for incidents of ground-water contamination. evaporation exceeds precipitation under arid Only about one-third of the States responding conditions, leachate formation is a slow process. indicated that they possessed the expertise, Research in Pennsylvania (Apgar and Langmuir, geological and otherwise, to respond effectively 1971), in Illinois (Hughes, Landon, and Farvolden, to ground-water contamination problems. 1971), and elsewhere has shown that the rate of Illinois is perhaps typical of most States. leachate production in a humid environment is Currently, the Illinois Environmental Protection almost unaffected by refuse disposal above or Agency (IEPA) responds to air and water below the water table. The leachate enters the emergencies through an Emergency Response ground-water system in all cases. In northeastern Program, which maintains a hotline 24 hours a day. Illinois, approximately one-half of the annual Upon notification of an emergency, an IEPA precipitation infiltrates into the refuse to produce representative visits the site and offers assistance. leachate (Hughes, Landon, and Farvolden, 1971). However, no specific strategy has been developed Where refuse is placed in fine-grained materials, for handling ground-water emergencies. a ground-water mound is likely to form within the The staff of the IEPA includes geologists, refuse, because infiltration and leachate formation chemists, soil scientists, and others who can provide are more rapid than is migration into the surrounding expertise in the event of a ground-water contamina- less permeable, fine-grained sediments (Figure 2). tion incident. Assistance is also available from a Ground water may discharge as seeps along the 13 I ~~~~~~~of relatively impermeable material provides a ~~~ NI' ~~~~~mappable base for sanitary landfill suitability Springs ~~~~~~~~(Cartwright and Sherman, 1969). In De Witt - ~~Refuse -~County (Figure 3), only the upland areas covered I j, ~~~~by clayey glacial till meet this requirement A' A' ~~~~~~consistently. The upland portion of DeWitt Fig. 2. Ground-water mound developed in landfill refuse County (area 1) is generally considered suitable for (after Hughes, 1972). solid waste disposal. Portions of area 2a may be suitable, but it locally includes sand and gravel or silt zones within 6 meters (20 feet) of land surface. edge of the landfill where the ground-water mound Only a few suitable areas may be found in area 2b intersects the land surface. Because of the mound, because of the proximity to streams and sand and ground water flows away from the landfill in all gravel deposits. Areas where loess overlies shallow directions. sands and gravels are included in area 3a; area 3b Fine-grained environments appear to be the includes land in the stream valleys. Both areas are most suitable for landfill siting. Clay minerals unfavorable for waste disposal. This ma~p provides limit the rate of leachate migration and remove a general guide to landfill suitability, but more chemical constituents by cation exchange, thereby information would be necessary for a specific site. providing a natural renovation of the leachate. Where geologic factors are inadequate to Cations in solution replace calcium and magnesium provide for natural renovation of leachate, the site on the clay structure and increase their concentra- can be engineered to protect the subsurface tion in the leachate; this is the "hardness halo" environment. Site design may include a liner or a that has been noted at several landfills (Griffin et al., well to collect leachate, a treatment or recycling 1976). system, an impermeable cover to minimize Sites underlain by coarse-grained sediments infiltration, wells for venting of gases, or some are usually considered poor choices for landfills. combination of techniques (Hughes, 1972). An Recent investigations of six landfills in sandy understanding of the hydrogeologic conditions environments in Wisconsin and Illinois, however, is necessary to determine which approach might be indicated that little leachate migrated beyond the most effective. perimeters of the landfills themselves (Gerhardt, The behavior of other potential contaminants 1977; Johnson and Cartwright, 1978). Even though in the subsurface also has been investigated. leachate is quite undesirable, leachate concentra- Researchers at Pennsylvania State University have tions may be reduced within a relatively short been studying the environmental aspects of spray distance, even in less desirable environments, by irrigation of sewage effluent for more than ten attenuation and/or dilution. years (Parizek et al., 1967;- Sopper and Kardos, The importance of understanding the 1973). Work in Illinois (Hinesly, Braids, and hydrogeologic conditions to permit evaluation of Molina, 1971) and elsewhere has focused on the potential environmental impact has been stressed impact of land disposal of sludge. The U.S. in research to date. Knowledge of the position of Geological Survey is currently studying the impact the landfill in the ground-water flow system and of of sludge disposal on reclaimed strip mine land in the nature of the surrounding earth materials western Illinois (Gary Patterson, U.S. Geological provides a basis for determining the degree of Survey, personal communication). Because natural renovation offered by the site. To be aware nitrates are weakly adsorbed by soils, the nitrogen of the ground-water resources and the existing or loading rate is an important factor in protecting potential uses of local aquifers is also essential. ground water. Heavy metals may be of concern in Although there is no substitute for site sewage sludge; excessive loading rates may permit evaluation, geologic mapping can provide a guide metal uptake by crops or migration of heavy metals for the planning and siting of disposal sites into the subsurface. (Kempton, Bogner, and Cartwright, 1977). As we Workers in Canada have been studying the gain knowledge of the surficial geology and the migration of radioactive wastes since the early hydrogeologic properties of the materials, maps 1960s (Parsons, 1960, 1961, 1962; Cherry, 197 3). can be prepared to show, in general, the The research to date improves our understanding of suitability of an area for solid waste disposal low-level waste migration. Although detailed (Figure 3). In Illinois, 9 to 15 meters (30-50 feet) information for each site is needed concerning 14 available; till nea r the surfaces eater-bearing silt zones within 2 Area I: Genlogically suitable for landfill the till nay o cc ur wi thin 20 feet (6 m)tio; lof thes over surfacll; uplay bend water-bearing sand and grael deposit (6m) o f the l and surface; may be near sand and g ravel deposits F Area 2b: A few suitable disposal sites prob- ab ly available; till at or near surface; land surface may be slop- ing; frequently close to streams and sands and gravels associated with streams u Area 3a: Generally unsuitable for landfill operations without significant site modifications; loess over shallow water-bearing sand and gravel de- posits Area 3b: Generally unsuitable for landfill operations; shallow sand and gravel deposits and flowing streams Fig. 3. Geologic conditions for solid waste disposal, De Witt County, Illinois (Hunt and Kempton, 1977). predicted flow paths and rates of nuclide transport, ground-water contamination. We are also likely to public acceptance of such sites may be a more continue to face contamination problems from serious problem than site selection. There is still old, abandoned, unregulated waste disposal sites. uncertainty as to the most suitable geologic settings Increased land disposal of wastes will require for high-level radioactive waste disposal;more effective regulation to minimize environmental research is needed. degradation. Recent environmental regulations Time does not permit a complete review of limiting disposal of industrial wastes into the air all research investigating the migration of and surface water will increase use of land disposal contaminants in the subsurface. Although research because it is a cheaper disposal alternative. Spray must continue, much valuable information has been irrigation and land disposal of sewage sludge will generated in recent years that can provide a logical also increase because federal guidelines require and reasonable scientific basis for the regulation of consideration of all alternatives for sewage treatment waste disposal to protect ground water. and disposal. The increasing volume of radioactive wastes will necessitate action to locate favorable FUTURE TRENDS sites for disposal-especially for high-level wastes. Regulations can reduce but not totally eliminate ground-water contamination. Accidental RECOMMENDATIONS spills and unlawful dumping will continue. Because We can reduce ground-water contamination by of the impossibility of monitoring all pipelines thoroughly evaluating and monitoring waste and storage facilities of the oil industry, petroleum disposal facilities and by responding quickly and products will continue to be a significant source of effectively when a contamination problem is 15 detected. The case histories and research suggest d. The migration of radioactive nuclides in several steps that can be taken to minimize the various hydrogeologic environments. incidence of ground-water contamination and limit e. Documentation of ground-water the extent of contamination once discovered: e ouetto fgon-ae the extent of contamination once discovered: contamination cases for possible application to 1. An inventory, and subsequent evaluation, future problems. in a State or a particular area of existing and potential sources of contamination would determine REFERENCES the relative significance or contamination potential r erene of the various sources. Such an inventory might American Petroleum Institute. 1972. The migration of of the various sources. Such an inventory might ptoempout nsi n rudwtr petroleum products in soil and ground water- include septic systems, spray irrigation systems, land prle and ro aer principles and countermeasures. American Petroleum disposal of sludge, municipal and industrial Institute Publication 4149, 36 pp. impoundments or lagoons, landfills, feedlots, acid Apgar, Michael A., and Donald Langmuir. 1971. Ground- mine drainage, salt stockpiles, and perhaps others. water pollution potential of a landfill above the water Some potential sources may be poorly regulated if table. Ground Water. v. 9, no. 6, pp. 76-94. at all. Such information would provide a basis for Apgar, Michael, and W. B. Satterthwaite, Jr. 1975. Ground-water contamination associated with the developing guidelines or regulations to evaluate Llangollen landfill, New Castle County, Delaware. potential sources. Proceedings of Research Symposium, "Gas and leachate from landfills: formation, collection, and 2. Equally important- is the delineation of those treatment," New Brunswick, New Jersey, March treatment," New Brunswick, New Jersey, March areas geologically most sensitive to environmental 1975, 9 pp. degradation. This would include areas in which Bergstrom, R. E. 1968. Disposal of wastes: scientific and geological materials are naturally unsuitable for administrative considerations. Illinois Geological waste disposal and those in which existing or Survey Environmental Geology Notes 20, 12 pp. California State Water Pollution Control Board. 1952. potential aquifer use might be jeopardized if Report on the investigation of ash dumps. California contaminants reach ground water. State Water Pollution Control Board Publication 2, 10O0 pp. 3. In addition to ground-water protection, 100 p California State Water Pollution Control Board. 1954. plans or strategies must be developed to limit Report on the investigation of leaching of a sanitary contamination once it is discovered. Cooperative landfill. California State Water Pollution Control efforts are needed to develop a plan for an early Board Publication 10, 92 pp. evaluation of each incident and an appropriate California State Water Pollution Control Board. 1961. response based on the hydrogeologic setting, the Effects of refuse dumps on ground-water quality. California State Water Pollution Control Board nature of the contaminant, and the extent of Publication 24, 107 pp. contamination. A regulatory agency may have the Cartwright, Keros, and F. B. Sherman. 1969. Evaluating expertise to respond to emergency situations, but sanitary landfill sites in Illinois. Illinois Geological may seek consultation with outside resources to Survey Environmental Geology Notes 27, 15 pp. properly evaluate remedial action for a long-term Cherry, J. A., G. E. Grisak, and R. E. Jackson. 1973. properly evaluate remedial action for a long-term Hdoelgcfcosi hlo usraerdo pollution problem. Each incident must be handled Hydrogeologic factors in shallow subsurface radio- pollution problem. Each incident must be handled active waste management in Canada. Proceedings of as a separate problem. the International Conference on Landfor Waste 4. The role of hydrogeologists in regulatory Management, Ottawa, Canada, October 1-3, 1973. Fryberger, John. 1975. Investigation and rehabilitation of a agencies should be strengthened to provide proper brine-contaminated aquifer. Ground Water. v. 13, evaluation of potential sources of contamination no. 2, pp. 155-160. and to aid in remedial actions when ground water Gerhardt, Roger A. 1977. Leachate attenuation in the is contaminated. unsaturated zone beneath three sanitary landfills in Wisconsin. Wisconsin Geological and Natural History 5. Several lines of needed research are suggested Survey Information Circular 35, 93 pp. by the evaluation of the case histories: Griffin, R. A., Keros Cartwright, N. F. Shimp, J. D. Steel, R. R. Ruch, W. A. White, G. M. Hughes, and R. H. a. The movement of contaminants in the Gilkeson. 1976. Attenuation of pollutants in unsaturated zone. municipal landfill leachate by clay minerals: Part 1 - Column leaching and field verification. Illinois b. Ground-water monitoring and sampling Geological Survey Environmental Geology Notes techniques. 78, 34 pp. Hinesly, T. D., O. C. Braids, and J. E. Molina. 1971. c. Techniques for removal of contaminants, Agricultural benefits and environmental changes especially of hydrocarbons, from the subsurface. resulting from the use of digested sewage sludge on 16 field crops. Interim Report SW-30d, U.S. Environmental Canada Limited no. 1485,22 pp. Protection Agency, 62 pp. Perimutter, N. M., and Maxim Lieber. 1970. Dispersal of Hughes, G. M., R. A. Landon, and R. N. Farvolden. 1971. plating wastes and sewage contaminants in ground Hydrogeology of solid waste disposal sites in north- water and surface water, South Farmingdale, eastern Illinois. U.S. Environmental Protection Massapequa Area, Nassau County, New York. U.S. Agency Report SW-12d, 154 pp. Geological Survey Water Supply Paper 1879-G, 67 pp. Hughes, George M. 1972. Hydrogeologic considerations Sopper, William E., and Louis T. Kardos, eds. 1973. in the siting and design of landfills. Illinois Geological Recycling treated municipal wastewater and sludge Survey Environmental Geology Notes 51, 22 pp. through forest and cropland. The Pennsylvania State Hunt, Cathy S., and J. P. Kempton. 1977. Geology for University Press, 479 pp. planning in De Witt County, Illinois. Illinois Geological Sulam, Dennis J., and Henry F. H. Ku. 1977. Trends of Survey Environmental Geology Notes 83,42 pp. selected ground-water constituents from infiltration Illinois Environmental Protection Agency open files, galleries, southeast Nassau County, New York. Springfield. Ground Water. v. 15, no. 6, pp. 439-445. Illinois State Geological Survey open files, Urbana. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. 1977. The report Johnson, Thomas M., and Keros Cartwright. 1978. Monitor- to Congress: Waste disposal practices and their ing the unsaturated zone in the vicinity of sanitary effects on ground water: Executive summary. U.S. landfills. Geological Society of America, North-Central Environmental Protection Agency, 43 pp. Section, Abstracts with Programs. v. 10, no. 6, Walker, T. R. 1961. Ground-water contamination in the pp. 257. Rocky Mountain arsenal area, Denver, Colorado. Kempton, John P., Jean E. Bogner and Keros Cartwright. Geological Society of America Bulletin. v. 72, no. 3, 1977. Geology for planning in northeastern Illinois, pp. 489494. VIII. Regional Summary: unpublished report by the Walton, Graham. 1961. Public health aspects of the Illinois Geological Survey for the Northeastern Illinois contamination of ground water in the vicinity of Planning Commission, 77 pp. Derby, Colorado. Proceedings of the 1961 Symposi- Lindorff, David E., and Keros Cartwright. 1977. Ground- um, "Ground-Water Contamination," U.S. Depart- water contamination: problems and remedial actions. ment of Health, Education and Welfare, Public Health Illinois Geological Survey Environmental Geology Service Technical Report W61-5, pp. 121-125. Notes 81, 58 pp. Williams, Dennis, and Dale Wilder. 1971. Gasoline pollution Palmquist, Robert, and L.V.A. Sendlein. 1975. The configu- of a ground-water reservoir-a case history. Ground ration of contamination enclaves from refuse disposal Water. v. 9, no. 6, pp. 50-54. sites on floodplains. Ground Water. v. 13, no. 2, Wilmoth, B. M. 1972. Salty ground water and meteoric pp. 167-181. flushing of contaminated aquifers in West Virginia. Parizek, R. R., L.T. Kardos,W. E. Sopper, E. A. Myers, Ground Water. v. 10, no. 1, pp. 99-104. D. E. Davis, M. A. Farrell, and J. B. Nesbitt. 1967. Waste water renovation and conservation. The * * * * Pennsylvania State University Studies Number 23, David E. Lindorff received a B.A. in Geology from 71 pp. Augustana College, Illinois in 1967. He attended the Parsons, P. J. 1960. Movement of radioactive wastes through University of Wisconsin-Madison and received a Master's soil: Part 1, Soil and ground-water investigations in degree in Geology (1969) and Water Resources Management lower perch lake basin. Atomic Energy of Canada (1971). Mr. Lindorff then worked as a Geologist for the Limited no. 1038, 51 pp. Pennsylvania Department of Environmental Resources; be Parsons, P. J. 1961. Movement of radioactive wastes through became involved in a wide variety of ground-water soil, Part 3, Investigating the migration of fission contamination problems in the Philadelphia area. In 1975, products from high-ionic liquids deposited in soil. be returned to Illinois, joining the Illinois State Geological Atomic Energy of Canada Limited no. 1325, 46 pp. Survey. His work at the Survey has included review of case Parsons, P. J. 1962. Movement of radioactive wastes through histories of ground-water contamination and a study of soil: Part 4, Migration from a single source of liquid migration of heavy metals in the subsurface. He has been waste deposited in porous media. Atomic Energy of a member of NWWA since 1972. 17 Ground-Water Pollution An Imminent Disastera by Wayne A. Pettyjohnb ABSTRACT The volume of waste produced annually is The significance of ground-water pollution depends increasing at an exceedingly rapid pace and, since on our perspective. To those individuals who are directly land disposal is becoming more popular, there is an affected, it is an imminent disaster. Once contaminated, even greater potential for ground-water pollution. ground water may remain in an unusable or even hazardous M any wastes are long-lived and chemica lly condition for decades or even centuries as illustrated by situations in central Ohio, New York, London and many complex and when mixed may form new compounds others. All polluted water can be treated to make it of unknown characteristics whose potential effects potable, but the expense may far exceed the resources of on health are largely unknown. It is imperative that the individual homeowner. we realistically examine methods of waste disposal and possible aftereffects. Further we cannot depend For millennia, man has disposed of his waste solely on federal, State or local controls. products in a variety of ways. The disposal method In most instances no well-established strategies might reflect convenience, expedience, expense, or have been developed for rapid response to alleviate best available technology, but nevertheless in many ground-water pollution problems and in many cases, instances, leachate from these wastes have come back agencies do not even have technical expertise to haunt later generations. This is largely because we available to them for advice and assistance. have not thought out the consequences of our Furthermore, how can anyone accurately predict actions. Several short circuits commonly exist in what might happen at some future date at a our planning procedures. In particular these boil ground-water contamination site since installation down to four major unknowns that someone of other wells, variable discharge rates and changes eventually may have to deal with: (1) the composi- in land use all may influence overlapping cones tion and volume of the waste, (2) the exact of depression and drastically change the configura- location of its disposal, (3) estimates of the tion of the water-level surface? potential detrimental effect of the leachate on the Individual polluted ground-water sites generally environment and (4) the hydrogeology of the do not include extremely large areas. The problem system. cannot be compared to a modern day example of On the Beach. On the other hand, ground-water pollution is certainly a disaster to those individuals who depend on ground water as their source of supply and who awake some morning to find it aPresented at The Fourth National Ground Water contaminated. Moreover, regulatory agencies, Quality Symposium, Minneapolis, Minnesota, September industries and the courts have paid but little 20-22, 1978. attention to the problems of individual homeowners bDepartment of Geology and Mineralogy, 125 S. Oval Mall, The Ohio State University, Columbus, Ohio who usually must bare the sole burden of cost and 43210. inconvenience, perhaps for years. Ground-water pollution may lead to problems of inconvenience, such as taste, odor, color, BAVARIA, GERMANY hardness, or foaming but some cases are far more 15 serious when pathogenic organisms, flammable or Lnfl explosive substances or toxic chemicals or their ,~ by-products are concerned, particularly when :. :. A~~~e long-term health effects are unknown. ..___ The purposes of this report are to point out that '1' ground-water pollution is an imminent ~'*'4. disaster to those individuals who are drcl affected, and that (2) once polluted, ground water More than 2 miles may remain in an unusable or even hazardous Fig. 1. Leachate from a landfill in Bavaria has migrated condition for decades or even centuries. Granted, more than 2 miles and the ground water has been degraded for nearly 25 years. any water supply can be treated to make it potable, but can the individual homeowner pay the cost and should he be required to do it? The gravel pit. Data collected from 1967 to 1970 examples briefly described herein are few in showed the narrow lense-shaped plume had number only because of space constraints. The mg a e ery2mls(iue1.Tegon illustrations are highly generalized, but nearly all migater intearliniy of thils (Fitue has beegond are adequately described in the literature. degraded for nearly 25 years. 1968 - CENTRAL OHIO 1 9 5 - KIEOGN An oil-field brine holding pond was constructed I nomleel prcse auinERm oreGONs adjacent to a producing well in central Ohio in dumped into a borrow pit in Keizer, Oregon from 1968. Two years later when the well was plugged, August 1945 to July 1946 (Price, 1967). The ore the holding pond was filled, graded and seeded. and mill tailings had been treated with sulfuric The chloride concentration in the ground water acid and ammonium hydroxide. First recognized in the vicinity of the former pond still exceeds by local residents in 1946, the contaminated 36,000 mg/l some 10 years after the operation gon ae oal otie oeta ,0 began and 8 years after reclamation. mg/I of sulfate; many shallow domestic wells 1964 - CENTRAL OHIO tapping the Recent alluvium were contaminated Scores of brine holding ponds were constructed (igure 2). in cetralOhio urin an ol bom in 964;manyIn the Spring of 1948 the waste was removed in cntrl Oho dringan il bom n 194; any from the borrow pit. Two wells, reportedly capable are still in use. Recently a number of test holes of producing mr hn70gm(aln e were constructed within 200 feet of one such pond. minute) were intaldoere than70 gpit (andlornsevera Within its vicinity shallow ground water contains montstallped towsea the contamnatd groundvra as much as 50,000 mg/l of chloride and reflects a monthspmer. By waste the contaminantsehd mgrated problm tht begn moe thn 14 earsago.more than a mile. No doubt some of the waste is Moreover, brine-contaminated ground water still in the ground water at Keizer, and although provides part of the flow of many streams and this has caused degradation of surface-water quality (Pettyjohn, 1971, 1973, 1975). KIE.OEO 1945 1954 - BAVARIA, GERMANY Documentation of the migration of leachate Incomlel Aluminum processed Al ore Processing plumes originating at garbage dumps and landfills lePlant is becoming increasingly abundant. Data show . ,:i that under certain hydrologic conditions leachate 'jj..,...r,4...7.4 plumes can move considerable distances and . * __ .*:*: degrade ground water throughout wide areas. .Yad Furthermore, the problem is worldwide. Exler u . . . (1974) described a situation in southern Bavaria, Fig. 2. Thirty-three years after disposal began the leachate Germany where a landfill has been in operation from aluminum ore and mill tailings is still a problem in since 1954. The wastes are dumped into a dry Keizer, Oregon. 19 considerably diluted, its effects remain noticeable study demonstrated that the chromium-cadmium some 3 3 years after disposal began. enriched cigar-shaped plume "had not only reached Massapequa Creek but was present in the stream as 1942 - NIAGARA FALLS, NEW YORK well as in the beds beneath it" (Perlmutter and Hooker Chemicals & Plastics Corp. began to others, 1963, p. C183). bury chemical-filled drums in and along the margin Now, more than 3 6 years after disposal began, of Love Canal in Niagara Falls 3 6 years ago. In 19 53 these plating wastes are still slowly migrating with the 16-acre site was sold for $1.00 to the Niagara the ground water. Falls Board of Education (Anon., 1978). The area was soon developed. By 1976 an abnormally high 1936 - WESTERN MINNESOTA water table caused some of the chemicals to seep During the middle and late 1930's grasshopper to the surface and form pools; fumes seeped into infestations were stripping the vegetation through- basements. out wide areas in the Northern Great Plains. in So far more than 80 chemicals have been western Minnesota partial control was obtained identified and at least 7 are carcinogenic. There by a grasshopper bait consisting of arsenic, bran are at least 30 sites like Love Canal in New York and sawdust. Eventually the leftover bait was alone. Nationally, according to the U.S. Environ- buried. In May 1972, a contractor drilled a well mental Protection Agency, there are more than a near his office and warehouse on the outskirts of a thousand. small town. During the next two and a half months Are examples of ground-water pollution by II of the 1 3 individuals employed at the site industrial wastes a rarity? Not likely, if the situation became ill; two were hospitalized. They were in Michigan is typical. suffering from arsenic poisoning. One sample of "Declared bankrupt in August, the Story Chemical water from the well contained 21 mg/I of arsenic. Company left a disarray of improperly stored chemicals on Analysis of soil from the site revealed arsenic its site in Muskegon. Lakeway Chemical's contaminationcoenrtnsagigfm300to100m/I results from 13 years of discharges to seepage lagoons. Icoenrtnsagingfo3,0to100m/l April, Systech Waste Treatment Center reported that Apparently the well was drilled in the near vicinity 500,000 gallons of sodium formate wastes were missing of the grasshopper bait disposal site, the location of from their underground storage facility and presumed to which had long been forgotten by the local be in the ground. Contamination at the Hooker Chemical residents who had been bothered by grasshoppers site consists of hexachlorobenzene, C-S56, carbon tetra-so e4 o royaserlr AW ,17) chloride, and tetrachloroethylene. Ground waters at thesoe4oroyaserlr(AW,17) Central Sanitary Landfill near Pierson in Montcalm County19498-LODN EGAD were contaminated when Approved industrial Removal, a19498-LODNEGAD licensed liquid industrial waste hauler, illegally buried a Wastes from munitions works include picric truck tank plus a 10,000-gallon tank in the ground and acid, a toxic, intensely bitter, pale yellow substance. filled them with 8,000 gallons of C-56 wastes from Hooker Picric acid is not readily removed by traditional Chemical. Later removal of the tanks disclosed damage and water treatment methods and its migration through leakage. Production Plated Plastics, Inc., a company thatthunarteorsuaedzedesotper metal plates plastic automotive components such asthunarteorsuaedzedesotper hubcaps and headlamp housings, doubled their production to neutralize it. without increasing their waste-water treatment capacity. During the critical World War I years of As a result, residential wells in the area are contaminated 1914-19 18, wastes from the manufacture of with high levels of chromium. At the Cratiot County explosives at a plant near the Thames River just Landfill, Michigan Chemical disposed of 270,000 pounds of waste containing 70 percent PB~s. Preliminary studies show traces of PBBs in the ground water." - (water Well journal, 1978, p. 15.) LONG ISLAND, NEW YORK 1942 1942 - LONG ISLAND, NEW YORK A well-documented study by Perlmutter andpltn others (1963) showed that disposal of chromium Massapequa Creek Wse and cadmium-rich plating wastes from an aircraft '..:.w., plant on Long Island during a 20-year period e� contaminated a shallow aquifer (Figure 3). The ~ . contamination was first discovered in 1942, and Fig. 3. More than 36 years after disposal of plating wastes by 1962 the degraded ground-water zone was about began, the ground water remains polluted in South 4,200 feet long and 1,000 feet wide. The 1962 Farmingdale. 20 LONDON, ENGLAND two nearby mining and milling operations. 19MUNITION Analysis of well waters collected during the A A A Nitrophenol WORKS Spring of 1972 indicated the existence of two zones of contaminated ground water in the alluvial deposits 1 l al I I .I., I I of the Mojave River (Figure 5). The deeper zone, |!,4?!:?'. !. ',:''CHALK[: ~I I I originating from the 1910 disposal area, exceeded 1,800 feet in width and extended nearly 41/2 miles More than 1 mile in a downgradient direction. Its upper surface lies Fig. 4. The picric acid, which has been found in the ground 60 or more feet below land surface. The second or water near London for decades, originated at a World War I shallow zone originates at the sewage treatment lagoon installed in 1968 and at the Marine Corps golf course. This zone consists of two apparently separate plumes. The upgradient plume extends northeast of London, England were placed in nearly 2 miles downstream, while the plume abandoned chalk pits (Figure 4). In the early originating at the golf course is nearly a mile long. 1920's water from a nearby well was first reported They are about 700 feet wide. Hughes estimated to have a yellow tint (Essex Water Co., 1974). that the pollution fronts are moving at a rate of Additional water samples collected between 1939 1 to 1.5 feet per day. The Marine Corps well field and 1955 also contained a characteristic yellow lies in the path of these plumes; several domestic picric acid tint. Sampling ceased in 1955 when the wells have already been contaminated. In this pump was removed. instance poor waste disposal practices, beginning By 1942 the pollutants had migrated at least nearly 70 years ago and coupled with subsequent a mile as indicated by another contaminated well. inadequate methods, may cause water-supply There is no reason to believe that the picric acid problems at the Marine Corps base unless expensive has been flushed from the aquifer within the corrective measures are undertaken. past 23 years. The ground water has certainly been polluted for 40, quite probably for more than 60, 1905 - LONDON, ENGLAND and very likely for many more years to come. From 1905 to 1967 wastes from a gasworks plant were deposited in abandoned gravel pits 1910 - BARSTOW, CALIFORNIA along the Lee River near Waltham Cross, a few Because of high evaporation and low recharge, miles northwest of London, England (Toft, 1974). waste disposal in arid regions can lead to long-lived The tar acids, oils, and sulfate sludge infiltrated to ground-water quality problems. In the first place, contaminate the ground water over a wide area salts are concentrated by evaporation to form highly (Figure 6). Apparently the pollution was first mineralized fluids. Secondly, water supplies may not detected in 1935, some 30 years after disposal be readily available and, therefore, every effort must began. At this time oil, floating on the ground be made to protect existing supplies. water, emerged at land surface. Continual but slow Ground-water contamination in the desert accumulation of oil on the land led to hazardous environment near Barstow, California was described conditions and, in 1943, the oil was ignited. by Hughes (1975). Beginning around 1910, waste fuel oil and solvents from a railroad system were discharged to the dry floor of the Mojave River near BARSTOW, CA. Barstow. The first municipal sewage treatment plant 1910 was constructed in 1938; the effluent was U.S.MC Industrial wastes. Barstow waste golf course discharged to the riverbed. Sewage treatment fuel oil, solvents disposal ponds sewage irrigation 1910 1968 1942 facilities were enlarged in 1953 and 1968. Effluent 1942 disposal was dependent on evaporation and direct percolation into the alluvial deposits. "A At the U.S. Marine Corps base near Barstow, 1::. :. industrial and domestic waste treatment facilities . first became operational in 1942; effluent disposal More tha 4 miles relied on direct percolation and evaporation. Some Fig. 5. Waste disposal beginning nearly 70 years ago at of the effluent was used to irrigate a golf course. Barstow, California is now threatening an important well Other sources of ground-water contamination were field at the nearby Marine base. 21 LONDON, ENGLAND plant discharged a mixture of calcium and sodium 1905 1905 ~~~~~~~ chlorides directly to the Tuscarawas River and to PLANT sulfate sludge retention ponds. The discharge of chloride in 1966 Athletic averaged 1,500 tons per day (Rau, 1975). These field wastes have led to serious ground-water pollution ~grvel~ *...~ Fire problems in eastern Ohio and have necessitated .~~; abandonment of streamnside well fields at Barberton * * 4~~,,44~9ssk*~ in 1926 and at Massillon and Coshocton in 195 3. -. ~~~~~ ~Municipal wel tZanesville, m rthn1 35 ~~~~~~ ~~~~ river miles downstream from Barberton, have also Fig. 6. Ground-water pollution by wastes from a gasworks been adversely affected by the chloride induced plant near London has even created a fire hazard. into the watercourse aquifer from the contaminated Muskingum River. Due to high treatment costs Zanesville officials considered abandoning their Contaminated ground water was also encountered well field in 1963. At the confluence of the in new excavations where it appeared as high Muskingum and the Ohio Rivers, about 220 river concentrations of sulfate in 1958 and as oily waters miles below Barberton, is the city of Marietta. in 1961. Oily liquids also seeped into Pymnmes Almost 20 years ago, Marietta officials were Brook and the River Lee Navigation channel in concerned over the marked increase in chloride in 1965 following a substantial rise in the water municipal wells during the preceding 10 years table after heavy rains. In 1966 additional surface- (Parker, 1955). The cause, of course, was induced water degradation occurred because of the infiltration of the chloride-rich Muskingum River discharge of oil from streamnside seepage zones. water (Pettyjohn, 1971). Ground water in the surficial sand and gravel it is evident that decades of poor waste- deposit was contaminated over a wide area. disposal practices at Barberton have grossly Fortunately, most water supplies in this area are contaminated or seriously impaired streamnside pumped from an underlying chalk, which through- aquifers and well fields for a distance of over 200 out much of the region is separated from the gravel river miles. The soda ash plant at Barberton was by the London Clay. It is evident from this closed in 1973 and waste discharges substantially example that waste disposal, which began more reduced. Presumably, these water-quality problems than 70 years ago, continues to be troublesome will decrease in severity over the next several years, and that ground-water contamination can indeed after a history of nearly 80 years. become a fire hazard. 1887 - COEUR d'ALENE, IDAHO 1904 - CROSBY, NORTH DAKOTA According to Mink and others (1972), mining All ground-water pollution is not necessarily operations in the Coeur d'Alene district of northern bad. Inhabitants of Crosby, a small village in Idaho have been continuous for more than 90 years. northwestern North Dakota, believed they produced Unfortunately, leaching of the ancient mining and the best coffee in the State because the water from milling wastes is now affecting the chemical which it was made contained "body." The rather quality of ground water in several areas, including highly mineralized water (dissolved solids = 2,176, Canyon Creek basin near Wallace. Here high sulfate = 846, chloride = 164, and nitrate = 150 mg/l) concentrations of zinc, lead, copper and cadmium used for brewing the coffee was obtained exclusively occur in both ground water and soil samples. from an old dug well. The well, however, was constructed, probably near the turn of the century, 1884 - NEW STRAITSVILLE, OHIO at the site of the local livery stable. Apparently Ninety-four years ago, striking miners set fire it was livestock wastes that provided the peculiar to several deep mines in the vicinity of New flavor so characteristic of the coffee made in Straitsville, Ohio. Still burning uncontrollably, the Crosby (Pettyjohn, 1972). fires were started by disgruntled workers who rolled burning wood-filled coal cars into the shafts that 1899 - BARBERTON, OHIO honeycomb the ground under the town. In the The manufacture of soda ash, caustic soda, years since, many wells have become contaminated, chlorine and allied chemicals began at Barberton, dried up or produce water hot enough to make Ohio shortly before the turn of the century. The instant coffee. 22 1872 - BELLEVUE, OHIO unsubstantiated event, spa guests began a mass Disposal of domestic, industrial and municipal exodus and reservations were cancelled. The spa wastes, which probably began around 1872 through never regained its popularity and shortly thereafter wells and sinkholes tapping a permeable limestone it was forced, to go out of business. aquifer, was the birth of a contaminated area that The Swedish reaction, however, is certainly now encloses some 75 square miles. By 1919 the not universal. Bill Back of the U.S. Geological practice of disposing of sewage at the northern Survey described an interesting example of Ohio town of Bellevue was well established and complacency. Near the center of a village in the many wells had been contaminated. In the early Yucatan is a large-diameter dug well that 1960's some wells were reported to yield easily apparently is used for more than just a water recognizable raw sewage, including toilet tissue supply. One public spirited individual painted in and a variety of unmentionables (Ohio Division of large bold letters the following request: NO Water, 1961). This problem began more than a ORINAR EN ESTE POZO. Neither the sign nor hundred years ago and remains to this day. what it implies has had much effect on the population or the use of the well. 1815 - NORWICH, ENGLAND A gasworks plant was built at Norwich in SUMMARY 1815 and abandoned in 1830. Phenolic compounds, Our concept of the seriousness of ground-water originating from whale oil, infiltrated and remained pollution is related to our perspective. Generally in the underlying chalk for at least 1 35 years we overreact, underreact, or simply don't react at when it contaminated a newly drilled well in 1950 all. On the other hand, ground-water pollution is (Wood, 1962; Pettyjohn, 1972). These organic indeed an imminent disaster for those who are compounds, no doubt, are still there more than directly affected or those who will be affected 160 years later. some time in the future. The problem is further compounded by a general lack of adequately 17th CENTURY - SOUTHERN ENGLAND trained regulatory personnel, ineffective legal A well drilled into the chalk at a gasworks controls and primitive but expensive cleanup plant in southern England produced hydrogen procedures. The few cases cited above conclusively sulfide. Although questionable, officials claimed show that, once polluted, an aquifer may remain that the hydrogen sulfide was derived from drainage in an unusable or even hazardous condition for from a 17th Century Black Plague burial pit. decades or even centuries. For centuries man has tolerated inadequate RFRNE IE waste disposal and even when the resulting RFRk S IE contamination leads to great expense and incon- American Water Works Association. 1975. Status of water- venience, generally no one is greatly concerned borne diseases in the U.S. and Canada. Jour. Amer. exceptperhap, thos immedately ffecte. ThisWater Works Assn. v. 67, no. 2, pp. 95-98. excet, prhap, thse imeditelyaffeted.This Anonymous. 1978. A nightmare in Niagara. Time Magazine. is not always the case, however, and sometimes the Aug. 14, 1978, p. 46. reaction is swift and effective. My colleague Stig Essex Water Co. 1974. Enduring pollution of groundwater Bergstrom has provided an example. The popularity by nitrophenols. in Groundwater Pollution in Europe. of many European health spas is closely interwoven Water information Center, Port Washington, New with the sa's reputaion, a sliht blemishonhc, Elrk, pp. 308-309. withthe pa'sreptatin, asliht bemis onwhic, ExerH. J. 1974. Defining the spread of groundwater either real or implied, can be disastrous. A few years contamination below a waste tip. in Groundwater after World War I, a small town in central Sweden Pollution in Europe. Water Information Center, Port became well known for the mineralized waters at Washington, New York, pp. 2 15-241. their extremely popular spa. The water, pumped Hughes, J. L. 1975. Evaluation of ground-water degradation from a well, was distributed to specific-use sites, resulting from waste disposal to alluvium near Barstow, incldin an penbasin or fountain used Cal. U.S. Geol. Survey, Prof. Paper 8 78, 3 3 pp. including an open ~~~~~~~~Mink, L. L., R. E. Williams, and A. T. Wallace. 1972. Effect exclusively for drinking water. of early day mining operations on present day water Following a formal ball and a good deal of quality. Ground Water. v. 10, no. 1, pp. 11-26. eating and drinking, officers from a nearby military Nash, G.J.C. 1962. Discussion of paper by E. C. Wood. installation gathered in the vicinity of the Proc. Soc. Water Treatment and Examination. v. 11, drinking fountain. The next morning a rumor Ohi 3 3 OhoDivision of Water. 1961. Contamination of underground quickly spread that one of the drunken officers had water in the Bellevue area. Ohio Dept. Nat. Resources, urinated in the fountain. Within hours of this Mimeo Rept., 28 pp. 23 Parker, G. G. 1955. The encroachment of salt water into Northern Ohio Geol. Soc., pp. 369-386. fresh. In Water, Yearbook of Agriculture: Dept. Toft, H. P. 1974. Pollution of flood plain gravels by gas Agriculture, pp. 615-635. works waste. In Groundwater Pollution in Europe: Perlmutter, N. M., Maxim Lieber, and H. L. Frauenthal. Water Information Center, Port Washington, New 1963. Movement of waterborne cadmium and York, pp. 303-307. hexavalent chromium wastes in South Farmingdale, Water Well Journal. 1978. Michigan begins in-depth study Nassau County, Long Island, New York. U.S. Geol. on ground water. Water Well Journal. March 1978, Survey Prof. Paper 475-C, pp. C179-C184. p. 15. Pettyjohn, W. A. 1971. Water pollution by oil-field brines Wood, E. C. 1962. Pollution of ground water by gasworks and related industrial wastes in Ohio. Ohio Journal waste. Proc. Soc. Water Treatment and Examination. Sci. v. 71, no. 5, pp. 257-269. v. 11, pp. 32-33. Pettyjohn, W. A. 1972. Good coffee water needs body. Ground Water. v. 10, no. 5, pp. 4749. Pettyjohn, W. A. 1973. Hydrologic aspects of contamination Wayne A. Pettyjohn is a Professor of Geology at The by high chloride wastes in Ohio. Jour. Water, Air and Ohio State University, an attorney and consultant. He holds Soil Poll. v. 2, no. 1, pp. 35-48. degrees in Geology from the University of South Dakota (2) Pettyjohn, W. A. 1975. Chloride contamination in Alum and Boston University. Joining the U.S.G.S. in 1963, he Creek, central Ohio. Ground Water. v. 13, no. 4, resided in North Dakota until 1967, when he left for Ohio pp. 332-339. State, although continuing WAE with the Survey. While Price, Don. 1967. Rate and extent of migration of a with the U.S.G.S., Dr. Pettyjohn read law with the Supreme "one-shot" contaminant in an alluvial aquifer in Court and was admitted to the bar in 1968. His research Keizer, Oregon. U.S. Geol. Survey Prof. Paper and investigations span a wide spectrum. He has authored 575-B, pp. B217-B220. or coauthored more than 80 books and reports. Wayne has Rau, J. L. 1975. Effects of brining and salt by-products served two terms on the Board of Directors of the Ground- operations on the surface and ground water resources Water Technology Division, and is on the Editorial Board for of the Muskingum basin, Ohio. Fourth Symp. on Salt, Ground Water. 24 Ground-Water Pollution -A Limited Problem' by D. Theodore Clarkb ABSTRACT The same technology that provided us with the new Few would argue that ground-water pollution is a chemicals and the wastes that show up in water analyses, problem and that serious ground-water pollution problems has also provided us with the means of detecting many more do exist. As serious as some isolated ground-water pollutioncotmntsamuhlwrevsofocnrtinna problems are, regionally and nationally, it is only a water sample than was possible 50, 25 or even 10 years limited problem. An industrial landfill may result in a ago. One must thus ask, has ground-water pollution really leachate plume contaminating ground water over an area of become a national crisis, or do we just know more about an up to several square miles downgradient from the disposal old problem made apparently more complicated by our site. Municipal landfills or chemical/petroleum spills can own technological advances? result in polluted ground water over areas measured in square miles. Surrounding these areas of ground-water I am here for two reasons: first, I find the pollution, however, are tens and hundreds of square miles of re whrethegrundwaer ovng hrughth aqifrs NWWA Technical Sessions worth my time because maintains its natural good quality. The ratio of good quality thyaevrwlldnadifomie.A, to contaminated water is such that ground-water pollution secondly, I am here because of the initial announce- can really only be considered as a limited problem. ment of this Symposium I picked up at last year's The problem will most likely remain limited as Technical meetings in Boston. A quick review of existing and future regulations continue to restrict the poor the announcement started me thinking, how can disposal practices that have been responsible for much of "gon-ae oluinalmte rbe"b the past and existing pollution problems. Technologyg r u d wtrpltinlmtepobm"e has advanced to the point that with proper management considered the negative side of the issue? Can and sound governmental regulations, control, isolation and Elground-water pollution-an imminent disaster" cleanup of contamination sources and areas of polluted really be the positive side of the issue? So, in a way, ground water can be so effective that migration of the Imhr odfn h su htgon-ae pollution front can be stopped and actually reversed with I'mlluetiodfnd h issu talmte groblmund-watsoerepcs time.poltoisalmtdpolmadinsmrepc, it can be considered the positive side of the discussion. In support of the limited problem of ground- water pollution, I will concentrate my discussion on a Peetdtwo basic concepts: first, the ratio of nonpolluted Peetdat the Fourth National Ground Water to polluted ground water; and, second, the role of Quality Symposium, Minneapolis, Minnesota, September technology in ground-water quality. 20-22, 1978. bSenior Hydrogeologist, Dunn Geoscience Corporation, Dr. Pettyjohn has given us some examples of 5 Northway Lane, North, Latham, New York 121 10. serious ground-water pollution and the problems that can result. Most of us have either seen or heard 25 about serious ground-water pollution problems- developed the new products has also provided the they do exist. There are thousands of municipal, capability of detecting an increasing number of industrial, and private landfills across the country. chemicals, metals and minerals in smaller and Many of these landfills have the potential for smaller concentrations. A water sample 10 years pollution, and, in some cases, they in fact do ago that was tested and reported as "pure, natural pollute the ground water below and adjacent to the ground water," today could be considered as disposal areas. Hundreds of additional pollution polluted because of our ability to measure traces problems have resulted from storage tank and of a metal or chemical now known to be harmful if pipeline leaks of petroleum products. Many of consumed in large quantities. The point is that these leaks and spills are serious because of the ground-water pollution is not new-, what is new is volume of product involved and the effort that how and what is causing the pollution and the fact must be expended to correct the problem. that sources of past and present pollution can be Not many of these problems, as serious as they detected more readily. are, however, affect large areas. Most of the serious There will be a tendency in the future for ground-water pollution problems that I am aware of ground-water pollution to be abated for several affect areas measured in the tens to hundreds of reasons. Federal, State and local regulations covering acres with a few involving several square miles. Let's the handling, storage, use, and disposal of chemicals put the ratio of polluted ground water to natural, and wastes have initiated increasing control over nonpolluted ground water into perspective. I will the rising rate of ground-water pollution. Improved use the State of Ohio to illustrate my point. The regulations and disposal methods should decrease land area of Ohio is 41,000 square miles. Ground the potential for future ground-water pollution. water is produced from high yielding sand and As we become more aware of the cost of improper gravel deposits, carbonate and sandstone aquifers, disposal practices and the resulting wasting of our and poor yielding shale aquifers. Ohio ranks high as natural resources, there will be a more conscious an industrial State and has a high population that is effort toward improved waste disposal and pollution spread fairly uniformly across the State. For one prevention. percent of the State to have a serious ground-water A second reason why serious ground-water pollution problem, it would require 410 individual pollution will be decreased is the improved under- sites creating ground-water contamination each standing and capability of controlling and contain- averaging a square mile, or 2,600 individual sites, ing sources of ground-water pollution. Many of if we use a more realistic size of 100-acre sites. the serious ground-water pollution problems that Here's another way to took at it. In north- exist today are the result of past waste disposal western Ohio, individual wells will yield 100 to practices or a leak that went undetected for a long 1,000 gpm from the carbonate aquifer. It is possible period of time. Some of the problems are being that the water may be high in hardness or contain controlled to limit the migration of contaminated some H-2S or iron, making it poor quality water, a water. In some cases, efforts are underway to natural problem, but the water is generally of good totally confine or even remove the source of the quality. The point is, wells yielding adequate problem. And, of course, many of the causes for amounts of good quality, natural ground water such pollution are being controlled now that the can be drilled almost anywhere in northwestern nature of the results is better known. Ohio. If local landfills, chemical plants, or petroleum The control and the restoration of ground- terminals cause a local ground-water pollution water pollution are the keys to solving the most problem, some adjacent area residents may have to serious problems without the situation becoming a have new wells drilled or have to relocate to obtain disaster. The disaster may result from the cost a satisfactory water supply. But, these steps can and effort involved in the control and restoration be done and have been done. Sure it's a serious of the problem. A case in point is the Love Canal problem, but I would not consider it a disaster. problem in Niagara Falls, New York. Technological advances over the past 10 to 20 Several additional examples may better years have provided us with many new products, illustrate how applied technology has been used to chemicals, synthetics, and ever increasing quantities limit or solve the problem of ground-water pollution. of waste. Environmental concerns raised during the In the first situation, an abandoned sand and gravel past decade have made us all aware of the problems pit was used initially as a dump until regulations resulting from unchecked discharge and disposal prohibited such operations. To become an of our waste products. The same technology that "approved landfill," burning of trash stopped and 26 waste was covered with sand located on the site. study confirmed the source and the extent of the Several truck loads of sewerage treatment plant problem. Due to the chemical nature of the source sludge and an industrial liquor are also disposed of and the fact that the problem would not go away in at the site each day. About 6,000 feet downgradient, a short period of time, it was concluded that the but east of the normally expected ground-water source area should be contained to stop the flow paths, are two municipal water-supply wells migration of contaminated ground water beyond drawing water from the same glacial aquifer complex the property. A containment system was installed in which the landfill is located. The position of the and followup monitoring has demonstrated its two wells altered the ground-water flow path by effectiveness. The source has been isolated and drawing landfill leachate-contaminated ground ongoing work outside the containment area is in the water into the wells. Chlorides and nitrates reached process of achieving almost complete ground-water a high level resulting in a total shutdown of the quality restoration. In this example, a ground-water two wells. Evaluation of the ground-water flow pollution problem has been brought under control paths indicated that with time, the water quality and the potential of it becoming a more serious adjacent to the wells should improve and that the problem averted. wells could be pumped for short intervals to help The objective of this Symposium and the three meet peak demands. Consideration is being given points of view presented are to generate interest to diversion pumping as a means of offsetting the resulting in an exchange of ideas and comments. It effect of the pumping wells. In this case, alternate has been my pleasure to be a part of this program. actions are taking place to deal with a pollution Thank you. problem created by poor waste disposal activities of the past. * The second example involves past disposal activities of industrial chemical waste. The disposal D. Theodore Clark has been employed by the site had not been used for several years and, in consultingfirm ofDunn Geoscience Corporation, Latham, fact, had been reclaimed to the extent that part of New York, as Senior Hydrogeologist since 1973. His the area is the site of a modern chemical waste responsibilities include ground-water exploration and treatment facility. A preliminary ground-water development, aquifer tests and analysis, hydrologic water monitoring program of the site indicated budget analyses, and ground-water pollution studies. During the past two years, Mr. Clark has worked extensively contaminated ground water, the source most likely on ground-water pollution monitoring and evaluation of being the abandoned disposal area. A more detailed industrial and chemical landfills.. 27 Audience Response to Session I - Ground-Water Pollution Wayne Jackman, Ontario Ministry of the Environment, bodies. Pump the water out, treat it, and get the cadmium Stoney Creek, Ontario, Canada L8E 3H2: I'd like to give an or other metal out. So I don't consider hard cases to be a example of what confronts our government. It shows the good basis for passing legislation. I think the problem is frustration we have in regard to environmental impact more local, and if you can associate future mistreatment assessments. of wastes, make the perpetrator pay; that's really the purpose Locations of a landfill site must have proper hydro- of legislation. We need more education; we need more maps geologic evaluation done by consulting firms. When it showing areas favorable for waste disposal and unfavorable involves an environmental hearing board, the opponents for waste disposal. It's education and a matter of priority. are given a say. In many cases the regional governments, as well as individual public groups, hire hydrogeologists to oppose the landfill sites, resulting in hydrogeologists Keith G. Kirk, Partner/Hydrogeologist, Environmental arguing against hydrogeologists. In many cases, you end up Exploration, Inc., Box 795, Morgantown, WV 26505: with a committee trying to decide what is right and wrong, I put forth to you that there is no imminent disaster of becoming so confused that they submit to political pressures, ground-water pollution, but in fact an ongoing catastrophe. and landfill sites go down the tubes, although it may have In the coal mining areas of the Appalachians and eastern been a very good site to begin with. Then the cycle starts coal measures, ground water has already been irreversibly all over again. ~~~~all over again.,~~ ~contaminated and depleted by fossil fuel extraction, i.e. In the meantime, old and out-of-date landfill sites are coal mining, oil and gas production. n the three-county coal mining, oil and gas production. In the three-county being over-taxed, built too high, industrial wastes are being area surrounding Pittsburgh, the major aquifer, other than put into them, in many cases illegally; but, because a number alluvial deposits adjacent to the rivers, is the Pittsburgh of areas where deep well disposal has been cut off or sandstone. This aquifer has been polluted by acid mine alternative types of treatment have not gone in because of drainage or dewatered entirely from the mining of the drainage or dewatered entirely from the mining of the the local opposition from citizens' groups, we end up with valuable Pittsburgh coal seam. valuable Pittsburgh coal seam. a situation where industrial wastes aren't allowed to be In the highly acid-producing coal measures of central In the highly acid-producing coal measures of central disposed of anywhere, but it has to be disposed of some- Pennsylvania, near Brookville, Pennsylvania, over 500 where, so illegal operations result. square miles of land are all but devoid of potable ground water because of over half a century of mineral extraction Ray Kazmann, Professor, Department of Civil Engineering, that has aa either olluted or deleted the round water that has again either polluted or depleted the ground water Louisiana State University, Baton Rouge, Louisiana in that area. Example after example of such contamination 70808: This session is going to set the tone for this 70808: This session is going to set the tone for this could be cited. This contaminated ground water adversely Symposium. What we say here will influence legislation and Symposium. What we say here will influence legislation and affects rural Appalachia and helps to compound its will influence attitudes. problems of unemployment and rural poverty. I'd like to take the negative side of this argument that Now, in the name of energy independence, much the ground-water pollution problem is a relatively limited o the gon er ineeen e m c of the ground water in the western States will soon fall problem. Anytime someone points to a major pollution problem and has to bring in illustrations 130 years old- victim to the shovels of the energy extractors, just as much problem and has to bring in illustrations 130 years old- o h rudwtrrsucsi h paahashs that's stretching to make a case. None of the problems that of the ground-water resources in the Appalachians has. Action must be taken by hydrogeologists and contractors have been brought forth are insolvable from an engineering tinu e tae rond otcto immediately to insure that the ground-water protection standpoint. It's a question of money. Who pays how much? section of the recently passed Federal Surface Mine That's important, but there are also costs involved in writing Reclamation Act is enforced. The Office of Surface Mine Reclamation Act is enforced. The Office of Surface Mine legislation based on hard cases, because that means that Reclamation, the agency in charge of enforcing this act, is you're involving the entire country in unnecessary costs already backstepping because of pressure from the coal already backstepping because of pressure from the coal for things that may not ever happen. industry. Citizens of the western coal measures, you have There's also a necessity to place a priority system on been put on notice! contamination cases. Biodegradable compounds-sure they're important, but they're relatively easy to treat. Once you get the leachate out of the ground, you can treat it with almost normal municipal sewage practices-either lagoons Jim Waltz, Associate Professor of Hydrogeology, Colorado or some other relatively cheap method. Poisons, like these State University, Fort Collins: I'd like to talk about number PCB's, are another problem and they need to be monitored four on the scoreboard of contaminant incidents; the and collected. Exactly what to do with it I don't know organic contaminants. I think it was at the First Ground because nobody seems to come forth with a chemical Water Quality Symposium in Denver that I addressed the solution. But I can collect it for you at least. topic of contamination from sewage disposal through Metals, heavy metals, chromium and hexachromium, septic tank systems. Contamination from septic tank primarily are difficult but they, might be considered as oil systems, particularly in areas of igneous and metamorphic 28 crystalline rocks, constitutes a type of contamination that some of the proper steps, some of the work we've been is geologically sensitive. doing implementing regulations, evaluations and monitoring Because it has to do with individuals, it is seldom programs are helping and some precautions are now being monitored adequately. I think this problem is more intense taken. than would be indicated by the fourth ranking ahead of Properly managed and operated landfills today industrial landfills, petroleum, and organics which was the certainly don't cause the same sort of problems that the order in which the wastes were listed according to incidents. old dumps in abandoned gravel pits did. They certainly did I feel that there are many more incidents of organic waste contribute to ground-water pollution. contamination from septic tank systems that are never I feel that some of the regulations, controls and discovered because it has to do only with private requirements that are being implemented definitely do individuals. The conventional septic tank sewage system, have some real benefit. We are seeing it already, and in the the leach field system, is designed to be used for soils future, we will not be running across as many examples that that are about 6 feet thick. in the mountainous terrain, we know about today that Wayne described. the igneous and metamorphic terrain, where I've had most of Wayne Pettyjohn, The Ohio State University, experience, soils are rarely over a foot thick. The weathered Columbus: If you think that the laws are going to stop rock can be altered and dug, and it's considered by county ground-water contamination, you're out of your mind. Let sanitarians to be soil. It has the percolation characteristics me give you an example. In Ohio, which is a good place to of a good soil, but not a filtering characteristic, and I think be from we have a fair amount of oil production. When that is the critical point in the errors that are made these wells were drilled, they used oil brine holding ponds. permitting absorption fields to go in where they should not. Now they used to call these evaporation pits, because they The aspect of this problem which makes me think that put this brine in there, maybe an inch or so with a layer of it is not an imminent disaster is that in some of the mountain oil on the top and all the water would evaporate. Now communities in Colorado, where I've done my studies, we know that because the water level in those things where perhaps 50 percent of the wells are contaminated by continued to drop. Those things were contaminating this source of contamination, the residents are uninformed streams, so they passed the law. They said that we will no about having X number of bacteria in their well. They say, longer use oil field brine holding ponds for evaporation "I've been drinking it for 20 years. I feel great." Perhaps pits. They are now called temporary storage structures, but that clearly underlines the fact that there is no disaster in they work the same way. this type of contamination, but there are also cases We have drilled over 200,000 oil wells in Ohio, and where contamination has occurred, and where serious illness nearly every one of them has had a pit. Now maybe the results. if a person is drinking his own sewage, perhaps contamination route would cover half an acre. Well, about that's not a serious problem, but I do think it deserves half an acre times 200,000, that's a good many acres where more attention than it's getting. the chloride content, as I showed you, might well exceed 30, 40, 50,000 mg/l many years later. Brad Caswell, Maine Geological Survey, Augusta, Maine: The passing of laws isn't necessarily going to solve I represent Maine. We don't have too many ground-water any of our problems. regulations at this time. In fact, we don't have much giound water but I'd like to speak about the bureaucracy doing the David Farlow, Water Resources Engineering, Stanley regulating, as being part of what I see as the ground-water Consultants, Muscatine, Iowa: I'd like to ask a question pollution disaster. We're all looking up to these institutions that is based on a trend that I've observed to be taking to protect our ground water. We give them a little science, place. This is that any change in ground-water quality they give us back the bureaucracy to do it, and it has begun seems to be defined as pollution. to scare me. I had something to do with setting up or Now, what about the case of a landfill where the suggesting ways of disposing of solid waste in Maine about natural ground-water quality has a pH of 8, and due to the 7 years ago. We have all kinds of forms, all kinds of people acid for example, the pH drops to 7. Is that pollution? We hired, and there's a definite procedure of waste regulation see, perhaps, a situation where the TDS level of ground going on in Maine. It's come to me now that some of our water naturally might be 300 mg/I, and it goes to 400. Is procedures are wrong. We need to change them. I go back that pollution? So, the question I want to ask here is, if a to that bureaucracy and I'm having a heck of a time getting change does occur in ground-water quality, but the people to listen, getting them to change their style. Maine ground-water quality still meets drinking water standards, is is just now starting to talk about more regulations because it polluted? we're becoming more interested in ground water. We Wayne Pettyjohn: My immediate reaction to that recently had our biggest pollution disaster in Maine's history. would be no. Somewhere recently I read the definition I'm quite frightened that we may now regulate that contamination occurs when the water quality has been ground water to a point where the bureaucracy gets so changed from one quality standard to another generally intransigent that it is not going to be able to change considered less desirable. Pollution is where it becomes such with the times. I'd like to relinquish the rest of the time to quality that it's really not fit for the normal use, such as the panel members to make comments. drinking or some processing or something that involves the Ted Clark, Dunn G~eoscience Corp., Latham, New use by mankind. I think, in this case, where maybe the York: I indicated that I thought one of the reasons quality or the chemistry is changed to some extent with ground-water pollution would be a limited problem, or solids or something increased by a couple hundred parts remain a limited problem, was that some State, Federal and or something like this, it still may not be altering the local regulations, put somewhat of a damper on what I feet natural ground-water quality enough to be considered was an increasing rate of ground-water pollution. I think pollution. 29 Ground-Water Quality Standards - A Neutral View a by Donald K. Keechb ABSTRACT the prescribed steps must be followed as dictated by the An objective view of the need for ground-water rule making process. The primary aim of such standards is quality standards requires that an individual recognize the to prevent the degradation of ground waters such as they value that ground water contributes to the water supply will not become a public health hazard or harm the users needs of our nation. A vast number of people living in of the ground water. rural areas and a large number of communities are The backbone of such a standard rests on the dependent upon ground water as their sole source of completion of a hydrogeological study which is necessary water for domestic, industrial, commercial, and to determine background water quality information, set up agricultural needs. the monitoring program and outline sampling to determine This large use and dependency upon ground water when water quality changes are taking place and what is a dictates that these resources are valuable and must be significant change. protected for both present day and future uses. There are many examples where present methods of disposal of Gon ae rvdsteol sbesuc wastes generated in America have not been satisfactory G roun wate protables wther onply forsable prsofuthe from an environmental standpoint, with an exception of fraptbewtrspl o ayprso h projects where disposal sites have been properly designed, nation. In Michigan over 2.3 million people depend operated, and managed for protection of the ground water. upon ground water as their source of water for One possible solution for ground-water protection is drinking and other domestic needs plus meeting the the establishment of ground-water quality standards. The need of a vast number of second homes, commercial purpose of such standards is to protect the public health adidsra eeomns n rwn gi and welfare and maintain the quality of ground waters in c n nulturial neved.Ntopments, 3n a gowin allwtri-edb all usable aquifers for individual, public, industrial, andcutrlne.Nioay,3%falwtrusdb agricultural water supplies. A legal basis must exist and municipalities comes from underground aquifers and ground water furnishes 80% of water used in rural areas for domestic needs and livestock watering. Thus it is evident that every person in the United a ~~~~~~~~~~~States with any background in the many uses of aPresented at The Fourth National Ground Water g round water is concerned about protecting the Quality Symposium, Minneapolis, Minnesota, September ground water as a valuable natural resource. 20-22, 1978. The question is then how to protect these bp.E., Chief, Ground Water Quality Control Section, valuable underground-water resources. Even a Michigan Department of Public Health, P.O. Box 30035, Lansing, Michigan 48909. cursory review of ground-water literature indicates that many aquifers across the United States have 30 been rendered unusable for production of a safe, absolutely necessary that a legal basis exist for wholesome water supply due to one type of adoption of a rule or standard of this nature and pollution or another. It is evident that existing that the required steps be followed as dictated by policies and disposal methods have not been success- the rule making procedures. This normally includes ful in protecting the ground water. a process where public hearings are held that are The complex society in which we live generates open to all segments of the population to speak all types of waste: chemical, liquid and solid, either pro or con regarding the proposed criteria sanitary, industrial, hazardous, toxic, and and procedures. Written comments should also be undoubtedly many others. How can we dispose of received and justification must be provided for these wastes safely? It is obvious that some of the those that feel the rules may be too strict and for practices in the past cannot be permitted and new others who feel they do not satisfactorily protect methods of disposal are being looked at. At the the ground-water resources. present time there is an emphasis to use the ground I am confident that all public health surface as a disposal medium for liquid wastes, professionals in the ground-water field believe that sludges, and solid wastes. It is obvious that ground water should be protected from nondegra- materials leak from these disposal sites and end up dation since any degradation may be a public health in the ground waters. On the other side of the coin, hazard or at least harm a user of that resource. It is there are examples where disposal sites are properly obvious that any degradation must be measured designed, constructed, operated, and monitored to from some background level. This presents at least protect the ground waters from the leachate. two problems: (1) how is the background water One solution to consider is ground-water quality determined, and (2) when does a change quality standards. If ground-water criteria is the become significant. The sophisticated technology answer, then consideration must be given to a large available to water chemists today permits number of factors. It is evident that every drop of measuring substances down into the parts per ground water will not be maintained in pristine billion range. This opens the door to valid questions quality, but ground-water rules would be regarding how an agency will determine a measurable established to protect the ground water as a change from background levels to indicate degrada- valuable resource. A decision must be made as to tion is taking place. It is nearly impossible to ascribe exactly what is to be accomplished with a clear finite values to determine significant changes, such definition of purpose. One statement of purpose for as a certain percent increase or an increase of some ground-water quality standards follows: "to precise value. Toxic chemical levels are mandated protect the public health and welfare and maintain by the Federal EPA Safe Drinking Water the quality of ground waters in all usable aquifers Regulations. However, from a realistic point of view, for individual, public, industrial, and agricultural these decisions must be made on professional water supplies." After the purpose is agreed upon judgment based on the facts at hand, public health then a decision must be reached as to how to hazards, and experience in ground-water chemistry. accomplish these goals. The intent is to provide a It is obvious to obtain a nondegradation mechanism to provide for nondegradation of condition, that proper engineering based on correct ground-water quality in all usable aquifers. These hydrogeological studies must be done prior to are aquifers that are currently being used or have a permitting a discharge of any type of waste. There potential for production of water for drinking are several avenues to accomplish this-through purposes, and various industrial or agricultural proper treatment, site selection, provision of barriers applications. Such rules would not generally apply to control percolation and seepage, use of underdrain to the highly mineralized brine or oil and gas systems, or complete containment of a discharge producing aquifers. To assure that aquifers are not within the disposal site. Public health workers degraded or that they will not be degraded it is recognize that the aquifers directly underlaying the necessary to require a hydrogeological study disposal site are no longer usable as potable water procedure and establish ground-water monitoring supplies and thus are relegated to waste disposal. requirements. From a practical standpoint it is To regulate discharges of waste materials for undoubtedly desirable to provide for variances or the protection of ground water, in addition to legal exceptions to specific rules due to any one of a basis for such regulation, it is necessary to know number of circumstances. who legally owns the ground water. Some people I would like to make a few comments believe that not all ground water is necessarily regarding the above noted principles. First, it is water of the State, but a property owner has an 31 inherent right to utilize ground water in a way that system which must be specifically designed to does not threaten or impair the public interest. adequately assess the impact of any discharge on The regulating agency must be prepared to answer ground water. It cannot be over-emphasized that questions regarding the right to regulate ground the design of a monitoring system must be based water if it cannot be demonstrated that a substantial on the geology of the area and the type of waste public interest, public use or necessity for ground- discharge. This means that exact details of the water standards exist. If not, then the argument is design and construction of monitoring wells must advanced that the regulations constitute unneces- be specified. Criteria to be considered would be sary and unconstitutional expropriation of a drilling methods to assure that water samples will property owner's rights to utilize his property and be obtained from the precise depth anticipated the ground waters underlying such property. This where the leachate might occur and that the wells issue may present an interesting legal discussion in are constructed to assure prevention of vertical some States. leakage between aquifers or leakage of surface Probably the most important tool in making water into the well. Another area of concern is any determination in the area of ground-water that the monitoring wells be designed so that quality standards is the completeness and thorough- practical methods can be used for collection of ness of the hydrogeological study and report. This water samples and measurement of water levels. study will form a basis for any discharge permit In other words, the monitoring system must be and perhaps even renewal of an existing permit when able to accomplish what it was intended to do. the potential exists for contamination of ground Monitoring is another area where those to be water. The hydrogeological study forms a basis for regulated can express concern since various aspects all decisions in matters relating to protection of of monitoring are extremely difficult to define. the ground-water quality. Problems are encountered This relates to the specific chemicals or other tests in determining the degree or sophistication of a to be made, the number of samples to be collected, study, which would vary depending on the volume the frequency of collection, and the time period and potential hazardous nature of the waste. to be covered by the monitoring program. Representatives from the fields to be regulated, Another concern will be expressed in this both the private and public sector, are concerned whole area regarding activities that perhaps should about the economic impact of the cost of these be excluded from the hydrogeological study and studies and question who is capable or qualified monitoring requirements. Obviously, if a specific to conduct such a study. It has been pointed out activity may pose a threat or be injurious to the that the small number of firms generally available protected uses of the aquifer, such studies will for conducting hydrogeological studies minimizes be required. On the other hand, it is not practical choice of contractors and could affect meeting to require an indepth study for a home sewage required timetables. A lack of an adequate number disposal system, application of dust suppressant or of qualified firms could present problems in deicing chemicals which are used within normally obtaining the required study in an acceptable accepted or regulated practices, controlled applica- economic and time framework. tion of chemicals for domestic or agricultural uses The purpose of the hydrogeological study is when used in normally accepted or regulated to obtain all known information in the hydro- practices, disposal of untreated noncontact cooling geological field, define the engineering modifica- water, and undoubtedly other activities may be tions that may be necessary, design a ground-water excluded from these requirements. monitoring program, delineate the usable aquifers, The nondegradation principle is certainly a and establish the impact a discharge may have on lofty idea and desirable for protection of ground- ground water contained in any usable aquifer. This water resources. On the other hand, there will be type of report must contain sufficient data instances when a variance will be requested to presented in a logical and understandable manner to allow a reasonable degradation in a usable aquifer. support the conclusions and recommendations. Obviously when variances are granted, the Another major aspect of ground-water quality degradation cannot preclude the use of the aquifer control relates to monitoring ground water to for its protected uses and will not become injurious observe for changes or any degradation that may be to the public health, safety or welfare. Such taking place or to assure that no contaminants are variances would only be granted in exceptional entering a useful aquifer. Both water quality and circumstances where it is determined that strict water level data should be collected in a monitoring conformity is not economically or technically 32 feasible and no prudent alternative exists. Granting generally through an irrigation type system to variances must be consistent with promotion of provide usable irrigation water and for nutrient the public health, safety, and welfare in light of use through renovation of the waste water through the State's paramount concern for the protection the upper soils. of its natural resources. This is an area that must Muskegon County has other disposal sites be handled technically correct and the criteria, where the highly toxic and hazardous industrial limitations, or conditions spelled out completely to wastes are being disposed of. The unknown protect the users of ground water. nature of these wastes present several problems I believe that it is pertinent to discuss both and sometimes it is practically impossible for the positive results and problem areas when the question laboratory to analyze for specific components. In of ground-water standards is viewed from an the past, disposal of such wastes was virtually objective standpoint. The Muskegon County area of uncontrolled and sometimes it appeared to be Michigan, which is located on the shore of Lake willful waste disposal into the ground without Michigan, makes a good study area. The geology is consideration of their effect upon ground water. fairly simple with sandy materials generally over- An example of this type of problem relates to lying deep clays extending to a depth where a chemical plant that went bankrupt a few years mineralized water is then encountered. This means ago but their disposal practices had already the upper sands are used both as a source for contaminated the ground water. Wells that had drinking water and for disposal of all types of been installed to purge the aquifer were then wastes. Muskegon County is an industrial area disconnected. This resulted in the contaminated serving as a home for several large chemical plants ground water moving from the industrial site and with the resultant need for disposal of numerous contaminating many drinking water wells in the by-products from the chemical production which area. At the present time Muskegon County is are oftentimes hazardous. Muskegon County also actually hauling water for drinking and domestic operates one of the largest lagoon-irrigation systems purposes to 50 homes in the affected area. The presently being operated for disposal of waste Michigan legislature passed legislation allocating waters. I' think it is interesting to note that this 1.2 million dollars (a portion of the money came facility provides treatment by three separate from a settlement with new owners of the chemical eight-acre area cells, with a treatment capacity plant) to be used for cleaning up this ground-water of 42 million gallons per day and is presently contamination, for disposal of the chemicals left handling an average daily flow of 27 million in storage, and sludge buried on the site. Eighty gallons. The treated waste water is disinfected and seven hundred 55-gallon drums plus over 2000 irrigated over 5400 acres with much of the land smaller containers containing toxic chemicals and being planted to corn. Fifty-four center pivot chemical wastes remained on the site when irrigation rigs are being operated for disposal abandoned by the defunct chemical company. In purposes. This site was developed on an area of addition it is estimated that 8000 cubic yards of marginal farm land, basically sandy in nature and sludge stored in lagoons must also be removed and generally with an extremely high water table. properly disposed of. A total of 10 pages were Concern was expressed for protection of the required to simply list the various chemicals used usable aquifers outside of the specific disposal site by this manufacturing plant. and accordingly the design was developed to A portion of the money is being provided to dewater and underdrain the disposal area. An Muskegon County for their problems in dealing elaborate monitoring system was developed and is with the pollution and for extension of a central being actively administered to assure that contain- water system into the affected area. It is evident ment of the waste is being obtained. It should be from this incident that the general public has to noted, however, that this entire disposal site has pay part of the cost of the damages caused by been relegated to disposal of waste water and the uncontrolled disposal into the ground water. In aquifers underlying this site are not considered a addition the ground waters have been contaminated source for drinking-water supplies. Additionally it to a point where they are no longer usable for is recognized that many universities across the potable water purposes. nation have water resource research projects A cursory review of the literature indicates whereby waste water is being treated and the soils that most if not all industrialized States have are being used for renovation and disposal of the recorded incidents where improper disposal waste water. The disposal of the waste water is practices for toxic chemicals have polluted under- 33 ground aquifers to a point where they are no but the question must be answered, what can be longer usable for production of potable water. Some done to safeguard the ground waters? of these aquifers are fairly small in extent and There is another problem that has recently simply are written off and forgotten as a source come to light in Michigan. Ground water has become of ground water. Others are much larger and affect contaminated from disposal of laundry wastes that a larger number of people. I know of instances contained perchloroethylene. Perchloroethylene is where the only usable productive water-bearing used as a dry cleaning fluid and many of the small aquifer in the area has been contaminated laundromats provide a coin operated dry cleaning necessitating a small rural community to extend a facility in conjunction with their coin operated pipeline a distance of over 20 miles. These types of laundromats. A nagging ground-water quality incidents result in economic hardship to individual problem has been under investigation for the last persons on private wells or even communities 3 or 4 years and it wasn't until last year that depending upon ground water for their municipal perchloroethylene was discovered as the con- supply. In some cases industries can no longer taminant. This chemical has contaminated many depend upon the use of ground water for their private wells along with a few noncommunity public industrial processes. water supplies, including a food service establish- Another interesting area to review relates to ment and an elementary school. At the present irrigation of crops in the farm belt areas. Michigan time the solution for providing a safe, potable farmers have found that is economically feasible to drinking water has not been resolved. However, install large irrigation systems (which I believe were many homeowners, as well as the commercial developed in the arid West) in an area where the establishments, have been harmed by having their average rainfall is approximately 35 inches per source of ground-water supply contaminated by the year. Production of corn through proper irrigation perchloroethylene. It is recognized that the and fertilization in Michigan can rival the produc- individual ownership and operation of small tion from the rich corn belt areas in Indiana and laundromat-dry cleaning establishments is desirable Illinois. A record corn production for one irrigated and a needed commercial venture in our acre approached 400 bushels. It is recognized that communities. However, the problems we have this is not a practical yield, but is not unusual for encountered in Michigan indicates that operation corn production to be increased from 75 bushels per and disposal of waste generated from these acre to 150 and perhaps even exceeding 190 facilities must be regulated. bushels per acre through irrigation. These excellent The question today is are ground-water crop yields not only in corn, but soybeans, quality standards necessary, and if necessary, how potatoes, and even alfalfa also require larger can they be effective to assure that the ground quantities of fertilizer which is oftentimes mixed water is not being degraded? It is necessary to with the irrigation water. To obtain these high protect ground water for users of today and yields excess nitrogen fertilizers are applied and tomorrow from economic harm and to assure sometimes through what appears questionable protection of their public health and welfare. procedures for the most beneficial use of the fertilizer. There is evidence that the nitrogen is leached below the recovery zone of the root systems Donald K. Keech is a Registered Professional and thus eventually ends up in the ground water. Engineer in the State of Michigan with a B.S. degree in Many areas in Michigan have evidenced an increase Agricultural Engineeringfrom Michigan State University in in the nitrate level in ground water to a point where 1951 and an M.S. in Engineering in 1961 from the University they far exceed the EPA maximum contaminant of Florida. He started his ground-water work with a large levels for public drinking water supplies. A recent water well drilling contractor in 1954 as an assistant levels for public drinking water supplies. A recent egnewrigi l hsso rudwtrdvlpet engineer working in all phases of ground-water development, ground-water publication stated that a research particularly in geophysical aspects and aquifer analysis. project is being conducted by the University of Since 1956 he has been an engineer for the Michigan Nebraska at Lincoln to study a means of controlling Department of Public Health and assumed his current water pollution resulting from irrigation practices position as chief of the Ground-Water Quality Control in the central plains States. The report goes on to Section in 1965. Current responsibilities include registration state that 13 States will be studied for nonpoit of all water well drilling contractors operating in Michigan, administration of a State-wide construction code, submission pollution resulting from irrigation. It is recognized of water well drilling records, and in general, supervision of that irrigation is necessary for the abundant crop water well drilling activities for the protection of the production which we expect from our farmlands public health. 34 Ground-Water Quality Standards -Relevant a by James H. McDermottb ABSTRACT President Carter's recent water resource policy The opportunity to begin formulating a national review served to demonstrate that ground water is a ground-water quality protection program is at hand. in neglected resource from a forward-looking manage- building the new program we should use the host of lessons ment point of view. Ground water continues to be learned in the experience of related environmentalouofsgtadutfmidThsslkeyo programs. This is necessary so that the new program will be ou-fsgtadu-fmi.Thsslkeyo realistic at the outset and congruent with the integrated continue until three problems are addressed: planning and management of the ground- and surface-water 1 h xeto ult erdto n resources of the nation. 1 h xeto ult erdto n The keystone of program development, implementa- quantity depletion must be better defined and the tion, and evaluation is and will continue to be water causes articulated. quality standards. To the extent that the goal "Safe Drinking2.Teptnilhraadcosqnesf Water for Americans" has already been established, the 2.Teptnilhraadcosqnesf point-of-use regulations (IPDW Regs and the RPDW Regs), degradation and depletion must be delineated. should serve as water quality objectives thus facilitating 3 ainlplc n rga utb ground-water program formulation and evaluation. The 3 ainlplc n rga utb major regulatory thrust of the program, the water quality advanced and gain widespread support standards, must be technology-based site selection, acknowledging existing ownership and institutional construction and operational standards, with only limited patterns. monitoring in a conventional water supply and water pollution control context. Few will argue with failing ground-water levels as a prima facie case demonstrating depletion. Most INTRODUCTION people can recognize and accept surface-water Ground-water regulations are necessary to analogies including falling lake levels as a rational provide a framework within which this nation can explanation of what is occurring at least insofar as move towards integrated management of surface- quantity is concerned. and ground-water resources for both quantity and Ground-water quality is, however, another quality. The need for an integrated approach has issue. Many people have difficulty visualizing the been learned in selected instances at the local level. significance of water quality. For instance, it has It has not yet been accepted on a national basis, taken the public 30 or more years to support water but we must prepare the way. pollution control efforts. The need to protect, conserve, and manage ground-water quality, by comparison with surface-water quality, will be a very a Peetdlarge step for the public at large until such time as Peetdat the Fourth National Ground Water the above three problems are addressed on a Quality Symposium, Minneapolis, Minnesota, September consistent basis. 20-22, 1978. bAssociate Deputy Assistant Administrator, Office of The process must begin with a goal which can Drinking Water, Environmental Protection Agency, 401 M be readily understood by the public and a set of Street, SW, Washington, D.C. 20460. common national standards which acknowledge critical uses and are accepted and supported by the 35 technical and professional community. Common which goes beyond water resource planning and bench marks, water quality standards, are needed development, beyond ground-water quality today to facilitate the technical debates which are protection, to fully integrated water resource now gaining momentum, as evidenced by this management. Symposium, leading towards eventual problem definition and program development. WHERE TO START And in a larger sense, ground-water regulations To begin to manage ground-water quality we will be essential to the conjunctive management of must (1) first set an achievable goal, (2) move to the nation's ground- and surface-water resources define the problem, (3) examine and select control in the future. options, (4) set objectives, (5) augment or establish institutions when and where needed, LESSONS FROM THE PAST (6) provide for evaluation and feedback, and From the recent water resource policy review (7) communicate the problem and solution to the we have learned that past categorical water resource public. planning and development not only neglected Acceptance of these basic principles, which ground water but that the categorical priority given must be accounted for at the birth of all new to surface-water development also frequently led programs, highlights the importance of to adverse environmental consequences and "standards." economic excess. Similarly, the last twenty years of The goal must make sense, both common sense ever increasing national priority for water and economic sense. For my part the goal is clear- pollution control, ostensibly a comprehensive safe drinking water for all Americans. What is less cleanup of the nation's water resources in the name clear with respect to ground water is whether or of current and future generations, has neglected not there is a threat. And, if there is a threat, who ground-water quality. Indeed past surface-water should pay for remedial action and regulatory cleanup priorities have been responsible for, and monitoring? recent land treatment initiatives (Session III) The common view in the past was that ground threaten in the minds of many, yet additional waters are safe if drinkable. Today, largely because endangerment to ground-water quality. of the public notice provisions of the Interim Thankfully these imbalances in categorical Primary Drinking Water Regulations and public approaches and loopholes in legal authorities have awareness associated with EPA's proposed synthetic been identified and articulated in professional organic contaminant regulations, the American journals and Congressional hearings during this public is beginning to recognize that our senses of decade. Assisted by scientists, engineers, and taste and smell are no longer adequate. environmentalists, the Congress has moved to if ground-water quality is questionable, there provide an array of statutes which provide at least a will emerge a recognition that someone is going to starting point to articulate the problems (Session I) have to pay for cleanup or for quality control. it and begin managing the quality of the nation's is also clear that those who are dependent upon ground-water resource (Session IV). ground water will conclude that they should not The fact that awareness and opportunity occur have to pay for treatment because of someone in an era of budget deficits, the inflationary spiral, else's current or potential "abuse" of ground-water4 the energy crunch and the regulatory backlash quality. should not dissuade us. There has never been a If we are to legitimately capitalize on the "good" time to increase the regulatory burden emerging recognition of ground-water pollution or the Federal, State, and local financial burden in and the safety of drinking water issue we must be the last twenty years. Only now that the program is prepared to define "abuse" and to identify, select well advanced are the real benefits of surface-water from, and communicate control options that make cleanup becoming apparent. And, only now that sense-common sense and economic sense. P.L. the adequacy of surface-water resource is being 93-523 provides a mechanism to define safety questioned is the concern for ground-water through point-of-use regulations. The abuse-safety resources growing. So those among us who are test at the consumers'-tap is thus established by concerned with the environment and public health maximum contaminant levels (MCL's) and potential and see the future need for conjunctive manage- treatment requirements specified in the 1PDW ment, should learn from the lessons of the past regulations. At this point in the program evolution and move to formulate a ground-water strategy we must address several questions. 36 *Should the burden of proof of pollution be are being financed and installed at a $3 billion on the user, or the Federal, State, or local annual rate. *gSoulvtercstofmenitrn esae Such likely consequences did not make sense amSongulesad wathe disostr ofmntrin be shaedsl to the Congress when it established the initial scope amsongsersit ofnth waste disposrer,?rb tesl of the Underground Injection Control Program in responsiblit of must wase depndontcharlger? the Safe Drinking Water Act of 1974. And the bansed oregulatiodpnd ton tontrolpotnilgyon - prospects will not appeal to the nation's citizens baeweuatiostocnro potentialgound- who pay the bills, either the local water bill or water pouitorngenncsar? through price increases in food, fiber and service Th Iser inamommnitornee ncomessarl, upon which the country is so dependent. agiuThea an nuserinal sensemunity commerinuelt But there is yet another more subtle reason bagricutuerasosblit and indstofrouialsnse mus ontinetor for not burdening the water user with responsibility bear tfhis sorcespofnsibilyeity surfacos of groutnedoitr for monitoring pollution which can be prevented. water ofhis isource ofnuply way thatuheacan assureuth Economics argues against burdening the ground- quality of the product, modify or install additional wateor morer ofithousearhnds ofporthemrentia polltns treatment, or spot the signals identifying the M oreovrmreo thepovisiond for ptretentia polluiremnts. occurrence of unexpected changes in water quality. Moeoer lieu pofvision was creatmednt reconiiremnofthe These costs are now being borne by users, but have i iuo C' a rae nrcgiino h led many people to jump to the erroneous fact that many exotic pollutants can only be conclusion that the nation's ground-water- measured in research laboratories. Thus, total dependent systems should also serve as a National dependence upon point-of-use measurement would Ground-Water Pollution Network. After all, goes be both economically unreasonable and techno- the argument, why increase the monitoring cost by lgclydneos requiring additional observation wells or by adding REALITY TWO to the burden of potential ground-water polluters?Aseodraiysthtpluonrvnin Unfortunately, the establishment of a national m us beginond rendaltyi that solution.prevenertion o programtion maaged and monitorcntte groundwteof experience with concepts like "enforceable" stream proectisndbased ton monit.Lsorng ato the pointor of quality standards highlighted economic and legal use isurface-wte poltion facLsonstromlh hitryogra realities that cannot be dismissed. Control at the tesupprfaewte polthioncnto progamiy source is the only viable basis upon which to proceed support this reality. ~~~~in the United States. REALITY ONE ~~~~~~But even this principle, forged on the anvil of ~~~RAIYONEreltwhchabenmnindts surface-water quality control efforts, creates One ralit whih ha beenmentonedthisdilemmas when efforts are made to translate this morning, and will be mentioned time and time again lesson from surface water to ground water. For during this Symposium, is that once polluted, an isachwd etasaete"eodshre aquifer is extremely difficult and costly to clean p insacipe, tow the prevnslate the gzround-wcatrge up. Neither dilution nor natural purification can be pouioniple how canhe arvoidmaiong somegound-aer ecouned on. ne goudwtrs more polluinthed (iPD egs) thesponsible for monitoring, to signal the early exceed one o more MdrininnteIPWR gs th violations of technology standards, when we know nation's self-supplied homesteads, public d rnigthat once polluted by pits, ponds, fills, dumps or water ystem, andotheruserswill ncur:injection practices, the aquifer could stay polluted 1. Additional monitoring costs in attempts to for generations? isolate the cause and examine alternative control measures; REALITY THREE 2. Treatment costs to meet quality require- To those who cry for control and prevention ments; or at any price, a third reality must be communicated. No activity conceived and implemented by man can 3. The cost of using alternative sources of be certified as 100 percent perfect or risk free. supply; while There will always be risks in design and in the 4. Continuing to pay off the cost of existing construction of physical facilities. Moreover, many wells and pumping facilities, with interest, which design and construction issues are in fact created by 37 the nature of the earth itself. The earth and its be prepared to listen and to compromise so that aquifers are seldom homogeneous or continuous. a start can be made. Parties at each pole must move Further, the often heralded natural attenuation to forge a workable consensus so that a credible phenomena (applicable to certain pollutants), while program can be presented to the public at large. effective in degree, provide no lifetime guarantee. For our part, we at EPA are moving to identify4 Accepting these realities means that the only for consideration and to integrate for implementation reasonable approach is to move to a technology- numerous available pollution control authorities. based standard calling for "virtual zero discharge" Vic Kimm's presentation during Session IV for pollutants. This, in my view, will require articulates the substantial progress being made evaluation of a series of tradeoffs which are clearly within EPA toward issuing a revised version of4 beyond the scope of this paper. For instance, the the Underground Injection Control Regulations as cost of the construction-modification-operation of part of a comprehensive, agency-wide strategy to a facility must be brought into balance with site- control ground-water quality. monitoring cost, the quality of the aquifers potentially impacted, the number of current or CONCLUSION potential users at risk, and the economic impacts The opportunity to begin formulating a which users might sustain. national ground-water quality protection program Again, in my view, site monitoring will require is at hand. In building the new program we should keen professional judgement. There are activities use the host of lessons learned in the experience where, because of clear knowledge and experience of related environmental programs. This is with the waste in question, the method of disposal necessary so that the new program will be realistic and the geology involved, no monitoring will be at the outset and congruent with the integrated needed. There will be other circumstances where planning and management of the ground and simple surrogates such as pH, temperature, pressure surface-water resources of the nation. or color tests will be judged necessary at the site. The keystone of program development, In other situations involving dangerous wastes implementation, and evaluation is and will those responsible for disposal should be required to continue to be water quality standards. To the install and monitor observation wells for specific extent that the goal "Safe Drinking Water for contaminants. Finally, selected waste disposal Americans" has already been established, the operations involving dangerous materials should point-of-use regulations (IPDW Regs and the bear the cost of monitoring for specific supple- RPDW Regs) should serve as water quality mental analysis, including those contaminants objectives thus facilitating ground-water program designated under the Safe Drinking Water Act. formulation and evaluation. The major regulatory thrust of the program, the water quality THE FINAL REALITY standards, must be technology-based site selection, The questions and issues I have been construction, and operational standards, with only addressing (and indeed, concepts like "virtual zero limited monitoring in a conventional water supply discharge" and "professional judgement") were and water pollution control context. purposefully chosen to stimulate this debate. Yet Let's not repeat the errors of the past. Let's great care must be exercised to avoid the do it right. Let's start now. misunderstanding and divisions which these terms * * * may inadvertently create. Thus, we must recognize James H. McDermott is the Associate Deputy a final reality: the problem of communication. Assistant Administrator of the new Office of Drinking Many of the concerned and involved parties Water which was formed following the passage of the Safe enter the debate from different poles. Some people Drinking Water Act. He was previously the Director of tend to deal in stereotypes or are trained in the Water Supply Division, which was established when EPA was formed in 19 70. Prior to joining EPA, Mr. absolutes. Others function in a physical, chemical McDermott bad been the Director of the Bureau of Water and economic world where absolutes cannot be Hygiene, Environmental Control Administration, in the predicted, designed, or constructed. If new ground- Department of Health, Education and Welfare since water quality standards are to be developed and 1969. Mr. McDermott received his B.S. in Civil Engineering ultiatey inegrtedinto a comprehensive water from the Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute in 1955 and his rsurceimanaeme nteprgrammtualgeedl M.S. from Purdue University in 195 7. He has puhblished resoure manaement rogram mutualy agreable numerous articles and reports on various aspects of water standards which are feasible and economically supply, pollution control, and water resource development viable must be negotiated. Thus all parties must and management. 3 8 Ground-Water Quality Standards -Irrelevanta by Frank A. Raynerb ABSTRACT Substances Control Act (PL 94-469); and Surface Mining Proposals to establish national ground-water quality Control and Reclamation Act (PL 95-87)-are totally standards appear to be premature, and redundant because unknown, since the procedures for full implementation of of the geohydrologic and geochemical factors governing the these acts have yet to be developed. occurrence and development of ground water. Although it Therefore, it appears that establishing a new ground- can be reasoned that there is no "good time" to establish water quality control act prior to testing existing law and additional governmental standards (and the resultant thereby learning from their flaws or shortcomings, could additional governmental regulations), it can also be result in unnecessary proliferation of law without its strongly argued that now is a "bad time" to consider reasonable testing. establishment of the proposed standards. This appears to be a good time to interrupt the First, a present mood of the general public is away geometric progression that tends to spawn additional laws from more governmental involvement in the business and when laws are developed ahead of their established need. private sectors, and a rebellion against the increasing cost Equitable and workable ground-water quality of government. Second, the applicability and workability of protection could be fostered through the enactment of present Federal (and some State) laws that could be used the long overdue requirement; for the integration of surface- to adequately protect ground-water quality, have yet to and ground-water development and management programs, be implemented or otherwise sufficiently tested. without widening the existing gap between present ground- The full force and effect of the Water Pollution Control water and surface-water management structures. This Act (PL 92-500 with amendments) has yet to be imple- integration would decrease inefficiency of use of these mented, and Congress is still considering its "oversights" in water resources-which are actually inseparable in identity their drafting of same. to their users, the American taxpayers. The Safe Drinking Water Act (PL 93-523), particularly those sections designed or usable to protect ground-water SvrlyasaoIpooe htteewsn quality, have yet to be tested by the EPA. Like PL 92-500, Severa yengars naturall purosed thattere wartclal ino the deadline for implementation of parts of PL 9 3-523suhtigantrlyprewepricalyn has long since passed. the Texas water community, and that the formula And the far-reaching effects on ground-water quality for water should be changed from H20 to H202- protection that three other federal laws-the Resource that is, two parts hydrogen, one part oxygen, and Conservation Recovery Act (PL 94-5 80); the Toxic one part opinion. At about the same time I suggested to my Texas colleagues that we could advance the causes of water conservation, protection and development aPresented at The Fourth National Ground Water 10 years by simply establishing a one-year Quality Symposium, Minneapolis, Minnesota, September mrtru nwtrmeig.Iraoe htsc 20-22, 1978. mrtru nwtrmeig.Iraoe htsc bConsulting Engineer and Geologist, 1706 26th St., a moratorium would enable those that attend the Suite I, Lubbock, Texas 79411. water meetings-which are usually the same people, all employed by water agencies-to work 39 uninterruptedly for at least one year, which the only living thing so doing; the Monongahela would be equivalent to 10 years of normal water- was completely devoid of fish and other aquatic meeting-interrupted work. The first proposal met life. with blank stares, and the latter with hostile ones. Large slate dumps smoldered during my entire But, today, with this presentation, I will 18 years at home, and their sulphur gases and ash probably prove the first contention, and possibly particulate matter combined with that of whole hasten the institution of the latter. hillsides full of black smoke-producing coke ovens, My circumstance of habitat makes it very kept the entire area covered with raindrop-size difficult for me to take the position I find myself black, oily soot gobs. White snow only existed in today-opposing the creation of new laws and below its top layer, and sulphur gases ate the metal rules that may offer the potential to fully protect off cars and other objects with considerably more one of the nation's most useful and essential efficiency than does salty ocean spray. To an resources-ground water. outsider, rust would appear to be the residents' Assaulted by the bleatings of the rabid, mania for choice of color. so-called, conservationists, I tend to turn a deaf From mountain momma I moved (in military ear to their cause; but I am forced to recall my service) to the arid West, where the economy is youth in the hills of West Virginia. Born and raised almost totally dependent upon the development of through high school on a small hillside farm (here I ground water and petroleum resources; and the have used the term "farm" generously, because exploitation of these resources was like no change at the size of that West Virginia farm would be about all in habitat from my native West Virginia; the that of a Texas family's vegetable garden plot) on only difference between the two habitats being the Monongahela River, Morgantown, West Virginia, two-thirds less rainfall, and 100 percent fewer trees. I lived through the era of the rape of that beautiful Brine produced with oil and natural gas was land's abundant bituminous coal. being discharged onto the very permeable soils Hillside and strip mines belched blood-red at the land surface, to simply migrate downwards mine acid waste into all of the area's many streams. from the so-called (unlined) evaporation pits (some Strip (now called surface) mining was practiced conveniently fitted with wells at their bottom) to without any land reclamation requirements. The enter and contaminate beyond use, the near- giant earth movers skirted the contours of the hills surface aquifers which in most cases, were the leaving ugly yellow scars, devoid of any ground- only fresh-water supply available. protecting vegetative cover-, uprooting and covering Since stream flow, in most of the area, only millions of tall, stately hardwood trees, when the occurred after storms, they were undependable as coal-bed overburden of yellow clay and rock was a fresh-water supply-ground water being the only simply pushed over the side of the hill. The area's dependable supply-so such streams were used as over-abundant rainfall did the rest, carrying the waste disposal dumps. The Trinity River between loose yellow earth into the nearest stream. Fort Worth and Dallas was visible for miles on the Mine acid drainage kept most of the streams' darkest night-by smell. The Houston Ship Channel water, and their rocky beds, colored a brilliant was claimed to contain the most buoyant water orange, and the larger (navigable) Monongahela in Texas, suspended and dissolved solids adding River a light pink. Sewage outfalls were always greatly to its waters' density. elevated to protect them from rising water, and These are only a few examples, but conditions totally untreated sewage, comprised of an enormous were similar throughout our Nation-the rape of amount of solids, formed waterfalls of changing the environment was accepted as a way of life. hues and varicolored large objects splashed into But today, my former habitats have changed. the Monongahela's waters. It is no longer considered foolish to wish to live on Living between the confluence of Sulphur the banks of the Monongahela River; pleasure Creek (a local name given to Dunkards Run, boating, swimming and fishing have returned because of its brilliant orange, or at low flow, blood thereto. The slate dumps have disappeared and red, color) and the Monongahela River, if we chose coke ovens are fast disappearing also. White snow, to go swimming, it was best to be in the River. A several days old, attests to the new atmosphere. dip in the Sulphur Creek made our skin look like Surface mining must be followed by land reclama- the Red Man. But, swimming in the Monongahela tion and removed overburden is not allowed to was not without risk, and it was always with a despoil the hillsides or enter the streams. Some of tightly closed mouth; if you swam therein, you were the choice, and usually the only flat, lands in the 40 Appalachians are now reclaimed surface mined varying ranges of individual dissolved constituents areas. in each aquifer, and within segments of the same Although improper waste disposal is still aquifer, the magnitude of the number of different practiced in some areas, most aquifers are protected standards that would have to be formulated is from surface disposal of brines, and other staggering. No one list, or possibly even hundreds contaminants, and even the Trinity River and the of lists, of standards could be developed to satisfy Houston Ship Channel are not easily located by all ground-water quality conditions. the nose. Only one type of standard could be developed Who, or what, is responsible for this remarkable to cover all aquifers. That standard would simply reversal in our respect for our environment? Of state that "the present chemical character of the course, it is not one person, or one thing or one existing ground water shall not be altered. "Although entity, but a change in public attitude; but what such a standard would be easy to develop, its helped change public attitude? If I were to choose application and usefulness are impossible and the major motivating force, I would have to worthless. Some will argue that standards could honestly pick the Environmental Protection Agency, be developed that would set the maximum amount and its predecessor, the Federal Water Quality of degradation (change) permitted, but how (or by Administration; and further laud the Agencies' whom) could such in situ changes be monitored dedicated and conscientious scientists, adminis- effectively and economically enough to provide a trators, and other staff personnel. means to control or limit degradation then in This choice does not ignore the contribution progress? of the numerous State and local agencies that have If ground-water standards are to be based upon also been in this fight for a better environment, potable-water considerations, (human consumption but even they must admit that the major catalyst standards) the implementation of such standards has been the EPA; its relative immunity from would wreak havoc on the ground-water economy political pressure, its conscientiousness, its laws, of many regions of the Nation. its rules, and its money. As examples, the major segment of the This realization, this admittance, of having, agricultural economy of the western United States thankfully, lived through a forced change of attitude is based upon irrigation, primarily from ground to that of a respect for our environment, and water. Most of this ground-water development is protection for that which we will leave to our depleting the aquifers so developed, and any successors, makes it most difficult to oppose means of aquifer augmentation (artificial recharge) proposals for increased quality protection of is assumed beneficial-including recirculated ground-water supplies; protection I realize is, in irrigation water and sewage effluent. some cases and areas, needed and overdue. Everyone is familiar with the Old West saga of Specifically, however, my presentation here a gunfight at the water hole; where some rancher and my negative stand regarding proposals for dammed up the stream or fenced off the spring and the establishment of ground-water standards stems maintained his acquisition (his water right) with a from Dr. Lehr's request that I take this position gun. In the West, the streams have long been over- on this program, as a replacement speaker, and, appropriated and the springs fully claimed, and perhaps, influenced from my reading of the present gunlaw has given way to some of the most lengthy mood of the public regarding increased government and costly water-rights litigation known to civilized spending and taxation. man. But, there is a new water hole spurring The suggestion for establishing ground-water renewed legal ramblings in the West; that is, the quality standards is not fully understood by this rights to city sewage effluent. In the eastern U.S., author. There are already water quality standards how to get rid of sewage may be a problem, but in that apply to ground water (and all other water) the West how to acquire and keep the rights to it- at the point of use of such water. the new fight at the water hole-is the main problem. My interpretation of the suggested standards Irrigation with sewage effluent is a major enterprise, is that they would apply to in situ ground water. If and now the irrigators sometimes find themselves such is the case, no one group of standards could in conflict with other would-be users, such as be made applicable. The quality of in situ ground thermoelectric power plants, who want to divert the water is the quality of the in situ ground water; irrigators' rights to sewage effluent to their own therefore, standards would have to be adapted to uses. existing conditions, and since there are greatly In nearly every case the irrigator who has a 41 right to sewage effluent also has an obligation to but, with notable degradation in water quality. dispose of same when he cannot utilize it all- These are only two examples of the numerous primarily during the winter months. Such surplus ongoing recharge projects that utilize poorer (but effluent, since its disposal into streams is now useful) quality water to recharge aquifers containing prohibited by the Water Pollution Control Act better quality water, or water with different ratios (PL 92-500), is usually accomplished through over- of specific dissolved solids. irrigation of crops, or onto fallow farmland, or into Standards that would prevent the recharging surface ponds. All such methods of "disposal" of a near-depleted or depleting aquifer with poorer provide for significant downward percolation, and quality water (but usable for most all of the present recharge to any water-table aquifer underlying such uses of the native aquifer water) would be ill areas-and such areas usually have underlying conceived and natural resource wasteful, and to aquifers. further limit recharge water to a quality to meet A classic example of this type of case is the strict potability requirements would be even more Frank Gray operation using the City of Lubbock, restrictive, and counter-productive to water Texas, sewage effluent. Irrigation on the Frank conservation efforts. Gray farm has recharged the formerly limited (in It is appropriate to note here that the NWWA's thickness) aquifer until the water table is now near successful efforts to generate interest in the use of the land surface, in some areas, and some playas ground water and aquifers as a heat or cooling sump are now water-table lakes. This type of recharge has could be jeopardized by ground-water standards 4 made possible the perpetuation of large capacity that would consider heat (or cold) as contaminants, irrigation wells on the Frank Gray, and surrounding such as does PL92-500 in respect to surface water. farms, and the development of numerous wells on And the use of aquifers for such purposes would be the recharged land to supply a new power plant, suspect due to the possibility of ground-water and to maintain a series of recreational takes in quality changes due to the increased mineral the City of Lubbock. But the aquifer now contains solubility of warm injected water, and the presence4 water much higher in dissolved solids, and probably of oxygen or algacides and bacteriacides or other unpotably high in nitrates. If the original quality of disinfectants, and solvents that may be added to the water in the aquifer had been maintained, the injection water. obvious benefits of sewage effluent recharge would Mr. McDermott has correctly noted that there have been foregone, and untold millions in is no good time to initiate new government programs. economic benefits unrealized. Continuing the reasoning along this line would lead The Frank Gray case is typical of thousands of to a further conclusion, that there is a "bad time" similar situations throughout the western United to initiate new government programs; and with the States. new wave of anti-taxation sweeping the country, Similarly, strictly adhering to existing ground- now does appear to be the worst of the "bad water quality would also prevent most other times" to initiate new governmental spending. artificial recharge and subsurface water storage The deep feelings (hidden like an iceberg) of programs, particularly if such standards are based the general public's discontent with the magnitude upon potability parameters, and it would deal a of governmental taxation (local, State and National) death blow to effective conjunctive management of is exemplified by the type of leader they have surface and ground-water resources-which, in most rallied behind. To me the creator of the latest cases, must be based upon exchange of storage "ism "-Jarvism-is repugnant. He does not appear between the two regimens. to me to exercise any reasoning, compassion, or Another classic example of increasing ground- understanding for the need for some (even if water storage at the sacrifice of ground-water quality reduced) taxation, and his lack of finesse in his is the Orange County (California) Water District treatment of opponents is appalling. Yet he is the recharge program. The Orange County district, faced chosen leader of the formerly silent masses opposed with depleting ground-water supplies and sea- (salt-) to taxation. My reasoning is that if a man water encroachment (due to ground-water pumpage), exercising the tact exhibited by Mr. Jarvis is emer- recharged the aquifer with the much lower quality ging as an antitax leader, then the antitax feeling is water from the Colorado River. The result was the a major force to be reckoned with, hence a reason reversal of the movement of the salt-water/fresh- to not initiate new government regulation, and water interface, and a replenished aquifer with increased-tax supported-regulatory activities. In water storage larger than that of historical record; other words, it appears to be a good time to "cool it." 42 However, in support of Mr. Jarvis' alms I note their flaws or shortcomings, if any, could result my record of recent public service to show that in unnecessary proliferation of law. taxes can be reduced while governmental services This appears to be a good time to interrupt are expanded. In 1976 and 1977, as the manager of the geometric progression that tends to spawn a Texas ground-water district, I initiated a 40 additional laws when laws are developed in haste percent reduction in the district's taxes while of their established need. * ~~expanding the district's services. This was attained The results of Federal (and State and local) * ~~by expecting district employees to perform their agency hearings, Congressional hearings, studies by * ~~jobs commensurate with their pay, and to require commissions, and public and private interests, those individuals violating district rules, and those have shown that the full implementation of demanding special services not provided by law, to PL 92-500-particularly the no-discharge * ~~pay for the cost for rectifying the violations, and provision of same-constitutes a major threat to for such special services. both the quantity and quality of ground-water In lieu of initiating new water quality laws, it supplies. Since Congress is aware of the shortcomings appears to be a good time to concentrate on the of this law, and since it has been successfully application and evaluation of the workability of amended in the past, it appears likely that Congress those parts of existing laws that treat ground-water would be more apt to amend PL 92-500 to provide quality considerations, and there are a lot of for more ground-water quality protection, in lieu existing Federal laws still left untested. of establishing new and separate ground-water The applicability and workability of present laws. This would be one of my recommendations Federal (arid some State and local) laws that could to proponents for new laws establishing ground- be used to adequately protect ground-water water quality standards. quality have yet to be implemented, or otherwise The rigidity of interpretation and application adequately tested. of Federal rules, by some agencies, is of particular The full force and effect of the Water Pollution concern to me, should they be so applied to new Control Act (PL 92-500, with amendment, the ground-water law. Also, in my opinion, the flimsy Clean Water Act-PL 95-12) has yet to be imple- and/or irrational reason for invoking rigid imple- mented, and Congress is still considering its mentation of some rules are very disturbing. oversights" in the drafting of same. The numerous excesses within the powers The S afe Drinking Water Act, (P L 9 3 -5 23) granted by the Endangered Species Act are particu- and the 1977 amendment (PL 95-190), particularly larly noteworthy. Tales of the impropriety of the those sections of same that were designed or are rules enforcement activities of OSHA abound. The usable to protect ground-water quality, have yet posting of warning signs at'the entrance of grocery to be tested by their implementation by the EPA. stores wherein products containing saccharin are Like PL 92-500, the deadlines for implementation sold is absurd. I get the impression that saccharin of parts of PL 93-523 have long since passed. may be a mad dog, and a dietetic soft drink may And, the far-reaching effects on ground-water jump off the shelf and attack me! quality protection that three other Federal Laws- In regard to ground-water quality standards- the Resources Conservation and Recovery Act at the time of the Congressional debate on HR (PL 94-580); the Toxic Substances Control Act 13002 (now PL 93-523), the hysteria about the (PL 94-469); and Surface Mining Control and existence of carcinogens (which may cause cancer) Reclamation Act (PL 95-87) are totally unknown, in the New Orleans water supply hit the headlines. since the procedures for the implementation of These carcinogens were detected in quantities of most of these acts have yet to be developed. parts per billion and parts per trillion. In a letter to I would particularly note that the title of Congressman George Mahon, of Texas, I noted that PL 94-469 is misleading. This act includes all for a person to ingest one pint of a substance in the chemical substances in any form, including pure quantity of one part per billion, by drinking the water, and possibly H202, and is not limited to New Orleans water, such a person would have to live substances of the toxicity classification. The a total of 456,621 years to do so! (if we are to be potential powers of the EPA provided by this act- concerned with parts per billion and parts per including ground-water quality protection-are trillion, we might as well consider the last year of a awesome. Therefore, it appears that establishing theoretical lifetime of nearly one-half million years). a new ground-water quality control act prior to Dr. Doris Thompson (then the Director of testing existing law, and thereby learning from the New Orleans Health Department) noted that 43 drinking from the New Orleans public water supply ing interest can argue the obvious merits for the is one of the safest things you could do in New conservation, environmental protection, quality Orleans. Having been to New Orleans many times, of water protection, safety, dependability, con- and nearly always visiting Bourbon Street, I venience, and economics of conjunctive management heartily agree with Dr. Thompson. I have not had of ground and surface water-which, in the eyes of any extensive experience with drinking New the consumer and taxpayer, are indistinguishable Orleans water, but I am sure it does not implant from each other, and they are indeed one resource, the headaches other liquids there do. both being only water. New ground-water laws will only widen the In conclusion, I believe that the time has not existing chasm between the development, conserva- yet come for the establishment of quality standards tion, and protection regimes adhered to by the specifically for in situ ground water, and to those existing ground-water and surface-water management carrying the ball for this proposal I say, you are entities; a condition that needs to be eliminated, faced with a first-down problem-punt! not fostered. Amendment of PL 92-500 would help in this regard. * * * * If new laws must be proposed, I would suggest If n ew laws must be proposed, I would suggest Frank A. Rayner received a B.S. degree in Geological that they embody conjunctive management, Engineering from Texas A & M University in 1958. He has conservation and development, and quality also completed graduate level courses in Geology and protection of both water sources-ground and Hydrology at Texas A & M and Texas Tech University. surface. Equitable and workable ground-water and After graduating from Texas A & M he was employed as a surface-water quality protection could be fostered Geologist by the then Texas Board of Water Engineers, through the enactment of long overdue laws Austin, Texas. Prior to joining the staff of the High Plains requiring the integration of ground- and surface- Underground Water Conservation District No. I (District), Lubbock, Texas, as its Chief Engineer, he was the Assistant water development and management. Director of the Groundwater Division of the Texas Water Both the surface-water and ground-water Development Board. In 1969 he was appointed the General interests are firmly entrenched, and apparently Manager of the District and served in that capacity until determined to maintain the status quo in regard to September 1977, when he established a private practice as a their specific interests; therefore, any proposed consulting engineer and geologist, specializing in ground- la.eutof these two .water development, quantity and quality evaluation, law requiring conjunctive management of these two m anagement and research. He is the author of more than regimes is going to receive concerted opposition 100 books, bulletins, handbooks, rulebooks, papers, from both interests. However, neither self-protect- articles and brochures. 44 Audience Response to Session 11 - Ground-Water Quality Standards Bruce S. Yare, Senior Hydrologist, Peabody Coal Company, exhaustion of ground-water resources. Due to increased 301 N. Memorial Drive, St. Louis, MO 63102: Establishing demand on ground-water reserves, what a person does with federal or State ground-water quality standards will have or to his or her privately-owned ground-water resource a severe impact on current methods of coal recovery, will, with increasing frequency, directly impact the especially if a nondegradation standard is adopted. Surface availability of some other person's source of potable water. mining for coal creates a large volume of disturbed To me, there is no question that ground-water quality overburden which often has a greater porosity and standards are necessary to help insure potable ground-water permeability than the original rock materials. As ground- supplies in the years to come. water levels recover in this spoil material, the water Second, and less obvious, is the effect that such becomes highly mineralized, containing at the very least standards could have in the area of waste recycling. objectionable amounts of sulfate, hardness and total Individuals that are forced to find ways of using materials dissolved solids. This degradation of local ground-water once discarded as waste are finding that it actually can be quality is unavoidable, since infiltrating water is bound to more economical to reuse the resources contained in the react to some degree with freshly exposed rock surfaces waste rather than disposing of them (the recovery of mercury in the spoil material, producing mineralized ground water. at Minimata Bay, Japan is a most striking example). To give some idea as to the amount of degradation, sulfate, In my opinion, ground-water quality standards will hardness and total dissolved solids concentrations are "aid" (i.e., force) industry to find new ways to recycle waste reported to increase as much as 621, 1366, and 3286 mg/l, and thus utilize our natural resources more efficiently, respectively, over background levels after surface mining since as a professor once told me, "There is no such thing operations in Muhlenberg County, Kentucky (Herring, W. C., as pollution-only wasted resources." 1977, Ground-water re-establishment in cast overburden: NCA/BCR 7th Symposium on Coal Mine Drainage Research, Ginia Wickersham, Assistant Ground Water Division Chief, Louisville, KY, pp. 71-87). Oklahoma Water Resources Board, Oklahoma City: In 1977, a total of 689 million tons of coal were I disagree with Mr. Rayner's statements that ground-water mined in the United States and nearly 61 percent of this quality standards are unnecessary because the "public does tonnage was produced by surface mining methods. The not want more governmental involvement in their private potential for a great deal of localized ground-water affairs." The public does not always know what is necessary degradation is apparent. If a nondegradation ground-water or best, especially in the protection of natural resources. quality standard is adopted on either a State or federal Oftentimes people forget or overlook the importance of level without allowance for a variance from the standard, underground-water supplies. A responsibility of the surface mining for coal will not be possible. Given the ground-water professional and regulatory agencies is to amount of coal produced by this mining method, approxi- foresee potential pollution problems for the public, and mately 417 million tons in 1977, the impact of a nondegrada- prevent further degradation of water quality. A way this tion standard on energy production in the country is can be done is through the development of ground-water enormous. quality standards. Only by developing standards for ground water can Mark P. Zatezalo, D'Appolonia Consulting Engineers, Inc., the natural chemical quality of aquifers be maintained. In 10 Duff Road, Pittsburgh, PA 15235: I appreciate the Oklahoma, we have received and investigated numerous opportunity to respond to this question and present two complaints of ground-water pollution. These include pollu- statements in support of ground-water quality standards tion by landfill operations, herbicides, salt water, oil and gas that were not brought out in the presentation. drilling activities, and even one case where cottonseed hulls First, I believe ground-water quality standards are were pumped into the fresh-water zone of a major aquifer obviously a necessity now and will be even more necessary in western Oklahoma to restore pressure in the drilling of in the future due to overpopulation and subsequent a gas well. Our major ground-water basins are being 45 constantly threatened and we cannot afford to let this as hepatitis can go through a water treatment plant without situation continue. being removed. It just seems to me that there has not been Without ground-water quality standards it is very enough research completed in the field of sewage sludge difficult to prevent or abate pollution. In Oklahoma over application to fertile soil and that the unsuspecting 60% of the population depends upon ground water for consumer public may already be consuming products with water supply, and 80% of the irrigation needs are met by dubious background. ground-water resources. However, when a water well is polluted it is almost impossible to prove in court that Ted Clark, Dunn Geoscience Corp., Latham, NY: Sitting pollution has taken place. Without a standard to compare here I developed a couple of concepts. First, I agree that with, how can you prove to a judge or jury that ground we do need to hold together our basic concept in the water has been degraded? With ground-water standards we understanding of hydrology and geology in the movement of can classify the ground waters -of a State and establish ground water. We must try to develop sound standards, baseline water quality conditions. so that we aren't faced with a kind of minimum standard The States must take the lead in establishing ground- or requirement, like zero discharge. This concept of zero water quality standards; not the Federal government. Only discharge may tend to concentrate contamination at the with the States in charge can we have the flexibility needed source area. Ground-water pollution problems that in developing standards for ground water. States already we are faced with today have often developed from have the mechanism for establishing standards, since it is concentrated point source areas. We need to look at how we the State's responsibility to protect the water quality of can better regulate with standards, how we might eliminate the State's waters. only the States can develop standards some of these concentrated sources that are causing so which maintain water quality, prevent pollution, and permit many problems. management of the ground-water resources for beneficial use by all citizens. The Federal government can assist, by Richard Dalton, Principal Geologist, Division of Water making Federal funds available and establishing minimum Resources, Trenton, NJ: I think New Jersey is getting guidelines in the establishment of ground-water quality involved in some of these problems we're discussing today standards. it is essential, however, that the first step be in an area known as the Pine Barons. Many of you have taken toward protecting our ground-water resources probably heard the pros and cons on this area. There is a through the development of water quality standards, as major aquifer there which has been delineated and regula- soon as possible. tions were set up for septic discharge. Unfortunately the people who drew up the regulations were not geologists, Daniel P. Waltz, Hydrogeologist, Layne-Western Company, geochemists, or anyone involved with ground-water Inc., 6909 Johnson Drive, P.O. Box 1322, Mission, KS movement, and now we in the State must live with the 66222: My comment is in response to the use of sewage procedures they set. These standards are mainly with sludge on farmland which is used to grow cash crops or regard to nitrate nitrogen-two ppm of nitrate nitrogen animal fodder. I would not be very interested in eating food and if anyone here has looked at septic tanks, it's almost grown on such a farm, whether I was consuming it directly impossible to meet these standards. Ground-water quality or through meat which was raised on feed from such a standards should be drawn up by geologists and geo- farm. I am familiar with studies of how trace metals such hydrologists, rather than by lawmakers. We have to know as zinc, cadmium, mercury, lead and others become concen- what is happening underground. We're finding we have trated in sewage sludge and can be passed up the food two public supplies already threatened by organic chain. I am also familiar with studies on organics such as chemicals, even more so than nitrate. Here, you're talking fertilizers and insecticides, i.e. D.D.T., Paraquat and others, ppm which is detrimental. One supply involves a community which also may be passed up the food chain in a similar of several hundred thousand people. These are the things manner. Also many human diseases caused by viruses such we have to address. 46 Land Application of Waste - State, of the Art'a by Kenneth R. Wrightb and Catherine Kraeger Rovey C ABSTRACT heavy metals, salts, and toxic substances in sludges applied Land application of treated waste water can provide to agricultural lands. Sludge is generally stabilized before unique opportunities, not only for a final high level of being applied, to destroy pathogens, and reduce weight, waste-water treatment but for reuse of nutrients as well. volume and odor. Recent laws passed by Congress have made it necessary Several case studies of successful land treatment to consider land treatment when planning and designing systems presently in operation are presented to demonstrate new waste-water treatment facilities. The three types of the viability of the land treatment concept. land treatment commonly used are (1) irrigation, (2) overland flow, and (3) rapid infiltration. Selection of INTRODUCTION the most appropriate type of land treatment for a specific The application of treated waste water to land site is based on several considerations, including soil can provide a final high level of pollutant removal. conditions, geology, topography, proximity to surface It also provides the opportunity for recycling of and subsurface water, and climate. Ensuring the protection of ground water is essential nutrients. Land treatment is'not ad hoc dumping of when siting or designing a land treatment system. Ground waste water hoping that it somehow will purify water is an important natural resource, having considerable itself. Land treatment systems must be well planned impact on human life and well-being as well as high economic and designed and carefully managed and monitored value. Safeguarding this important resource from contamina-toesrthtpblmdontevo. tion includes careful site selection, appropriate pretreatment toesrthtpblmdontevo. of waste water prior to its application, and a program of The land application of waste water entails regularly scheduled monitoring to ensure that the waste the use of growing plants, the soil surface and the water is being properly renovated for safe release to the soil matrix for removal of certain waste-water environment. constituents. Sunlight and air make it possible Utilization of municipal sludge on land for agri- for the plants to grow, the soil to remain aerobic, cultural production is encouraged by federal law, as is land treatment of waste water. Sludge contains concentrated as well as assisting in disinfection and decomposition wastes, and there are practical limitations on the levels of of organic solids and organisms. The subject of land treatment cannot be considered in an abstract, academic or theoretical basis such as professionals did only a few short apresented at The Fourth National Ground Water years ago. During the last 12 months, the U.S. Quality Symposium, Minneapolis, Minnesota, September Congress has passed a law, which the President has 20-22, 1978. signed, and the Environmental Protection Agency bPartner, Wright-McLaughlin Engineers, and President, (EPA) has promulgated rules and regulations which Wright Water Engineers, Inc., 2420 Alcott St., Denver, make land treatment a fact of life. The EPA is Colorado 8021 1. pesn ulcwsewtraece oueln cWater Resources Engineer, Wright Water Engineers, pesn ulcwsewtraece oueln Inc., 2420 Alcott St., Denver, Colorado 8021 1. treatment, and if they do not, their construction grant applications must provide complete 47 justification for rejection of land treatment. Further, these agencies cannot require overly strict pre- SPRAY OR SURFACE EVAPOTRANPIRATON application treatment for the effluent to obtain APPLICATION ? v pJVARIABLE EPA funding. (1) $iOPEi P "* It was in late 1977 that Congress passed ROOT ZONE} . .j .ijj PL 95-217, the Clean Water Act, with incentives for SUBSOILEEP increasing the use of less costly, less energy-intensive (A) IRRIGATION technology. Specifically, the federal government has identified innovative and alternative technology SPRAY APPICTION EVAPOTRANSPIRATION sewage treatment works as being necessary and ASSN desirable. To encourage selection of such tech- SLOPE 2-4% L nology, EPA will provide an additional 10 percent | TON bonus to its usual 75 percent grant for innovative IO-o or alternative technology, i.e., a total of 85 percent (B) OVERLAND FLOW would be forthcoming from the federal government, leaving a local share of only 15 percent. While only EAPN 350 out of the 2,700 sewage treatment projects .PRAYOR SURFACE funded during the past decade have used land treatment, the percentage during the next decade I'- is expected to rise markedly, if for no other reason than that local agencies will want to receive 85 --- . percent federal grants.(l) Land treatment, according '-. to EPA, qualifies under both innovative and alternative technology.(2) (C) INFILTRATION -PERCOLATION Arguments, often bitter, have taken place within the engineering profession during the last WRIOIHT-MCLAUOHLIN ENOINEIER .~. ~=o.. .. o..AvCO O , o..o, decade over land treatment in general and over its components and impacts specifically. On one side Fig. 1. Types of land application in common usage. have been public interest groups, advocates of conservation, sporting associations and advocates of clean streams. On the other side have been municipal and public works engineers and various depending on design parameters and operation. sewerage associations and waste-water agencies. There are numerous variations and combinations One good question to ask is "Why has this which can be used to optimize the system.(3) controversy existed, and why has it lasted so long?" Furthermore, one might ask why the Irrigation Method decision was made by politicians in Washington The irrigation method is the application of rather than waste-water professionals. A third waste water to agricultural lands where a crop is question which should be discussed today between grown. This method can produce an economic the pro and con speakers is whether or not Congress return on the crop as well as renovating the waste made the right decision on land treatment in the water. The minimum application is normally 1977 Clean Water Act. enough to satisfy the evapotranspiration of the A wide range of design possibilities is available crops with a 30 percent excess for deep percolation. in land treatment to suit specific site characteristics. However, some installations operate at 8 to 10 feet There are different types of land treatment, as of application per year, which provides for deep described following. percolation of 80 to 90 percent of the total amount applied. TYPES OF LAND TREATMENT The water is subjected to several processes The three types of land application in common including physical filtering, adsorption, biological usage are: (1) irrigation, (2) overland flow, and activity and natural uptake, as it percolates down (3) rapid infiltration, as schematically represented through the soil. A natural disinfection caused by in Figure 1. Each can be adapted to different site air and sunshine may also occur. conditions, can satisfy different objectives, and The soil matrix filters out suspended particles can produce renovated water of varying quality, in the waste water, and soil bacteria break down the 48 soluble organics and nitrify nitrogen in the waste water. Some of this nitrogen is taken up by the plants, some is stored in the soil, and the remainder is either denitrified (N2 gas) or percolates downward / with the renovated waste water. Soil particles also absorb phosphorus and heavy metals while 2 IRRIG.T.I 'A'h filtration and adsorption remove bacteria and viruses. Macro-nutrients, nitrogen, phosphorus and FL O . potassium, are subjected to uptake by the growing 4 vegetation along with micro-nutrients such as copper, zinc, cadmium and nickel. By reading the fine print on a package of household plant fertilizer,10 � " one will note that the same constituents are N a INLTI \ TION sometimes colored and then packaged to sell for the equivalent of several thousand dollars per ton. % This method of land treatment is most widely ' used. The managers of the Bortnichy State Farm in V the Ukrainian Republic of the U.S.S.R. have found C irrigation land treatment very satisfactory. This 6 Farm which serves Kiev is 16 years old, and has 8C been extensively studied by the Ukrainian govern- loA DC CLAY CLAY SILT LOAM SANDY LOAMY SAND ment. The Farm is described later in this text.(4) LOAM LOAM Overland Flow Overland flow is the application of waste water to a vegetated slope where the waste water travels WRIOIT-MMLAUOILIN *NGINURN R420 ALCOTT UT M. ENV1, COLO.s along the soil-vegetation interface. The bacteria - growing at the interface and on the vegetation treat Fig. 2. Compatibility of land application types with different the waste water in a manner similar to a trickling' soils. filter plant. While the treatment mechanism is primarily biological, there is also physical treatment can be recovered by underdrains or adjacent wells. caused by the filtering action of the grass. Waste The main goal of rapid infiltration is treatment of water also penetrates the top few inches of soil the waste water. and flows longitudinally through it, and metals, This method operates by merely flooding the phosphorus and other nutrients are adsorbed on grassed surfaces of shallow basins and allowing the soil particles. The growing plants also uptake waste water to seep into the ground. Application nitrogen, phosphorus and potassium.(i) rates range from 100 to 400 feet per year.(5) With overland flow, application rates often An ad hoc rapid infiltration system has been range between 10 and 25 feet per year and, used satisfactorily on the Widefield Aquifer near therefore, as much as 90 to 95 percent of the Colorado Springs for some 15 years. Municipal applied waste water can be recaptured for recycling water wells are located adjacent to the infiltration and reuse or discharged to the stream in a near ponds. Monitoring of the municipal water supplies pollutant-free condition. has been careful. The water tap foaming problems Overland flow was "invented" in Ohio by a encountered were from detergent in the days prior food processing company. It is generally used on to the introduction of biodegradable detergents. very tight soils where there is essentially no Occasional nitrogen problems have been reported. downward percolation capacity. Figure 2 There have been no reported cases of illness demonstrates how overland flow is related to the related to virus or bacteria transmitted through other two types of land treatment in terms of soil the aquifer.(6) type. IMPORTANCE OF GROUND WATER Rapid Infiltration Ground water throughout the world is an Rapid infiltration requires very little land important natural resource with high economic area and high permeability. The renovated water value and sociological impact. It is important not 49 only to protect ground-water aquifers from being Table 1. Expected Quality of Renovated Water from polluted beyond maximum levels, but also to Land Treatment Systems (10) enhance the quality of ground water whenever Value, mg/i feasible through proper management. infiltration- Overland Alluvial aquifers along streams and rivers Constituent irrigation Percolation Flow have frequently been allowed to degrade as a 10 o 2 2 t o1 result of recharge with polluted surface stream S upede S oid1 to 2 2 to 2 5 to 10 water. Degradation of deep ground water has SuspiNiroende aois 1 . to 2 1. to 2 8. to 10 occurred as a result of human activities in aquifer T onial Nitrogen as N 2. to 4 10. to 15 2. to 1 recharge areas. Phosphorus asP O.l toO.5 to 3 3to 5 At Thornton, Colorado, old gravel pits and alluvial wells are used as the main water source for two cities during the winter and as a supplemental source during the summer. recommended, but with relaxed criteria for The Thornton well field area lies several miles suspended solids.(8) downstream from the direct surface discharge point The quality of waste water applied to the land for the Denver Metro Sewage Treatment Plant. Late varies significantly. For example, in Melbourne, in 1977, an emergency arose as a result of nitrite Australia, the waste water receives only primary (NO,) contamination of the potable water supply treatment prior to either irrigation or overland being delivered through the distribution system.(7) flow. In the Ukraine, the waste water is given full The problem was noted when a local aquarium secondary treatment.(9) It is important that waste owner reported that his fish were dying. Analyses water not be overtreated prior to land application, showed that the alluvial aquifer was being recharged not only because of the extra cost involved, but with effluent containing 16 mg/l of ammonia also because too much treatment can remove nitrogen. The treatment plant was suspected of valuable nutrients. The quality of renovated water converting ammonia to toxic nitrite between the is not significantly affected by the organic quality well pumping and the delivery to the distribution of the water applied, that is, by BOD and system. To alleviate the problem, the water wells suspended solids. The renovated water can generally located immediately adjacent to the surface stream be expected to fall within the ranges of water were shut down and a monitoring program was quality as shown in Table 1. instituted. It is important to note that no effort was SITE SELECTION made to decrease the ammonia concentrations in Selection of a suitable land treatment site the effluent discharged to the South Platte River. should involve a thorough investigation of physical The City of Brighton, further downstream, derives characteristics, including soil texture and permea- its municipal supply from the same alluvial aquifer. bility, underlying geology, topography, and High concentrations of nitrate (NO3) have been proximity to ground water and surface water. A reported there for at least 20 years. land treatment site should have the capabilities of Wells, infiltration galleries, and floodplain transmitting water either over land or through the gravel pits are used for withdrawing ground water. soil at some desired, controllable rate, and to provide An evaluation of the aquifer and its character- sufficient treatment so that water leaving the site istics is of special importance when planning and does not cause degradation of the environment. designing a land application system so that When evaluating the site characteristics and potential problems can be identified and preventive the related water reclamation capabilities, one actions taken. should keep in mind that present land application On any land application project, a monitoring facilities generally are not stressing the soil treatment program is essential so that trends in ground-water system. investigations by the Public Works quality and possible escape of pollutants can be Association Research Foundation indicated that identified early. most land application systems provide a large factor of safety.(l1 PRETREATMENT Soil Characteristics Prior to land application, waste water usually In most areas, the Soil Conservation Service undergoes secondary treatment. Such treatment is has summaries of physical and chemical properties 50 of soils. Knowledge of these properties is necessary when center pivot sprinkling systems are used, for selecting the optimum land application site slopes of up to 20 percent are feasible. Sometimes and for properly designing the system. Typically, wooded terrain is used for land application the data provided by the SCS includes: because of the nature of the soil cover. Wooded a. Depth to bedrock or gravel. slopes of up to 3'0 percent are suitable. For b. Depth to seasonal water table. overland flow systems, slopes of 2 to 8 percent are c. Thickness of the soil zones. satisfactory.(lO) d. Sieve analyses. e. Permeability of each soil zone. Proximity to Water f. Available water capacity of each zone. The water table underlying an irrigation site g. pH of each soil zone. should be deep enough to ensure aerated soil h. Salinity. conditions. Generally, 5 feet is considered i. Shrink/swell potential. adequate. Periodic increases of the water table j. Corrosivity. resulting from irrigation application can bring the The depth to ground water should generally be water table closer to the surface. in this case, 5 feet or more to ensure proper renovation and special analyses are required to determine the length root development. However, if the depth to the of time that the root zone is saturated. With a water table is less than 5 feet, artificial water-table shallow water table, it is often economical to control can generally be instituted by using drains install underdrains to provide positive water- or by well pumping. table control and to provide for easy monitoring For rapid infiltration systems, well-drained of reclaimed water. soils such as sandy clays, sandy loamns, loamy sands Valley bottom land can provide good land and gravels are preferred, with depth to water treatment sites for all three methods. The frequency table from 10 to 15 feet unless underdrains are and extent of floods should be analyzed, but other used. than for low lands which are frequently flooded Soils with limited permeability such as clays (2 to 5 years), floodplain lands often make ideal and clay loams are best suited for overland flow land treatment sites.(13) systems.(12) The designer should avoid potential short circuiting of waste water directly to surface water, Geology streams or lakes. In many areas, minimum distances Underlying geology is an important considera- from land surface waste disposal sites to surface- tion in selecting a land treatment site, because it water bodies are specified by law. must provide a structural base for the site and, for the irrigation and rapid infiltration methods, a Climate repository or conveyance medium for the treated Waste-water application, except for rapid water leaving the soil zone. Limestone or dolomite infiltration, is often restricted to the growing areas may be suitable land treatment sites of the season which is usually defined by that period soil zone is sufficiently thick and well graded. between the first and last killing frost; however, The pH of the waste water should receive special for pasture, hay and woods irrigation is often evaluation when limestone forms the bedrock. beneficial during the months preceding and Karst areas should generally be avoided because of following the killing frosts. the potential for sinkhole collapse. Areas underlain Warm climates provide special advantages for by fractured rock can be suitable land treatment land treatment. Nevertheless, many successful sites if the soil overlying the rock is sufficiently projects have been operated at northern latitudes. thick to prevent piping, which can short-circuit Some rapid infiltration systems operate year-round partially treated or untreated water. in cold climates with the waste water being applied under the ice cover, such as at Lake George, New Topography York. A wide variety of topographical conditions can be incorporated into land application sites; PUBLIC HEALTH CONSIDERATIONS however, unusual topography can lessen the Public health concerns relate to: application operation and increase costs. For * Viruses and pathogenic bacteria. cultivated agriculture, a land surface slope should a Dissolved chemical constituents. not exceed approximately 15 percent. However, a Crop quality and pollutant uptake potential. 51 * Propagation of insects, of the technique cannot be made, but each alternative Sprayed aerosol droplets have been a concern proposal must be separately considered. Further, site in the public health field because of their potential specificity not only means that land application treatment might not work for some situations but also that it might to carry viruses long distances under windy be the most well adapted technique for others. It also conditions. means that each community needs to explore a variety of land treatment adaptations before it can say definitely Pathogenic Organisms that no viable alternative exists.(l6) Pathogenic organisms can survive in the soil and on vegetation for a long time; some have Heavy Metals potential lives measured in months. The survival The fate of heavy metals in land treatment time of organisms outside their natural habitat systems is the item which is often of most concern depends on many factors. Their survival in soil is to the regulatory agencies. For this reason, it is a relatively unexplored field, though Bouwer et al. important to evaluate the uncertainties of heavy reports a very high degree of virus removal in their metals in waste-water effluent following secondary Phoenix studies under conditions which would be treatment and to analyze the long-term buildup in conducive to virus transmittal.(l4) the soils over a long period of time. Generally, one EPA reports that "The effects of working or more of these constituents is more critical than around and handling waste water on land applica- others. Because the soil will remove and store most tion sites are minimal-the health hazards appear of the heavy metal concentrations, heavy metal to be no different than for activated sludge and buildup can, in some cases, limit a particular site to trickling filter plants." a finite number of years of operation. Normal In Melbourne, Australia, the waste-water municipal effluent does not contain any significant agency has had several generations of workers degree of heavy metals. If they are found in the directly connected to the Werribee Wastewater effluent at levels which are of concern, it is Farm (a discussion of the Werribee Farm will appropriate to trace the contribution back to its follow later in the text). For instance, one top source so that pretreatment or recycling of metals official with the agency was born and grew up on can be instituted at that particular source.(3) the Werribee Wastewater Farm. Both his father and grandfather had been farm workers. Medical Toxic Substances records of the present 500 residents of the farm A well designed land application system has show no special problems with the waste-water the capability of removing a high percentage of farm users. In addition, the absenteeism/sick leave organic compounds, halogens and carcinogenic records all indicate normal health for the farm materials. With the advent of the Safe Drinking workers, even those who are second or third Water Act and its resulting regulations, removal of generation employees of the 28,810-acre these materials should receive special evaluation farm.(l5) and economic consideration. The Russians report that their public health studies on the Kiev 60,000-acre site showed no Macro-Nutrients public health problems to workers or to consumers, Nitrogen, phosphorus and potassium are macro- even though 16 percent of the crop is for direct nutrients found in municipal waste water. Land human consumption, i.e., potatoes.(4) treatment removal efficiencies are indicated in The Scientific Advisory Committee to Table 2. Governor Lamm of Colorado has reported: Soil has the capability of removing and fixing Land application treatment of waste water is a viable alternative means to tertiary treatment in Colorado, provided Table 2. Expected Municipal Effluent Removal Efficiency Table 2. Expected Municipal Effluent Removal Efficiency proper site conditions are available. Advantages offered in Land Treatment System(5) the synergistic use of water, fertilizer and land resources make the potential for land treatment applications promising Value, Percent Removal and the consideration of the land treatment alternative should be mandatory in waste-water treatment planning. Overland Rapid Advantages may also exist, for gravity distribution systems, Constituent Irrigation Flow Infiltration in lower energy consumption. Land treatment is highly site BOD 98+ 98 80-85 specific and the possible range of site conditions within Suspended Solids 99 94 99 the State is very broad, varying from relatively long Total Nitrogen as N 85+ 80 75-80 growing seasons in plains areas, to extremely short seasons Phosphorus as P 99+ 40-80 50-60 in high mountain locations. Therefore, blanket prescriptions 52 nearly all potassium and phosphorus contained is first stored for one year. In addition, the Colorado in the waste water. However, nitrogen is more Health Board allows application on ice-covered or mobile and, for this reason, the amount of nitrogen frozen land without a permit if the land slope is applied by the land on an annual basis should 5 percent or less. On land sloping in excess of receive special evaluation to ensure that the potential 5 percent, annual soil loss must be limited to concentration of nitrate nitrogen does not result 5 tons per acre. in ground-water contamination. Generally, a nitrate To protect the ground water, Colorado requires nitrogen limit of 10 mg/I is used as an upper limit that the mean annual depth to water table be in renovated waste water. greater than 7 feet and that no domestic well be closer than 150 feet. Sludge can be applied in the SLUDGE APPLICATION floodplain as long as it is outside of the area Sludge utilization on land for agricultural flooded more often than once in 10 years. If production is encouraged by Federal law.(17) these conditions are not met, then special review It is considered to be the ultimate disposition of is needed with issuance of a permit. sludge in a manner which will not cause environ- Monitoring is required for municipal treatment mental degradation if it is done in a planned and plants of up to 10 mgd with at least one sample taken managed way. each 3 months. For larger plants, sampling each Presently, the Colorado Department of Health month is required. and the State Health Board concluded that utilization of stabilized sludge on land for MONITORING FOR WASTE-WATER agriculture, silviculture or reclamation purposes APPLICATION is an environmentally acceptable alternative for Monitoring of a land application facility is solving te currentsludge prblem.(l8)Monitoring of a land application facility is solving the current sludge problem.(18) solvipathlcurrottsldgheponcntrtedrequired to ensure that the waste water is being Municipal sludge contains the concentrated Mul sge comuntainsh comnentrd properly renovated and that the environment is wastes of the community. Certain components wastes of thecommunit. Certabeing protected. The influent waste water should may be toxic and/or hazardous, depending on their be analyzed in the same manner that conventional be analyzed in the same manner that conventional concentration and method of application. Such waste-water treatment plants are monitored so application must not degrade the surface or ground t ate rat ns te mit o that the operator knows the specific quality of waters. The salt content of sludge can inhibit effluent being applied to the land. In addition, effluent being applied to the land. In addition, plant growth if it is applied in high concentratiohs or monitoring of the quality of renovated water, the monitoring of the quality of renovated water, the at the wrong time. Thus, the key to a proper sludge vegetation, and the soils is recommended. This application project is to have the right qualityvetaon a t o i rcmen o should be considered a part of the management of sludge applied at agronomic rates. a land treatment facility. The nominal reason for stabilizing the sludge ld eate fot Renovated water should be analyzed for those is to obtain pathogenic destruction, volume and r ae ters nalyed frte parameters normally monitored in drinking-water weight reduction, and odor control. Stabilization parameters rired r gatr can be by chemical treatment, digesupplies, those parameters required by regulatory can be by chemical treatment, digestion, or agencies, and specific parameters required by the composting, the most common form being digestion engineer for quality control. Typically, nitrate by aerobic or anaerobic means. Stabilization in aenin ramt ot clly nitre nitrogen is the parameter most closely monitored. lagoon bottom under anaerobic or facultative rogn the paat o it conditions is a low cost and effective method. Crops grown on the land application site T conionsadlo costad effe methlow d should be analyzed periodically both to optimize The Colorado Board of Health allows sludge growth and yield and to determine crop intake application without a permit if minimum standards l evel of micro and macro-nutrients. level of micro and macro-nutrients. are met relating to nutrient concentration and trace Soils should be tested periodically (quarterly) Soils should be tested periodically (quarterly) element content. For instance, nitrogen is limited for salinity, pH, cation exchange capacity and for salinity, pH, cation exchange capacity and to 60,000 mg/l, zinc is limited to 3,000 mg/1, and to 60,000 mg/I, zinc is limited to 3,000 mg/, and infrequently (yearly) for considerations of various cadmium to 30 mg/l. If standards are exceeded, the elements such as heavy metals. elements such as heavy metals. State reviews and approves on a case-by-case basis. Colorado recommends subsurface application of sludge as a nitrogen conservation measure. With CASE STUDIES surface spreading, they estimate that 80 percent of Bortnichy/Kiev State Farm, U.S.S.R.(4) the ammonia nitrogen may be lost. The Bortnichy State Farm outside of Kiev, Crops should not be fertilized with sludge if U.S.S.R., is a successful land application project. they may be eaten raw by humans unless the sludge The Minister of Land Reclamation and Water 53 Management in the Ukrainian Republic of U.S.S.R. Table A. Use of Bortnichy Irrigated Lands has transmitted a report stating that "since theCrpHcaeArsPren start of operation of the (waste-water) irrigation Cro ecreas 7 cres Percent3 system the productivity of agricultural crops has Potatols 3,900 18,650 16 doubled." (Personal communication with N. A. F oddter 7 3,00 98,650 16 Garkusha dated September 24, 1976, transmitting irrigated Pasture 3,900 9,650 16 report by A. I. Nasushkin.) Other Crops 1,900 4,700 8 The Bortnichy Farm has 24,300 ha (60,000 Total 24,300 60,000 100 acres) under production with irrigation water derived from municipal and industrial waste water generated by Kiev, a city having a population of 1,900,000. Cost of the irrigation system system is mainly gray or dark gray light clayish amounted to $47,000,000 (32,000,000 Rubles) loamy podozols. in 1968. Unit cost was $1,940/ha ($780 per acre), The various types of crops in the irrigated which includes transmission canals, laterals, lands are summarized in Table A. Application rates pumping plans, and all field sprinkler equipment. average 1,500 ml/ha (0.5 acre-feet per year) per season to supplement the natural precipitation of Description of the System 500 to 580 mm/year (23 inches per year). Average The industrial waste-water treatment uses temperature during the year is +7VC. The period physical-chemical processes at the industrial with average daily temperatures exceeding 15' C is sources prior to its being combined with the 1 15 days. Above freezing temperatures prevail for municipal waste water. Approximately 60 percent 165 to 170 days. The average for the freezing-free of the waste water is derived from industrial period ranges from April 19-25 to October 6-10. sources. Primary treatment consists of screening and pulverizing, followed by settling. The waste Environmental Effects water is then routed to the secondary activated Officials of the U.S.S.R. report no health sludge plant for aeration and clarification prior to problems. All effluent is regularly tested and is safe irrigation. The waste water is not disinfected prior for irrigation. Fourteen years of health records of to irrigation so as not to waste chlorine or ozone. farm employees have been analyzed and no indica- The sludge resulting from the primary and tion has been found that workers are subject to secondary treatment operation, which contains health hazards. The quality of the waste water is 3 percent solids, is carried by pipeline to sludge constantly controlled by laboratories of various drying beds where it is digested using natural ministries. processes of sunlight and drying. The U.S.S.R. The ground-water table ranges from 3 to 16 government is presently studying methods of meters (10 to 52 feet) in depth below ground direct application of the wet sludge to the fields. surface. By carefully controlling application rates, Currently, the dried sludge is used as a field the recharge to the ground-water table is strictly fertilizer with good crop. response. Direct application limited; however, care is exercised to insure against of the 3 percent solids wet sludge would reduce salinity buildup in the soil zone, for salinity costs and result in reduced land use for natural increase would be sure to cause damage to the drying beds. productivity of the soil in this rich agricultural Waste water is supplied to 300 irrigation rigs region. The dissolved constituents in the waste by 32 pumping stations for 24 hours per day. The water used for irrigation do not exceed 1,000 rigs include the self-propelled power'sprinklers milligrams per liter. DKSh-64, the "Volzhanka," which operate from a The objectives of the use of waste water for closed irrigation system. Irrigation occurs 7 months the Bortnichy State Farms are to increase crop per year, from April to October. Total length of open production and to reduce pollution of the Dneiper canals amounts to 41 kilometers (25 miles) with a River which flows through Kiev and which provides 1975 flow of 7.2 m3/sec (163 million gallons per environmental and recreational opportunities to the day). During the growing season 45,200,000 m3 citizens of Kiev and the 49,000,000 residents of the (36,600 acre-feet) of treated waste water is used for Ukraine. The Bortnichy State Farm is in the vicinity irrigation. There is no mixing with fresh water. All of the Kiev airdrome. It provides a natural buffer irrigation is via sprinkler system to maximize against development in the vicinity of the airport, efficiency of application. The soil cover in the which represents an important benefit. 54 Macro and micro-nutrients are provided to the sanctuary. The open space near the metropolitan crops by the nutrient-rich waste water. For instance, area discourages urban sprawl in that direction. nitrogen content in the waste water approximates Many foreign and local visitors tour the Farm yearly. 22 mg/I, phosphate is 4.5 mg/I, and potassium is 1 1 mg/I. The nutrients are furnished to the crops Description of the System on a periodic basis with each irrigation of approxi- Melbourne's sewerage system was established mately 400 ml/ha. in 1893 and has been in continuous operation There is a leaching of salts to the ground-water since 1896. Raw waste water is collected from the table, particularly because the water applied has a Melbourne metropolitan area and carried to the TDS of 1,000 mg/I. If the Ministry used fresh water Werribee Farm in an open canal. Approximately (with a salinity of no more than 600 mg/l) the 20 percent of these wastes are industrial in nature. leaching of salts to the ground-water aquifer would The Farm currently receives approximately be substantially less; however, artificial fertilizers two-thirds of the Melbourne area wastes. These would have to be applied which would tend to add wastes have a BODs of 600 mg/I. In recent years, more TDS concentration. the Farm has been treating raw wastes at a rate far in excess of its rated capacity. As a result, the Summary Metropolitan Board of Works is currently exploring The Bortnichy State Farm at Kiev is a highly pretreatment works for the Werribee Farm. The successful waste-water irrigation farm, operated by Werribee Farm has been and will continue to be dedicated and skillful personnel of the Ministry of the pride of the Board of Works. (Interview with Land Reclamation and Water Management of the A. H. Croxford, Chairman, Melbourne and Metro- Ukraine Republic of the U.S.S.R. The project was politan Board of Works, September 7, 1976.) initiated in 1962 and construction completed in Waste-water treatment is accomplished at the 1968. The favorable economics of the irrigation Farm by 3 processes. During the irrigation season system using waste water is evident to U.S.S.R. (6 to 7 months per year), raw sewage is applied officials and to the observer as one views the green to pasture areas totaling 10,351 acres. The applica- fields and busy farmhands going about their work. tions are intermittent, being approximately 10 Crop production has doubled with the use of the centimeters (4 inches) deep. Between applications, waste-water irrigation system. Potatoes for human this provides excellent pasture for grazing cattle. consumption are grown. Results of careful monitor- Usually a drying out period of one week is allowed ing of the system and its products show no harmful prior to grazing. Approximately one-fifth of the effects of using waste water for irrigation. total waste water at the Farm is used in this manner. The economic impact in the Ukraine is The irrigation operations are continuously controlled significant as a result of farm income, food produc- by approximately 100 shift workers. The major tion, local employment, and the improved quality statistics of the operations are summarized in of the Dneiper River. Table B. The waste water not required for irrigation is Melbourne, Australia: Werribee Farm System (9) treated by sedimentation and oxidation in shallow The Werribee Farm of the Melbourne and Metropolitan Board of Works is a highly productive agricultural and livestock enterprise as well as an TbeB ebun n erpltnBado ok efficient waste-water treatment project. The Farm TableB.Mlore Farm Sysetrplia BoarameteWrks was constructed in the 1890's and is presently onlyWerbeFmSytmPaees 22 miles from a metropolitan area with a population Amount of 2� 1million people. Metric English The Farm covers 11,660 ha (28,810 acres), and represents the most productive agricultural 1974 Annual Waste-3 land in Australia. The gross returns from the Water Supply 207,000,000 m3 168,000 Ac-Ft Gross Farm Area 11,660 ha 28,810 Acres Farm's sale of livestock produced approximately Purification Areas 7,210 ha 17,821 Acres $1,500,000 in gross revenues in 1974. It also Land Filtration 4,190 ha 10,351 Acres provides an essential municipal service by treating Grass Filtration 1,515 ha 3,744 Acres waste water. In addition to cleaning the waste Lagoons 1,446 ha 3,573 Acres water, the Farm has provided beneficial environ- Sedimentation 62 ha 153 Acres mental impacts such as providing a major wildlife Average Annual Rainfall 49.3 cm 19.4 Inches 55 lagoons. During the winter period, the entire flow been minimal. Odor resulted from overloading of is treated by primary settling followed by grass the system as the strength and volume of the filtration and oxidation ponds. Since permeability raw waste water increased, coupled with is not the key to this particular process, the areas occasional management laxness. used for this purpose are the heavier clay soils. The vastness of the Farm's operations has Open drains of 1.2 to 1.3 meters (4 to 5 feet) provided an open space buffer area for Melbourne. extend throughout the irrigation area. Their The lagoons at the Farm have also developed into function is to collect surface flows and ground- an outstanding year-round bird sanctuary. In the water seepage for discharge into Port Phillip Bay. summer months, when inland feed and water Water in the drains is sampled to assure the proper sources dry up and birds from the northern operation of the waste treatment/irrigation system. hemisphere leave their harsh winters behind, the bird population at the Farm exceeds 100,000. The System Costs and Revenues Farm staff has developed an intense pride in the The irrigated pastures are grazed by 15,000 bird life and their welfare. The wildlife sanctuary head of cattle throughout the year. During the which the Farm provides is an example of how spring and summer, approximately 40,000 to agriculture and waste treatment can work 50,000 sheep are fattened and sold in the fall. harmoniously with nature. About 7,000 cattle are sold annually and replaced There have been no reports of ground-water with calves born during the year. These operations contamination. Application of effluent irrigation produce direct revenues for the Farm which has helped provide a fresh-water barrier to the saline totalled approximately $1,500,000 in 197 3/74. water of the adjacent Port Phillip Bay. The capital investment of $16,800,000 in the Farm was amortized long ago. The operation and maintenance costs of the Farm are reduced Muskegon County, Michigan Systemn(9) considerably by the revenues which it produces. The The Muskegon County waste-water system costs and revenues are summarized in Table C. The has brought 2,266 hectares (5,600 acres) of previous net annual cost of the system is $0.12/in3 of waste wasteland into productive irrigated agriculture. The water treated. Equivalent costs for treatment by agricultural aspects of the project and the high level conventional systems would be several times as of treatment have resulted in an economically great. As a result, substantial savings are enjoyed productive and environmentally sound project. For by the people of Melbourne area because of the each acre-foot of irrigation water applied to the Farm operations. The over-all benefit-cost ratio land, the regional net benefits amount to $62.74 does exceed unity. (U.S.). The benefit-cost ratio is currently 1. 53: 1.00. The annual benefits include direct revenues of Environmental Effects $706,000 from sales of corn grain. The annual Since its inception, the Farm has had a benefits arising from the basic employment of resident population which has varied from 67 to farm workers is $1,400,000 per year. A savings of 500. The health of these people has been similar to $5,716,000 per year is also realized since any other population of the area. No epidemics or conventional waste-water treatment facilities which disease has occurred. The livestock on the Farm would otherwise have been necessary have not been have thrived. There have been some complaints built and are not in operation. of odor from the Farm. These complaints are Substantial secondary benefits include relatively infrequent and the degree of offense has improved aquatic habitat, improved industrial siting potential and general public awareness. Dollar values for these benefits have not been included in this analysis. Table C. Melbourne and Metropolitan Board of Works Werribee Farm Summary of Costs (1974 Estimates) Description of the System Construction (initial Waste water is collected from 13 municipalities costs paid off) and 5 major industrial sources. Approximately 65 Operation and Maintenance $4,044,000 percent of the wastes presently treated are from Farm Revenues (Gross) $1,493,510 industrial sources. Net Annual Cost $2,549,990 Net Annual Cost $.0 12/rn3 ($.04-7/1,000 gal.) The volume of wastes treated currently averages 37,267,000 cubic meters (30,200 acre-feet) 56 Table D. Muskegon Waste-Water Irrigation System - Summary of Irrigation System Parameters Amount Metric English 1975 Annual Waste-Water Supply 37,267,000 m3 30,200 A.F. Capacity Annual Waste-Water Supply 58,000,000 m3 47,000 A.F. 1975 Usable Waste-Water Supply 37,267,000 m3 30,200 A.F. Gross Irrigation Site Area 3,035 ha 7,500 acres Usable Irrigation Site Area 2,266 ha 5,600 acres Average Seasonal Rainfall (April-October) 49 cm 19.3 inches Seasonal Rate of Application 136 cm 4.45 A.F./acre Size Rotating Irrigation Rigs 14-57 ha 35-141 acres Number of Rotating Rigs 54 per year. As the waste collection system is expanded System Costs and Revenues and growth occurs, this volume will increase to The system costs and annual revenues for the approximately 58,000,000 cubic meters (47,000 Muskegon system are shown in Table E. The cost of acre-feet) per year. construction for the treatment system was Waste water is pumped approximately 10 $37,700,000. The operation and maintenance costs miles from the urban center to the irrigation site for the system are $1,822,000 per year. Labor through a force main. At the treatment site, the costs make up approximately 35 percent of these waste water is first biologically treated. Following annual costs. this treatment, the waste water is either applied The fertilizer value of the waste water is an immediately to the land or stored for later such important component of the project. It has been use. All water is chlorinated prior to irrigation as estimated that 60 percent of the nitrogen, 70 required by State authorities. percent of the phosphorus and 100 percent of the The major statistics of the irrigation operation potassium removed from the combined domestic are summarized in Table D. The annual application and industrial wastes actually served as fertilizer of waste water far exceeds the irrigation requirement for the 1975 corn crop. At current prices (spring, for corn in this area because the project is a 1976), these chemicals are worth more than combination waste-water treatment and irrigation $190,000 (U.S.) per year. project. The over-all economics of the project have, The irrigation component of the system is at least in the short-term, dictated the'high waste- the prime source of revenues. In 1975, this water application rates. The soil at the site is sandy amounted to $706,000. In future years, these and was considered to be nonproductive prior to revenues are expected to increase to approximately the waste-water irrigation project. In 1975, the $1,400,000 when experience is gained in the average yield of corn for the waste-water irrigation operation of the agricultural portions of the system. project was 5.2 m3/ha (60 bushels per acre). The capital construction is amortized at 7 percent Although this nearly matched the average yield of over 20 years. After consideration for amortization, 5.7 m3/ha (65 bushels per acre), it is felt that operation and maintenance, and direct revenues, the yields of 10.5 m3/ha (120 bushels per acre) may be net annual cost of the system is $4,457,000 per obtained as operational experience is gained with year or $0.12/m3 ($0.45 per 1,000 gallons) of the waste-water system. water treated. When the system is operating at full Ground-water levels at the irrigation site prior capacity, these treatment costs will be reduced to to construction varied from less than 1.5 meters approximately $0.09/m3 ($0.33 per 1,000 gallons). (5 feet) in most places to 7.6 meters (25 feet). The estimated cost of treating waste water to a Perforated polyethylene pipe was installed to assure lesser degree by conventional treatment systems at least 5 feet of freely draining aerobic soil in this area is approximately $0.15/m3 ($0.58 throughout the site. The drainage network discharges per 1,000 gallons). This represents an initial savings to open channels which carry the clean water to of $0.13 per 1,000 gallons. When the system is fully natural waterways. Monitoring of discharge within developed, an annual savings of $0.07/m3 ($0.25 the site is provided by a network of 272 observation per 1,000 gallons) may be realized. wells scattered throughout the property. The costs of agricultural production are 57 similar to those of any other public irrigation stocking of more sensitive and desirable fish species project of this magnitude in this area. The only in the lake, fishing activity, and has created an benefit identified under the agricultural category is over-all improvement in the quality of recreational the revenue received from the sale of the corn experiences in the area. grain harvested. The revenues received in 197 5 fall The waste-water irrigation system is also viewed short of the potential revenues expected in future by local public officials as an important resource in years. In the future, these revenues are expected to the improvement of Muskegon County. The double, whereas the cost of agricultural production improved quality of Muskegon Lake has encouraged will increase only approximately 20 percent for the the City of Muskegon and private interests to same period. Secondary benefits normally associated redevelop the lake's waterfront as the focus for with agricultural products were not included in this downtown redevelopment and community revitaliza- analysis. A limited special category, however, has tion. Various programs for attracting industry and been included because it has special meaning for over-all economic development of the area stress waste-water irrigation projects. This benefit is the capabilities of the waste-water irrigation system. known as basic employment, as discussed previously. Monitoring of ground-water quality at the In the Muskegon system, special efforts were Muskegon facility show it to be of high quality with made to convert workers to agricultural employ- no measureable salinity increase. Pollutants have ment. These workers represent approximately not degraded the ground-water quality. one-third of those employed by the entire system. Using the multiplier factor of 8 for identifying Sonnenberg-Sterling, Colorado Systemn(9) regional national benefits, this results in a net The Sonnenberg-Sterling Irrigation Project benefit of $1,400,000 per year. would use 3,947,700 m3 per year (3,200 acre-feet4 The over-all environmental enhancement of the per year) of waste water to irrigate 5 30 hectares Muskegon area has been the most visible benefit of (1,310 acres) of present sand hill prairieland for the system. To date, 3 positive environmental production of corn grain. This project is small, impacts have emerged: a general improvement in but the relative economic impact on the region water quality in Muskegon County, increased would be substantial. The annual benefits include wildlife populations at the irrigation site, and (1) cash crop, corn grain production of $425,800 increased aquatic life in Muskegon Lake. These per year based on I11. 3 m3/ha (I130 bushels per benefits nanifest themselves in various forms. acre) yield; (2) basic local employment for farm Visual improvements in Muskegon Lake's water workers of $140,000; and (3) savings of $479,7009 quality have increased the over-all pride of the in waste-water treatment which otherwise would local citizenry in their environment, tourist trade, be necessary in the Sterling, Colorado area. (This project was first conceived in 1970 with detailed planning commencing in 1975. The project as Table E. Muskegon Waste-Water Irrigation System described herein is a private enterprise system Summary of Costs designed as an agricultural enterprise with costs Construction (including based on economic agricultural construction land cost) $37,700,000 techniques and actual bids. The project will Operation and Maintenance probably not be constructed as described for (1975) $ 1,822,000 institutional reasons. A federally subsidized waste- Total Annual Cost* $ 5,380,000 water irrigation project is anticipated.) Total Annual 1975 Direct Revenues` $ 923,000 This waste-water irrigation system is unusual Net Annual Cost** $ 4,457,060 in the sense that the financing of the system Net Annual Cost*** $0.12/rn3 (S0.45/1,000 gal.) would be undertaken in a partnership between * Based upon debt retirement over 20 years at 7%prvtinestadgenmtaece.Inhs ** interest. case, the desire to irrigate additional lands is the Revenues include approximately $216,400 in grants, prime motivating force in the project development. laboratory services and other miscellaneous revenues. The need to irrigate additional lands, when combined **After more operational experience is gained, a corn with the waste-water treatment needs in the area, crop yield of 10.5 m 3/ha (120 bushels/acre) ishareutditepefrdalrnivofrigin estimated. Also, when full design flows of 58,000,000 wihwasreutedi wthepeerre alterachievemn of irriatinwae mn3/yr (42 mngd) are realized, net annual costs willwihaseatrndcivmntoclnwtr increase by about $500,000 resulting in a net annual goals. unit cost of $0.09 /m 3 ($0.3 3/1,000 gal.). The first step in the Sterling plan is the 58 collection and transport of the domestic and the design for irrigation of alfalfa, if necessary, by industrial waste-water flows of the area to a site some of the rigs. The soil texture at the irrigation approximately 4 miles east of the City. At the site is sandy. Sprinklers are the only practical site, aerated lagoons are used to pretreat the method of irrigation; pivot sprinklers are ideally waste water to avoid nuisance conditions. The suited for this purpose. The design application nutrient-rich stabilized waste water is then stored rate is 67.5 centimeters per year (2.22 acre-feet for use as an irrigation and fertilizer supply. per acre). Rotating rigs are used to irrigate the crop land. The use of sewage effluent assures that nitrogen would be applied frequently and in small Description of the System amounts. Allowing for some loss of nutrients, about Included in the system would be wastes from 280 kg/ha (250 pounds per acre) of nitrogen and 3 sources: (1) domestic wastes from the Town of 67 kg/ha (60 pounds per acre) of phosphorus would Sterling, (2) industrial wastes from the Sterling be applied. Unknown quantities of trace elements factory of the Great Western Sugar Company and would also provide fertilizer value to the irrigation (3) industrial wastes from the Sterling, Colorado water. The expected initial yields of the system are Beef Company. Industrial wastes represent approxi- 11.3 m3/ha (130 bushels per acre). As the organic mately 60 percent of the total irrigation supply. content of the soil increases through waste-water Following biological treatment in the aeration application and the plowing in of sludges collected cell, the effluent would be discharged to a storage in the storage basins, the expected yields would basin. Since the normal irrigation season lasts only increase to the 13 m3/ha (150 bushels per acre) from mid-April to mid-October, it would be range. necessary to store approximately a 6-month volume The major parameters of the irrigation portion of waste water. The storage basin also provides for of the Sonnenberg-Sterling system are summarized additional treatment since the solids remaining in in Table F. the waste water will settle out. At the time of The soils of the area are well drained with withdrawal from the basin, the treated waste ground water 25 meters (82 feet) or more below waters are disinfected with chlorine prior to the surface. The natural drainage characteristics irrigation. After accounting for evaporation and of the site would allow ample movement of the minor seepage losses, about 3,580,000 m3 (2,900 percolated water to the South Platte River acre-feet) would be available for irrigation. The approximately 3 miles to the north. irrigation land would consist of about 530 hectares (1,310 acres) in the area of the treatment and System Costs and Revenzles storage basins. The waste water would be The estimated total construction cost of the distributed for irrigation by 10 circular electric- Sonnenberg-Sterling system is $2,441,000. The driven irrigation rigs. Each rig is capable of annual operation and maintenance cost of the irrigating 53 hectares (131 acres) and could be system is estimated to be $271,000. expanded in the future as needed to include corner The projected annual revenue for the waste- systems capable of irrigating an additional 10 water irrigation system would develop only in the hectares (25 acres) each. irrigation component. These revenues develop The primary crop grown would be corn grain from the sale of the corn crop harvested. Based on a for cattle feeding purposes. Flexibility remains in projected initial yield of 11.3 m3/ha (130 bushels per Table F. Summary of Irrigation System Parameters - Sonnenberg-Sterling Waste-Water Irrigation System Amount Item Metric English Annual Waste-Water Supply 3,947,700 m3 3,200 A.F. Usable Waste-Water Supply 3,580,000 m3 2,900 A.F. Gross Irrigation Site Area 688 ha 1,700 acres Usable Irrigation Site Area 530 ha 1,310 acres Average Seasonal Rainfall (April 15-October 15) 30.5 cm 12.0 inches Seasonal Rate of Application 67.5 cm 26.6 inches Size Rotating Irrigation Rigs 53 ha 131 acres Number of Rotating Rigs 10 59 Table G. Sterling-Sonnenberg System Summary of Costs considered a benefit to the Sonnenberg system Construction $2,441,000 since it represents a regional investment which Operation and Maintenance $ 271,000 would be necessary in the absence of the waste- Total Annual Cost s 501,000 water irrigation project. Total Annual Direct Revenues $ 425,800 Additional benefits for over-all environmental Net Annual Cost $02m 75,20.07/0 a. enhancement such as water recreation and wildlife Net AnualCost$0.0/rn3($0.7/i O00 al.) habitat have not been quantified. The annual cost of agricultural production includes provision for harvest machinery, supple- acre, thse rvenus wold otal$425 800 er yarmental fertilizers and herbicides, irrigation equip- acr),theervne would vaydpniguonatual yi580 eld year ment, etc. The benefits identified with agricultural bth system vand theprevaiing mpnarktua priels. As production include only the direct revenues the yste andthe revilin maret pices Asassociated with the sale of the corn crop. They do experience is gained in the operation of the system not include the secondary regional benefits some- and the organic content of the soil improves, a times associated with the sale of agricultural general upward trend in these revenues can be products, which typically range on the order of expected. 50 percent of the direct revenues. The benefits The costs and revenues of the Sonnenberg- also do not include intangibles such as the Sterling system are summarized in Table G. Capital enhancement of local cattle feed supplies for local construction costs are amortized at an interest feed lots, nor the development of a firm irrigation rate of 7 percent over a 20-year pay-back period. water supply. Financing of the capital construction costs is anticipated to be through industrial revenue bonds. SUMMARY If other methods of financing were available via Due to the law passed by Congress recently, municipal bonds or federal funding at lower interest the rules and regulations of the Environmental rates, lower annual costs could be achieved. Protection Agency, and the need to optimize After consideration is made of the direct federal funding, it is necessary to consider land revenues produced by the sale of corn, the net treatment when planning and designing new annual cost of the system would be $75,200 per sewage treatment facilities. Items to be weighed year. This represents a cost of $0.02/in3 in determining the appropriateness of choosing a ($0.07 per 1,000 gallons) of waste water treated. land treatment Iapproach include site characteristics For comparison purposes, a conventional system such as soil conditions, geology, topography, which would provide similar water quality in this proximity to water, and climate. If the land same area would be approximately $0.1 2/in3 treatment approach is within 15 percent of being ($0.46 per 1,000 gallons). Thus, an initial savings the most cost effective, it will probably be selected. of $0.39 per 1,000 gallons of waste water treated The decision must be made as to which method to would be realized immediately. use, irrigation, overland flow, or rapid infiltration. The designation of benefits has been divided An evaluation must also be made of the aquifers into 4 general categories. The waste-water treatment and their properties so that potential problems costs are those involved in the transport to, and can be identified and appropriate preventative pretreatment of, the wastes at the irrigation site. actions taken. Since the storage basin provides treatment in A monitoring program is essential for land addition to storing flows during the winter treatment systems so that awareness is maintained nonirrigation season, half of the construction cost as to the actual quality of effluent being produced ($303,100) was allocated to agricultural production. and the first indications of potential effects on The regional benefit of $479,700 assigned to waste- ground and surface waters, crops, and soils. water treatment is the estimated cost of providing The application of treated waste water to land treatment by a more conventional alternative. can provide an economical and environmentally This benefit can vary substantially dependent viable alternative to conventional waste-water upon local stream quality problems. In the Sterling treatment. area sulphates and nitrogen are emerging problems in the water supplies. The estimated equivalent REFERENCES treatment cost includes provision for nitrogen 1. Pound, C. E., R. W. Crites, and S. C. Reed. 1978. Land removal only. treatment: present status, future prospects. Civil The cost of conventional treatment is Engineering. June. 60 2. Proposed Rules - Environmental Protection Agency - 14. Bouwer, et al. Wastewater renovation and reuse: Federal Water Pollution Control Act. 1978. virus removal by soil filtration. Paper. Construction grants for treatment works. Federal 15. Personal conversation by author with Mr. R. H. Register, April 25. v. 43, no. 80. Engelsman, AASA, Secretary, Melbourne Metro- 3. Cleveland-Akron metropolitan three river watershed area politan Board of Works, Melbourne, Australia. wastewater management survey. Scope Study, 16. Report of the Task Force on the Land Application Wright-McLaughlin Engineers. Treatment of Wastewater to the Governor's Science 4. Field inspection and interview with A. I. Nasushkin, Head and Technology Advisory Committee. of Science Division, Ministry of Land Reclamation 17. The Federal Water Pollution Control Act Amendments and Water Management, Ukrainian Republic by of 1972. PL 92-500. K. R. Wright on August 14, 1975; Interview in Denver, 18. Guidelines for Sludge Utilization on Land, Techn. Policy Colorado, with N. A. Garkusha, Minister of Land prepared by State of Colorado Department of Health. Reclamation and Water Management in the Ukrainian Soviet Socialist Republic, September 1975. * * * * 5. Wastewater management by disposal on the land. 1972. Report prepared by Cold Regions Research and Kenneth R. Wright is a consulting engineer with offices Engineering Laboratory, Hanover, New Hampshire, in Denver, Colorado. He is president of Wright Water February 1972. Engineers, Inc., and a managing partner of Wright-McLaughlin 6. Personal conversations by author with Thomas K. Engineers. Wright has his B.S. and M.S. degrees in Civil Remple, Manager of Security Water District, Southern Engineering from the University of Wisconsin, along with Colorado. a B.B.A. in Business Administration. He is registered as a 7. Meek, Joseph A. 1978. Report on the Thornton water Professional Engineer in ten States and is Secretary of supply. Colorado Department of Health, January. the Colorado State Board. His firm has planned and designed 8. Policy on land treatment of municipal wastewater. five land treatment systems in Colorado which have been Adopted July 5, 1978, Colorado Water Quality Control constructed, and they have planned others which are in the Commission. design stage. Wright-McLaughlin Engineers has designed 9. Wright, K. R., J. R. Sheaffer, and F. R. McGregor. 1976. around 1 00 conventional sewage treatment plants in the Municipal wastewater irrigation economic environ- Rocky Mountain region. mental analysis. Presented at Seventh Technical Catherine Kraeger Rovey specializes in both ground- Conference on Irrigation, Drainage, and Flood and surface-water resources from the point of view of a Control, Spokane, Washington, October. civil engineer and computer modeler. Dr. Rovey heads up 10. Land treatment of municipal wastewater effluents. the Special Problems Division of the Ground-Water Branch 1976. Design Factors - 1, Environmental of Wright Water Engineers, Inc. She has B.S., M.S., and Protection Agency, Technology Transfer Seminar Ph.D. degrees in Civil Engineering from Colorado State Publication EPA-625/4-76-010, January 1976. University and is registered as a professional engineer in the 11. Survey of facilities using land application of wastewater. States of Colorado and Montana. Rovey has handled 1973. Environmental Protection Agency, EPA- conjunctive use and water right assignments, and most 430/9-73-006, July 1973. recently is in charge of complex ground-water modelling 12. C. W. Thornwaite Associates. An evaluation of cannery for uranium tailings leachate in Wyoming. She is also waste disposal by overland flow spray irrigation - handling the study of urban runoff pollutants for the State Campbell Soup Co., Paris Plant. of Montana. She has taught at the college level, and has 13. Clean Water Act, P.L. 95-217, 1977 Amendment. been in consulting engineering since 1974. 61 Land Application of Waste- Important Alternative' by John R. Sheafferb ABSTRACT INTRODUCTION Land treatment uses a combination of processes to Land treatment of waste water is a contro- manage and beneficially use waste water. It represents a versial issue. A part of the controversy stems from revolution in sewage treatment because it (1) transforms misunderstanding. As Mark Twain once said, if two sewage treatment from a single purpose activity into a minds disagree, it's for one of two reasons. Either multipurpose activity, (2) changes sewage treatment construction grants from subsidies into investments in the they are using the same words to mean different production of food and fiber, and (3) requires the things, or they are using different words to mean participation of a variety of disciplines to implement the same thing. This characterization describes successfully. Because it is revolutionary to the sewage many discussions and articles relating to land treatment field, three situations have developed. First, it is treatment. In general, discussants are perceiving displacing traditional technology at a record-breaking pace. different systems as they debate the performance Second, its logical appeal to thinking decision makers has created a situation in which the policy makers are ahead of level of land treatment. many technicians. Third, it is attacked with a fervor To initiate a meaningful discussion of land heretofore unknown in the sewage treatment field. treatment, it is necessary to identify first the Land treatment has logged an enviable track record elements of a complete system. This does not in the United States. Existing systems have produced amentaavriyofbrvaedesosofld high quality effluent at economically competitive prices. enta ait fabeitdvrin fln in addition, in terms of relative risk, the threat to treatment system do not exist. Rather, it suggests environmental quality from a land treatment system that one should not expect an abbreviated version compares favorably with advanced waste treatment systems. to function like a complete system. There may be good reasons to abbreviate land a ~~~~~~~~~~~~treatment systems. These are policy decisions. aPrestd at The Fourth National Ground Water However, the performance data from an abbreviated Quality Symposium, Minneapolis, Minnesota, September system should not be used to evaluate a complete 20-22, 1978. bPh.D., President, Sheaffer & Roland, Inc., 130 N. system. When this is done it is an incorrect Franklin St., Chicago, Illinois 60606. technological transfer. Such incorrect transfers have taken place and have influenced planning decisions. 62 COMPONENTS OF A LAND The following group of analyses will help to TREATMENT SYSTEM establish the potential for prolonged irrigation of A complete land treatment system consists the soil and to evaluate its potential to purify the of a number of processes which manage and use the waste water: (1) cation exchange capacity (c.e.c.), waste water. There are six basic components. Each (2) pH, (3)Fcalcium carbonate (CaCO3) if exceeding component is discussed briefly. 0.1 percent, (4) particle size distribution, (5) total The first component is a network of pipes to organic carbon, (6) total organic nitrogen, collect the waste water. This collection and trans- (7) exchangeable Ca, Mg, K, and Na, (8) total port system conveys the waste water to a selected soluble salts, (9) chlorides, and (10) bulk density. location. The location could be contiguous to (These parameters are gleaned from the analyses the producing area 5 miles away, or conceivably of land treatment systems provided by G. W. Leeper, 100 miles away. consultant in agricultural chemistry to Sheaffer The second component provides pretreatment. & Roland, Inc.) The importance of these parameters Thus, a land treatment system does not spread raw is discussed briefly in the following passages: sewage on the land. Rather a proper level of 1. Cation exchange capacity. This has a role mechanical and biological treatment is provided in both spheres of irrigation and purification. In before application to the land. The pretreatment irrigation, it is helpful in estimating the impact of a reduces the BOD level of the sewage to prevent known amount of sodium in the irrigating water. In the cethirdcmonen pofvnidsstoane. codthios . purification, it is used in estimating the load of The ~~~~wthir compoent po i esto r g.Ti heavy metal which the soil may safely carry. A component provides flexibility w i hrsett useful figure that is quoted here, and one with when waste water will be applied to the land. This s m xeietlbcig sta ftep s65 elimiatesconfictswith espet toplaningthen 10 percent of c.e.c. may be held by zinc and harvesting, and irrigation. Also, it avoids the other heavy metals. (if c.e.c. is 20 m.e. per 100 g, necessity of irrigating during the nongrowing this means 650 ppm of zinc.) season. if the pretreated waste water is to be used primarily to irrigate and fertilize crops it must be 2. pH. There is also a dual role for pH. A pH stored during the nongrowing season. The storage exceeding 8 is taken into account in assessing the facility must be designed to-manage potential impact of sodium in water; while any information leakage. This can be done by constructing facilities about pH is useful in describing a soil's chemistry-a to intercept the leakage and return it to the storage low pH implies low reserves of nutrients, in basin, controlling ground-water movements by particular. In renovation, one desirable (or essential) wells and drainage ditches, or lining the storage basin side of a moderately high pH is the increased with an impervious layer. Disinfection of the ability to hold heavy metals (Leeper, 1978). treated and stored waste water takes place as it Another concern is phosphate. It is held by calcium leaves the storage basin. at pH above 6 and by iron and aluminum at pH The fourth component is an irrigation site below 6. on which crops can be grown. When selecting the 3 acu abnt.Ifraino aO site, the hydrogeology and the soil characteristics 3 acu abnt.Ifraino aO should be evaluated. There is a double interest in is in any soil study. The qualification "above 0.1 these evaluations. First, there are the general percent" is merely to avoid analyzing for trivialities. questions regarding the use of the site for irrigation, Calcareous soils have their own peculiarities in e~g. salnity watrlogingand he bildu ofavailability of trace elements. In terms of renovation, sodium sainiy wthersol.eoggnd, teeare the quesildpons CaCO3 is a powerful buffer against both heavy regadiuing the capailit Seofd thersie toprif the qetos metals and phosphate. Against zinc, I percent stredgandin ptheaabltyfted wsite wtoepr.f h CaCO3 would certainly hold 6500 ppm zinc. ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~gist pospae, In pretrentedO would holdr Initially, a field description of the site must 1900inst phosphot,1prcetCC wuldsol be developed. The soil must be evaluated with 10 p hshrs regard to texture and be separated into horizons 4. Particle size distribution. This is a numerical with depth. This information on soil needs to be way of recording what the soil survey reports as accompanied by observations regarding sand, loam, clay loam, clay, etc. The percentage infiltration, permeability, depth to zone of clay is the most important single value in this saturation, and direction and rate of flow of analysis. It can be linked to the conduction of ground water. water through the soil, and to the c.e.c. though 63 different kinds of clay differ greatly in c.e.c. Many abbreviated land treatment systems do not have an underdrainage system. In essence, 5. Total organic carbon. This provides an they have uncontrolled recharge. The Muskegon estimate of total organic matter (given by multiply- ty ae-teragemn s e n County waste-water management system can be ing by 1.72). While this figure is largely determined used to illustrate how an underdrainage system will used to illustrate how an underdrainage system will by climate it also depends on management and by climate it also depends on management and function. The United States Geological Survey in generally increases with fertility. Organic matter conjunction with the State of Michigan analyzed conjunction with the State of Michigan analyzed contributes to c.e.c. much more than does clay, the underdrainage system at Muskegon County the underdrainage system at Muskegon County and it holds heavy metals, atom for atom, more (U.S.G.S., 1978). A digital model analysis was (U.S.G.S., 1978). A digital model analysis was strongly than clay. This need not be evaluated undertaken. This analysis showed that if the undertaken. This analysis showed that if the below 2 feet. ~~~~~~~below 2 feet. ~effectiveness of the tile to collect drainage is 6. Total organic nitrogen. This is easily reduced by 75 percent-a severe planning determined and gives a little additional information assumption-large areas within the land treatment to organic carbon, in terms of fertility. The carbon site would become waterlogged. However, the nitrogen ratio (C/N) is usually of the order 10 to 12 effect outside the waste-water site would be to 1. Any reduction in this ratio indicates a negligible. With this type of information, greater likelihood of liberating ammonia. This conjecture concerning the potential effects a need not be evaluated below 2 feet. complete land treatment system would have on off-site wells is academic, when a properly designed 7. Exchangeable Ca, Mg, K, and Na. These exchangeable metals are primarily of interest in underdrainage system is provided. It is important to note that many systems coping with high proportions of sodium. They are It is important to note that many systems referred to as land treatment are not designed of primary interest to the irrigator. of primary interest to the irrigator properly and do not contain all of the components 8. Total soluble salts. This is of interest to the of a complete system. In some instances, the treat- irrigator. ment plant does not work so the effluent is conveyed to a nearby field and discharged. This is 9. Cbloride. This is of interest to the irrigator. not a land treatment system. Similarly an industry 10. Bulk density. This information is needed with a seepage bed does not have a land treatment to make mutual transformations of parts per system. The performance of such a system should million and kilograms, per hectare or pounds per not be used to evaluate the performance of a land ~~~~~~~~acre,~ ~treatment system. acre. The fifth component is a growing crop. This provides a living filter with the potential to LAND TREATMENT IS SITE SPECIFIC recycle nutrients. The crops selected must be There is danger in repeating the design of a compatible with the soil, climate, and the waste- successful land treatment system at a new site. In water characteristics. A soil system with a growing this respect, land treatment differs significantly from crop can recycle nutrients and can extract some the more conventional treatment plant technology. substances that should be confined and contained One should not repeat the Muskegon design in the environment. Cadmium, an example, is an throughout the country. A land treatment system element in sewage which is efficiently extracted by must be designed to fit specific site characteristics. crops. However, the crop keeps the cadmium out Even outspoken opponents of land treatment agree of its seed and deposits it in its stems and foliage. that it is possible to design a land treatment system The sixth component is an underdrainage that would not result in the pollution of system. This important component can be either underground-water resources. natural (an area of ground-water discharge) or To illustrate, one critic stated, "the impression installed (drain tiles or wells) or a combination should not be left that no waste materials can or of the two. The purpose of the underdrainage should be placed on, in, or under the ground system is to protect both the living filter and the surface. Given the proper hydrogeological aquifer. The living filter is protected from water- conditions and using appropriately designed logging and excessive salt buildup by the drainage facilities, there are situations when selected wastes network. The aquifer is protected because of the can be disposed of into the ground without capability to collect and recycle any pollutants appreciably modifying the quality of the potable which may have broken through the living filter. ground water." (Johnson, 1978). 64 TECHNOLOGICAL CHANGES role since land treatment is dealing with the basic There are a number of significant technological laws of matter and thermodynamics. Land treatment changes inherent in a land treatment system. seeks to use the forces in nature for the benefit of Essentially land treatment transforms sewage humanity. To do so successfully requires the involve- treatment from a single purpose activity into a ment of several disciplines. multipurpose activity, changes sewage treatment construction grants from subsidies into investments EFFECTS OF LAND TREATMENT in the production of food and fiber, and requires Land treatment is replacing traditional the participation of a variety of disciplines to technology at a rapid rate. A decade ago, implement successfully. land treatment was not considered seriously. A land treatment system constitutes a change Land treatment was viewed by some as a movement from a single purpose to a multiple purpose back to the Dark Ages. It was viewed as a return program. A land treatment system provides agri- to honey buckets. cultural open space near urban areas. It helps to However, dramatic changes are now underway preserve agriculture-a stated goal of many urban and land treatment is in the forefront. It is the regions. encouraged alternative because it has been successful. Land treatment can be integrated with flood- In the light of its success, many policy makers plain management. The Department of the Army have become the leaders or advocates of the observed that the authorities in the Federal Water approach. Pollution Control Act Amendments of 1972 regard- Many persons in the engineering profession ing the acquisition of sites for land treatment of have chosen not to lead. This reluctance was waste water when combined with the authorities observed by Eugene T. Jensen in 1971. Mr. Jensen of Section 73 of the Water Resources Development told an American Society of Civil Engineers Act of 1974 offer an outstanding opportunity for National Specialty Conference at Los Angeles: multiple uses of floodplains while preserving green "I am ashamed to admit that ... the old 'pros' in space and providing recreational opportunities. the field of water pollution control appear to be The Army spokesman inquired, "why not use our lagging. The people and Congress appear to have floodplains in urban areas for crop production, golf swept by us." The reaction to his challenge was courses, forests, and other uses which can somewhat predictable. Simply remove Mr. Jensen capitalize on the nutrients in our waste water and as Operations Chief of the Water Quality Control provide tertiary waste treatment at the same Office of EPA. The transfer took care of Mr. time?" (Ford, 1975). Jensen, but fortunately it did not take care of land Land treatment impacts on energy. The treatment. Congress recognized the validity of his nitrogen in a year's flow of domestic waste water in statement and has moved land treatment along the United States requires the equivalent of two legislatively as evident by the passage of the Clean and a quarter billion gallons of crude oil to replace Water Act of 1977 (P.L. 95-217). Having abdicated as fertilizer. the leadership role, some in the engineering The implementation of a land treatment system profession have chosen to attack land treatment. allows a community to transfer the cost of sewage Articles have crept into the trade journals with treatment (a social inflationary cost) to the positive titles or headings like "Land Disposal: A Giant side of the ledger (an investment in the production Step Backward;" "Land Disposal: The Paper Tiger;" of future food and fiber). This is the rationale and "Land Disposal: The Environmental Blunder behind the 10 percent bonus in Federal construction of the 20th Century." This terminology gives grants for land treatment systems. When the these authors away. They are so engrained with a Federal government supports a land treatment disposal philosophy that land treatment is system over a conventional treatment plant, the beyond their comprehension. The management construction grant shifts from a Federal subsidy to and use of pollutants as resources out of place is an investment in the production of future food not understood. Thus, these critics tend to gravitate and fiber. to their familiar turf-disposal. To design a land treatment system that is site In the planning process, the attack on land specific will involve a number of disciplines. The treatment takes a different course of action. Here, design of such systems requires soil scientists, technical distortions are introduced into the data to hydrogeologists, agriculturalists, chemists, color the outcome. biologists, and engineers. Physicists should play a A review of alternative treatment systems in 65 Table 1. Key Chemical Raw Materials Advertised as 1977a). Therefore, emphasis here will be placed on Being Available from Michigan performance with respect to organics. Organics Inorganics Minerals The Muskegon system receives an unusually large assortment of organic compounds and this is Benzene Air gases Cement Butadiene Bromine/derivatives Clays not typical of a normal municipal system. Some Butadiene Bromine/derivatives Clays Chlorinated solvents Chlorine Gypsum of the exotic materials which enter the system is Ethylene Hydrochloric acid Lime evidenced from the raw materials tabulated in Phenol Magnesium oxide Natural gas Table 1. The industries which discharge their Propylene Phosphoric acid Petroleum wastes into the system are tabulated in Table 2. Styrene Sodium carbonate Salt Another Another complicating factor is that the ground Sodium hydroxide Sulphuric acid water in the nearby area has been contaminated by discharges from Lakeway Chemical Company's unsealed lagoons and Thermo-Chem Incorporated's seepage lagoons. In an effort to correct this a New England State was undertaken. One system ground-water pollution problem, two 8-inch purge included a traditional treatment plant. The other wells are now in operation at the Lakeway Chemical system called for land treatment. Both of them site to pump the polluted groundwater to the were going to chlorinate their effluent. The study Muskegon County Wastewater Management System concluded that the two systems would cost for purification (communication with Andy Hogarth, essentially the same, and suggested that it would Michigan Department of Natural Resources, August probably be easier to build a traditional treatment 10, 1977). The area north of the lagoons has shown plant since there has been more experience in steady improvement. However, the number of purge building such plants. When the cost breakdown of wells needed to correct the situation is likely to these systems is evaluated, a great disparity in increase to six 8-inch wells before the ground-water estimating appears. The cost of the chlorination pollution will be brought under control. There are facility at the treatment plant was listed at $20,000. two interesting observations that can be drawn from On the other hand, the cost of the chlorination this experience. First, the Muskegon system is facility at the land treatment system was listed at deluged with assorted organic discharges from $360,000 (Town of Falmouth). This is simply one industry each day (see Table 2). Second, it is of many blatant examples of technical distortions serving as a pollution sink for a program that which are being used in an effort to stymie the is seeking to clean up polluted ground water at a move toward land treatment. nearby industrial site. This ground-water cleanup program is enjoying a measure of success (W. Mich. PERFORMANCE OF A LAND Shoreline Regional Dev. Comn., 1977). TREATMENT SYSTEM The Robert S. Kerr Environmental Research Empirical information on the performance of Laboratory undertook a preliminary survey of a land treatment system can be gleaned from the toxic pollutants at the Muskegon system in monitoring of the Muskegon system. The excellent August and September of 1976. The report removal experience of traditional pollution emphasized that this was a preliminary survey parameters by the Muskegon County Wastewater conducted within a restricted time frame which Management System is well documented (U.S. EPA, considerably limited both sampling and analytical Table 2. Chemical Process Industries Discharging into the Muskegon Wastewater Management System Name Employees Products Burdick and Jackson Laboratories 35 Fine organic chemicals East Shore Chemical Co., Inc. 50 Specialty chemicals Lakeway Chemicals, Inc. 140 Dichlorobenzidine dihydrochloride, benzidine sulfate slurry Story Chemical Corporation 240 Specialty fine chemicals Webb Chemical Service Corporation 25 Industrial and laboratory chemicals Thermo Chemical, Inc. 25 Disposal and reprocess chemicals Thomas Solvent Company 50 Solvents Fisons Limiteda - Agrochemicals and pharmaceuticals a Not on line when survey was taken. 66 SAMPLE: EQUIVALENT TO 7.5 ML compounds which survived the entire treatment sequence OF WASTEWATER. COLUMN: 3% OV-I ON 100/200 GAS CHROM is significant primarily because these substances necessarily TEMP: Q. 1.8 NQo 2 6MMlN. traversed 5-12 ft (1.5-3.66 m) of sandy soil to reach the : 7-240� 6�0MIN. tile carrying the final effluent from the site. This comprises furth&r evidence that organic pollutants, including chlorinated compounds of suspected toxicity, ENFLUENT may survive and move significantly in the subsurface under proper conditions. Hence, the need is reiterated for developing definitive information concerning the movement and fate of organic pollutants in the subsurface environment in order that waste disposal methods which AERATED LAGOON EFFLUENT employ the subsurface as a pollutant receptor may be utilized to their full potential with minimum impact on ground water (U.S. EPA, 1977b). This research did not show any evidence of ground-water pollution. Rather it simply showed that with heavy applications of waste water on a sandy soil, small quantities of organic compounds moved through 5-12 feet of sandy soil into the STORAGE LAGOON EFFLUENT underdrainage system. It is necessary always to distinguish between ground water and a controlled underdrainage system when discussing a land treatment system. The scientists called for more research. This is proper in light of the myriad of organic com- FINAL EFFLUENT pounds which enter the environment. The removal of chloroform by the Muskegon System is presented in Table 3. The influent SOURCE: Robert S. Kerr; Environmental Research Laboratory, May 1977. averaged 870 parts per billion. A maximum Fig. 1. Comparison by gas chromatography of neutral extracts of waste waters from Muskegon system, August 10, contaminant level of 100 parts per billion for total 1976. ' trihalomethanes including chloroform is suggested for drinking water. The concentration which appears in the drainage tiles at Muskegon averages 6 parts efforts. Results from the analyses are presented per billion. in Figure 1. It concluded that: The Muskegon County Wastewater Treatment System CONCLUSION was receiving for treatment waste waters consistently con- Land treatment systems provide an oppor- taining a great many organic pollutants of possible concern, including at least 11 compounds appearing on the EPA tunity to view sewage treatment as an investment "List of Dangerous Pollutants." It is further apparent that, in the production of food and fiber. They can be even though low levels of eight organic pollutants, including viewed as an investment in the future, rather than four toxic compounds, were indicated to survive the treat- an increase in social costs. Land treatment provides ment sequence, the Muskegon System was relatively quite effective in removing organic pollutants from the waste water which it was treating. This is emphasized by the Figure Table 3. Removal of Chloroform by the Muskegon Land which presents a comparison by gas chromatography of Treatment System (in parts per billion) neutral extracts prepared from influent, aerated lagoon effluent, storage lagoon effluent, and final effluent samples. Chloroform These chromatograms, which were obtained by chromato- from sample Drainage Percent graphing quantities of extract equivalent to 7.5 ml of each date Influent watera removed waste water, clearly show the very significant attenuation of organic pollutants across the system. It is very doubtful 8-10-76 425 3 99.3 if any other types of treatment systems, with the possible 8-11-76 440 3 99.3 exception of those utilizing heroic and very costly measures 8-12-76 480 1 99.8 for polishing of final effluents would have been more 9-7-76 360 13 96.4 effective than the Muskegon System in removing the organic 9-8-76 2645 10 99.6 pollutants occurring in the waste water being treated, Average 870 6 99.3 especially since more than 60 percent of this waste water was comprised of industrial components. The presence in the final a Maximum contaminant level (MCL) 100 parts per billion effluent of atrazine, trimethylisocyanurate, and those eight for total trihalomethanes including chloroform. 67 our nation with a positive program to deal with a survey of toxic pollutants at the Muskegon waste- negatively perceived material, sewage. In addition, water management system. Robert S. Kerr Environ- clean water is achieved. It is very doubtful if any mental Research Laboratory, Ada, Oklahoma. u.s. Geological Survey. 1978. Model analyses of the impact other type of treatment system could be as on groundwater conditions of the Muskegon County effective as the Muskegon land treatment system Wastewater Disposal System, Michigan. Open-File in purifying water. Biases of the past pale when Report 78-99, January 1978. the merits of land treatment are evaluated West Michigan Shoreline Regional Development Commission. 1977. Assessment of groundwater quality in region objectively. We need to know more about it. 14. Preliminary Report, December 1977. REFERENCES * * * * Ford, Charles R. 1975. Effect of new legislation on John R. Sheaffer is President of Sheaffer & Roland, management of river systems. Transactions of the Inc. He received a B.S. in Physical Science at Millersville 40th North America Wildlife and National Resources State College, Pennsylvania in 1953; an M.S. in Physical Conference. Washington, D.C., p. 278. Science from the University of Chicago in 1958; and a Ph.D. Johnson, Charles C., Jr. 1978. Drinking water policy in Social Science from the University of Chicago in 1964. problems: background of the current situation. Paper He received a Declaration for Exceptional Civilian Service presented at the National Conference on Drinking from the Department of the Army in 1972. His past Water Policy Problems, March 6, 1978. experience includes: Presidency of K & A Resource Leeper, G. W., 1978. Living with heavy metals. Marcel Planning, Inc.; Bauer, Sheaffer, and Lebr, Inc. (1973-75); Dekker, Inc., New York, p. 88. Special Assistantfor Environmental Affairs, Department Town of Falmouth, Massachusetts. Wastewater facilities of the Army (1972-73); Scientific Advisor, Office of the plan. Preliminary draft, pp. A-8 and A-9. Secretary of the Army (1970-72); Research Associate and U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. 1977a. Process Consultant, Centerfor Urban Studies, University of design manual for land treatment of municipal Chicago (1966-70); and Resource Planning Officer, North- wastewater. EPA 625/1-77-008, October 1977. eastern Illinois Planning Commission (1960-66). He has U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. 1977b. Preliminary published numerous papers. 68 Land Application of Waste - An Accident Waiting to Happen' by Charles C. Johnson, J~ ABSTRACT Symposium, let's take a brief look at the tremendous Half the population depends on ground water for waste produced in this country that helps to place domestic uses. Use is increasing 25 percent per decade. our nation's vast ground-water resources in Ground water is generally used with little or no treatment. epry ahya ao ..idsre ra Some persons would transfer the discharge of our aboutdy Each billio gallons ofS wadstres wterbfrea p ~~~waste products from contaminated surface streams to theabu5,0biloglonofwseatreoe land and thus relatively clean ground waters. discharging it to the environment (U.S. EPA, No standards exist that protect ground-water quality. 1977a). Of this volume, about 1,700 billion gallons Research necessary to give assurance that natural interaction are pumped to oxidation ponds or lagoons for of waste water and soils will remove, to acceptable levels, treatment or as a step in the treatment process. potentially harmful contaminants, organic and inorganic, Another 5,000 billion gallons per year of municipal that permeate today's waste streams and today's health w s e w tri icagdt h niomnwt concerns, has not been done. wsewtri icagdt h niomnwt Success reports on land treatment of waste water have an estimated 7 30 billion gallons of this amount not evaluated deterioration of ground water from organic discharged to the land. In the United States, contamination. Most waste waters contain synthetic muncplsugprdtinaotsoabt organics in varying concentrations. EPA recommends their n iipal sldry poutionse yar.inunstria aboudg reduction in drinking water to the lowest possible level. milo r ospryer nutilsug Most instances of ground-water contamination have production is believed to be many times this been discovered after drinking water is contaminated. amount. EPA (1977b) estimated annual solid Unless the public is willing to treat ground water as it does waste production at 136.1 million tons in 1975. In water from surface streams, greater control of land disposal addition we must deal with the millions of tons of practices must be exercised. Current practice does not gaseous wastes that are produced annually; the indicate the necessary controls are contemplated or utl udeso ilo oso ietiig recognized. it follows that the widespread use of the land d ispoldhudeds of eacllio;ndte trmnous volumietalns treatment alternative is, in reality, an accident waiting todipsdoeahyr;ndtermnouvlms happen. (more than 24 million barrels per day) of oil field brines produced each day. The discharge to the The itl assgne forthi sesiondoesnotenvironment of such large volumes of waste with limtit asined for atdiscuession dofewst-ae tramnot varying concentrations of toxic and hazardous lii noadicsond o f w s e w te.ramn substances must have a detrimental effect on the practices adtheir residuals, although I suspect thisqultofurnin'waersucsbhsrae was the original intention. Inasmuch as ground-water qandt ofrournd-onswater rsoupples,.ohsufc protection is the underlying theme of this National Beause wofund-ocivtfrwasteprodupplies. in this country, and as a result of the rather indiscriminant waste disposal practices that prevail, some basic concepts regarding water-supply protec- aPresented at The Fourth National Ground Water tion have been destroyed, and some new ones Quality Symposium, Minneapolis, Minnesota, September that affect established policies in the water-supply 20-22, 1978. field have surfaced. The paragraphs that follow bChairman, National Drinking Water Advisory Council, will discuss some of these as they relate to land and Vice President, Malcolm Pirnie, Inc., Consulting Environmental Engineers, 8757 Georgia Ave., Suite 503, application of waste water and protection of Silver Spring, Maryland 20910. ground-water quality. The Public Health Service Drinking Water 69 Standards (USPHS, 1962) required that water substantive movement of heavy metals, cyanide, supplies be obtained from a "protected source." arsenic, selenium and organics through the soil In the case of ground water, the standard defined and into the ground water. " protected source" as water resulting from the A study of the long-term effects of land natural purification by infiltration through soil application of domestic waste water at Hollister, and percolation through underlying material and California (EPA, 1978a) revealed substantially storage below the ground-water table. If the source higher levels in the total coliform count per 100 ml was not adequately protected by natural means, the over control wells; also it indicated increased supply is to be adequately protected by treatment. cadmium levels, and lead levels that sometimes Ground water for human consumption is seldom exceeded drinking water standards. Further, the treated except for disinfection. It is generally report stated that "the greatest void of information agreed that these standards were designed to remaining with respect to land treatment systems protect against bacteriological contamination and is that of persistent or refractory organic that this definition of protected source provides compounds. Uncertainties regarding health insufficient protection against the massive volumes effects from transport of these materials through of toxic and hazardous wastes that are discharged the soil from land-applied waste water must be to our environment today. answered before essential design criteria can be It must be recognized that the number of established. Quantification of basic scientific protected underground sources are diminishing. data on organic substances of known or suspected The remaining acceptable sources are further toxicity and determination of safe underground threatened by policies being initiated without travel distances are major areas where research is supportive studies in terms of today's health needed." concerns, and promoted under the desire for "zero A report just recently released by EPA discharge" of waste water to surface waters. (1978b) discusses environmental changes from Well meaning, but poorly. advised persons long-term land application of municipal effluents. would have us transfer the discharge of our waste In my opinion, what the report says about the products from our surface streams, which are already impact of the practice in two communities- contaminated to the land and thus, subsequently to Bakersfield, California, and Lubbock, Texas-on the ground water, which in both instances are ground water is most supportive of my concern relatively clean. This would be an excellent idea if for the paucity of data related to this practice and complete reliability could be placed upon the natural its impact on ground-water quality. The report says action of most soils to remove the potentially that "very little" is known with regard to ground- harmful contaminants, organic and inorganic, that water changes underlying the sewage-effluent- seems to permeate today's waste stream and irrigated farm at Bakersfield. What is known suggests today's health concerns. The fact is that we can not. that high levels of nitrate are in the ground water A search of the literature has failed to reveal one under the farm. By comparison it notes that instance where any qual ified expert has agreed that ground water under farm land several miles to the the natural filtration and percolation of today's east are also high in nitrates. The report states that waste-water stream through the soil produces a only slightly more information is available on water that without question is safe to drink. That is ground-water quality at the Lubbock irrigation farm. not unusual. Neither does anyone recommend that Total dissolved solids of 1692 ppm were one-third waste water receiving tertiary treatment followed higher than comparison wells, and nitrates of 50 by dilution with water of drinking qhality ppm were 6 times higher. From the few data is fit to drink. On the other hand, the literature available, it appears likely that the long-term is replete with examples of ground-water effluent irrigation operation (3 farms operated for contamination that results from current 38, 19 and 6 years) has caused increased dissolved practices-even those projects considered by some solids and nitrate concentrations in the ground to be successful land treatment operations. water underlying the farms. While some will dismiss these studies as being It can be pointed out that even the quality of representative of archaic practices, others will the ground water under the country's most recognize that they provide information that we heralded land treatment system-the waste-water need to know. For instance, a preliminary report management system serving Muskegon County, discussing the subsurface migration of hazardous Michigan-must be viewed with a note of caution. chemicals (Geraghty and Miller, 1977) showed Following a preliminary survey of toxic 70 pollutants at the site, the report (EPA, 1977c) * Degree of contamination ranges from a slight stated the presence of low levels of organics in the degradation of natural quality to the presence of toxic final effluent indicates the need for definitive concentrations of such substances as heavy metals, information concerning the movement and fate of organic compounds, and radioactive materials. * Removing the source of contamination does not organic pollutants in the subsurface. I believe we clean up the aquifer once contaminated. The contamination all know that the State of Michigan does not of an aquifer can rule out its usefulness as a drinking water allow the ground water at this site to be used for source for decades and possibly centuries. drinking water. 0 Existing technology alone cannot guarantee that Other States also have exhibited concern for soil attenuation alone will be sufficient to prevent ground-water contamination from a waste disposal source. the potential health effects of ingesting over long a Land disposal of waste is not environmentally periods of time, ground water contaminated with feasible in many areas. the waste water following its application to land. * Existing Federal and State programs address many California convened a panel of experts to advise of the sources of potential contamination, but they do not it on this question (State of California, 1976). provide comprehensive protection of ground water. Their report concluded that "areas of uncertainties regarding health effects can not be resolved because A review of EPA's Land Treatment Manual by basic scientific knowledge is lacking." It noted that C. Winklehaus was carried in the Journal of the "monitoring and surveillance have not been directed Water Pollution Control Federation (1978). The at health aspects." commentary in the review in large measure The California State Health Department has summarizes some of my concerns on this treatment completed a draft version of proposed ground-water alternative. Mr. Winkelhaus notes that there is a recharge regulations for use when reclaimed waste tendency to overlook the fact that land treatment waters are used to augment underground potable systems, unlike "conventional systems," have water supplies through spreading (AWWA Research relatively open boundaries through which water Foundation, 1977). Among other things these and solids can pass quite freely-once applied, draft regulations require that the waste water the waste water and pollutants are largely beyond receive carbon absorption treatment (30 minutes control. Can anyone assure us that the EPA policy detention time), and percolate through an on land treatment as contained in the Adminis- unsaturated aerobic zone of undisturbed soil for at trator's memorandum of October 3, 1977 (Costle, least 10 feet vertically. 1977), and further amplified by the draft Program Almost daily we are reminded of the Requirements Memorandum (EPA, 1978c) by perils to our ground water that can result from Mr. Cahill dated May 10, 1978, provides the land application of wastes. Just recently the safeguards required to protect our ground-water Communicable Disease Center of the Public Health resources? In my opinion; the answer is no. Service (1978) reported at least 759 cases of The Assistant Administrator for Water and gastroenterits associated with leakage from a Hazardous Materials for EPA seems to have verified municipal sewage lagoon in southern Missouri that these concerns in a statement (Jorling, 1978) affected the aquifer in Arkansas as well. The lagoon before the Committee on Environment and Public was over a porous limestone formation which Works of the U.S. Senate. In that statement he permitted rapid movement of ground water. said "concern for ground water has emerged Hindsight tells us a lagoon system probably should relatively recently as a major environmental issue. not have been used at this site under these There is a great deal yet to be learned about the fate conditions, but it was. It is a very poignant and transport of contaminants below the surface; reminder that most instances of ground-water the practices that represent the greatest threat to contamination have been discovered only after this national resource; and the economics of drinking water has been contaminated. alternative ways of disposing of wastes in a manner The EPA recent report to Congress on waste more protective of the environment. Another disposal practices effects on ground water (EPA, reason for proceeding carefully is the sheer number 1977a) offers some interesting insight into this of facilities that seem to have the potential for an subject. Among other things it notes that: adverse impact on the quality of ground water. 0Ground water has been contaminated on a local Literally hundreds of thousands of wells, surface basis in all parts of the nation and on a regional basis in impoundments, ditches and landfills used by some heavily industrialized areas, precluding the develop- industry, municipalities, farmers and other private ment of water wells. individuals are involved. Prudence dictates careful 71 preparation in designing programs to bring these municipal wastewater. Memorandum of October 3, practices under control and in incurring the probable 1977 to Assistant Administrators, and Regional social and economic costs involved." Administrators. Washington, D.C. Geraghty and Miller, Inc. 1977. The prevalence of subsurface It is accepted knowledge that contaminants of migration of hazardous chemical substances at known and unknown character and concentrations selected industrial waste land disposal sites. Draft reside in all sewage effluents. The examples that Final Report Prepared for U.S. EPA. Port Washington, have been cited in this paper certainly show that N.Y. sewage effluents do percolate through the ground Jorling, Thomas C. 1978. Testimony before the Subcom- mittee on Environmental Pollution Committee on to the ground-water table. Contaminants in sewage Environment and Public Works-Unit tes Senate without a D o ubt h ave public health significance. Environment and Public Works-United States Senate without a doubt have public health significance. on July 18, 1978. Washington, D.C. Little is known about the health significance of State of California. 1976. Report of the consulting panel trace levels of synthetic organic contaminants that on health aspects of wastewater reclamation for have been identified in the ground water under ground-water recharge. Joint Report of the State some of the land treatment systems. The Adminis- Water Resources Control Board, Department of Water Resources and the Department of Health. Berkeley, trator of EPA has publicly stated that the presence California. of trace levels of synthetic organic chemicals in U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. 1977a. Waste drinking water may be hazardous to the health of disposal practices and their effects on ground water. persons. Further, the EPA has proposed a treatment The Report to Congress. Washington, D.C. standard for public water supplies so that these U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. 1977b. Resource contaminants can be reduced to the lowest recovery and waste reduction. Fourth Report to Congress, Washington, D.C. practicable level. If EPA's statements and actions u.s. Environmental Protection Agency. 1977c. Preliminary are to be taken seriously, why should anyone survey of toxic pollutants at the Muskegon wastewater promote a waste-water treatment practice that adds management systems. Ada, Oklahoma. even small increments of these contaminants to an u.s. Environmental Protection Agency. 1978a. Long term otherwise safe water supply? effects of land application of domestic wastewater: Hollister, California, rapid infiltration site. Washington, There is no doubt in my mind that from D.c. strictly a technological viewpoint we can design land U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. 1978b. Environ- disposal systems of many types that will dispose mental changes from long-term land application of of waste water, allow the production of agricultural municipal effluents. Washington, D.C. crops, extend the development and use of pasture u.s. Environmental Protection Agency. 1978c. Construc- land, provide for certain recreational pursuits and tion grants program requirements memorandum - 'land, provide for certain recreational pursuits andrevision of agency guideance for evaluation of land establish bird sanctuarys, all at a profit when only treatment alternatives. Washington, D.C. measured by the flow of dollars into the cash U.S. Public Health Service Drinking Water Standards. 1962. register. The overriding question is, where should Department of Health, Education and Welfare, this be done; what quality of waste water should Washington, D.C. be applied to the land; and what degree of degrada- u.S. Public Health Service, Center for Disease Control- Morbidity and Mortality Weekly Report. 1978. v. 27, no. 22. Gastroenteritis associated with a sewage leak- ground water? In the absence of more definitive Missouri, Arkansas. Atlanta, Georgia. answers to these questions than those implied by Winklehaus, C. 1978. Land treatment: a paper tiger? Journal current EPA policy, I would prefer the policy I Water Pollution Control Federation. January, 1978. understand is used by the British, i.e., only water Washington, D.C. of drinking water quality should be returned to * * * * ground-water aquifers from which drinking water Charles C. Johnson, Jr., Vice President of Malcolm will be extracted. Otherwise we must admit that Pirnie, Inc., and retired Assistant Surgeon General in the we proceed in ignorance and we cannot be u.s. Public Health Service, graduated from Purdue University which has designated him a Distinguished Engineering surprised at some future time when reality tells Alumnus. He is a Diplomate in the American Academy of us the accident has happened. Environmental Engineers, a licensed Professional Engineer, Chairman of EPA 's National Drinking Water Advisory Council, associated with EPA 's Management Advisory Group for the Construction Grants Program, and REFERENCES recipient of the National Sanitation Foundation/National American Water Well Association Research Foundation- Environmental Health Association 1977 Walter F. Snyder Municipal Wastewater Reuse News. 1977. v. 3, p. 7, Award of Achievement in Attaining Environmental Quality. "Regulations and Legal Aspects." Denver, Colorado. His 30 years' environmental experience includes positions Costle, Douglas M. 1977. EPA policy on land treatment of in federal and local government and in private industry. 72 Audience Response to Session III - Land Application of Waste Stephen A. Smith, 1423 S. College Ave., Tempe, AZ 85281: and disposal facilities as near as possible to ground-water The advantages of using the soil for the application and discharge areas. This will accomplish some important treatment of wastes are well-known; however, although we objectives. If an accident does happen (and Murphy's Law probably have the technology to design a fail-safe system, says that it will), the actual zone of degradation is small, we may not be able to afford it. Accidents can happen due and we won't waste valuable hydrogeologists' time tracking to improper design, inadequate maintenance, or a lack of a a plume across a county (let the engineers track it down a complete understanding of the soil-water system. stream). In addition, if the facility is subsequently Ground-water zoning, and the delineation of areas of modified to correct the situation, the zone of contaminated possible, potential, or actual ground-water degradation, is a ground water will be renovated in a relatively short time. possible solution to this dilemma. We can, in effect, have Mr. Sheaffer has suggested that we use floodplains our cake (land treatment) and be able to eat most of it (or for the operation of land treatment systems. Provided drink the water). By siting land treatment and disposal that a floodplain site can meet the criteria for soils and facilities in areas designated as zones of potential degrada- ground water set forth in most State regulations, it would tion, we serve notice that a contamination'potential exists, be an excellent choice if we accept the discharge area and special measures are necessary to ensure the safety of concept of degradation zoning. Obviously, floodplains water supplies. For example, development in the area would be a poor choice for land disposal facilities such would have to be accompanied by public or community as solid waste sites, for which adequate protection from water systems with an outside source, or any wells drilled periodic flooding would be difficult and expensive to in the zone would have to meet rigid requirements, with provide. sufficient casing and depth to seal off any contaminated ground water due to the waste disposal facility (zones ground water due to the waste disposal facility (zones David E. Lindorff, Assistant Geologist, Illinois State Geo- could be three-dimensional). ~could be three-dimensional). logical Survey, 425A Natural Resources Bldg., Urbana, IL To a limited extent, the zoning concept is already b To a limited exten t i , the z oning concept is already 61801: It is perhaps obvious that an important part of any being applied. In Wisconsin, bacteriological contamination land application program is proper operation and land application program is proper operation and of ground water is a fact in a few, scattered areas where maintenance. No matter how well designed a land disposal creviced dolomite is overlain by thin soils. In these areas,prjc mayeriu prbescntl del f which are delineated on maps or described in terms of project may be, serious problems can still develop from lack of or improper maintenance and operation. I have section, township, and range, drillers have been notified section, township andrangedriller s haveb eennt visited a number of industrial spray irrigation facilities and that they are required to emplace as much as 200 feet of found that, frequently, they are a low priority in terms of casing in order to seal off the upper, contaminated portion m aintenance. We, theref ore, need to be awa re of this maintenance. We, therefore, need to be aware of this of the aquifer. In other words, zones of actual ground- water degradation have been defined, and measures have problem, not only for land disposal of waste, but for other been taken to ensure bacteriologically safe drinking water. types of waste disposal as well. However, these are not areas where additional land disposal facilities are encouraged; they would aggravate what is Elmer E. Jones, Jr., Agricultural Engineer, USDA, Beltsville already a bad situation. Agricultural Research Center, Beltsville, MD 20705: For planning future land treatment and/or disposal Kenneth Wright implied that on-site subsurface disposal systems and zones of potential degradation, we obviously was not a satisfactory land application technique. In the want to keep the zones small. Case histories of contamina- last 10 years, tremendous advances have been made in tion incidents in the literature document the difference in on-site disposal technology. Johannes Bouma and others the extent of contamination between incidents which have with Small Scale Waste Management Project at the taken place in recharge areas and those which have occurred University of Wisconsin have made four major contributions near discharge areas. I suggest that we site our land treatment to the science of subsurface disposal, (1) Application of soil 73 moisture tensiomnetry to subsurface disposal system going to find itself 20 years down the road where we won't evaluation; (2) Quantification of interface barrier resistance; be able to grow the crops. They look okay now but it may (3) Development of effluent purification criteria, and be a problem in a few years. (4) Development of innovative loading procedures to if we look at sewage treatment, basically it is one of improve purification, reduce interface barrier resistance, removing carbon. When we throw sewage in the river, we and maintain or improve soil porosity. While the Wisconsin are killing the fish and causing zones of pollution. So research has demonstrated that it is possible to design we've gone to removing carbon which eliminates this systems for higher loading rates than recommended in the problem. What's happening now is we don't remove too Manual of Septic Tank Practice, I would recommend using much of the nutrients in terms of phosphorus and nitrogen,4 lower rates, in effect making the subsurface disposal system and in some cases we find that algae will just take that an irrigation system to maximize utilization of water and nitrogen and phosphorus and put it right back in the stream. nutrients by vegetation. On-site disposal can be the most So in terms of sewage treatment, we haven't economical and desirable land application technique. done anything except transfer it down the stream a little Dr. Sheaffer placed considerable emphasis on the use ways. of underdrain systems. There are sites where underdrainage I'll give one example of what happened in Winnipeg. is essential to satisfactory performance; however, there are There was a town that was on ground water for quite a other situations where increased ground-water recharge long time and could have continued it but the engineers should be a major factor in encouraging greater use of land decided to go to river water. You can see it, and it's a lot application. Some major rivers serving large metropolitan easier to use so they went to it. Now during low flows, the areas are deficient in surface storage for low flow augmenta- water going into that plant was about 50-50 sewage/river tion. Every home or building built will increase runoff and water which a lot of the people in town didn't think was reduce ground-water recharge. As development proceeds too good. Now they are finding during some tests there the rivers tend to become flashy, higher peak discharges may be problems with viruses. and lower base flows. Land application of waste water to If we are looking at adding things into the environ- increase ground-water storage can have two very beneficial ment which we have to, we can only add it into the water, effects, reduction of waste-water discharge to the river the air or the land and if we look at most of our waste, during critical low flow periods, and increased base flow they are either on the land or water; we have to be able to from ground water. integrate the two and have a managed system that will allow4 acceptable use of the environment. Robert D. Sinclair, Western Ground-Water Consultants, St. Norbert, Manitoba, Canada: In looking at this problem Virginia Jamison, Suntech Group, Marcus Hook, PA: as a hydrogeologist and as a sanitary engineer, I see it from Sometimes I feet as if I should have a very big inferiority both sides. We are bound to have some sort of pollution. complex because I work for a big, bad villainous oil company. if we are looking at any kind of waste, we have the We have seven refineries in the U.S. and Canada, and we problem of the sugar in the tea. You put the sugar in, and produce an awful- lot of waste water and an awful lot of we have a problem trying to get it out again. I think this is sludge, and we have to get rid of that. We can't dump it in the big problem with a lot of the sewage we're trying to the oceans, or in the streams, or in the rivers. The govern- put on the land. For example, heavy metals, if we took at ment laws say we can't. We have to pay and it is an the plating industry, it would be much easier and simpler expensive proposition to have it hauled away and then in a lot of cases to tackle the problem at the source incinerated. Then we've got an air pollution problem. instead of trying to handle it after it is in the sewage Dick Raymond and I have spent the past ten years and diluted down a couple hundred thousand times. It trying to convince our company that there is a safe way to makes it impossible to get it out. I think we would be better get rid of this waste and it is land application. I think we've spending our money in terms of looking at this type of convinced our company of this and they are doing alternative versus trying to figure out how much sludge or something about it. We are what we call "biofarming." We4 sewage we can put on the land and how much heavy metals are applying our waste on the land and getting rid of it. I we can accept in a crop. it may be easier to just get the think we meet all of Dr. Sheaffer's criteria. problem out right at the start and avoid this whole mess in the first place we don't have a storage problem we've got into. because our crop doesn't cease in the winter. Our in terms of adding stuff on the land we have to look crop is bacteria and they biodegrade in the winter as well at what the land can do. What sort of crops are we taking as in the summer. I don't think that, as Dr. Johnson says, off? We're looking at crops that pass through the food "we' re an accident about to happen," because we have cycle, we're looking at crops that can be biodegraded, so very strict, stringent regulations and we monitor these what kinds of things should we be looking at putting back land applications. If we monitor them correctly and put on on the ground as these alternatives. We're looking at food the proper amounts of material, there is no reason why we processing waste for one. There are some problems maybe will contaminate ground water. We have been doing this for4 with caustics in some of them but in general, if we look at five years now and we are not the only company. Most of waste like pulp and paper and food processing or even the oil companies are using land farming. We feel as if it is an human waste, we are looking at some materials that can economical process; therefore, our company is happy. We be recycled back on the land that don't have the impact of feel that it's a natural process; therefore, we meet govern- such things as heavy metals and plastics that we have in ment regulations and it is a very safe process. industries. They can't be handled by the soil structure. It I hope that our government doesn't outlaw land may take them out but if they are not biodegrading they farming. if it does, the oil companies have spent an awful are just accumulating, and this problem with time is lot of time and money in perfecting this process for nothing. 74 The Federal Ground-Water Protection Programn - A Review a by Victor J. Kimmb ABSTRACT protect public health while being realistically implementable. The Nation's ground-water resources constitute a vast All of us-government, industry and citizens, through and often unprotected resource. The Environmental acts of commission or omission-have contributed to the Protection Agency is about to launch a number of programs potential problem. We must work together if we are to get designed to protect what is, in many cases, a virtually non- on with the important task of protecting the quality of renewable resource. Separate regulatory activities mandated the Nation's ground-water resources. under the Safe Drinking Water Act, the Resource Conserva- tion and Recovery Act and the Clean Water Act must be The topic I have been asked to address is the carefully coordinated if they are to be effective. FdrlPormfrpoetn rudwtr n The current implementation efforts within the FdrlPormfrpoetn rudwtr n agency are being framed in view of our major principles whether it is a matter for rejoicing or concern. I which will be the focus of public comment in the months suppose in these days of Proposition 13, the easy ahead. These principles are: answer is that any new or developing Federal effort First, the administration of the related programs will istberaddwthomsuicn.Iont be a cooperative effort involving Federal, State and local ist ergare ihsm upco.Ido governments, all of which must participate in formulating share this view. the program if it is to be effective. Historically, our society has chosen to approach Second, the focus of the programs will be on the environmental problems in the context of a national prevention of contamination rather than on its treatment partnership. This partnership involves not only the at the point of withdrawal. Federal, State and local governments, but through Third, the applicable standards will be based primarily the mechanisms of advisory councils and public on technology rather than ambient ground-water quality considerations since the effects of discharges upon ambient participation, interest groups and the general public quality are complex, difficult to predict, and of long as well. Personally, I think this partnership is crucial duration. to the success of environmental efforts. in Fourth, there is a need to balance environmental drinking-water programs we have tried hard to protection, energy development and continued economic make it work. prosperity objectives so that the resulting programs fully Our expectations about the future of the effort to protect ground water must be assessed in the context of a national partnership. And the a ~~~~~~~~~~~~real answer is to be found in Pogo's immortal aPresented at The Fourth National Ground Water observation that: "We have met the enemy and Quality Symposium, Minneapolis, Minnesota, September he is us." All of us-governments, interest groups 20-22, 1978. bDeputy Assistant Administrator for Drinking Water, and citizens-have a part to play. The success or U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 401 M St. SW, failure of the national program will be a function Washington, D.C. 20460. of the manner in which all of us meet our responsibilities. 75 How then do we in EPA view our part in the Drinking water taken from underground national program at this time? sources in most instances received little treatment prior to use. Sophisticated treatment for individual users or small systems, which constitute the bulk GENERAL FRAMEWORK of ground-water consumers is prohibitively Admittedly, EPA's efforts to protect ground expensive. As a practical matter, the abandonment water are still in the developmental stage. One focus of the contaminated source is often the only for our efforts has been the development of certain choice. The switch to an alternative source of basic principles which will guide our participation. water supply is both disruptive and costly, and The first among these I have already touched upon: will become increasingly so in the future. Such a true partnership between the States and the Feds considerations argue for a strong policy of and between government and the public it serves. protection. With regard to the former, it is EPA's policy The third principle governing our approach is to consult extensively with States during the a corollary to the concept of prevention. It is a development of any regulations and this will reliance on technology-based standards or the use certainly continue to be the case for ground-water of sound engineering practices in the siting, protection. Furthermore, the Federal legislation construction, operation, closure and abandonment either provides exclusively for State programs of facilities that have the potential for adversely [e.g., the control of open dumps under the Resource affecting the quality of ground water. This is not to Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA)] or for say that ambient water quality standards for ground primary State responsibility in the administration water are not important because they are. However, and enforcement of programs [e.g., the Underground one of the lessons we learned from earlier efforts to injection Control (UIC)] program under the Safe clean up the Nation's navigable waters is that the Drinking Water Act. Generally, EPA would prefer business of proving, in a court of law, the linkage the States to retain the lead in managing ground between a specific discharge and a measured water. The Agency's role will be to: (1) establish degradation in ambient quality is very difficult. minimum quality and program requirements to This is doubly true for ground water where less is insure national consistency; (2) provide technical known about ambient quality, monitoring is and financial assistance to the States; and (3) review costly and haphazard, and cause and effect may State progress and performance. In establishing be separated by years and miles. Furthermore, the requirements, EPA will strive to minimize any dearth of reliable knowledge about the fate and disruption of programs the States are already transport of contaminants below the ground make enforcing. We will assume direct responsibility for it virtually impossible to express discharge limits administration and enforcement of programs only in terms of maximum concentration levels. in cases where the States fail to meet minimum A fourth principle guiding our efforts is the national standards. need for balance. Ground water is a major resource With regard to full public participation, the that must be protected through the prevention of Agency has recently proposed new regulations on contamination. the subject and we will insist that States observe the At the same time, many of the practices that requirements established therein. contribute to the degradation of ground-water A second principle that will guide our approach quality are associated with activities that serve other to ground water is that protection must rely on national objectives. Extractive processes, for the prevention of contamination rather than on its example, oil or uranium recovery, are activities abatement. Unlike flowing surface water, ground that are essential to the economic well-being of the water does not readily cleanse itself. Once a country. Our technological society will, for the contaminant is in the ground, it may be years before foreseeable future, continue to produce a large it reaches an aquifer and then may contaminate variety and volume of waste products which must that aquifer for many more years. Remedial action go somewhere. (e.g., the excavation of the contaminated soil) is Disposal practices need not have unacceptable often impractical. Further, due to the slow move- environmental consequences. The land application ment of water in an aquifer, usually measured in of sludges low in potentially toxic substances can feet per month or even per year, it may take have important benefits for soil conditioning. decades or even centuries for natural processes to Other practices, for example, deep well injection, "flush" an aquifer of contaminants. may in fact be the most cost-effective and 76 environmentally acceptable alternative for the � The authority to designate an aquifer as the disposal of some wastes. The land treatment of sole or principal source of drinking water for an sewage can be used to maintain quantity and area and to deny Federal financial assistance to a quality in the water-table aquifer and can thus project that may endanger the aquifer so as to have an environmentally beneficial impact. create a significant threat to public health under The point is that the appropriate policy Sec. 1424(e) of SDWA. is to strike a balance among competing national �The authority to undertake a national objectives. Many practices serving other objectives aseato r oundentona assessment of surface impoundments (pits, ponds, can be carried on with little adverse impact on the environment if they are located, designed, and lagoons) and their potential for contaminating environment if they are located, designed, ground water under the SDWA. constructed, and operated according to known ground water under the SDWA. ecological and engineering practices. � The authority to support State plans for the I might add that we have been developing control of solid waste facilities under Sec. 4004 of Agency-wide consensus around these principles RCRA. through the mechanism of a policy statement. We The requirement to promulgate regulations �The requirement to promulgate regulations hope to publish this statement in the Federal for State or Federal programs to control the Register for general comment in the near future. for State or Federal programs to control the surface or subsurface disposal of wastes defined as hazardous under Sec. 3001 of RCRA. COORDINATION WITHIN EPA � The authorities to regulate the entry into Let me now turn to the second area of EPA the market place, use of, and the ultimate disposal priority as we develop our role in the national of substances defined as toxic under TSCA. effort to protect ground water: coordination among * The authority to require and support through �The authority to require and support through authorities under our iurisdiction. authorities under our jurisdiction grants the development and implementation of As you all know, there is no single Federal law State comprehensive water quality management State comprehensive water quality management nor a single Federal agency that comprehensively plans under Secs. 106 and 208 of CWA. addresses the protection of ground water from every form of contamination or mismanagement. At the In my view, there is no need for more same time, a number of sections in six Federal Federal legislation. Under one section or another, laws [the National Environmental Policy Act EPA has more than enough authority to initiate (NEPA), the Safe Drinking Water Act (SDWA), ihe an effective Federal role in what must be a national Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA), effort to protect ground water. The challenge that the Clean Water Act (CWA), the Toxic Substances faces the Agency is to marshal these authorities in Control Act (TSCA), and the Federal Insecticide, a coherent fashion that reduces confusion and Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act (FIFRA)] are burdensome overlaps on the one hand, and related to or can impact ground water. These laws minimizes major gaps in coverage on the other. variously mandate the control of: (1) certain We are moving to meet this challenge in a number hazardous or toxic substances; (2) certain actions of ways. such as the manufacture or transport of toxic or First, EPA intends to require the phased hazardous substances; or (3) certain physical implementation of State/EPA agreements. These facilities such as injection wells or open dumps. agreements, to be concluded annually between the The significant requirements in Federal State and the cognizant Regional Administrator, legislation that bear directly on the protection are to: (1) identify the State's environmental of ground water include: problems related to surface waters, ground waters and solid waste disposal; (2) specify the priority The requirement to consider the effects pof tproblems the State intends to address in that year Federal action on ground water as part of the and the actions it intends to take; and (3) relates Environmental Impact Statements mandated by EPA's technical and financial support activities to NEPA. the State plan. While the inclusion of program areas The mandate to promulgate minimum will be phased over FY 1979-81, the eventual requirements for State programs to protect existing goal is a fully integrated attack on related and potential underground sources of drinking water environmental problems. from endangerment from well injection under Sec. Second, we are reaching agreement on 1421 of SDWA. the definitional framework to be used by all 77 EPA administrated programs that address ground The final question is: Where is endangerment water. This framework involves the three to be measured? We have considered various possible questions that are basic to any effort to protect approaches such as mathematical modeling, fixed ground water. distances, the property boundary and combinations The first question is: What is the resource that of some or all of these. Our conclusion is that the is to be protected? I expect that EPA regulations contamination pathways are different for the for the UIC program and the open dumps inventory various practices of concern and no single will require States to inventory their aquifers and approach is appropriate to all of them. A zone of to designate them for various uses. All current endangerment can, for example, be hypothesized underground sources of drinking water and all for well injection. Percolation from the surface, aquifers that contain water with less than 10,000 however, behaves differently. parts per million of total dissolved solids (ppmn/TDS) Consequently, EPA's current policy is to are to be designated as sources of drinking water. encourage monitoring at several distances from In the case of aquifers or portions of aquifers that the potentially endangering activity. The point do not already serve as drinking-water sources, at which endangerment will be considered to exceptions can be made to this general rule if: have occurred will be defined in a manner appropri- * The aquifer or its portion is located in such attohepriurtyefpacc. a fashion that the mining of water would be A third area where EPA is attempting to technially o econoicallyimpracical.ensure the coherent use of Federal legislation to technially o econoicallyimpracical.protect ground water is in the coordinated * The aquifer is already contaminated so as development of regulations. For example, an to make the treatment of the water for drinking Agency-wide Implementing Task Force is charged purposes technically or economically impractical. with the responsibility of drafting the regulations to implement the hazardous waste provisions of � The aquifer is oil or mineral producing. RCRA. A number of policy directions are emerging * The aquifer or its portion has not been from the coordinated approach to the development protected in the past and adequate alternative of regulations, including the following: supplies of drinking water are available through *The control of toxic and hazardous industrial the year 2000. ~~~~~~~process wastes continues to be one of the Agency's These exceptions would be subject to public highest priorities. EPA is attempting to establish hearings, EPA review, and a demonstration that a single set of procedures for granting Federal the aquifer is sufficiently isolated so that other permits under RCRA, SDWA, and NPDES. surface or ground waters would not be Eventually, we hope to develop a fully integrated endangered. ''one stop'' EPA permits program. In addition, an aquifer or a portion thereof *The open dumps inventory under RCRA that is not designated as a source of drinking will be phased over several years. The Surface water may be designated by the State for other Impoundments Assessment will, among other uses, uses. Such aquifers would be protected to a level serve as a "screen" to define priority areas for commensurate with the designated uses. future phases of the open dumps inventory. The second question is: How is "endangerment"Aoutarafcoditonsbewn to be defined? Here the Agency is fashioning a Aoperatin area sport progrdiatinms. Thetwfieenf protective, yet reasonable approach. Ground-water oprtnadsuotpogm.ThOfief regulations under both RCRA and SDWA will Drinking Water and the Office of Research and define "endangerment" to occur if the activity in Development are participating in a pilot project question has failed to meet technology standards designed to make EPA's research efforts more or may cause: directly responsive to program office needs. A Steering Committee has been mapping the research a an existing or potential user of the ground effort for fiscal years 1979 and 1980 and will water to violate any drinking-water standard. continue to supervise the progress of the crucial * an existing or potential user of the ground projects. water to treat the water more than he otherwise CONCLUSION would have had to. ~~~~~~Much of what I have sketched here is cast in *other adverse effects on human health. developmental terms. It would be easy to conclude 78 that all that is really happening is that a bunch of the other forces of our society that have a bearing Washington bureaucrats are appointing task forces, on how we use our environment, how we manage and holding meetings and writing memoranda of preserve our natural resources. The issues engage us understanding of greater relevance to their own all. I urge you to join the debate, letting your concerns than to the reality of protecting a vital voices be heard in the common cause of national resource. preserving for ourselves and children the vital Some of that, I suppose, is true. However, I treasure of our Nation's ground water. think we are making real progress and you will see the results in the accelerating pace of EPA activities in the months ahead. I say this because Victor Kimm is responsible for EPA 's program to activitiesin the months ahead. Isay this b e caus e ensure the quality of the Nation's drinking water. He joined I think we have learned from the past and are EPA in 1971, and was Deputy Director of the Office of developing an integrated ground-water protection Planning and Evaluation prior to assuming his present program. position in 1975. The pollution control dimensions of this effort Prior to joining EPA, Kimm worked on economic are underway. The remaining challenge is the development programs in the United States and Latin coordination of the various Federal agencies and America. He also spent six years with consulting engineering firms engaged in the planning, design and construction of authorities with their State counterparts. Efficient water supply and sewage treatment facilities. integration and cooperation among the govern- Kimm is a licensed professional engineer in New York mental actors at all levels is a prerequisite to an and Pennsylvania. He holds a Bachelor's and Master's degree effective national program to safeguard our ground- in Civil Engineering from Manhattan College and NYU. As a recipient of a National Institute of Public Affairs Fellow- water resources. This calls for patient, open-minded, recipient ofa National Institute of Public Affairs Fello water resources. This calls for patient, open-minded, ship, he spent the 1969-1970 academic year at Princeton intelligent planning on all sides. University studying economics and public administration. Most of all, it calls for the active participation of all involved: the public at large, American industry, and the engineering and geohydrology professions, as well as agencies of government. Appendix II. States Designated as Requiring an For the Federal Ground-Water Protection Program- Underground Injection Control Program my topic for today-is not a thing apart; it can Texas West Virginia function only in the context of interaction with all Pennsylvania Indiana Louisiana New Mexico California Florida Appendix I. Status Report on State Primacy for Public Kansas Kentucky Water System Supervision Program Michigan Utah Following States Have Assumed Primacy on the Indicated Illinois Colorado Dates: Wyoming Mississippi 1.Oklahoma 04-30-77 21.Maryland 02-13-78 New York Iowa 2.Connecticut 05-07-77 22.North Dakota 02-18-78 Ohio Arizona 3.Louisiana 05-16-77 23.Florida 02-18-78 Oklahoma Arkansas 4.Mississippi 06-20-77 24.Wisconsin 03-02-78 5.Nebraska 06-23-77 25.Nevada 03-30-78 Appendix III. Listing of Studies Mandated by 6.Alabama 07-10-77 26.Kansas 03-30-78 The Safe Drinking Water Act 7.Arkansas 07-10-77 27.Montana 03-30-78 * Report to Congress-Preliminary Assessment of 8.Georgia 08-07-77 28.1daho 03-30-78 Suspected Carcinogens in Drinking Water in December 1975. 9.New York 09-10-77 29.Washington 03-30-78 * Impact on Underground Sources of Application of 10.Virginia 09-10-77 30.New Mexico 04-02-78 Pesticides and Fertilizers in 1976. 11.Iowa 09-23-77 31.Delaware 04-02-78 0 Report to Congress-Waste Disposal Practices and 12.Minnesota 09-26-77 32.West Virginia 04-02-78 Their Effects on Ground Water in January 1977. 13.Tennessee 09-30-77 33.Colorado 05-07-78 * Drinking Water and Health, a study of the National 14.S. Carolina 09-30-77 34.California 06-02-78 15.Maine 10-07-77 35.New Hampshire 08-18-78 Academy of Sciences, in June 1977. 15.Maine 10-07-77 35.New Hampshire 08-18-78 � Impact of Abandoned Wells on Ground Water in 16.Hawaii 10-20-77 36.Trust Terr. 09-19-78 17.Kentucky 10-20-77 37.Guam 09-09-78 17.Kentucky 10-20-77 37.Guam 09-09-78 * Underground Injection Methods Which Do Not 18.Massachusetts 12-01-77 38.Alaska 09-22-78 19.Texassachuses 12-01-7 3.Alsrizona 09-24-78 Endanger Underground Water Sources in December 1977. 1920.MichiganTe 02-01-78 39.Arizona 092478 Surface Impoundments and Their Effects on Ground- Water Quality in the United States-A Preliminary Survey Following States Are Found to be Qualified for Primacy in August 1978. Pending Notice in the Federal Register: � Identification of Potential Contaminants of Under- 1.Rhode Island ground-Water Sources from Land Spills in August 1978. 79 The Federal Ground-Water Protection Program - Today's Hope' by Charles W. Severb ABSTRACT Before we start a discussion on why federal The necessary administrative mechanisms for protec- regulations are needed, let us first agree that the tion of our underground drinking water sources, and problem of unsafe drinking water should be coordination of natural resource and energy development primarily the concern of State and local govern- and environmental quality programs, should be provided ments but that the federal government also has by a federal ground-water control program, else today'sthrepniltyoisueheafyofhwtr underground contaminant disposal activities will be tersosblt oisr h aeyo h-ae tomorrow's undoing. Federal regulations, however, must that citizens drink. provide flexibility to States and industry to find the least Let us further agree that State agencies and costly means of meeting national environmental goals. citizens can best determine whether a need exists A growing body of literature clearly documents cases to regulate sources of pollution that may of underground drinking water source contamination, cnaiaeudrrudsucso rnigwtr sometimes severe, from a large variety of conditions and cnaiaeudrrudsucso rnigwtr practices. Existing studies also indicate that this problem which directions to take in developing regulations, is pervasive: aquifers have been adversely affected in and which needs are crucial for protecting these every region of the country. resources. A federal ground-water protection program which Therefore, would it not be better to rely upon (1) reflects consideration of total long-range natural the States themselves for the evaluation of need resource protection and environmental quality benefits, , adtedrcino mhssi h eea (2) regulates in a manner so that the benefits to the adtedrcino mhssi h eea environment generally exceed the regulatory costs and regulatory process? To evaluate the need for a (3) encourages more efficient ways of meeting federal ground-water protection program, we need environmental goals in the least costly manner can and must to first look to existing State ground-water programs. be developed by the Environmental Protection Agency. All States have encountered serious problems Without an effective Federal ground-water protectionbeasofaiuetueavlbegooicnor- program, the underground contamination problem willbeasofaiuetueavlbegooicnor- likely worsen. tion and accepted and proven engineering practices in design and completion of injection wells, pits, ponds, lagoons, and the like. All of the 50 States have established some a Presented at The Fourth National Ground Water type of State regulatory programs concerning Quality Symposium, Minneapolis, Minnesota, September ground water. Thus, the need for regulation of 20-22, 1978.unegoninetoprcieisceryeonzd bChief, Water Supply Branch, U.S. Environmental byndergon Snetinpacties and lclarly pepecntognwide. Protection Agency, 1201 Elm St., First International Bldg., byteSaendlclpoentiwd. Dallas, Texas 75270. A growing body of literature clearly documents cases of underground drinking water source con- so tamination, sometimes severe, from a large variety I have investigated salt-water contamination and of conditions and practices. Existing studies also traced it back to "abandoned" brine disposal pits indicate that this problem is pervasive: aquifers have associated with oil and gas production. been adversely affected in every region of the My personal experience has convinced me that country. Without appropriate federal ground-water numerous independent ground-water contamination protection regulations, the ground-water contamina- problems have been observed by most of us. Surely tion problem will likely worsen. we can all agree that further contamination of our For me, and I am sure for most of you, existing or potential drinking water sources should personal experience is the authority that I used for not be permitted if there is any reasonable likelihood determining whether existing State programs are that these sources will be needed in the future to adequate or whether federal presence is indeed meet the public demand for drinking water and that needed. During the last ten years or so, I have these sources may be used for such purposes in the either observed or been personally involved with future. numerous ground-water contamination situations The necessary administrative mechanisms for in States that thought they had adequate ground- the protection of our underground drinking water water protection laws. These included Miami, sources, reduced property damage, coordination of Florida, where raw blood from an abattoir was natural resource and energy development and being injected through an unregulated well environmental quality programs, should be provided directly into porous limestone of the Biscayne by a federal ground-water control program, else Aquifer which is the principal source of drinking today's underground injection and contaminant water for the entire city of Miami. disposal activities will be tomorrow's undoing. But In Camilla, Georgia, creosote, phenyls, and these federal regulations must provide flexibility other organics were being injected through wells 'o States and industries to find and implement the into the principal artesian limestone aquifer which least costly means of meeting national environmental supplies drinking water for all of south Georgia and goals. north Florida including the city of Camilla. An Congress recognized the need for "federal estimated 20,000 of these unregulated wells are in presence"~ in the area of ground-water protection use in the Georgia-Florida area today. and indicated that it would be beneficial from the Each of you who have worked in ground water aspects of enhancing State enforcement authority, in the field have yourselves observed similar types facilitating public acceptance of a State program, of direct ground-water pollution. and insuring consistent performance from the But pollution is not restricted to injection States. Federal presence would also provide technical into a drinking water aquifer. For example, at assistance to State programs and emergency response Wilmington, North Carolina, a 1,000-feet deep capabilities, and would broaden the State's jurisdic- industrial injection well failed because fiberglass tion to include federal lands and facilities within casing was fractured during construction and the their boundaries. acids being injected ate their way through the In establishing an underground injection cement lining on the outside of the casing. In control program, as mandated by Congress in the southern New Mexico there is a case of brines Safe Drinking Water Act, EPA has looked to the injected for secondary recovery which escaped States which had a high dependency on ground through fractures which opened up during high water to determine what measures these States pressure injection operations and contaminated felt they needed to ensure ground-water ground water at the surface. A similar incident protection. Using the programs of the States such occurred in southern Oklahoma. as Texas, Oklahoma and Louisiana as a model, But, in discussing cases of contamination, we EPA hopes to develop federal regulations which certainly do not want to leave out pits, ponds and closely match the requirements felt to be necessary lagoons. At Pensacola, Florida, nitric acid that was in States with a long experience in underground discharged from a fertilizer plant into a pit on the protection regulations. In other words, EPA has southeast part of town percolated downward into a followed the lead of the States in determining the sand aquifer then moved laterally and contaminated need for a'standardization of regulations to several of the city's municipal water-supply wells. alleviate any problems arising from the use of At Miami, organics from a nearby landfill have interstate aquifers and for more effective manage- ruined their Preston well field. There is inadequate ment and control of well systems. time to discuss with you today the number of times EPA has been a leader in destroying the 81 barriers that in prior times prevented the exchange developed by the Environmental Protection Agency of knowledge and ideas from all sources available. to protect our ground-water resources. Without an We have been fortunate in developing the UIC effective federal ground-water protection program, regulations to have had such a wealth of knowledge the underground contamination problem will from such diverse sources. We have come to likely worsen. understand the viewpoints and the concerns of the But let's also all agree that the federal govern- States, of industry and others. And, through ment should propose no regulations for controlling understanding, EPA has, over a period of time, subsurface implacement of fluids that (1) do not altered its thinking on the content of its regulations. protect the nation's drinking water resources, Whether significant pollution of an aquifer (2) do not protect public health and welfare to the has, or has not, occurred, should not be the point. maximum extent feasible, and (3) unnecessarily Federal programs to protect aquifers and the interfere with or impede development or production incorporation of ground-water concerns in related of the nation's mineral and energy resources. programs are appropriate: for efforts of a regulatory nature need not necessarily be of a reactionary * * * nature. The goal should be to prevent contamination Charles W. Sever was born in Miami, Florida in January in the first place, rather than to attack problems 1931. His undergraduate work was a combination of Physics that could have been avoided properly with at Georgia Institute of Technology and Geology at Emory University, both in Atlanta, Georgia. He worked as a Geo- reasonable controls. A federal ground-water physicist with the Ground Water Branch of the U.S.G.S. for protection program which (1) reflects consideration 7years from 1958 to 1966; worked as a consultant for his of total long-range natural.resource protection and own company on water resource development and sub- environmental quality benefits, (2) regulates in a surface disposalfor 5 years; then worked as regional expert manner so that the benefits to the environment on subsurface disposal with the U.S. EPA in Atlanta for 3 years. For the past 3 years he has worked as Chief of the exceed the regulatory costs, and (3)! encourages Water Supply Branch for EPA in Dallas, Texas. He has] more efficient ways of meeting environmental goals published numerous books and journal articles on subjects in the least costly manner, can and must be related to ground-water resources protection. 82 The Federal Ground-Water Protection Program - Tomorrow's Undoinga by Dale C. Mosherb ABSTRACT It may be presumed that such State programs Past and present guidance in landfilling has been based are inadequate because Congress passed the Resource on inadequate information. More recent information Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA, PL 94-580). indicates past and present recommendations/guidance may This act provides for total control of all waste not be accurate. Current trends, as a result of RCRA (PL 94-580), are generally following the same recom- disposal in or on the land. Essentially, Congress mendations. The result can be greater problems from found that waste disposal "in or on the land . landfills constructed now and in future years than have can present a danger to human health and the occurred from past landfills, such as the well-known environment." Llangollen landfill. It is time for Congress, EPA, and others The most appropriate question is will the to recognize what is and is not known about the pollution potential from landfills and waste disposal, in general. regulations promulgated by EPA as equired by RCRA be adequate? INTRODUCTION The RCRA requires all wastes to be disposed The first thing necessary in discussing the of in sanitary landfills which will be defined by inadequacy of Federal ground-water pollution the EPA. The act also requires EPA to develop protection programs is to put the question in guidelines providing a technical and economic proper perspective. Today's Federal ground-water description of the level of performance that can be protection program covered by sections of the attained by various waste management practices. Clean Water Act, Safe Drinking Water Act, etc. are It is this latter requirement (the level of inappropriate for "solid waste." For example, under performance) which is difficult to meet due to the the Safe Drinking Water Act the Underground inadequacies of regulations developed. A brief Injection Program covers only deep well injection, examination of the history of sanitary landfilling is Other acts cover specific toxic substances. Pits, ponds, landfills, landspreading, etc. are still today, PAST HISTORY however, virtually not covered except by a few Landfilling of waste material received limited study until the 1950's. Since that time, significant changes have occurred in the philosophy and practices deemed acceptable from the standpoint apresented at The Fourth National Ground Water of ground-water quality. Quality Symposium, Minneapolis, Minnesota, September A report published in 1954(1) indicated that 20-22,A report published n 1978. ee54(1) indicated that bDirector of Research Programs, Wehran Engineering, keeping waste materials out of the water table would 666 E. Main St., Middletown, New York 10940. alleviate ground-water contamination problems. This concept apparently prevailed until 1961 when 83 another California publication (2) indicated that is reflected in the limited budget that solid waste percolate (leachate) from rainfall or irrigation programs have had. Such research work done on an water infiltrating the landfill could cause impair- excalated scale could easily cost several million ment of ground-water quality. This represents a dollars per year. Over the past few years, the EPA major change and reversal in concepts concerning solid waste programs have barely spent one million protection of ground-water quality from waste per year, and this has been split too far between disposal. A 1969 report(3) indicated that leachate many aspects of the problem. The second largest could be prevented by placing an impermeable cap contributor to inadequate information has been over the completed landfill. There is no the length of such programs. question that leachate can be prevented if an The EPA's prior research on waste-water impermeable cap is used if that is the only source treatment has been of a highly structured engineer- of leachate entry into the landfill. ing nature lending themselves to short-term (1 to 3 The next major publication, Sanitary Landfill years) investigation. Waste disposal, however, takes Design and Operation(4) addressed the major place in the natural environment where there are potential environmental problems associated with numerous variables and many are interrelated. In waste disposal. This report requires further evalua- such an environment, research must have adequate tion. replication enabling the researchers to factor out The report states on page 4 that "Some investi- influence of individual parameters. In this manner, gators believe that even in a sanitary landfill, it is then possible to discern those factors most leachate production is inevitable and that some responsible for observed variability. leachate will eventually enter surface water or A third reason for limited development is the ground water." It even stated further in the same nature of the system. Essentially, Congress required paragraph that "the present philosophy held by the EPA in the early seventies to publish guidelines the Office of Solid Waste Management Programs, relating to safe land disposal practices. The most States .... is that through sound engineering environmental groups pushed for rapid development and .design, leachate .... may be prevented or of such guidelines. Based on best available although minimized to the extent that it will not be a limited data, the EPA issued Thermal Processing problem. The most obvious means of controlling and Land Disposal of Solid Waste Guidelines in leachate production and movement is to prevent 1974. waste from entering the landfill to the greatest The problem is solved! At least the problem is extent practicable" (italics for emphasis by the solved in the minds of Congress and high level EPA author). management. However, at the program level EPA While the latter statement indicates in the apparently recognized during development of the least that some sanitary landfills will produce some Guidelines that the problem was not solved. From leachate, the prevailing concept was that due to 1973 through 1975, the Office of Solid Waste sound engineering design and operation, leachate Management Programs has spent man-hours was not a problem at sanitary landfills. evaluating the potential for ground-water con- Those involved with the many discussions tamination and studying available data on real concerning review of a paper published in Waste world cases. Many hours were spent in developing Age(5) are well aware of the numerous experts who in-house show and tell programs to "sell" the need felt that sanitary landfills did not generate leachate. for funds for further investigation. Funds for the Since that time, it is now generally recognized first study of existing sites was not available until and accepted that sanitary landfills do generate 1975 and then only in very limited quantities. leachate. The Waste Age paper(5) further states The first monitoring program covered 10 sites that where attenuation is ineffective, leachate taking 5 samples over a 7 to 9 months' period of collection and treatment should be employed. time at a cost of about $300,000 including EPA There was, however, no guidance as to how to personnel time. The second study of hazardous determine where attenuation would be effective. waste disposal sites included investigation of Further, no guidance is available as to whether numerous sites with existing data and 50 sites minimization to the greatest extent practicable is actually drilled and sampled. However, only one adequate. This constitutes one of the major sample was taken from most sites. problems RCRA regulations face. Of these two studies, the former of Probably the greatest single reason such municipals' solid waste only site provided the most predictive capabilities have not been developed useful information. All sites evidenced some level 84 of contamination and demonstrated that even are rate functions (except infiltration), the actual "sanitary landfills" can contaminate ground water. amount of attenuation will be a function of rate The most significant result of that study was that of water movement, thickness of the unsaturated operation, soils, and design were of no value in zone and rate function of attenuation. Note that explaining differences in the levels of contamina- quantity of leachate at any given time is not tion found. In short, some of the "best" sites included in this evaluation. It is, therefore, studied were among those with the highest levels reasonable to assume that the leachate with the of contamination found. In most cases, the level higher concentration will receive less attenuation of contaminants found did not suggest that and, therefore, will have a greater impact on widespread serious problems exist from municipal ground-water quality. In short, under the above solid waste disposal practices. circumstances, minimizing leachate will have a greater impact on ground water. CURRENT CONCEPTS-FACT OR FANCY The prevalent current philosophy is that mini- THE REAL WORLD mizing leachate quantity lessens impact on ground In reality, the situation is somewhat more water. This must assume that less quantity means less complicated. Although significant bodies of data pollutants. It seems, however, that many expert- do not exist to support the previous conclusion, subscribe to the theory that minimizing leachate the writer has not seen any evidence in support of production maximizes contaminant concentration. the opposite view. The only firm conclusion is Again, however, by assumption it is assumed that that current technology indeed does not allow pollutant loading is minimized. It is quite possible prediction of leachate impact on ground water. that this assumption is false. The amount of This would strongly suggest that EPA cannot issue percolation and ultimate leachate production is a regulations under PL 94-580 which are based on function over soil conditions and rainfall intensity. technology. To do so would result in landfill Increasing slope and decreasing permeability will, practices not acceptable in other locations. in general, decrease the quantity of leachate formed All, however, is not gloomy. In spite of the from any given rain storm event. The key is event. number of impressive cases of ground-water The quantity of pollutants leached and, hence, contamination, that number represents a small leachate quality is a function of the solubilization portion of the total number of land disposal sites rate within the landfill between events. As a first in existence. An examination of ground-water data cut, it may be safe to assume that the rate of from States' files will most likely show some pollutants' solubilization within the landfill is contamination of water quality at all sites, but constant (after a period of time), since under these generally to a limited extent. conditions the landfill with less leachate would have higher pollutant concentrations. Both landfills, CONCLUSIONS however, are leaching the same quantity of If the relationship between leachate quantity pollutants. and ground-water pollution potential as described At this point it is the responsibility of the are correct today, federally recommended underlying unsaturated soil material to attenuate procedures are incorrect. This will result in more the respective leachates. The question is which landfills started within the past 10 years to start leachate poses the greatest risk to the underlying showing greater problems than the open burning ground waters. dumps of the past within the next 10 years. We must keep in mind that problems which are a long LEACHATE POLLUTION POTENTIAL time in appearing may be with us essentially Without going into great elaborate detail or forever. using a myriad of equations, simply stated water If regulations are based on technology's movement (permeability) in unsaturated soils is practices rather than performance standard, the greater than for saturated soils. Further, since result may well be greater contamination problems leachate is formed in small quantities and moves, in the future. as the result of discrete rainfall events, leachate will A thorough review of existing ground-water generally move as discrete quantities without quality problems at disposal sites at this time would respect to actual quantity produced at any given greatly etihance the state-of-the-art. While the task is time. monumental, it is feasible and perhaps the only way If we assume that all attenuating mechanisms to properly determine the basis for and form of 85 regulations promulgated under the Resource answer, it will not solve today 's problems Conservation and Recovery Act. everywhere for many years to come. Even in the Several groups are now suing EPA for not distant future it appears that many residuals will issuing regulations as required by Congress. The still require land disposal practices. basis of these suits is that EPA has failed to promulgate regulations as required by Congress. It would seem logical to assume that for the most LITERATURE CITED part such suits would be aimed at getting required (1) Final report on investigation of leaching of a sanitary regulations promulgated at the earliest possible landfill. 1954. Publication no. 10, Sacramento, date. In view of the preceding information, that ()California. State Water Pollution Control Board. 2)Effects of refuse dumps on ground-water quality. 1961. may well be an error in that adequate regulations Publication no. 24, Sacramento, California, State meeting the full intent of Congress cannot be Water Pollution Control Board. promulgated at this time due to insufficient (3) Bulletin No. 147-5. 1969. Sanitary landfill studies, knowledge or technologies. It would be more in Appendix A, Summary of selected preview investiga- the interest of the environment and general public tions. State of California, The Resources Agency, July 1969. to have EPA issue performance standards and/or (4) Brunner, D. R. and D. J. Keller. 1972. Sanitary landfill interim acceptable practices in a manner to eliminate design and operation. Washington, D.C., U.S. Govern- practices. ment Printing Office. p. 59. Regulations of this nature accompanied by (5) Garland, G. A. and D. C. Mosher. 1975. Leachate effects adequately funded investigative and research of improper land disposal. Waste Age. March. problems would provide the best solutions in the* * * * least amount of time. In the field of waste disposal Dale C. Mosher is a Soil Scientist with Webran practices, the use of "best judgement" or "best Engineering, New York. He has also worked with the U.S. engineeing" pactice which re basd on aEPA, Soils Consultants, Inc., Maryland Environmental engineerng" pracices whih are baed on aServices, and University of Maryland. He received a B.S. in limited data base are no longet adequate. Agriculture from the University of Maine in 19 70, and Although resource recovery is really the an M.S. in Soils from the University of Maryland in 19 72. 86 Audience Response to Session IV - The Federal Ground-Water Protection Program Boyd N. Possin, Project Manager, Roy F. Weston, Inc., FPC, and HUD authority, CZM, COE 404 program, plus Wilmette Office Court, 3330 Old Glenview Road, various local, regional, and State air and water pollution Wilmette, I L 60091: A popular television beer commercial Control and planning programs. My concern is that there is these days in the Upper Midwest shows a panoramic view no comprehensive, strategic plan to protect ground-water of the rolling hills and valleys in and around La Crosse, quality and to manage the resource conjunctively with Wisconsin. Referring to this land (with some justification) surface-water resources. Mr. Kimm, how does EPA plan to as "God's Country," the narrator tells us that the brewer's use existing authority and procure additional authority to water "comes from an underground reservoir which, some protect the ground-water quality of the nation? people say, stretches all the way to Canada." The implication of course is that if the reservoir, or aquifer, extends into R. G. Shepherd, Willard Owens Associates, lnc.,7391 West Canada, then the water withdrawn from the wells in 38th Ave., Wheat Ridge, CO: I'm sure that everyone in La Crosse might very well come from Canada. Evidently, this room would agree that any efforts to protect our Canadian ground water brews better beer than United aquifers from contamination and to assure safe drinking States ground water. water are commendable. However, as I listened to the Unfortunately this example, an aquifer as a closed presentations of this session, I could not keep from thinking pipe, is not as ludicrous as it should be to many people of the many, many supplies of drinking water, both municipal who should know better. Today we have heard a great deal and private, that are already below minimum quality of discussion concerning "aquifer protection." All too often standards, especially throughout the semiarid West. For this commendable goal is translated into a policy of aquifer example, in Buffalo, a small town in northwestern South outcrop protection, a simple-minded approach which makes Dakota, the municipal supply, although the best water no use of the modern hydrogeologic theories of ground- available, probably would be considered undrinkable by water movement as set forth by scientists such as M. K. everyone in this room. Total dissolved solids are probably Hubbert, J. Toth, R. A. Freeze, and P. A. Witherspoon. well into the thousands of milligrams per liter, and the water Ground water is not created in situ in an aquifer; neither has a distinctly disagreeable odor. Remarkable, however, does it necessarily enter an aquifer through the aquifer's the local townspeople do not consider their water to be outcrop area. Ground water moves along predictable paths especially bad, simply because they have used it all their defined topographically by identifiable ground-water flow lives. I do not know the detrimental effects to their health, systems. Ground-water flow systems have recharge areas but the same situation exists for numerous farms, ranches, and discharge areas. If the water quality at a particular and other small towns all over the West; the total effect of location within an aquifer is to be protected, then the so many people drinking poor quality water cannot be good. recharge area for the ground-water flow system which I guess my basic point is that if someone from Buffalo moves through that part of the aquifer must be protected. were here, he might say that much money is being spent to This recharge area may or may not contain parts of the protect aquifers from people, even in remote areas of the aquifer outcrop area. It is a complicated set of problems West, while no one seems to be actively working, using for which there are seldom any simple answers. Still, the readily available solutions, to protect people in the same effort must be made because protecting a ground-water areas from the naturally unpotable water in the aquifers. supply by protecting only the aquifer makes about as Most of these small-town people probably would never much sense as trying to protect a household water supply understand the direction of effort reported by the EPA here by protecting only the faucet. today. My question is then, is the EPA interested in efforts to protect people from aquifers, instead of vice versa? Lloyd H. Woosley, Jr., P.E., Water Quality & Ecology Branch, Tennessee Valley Authority, Chattanooga, TN Elmer E. Jones, Jr., Agricultural Engineer, Beltsville Agri- 37401: EPA and various other agencies through a multitude cultural Research Center, USDA, Beltsville, MD 20705: of laws and regulations, have only limited and fragmented Mr. Sever referred to maintaining a positive benefit-cost authority for protecting the nation's ground-water quality. ratio. It is important to remember every successful public Such laws and regulations include UIC, sole source health program has a negative benefit-cost ratio. As a aquifers, NEPA, NPDES, 201, 208, State basin plans, Fellow-American Public Health Association, the continued RCRA, Surface Mining and Reclamation Act, USGS, NRC, funding of preventative programs is of special concern to me. 87 Typhoid, polio and smallpox are not major problems today, was drilled across the road from this pit. This year, there but who wants them back? is salt water flowing at the surface. EPA concluded that it Edgar A. Jeffrey, Acting Chief, Water Supply Branch was from the pit that was closed 25 years ago. I wonder if in (6AWS), U.S. EPA, First International Bldg., 1201 Elm St., fact we really want EPA to come in to arbitrate our salt- Dallas, TX: Positive benefit-cost ratios are desirable and water pollution problems. certainly attainable for public health programs. Without Charles Sever, Chief, Water Supply Branch, U.S. EPA, having made a benefit-cost analysis, I have ari intuitive Dallas, TX: I think your facts are a little bit wrong. In fact belief that with the advent of chlorination in 19 12-13, and the pressure at the injection formation is 1,700 feet on the its use in large cities in the U.S., the related cost (only land surface so there is no way the water from that depth pennies per person per year) was, and continues to be, can get to the surface. Second, we flew it and have infrared considerably less than the dollar benefits from disease photography of it that was presented and it showed that, in prevention. The same holds true for poliomyelitis, which fact, the pit was there, that there are 3 old brine lines was virtually eradicated from one year to the next by crossing the property that showed breaks in them. There the mere application of a vaccination procedure. was no water at the surface, but there was salt and there Benefit-cost figures for fluoridation programs, on the was oil from an old oil spill. The photography showed that other hand, are readily available. It is estimated that if the salt was coming from the breaks in the lines. You could every community were to fluoridate its water supply to trace it, it was all there on the photography. the optimum concentration, the annual savings in unneeded Rich DeVries: I agree that was in the report, but there's dental treatment would be approximately $700 million, also a water well in the north side of the road that is a return of about $50 for every dollar invested. The cost flowing. Since the secondary oil recovery was started, and again is only pennies per person per year. Detailed cost the only way you could start the flow is that it is being studies have been made for several cities. pressured from below. Granted, public health programs related to the Charles Sever: The point was we had them shut down therapeutic stage of health care may not have such an the well and we made pressure measurements in the well, evidently advantageous benefit-cost ratio. However, to be and the pressure in the well is at 1,700 feet below the fair, one must distinguish between preventative and surface. How do you get it from 1,700 feet up? therapeutic programs. In so doing, the preventative health programs come to stand on their own as being self Paul Plummer, Miami Conservancy District, Dayton, OH: supporting and having a positive benefit-cost ratio. Many of our local water supplies either are directly induced from surface supplies or are artificially recharged. So the Don Keech, Section Chief, Ground Water Division, connection between our surface supplies and our major Michigan Department of Public Health, Lansing, MI: municipal wround-water supplies is quite close. I wanted to speak in regard to the Office of Drinking Why are the EPA and the water supply industry so Water's standards and specifically to a comment made by far apart on the use of activated carbon to control Mr. Sever regarding application of these standards to trihalomethanes in water supplies; has chloroform, etc. ground-water quality in the aquifer. The standards really been detected in ground-water supplies, and to what extent apply to drinking water as it's furnished to the customer. is this a real problem? However, the fact that you can degrade water in an aquifer Victor Kimm, Deputy Assistant Administrator for to this level or to a point that exceeds the level, as long Drinking Water, U.S. EPA, Washington, D.C.: I thought as you can treat it to meet these requirements, is not no one would ask. That's been the big battle for the last sensible. I think that's an erroneous statement because 6 months. Almost everyone in the industry is up in arms ground water is usually not treated before passing into about our proposed organic standards. As far as trihalo- the drinking water system. This is true specifically in methane in ground water, we have found it in some places. private homes, small establishments, industry and to a But generally ground water is better than surface water. As large extent, in small communities. far as the legitimate public health concern about trihalo- You don't degrade something that's good quality to methanes and other organics, we have testimony from the some predetermined level. You maintain that quality at head of the National Cancer institute and the head of the what it is. Again, I don't think this is the proper approach. National Environmental Health Sciences Institute at our Now I'd also like to make a comment regarding the D.C. hearing, saying they both believe it and they are both secondary drinking water standards which were referred to. big in the cancer game and not directly responsive to us. I understand that there was not going to be any secondary Specifically, how big is the magnitude of the health problem standards. There were no provisions in the law for these, posed by these contaminants is the kind of question I they are not regulations, they're simply a guideline and described earlier in which no one really knows. You can go again, you don't degrade water quality to some guideline through models and come up with some numbers, but but you maintain your water in a natural aquifer to the they're not very meaningful. The question is, is it reasonable best quality that you have there to start with. to go ahead through standards and force people to reduce those levels? We think it is, we proposed regulations on that Rich DeVries, Oklahoma State University, Stillwater: basis. I think we have a pre~tty good agreement on that with I have a question for Mr. Sever. The fundamental law of the industry. It's the other part of the regulation that gravity states that the water goes downward. in a recent requires granular activated carbon unit processing in waters report that the EPA published and put out on an oil field derived from surface sources highly contaminated with pollution case in Oklahoma, it was stated that the water man-made chemicals where the real controversy lies. That's flows upward. in this case in point, a salt-water pit was going to be a tough problem for us to deal with in the closed 25 years ago. Last year, a secondary oil recovery well months ahead. State Ground-Water Protection Programs- A National Summary'a by Richard E. Barteltb ABSTRACT The presentation will provide a national look at In order to discuss the adequacy or inadequacy of existing ground-water programs with in-depth analysis F ~~~State ground-water protection programs, it is helpful to of certain State programs. The variations in State establish a base line which may be used as a frame of programs are highlighted and an attempt is made to estimate reference for the discussion. To provide that frame of resources currently dedicated to ground-water protection reference, the 50 States were contacted and representatives at the State level. were questioned as to the nature and extent of their existing ground-water programs. The survey of States produced a wealth of information relative to the structureEvroeifalarwtthodsyng of various State programs and this information is presented " P erople istamlkabou wthe wetheru nol saynege graphically in the neutral presentation. The subject of "epetl bu h ete u ooeee multiple agency involvement is addressed. does anything about it." The purpose of this In addition to looking at the structure of State presentation is to talk about State ground-water programs, information was collected regarding the nature protection programs, NOT to do something about of existing State statutes and regulations. Tabulation and them. The more active role in addressing this issue interpretation of this information is provided to illustrate i ett h r n o rsnest olw how the institutions are providing for the protection of i ett h r n o rsnest olw our ground-water resources. in addition to evaluating the Simply stated, the purpose of this article is to various types of statutes, existing enforcement mechanisms outline the status of State ground-water were researched and are presented for review. Graphic protection programs and to look at predominant presentations of the national data base are used and again trends or characteristics on a national basis. In several States' procedures are reviewed in detail. The topic order to simplify the task of depicting State of ground-water quality standards was specifically addressed during interviews in order to note the extent of programs, the concept of managing ground-water this developing regulatory technique. resources-i.e., ground-water use-has not been pursued. The is not to say that management and protection of ground water can or should be separated. It is my personal opinion that they cannot; however, the topic at hand is State ground-water protection programs and, accordingly, aPresented at The Fourth National Ground Water the emphasis was placed on protection during Quality Symposium, Minneapolis, Minnesota, September data collection. 20-22, 1978. Arve f17 aacmie yteUS bChief, Ground-Water Protection Section, Region V, G ogal Sreviey (Murray adat compiled 197 7 showUs. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 230 S. DearbornGelgclSry(MraanRevs197shw Street, Chicago, Illinois 60604. that far more than half of the States rely on ground water to supply 40% or more of their population 89 State programs and problems. The principal informa- tion solicited from the State representatives interviewed is as follows: 1. Laws under which the program is being ~_~, ? . _. implemented. 2. Names and functions of the State agency or agencies involved in ground-water protection programs. 3. Enforcement mechanisms used to insure .0~~ ~~~~~ ~ground-water protection and location of the enforcing operational unit. Fig. 1. Percent of population served by ground water. 4. Status of development of ground-water quality standards. (see Figure 1). On a national scale approximately 5. Estimate of person years associated with 40% of the population depends on ground-water State ground-water protection programs. sources for their water supply. With these figures in It should be noted that the information mind it is impossible to dismiss the importance of presented was collected solely for the purpose of State ground-water protection programs. The State ground-water protection programs. The adequately depicting national trends. With limited responsibility for protecting the quality of the resources it was not possible to contact representa- nation's ground-water resources has, in the absence tives of all involved State agencies. In addition, of a strong national policy, been left principally collecting and categorizing the data collected to the States. The information to follow was required a certain amount of extrapolation and required a certain amount of extrapolation and collected to represent current State activities in drawing some conclusions. It is hoped that we drawing some conclusions. It is hoped that we discharging this awesome responsibility. have adequately represented the national picture In order to more realistically evaluate the data and in so doing have not grossly misrepresented to be presented, it is necessary to examine the any particular State. method by which the data was collected. Basically an aticl te In evaluating the information collected, the the data was collected through an extensive phone logical starting place is the body of laws under survey in which all 50 States were contacted. which the programs are being implemented (see which the programs are being implemented (see During the survey, all ten EPA Regions were Figure 2). Our compilation of the data revealed contacted and asked to identify their key ground- that the State agencies involved in ground water water protection contacts at the State level. In operate under various and diverse laws. The most addition, several lists of State ground-water common is the broad environmental law governing representatives were consulted to insure that all pollution of what is defined within as "waters of States were adequately represented. Once the list of representatives was complete, the survey itself was initiated. During the survey, at least one repre- sentative of each State was contacted and inter- viewed regarding the nature, extent, and status of . that State's ground-water protection program. In ,- numerous incidents, it was necessary to talk to several individuals representing more than one State agency while, in other cases, several individuals, representing a single agency, were j interviewed. All those contacted were asked . . basically the same questions, and almost all responded openly and proved most helpful. In many instances, those contacted provided not ' [ general la,. withpeclfic only the information requested but also volunteered more detailed explanations andE a.... insights (not to mention interpretations) into Fig. 2. State ground-water laws. 90 the State. " The term "waters of the State" can be Looking back at the kinds of laws currently typically defined as, "All streams, lakes, ponds, being used to protect ground water, it is important marshes, watercourses, waterways, wells, springs, to note that, in many cases, States must rely upon reservoirs, aquifers, irrigation systems, drainage legislation which was not specifically designed to systems, and all other bodies and accumulations of protect ground water and, as such, is cumbersome water, surface and underground, natural and and often difficult to litigate. In other cases, State artificial, public or private, which are contained laws may be bypassed in favor of federal statutes. within, flow through, or border upon, the State or This happens most often in the case of individual any portion thereof." This definition is used by laws, as can be seen in the State of Washington. Minnesota in its Environmental Protection Law, Since the federal government has no singular Chapter 1 15. Approximately 60% of the States comprehensive ground-water protection statutes, currently rely on general laws as a basis for ground- the limitations of relying solely on federal laws water protection. are obvious. It should also be pointed out that Eleven, or approximately 20% of the States, the classification of States is not based on accepted rely on what we have termed individual laws for criteria for evaluating State laws, but, rather, their ground-water protection authorities. represents our interpretation of the data collected Individual laws can be characterized as separate during the interviews. pieces of specific legislation which deal with *Having considered the State laws being used particular sources of pollution, usually activities, to protect ground-water resources, it is important to and aspects of ground-water protection. These look at the agencies involved in ground-water statutes may be used in addition to existing protection. Figure 3 depicts the number of agencies environmental laws as in the case of North involved in ground-water protection in the various Carolina, or they may be adequate in themselves States. It would be impossible to address the nature to provide the requisite ground-water protection, of the agencies involved as an adequate treatment as in Washington and Idaho. Washington, for would take volumes as opposed to the paragraphs example, relies on the following statutes: at hand. Lehr et al. (1976) have addressed this issue Pollution Source Laws & Regulations in a previous EPA publication. Looking at the data on the number of agencies involved we see that Waste Injection SDWA, UIC eleven States involve three agencies, and five States Soluble Slud ge Disposal State Guidelines involve three or more agencies in their implementa- Ground Discharge Treat- tion programs. This leaves only nine States with a ment of Effluents Clean Water Act NPDES single agency responsible for ground-water Non-Point Sources Federal Water Pollution protection. In collecting this data we considered an Control Act agency involved in ground-wafer protection when it Toxic Chemical Storage Hazardous Waste Law, State possessed regulatory authority. Other agencies Regulations commonly associated with ground water, such as Chemical & Oil Spills State Water Pollution Control Act On-Site Waste Disposal Clean Water Act In seven States, general environmental protection laws with specific reference to ground water are used to effect ground-water protection. Our investigations identified only three States which had specific ground-water laws. Georgia has its Ground-Water Use Act of 1972 which provides protection in conjunction with the Water Quality Control Act which employs the waters of the State concept. The Utah Water Code has a specific section relating to ground water and is used in ii conjunction with the State Water Pollution Control Act. Virginia's Ground-Water Act, passed in -..39-~ 197 3, has provided for the implementation of that Fig. 3. Number of State agencies involved in ground-water State's ground-water management program. protection. 91 State geological surveys, which typically are involved in data collection and research, are not included inP O Figure 3. During the data collection we found various arrangements and combinations of involved I- ---- organizational units. In portraying this data, we are not attempting to infer that single agency involvement is better than multiple agency involve- K ment or vice versa. We are merely trying to depict : what exists in the States. With the type of laws and number of_. State agencies involved in ground-water protection fresh in mind, it is illuminating to look at the - 0drftigIeW ItIdr enforcement mechanisms the States rely on to -dIin Offet______ implement their ground-water protection programs Fig. 5. Ground-water quality standards. (see Figure 4). Enforcement mechanisms vary widely among the States with the most common method (40%) being through the State's Attorney General. In this instance, a violation would be ascertain whether fines or penalties could be levied identified and resolution attempted by the involved so the purpose of enforcement in these cases was State agency. In the event that resolution fails, a limited to cease and desist. In other States it case would be prepared by the technical/professional could be established that fines could be levied but staff of the agency and turned over to the Attorney the enforcement mechanisms were unclear. General for prosecution. (This is an obvious in order to round out the general information simplification of a complex administrative needed to give a reasonable picture of existing procedure.) Upon completion of a case and State ground-water protection programs, we rendering of a decision against a violator, penalties attempted to devise a "progressive" barometer may vary from censure to cease and desist orders which could give an indication of the progressive to considerable fines. In eighteen States, agency nature of State programs in general. We selected attorneys are responsible for enforcement actions. ground-water quality standards as this barometer, In two States, Kansas and Nebraska, a major share simply because there seems to be a growing interest of the responsibility falls to the county/district in this particular ground-water protection tool. attorney. In at least seven States, no court action Figure 5 depicts the responses we received. We has been taken against ground-water polluters to found that five States have standards in effect, six date, thus leaving State procedures untested. These are currently reviewing or processing proposed States are Washington, Montana, Wyoming, standards, and another seven are currently involved4 Louisiana, Vermont, Massachusetts, and Hawaii. in drafting ground-water quality standards. Thus, in a small number of States we were unable to nearly 40% of the States are taking, or have taken, steps to develop specific standards to protect ground-water quality. In numerous other cases, interviewees in States not developing ground-water quality standards indicated interest, or intent to do so. The number cited deals with specific ~~4KZ24 . ~~~. ground-water standards, but does not include '~~~~ ~~~ ~standards relating to drinking water, effluent / ~~~~ /4 - ~~~~~quality, or discharges which may contribute to ground-water protection but are not solely designed to protect ground water. It should be pointed out that ground-water quality standards may be very different from State to State with each State emphasizing the parameters ]'I Wk ~~ and levels needed to insure ground-water protection. Intenalstrct ttoneyMaryland, for example, has standards which classify the producing aquifer based on its trans- Fig. 4. Enforcement of ground-water protection programs. missibility, permeability, and total dissolved solids. 92 Other States define discharge standards which are in the ground-water programs make it almost relatively independent of the aquifer. New Mexico impossible to derive accurate figures. The data * ~~has identified the parameter of Total Dissolved presented represents our compilation of these Solids and the limit of less than 10,000 mg/i as guesses and serves to document, at least to a requiring protection. Maximum contaminant levels limited degree, the resources currently committed have been established for three separate categories: to ground-water protection at the State level. (1) human health standards, (2) domestic water- It is obvious that State staffing and budgeting supply standards, and (3) irrigation use. In addition, limitations will, for the most part, determine the there are also detailed provisions for discharge ultimate form and organization of ground-water plans, application approval, and reporting and protection efforts. Based on our discussion with monitoring of ground water. On the other hand, the States, it appears that no State has the Nebraska's proposed ground-water quality resources or the funding it needs. A broad standards are based on a non(anti)-degradation extrapolation of the data collected regarding policy. Maximum contaminant levels are established person years currently involved in State ground- in terms of health and aesthetic quality. Non- water protection programs, indicates that less degradation is also the focal point of Michigan's than 700 person years may be involved nation- ground-water standards which place emphasis on wide. This figure includes all administrative and regulating discharges, preparing hydrogeologic support functions which typically can be reports and monitoring. Alaska and South Carolina estimated as � 4of the work force. Thus, we can rely on more general ground-water quality standards. crudely say that approximately 525 person years In the case of Virginia, several hydrogeologic regions of professional/technical effort are expended by have been identified and specific standards are the States each year to protect ground water. being applied to each region. In summary, we have tried to present a brief It is difficult to assign a major significance to overview of the state of State Ground-Water the number of persons or person years involved in Protection Programs. It is difficult to collect and State ground-water protection programs. As Figure present this data without making some assumptions 6 shows, the level of involvement varies among the and drawing some conclusions; hopefully, these States. Variations in organization of the State liberties have not biased significantly the data programs make it difficult to relate the outputs of presented. In conjunction with the subsequent Pro p ~~five person years in Maine to five person years in and Con presentations, we hope the evaluation of Arizona. We do feel that in general the numbers can legal authority, State organization, and person serve as an indicator of the States' awareness and power will allow the attendees of the Fourth possibly commitment relative to ground-water National Ground Water Quality Symposium to protection. Estimates of the person year involve- determine for themselves whether "State Ground- ment of the various States were almost always Water Protection Programs" are adequate or identified as very rough. Multiple agency involve- inadequate. ment and mixed responsibilities of those involved REFERENCES Murray, C. R., and E. B. Reeves. 1977. Estimated use of water in the United States in 1975. Geological Survey Circular 765. ~~~~~ ~~~~~~~ ~~~Richard E. Bartelt graduated in 1970 with a B.S. in r ~~~~~~~~~~~~Civil Engineering from Iowa State University. Subsequently he served 2years in theArmy as aLieutenant in the Corps of Engineers. Upon completion of active duty be returned / ~~~to Iowa State University where, in 1973, be received a taj ~~~~~~ ) ~~Master's degree in Sanitary Engineering. For the past 4%2 years, Rich has worked for the U.S. EPA, Region V, in Chicago. The past year and a half be has been the Region's grou nd-water protection representative and is currently serving as Chief of the Ground-Water Protection Section, ....... ~~which represents the Region in most ground-water related M., n 25 pe.so..y..r issues. For the past year Mr. Bartelt has participated in the no etmtffe-d national work group responsible for drafting and executing Fig. 6. Person years dedicated to ground-water protection. the Surface Impoundment Assessment, 93 State Ground-Water Protection Programs - Adequate'a by Edwin H. Rossb ABSTRACT branch to design and manage programs that will avoid the An assessment of the adequacy of State involvement necessity of court action. Continued advocacy efforts for should include a historical perspective of resource manage- ground-water protection programs yet remains the ment in the nation. A review of the record indicates that up responsibility of the water well industry and a small ground- until the 70's, Federal policy was virtually nonexistent with water technical constituency. The public and the politicians respect to ground-water protection programs. need to be further informed and educated about the need Efforts of the ground-water industry and related for ground-water protection. scientific community to gain legislative action has, within the last few years, shown progress within State government. INTRODUCTION The Federal EPA, in response to efforts of the only The purpose of this paper is to provide an significant constituency, the NWWA, is now requiring analysis of the political perceptions of the adequacy ground-water protection in their regulations. institutional arrangements, whether national, State or of State ground-water programs. Whether a program local, will at least for some years to come by political is adequate in the politician's view appears to be necessity require central involvement of the States in closely related to the immediacy of a crisis. ground-water protection. Webster (1970) defines adequate as: The legislative and executive branch in many States have shown their willingness to act; however, without an 1. Enough or good enough for what is required active political constituency, legislative appropriations are or needed; sufficient, suitable. provided after actual problems arise due to drought or contamination problems. Rainfall provides extra time to 2. Barely satisfactory; acceptable but not address quantity problems but there may not be a second remarkable. chance to protect ground-water quality. These branches of government have the monetary and legal authority to act Adequacy is a relative term and may be judged once the need is demonstrated. The record of the judicial differently by various people. In assessing the branch indicates a need for the legislative and executive adequacy of the State ground-water protection programs, Bartelt and Dawson (1978) made a survey of State agency professionals throughout the nation. Adequacy of State ground-water programs could be related to: aPresented at The Fourth National Ground Water Quality Symposium, Minneapolis, Minnesota, September 1. Needs as addressed by Federal programs. 20-22, 1978. bSupervisor, Ground Water Quality Control Unit, 2. Needs as addressed by private foundations. Minnesota Department of Health, 717 Southeast Delaware 3. Needs as perceived by the politician. St., Minneapolis, Minnesota 55440. 4. Actual needs for ground-water protection. 94 FEDERAL AND PRIVATE Foundation research on public policy issues FOUNDATION PROGRAMS TO PROTECT has significantly influenced passage of much GROUND-WATER QUALITY legislation in the United States. There are In an assessment of the adequacy of State approximately 25,000 private foundations in this ground-water quality programs, it would be of country. Even though some of the foundations interest to make a comparison with Federal have impressive assets, the Ford Foundation being programs and private foundation efforts to protect the largest with over 3.6 billion dollars, the private ground-water quality. foundations have not been found to have much Dana (I195 6), in his survey of Federal natural concern over ground-water protection (Ford resource programs, documents no programs for Foundation, 1974; Nielsen, 1972). The Rockefeller F ~~ground-water quality protection. Not until 1969 Foundation has funded research into the quality was there any significant Federal program to of the environment since 1969, but the program protect ground-water quality. The National was phased out in June 1978. The Ford Foundation Environmental Policy Act of 1969, PL91-190, is decreasing its funding of projects in environmental provided a mechanism to identify environmental protection. A search of funding done by other problems (Hagman, 1974). private foundations (Council of Foundations, Legislation passed in the early 1970's, 1975; Conservation Foundation Report, 1958, including the Water Pollution Control Act, 1959) revealed almost no foundation-sponsored PL92-500, and the Clean Air Act, PL91-604, research in the areas of water resources, ground- forbids or limits the disposal of waste into surface water quality protection or the related areas of waters, the oceans, or the atmosphere, but these resource recovery, hazardous waste or toxic pollution control programs are resulting in ground- materials handling. water degradation (Gillies, 1978). Pollutants that are removed from the air and surface water are now being dumped on the land surface or into wells STATE PROFESSIONALS' PERSPECTIVE resulting in the contamination of ground water. Bartelt (1978) and Dawson (1978) have made The Safe Drinking Water Act, PL9 3-5 23, extensive surveys of the States to solicit the views limits the protection of ground water to the of the professionals concerning State ground- designation of certain "sole source aquifers" and to water programs. Dawson reports that the majority the control of underground injection of waste fluids. of State agency personnel questioned feel their Studies authorized under the act demonstrated ground-water protection programs are inadequate the urgent need for further ground-water protection in providing total resource protection. and led to the passage of the Resource and Recovery F ~~Act, PL94-580, which controls the disposal of solid and hazardous waste. The act requires the U.S. ONE STATE'S PERSPECTIVE - Environmental Protection Agency to develop an MINNESOTA EXPERIENCE inventory of hazardous substances produced in the In contrast to the nationwide surveys of nation. The Toxic Substances Control Act, Bartelt (1978) and Dawson (1978), the author PL94-469, seeks to limit or prohibit entry into the has confined this paper primarily to the question environment of chemicals potentially hazardous to of adequacy of ground-water programs in human health. The Surface Mining Control and Minnesota over the past 20 years. A description of Reclamation Act, PL9S-87, singles out specific water resources and the importance of ground water sources of contamination such as injection wells. to public need is included with a discussion of This controls coal mining, both surface and funding and personnel provided for ground-water underground, and requires hydrogeological studies programs as contrasted to total State expenditures before disposing of mining waste or filling of a and political perceptions of the needs of constituents mine. Most of these Federal acts are administered and pressure groups. and enforced by the States, many of which have primacy over the acts by virtue of setting up their own regulations following Federal directives. MINNESOTA WATER RESOURCES AND THE Enactment of these environmental protection laws IMPORTANCE OF GROUND WATER demonstrate that the Federal and State governments Minnesota is a head-water State (Figure 1). are becoming increasingly more concerned about Minnesota does not receive surface water in the protection of ground-water resources. appreciable amounts from beyond her 95 boundaries (Ross, 1976). Most surplus water flows from the Rainy River in northern Minnesota and .-5" the Mississippi River below the Twin Cities (Figure 1). Although Minnesota is the land of 10,000 lakes, the majority of these lakes lose more to evaporation than they gain from precipitation in a year's time (Figure 2). Topography and land-use priorities do not provide natural sites for dams to impound significant amounts of surface water. Ground water is the water supply for 93 percent of the communities in Minnesota. Over 2,500,000 or 66 percent of the State's A population is served by ground water. PRECIPITATION MINNESOTA PROGRAMS Between 1956 and 1970, when the first ground-water hydrologist was employed by the Department of Conservation (now Department of -15" Natural Resources) (Table 1), State personnel engaged in ground-water programs in Minnesota increased only slightly. In 1972, public concern for water quality was reflected in the staff additions -15" -10" -5. 0 to the Pollution Control Agency. The additions in Fig. 2. Minnesota's average precipitation minus evaporation 1973 and 1975 were primarily for the solid waste from lakes. program. The additions in 1977 were primarily for the requirements of the underground injection1 control programs of the Federal Safe Drinking Water Act. Other additions to staffing of the Health and Natural Resources Departments and the Minnesota Geological Survey resulted from the near public panic caused by the drought of 1976 and 1977 (Figure 3). RED ~~RAIN Table 1. Professional Ground-Water Personnel Minnesota State Government MDH MPCA DNR MGS Total 1977 5 20 11 5 41 1975 2 12 5 3 20 1973 1 8 5 3 16 1971 1 3 4 3 11 1969 0 1 4 2 7 1967 0 1 4 1 6 SCALE OF FLOW IN CFS 1965 1 4 1 6 1 ~~~4 1 6 0~ ~,? x ~.0001963 1 4 1 6 1961 1 4 �/2 51/2 1959 1 4 0 5 1957 0 4 0 4 1955 0 1 0 1 1953 0 0 0 0 Ml ssou~~ MDH - Minnesota Department of Health MPCA - Minnesota Pollution Control Agency Fig. 1. Flow of Minnesota streams (width of stream indicates DNR - Department of Natural Resources the relative magnitude of average flow). MGS - Minnesota Geological Survey 96 the inflation and progressive tax laws provided a solution (Figure 5). State and local budgets are ,-~ ...... -~~~~~now generally in sound condition (Figure 6). A sudden change in public attitude erupted when California voters sent a loud and clear message to their elected officials by passing Proposition 13, and reducing property taxes by 57 percent (Figure 7). In Minnesota, the politician is responding to ..... lul...=s ~v'"'"'" ?~ the issue with his concern for the high cost of government (Table 2), but in a way qualified so as to not alienate the most influential special interest ...... I ,: ,re~m,,,, constituency. Although there are about 900 special Fig. 3. Drought, 1976-77. POLITICIANS' PERSPECTIVE . ...i 1i. .9 Politicians strive to provide programs to meet - the needs of their constituents. To be successful the politician should continually assess the adequacy of governmental programs. Accordingly, the adequacy or inadequacy of any public program will be the result of the politicians' perception of the public's needs and wants. As the surveys of Bartelt (1978) and Dawson (1978) have indicated, State ground-water pro- fessionals throughout the nation are of the opinion that ground-water programs are inadequate. However, Minnesota aspirants to political office in the Summer of 1978 indicate a contradictory perception of public wants and needs to that of most State ground-water professionals. In 1978, the Minnesota politician has an .. ..l , obvious lack of concern for issues other than the high cost of government and the need to cut taxes. One can only conclude that the public policy makers at this time are of the opinion that State ground-water programs are adequate. Because of h the average wage earner's problems in meeting everyday expenses, the concern for taxes and the cost of government has accelerated this year. The ii"/ consumer price index increased faster than the real growth in thegross national product (Figure TM bittf!e 4). Because of the progressive income tax rates, :11iil i the average wage earner's taxes increase dispro- TI ME portionately to his cost-of-living salary adjustments. Fig. 4. Soaring prices, slowing growth - percent change in The projections of revenue for Federal programs real from national product, and percent change in consumer seemed to be rather dismal a few years back but price index. 97 interest groups represented by about 1300 lobbyists :,: registered with the Minnesota Ethical Practices a1] Board, none are as powerful and influential as the -:. education lobby. In early September 1978, newspaper headlines announced, repeatedly, the governor's opposition to increasing taxes as well as spending. The headlines did not announce the entire story as revealed in the text of the newspaper articles: "Two of the biggest budget items are school and property tax relief, which includes aid ; :1 dOIIt to local governments (schools*); programs the : ii.! i *Inserted by author. i ,i ... ............iiiiii? iiiiiiiii LIP~~~~ 220% ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~~~ , ~ . Fig. 6. State and local budgets in billions of dollars. Ia i [ig. 5, leaping taxes, billions of dollars. Fig. 7, Proposition 13, 98 Table 2. Minnesota Summary of Legislative Appropriations by Function % of Federal Funds State Funds State Funds Education $ 216,074,424 $4,378,244,266 62.07 Welfare 864,407,849 892,3 58,607 12.65 Transportation 156,744,147 693,486,873 9.83 State Agencies 269,690,571 643,625,523 9.12 Open Appropriations 270,111,206 3.8 3 Miscellaneous 125,149,850 1.77 Legislative 83,000 34,366,806 .49 judicial 276,688 16,610,592 .24 Total Federal Funds $1,507,276,679 Total State Funds $7,05 3,95 3,723 100% Tax Refund 428,430,000 $7,482,383,723 Federal Funds 1,507,276,679 Grand Total Appropriation $8,989,660,402 legislature has committed itself to finance at a adequate and education is inadequate (Minnesota substantial level. The governor said he will go along State Senate, 1977). with a 1978 legislative promise to increase Of the total State biennial budget (Table 2), school aid next year." What the governor said only $.25 per capita is allocated to the professional illustrates a consensus of viewpoints of most staff involved with the ground-water program and aspirants to. public office. $.025 per capita goes to the professionals working To fully explain the politicians' sensitivity with the water well program. All the funds spent to the needs of education in Minnesota would by the State averages out to $1,750 per capita and require a rather detailed and somewhat subjective the funds appropriated for the State agency analysis; however, it may be sufficient to say that State funds are provided beyond the strict needs of the student. Eighty percent of the total number Table 3. Analysis of Employee Complements Financed in of State tax-supported employees (Table 3) are Whole or Part by State Funds employed in education. Politicians are strangely Positions silent to the seemingly popular opportunity to discuss the fact that the most dramatic and obvious Education place to cut spending would be in elementary Department of Education 521 education. Higher Education 14,342 Elementary and Secondary By 1980 the budgetary needs of the school School Teachers 5 3,588 age population (Minnesota State Planning Agency, Support Staff 3 3,016 101,467 - 79.2% 1972, 1975) will only be 80 to 85 percent of the State Departments 11,889 - 9.3% 1970 levels, and by 1985 the needs will only be 70 Welfare and Correction 8,427 - 6.6% to 85 percent of the 1970 levels (Figures 8 and 9). Transportation 5,023 - 3.9% Legislative 761 - 0.6% In 1978 dollars this could represent a saving of Judicial (Including Attorney more than $500 million per year and yet the General's Office) 529 - 0.4% governor and the legislators are promising to T t l 1 8 06-10 provide more school aid instead of cutting spending Ttl 1806-10 for education. Considering that this savings is (Data from: Minnesota Population Projections, 1970-2000, almost equal to the total amount provided to all of Minnesota State Planning Agency, November 1975; Minnesota the State government agencies and that funds Socio-Economnic Characteristics (from 1970 Census), Minnesota State Planning Agency, April 1972; Minnesota provided for ground-water programs is less than State Senate - A Fiscal Review of the 1977 Legislative $2 million per year, it is obvious that the politicians Session, December 1977; and Minnesota Tax Payer's are of the opinion that ground-water programs are Association.) 99 PROJECTED TOTAL SCHOOL AGE POPULATION, functions excluding transportation and welfare BY FERTILITY LEVEL 1970-2000 AS A PERCENT OF 1970 SCHOOL AGE POPULATION averages out to about $160 for each person in the M I NNESOTA State. 100 - 2.1 90 - CONCLUSION I. 9 Problems with protecting ground-water quality - 8 0 continue to grow (Figure 10). Recent discoveries L 9 n of damage to the drinking-water aquifers reveal a a. 70 - I.5 frightening consequence to the affected communities in both health and financial costs. Land-use practices 60 - that severely contaminate the land surface may, in future years, cause severe contamination to 01 subsurface- (ground-water) water supplies. There 1 970 1980 1 990 2000 is evidence that the ground water in some areas is Fig. 8. Projected total school age population of fertility becoming contaminated. Inadvertent and accidental level, 1970-2000, as a percent of 1970 school age spills and discharges enter the ground water. population-Minnesota. Increased loading of the soil with fertilizers, insecticides, and herbicides, plus the thousands of synthetic substances manufactured each year are contaminating this valuable resource. Landfills, PROJECTED TOTAL SCHOOL AGE POPULATION,O 1970-2000 I 1tdipt 2 MINNESOTA . I N. E S O r A iii~~~~~~~iii':~i i 1000- 1 ?1.!;g Total 0 00 - T.............................................. KIndergarten D I I I I I I , 1970 198D 1990 2000 Fig. 9. Projected total school age population 1970-2000- Minnesota. Fig. 10. Ground-water contamination. 100 pipelines, and improperly constructed wells add guardians of their own rights, and are the only to the pollution of the ground water. instruments which can be used for their An explanation of this dilemma could be destruction. And certainly they would never that in the area of public resource management consent to be so used were they not deceived. To and protection, it apparently makes little difference avoid this, they should be instructed to a certain what the facts are or what the professionals' degree." (Koch and Peden, 1944.) observations are if the public or politicians' perceptions are of a different or indifferent persuasion. If ground-water quality is threatened and if it REFERENCES is ever to be protected, a concerned public must be Bartelt, Richard E. 1979. State ground-water protection the primary motivating force in providing the programs - a national summary. Ground Water. v. 17, no. 1. necessary means to assure adequate protection. To Conservation Foundation Annual Report for the Years provide a responsible role to the public in this 1958, 1959. 30 E. 40th St., New York, NY 10017. regard, the scientist, technician, bureaucrat or Council of Foundations. 1975. Foundation grants index. academician must inform the public of all New York. available facts needed to arrive at a consensus Dana, S. T. 1956. Forest and range policy. McGraw-Hill. opinin cosistnt wth te pubic'srespnsiblityDawson, James W. 1979. State ground-water protection opinio consstent ith te publc's rsponsiilityprograms - inadequate. Ground Water. v. 17, no. 1. and welfare (Figure II). Jefferson (1795) wrote: Ford Foundation Experiments in Regional Environmental "The people of every country are the only safe Management. 1974. A Symposium of the American Association for the Advancement of Science. 320 East 43rd St., New York, NY 10017. Gillies, Nola. 1978. How recent federal legislation has moved toward greater protection of ground-water resources. Ground Water. v. 16, no. 4, pp. 29 3-296. Hagman, D. G. 1974. Urban and land development cases and material. American Casebook Series. __ ~~~~Jefferson, T. 1944. The life and selected writings of Thomas Jefferson. Edited by Adrienne Koch and William Peden, Modern Library, New York. Minnesota State Planning Agency. April 1972. Minnesota socio-economic characteristics (from the 4th count summary tape of the 1970 census). Minnesota State Planning Agency. November 1975. Minnesota population projections, 1970-2000. Office of the State Demographer. i~~~~-Itnw ~~~~~~~Minnesota State Senate. 1977. A fiscal review of the 1977 legislative session. Published by the Minnesota State Senate. MIN NEC&1.......A ~~Nielsen, Waldemar. 1972. The big foundations. Columbia - ~~~~~~University Press. Ross, E. H-. 1976. How about irrigating western Minnesota? ~~ 1UAT~~~~~D WE L ~~~~Soil, Fertilizer and Agricultural Pesticides Short L ~~~~~~~Course, Minneapolis Auditorium, December 13-15, n~~~~uu~~mnuuuug ~~~1976. UEW~~~V~UflUE~~~UU ~Wilson, B. 1978. Perpich again says no increase next year. Minneapolis Star. September 6, 1978. Edwin H. Ross is Supervisor, Ground-Water Quality I j ~~~~~~~~~~~~Control Unit, Section of Water Supply and General Engineer- ing, Division of Environmental Health, Minnesota Depart- I ,,eLS4W NEW~~~~LEWT~~R - ment of Health. He received a B.A. in 1958 in Geology from th. ~~~ _ - ~the University of Colorado. He has held the following positions: Geologist, Minnesota Department of Natural _ ~~~Resources, Division of Waters, 1958-1 966; Ground-Water mj~~~kv~~~m~t::- - ~~Geologist, Michigan Department of Health, Ground-Water -, ~~~ im~~~ ~~ ~~ - Quality Control Section, 1966-1 967; Water Resources Planner, Minnesota State Planning Agency, Water Fig. 1 1 The constituency. Resources Planning Program Budgeting Systems, 1967-19 72. 1`01 State Ground-Water Protection Programs - Inadequate'a by James W. Dawsonb ABSTRACT This discussion concerns some deficiencies of The primary reason State ground-water protection State ground-water protection programs and programs are inadequate is that the resource is misunder- emphasizes the fact that the majority of State stood, surrounded by misconceptions and, due to its agencies contacted feel their programs are inadequate occurrence, is "out of sight and-out of mind." To most in providing true resource protection. While people, ground water is a very elusive and somewhat magical resource, whose significance in the over-all picture protection immediately implies the prevention of of water resources has not been realized by those who have contamination, management is an integral part of the power and authority to rectify the present state of protection, since the act of protecting is "to shield affairs. The need for adequate protective legislation and from injury, damage or loss; guard; defend" sufficient financial and manpower resources commitment (Guralnik, 1972). For State ground-water protection is even more difficult to justify because there has not, toprgastbecnirdaeqtthymty date, been a citizenry outcry for such measures. rgast ecniee dqae hymsb To ascertain the status of current State ground-water definition, be directed towards the total resource, protection programs, a survey of State legislation concerning i.e., both quality and quantity. Without manage- ground water was undertaken; additionally, a questionnaire ment authority, State programs cannot provide was sent to the agency in each State responsible for total resource protection. administration of ground-water protection programs. TheThmeodfdaaclctnmutb results of this survey indicate that most States have broadThme odfdaaclctnmutb authority over ground-water resources through general considered when evaluating the data presented water resources legislation, but the majority do not have herein. Two survey questionnaires were sent to specific ground-water protective legislation. in many cases, the primary State agency concerned with ground- the broad legislative authority is inadequate or, if water resources which requested both subjective legislation is adequate, implementation of legislativeevlainofsmprgaaesaddlnatn mandates is not sufficient to provide adequate protection. evlain of somecii program eleents; tn elepoeinterviews Lack of ground-water quality and quantity data is severe to o pcfcpormeeet;tlpoeitriw the point that many agencies do not have a realistic were conducted to complete data collection. characterization or identification of the ground-water (Note: Survey questionnaires were not sent to the resources they are to protect. Virginia State Water Control Board, Bureau of Water Control Management. Program evaluations utilized in this discussion are those of the author a Peetdand do not constitute official Agency response to Peetdat The Fourth National Ground Water the questionnaires.) In most of the States, program Quality Symposium, Minneapolis, Minnesota, September implementation is divided between two or more 20-22, 1978. bRegional Geologist, Virginia State Water Control agencies and input from sister agencies was provided, Board, P.O. Box 7017, Roanoke, Virginia 24019. in many cases, through the efforts of the primary contact. 102 The survey was not as detailed as would be LEGISLATIVE BASI * ~~required for a comprehensive analysis of State * ~~ground-water protection programs; however, the effectiveness of such programs can be demonstrated by considering the following factors: icS,...t ...e ..n ~.. 1. Legislative basis for development ofI programs and the adequacy of that legislation. - ~&;-------- 2. Ability of the State to collect ground-water T" AEc resources data. hr 3.Protection of the resource through proper . eealLc NTAIVTATE development. i:vda 4. Ground-water quality standards as an Fig. 1. Legislative basis. enforcement/regulatory tool. 5. Regulation of ground-water users and existing legislation was adequate, 15 States management of the resource. indicated it to be partially so, and 2 3 States felt 6. Imlemetatio of xistng prgram andtheir legislation was inadequate. In all, 38 States the fmlexibiltyationo expandting programso ad e lo (76%) felt that their legislative basis was thew onesilt to adesspaond-wthoer problems,.rdeeo inadequate or had deficiencies, with lack of new nesto adres grond-wter roblms.management authority cited as the predominant Adequate legislative authority is a prerequisite factor; fragmented and incomplete legislation for development of State ground-water protection (i.e., specific problem areas not addressed) and programs. All States have general water resources legislative ambiguities were also cited. legislation which declares (in one rhetorical form or Comparison of legislative basis and evaluations another); as public policy and legislative intent, reveals that seven States felt a general law basis the potecionenhacemet an mangemet of was adequate, ten States noted deficiencies and II State waters for the public health, safety and indicated that this basis was inadequate. General welfare; the definition of State waters usually laws which specifically mention ground water includes both surface water and ground water. Most were termed adequate by one State, deficient by of this legislation is pollution control/abatement- two and inadequate by four. Four States felt oriented and is directed primarily towards surface the individual law basis was adequate, while two water, with only broad authority over ground water. indicated deficiencies, and six felt it was A few States have specific ground-water legislation, inadequate. Of the States that have specific but for the majority of States, ground-water ground-water legislation, one noted deficiencies, protection is provided through several different and two felt it was inadequate. These evaluations, statutes which mandate, to one or more agencies, I contend, emphasize that ground water is a the development of sufficient programs to achieve complex subject which has not received sufficient the intent of the legislation. Figure I depicts the legislative basis for development of State ground- EALAEA water protection programs (Bartelt, 1978) and -le the State's evaluation of the adequacy of that VVV n~nT( legislation to provide for protection and manage- ~ ~ ment of ground-water resources is presented in 7e*p.A1tjc Figure~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ 2.N Figue 2.majority of States (56%) rely on general ~ fc laws for development of ground-water protection programs; seven States utilize general laws which specifically mention ground water; 12 States have .S~ yo individual laws which address specific pollution ~ NTDSAE sources (usually activities) and their effect on S feeV~ oe -------~ ----- - ground water; and three States have specific L ground-water legislation. Twelve (12) States felt Fig. 2. Evaluation of legislation. 103 WATER WELL OOTEELETSOE REPORTS SESUORES R~~~~~~~UISESE & SE RESPOS REQUIREED D DD.~ IN -= . -W Fig. 3. Water well completion reports required>~~~ILY . Fig.4 uneadus eot eurd cni d rtoby toewohvte legl a iedt c olcto is~ dependetupnmpoead res ponsibility to mandate adequate protection. budgetary constraints which can limit sufficient~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~tW A~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~TPS1 fundamenta asTpeES ofT aypoetndtacumlin(sevrlcmetsniatedS program is~~~~~~~ collectin o neessrWnomto ako ai g rud-ae qualtySE d a .ta.O insufficient data precludes accurateresource number-of States are u n ableto dvloasufent Finclde sumsso ofwater well completion rEnforcsrqied.Fg.mpaeant use reguaorts provisiosfredat reonsdratsionrb thsewomhv e sleimlareotingveh i tacole),sbmsion was depndiaedntob uponimalpowr anon responsbiit tmandat aeuate rporotectiond backgetryoundxsteantsuet whithe fical limitain (manpower, qundmnaliapetofay infrmaetion . Fgr3 r evalsthat2bde appropriation, (et)eral incomment idcasedsa Staesgardingchateracterisl cmticson h repourts because Thegslaie surve regulator amiguictiesta ag weresuppsdtfeficied, dalthogaxepin precludes acuaenfeourcenmbent ofSAts a resunalet, develo Satesufiin idntfiaonor oneveasntory andother),exiotedtrineof doanta have an thedalitic dteriation cofllecte istyial those reaighti manageetbeoes idificultedi spthyncuate nor icompletion wisthear suposellpoect.o reort osimlrpormwssrqibled. Suchqdateail Prollection usull based presourily thoug poutrycoperain aqife aaees u nclyudSaes reursubmpithono water well constrution b eingforcemn of thegltr mrvsonsfrdta tesots for soelimlareotn wehile), submissionawas indicated tha pum signifianvele avial or ground-wae testsg andeue requreports pudblickgrupp l exstntdue/or highe ficalnlimination. (mate eldilngpodesFgre, quapaity inomtonwiuel3reels. Athot4udget appopitin retc.)ired by somecss mjrtofStatesmn indicated thate thellcmlto reprs bcuelgsaieo eulatr miutis weespofe yiefled, athuhexemtios w erecld eforcequently file awrsuth waySatersel (fompetone repsnorts anowever, cxse ormnieoonothv elsti dtrinationofwatei thos;egtSate idcthed thtncopestios thereuuly iaccrae dupoed to prthect....... mestho aroeesayfo dtesting(aiiong orilft manydelomn insubasicitpeentigcnanto, tests duration Iel nd r8Saegniated toa pumpag sgicand ueilsaalbe reort gon-Ate -vitaler datare for pulcsupyana/rhge otmenatin putrpwlriln oses- -Figure-- capaitwel.Ahogh o euired 4y theMZ" maortyo States, manypindiaed that thewre requires atoug aproimadtest eefeunly filedf wthos iniaterdel thtoxmpltions rexists (ihvoluevuers, publtsinicat OLE suppl sythemtss orwertai usersl inacrt duesignathed areastar usuralytheonly one required to submpaeadusieots 32hreot);fv States indicaded that they haereurd, ~. ., atheototoreuirguh reporoxmtel s if thoey wandcted T~~tt ~I- AD -. -~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~L ~*S... I C~q.-.1 Althoug backroun usuality dthe onllytone -euie tosbi was not specifically addressed in the survey, such Fig. 5. Drilling codes/construction standards. 104 ....li.. ...l......... /Eic/ yis difficult or impossible to prove if degradation ), M .�-...-......ar - E -._ n ,from some previous quality standard cannot be / " . ! ,4demonstrated; further, regulation of ground-water :'-. ......>._ t ';. signed: Odischargers can be difficult if background quality i�-�;�-/u- ... .. I has not been established. Ground-water quality ~-~~:: / , ......~w:~5_ e::-:: ~__~~; tstandards provide the necessary reference point _- .,,. --H-__- ----.- for comparison and regulation. Since ground-water *"%7- --- .o.I--- , .-..s.,-e'i quality is not constant, adoption of a non-degrada- , -:. . ] tion policy, in addition to specific parameter vK' _---<__-:_--\LN W:-"-- :._-:___,.. concentrations, can prove beneficial in enforcement i'. X . .UNI S proceedings. Figure 7 indicates which States have adopted specific ground-water quality standards: LI 7L_ _3 Uo k U@1U5 Qfive States have done so; two States have surface- Fig. 6. Driller licensing. water quality standards which apply to ground water; 11 States have standards in the developmental which promulgate mandatory construction or proposed stages; and 32 States have no specific standards or provide recommended minimum ground-water quality standards (Bartelt, 1978), standards, have been adopted by 30 States, while although ten of those have adopted standards for three States are developing such codes (Adams, drinking water supplies which utilize ground 1978). The integrity of public water-supply wells water. As mentioned earlier, most States do not is fairly well established through adequate well have the reference point (standards) which is construction standards (40 States have essential in demonstrating water quality degradation mandatory requirements). However, for domestic and providing regulatory basis and thus, quality water wells (which constitute a larger user protection of the resource is diminished. population) there are not mandatory standards Statewide regulation (Figure 8) of ground- in most States (20 States indicate no standards water users can greatly enhance a State's ability adoption and of those who have such standards, to inventory and protect the resource. State-issued many are recommended with only voluntary permits for ground-water use are required for some compliance and thus, non-enforceable). users in all but 17 States; however, exemptions for Licensing of water well contractors (Figure 6) certain uses or volumes exist in 22 of the 33 States is another means of encouraging adequate well that do issue permits for ground-water use; only construction, with 30 States requiring licensirig 11 States require permits for all wells, while three (one State requires it only for commercial States leave this issue for local control. The fact irrigation wells), 14 States with no licensing (two that the majority of States do not permit or States leave this for local control), five States with regulate all ground-water users indicates that most licensing procedures in process and one State that States do not have an accurate determination of requires driller registration (Adams, 1978). the level of ground-water development and thus, However, licensing in itself assures the competency realistic management of the resource is impossible. of the contractor, not necessarily that adequate construction will be employed. Most citizens do not know what constitutes adequate well construction GROUN...T.R DU.L.TAND... and therefore, State-mandated minimum construc-..... tion standards for all wells seem to be in order from .W. ....... a resource, as well as a consumer, protection ' j ;-N'- standpoint. I AW Ground-water quality standards (which refer specifically to ground-water quality and are not W concerned with discharge standards, drinking water .. --.. standards or any other such regulatory standard) t have received considerable interest recently as a Add Be DW i - means of facilitating ground-water protection; S \TE in fact, such standards can significantly affect a A N - State's ability to enforce its programs. In numerous ___ __ure IacEU UlESPlP DI DIlrnktertandr instances, ground-water pollution or contamination Fig. 7. Ground-water quality standards. 105 -,~~~~~~~~~~ LC . A I oil aewls 2E UN ITED PTATES L r n & .t[' ~','"� J'' "J LC - Local Conteol ' ' Fig. 8. Regulation of ground-water users. Fig. 10. Implementation of programs. Private domestic wells and small volume users results indicate that exemptions and (between 5,000 and 50,000 gpd) are typically "grandfathered" users can significantly reduce the exempt from regulation and it is recognized that effectiveness of management plans that are eliminating these exemptions could significantly implemented); one State has legislation in process increase the regulatory workload. But in certain that would authorize such areas; two States have cases, the total combined effect of these users can such areas in the State, but cannot delare similar be greater than that of the permitted users. For areas in other portions of the State; and, 23 States adequate resource inventory and management I have no such provision. Without this authority, contend that regulation of all ground-water users State ground-water protection programs cannot is a necessity. provide total resource protection (many comments As previously mentioned, management of identified this as a major program deficiency). ground-water resources is innate to any adequate Implementation of legislatively mandated protection program. The specific management tool programs is a significant factor in evaluating the (e.g., beneficial use, prior appropriation, ground- effectiveness of State ground-water protection water mining, sustained yield, etc.) is not the programs. As seen in Figure 10, implementation topic of discussion, but rather, the State's authority of existing programs was termed inadequate by to implement management alternatives, if warranted. 27 States, with 14 States indicating that the existing Declaration of ground-water management areas program implementation was deficient in certain (included in this term are capacity use basins, areas. Comments received generally fell into the adjudicated basins, critical ground-water areas, categories of insufficient manpower, budgetary etc.) is the most common means of implementing limitations, ambiguities in underlying legislation management alternatives. Figure 9 depicts that and non-enforcement of regulatory provisions. 24 States can declare management areas (survey Figure 11 depicts the number of State agencies AI--~~' / ~ p,,j.AAL~t .E..... .MI -A7-~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~A o, ~ ~, 4: 4 i ' L:. i ~ji~ : L~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~I - . _ . - ' '~ Proes i- --gnce 4~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ i ,.EA Fig. 9. Ground-water management areas. Fig. 11. Number of agencies implementing programs. 106 and fed into the legislative grist mill where they -.-. " r ~~~~~may not be well received or undergo debilitating t A ~~~~~~~~changes. The net result is that problem areas are V ~~~~~~~~~~not addressed in a timely manner and the A ~~~~~~~program's effectiveness in providing adequate 2 ~~~~protection for ground-water resources is reduced. ...tj\~4 ~ .L~41r&4kZ ASUMMARY No..~~~~~~~~~~~~ detailed analysis of State ground-water To\,J-L~ hN er protection programs must consider other factors 55025 ~CN~5 and program elements which have not been 25 - . ~- _ - Geaap~thar E~pearNmentioned in this discussion; however, the majority Fig. 12. Person-years invested in programs. of State agencies feel their ground-water protection programs are inadequate in providing total resource involved with implementation of programs protection. Several States feel that they have done (Bartelt, 1978) and it lends credence to the a pretty good job considering the limitations under adage, ('too many cooks spoil the broth." In many which the programs must operate, although cases, this situation results in jurisdictional practically all States indicated that programs could overlps an ambguousdelinatio of aencybe more effective if the deficiencies discussed herein responsibilities, spawns inter-agency conflicts, wr leitd leadsto dulicaion o effrts i som area andThe fact that the majority of the States feel lead to uplcatin o effrtsin sme reasandtheir current programs are inadequate is indicative, fosters the lack of any substantial programs in I contend, of mor f u dmna prbescnen other areas. The net result is a hit and miss program, in grorfund-atenta problemstcon:en plagued with inefficient administration, which iggon-ae rtcin does not provide adequate protection and does not 1. Ground water is a highly misunderstood achieve legislative mandates. resource and, due to its occurrence, is "out of Figure 12 depicts an estimation of the amount sight, out of mind"; its significance in the total of person-years invested in each State for program water resources picture, and its vulnerability, have implementation (Bartelt, 1978). Comparison of not been realized; and, person-years invested with implementation adequacy 2. Mankind's capacity to zealously react to a (Figure 10) emphasizes the variability of ground- problem, rather than to rationally act to prevent the water conditions throughout the country. In many problem from occurring in the first place. cases it was difficult to derive even a "ball park" estimation; however, it is obvious that increased These reasons combine to prevent, or impede, staffing is warranted (numerous comments program development because improper understand- indicated insufficient program staffing). ing of the resource and the factors that affect it A further indication of the effectiveness of makes justification for truly adequate programs State ground-water protection programs is the difficult, if not impossible. Further, significant flexibility of the responsible agency, or agencies, ground-water problems have not developed in most to expand existing programs, or develop new ones, States and many people feet that there are no real to provide for increased protection of the resource. problems that need action at this time, even though Most enabling legislation mandates to a particular widespread bacterial contamination and specific agency the responsibility of developing programs instances of more serious contamination have been sufficient to achieve the intent of that legislation, reported (EPA, 1977). However, remedial programs with promulgation of rules and regulations after for the majority of contamination problems can public hearing. The major deficiency with this require such enormous financial commitment and procedure is the fact that this regulatory flexibility extensive time periods that they are prohibitive and is usually restricted to legislative-specific items effectively irreparable; additionally, cases of and consequently, if a particular item is not physical damage to an aquifer are irrevocable. mentioned in the enabling legislation, an agency PREVENTION is the key to ground-water can be essentially powerless to address that protection and this can only be realized if these problem. This situation dictates that amendments fundamental problems are alleviated. to existing statutes, or new legislation, be developed Improvement of existing programs will require 107 legislative change, governmental reorganization or I only hope that the former, not the latter, situation realignment and a substantial financial investment results in development of adequate State ground- that will not have an appreciable return at the water protection programs. present time; although the benefits of such programs may be realized at some future date-20 years, 50 years, or even later. With reliance on ground water REFERENCES increasing at 25% per decade (EPA, 1977) and as Adams, Gene, Editorial Director. 1978. Ground Water Age. land disposal (both surface and subsurface) of waste v. 12, no. 9. Scott Periodical Corporation, Elmhurst, materils inrease, it ehoovs theState to dvelopIllinois, May 1978, pp. 16-18. mateialsincrases it ehooes te Sttes o deelopBartelt, Richard. 1979. State ground-water protection adequate protection programs to assure that ground programs - a national summary. Presented at The water remains an economical and high quality Fourth National Ground Water Quality Symposium, water source. Is comprehensive federal legislation Minneapolis, Minnesota, September 20-22, 1978. the answer? The majority of States felt it was not, Ground Water. v. 17, no. 1. Guralnik, David B., Editor in Chief. 1972. Webster's New although comments indicated that a federal World Dictionary. Second College Edition, The program-with financial and technical assistance- World Publishing Company, New York and Cleveland, for development of adequate State ground-water p. 1142. protection programs would be beneficial. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Water The majority of State agencies feel that their Supply and Office of Solid Waste Management ground-ater prtectionprogram are indequatePrograms. 1977. The report to, Congress. waste disposal grond,-waotend prthectio programs wilremainadequntil practices and their effects on ground water. Washington,4 the need is recognized to develop adequateD.,Jaur197 programs. This need may be recognized through: (a) Adequate understanding of the resource by those who have the legislative responsibility to James. Wv. Dawson is Regional Geologist for the Virginia mandate adequate programs (be they federal or State Water Control Board, West Central Regional Office, State legislators); or Roanoke, Virginia. He received a B.S. degree in Geological (b) When ground-water problems achieve a Sciences from Virginia Polytechnic Institute in 1970, and began his employment with the Board in 1973, concerned level that will force the development of adequate primarily with regulatory responsibilities. He has coauthored programs. reports on ground-water resources for some Virginia counties. 108 Audience Response to Session V - State Ground-Water Protection Programs Ray Kazmann, Louisiana State University, Baton Rouge: think that the problems that we've seen in south central I've listened to these presentations with a great deal of Arizona with ground-water mining, the problems that interest. Protecting aquifers and defining aquifer qualities were evident in parts of Texas which have been turned is a great idea. Mr. Bartelt, I have a question for you. When around a little bit by taking into account management you have several aquifers, one underneath the other, with actions-we have to beneficially utilize our resources, and water of varying quality in each one and differing xithin there's nothing worse than for us to develop our civilization the aquifer itself, how do you devise an aquifer water or particular urban area and then find out that we're out of quality standard? That's the problem in Louisiana. water. What do we do now? We truck it in from 150 miles Richard Bartelt, U.S. EPA, Region V, Chicago, IL: away. I think that the State should have the flexibility to If I knew how to protect those aquifers, I probably implement management alternatives if it wants to. If it wouldn't be working for the Environmental Protection decides to mine ground water, well it's their business, Agency, I'd be working for one of the States. We are not but the point of the matter is that a large number of the involved in ground-water quality standards right now, and States don't have the flexibility to implement management I have no idea how you'd handle the situation. When I alternatives if they want to. So I think that as a total said States did or did not have ground-water quality resource, you have to hit both the quality and the standards, I didn't mean to infer that I was suggesting that quantity aspects in your protection programs. They go they go out and develop them, I just wanted to state this hand in hand. was my interpretation of the progressive step that is being Ray Kazmann: Who is going to decide whether used by approximately 40 percent of the States in the U.S. water shall be mined or not? In the final analysis, the people I'm not trying to cast an aspersion on a State that doesn't that own the land are trying to make a living and need the have it. water, if they mine it, it's better used mined than left Ray Kazmann: It all depends on the hydrogeology. there protected against something else. I don't know what. Mr. Dawson, I have a couple of questions for you. Why do It's like saying we don't need the petroleum in the ground you feel you have to control the quantity of water being and the coal in the ground because of the limited stock and taken out of the ground as well as the quality? Why do you we're going to run out. What are you protecting when you expand this method of protection? You're protecting the protect petroleum in the spaces? ground water from whom? James Dawson: Well, I've never fooled around with James Dawson, Virginia State Water Control Board, petroleum except to put it in my car, but I think the point Roanoke: That's agood question. I guess in a way it sort is, you seem to be thinking that I'm professing a of depends on how you look at the resource in general. I, preservationist attitude which I'm not. In preservation, a for one, hold the philosophy that we ought to use our preservationist implies no use, and I'm saying that we ought common sense. We ought to approach problems or manage to at least take a look at the resource and use it wisely. our resources. First of all, we're in a finite world, and I 109 The 208 Planning Approach to Ground-Water Protection -A Program Overview' by Marna Hurdb ABSTRACT As Director of the Environmental Protection Ground-water protection is one of the water quality Agency's national Water Quality Management management priorities that Section 208 planning is program, I welcome this opportunity to address such addressing. Examples are derived from the experiences of rcgie rudwtreprscnenn h selected 208 planning agencies, among them Nassau- rcgie rudwtreprscnenn h Suffolk Regional Planning Board (NY), Old Colony 208 planning approach to ground-water protection. Planning Council (MA), and Ventura Regional County While I am relatively new to EPA, having assumed Sanitation District (CA). These agencies have used 208 my current responsibilities in January, I am not new funds to identify problems such as salt-water intrusion to water quality management. Prior to my arrival in and contamination from storm runoff. Through ground- Washington, I was on the front lines, so to speak, in water studies, each assessed the extent of the problemsthbalefrcansfcendgodwtr, and used their analysis to produce protection and controlthbalefrcansfcendgodwtr, recommendations. having served as Director of the New Castle County, Section 208 requires that designated State and area- Delaware 208 Agency. From those perspectives, I wide agencies plan for ongoing water quality management will tell you straight out that it is my philosophy to meet the 1983 goal of restoring and maintaining the that the achievement of the Clean Water Act chemical, physical, and biological integrity of the Nation's objective "to restore and maintain the chemical, water. The Section, which originated with the Federal pyiaadbooia nert fteNto' Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, contains the only pyiaadbooia nert fteNto' extant provision for nonpoint source pollution control. waters" requires the conjunctive management of Opportunities for integration of 208 with other Clean both surface and ground waters. There exists a Water Act programs as well as with programs established compelling case for the significant involvement of under the Safe Drinking Water Act and the Resource 208 agencies in the planning and management of Conservation and Recovery Act are now being explored gon- ae rtcin nedt aeta as a means of increasing water quality management gon-ae rtcin nedt aeta efficiency and quality. case here. PROGRAM OVERVIEW I feel in somewhat of a paradoxical position, aPresented at The Fourth National Ground Water however, speaking to you as a Federal off icial on Quality Symposium, Minneapolis, Minnesota, September the subject of ground-water protection. There exists 20-22, 1978.noFdrlsauedvtdslltogud-tr bDirector, Water Planning Division, U.S. Environmental cnesno Federal progamtxcusiel devoted sll ogon-ae Protection Agency, Office of Water and Waste Management, cnenn eea rga xlsvl eoe WH-5 54, 401-M St., S.W., Washington, D.C. 20460. to problems unique to the ground waters and no national ground-water policy (although we at EPA 110 are, through an intermedia effort, attempting to I am aware of the arguments, upon the passage develop a ground-water policy statement). Rather, of P.L. 92-500, concerning a usurpation by the there exists fragmented authorities whose Federal government 'of what were historically State implementing responsibilities are divided among and local prerogatives. Whatever the merit of those various Environmental Protection Agency water, discussions, I believe it worthwhile to note that and water-related, programs. the Water Quality Management program is another Currently, various sections of six Federal example of our Nation's experiment in Federalism. statutes directly impact ground-water concerns. This Federally initiated program was conceived to These laws are: the Clean Water Act (CWA), be State and locally operated. As such, it was the Safe Drinking Water Act (SDWA), the Resource intended to be reflective of the regional nature of Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA), the the water pollution problem, the tendency on the Toxic Substances Control ACT (TSCA), the part of most Americans to want to solve their National Environmental Protection Act (NEPA) problems locally and to provide opportunities for and the Federal Insecticide, Fungicide and innovation within the system. Clearly, local Rodenticide Act (FIFRA). As my colleague, Vic engineers and planners have a better understanding Kimm, has already given you an overview of the of their own water quality problems and priorities relationship between these statutes and ground and the ability of their communities to address water, I won't be repetitive. I will say, however, them than do Federal engineers and planners. As that all of the necessary authorities appropriate the initial Environmental Protection Agency role to the Federal role in ground-water protection are was to set up the program and to develop its probably contained within various sections of guidance and regulations, I can say without these laws. The challenge is ours to coordinate reservation that the Water Quality Management their implementing programs in such a way that program exemplified the American Partnership. effective ground-water quality management But it does more than bring governments occurs. That task is complicated somewhat by together in a sharing process. It also brings to one State ground-water allocation laws which, in most place key elements of the Clean Water Act so that cases, allow landowners the right to withdraw those governments might more efficiently achieve extensive amounts of ground water while imposing the Act's goals and requirements. Section 208 few limitations. State law relating directly to provides that water quality management plans ground-water quality is virtually nonexistent. regulate within their jurisdictions, point source The primary responsibility of the Water discharges, including publicly owned treatment Quality Management program, under Sections facilities. In addition to point source controls, it 106 and 208 of the Clean Water Act is to is important to note that Section 208 contains integrate the water pollution control efforts of the only Clean Water Act requirement for the Federal, State and local governments in order nonpoint source control (including agricultural, to achieve the 1983 "goal of water quality which silvicultural and mining practices). Section 208 provides for the protection and propagation also requires that plans are to include processes to of fish, shellfish and wildlife and recreation in and identify and control saline intrusion, residual wastes on the water .... "It provides a State and local and the disposal of pollutants on land or in government with a mechanism to develop and subsurface excavations to protect surface and enforce controls for point and nonpoint source and ground-water quality. ground-water pollution. The structure of the Water Quality Manage- The program is important in other respects. It ment program, then, lends itself well to the protec- is intended to assist State and local governments in tion of our ground waters. State and local govern- the development of institutional capacities-to ments are primarily responsible for developing create or strengthen their substantive abilities in solutions to their water quality problems and all this field. It is also a mechanism whereby Clean Water Act and other water, or water- economic, fiscal, social and political factors related programs, can be applied in concert affecting water pollution control can be integrated through this mechanism. All areawide impacts upon into State and areawide plans. 208 agencies ground water including nonpoint sources, landfills may also be the focal point for the education of and withdrawals can be identified and plans for their local elected officials, operating agency personnel control developed. Likewise, ground-water impacts and the interested public concerning local or upon receiving streams due to withdrawal or regional problems and recommended solutions. contamination of the aquifer can be considered. 111 Ultimately, a plan will be developed which will water intrusion may stabilize and possibly reverse. have considered virtually every alternative for 208 planning is doing its job; problems are being the improvement and protection of water quality identified; alternatives examined and solutions on a comprehensive, intermedia basis. proposed. I am referring here to the broadest variety of programs. Because 208 agencies will have developed OVERVIEW OF THE PROBLEM areawide water quality expertise, I can envision There exist four primary sources of ground- a role for them to play in the sole source aquifer water pollution: saline intrusion associated with designation and management process and in the ground-water pumping; the movement into ground regulation of pits, ponds and lagoons. There is water of bacteria, nutrients, salt, toxics and other also a role for them in the siting and regulation of pollutants from agricultural runoff, landfills and local landfills, as well as the more traditional role septage fields; the percolation of bacteriological of siting and regulating the construction of waste and chemical contaminants into and between treatment facilities. aquifers caused by improperly installed wells, or I would like to mention just a few examples of by abandoned wells not properly plugged; and the those 208 agencies which have been addressing movement of contaminants between interconnected ground-water problems. Among them is my old ground- and surface-water bodies. agency at New Castle County, Delaware. Its As you know, due to the extremely slow planners have examined the state of septic system movement of ground water within an aquifer and usage in the planning area. They have found to subsurface geological discontinuities, pollutants deleterious water quality effects caused by introduced into an aquifer at one location will suburban septic systems. Costly relief projects usually constitute a localized or, perhaps, a are necessitated by these failures and their impact regional problem. Since ground waters lack any is expected to increase as septic tank popularity significant assimilative capacity such pollutants continues to rise because they represent a least cost will likely remain in the aquifer as we have alternative to sewering. The New Castle 208 has discovered no cost-effective way to remedy the recommended that the County take action, which contamination. Six factors, all local or regional at a minimum, might include more stringent in nature, determine the extent of ground-water regulations or more strict enforcement to control pollution. Four of them, soil, geology, climate the problem. and hydrology exist in nature and are beyond The Nassau-Suffolk Regional Planning Board man's capacity to control, although they may be and the Old Colony Planning Council in modified. The other two factors, land use and Massachusetts have also been concerned about growth patterns are subject to control by man septics. Both Nassau-Suffolk and Old Colony through planning and management utilizing planners have emphasized good septic system techniques from zoning ordinances to Best management and nonstructural solutions. Management Practices (BMP's). Nassau-Suffolk has also addressed the problem of State ground-water law must also be nitrates which have been leaching into the ground understood in order to define further the ground- water from indiscriminate lawn fertilization. That water protection problem and to place the Federal agency has also cited storm-water runoff as a role in its proper perspective. greater threat to ground-water pollution than is The conclusion to be drawn from any study domestic sewage. As solutions to the problem, of State ground-water law is that water quality Nassau-Suffolk planners have proposed street protection is not a significant factor in making sweeping programs, recharge basin modifications g round-water allocation decisions. With regard to and zoning changes. percolating waters upon which most State ground- Salt-water intrusion has been addressed by a water law is based, there exist five basic categories number of 208 agencies including the Ventura of law in use among the various States. County Regional Sanitation District in California. The absolute ownership rule, reasonable use The Ventura 208 has recommended that a rule, 'and restatement rule fail to address the issue moratorium be declared on building wells into the of depletion of a ground-water reservoir. Under upper, intruded aquifer. Wells would be permitted the absolute ownership rule a landowner may into the lower zone. An intermediate strategy is withdraw ground water without regard to either to modify the pumping patterns so that pumnpage the impact on neighboring landowners or the from the upper zones will be reduced, and salt- depletion of the ground-water reservoir. Under the 112 reasonable use rule a landowner's right to with- beneath the land surface. There are over 150,000 draw ground water will be restricted only if it is land disposal sites in the Nation. Contaminants wasteful, is located on distant or nonoverlying found in the ground water beneath these sites lands, or both. Otherwise, a landowner may cover the entire range of physical, inorganic and withdraw ground water without regard to ground- organic chemical, bacteriological and radioactive water reservoir depletions. The restatement rule parameters. Waste materials are often stored or makes landowners liable for their unreasonable deposited on land surfaces whereby percolation of interference with other ground-water uses, but rain through the material will carry certain of its deliberately leaves the issue of ground-water constituents downward modifying the natural reservoir depletions for legislative resolution. quality of the underlying aquifers. The correlative rights doctrine addresses Ground-water contamination is also caused depletion of ground-water reservoirs in theory by by the discharge from on-site disposal systems prorating the "safe yield" of an aquifer among (septics) of water containing dissolved and other ground-water users. constituents which eventually reach the water table. Approaches for dealing with ground-water The threat of pollution becomes more serious if depletions vary under prior appropriation. The the system is not regularly pumped. The most basic principle that a junior appropriator must stop critical factors influencing ground-water contamina- using water when his withdrawals conflict with tion on a local and regional basis, however, are those of senior appropriators provides one method the density of on-lot disposal facilities, the for resolving disputes among ground-water users, permeability of the ground and the depth to water. but does not prevent the depletion of ground-water Improperly constructed wells are also a cause reservoirs. In some appropriative States the amounts of ground-water degradation. If they do not of ground water withdrawn may be reduced in contain a surface seal, or if the seal leaks, poor critical ground-water areas. This is essentially a quality surface water may enter subsurface waters. modification of the correlative rights doctrine To avoid contamination, proper well design must with an administrative determination of the consider the type of aquifers penetrated, the allowable level of ground-water withdrawals. quality of waters in each and the relative water or Some sources of ground-water pollution are pressure levels existing. Poor quality aquifers must directly related to ground-water allocation be sealed off to prevent interaquifer exchange. policies. Saline intrusion often occurs in coastal areas where ground-water withdrawals result in WATER QUALITY MANAGEMENT ground-water levels lower than salt-water levels, PROGRAM DIRECTION allowing the intrusion of salt water into the aquifer. Ground-water problems are generally local In the West, use of ground water for irrigation may or regional in nature. State law historically has also cause ground-water pollution. Excessive placed few restrictions on withdrawals from ground-water use may result in the leaching into underground reservoirs, and therefore, indirectly the aquifer of agricultural chemicals including foster ground-water pollution. Ground-water nitrates from fertilizer and organic decomposition, protection through regulation is best accomplished herbicides and pesticides. by the States or by regional entities who know Ground-water allocation policies also affect best what community needs are and will be, who surface waters. Where excessive withdrawal know best how to balance competing demands occurs, ground-water contributions to stream flow upon capital and operating budgets and who know decline, inducing aquifer recharge from stream flow. best how to operate within their unique ground- Eventually, stream flow is reduced, reducing the water legal systems. surface body's assimilative capacity and its ability But what of the Federal role? The appropriate to sustain fish and wildlife. In some situations, ground-water protection role for the Environmental the stream may dry up. Protection Agency is to develop programs which To cover adequately the major causes of will allow the Agency to utilize its resources to ground-water pollution, I would like to discuss help States and local governments solve their own briefly the relationship of landfills, septage fields problems. The Agency should provide technical and wells to ground-water contamination. and financialassistance to State governments and Innumerable waste materials and natural and areawide agencies which implement the relevant man-made products with the potential to pollute our programs. Evaluation of State or areawide programs ground waters are stored or disposed of on or for progress achieved and substantive quality is 113 also a necessary Federal function. Administrator, to determine their own needs But I do not see, given the facts, a direct, and priorities. Programmatic problems, perhaps overarching, Federal role. It is simply not the right institutional, resource deficient or legal in nature level at which to address the problems of ground- will be identified and prioritized as well. The water protection. States will also consider the broad panoply of While there exist several separate and distinct programs and funding sources, both Federal and EPA ground-water protection programs, including State, which might be brought to bear to resolve the Underground Injection and Sole Source their priority problems. They will be limited only Aquifer Programs under the Safe Drinking Water by EPA's own national goals, eligibility require- Act and the RCRA land disposal program, among ments and most of all, by their own creativity in others, I believe that the Water Quality Management determining their approach to getting the job done. program will prove to be the invaluable Federal Their focus is upon problem resolution, not upon mechanism in the prevention of ground-water programs. pollution. The Agreement will serve as a management As we have seen, the Water Quality Manage- tool for both the States and the Federal govern- ment program brings together all levels of govern- ment. It represents a State commitment to accom- ment and all relevant point and nonpoint sources plish its own identified and prioritized outputs in and ground-water quality programs. Available the coming year. It includes a detailed, integrated, resources with which to plan and implement intermedia workplan (which by itself serves to abatement and prevention programs, whether for reduce the paperwork burden). By identifying all ground or surface waters, can be brought to bear State and Federal sources of funding in advance, through the water quality management process. the States and EPA Regions can better determine State and local experts, assisted by Federal funds whether sufficient funds are available for obligation, and technical know-how, will develop plans to whether they may be used for the purpose intended, solve their own ground-water problems. It is likely or whether alternatives to proposals exist. that integrated into their recommendations will be The Agreement, then, sets a baseline for State regional socioeconomic, demographic and and Federal evaluation efforts with which we can political considerations. more accurately measure success and pinpoint As the Water Quality Management program has accountability. developed over the years, it has acquired a wealth The State/EPA Agreement applies to ground of experience concerning water quality control. water as well as it does to any other resource From the initial emphasis on getting the program problem. The separate States each have their going and developing guidance, we have had an own water quality problems. Some have ground- opportunity to analyze where we have been and water problems and others do not. Of those where we want to go. We have acquired a better that do, some are more severe than others, and understanding of water quality problems as they the causes of the contamination may differ. relate to water quality management. We have Each of these categories may be addressed in the assessed our successes and failures, our strengths Agreement. and weaknesses and the proper role of the Federal Each State having a ground-water problem is government in water quality management. We have free to assign a priority to that problem in determined that our process isunique and can relation to its other water quality management accommodate most every program impacting needs. We can assume that such problems will be water quality. And, as we are on the verge of assigned high, middle or low significance depending receiving the initial round of 208 plans, we have upon the State's own ranking. The State will also had to think about their implementation. identify the sources of funding which may be The State/EPA Agreement is the major tool applied to problem resolution. To solve a ground- with which we have decided to reorient our water problem a State may use funds from the Program. Next year this mechanism integrates Clean Water Act under the Program Grant (106), water quality planning, management, implementa- Construction Grants (201) and the Water Quality tion and evaluation programs. In the future all Management (208) sections. Relevant sections of water programs and other EPA efforts will be the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act may included. also be utilized. Its major feature is that it permits the States, Programs too, will be State designed. If a land in consultation with the EPA Regional disposal site, for example, is polluting an underlying 114 aquifer, a program to remedy the problem can be to speak to you today. In closing I will pledge the fashioned and implemented through the Agreement. efforts of the Water Quality Management Team of An areawide agency may be identified to complete EPA to do our share in solving the ground-water planning and a management agency may be protection problems of this country. I firmly believe designated, upon appropriate State and local that with the 208 program and other EPA programs approvals, to implement the plans. In this case, melded together through the State/EPA Agreement, sections 106 and 208 of the Clean Water Act, States and local governments will have the Federal section 1424, Sole Source Aquifers, of the Safe tools to solve their existing and potential ground- Drinking Water Act and the 3000 series, Hazardous water problems. Wastes, of the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act are, at a minimum, applicable to the* * * * development of a comprehensive solution to the problem. Merna Hurd, P.E., is Director, Water Planning Division, The State/EPA Agreement contains benefits Office of Water Planning and Standards, U.S. EPA. Educa- for the States and for EPA. Its major advantage is tion. University of Nebraska - B.S., 1964; M.S., 1969. that he Sttes wll b ableto brng maimumHurd has worked as Director, Water and Sewer Management that te Stats wil be abe to ring mximumOffice, and Director of 208 Program Administration, and resources together to solve their priority problems Senior Planner, New Castle County, Delaware; and as a in a systematic manner. Consulting Engineer with Harold Hoskins & Associates, I would like to thank you for this opportunity Inc., Lincoln, Nebraska. The 208 Planning Approach to Ground-Water Protection - A Foot in the Door'a by Donna Waiiaceb ABST RACT INTRODUCTION The benefits of employing the 208 planning approach Ground-water management planning becomes in the protection of surface water or ground water are more significant each year as the disposal of wastes twofold-one, involvement of the public early in the planning is directed away from rivers and streams and toward process and two, determination of solutions that are t e ln .I nefr opoiecenrsras implementable. With increased public awareness precipitated thladInnefotoprvecenrsems by the required involvement in Water Quality Management regulations require removal of most pollutants Planning (WQMP), the ensuing public interest will ultimately before discharge to surface water. These force ground-water issues which have been neglected for contaminants are later placed in sanitary landfills many years. The preparation of a "5-Year Strategy" in in the form of sludge or liquid wastes. Both each State coupled with USEPA's new emphasis on aquifer hazardous/toxic and nontoxic residual wastes from protection as a priority issue will provide the mechanisms for funding ground-water planning under 208 programs. industries find their way to land disposal as well as As the cry for ground-water management planning is those leftover materials from man's activities in adopted by the public as well as technicians, emphasis will general. As pollutants move toward the land, the shift and programs will develop. in addition, planning potential for ground-water pollution increases, and programs under 208 are usually regional in nature ingrudwtrpoeinbcmsmreinfca. contrast with the ground-water studies in recent years U tlrcnyground-water prtetinagecmentor plannifcnt. which have been site-specific, directed toward the identi- Utlrcnlgon-ae aaeetpann fication and alleviation of local problems. Since the has been generally overlooked, but a new planning management approach requires that the evaluation of approach has begun to offer some hope in terms of available alternatives include those mechanisms necessary ground-water planning issues. The 208 planning to implement the recommendations, viable alternatives approach is a combination of some old programs without either management agencies o~r financial ta rdcd rwr opoue ae ult considerations will not be acceptable. Therefore, the strength manatgrdceo ementopduewarqalt of the WQMP approach to ground-water protection lies in maaeetplans, and the addition of a very new those concepts that make planning under 208 a new breed concept in Federal planning programs designed to of governmental program. put the plans formulated under the 208 program into practice. The general opinion at both the State a Presented ~~~~~~~and Federal level is that the 208 approach has a a~eetdat The Fourth National Ground Water better chance of being functional than past planning Quality Symposium, Minneapolis, Minnesota, September programs. If this is found to be true and if ground- 20-22, 1978. water quality management planning can be drawn b208 Program Coordinator, Planning and Standards under this umbrella, States may finally find the Section, Illinois Environmental Protection Agency, 2200 Churchill Rd., Springfield, IL 62706. mechanism for the long-awaited planning needed to protect ground-water resources. 116 THE GROUND-WATER PLANNING appeared to be common with both the Illinois PROGRAM IN ILLINOIS EPA and the USEPA. Ground-water protection in Illinois is similar Two major obstacles stood in the path of to that in many States, significantly behind a few ground-water planning initiation in Illinois. First, progressive States, and somewhat ahead of a few the three designated areas in Illinois where specific seriously lagging States. In general, when ground- problems had been identified were funded early. water pollution problems are discovered, detailed This left the statewide agency, IEPA, significantly site-specific studies are designed, data collected underfunded and programs were severely restricted and evaluated, causes identified, solutions as noted earlier. In designated areas where funding determined, and, when necessary, enforcement cases was more realistic, the areas covered were so small, prepared. This type of activity could be more 19 of 102 counties, that results of studies com- accurately termed "remedial action." The protection pleted within them were not representative of portion of the ground-water activity in Illinois the State as a whole. Therefore, localized studies centers on the Illinois regulation that no source may were not likely to result in statewide policy cause or contribute to causing a water quality decisions. violation. Since ground water continues to be Second, Illinois has an extremely compre- considered waters of the State, ground-water hensive historical ground-water quality data base pollution is also covered under this regulation. scattered among half a dozen State agencies. The improvement or maintenance of water However, only one of these agencies has the data quality resulting from regulation is, however, readily available on a computer. No agency engages dependent upon the degree of enforcement in ground-water management planning as a major applied. In ground-water pollution, as in that of portion of its activities. This requires that Illinois surface-water quality, only the major cases of begin ground-water efforts at the data pollution justify the time required to prepare compilation phase. Data evaluation efforts appear legal action and to provide the data necessary to productive and even data collection efforts seem prove that pollution can be attributed to a single reasonable, but there is little marketable in data source. Therefore, in reality, water pollution, both compilation efforts. Program managers understood surface and ground, is held to a minimum level that neither the public nor USEPA can visualize as much as possible within the resources of the data compilation as providing early outputs. existing programs. Although this approach Therefore, once the initial 208 program was defined provides a reasonable degree of protection in terms with minimal ground-water emphasis, it became of control, there is not a high degree of planning even more difficult to secure funding. for the management of future ground-water quality and quantity. THE 208 PLANNING APPROACH Illinois can rightfully claim to have a Although in most States surface-water quality reasonably successful statewide 208 Water Quality management planning has been addressed for five Management Planning Program, although it has to ten years, Federal and State programs have not not been advanced in terms of ground-water been totally successful. Past approaches to planning planning. Due to the levels of Federal funding for surface-water protection have resulted in data available for statewide planning, certain decisions collection, evaluation, and the preparation of were made early in the program to limit the plans that generally were not implemented. This pollution sources to be studied to those most is where the 208 approach differs from past likely to result in implementation. This planning programs. The 208 concept addresses narrowed the scope of the program but aided in three new requirements for plans prepared with maintaining realistic objectives that allowed Federal funding. (1) Plans must have continual planning to progress beyond the problem assessment public involvement, (2) alternatives must include phases in those areas under study. Ground-water the definition of mechanisms for implementation pollution problems wlere not seen as belonging and (3) plans must be updated annually to reflect in the category likely to yield solutions. In fact, the results of each year's progress. This suggests the history of ground-water management planning that the public must have a hand in determining in Illinois suggests a small commitment to address which solutions should be selected since funding ground-water planning that managed to get smaller. for implementing alternatives is not provided in More importantly, in terms of the initiation of the 208 program. In addition, the solutions are ground-water planning, the lack of commitment to be implemented and not simply discussed and 117 shelved, and changes in solutions may occur as a statewide 208 planning. The bulk of the early result of additional studies. To ascertain that Federal funding for 208 planning was provided implementation strategies be carried out, much to areas where specific sources of pollution could be of the Federal funding for other State pollution identified and planning was initiated early to address programs has been tied to the success of 208. those identified sources. With funding levels low, Therefore, there is reasonably strong Federal State program administrators were required to support for successful State 208 programs- identify those issues most significant and familiar; addressing surface-water pollution. and, with implementation a major issue in 208, The mechanisms built into the design of priority was given to those sources of pollution 208 planning which aid surface-water planning will most likely to provide implementable solutions. aid in the establishment of direction of 208 studies Generally ground-water pollution did not qualify for ground-water quality as well. Under the 208 as either significant or familiar. A few token studies approach, nonpoint sources are addressed in the were initiated but, as ground-water technicians following general manner: were quick to realize, funding levels were far too low to provide definitive results. 1. Problem assessments are designed and Once the initial 208 plans have been completed performed to determine the relative contribution of nationwide, a more favorable climate should exist each source and priorities are established. in terms of ground-water studies. Most States will 2. Alternatives are defined for control of have found that the control of point sources has significant pollution sources~ and evaluated in terms been defined but that the contribution of these of the ability to implement each alternative. sources to surface-water quality is relatively low compared to that of nonpoint sources. In addition, 3. Recommendations of alternatives that best the most significant nonpoint sources in each State fit the needs are determined from an examination will have been addressed and the level of contribu- of costs versus benefits. tion defined. In only a few States, ground water 4. Implementation strategies for the itself was identified as a major nonpoint source. recommended alternatives are determined and put Program administrators and planners will begin to into practice. identify the degree of control that will be achieved as a result of implementing these initial 208 plans 5. Evaluations of the effectiveness of the so that the scope of future planning programs can alternatives are conducted after implementation has be redirected. Since 208 has required elaborate occurred. public participation programs from its inception, 6. New recommendations are made based on this direction for the future planning programs will new information or if old recommendations are have to come, in part, from the people. If planners shown to be ineffective. are to be successful in determining the relative contributions of nonpoint sources so that Although site-specific studies and evaluations pollution problems may be controlled, planners are allowable and in some cases necessary, the 208 will also influence the direction of the program. planning approach requires that nonpoint problems be addressed on a statewide basis. Therefore, if THE FUTURE OF 208 PLANNING 208 planning operates properly, controls will not While future 208 programs are being designed be placed on one source of ground-water pollution at the State level, some significant activities have (wastes placed in sanitary landfills) while ignoring occurred at the Federal level which will impact the others (improper installation of ground-water States' decisions. Since the 1977 Clean Water Act monitoring wells). In most cases, these controls called for the examination of all State water quality will also be applied in a similar manner on a management programs in terms of overlap or gaps, statewide basis. US EPA has defined an expanded list of priority But until recently, 208 has been of little value areas for 208 funding. This list includes, among in producing any direction for ground-water other point and nonpoint sources, salt-water planning in other States as well as Illinois. Initial intrusion and aquifer protection. The USEPA 208 plans in most States barely address ground rationale is that (1) 208 has proven itself to be a water, if at all. Federal funding for the States' viable program for the solution of water pollution portion of 208 planning has been at a minimum problems and (2) funding for planning is not due to the late recognition of the necessity of presently available under related Federal programs 118 (Safe Drinking Water Act, Resource Conservation responsible for completing the work, how much it and Recovery Act, etc.). Thus, USEPA has laid will cost, and when each study will be initiated. the groundwork for including planning for ground- The first "5-Year Strategy" for each State is to be water protection in future 208 planning programs. submitted to USEPA in September. Once this It must be understood that recognition of document is approved, some form of interagency ground-water issues by water quality planners is coordination will be required. Therefore, develop- only an initial step. Once their attention has ment of planning for ground-water protection will turned to ground water, the second major issue require the coordination of all agencies involved in of overlapping authority among State agencies can ground-water studies. be addressed. Although surface-water quality authority is relatively fragmented, responsibility THE FUTURE OF 208 GROUND-WATER for ground-water quality and quantity appears to PLANNING IN ILLINOIS be even more so. Control of the various pollution The outlook for ground-water planning began sources rests with one group of State authorities to improve late in 1977 when two proposals were while the quality and relative availability of the submitted to USEPA in request of supplemental ground water itself rests with a second group. FY'77 funding. The first would have expanded the With little funding directly tied to ground-water ground-water studies to a minimally acceptable management, efforts in most areas have been level. The second was to assess the impact of oil minimal, of necessity, and fragmented. It is field brine disposal. Although USEPA rejected obvious that a program to address all aspects of the first proposal, they did fund the second, planning for ground-water protection must be concerning oil field brine pollution. established. The importance of such a program will It appeared that Illinois EPA was beginning to not lie in which agency is actually performing the recognize the need for ground-water planning but data collection, analysis, and description of USEPA still seemed hesitant. The turning point alternatives but instead in the interrelationship of came in early 1978 when USEPA agreed that if the proposed alternatives, in the inclusion of all ground-water proposals were included in the significant sources of ground-water pollution, and requests for FY'78 funds, they would be given in the determination of the levels of protection careful consideration. True to their word, Illinois that are both technically and economically has just received $120,000 in USEPA 208 funding reasonable. to begin ground-water management planning on a Federal guidelines suggest that USEPA also statewide basis. And the situation is still improving. recognizes this need. As mentioned previously, In September, Illinois submitted to USEPA ground-water programs have been added to the list their strategy for the funding of Water Quality of sources to receive priority Federal funding; and Management Planning studies over the next five USEPA has determined that preplanning of future years. The commitment to ground water was ten directions of 208 will occur prior to the release of percent of total budget or two and a half million the remaining 208 funds. The mechanism to dollars. The initial studies were, of necessity, data establish this preplanning, called annual Water compilation efforts. Once the data compilation and Quality Management Planning (WQMP) programs, collection is completed, the following studies is the requirement that States prepare a "5-Year address problems concerning the major sources of Strategy" delineating the status of planning, the ground-water pollution. Two full years have been problems not yet solved, and the programs to be devoted to actual policy preparation and evaluation initiated to solve these problems. In terms of for ground-water management. Following are the ground water, one of the most significant require- five-year objectives for the ground-water program: ments is that this "Strategy" not be prepared solely by State program administrators. 208 calls for 1. To compile the existing data to provide a public involvement and the strategy follows suit. comprehensive data base for use in management Not only do citizens have to be allowed to react to decisions. the proposed programs but other agencies must 2. To locate and determine the contributions 2. To locate and determine the contributions describe how their activities will be related to that of significant sources of ground-water pollution. of significant sources of ground-water pollution. which is proposed. As the program progresses, the strategy must be fine-tuned and updated annually. 3. To determine the ground-water contribu- But most importantly, this strategy must actually tions to surface-water quality in those areas where describe the studies to be performed, who will be background concentrations cannot be explained in 119 terms of known point and nonpoint sources. At this point, if ground-water quality manage- 4.Tdeemnthreinlfosytman ment has not received sufficient emphasis, the Todthermiecthare aregoas flor systmsund wae.technical and social outcry will be loud. Efforts to the rechage areasfor groud water.claim excessive levels of unusual contaminants 5. To determine which areas have a high (heavy metals, for instance) to be naturally occurring potential for ground-water contamination. in ground water will immediately establish the need 6. To examine the problems associated with for more detailed ground-water evaluation. If existing and abandoned public water supply wells program managers miss this important linkage, the and onpulicwater supply wells. public, who will be expected to pay the bills for and nonpublic ~~~~~~~~other controls, will not. Therefore, the evaluation 7. To evaluate the impacts of industrialization, of initial 208 programs will force ground-water underground injection, artificial recharge, and land quality evaluations on a regional basis. disposal on ground-water quality. Obviously, all ground-water problems may not S. To project future ground-water quality be addressed if the needs of ground-water quality based on existing and proposed practices. studies and planning are not recognized on their own merit. Quite possibly, the entire ground-water 9. To develop the necessary State policy, question could result in the definition of the contri- regulations, and/or legislation to control ground- bution of ground water to surface-water quality water degradation. and little else. Should this occur or appear likely to occur, the public may well express the opinion THE OUTLOOK FOR GROUND-WATER that such conclusions are a whitewash and more PROGRAMS IN OTHER STATES careful examination is not only warranted but The initial directions that ground-water required. management planning will take should be fairly Past experience with 208 planning has shown well defined by late 1978, considering the that the public, especially special interest and schedules established by USEPA. It is the fine- environmental groups, are remarkably well informed tuning that will occur after this time that will more and certainly vocal. This group, the informed public, significantly influence the ground-water planning in is unlikely to be satisfied with the basic description the nation. Initial strategies will probably address of ground-water quality as naturally occurring. So ground water in terms of some planning that, if program manage'rs fail to move into mean- studies identified, but development of the ingful ground-water management planning programs, alternatives required for protection of ground water the public will insist on evidence that polluted will only come as a result of the problem assess- ground-water quality should be claimed as natural. ments once they have been completed. Although If ground-water pollution is shown to be caused by past experience with surface-water planning will man and his activities, solutions will have to be aid in the development of ground-water planning, forthcoming. Since 208 cannot avoid public input, control programs require time for development, it cannot totally ignore public advice or comment. and implementation is slow. A possible scenario Therefore, regardless of early or late recognition, for minimal ground-water planning follows. the results will ultimately be unavoidable and "Point and significant nonpoint sources of ground-water planning will be initiated. surface pollution will be identified and The real question facing the ground-water reasonable controls determined. The resultant planning proponents is how this process can be water quality will be evaluated, often by insured or better yet, hurried. It seems apparent means of complicated water quality that NWWA has recognized the positive aspects of modeling. This water quality to be expected, the 208 planning approach since this topic was following implementation of previously included in a program addressing significant ground- identified controls, will then be evaluated as water issues. It would also seem that those who to the relative contributions that can be attended the Symposium see a need for ground- attributed to other nonpoint sources and those water planning. Obviously, there is no cookbook that can be claimed as naturally occurring and remedy for lagging ground-water efforts but a therefore not controllable. That contribution number of opportunities are now available to those claimed as natural background will be described believing in both the need for and value of 208 as the result of geologic conditions including planning. the ground-water contribution." First, as a citizen, planner, or technician, insist 120 on a copy of your State's "5-Year Strategy." Check planning. Do not smile knowingly when ground- carefully for the direction of ground-water planning water quality is generally claimed as a "given" or as envisioned by program managers. One of the worse-natural. Forget apathy, get involved, be heard! significant aspects of strategy development is the requirement for an annual revision; therefore, the* * * * lack of a well defined program for ground-water planning is not irreparable if recognized. Donna Wallace is the 208 Program Coordinator/for Scnget involved in the 208 planning Illinois' Water Quality Management Planning Program and is Second, ~~~~~~~~~~~also responsible/for the ground-water portion of/the technical program. States are required to have elaborate studies being performed under this program. Donna holds public participation programs with weight on the an M.S. in Geology/from Iowa State University at Ames participation of local elected officials. Remember and has taken post-graduate studies in both environmental local mayors and councilmen may not understand engineering and public administration. During her five years the impacts of ground water in their areas. Visit of/employment with Illinois EPA, she has been responsible them and ex plain your concerns. for the implementation of/the State's ground-water monitoring program for sanitary landfill sites and Third, and most important, share your interest coordinated the preparation of the State's Basin Plans, the and abilities with those involved in doing the actual predecessor of/208 planning. 121 The 208 Planning Approach to Ground-Water Protection - What Is Wrong and What Can Be Done About It? a by Kenneth D. Schmidtb ABSTRACT Successful 208 programs in terms of ground water Generally, the 208 planning approach is deficient in have been enacted when ground-water professionals have a number of ways. Its origin lies in Public Law 92-5 00, had major roles. Changes are necessary in the academic which focuses on protection of surface water and special training of ground-water geologists and hydrologists. uses of water for fish, wildlife, and recreation. Little The public must be educated concerning the long-term ground water is used for these purposes. Nonpoint sources consequences of ground-water pollution. Lastly, ground- have not been defined in terms that have hydrogeologic water professionals must assume the leadership in significance. Local and State regulatory agencies have ground-water protection. often been unsuccessful in controlling ground-water pollution, yet the 208 approach tends to disregard the There are numerous deficiencies in the 208 reasons for this situation. The reasons for ground-waterplnigarocatcurywthescto pollution in an area must be understood beforeplnigarocatcurywthescto meaningful control measures can be enacted. These ground water. Many of these deficiencies are include both technical and institutional problems. common to other water pollution control Planners are placed in the forefront of many 208 approaches at the Federal and State level. It is programs at the local level and often their backgrounds the author's objective to discuss what is wrong with are inadequate in ground water. There is a great lack the 208 planning approach in terms of ground-water of ground-water professionals in regulatory agencies involved, particularly in the Southwest. This deficiency quality protection. In addition, remedial measures is paramount at high levels and in many regional offices are proposed that could correct some of the of EPA. There are no provisions in the approach to insure deficiencies in the present approach. that qualified ground-water geologists or hydrologists One of the major problems with the 208 will be involved. Academic training in ground water isaprchiobouinedngSton1 f presently oriented toward ground-water development andaprchiobouinedngSton11f not pollution. Lastly, public participation is greatly Public Law 92-500. Although the objective of the limited by the general lack of knowledge regarding ground act is "to restore and maintain the chemical, water and its pollution. physical, and biological integrity of the Nation's waters," a number of specific goals and policies a Peetdwere stated that effectively ignore ground water. Peetdat The Fourth National Ground Water Navigable water, waters of the contiguous zone, Quality Symposium, Minneapolis, Minnesota, September and the oceans were all given special attention. 20-22, 1978. bGround-Water Quality Consultant, 1111 Fulton Mall, Also, special uses of water were to be protected, Suite 306, Fresno, CA 93721. namely fish, shellfish, wildlife, and recreation. On the other hand, the major uses of ground water 122/ in the U.S. are for irrigation, public supply, required for pollutants to travel from the land domestic, industrial, and mining purposes. It is surface to the water table. This travel time is my opinion that these are far more important commonly decades or even centuries in arid areas. than the special uses designated for protection in Additional time is required for pollutants to travel Public Law 92-500, as only an insignificant from near the water table to the producing zone amount of ground water is used for the special of a well and thence to the well. Ground-water uses. pollution ordinarily cannot be seen even when it A careful review of Public Law 92-5 00 clearly occurs. The combination of these and other indicates an overwhelming emphasis on surface- factors renders ground-water pollution a much water quality. This emphasis has hopefully resulted, different entity than surface-water pollution, in some improvement in surface-water quality since particularly in the western U.S. Public Law 1972; however, much of this improvement has 92-500 fails to recognize this difference and its occurred at the direct expense of ground-water importance for protection of ground-water quality. quality. The number of potential sources of ground-water pollution was greatly increased DEFINITION OF SOURCES through implementation of portions of Public Law In terms of surface water, a point source may 92-500 and air pollution regulations. Examples be rather obvious-namely, a waste discharge from include disposal of sludge and effluent from new a pipeline or other discrete structure. The term and expanded sewage treatment plants, and on-site "nronpoint source" has been used for diffuse disposal of wastes formerly disposed indiscrim- sources of pollution. An example is storm runoff inantly to sewers. The present emphasis on land into streams, whereby pollutants can be introduced disposal or treatment will undoubtedly create over a great distance and not just at one point. The numerous new potential sources of ground- terms "point and nonpoint sources" as used in water pollution. Public Law 92-500 have limited significance in Despite the fact that the Safe Drinking Water terms of ground water. For example, in some 208 Act (Public Law 93-523) indicates a strong concern programs, "point source" has been used for sewage, for the quality of drinking water, there has regardless of the method of disposal of the effluent apparently been no similar concern at the Federal or sludge. Alternative disposal methods include level to protect water used for irrigation, ponds, normally dry stream channels, irrigation, industrial, and mining purposes. In the western and landfills. All other sources of pollution are U.S., much more ground water is used for these termed nonpoint sources, regardless of the type of purposes than for drinking water. waste or the method of disposal. Sources of ground-water pollution should be CONCERNS IN ARID LANDS defined in terms that have hydrogeologic signifi- Besides virtually ignoring ground water, cance. Hydrologists have customarily spoken of Public Law 92-S500 also deals primarily with recharge from point, line, and diffuse sources. humid area problems. An example is emphasis on Schmidt (1976a) proposed a similar use of this treatment of sewage and industrial wastes which terminology for sources of ground-water pollution. often were formerly dumped untreated or poorly Point sources occur over small areas, and include treated into streams, particularly in the eastern percolation ponds, landfills, and disposal wells. U.S. While sources such as sewage, industrial Line sources have the length dimension much wastes, and storm runoff may comprise the major greater than the width, and include discharge to a sources of surface-water pollution, they may be but normally dry stream channel and leaking sewers. minor sources of ground-water pollution. There are Diffuse sources occur over large areas, and include no perennial streams in much of the Southwest suburban areas on septic tanks and return flow and wastes are disposed to the land or to inter- from crop irrigation. The type of source is important mittent or ephemeral streams. The major uses of in designing monitoring programs and formulating such streams are obviously not for the special uses control measures. Since an evaluation of ground- to be protected, as specified in Public Law 92-500. water pollution starts at the source, the importance instead the major use may be for ground-water of source evaluation should not be overlooked. recharge. Curiously enough, the use may apply to Several EPA publications dealing with nonpoint the stream bed instead of the water in the stream. sources (U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, A common situation in arid lands that may 197 3 and 1976) have little direct relevance to be unusual in many humid areas is the long time ground water. 1 23 WASTE TREATMENT MANAGEMENT has nothing to do with ground water. Thirdly, Much of Public Law 92-500 deals with waste the method of treatment chosen often has a side treatment management. "Waste treatment" is effect of polluting the ground water, due to the somewhat of a strange concept to ground-water production of sludge and other factors. geologists and hydrologists. Most specific types of waste treatment have been directed toward LOCAL IMPLEMENTATION disposal of wastes to surface water, odor considera- At the local level, 208 planning has often tions, or some other concern. An example is been attempted by the planning community. In reduction of suspended solids content and bio- general, this group is deficient in both academic chemical oxygen demand for sewage. Few examples training and work experience in geology, water, of waste treatment designed specifically for ground- soils, water quality, and ground water. All of water disposal can be found in the literature, these disciplines are integral parts of a 208 program Instead, the usual procedure has been to evaluate where ground water is to be properly considered. the soil and other nonstructural factors. If these The end result in many 208 programs where there factors cannot be managed to preclude ground- has been insufficient input by ground-water water contamination, a liner is used to limit professionals has frequently been a waste of large infiltration or seepage loss. This concept is in amounts of money and several years of time. diametric opposition to classical structural Without qualified ground-water geologists and solutions. These "solutions" emphasize removing hydrologists involved, meaningful plans cannot be specific pollutants from a waste stream prior to formulated to protect the ground water. In fact, discharge. plans may be formulated which can seriously The concept of areawide waste treatment pollute the ground water. management discussed in section 208 is but one approach. An alternative approach begins with an FORMULATION OF CONTROL MEASURES evaluation of the ground-water quality. The impact The 208 approach focuses on formulation of of waste disposal is determined, and then the type control measures for nonpoint sources of pollution. and degree of waste treatment is specified, if any As opposed to surface-water pollution, ground-water is necessary. Sewering is an informative topic pollution takes a much longer time to manifest relevant to this concept. It is questionable on a itself. Only some of the present sources of ground- national scale whether sewering has improved water pollution are susceptible to immediate ground-water quality or not. Certainly new control measures. This is because little or no sources have been created, such as thousands of monitoring is available in most situations to miles of sewers that may leak. Secondly, the determine the nature and extent of the problem. concentration of wastes in small areas due to Thus only the most obvious sources offer potential regionalization of facilities, which was formerly for immediate control. Examples include disposal widely promoted as the best alternative, tends to of brines and hazardous wastes in percolation pollute ground water. The latest findings for ponds or wells, where direct pollution of the aquifer disposal of effluent by percolation suggest that may occur. In most cases artificial liners may be primary treatment is preferable to secondary necessary to prevent seepage. The majority of treatment for nitrogen removal, which is one of the nonpoint source ground-water pollution is caused major concerns. Also, chlorination of effluent may by diffuse sources. Such sources will require not be desirable if disposal is by percolation. decades of monitoring before the impact on ground Sewering in itself can adversely affect ground-water water can be determined. The 208 approach quantity in an area due to export of pumped focuses too much attention on formulating control ground water to downgradient areas. It is now measures and not enough on problem definition becoming widely known that the adverse effects and monitoring. In most cases, extensive monitor- of septic tanks were greatly exaggerated in many ing is necessary prior to development of realistic areas in order to promote sewering. These and control measures. This monitoring includes source other factors bring into focus the question of the monitoring, assessing infiltration potential, and meaning of "areawide waste treatment" in terms evaluating pollutant mobility in the vadose zone of ground water. On a national scale, many of the and aquifer. wastes that we are attempting to treat are not the A common strategy in many 208 programs is major sources of ground-water pollution. to rely on existing data, without accomplishing Secondly, the method of treatment selected often site-specific monitoring. Often this entails using 124 previous reports which were not prepared for or lack of knowledge of polluters, (2) lack of the purpose of protecting ground-water quality. knowledge and awareness of public, and (3) regula- * ~~Numerous recycled mythologies are quoted for tory agencies. In some cases polluters are unaware decades in some areas, based merely on opinion and of the impact on ground-water quality of not on actual water quality data. For example, in their operation. However, in many cases wastes * ~~the alluvial valleys of southern Arizona and parts are merely swept under the rug and into the * ~~of the San Joaquin Valley of California, it has been ground water. Limited data now available indicate * ~~frequently stated that ground-water salinity is that there has been an extreme lack of concern, increasing beneath irrigated areas. Also, it is particularly for disposal of hazardous wastes. frequently stated that overdrafting increases the Protection of ground-water quality requires a * ~~salinity of ground water. Neither of these long-range perspective by water users and potential generalities is supported by actual data. For polluters, often difficult in today's economic example, extensive chemical analyses of ground climate. water in the Salt River Valley of Arizona since The public lack of knowledge of ground water * ~~the 1920's indicate that the predominant long- is extensive throughout the nation, as attested to * ~~term trend has been a constant salinity. The by the prevalence of water witching. The meaning second most frequent long-term trend has been a of the word "hydrologist" is not understood by p ~~decreasing salinity. The most infrequent trend has many people. Presently there is little concern for * ~~been one of increasing salinity, which has occurred problems that seem decades away. As such, the * ~~only in two specific areas due to altered ground- public is susceptible to acceptance of the easy or water flow directions. Salt balance calculations have cheap short-term solution. With the public lack of been made which contain the assumption that knowledge and apathy, it is difficult for the * ~~there is no dissolution of minerals or precipitation public interest to be protected in matters of of salt in the soil-aquifer system. Substantial ground-water quality. The environmentalists and increases in salinity of ground water with time are consumer advocates have yet to enter the field of projected from such calculations. The results of ground water in most areas. Politicians have had these calculations frequently do not agree with little incentive to protect ground-water quality historic ground-water quality records. Use of when there is no pressure to do so. The long-term recycled mythologies can lead to implementation solutions are often contradictory to short-term of costly control measures for no reason. interests. In many areas, an abundance of records are An important aspect of ground-water pollution available, but may not be collected or well lies within the regulatory agencies themselves. In organized. Data collection and organization itself my experience, they are often part of the problem. may take several months or years, and must be The 208 planning approach is to go through the done before interpretation is possible. With little State and local regulatory agencies. Ground-water or no understanding of the present or historical professionals familiar with the national state of situation, there is little likelihood of meaningful ground-water pollution must ask - "What have these control measures being formulated. Natural agencies done in the past, and what are they doing factors often exert a predominant influence on now to protect ground water?" Often the answer is ground-water quality on a regional scale. The 208 little or nothing. This situation is well documented * ~~approach does not focus on distinguishing between in the excellent report on ground-water pollution natural and man-made factors that affect water by hazardous wastes (Geraghty and Miller, Inc., quality. Such a distinction is necessary if man's 1977). In many cases, regulatory agencies have activities are to be evaluated. Although natural dealt with polluters behind the scenes, away from factors may not be subject to control, information public scrutiny. As such it is difficult for the public on them can be extremely useful for future interest to be protected. Perhaps the biggest problem management of ground-water quality. is the lack of qualified ground-water professionals in local, State, and Federal regulatory agencies. This REASONS FOR GROUND-WATER is particularly true in the Southwest. Often sanitarians, POLLUTION sanitary engineers, or bivil engineers are at the fore- * ~~~~If meaningful protective measures for ground- front and their knowledge of ground water is usually water quality are to be formulated, the exact inadequate. As proven in some States, excessive reasons for ground-water pollution in an area must amounts of money coupled with extensive regulations * ~~be known. Causative factors include: (1) indifference do not insure ground-water protection. 125 HYDROLOGIC INPUT a minor consideration. The recent survey of The 208 approach was developed with little university classes in ground water on a national apparent hydrologic input. My opinion is that a basis by NWWA indicates only a few classes number of politicians and administrators and staff devoted specifically to water chemistry or of EPA throughout the country still lack adequate ground-water quality. Also, ground-water training knowledge of ground water. This is suggested by has historically focused more on the part of the numerous recent publications in which surface soil-aquifer system below the water table than that water is still given predominant attention; for above. Investigations of ground-water pollution example, the publication on nonpoint source also involve the vadose zone, particularly for guidance-hydrologic modification (U.S. Environ- diffuse sources and in arid areas. Pollution sources mental Protection Agency, 1977). On a national and the vadose zone are more important scale, there has been no mechanism developed to considerations in some situations than the aquifer enhance hydrogeologic input to regulatory itself. Also, many hydrogeologists tend to be agencies. There is no provision in the 208 approach poorly trained in chemistry. Soils chemistry, water to insure that ground-water professionals will be chemistry, and geochemistry are all important involved. Hydrologists and geologists have taken a aspects of ground-water pollution evaluations. back seat in most 208 programs to engineers, Many new ground-water professionals are being planners, lawyers, sanitarians, soils scientists, and asked to work extensively on ground-water others. The same situation is true in many other quality problems. Obviously, their academic EPA programs. training is often inadequate for this purpose. Land disposal or treatment is another area Schmidt (1976b) proposed a new approach for where there has been a lack of hydrogeologic the academic training of hydrogeologists who input. Numerous evaluations of the impact of land specialize in ground-water quality. This approach disposal of wastes have been reported in the includes specific training on pollution sources, literature by researchers with little or no training including courses in sanitary engineering, mining, in ground water (Schmidt, 1978). "Land treat- agriculture, and other fields. Ground-water quality ment" has been widely promoted and is given specialists must be well trained in water special consideration under present Federal chemistry, soils chemistry, and geochemistry. policy. In fact, qualified people are not available Newly developed classes on ground-water quality to operate the numerous proposed land treatment are necessary. Water and pollutant movement systems. Secondly, there are not enough ground- through the vadose zone must receive greater water professionals to properly monitor such attention in academic education. systems. Thirdly, little data is available from existing systems due to monitoring deficiencies. SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS Probably the only 208 programs in the The basic deficiencies of the 208 planning country where ground-water quality has been approach relative to ground water stem from the successfully considered are ones where fact that the goals and policies set forth in Public experienced ground-water professionals have Law 92-500 emphasize protection of surface assumed paramount roles, such as the Long water. Secondly, special uses are to be protected Island, New York and Phoenix, Arizona which do not coincide with the major uses of programs. Ground-water geologists and ground water. Many politicians and EPA hydrologists must be placed in the leadership in administrators and staff in decision making ground-water quality protection if meaningful positions have an inadequate understanding of results are to be expected. This includes ground-water pollution. This was true when professionals at high levels in EPA. Registration Public Law 92-500 was formulated and is still or certification in ground water is urgently true today. There is a serious lack of ground- needed. water professionals in local, State, and Federal regulatory agencies. There are no provisions to TRAINING OF HYDROGEOLOGISTS insure that qualified ground-water professionals In many respects, academic training of are involved in 208 programs. Lastly, ground- ground-water professionals has a similar orientation water professionals are often poorly trained in to that of a decade or two ago. Prime consideration ground-water quality, partly because of the past is usually given to ground-water development and emphasis on ground-water development and the aquifer testing, and water quality may receive only quantitative aspects. 126 Solutions to these problems include placement quality specialists. In Hydrology and Water Resources of more ground-water professionals in local, State, in Arizona and the Southwest. v. 6. Arizona Section, * ~~~and Federal regulatory agencies. Ground-water AWRA. ppi. 119-123. Schmidt, K. D. 1978. Impact of land treatment of waste- * ~~~geologists and hydrologists must assume leadership water on groundwater. In Proceedings of National roles in ground-water quality protection. Pro- Conference on Environmental Engineering, Specialty * ~~~visions are needed in the 208 approach to insure Conference, Environmental Engineering Division, * ~~~that ground-water professionals are involved. The ASCE, Kansas City, Missouri, July 10-1 2. pp. I118-1 25. * ~~~public should be educated on a long-term basis U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. 1973. Methods for about ground wter and polluion. Academicidentifying and evaluating the nature and extent of about ground wter and polluion. Academicnonpoint sources of pollutants. Office of Air and training in ground water needs to be expanded and Water Programs. 261 pp. * ~~~ground-water quality elevated to the same level as U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. 1976. Loading ground-water quantity. There is an urgent need for functions for assessment of water pollution from regitraionin the field of ground-water hydrology nonpoint sources. Environmental Protection Tech- andadistioaldvopet o hrfsion. nology Series. Report EPA-600/2-76-151. 445 pp. and aditioal deelopent o the rofesion.U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. 1977. Nonpoint source control guidance-hydrologic modifications. REFERENCES Office of Water Planning and Standards. Geraghty & Miller, Inc. 1977. The prevalence of subsurface* * * migration of hazardous chemical substances at selected industrial waste land disposal sites. U.S. Kenneth D. Schmidt received a B.S. in Geology from Environmental Protection Agency, Solid Waste Fresno State College and an M.S. and Ph.D. in Hydrology Management Series. Report EPA/S530/SW-634. from the University of Arizona. He has over 12 years of 166 pp. work experience in ground-water consulting. Since 1972, Schmidt, K. D. 1976a. Monitoring groundwater pollution. b e has been the principal of a firm headquartered in Fresno Proceedings of the International Conference on and specializing in ground-water quality. His firm has Environmental Sensing and Assessment, Ground- conducted numerous investigations of ground-water pollution water Section. Sponsored by EPA, WHO, and in the West. The results of his nitrate study in the Fresno University of Nevada, Las Vegas. September 1975. urban area were presented at the First National Ground The Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers, Water Quality Symposium. Schmidt was the General Inc. v. 1, session 9, no. 4, pp. 1-6. Chairman of a national symposium on water quality Schmidt, K. D. 1976b. Academic training for groundwater monitoring in June 1978. 127 Audience Response to Session VI - The 208 Planning Approach to Ground-Water Protection Russ Stein, Chief, Division of Ground Water, Ohio EPA, they had some experience in planning the agencies in 361 E. Broad St., Columbus, Ohio 43215: I agree with general. We're not there yet either, and our first plan is both positions on this topic. I think in theory the idea of going to be pitiful. I think it's magnificent that we've 208 planning is certainly a foot in the door, but I see some gotten this far. But I think it's significant only in that we're problems because I think the preliminary plans that have off the ground and moving, and this is a very new field been developed so far are a terrible joke. I think the reason for almost everyone. for this is the fact that the 208 program has been put Jay Lehr, Executive Director, NWWA, 500 W. Wilson together under a very strenuous schedule of completion. Bridge Rd., Worthington, Ohio 43085: Perhaps some Our 208 staff consists of a large number of young advice we might offer Merna is that the initial plans men and women who do not have any training; they do not completed anywhere close to the deadline might be taken have any experience and their disciplines do not in fact with a grain of salt and some mechanism developed where coincide with the job they're supposed to be doing. As it they could be reviewed and revised, especially with Ken's turns out, they really don't know what they're doing. point of view that a lot of it was recycled mythology. Consequently, we're ending up with biologists who are Merna Hurd, U.S. EPA, 401 M St., S.W., Washington, working on sewage treatment plant plans, and what D.C. 20460: I don't disagree that the plans we have coming geologists we do have are not working on ground water. are first drafts. We do have to manage our water resources They are not that experienced in ground water. They're and somebody's going to have to do it. We've taken the right out of school, probably interested in other first step. One of the things we've tried to do in working specialties in geology. This was a job, a lot of money is to gain stability for the program. First of all, 208 was available. So consequently, I think there's a great need faced with the problem of trying to retain staff all of a to provide at some level, the training of these people. sudden, and a matter of a few weeks and months to take Maybe it's too late now. I guess it is. on a project for a short period of time. I was very My greatest problem with 208 planners is the fact fortunate in having one of the first agencies. As more and that I work in the same building with them and I'm not a more agencies received money, it was very difficult to really 208 planner. I would love to be able to sit down with these be able to hire people that would come for a short period people and possibly help train them, but I just simply of time. We're trying to get stability for a longer period don't have time to do this. Every other day I've got a of time - 5 years to start with so that you can have some young man or a young woman coming down to ask me a lot kind of confidence in hiring. The second step is to of questions that I could handle if I had the time. gradually try to train these people as they work in the I would like to ask a question of Donna and possibly program. Merna and Ken if you'd like to respond. Donna, did the State of Illinois have this problem, and if you are progressing Gerald Hendricks, President, Seico, Inc., 309 Washington on this program, how do you approach this within your St., Columbus, Indiana 47201: The data we've had presented time frame? at these meetings so far indicates the States have not Donna Wallace, Illinois EPA, 107 S. Douglas, appropriated enough money to take care of their problem Springfield, Illinois 62704: Is your question do we have a on ground water and ground-water pollution. It's problem with the quality of the people doing the planning? unfortunate that we seem to have to keep proving that there Russ Stein: Yes, that, and the training aspect of is pollution of ground water. More serious damage is getting some experience and expertise in this area to do the occurring each year. It bothers me that 25 years ago, I job. observed the first loss of a well due to a chromium problem Donna Wallace: You bet. The 208 program builds on in an industrial plant in my home town from the plant top of the 303-E base and planning program which builds itself. And yet, we keep reinventing the wheel here. It on top of numerous other programs that came before. When bothers me that we keep creating these problems. we got 208 planning in Illinois, we had a planning staff doing I disagree with the urgency associated with trihalo- 303-E planning, which for Illinois was data collection only. methanes along with the AWWA group. Why not leave that All we did was add more people, and essentially the more thing alone for a little while and spend our energy where people were two different kinds. One, a group of it's needed? technicians which are still inadequate but we're still I think the Federal government should control the building, and a group of management public participation development of new chemicals. Why do we allow this type people who knew how to get to the public because continual addition to the problem? It's going to be very 128 expensive to build some new water plants that may not be programs together to decide how best to handle those needed. If we take the same resource and control a product problems. Of course, sludge is also a political problem which is not yet even on the market, which may be a because the city is faced with large volumes of it, and problem, I think it would be more productive. I can get nobody wants it outside of the municipal boundary. EPA's along without new products but I can't get along without role is trying to pressure the agencies in different juris- my water supply. So I think we're off on the wrong track dictions to solve their problems together because they are here. not going to go away. My second point is that States be required to establish pollution standards for ground water and then Daniel P. Waltz, Hydrogeologist, Layne-Western Company, control the violations. How on earth can you take anything Inc., P.O. Box 1322, Mission, Kansas 66222: My comment to court on general, broad concepts? That's our problem. is re a case history involving the Ohio Environmental I think somebody should have to prove something when Protection Agency. Columbus and Southern Ohio Electric they claim pollution. Company wanted to run an aquifer test on the Hocking River flood plain near their Poston Run Power Station just south Richard Cadwgan, Hydrogeologist, GZD Geotechnical of Chauncey, Ohio. They were told by a representative of Consultant, 30 Tower Road, Newton Upper Falls, the Ohio EPA that they would have to obtain a point Massachusetts 02164: I come from a very densely discharge permit. C&SOEC was only planning to pump populated part of eastern Massachusetts and was fortunate ground water from a test well and release it on the surface. to participate in a very well funded drilling program in They were not putting it to any use and the water was not the Boston area. being altered in any way. Although the Ohio EPA was I specifically would like to ask a question of Mrs. aware of this, they continued to insist on a point discharge Hurd. It seems to me that an immediate near-term impact permit. It took almost a full 12 months for approval of of the 208 planning process would be the construction of the point discharge permit. It seems to me that this is a a large number of sewage treatment plants. Together with gross misuse of the authority granted the Ohio EPA by that, there are ongoing NPDES programs. I think the State the Ohio legislature. If the Ohio EPA were to enforce this of Massachusetts is trying to write pretreatment standards on every well drilled in the State of Ohio, nobody would for industrial discharges to sewer systems. I gathered that even be able to test pump the well which they just finished the pit, pond and lagoon inventory is going to also lead to without obtaining a point discharge permit. With a similar the production of both the installation of brine ponds and 12-month delay, all of the well drillers in Ohio would be the reuse of industrial waste water. All three things-plants, put out of business. pretreatment standards and the inventory of ponds and lagoons-are going to lead to a tremendous volume of W. Bradford Caswell, State of Maine, Department of sludge generated in my part of the State of Massachusetts. Conservation, Augusta, Maine 04333: The impact of We don't have any place to put it; we don't know how to Maine's 208 program on maintenance of ground-water treat it. What thought is being given to help our State quality was not necessarily a terrible joke, but certainly a agencies deal with this problem? disappointment. The basic problem was that funds were Merna Hurd: I don't know if I have an answer for put into the hands of planning groups with little or no that. Unfortunately, this is what happens when you prior experience in ground-water research and management. have individual programs dealing with one little individual Although honest, hard-working people, the 208 program part. There have been billions of dollars in treatment ran out before many knew what to do. As a result, a large facilities, and this is why this has been such an active part of the Round II 208 funds is going directly to the program. What we need to do is look at our waste support of established ground-water programs of the Maine products which are going to end up either in the air or the Geological Survey. The State needs most of all better water or on the land. We've got to decide where best they continuity of the 208 program, but also Federal oversight should be placed and how best they should be managed. that is both critical of our activities, and sensitive to our I can't tell you right now how you should manage sludge particular needs. The demand to implement 208 ground- in Boston or in your State. In a State resource management water management schemes that have been designed from a program, we have some very difficult political problems, paucity of basic ground-water data, for example, may not because we deal with more than one agency within a State. be in the best interests of Maine people. We need to put those State agencies together and the 129 Controlled Degradation and/or Protection Zones - The Way It Looks a by David W. Millerb ABSTRACT industrial waste on the land, require very low4 The support for controlled degradation and/or density housing development, and limit the use of protection zones arises from the fact that cleaning up sc oeta otmnnsa iha ecn existing bodies of contaminated ground water, almost s u h p t n i l c n a i ansa4iha ecn without exception, has not been successful because of salts, lawn fertilizers, and organic chemical technical difficulties and extremely high costs inherent septic tank cleaners. In this paper the major to abatement procedures. With regard to potential future emphasis is directed toward the use of controlled sources of ground-water contamination, controlled degradation zones. degradation and/or protection zones are attractive because Any discussion involving strategies for ground- the state-of-the-art for containment of pollutants has not water quality protection must acknowledge the advanced to the degree that full ground-water protection can be guaranteed. Methods used to carry out a program of existence of two distinct types of contamination controlled degradation and/or establishment of ground- problems. The first involves new sites where wastes water protection zones can be applied on both a regional are to be stored or disposed of in the future, in and site-specific level. facilities such as waste-water impoundments and landfills. The second involves existing sources of The concept of controlled degradation and/or contamination, including not only old landfills and protection zones is based on the assumption that at lagoons but also areas of heavy industrial activity least some of man's activities will always contaminate and urbanization where many and diverse individual ground water regardless of technological and sources of contamination are concentrated. regulatory safeguards. Where extensive degradation Regulations reflecting recent legislation will of ground water has already occurred, zoning is improve design and management at new disposal used to protect the present or future water well sites. However, improvements will be difficult to user rather than to clean up the aquifer. implement at existing sites where long-term land Creation of controlled degradation zones disposal has already contaminated aquifers beneath requires application of special regulatory alternatives the land receiving the wastes. In addition, the to areas where contamination of ground water has complexity of permit systems, accompanied by already occurred or is expected to occur. The vociferous public opposition to the establishment regulatory mechanism established for controlled of new industrial waste disposal sites, casts serious degradation zones may prohibit ground-water doubt upon the ability of localities to issue permits pumpage for potable supply in selected areas, may for new sites regardless of their apparent hydro- concentrate all potential polluting activities within geologic suitability. Programs of public participa- the zone, and may allow for application of the tion will not be helpful unless the participating most practical, but not necessarily the most rigid, public is first educated to awareness that safe sites pollution control practices.. are technically possible, and that failure to approve Protection zones are normally areas that are sites will result in even greater environmental still rural and/or where high quality aquifers have hazards. The shortage of secure sites for the disposal not been adversely affected by land-use and waste of industrial wastes is evolving as a critical national disposal practices. In these zones, very strict problem. regulatory controls are instituted. They might rule If it is assumed that standards for site selection out the use of facilities for storage or disposal of and engineering of new sites are sufficient to minimize the possibility of contaminants migrating aPresented at The Fourth National Ground Water to underlying earth materials, the philosophy of Quality Symposium, Minneapolis, Minnesota, September controlled degradation may be defined as the 20-22, 1978. provision of safety measures in the event that bSenior Vice President, Geraghty & Miller, Inc., Con- eniernyeinfis rta plsadpo sulting Ground-Water Geologists and Hydrologists, egneigdsg al rta plsadpo 44 Sintsink Drive East, Port Washington, New York 11050. housekeeping at the facility result in ground-water contamination. The strategy requires establishment 130 of adequate buffer zones around the waste disposal taminants from the aquifer system. site. The time required for migration of contami- Another major problem associated with nants to adjacent critical aquifer areas is then aquifer cleanup has to do with the magnitude of sufficient to allow for a reasonable planning period the task nationally. As monitoring of ground-water for correction of the engineering design or improve- quality is more widely applied, accompanied by ment of management procedures. Proper monitoring, increased ability to analyze for synthetic chemicals an essential part of this strategy, will provide at lower and lower concentration, there is little early warning of impending problems. In addition, doubt that the number of ground-water pollution the zone must be large enough to accommodate cases discovered and brought to local and national some attenuation of contaminants. Control of the attention will increase on a logarithmic scale. buffer zone is assured by either outright ownership USEPA estimates that 80 percent of the 46 of the land around the facility, purchase of water million tons of potentially hazardous industrial rights in the direction of ground-water flow, or waste produced in this country each year is control over ground-water diversion to limit the use disposed of on the waste generator's site in more of the aquifer area that might be affected by escape than 100,000 waste-water impoundments or of contaminants from the facility. industrial landfills. There are about 20,000 active The use of controlled degradation zones has a and thousands more abandoned sites where much wider application to cases where ground-water hazardous wastes were stored, treated, and disposed contamination has already occurred. At older waste of on the land overlying important aquifers (The disposal sites in humid parts of the country and in Bureau of National Affairs, 1978). Facilities were areas of concentrated industrial and urban activity engineered to prevent ground-water contamination throughout the nation, there has been enough time at only a few of these sites. In most cases, ground for chemical contaminants to move uncontrolled water was used as the discharge mechanism to carry through significant thicknesses of heavily used the pollutants away from the site, with little or no aquifers. The contaminants may have moved beyond understanding of the future problems being created. the limits of such informal buffer zones as property Unfortunately, each typical significant source of boundaries of industrial sites and vacant land contamination may require millions of dollars to surrounding many municipal landfills. In such cases, clean up. The long-term economic implications are where the water quality of an extensive portion of clear. While money may be invested by government an aquifer has been degraded, rehabilitating and industry to clean up the first few startling cases ground-water quality to its natural state is rarely of ground-water contaminatioh in a region, the funds technically or economically feasible. The cost of will soon dry up as the number of instances pumping large quantities of ground water in order proliferates. to treat relatively small concentrations of The diversity of individual sources of contami- contaminants is normally beyond the means of any nation in an area which has become heavily private or public entity. In addition, it is not urbanized and industrialized further complicates always possible to intercept and remove all of the the development of ground-water strategies. The contaminated ground water because the interceptor combination of such diverse sources as landfills, wells would require periodic relocation and/or the waste-water impoundments, septic tanks, leaky quantity pumped would have too great an inter- sewers, and spills, makes it extremely difficult to ference effect on water levels in unpolluted sections determine the priority that should be given to of the aquifer. correct any particular source of contamination The most usual practice involves condemnation without a long-term and statistically valid monitor- of wells used to produce drinking water or, if ing program. Efforts are typically directed toward possible, treating the ground water at the well head the more obvious sources which may or may not or mixing it with nondegraded water before actually represent the key problems in the region. distribution. Pumping and treating contaminated Correction of these more obvious sources at great ground water has been used successfully when the cost to private organizations or to the public objective is only containing the polluted ground- may not result in significant improvement of water body within a certain area or controlling the ground-water quality. rate of migration of contaminants. The quantity Finally, the size and type of some pollution of water removed from the aquifer is much less sources essentially prohibits securing them from than would be required if the objective of the the environment or physically removing them for pumping and treating is actual purging of con- detoxification or disposal at another location, for 131 example, hazardous wastes buried in large landfills In another zone of about 25 square miles, and sludges deposited in extensive lagoon systems. serious ground-water quality problems have been Even if it were feasible to dig up the wastes and experienced over the past few years, primarily due transport them elsewhere, there are few places for to the presence of organic chemicals and high disposal favorable enough to warrant the high concentrations of nitrate. Land use is characterized cost and environmental risk. Elimination of other by mixed commercial/industrial and high density sources, i.e. septic tanks and leaky sewers, involves housing. Where practical, identified sources of substantial expenditures of public funds for large- contamination are being eliminated or their scale construction projects. In addition, the slow impacts minimized. Industrial pumpage, presently recovery of an aquifer from widespread contamina- about 10 mgd, is being encouraged to prevent tion makes it obvious that other alternatives must contaminants from migrating into adjacent zones be considered for managing ground-water systems containing high quality ground water. The zone where the water is severely degraded. would not be governed by nondegradation regula- One such alternative is the zoning of aquifers tions. In other zones within the 208 area, depending on the basis of variations in permeability, recharge on local hydrogeologic factors, recommended and discharge relationships, potential effects on waste-water management alternatives are designed surface waters, existing ground- and surface-water to achieve a balance between present land-use and quality characteristics, and present and proposed water quality conditions and environmental land use. In this way, priorities for ground-water controls so that the quality of ground water can protection can be established based on sound be maintained to assure its continued use as the environmental planning and economic principles. regional water supply. Controlled degradation and protection zones In summary, a uniform set of environmental as a ground-water management technique have been controls cannot be applied across the board as a used in the development of the Long Island solution to all real or potential ground-water Comprehensive Waste Treatment Plan, a 208 contamination problems. Man's impact on ground- project covering Nassau and Suffolk Counties, water quality is determined by too many variables New York (Nassau-Suffolk Regional Planning Board, including land-use and local geologic and hydrologic 1978). Ground water beneath Nassau and Suffolk conditions. To manage ground-water quality Counties is the only source of potable water for correctly, we must be able to accept the fact that almost three million people. Total withdrawal from it is too late and too costly to undo many of the the three principal aquifers currently approaches past mistakes. However, we must also have sufficient 400 mgd. Long Island lies within the Coastal Plain foresight and creativity to protect high quality physiographic province. Major patterns of ground- aquifer areas by means of strict land-use controls water flow are such that the deep ground-water and advanced engineering design. reservoirs are mainly replenished over a broad area A REFERENCES CITED in the central portion of the region. Recognition N s Ie of this flow system and areawide effects of past The Bureau of National Affairs, Inc. November 17, 1978. Environment Reporter. Washington, D.C. pp. 1301- land-use and waste disposal practices, prompted 1302. the definition of critical watersheds or protection Nassau-Suffolk Regional Planning Board. July, 1978. The zones for the 208 region. For example, in one zone Long Island comprehensive waste treatment manage- of more than 100 square miles, good quality ground ment plan. v. 1: Summary plan. 247 pp. water still exists in the major aquifers. Moreover, * * * * since the hydraulic conductivities of the aquifers David W. Miller is a principal in the firm of Geraghty are high, there is considerable potential for water- & Miller, Inc., consulting ground-water geologists and supply development in this zone. Much of the area hydrologists. He holds degrees in Geology from Colby is woodland. The 208 plan recommended that the aCollege and Columbia University. Mr. Miller has devoted is woodland. The 208 plan recommended that the more than 25 years to the solution of problems involving zone should be protected by applying land-use the development, management, and protection of ground- restrictions which would severely limit future urban water resources. He has directed consultingprojects for and industrial development. Strict control over industry throughout the United States and overseas. Over potential nonpoint sources of pollution and prohi- the past few years, Mr. Miller has worked on numerous bition of facilities for land disposal of waste were studies for the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. These have included investigations of ground-water pollution also recommended. In other words, the entire problems in 26 States; preparation of manuals on monitor- zone would be governed by nondegradation ing; and development of the Report to Congress on waste regulations. disposal practices and their effects on ground-water quality. 132 Controlled Degradation and/or Protection Zones - Sense'a by Ronald A. Landonb ABSTRACT I would like to begin by stating a well-worn It is herein submitted that the nearly universal phrase, "What this country needs is . "and I'd phrase "shall not cause pollution of the ground waters like to add another to that long list. What this and surface waters" written into the State regulations forconrnedisaetfrgutosgvrigth waste disposal operations not only refutes a sound technical contyneds dispoa andln treatet of reuastios goveringare alternative, but is impractical, uneconomical and often unworkable. more realistic with respect to the impact of those It is a fact that all ground waters are not created equal, wastes on ground-water and surface-water quality. as governed by certain irrefutable physical laws including The thesis that I would like to build on is that the water budget equation and Darcy's Law which states we don't have those realistic, flexible regulations that the quantity of ground water available is subject to today and in many cases we are painting ourselves wide variation from location to location. While an aquifer is a relative term, major, minor and nonaquifers can be into a corner whereby we are refuting a sound identified within a given geographic area with respect to technical alternative-that alternative being of cost-effective ground-water resource development. Like- controlled degradation. I've found in working for wise, the natural quality of ground water is also a both regulatory agencies and consulting fi rms that significant variable with certain parameters often many times the regulations become impractical, exceeding drinking-water standards. The land application ueooia n utpanuwral.Idlk of wastes overlying the ground waters of an area should, ueooia n utpanuwral.Idlk therefore, also be subject to a certain degree of flexibility to clarify my stand on this issue by saying that I for prudent management of both the waste operation and am not in favor of uncontrolled pollution, but I am the ground-water resources. definitely in favor of controlled degradation, and I Numerous investigations and empirical data can be think that there is a difference between the two. cited to substantiate the fact that many wastes and their W aejs er necletpeetto associated leachates can be safely assimilated into the W a e js er necletpeetto environment with reliance on attenuation and controlled on a number of case histories that show very degradation of ground water by utilization of a mixing practical applications of controlled degradation. I zone or zone of renovation with a specified distance from would like to build on the concept of controlled a disposal operation. As increased emphasis is placed on degradation. I think we have only to look at the the land disposal/management of wastes/residuals and as quantitative and qualitative aspects of ground water the cost of these operations continue to mount, it is strongly to realize that this concept does, in fact, make some recommended that controlled ground-water degradation be utilized in those areas where a "true" ground-water sense. All ground waters do not exist with the same resource does not exist. Protection of such a "true" degree of value and all ground waters, therefore, are ground-water resource is obviously necessary as our not created "equal." A very definite natural demands for a potable water supply also continue to grow. variation exists for both geology and ground-water flow systems. While that is not news to most, I a~reente at he ourt Natona Grond Wterthink we often lose sight of that fact. Qalisetydah Symosurth Mainneaplis Mineota, Septembr There are several very basic irrefutable physical Quality Sypsum9ineplsMnestSetme laws that govern the occurrence, movement and bp.G., Principal, Environmental Resources Manage- quality of ground water. The water budget ment, Inc., One South Church St., West Chester, PA 19380. equation, for example, states that precipitation, runoff and evapotranspiration will vary in any 1 33 given region and, therefore, the net recharge to water as a receiving stream for the point of ground water will also vary in accord with the ground-water discharge. others. Likewise, Darcy's Law states that the For controlled degradation to be a viable waste quantity flow is proportional to the permeability, management approach, several critical factors must gradient, cross-sectional area, with permeability be considered. Obviously, the basic hydrogeology being the most important criteria. Although is a critical factor for any given land disposal site. ground water will be recharged at a certain rate I believe, again, that perhaps one of the more at any given locality, its movement and important criteria in the hydrogeologic regime is withdrawal rate will vary according to the that of the permeability. Based on a significant permeability of the host deposits. Similarly, there amount of empirical data and experience, it would is variation in ground-water quality which is appear that a permeability in a moderate to dependent upon the quality of the recharged water moderately low range of 1 X 10-4 to 10- cm/sec or and the geochemical reactions in the unconsolidated a silty sand deposit has repeatedly proven to be and consolidated deposits through which that adequate for renovation or assimilation of waste ground water is moving. leachates emanating from land disposal facilities. It would appear to make sense, therefore, that Distances of 200 to 600 feet are commonly cited with the realization that the natural hydrogeologic in the literature as being adequate to assimilate system is variable, there is a need to apply that leachates from rather sizable landfills and other realization for more sound waste management land disposal areas. A permeability is desired that practices. We are in essence between the hard-hat and will control this diffuse leachate discharge at a rate the boulder, as they say. We have both a need to that is not so low as to result in a concentrated protect the ground-water resources in the country, buildup of leachate and, at the same time, is so while at the same time we have a growing need to rapid (i.e. fractured rock or very permeable sand dispose of wastes we generate. I am a very strong and gravel) as to result in rapid and far-reaching advocate of that, with more emphasis being placed migration of leachates and associated adverse on those resources. We have a need, therefore, impacts on water quality. to balance the two interests. This is perhaps best Another important concept which is being exemplified by a United Kingdom publication more frequently discussed with respect to controlled addressing that very issue entitled, "Balancing the degradation is that of waste disposal zoning. Interests Between Water Supply and Waste Actually, the concept of waste disposal zoning Disposal." has been around a long time. I can think back easily The concept of controlled degradation is ten years ago when this concept was discussed. It based on another concept of a zone of renovation, is time to realize that we should zone land from a assimilation, or a mixing zone. I personally dislike hydrogeologic standpoint as well as from a the phrase "zone of degradation" since degradation political standpoint. Again, there is a need to implies a negative. I would rather turn it around in a balance the interests between water supply positive sense and say a "zone of assimilation" or problems and needs and waste disposal problems and "mixing zone." Numerous studies have been needs. Waste disposal zoning would entail desig- conducted, several of which I have been fortunate nating waste areas in areas of intense land use, to have been a part of, that have contributed a large particularly highly industrialized, or areas where bank of empirical data to the literature which state the natural ground-water quality or the man-made that leachate produced by landfills, sludge sites, ground-water quality is already altered. Waste spray irrigation sites, and other land treatment/land disposal zoning also implies that the major aquifers disposal facilities can, in fact, be safely assimilated in any given region will be designated. It may be into the environment by attenuation. There are necessary to look beyond the limits of the various forms of attenuation; major among them formational boundary to recharge boundaries as are precipitation, adsorption-desorption, and, not well, but the point is that for any given area we the least important, dilution. I am a strong advocate can designate major and sole source aquifers as of using the natural environment, including well as those areas that have minimal value as a dilution, at a controlled rate to assimilate wastes. ground-water resource. This zone of attenuation or assimilation may be Another critical factor is the need for waste strictly within the ground-water flow system segregation, particularly at the disposal site, and if depending on the size of the facility and the site possible at the source itself. Controlled degradation hydrogeology, or it may also include the surface or a zone of assimilation does not apply to any or 134 all wastes. What is needed is a waste segregation degradation, in fact, make sense-not for all based upon a classification system similar to that wastes, but for select wastes. in use in California, or what Texas and Illinois In summary, I would hope that what may have and others are developing. Toxic and truly initially appeared to be a radical concept is not so hazardous wastes must be disposed of either in radical after all. We have only to look at the fact a secure landfill or by some other method such that there have been numerous waste operations as incineration or encapsulation. But I do believe conducted in the past which have not caused that there are many "wastes" that in fact are significant impact prior to enactment of the nontoxic, decomposable, that can be applied to increasingly stringent environmental laws existing the land in a managed and environmentally today. Granted, we do have the Love Canals and compatible manner. other similar horror stories which, to my way of Perhaps one of the weakest links in the whole thinking, are largely a case of the wrong waste in the waste management chain is that of poor operator wrong place and/or poor management practices. training or knowledge. There is a definite need to We do have literally thousands of waste operations have training and certification of land disposal which have been conducted over the years that operators comparable to what exists for water have not caused significant impact and I would state treatment and waste-water treatment plant again, therefore, that controlled degradation does operators. All too often a problem arises because make sense. I think that it is a very sound technical the person in charge of the daily field operation alternative which is workable, practical and frankly does not know what he's doing. While economical. engineering plans are required, the plans are often misapplied or in fact never implemented. Certifica-* * * tion and training of these people to be presentRoadALnoniemlydbEvrnetl and accuntabl for aday-today tehnicalResources Management, Inc. He was formerly employed professional input to that operation are needed. with Roy F. Weston, Inc., Moody and Associates, Inc., Finally,. I think we need an attitude change Pennsylvania Department of Environmental Resources and by the regulatory and legal personnel. There is no Illinois State Geological Survey. He has 15 years' doubt that the socioeconomic, political and legal experience in management, direction and quality assurance aspects of solid waste management all take of geologic and ground-water resource projects; ground- preceenceoverthe echncal isues Thi atttude water hydrology and flow system analysis; environmental preceence ver te tecnica issus. Ths atttudeimpact of existing and proposed sanitary landfills; change is necessary, therefore, to apply the concept delineation, recovery and containmen't of bydro carbons that waste disposal zoning and controlled and hazardous material spills. 135 Controlled Degradation and/or Protection Zones - Nonsense'a by Herman Bouwerb ABSTRACT The discovery in the early part of this century Man's activities are an ever-increasing threat to that chlorine could be used to make polluted surface ground-water quality. New EPA policies encourage cities to water bacteriologically safe for drinking gave cities discharge sewage effluent on land. Irrigated agriculture is a license to dump sewage effluent into streams and incompatible with high-quality ground water where deep lakes, which in turn led to widespread pollution of percolation water is not removed by drainage. Present drinking-water quality standards cannot be used to our surface water. Let's hope the illusion that determine the suitability of water for potable use if such controlled degradation of ground water is permissible water is waste-water-derived. Where sewage effluent is applied will not do the same to our underground-water to land, persistent trace organics occur in underlying resources. Controlled degradation is still degradation- ground water. Some of these organics may be carcinogenic the only difference between controlled and uncon- or otherwise toxic, and much additional research is needed. Controlled degradation of ground water still is degradation. trolled degradation of ground water is that con- High-quality ground-water resources either are to be trolled degradation takes longer; either way, the day protected, or aquifers eventually must be abandoned as of reckoning will come. sources of high-quality drinking water. In the long term, As an example, let's take an irrigated valley. there is no in-between. The choice will be dictated by Such a valley is essentially a large evaporation pan. economic and environmental considerations. For example, Salt accumulates in the root zone of the crops. the most economical use of aquifers below irrigated valleys Sn ultimately may be to serve as facilities for treatment, storage, S ne salt injures plant growth and eventually makes and conveyance of municipal waste water from surrounding agriculture impossible, it has to be leached out of communities, so that this water can be used again for the root zone by regularly or periodically applying unrestricted irrigation. While such uses of aquifers may be more irrigation water than is needed for evapo- far off, they should be anticipated now to allow proper transpiration. The salt leachate from the root zone, planning. often called deep-percolation water, then moves down and eventually ends up in the underlying ground water. Some areas have a high water table and are "poorly drained." Although this is a Presented at The Fourth National Ground Water agriculturally undesirable and forces farmers to Quality Symposium, Minneapolis, Minnesota, September install tile drains to control the water table, it is a 20-22, 1978. blessing from the standpoint of protecting ground bDirector, U.S. Water Conservation Laboratory, Science wtrbeasthdep-ecltowarisne- and Education Administration-Agricultural Research, U.S.waebcuetedp-rolinwtrisne- Department of Agriculture, 4331 E. Broadway, Phoenix, cepted and disposed of on the surface. In irrigated Arizona 85040. areas, however, ground water is pumped from most aquifers, and water tables have declined enough that 136 the overlying land does not need artificial drainage. effluent is used directly for irrigation, the nitrogen This is good for farmers but, unfortunately, all and phosphorus in the effluent serve as nutrients deep-percolation water ends up in the underlying for crops, so that land rather than surface water is ground water. Consequently, the quality of ground being fertilized. If the effluent is applied according water and well discharges deteriorates, mostly as to nitrogen requirements of the crop, the amount of total dissolved salts (TDS) and nitrate concentrations nitrogen leached to underlying ground water will increase. probably be about the same as that from A number of things can be done to reduce or conventional farming. * ~~~delay the ground-water degradation that deep Another form of land treatment of sewage * ~~~percolation from irrigated agriculture causes. For effluent is the rapid-infiltration system. This is example, farmers can irrigate more efficiently, more like a ground-water recharge system, where applying the water uniformly and in amounts that effluent seeps into the ground from infiltration do not exceed crop evapotranspiration and the basins. The soils and aquifers are then used as leaching required to maintain a salt balance in the natural filter systems to remove almost all of root zone. This produces less deep-percolation the biological oxygen demand (BOD), suspended water, but this water will have a higher salt solids, bacteria, viruses, and phosphorus and most content. The higher salt concentration increases of the nitrogen from the effluent water. The precipitation of carbonates in the vadose zone, system produces renovated water that can be thus reducing the salt content as the water pumped from the aquifer and used for purposes percolates downward. The lower deep- with a higher economic or social return than direct percolation rate also results in less leaching of salt irrigation with sewage-plant effluent (for example, from weathered minerals or from deeper, saline irrigating vegetables and other high-value crops, formations. Despite these beneficial effects, total recreational lakes, etc). The problem with this salt loads on underlying ground water are still system is that, although the renovated water is of severe. Efficient irrigation practices do, however, much better quality than the effluent that slow downward movement of the deep-percolation entered the soil, it often is not as good as the water through the vadose zone. This is advantageous native ground water. The problems are associated where ground-water tables are declining, because it not only with nitrogen or metals, but also with reduces the rate at which deep-percolation water refractory and other trace organics, including joins the ground water. As a matter of fact, pumping known carcinogens like trihalomethanes and other ground water out so fast that deep-percolation chlorinated hydrocarbons. More research is needed water does not catch up with the declining ground- on the identity and toxicity of these organics in water level is about the only way to protect renovated sewage water. Normal drinking-water ground-water quality in irrigated areas. standards cannot be used in determining the Another potential threat to ground-water safety of renovated waste water for drinking, quality is land application of waste water such because these standards apply to relatively as sewage effluent, wet sewage sludge, and agricul- unpolluted surface-water resources. In waste-water tural wastes (manure slurries, processing plant reuse, renovated waste water is guilty until proven effluents, etc.). Land application of sewage innocent. effluent will probably increase dramatically in the Encroachment of renovated effluent water near future because secondary and tertiary upon native ground water can, theoretically, be treatment cost so much and require so much controlled by taking the renovated water out of energy and because new EPA policies favor land the aquifer with wells or drains at a certain distance treatment over conventional, in-plant treatment. from the infiltration basins. The native ground The policies include increased reimbursement for water beyond these collection facilities is then costs of land treatment systems, higher priority protected against encroachment by the renovated for the systems on State project lists, free modifica- water. In practice, these systems require careful tion or replacement of land treatment systems if management and monitoring of ground-water they do not do the job properly, and the require- levels so that water from the renovation system ment that cities not electing land treatment must never flows into the native ground water. This explain why in their application for sewage-plant could pose problems in the winter or whenever construction grants. the demand for renovated water is less than the Land application of sewage effluent has a amount that must be collected to protect the number of very attractive features. Where the aquifer. Plans and facilities for handling "surplus" 137 renovated water or sewage effluent thus must be that such areas can support, often are limited by an integral part of any rapid-infiltration system. available water supplies. Thus, urbanization can Another approach toward protecting native cause conflicts between municipal and agricultural- ground-water resources against spread of renovated water demands. Assuming that the area has a waste water is treating the waste water until it is certain ensured water supply from a river or other essentially of drinking-water quality before it is outside source, agriculture and urban development applied to the land. This is California's philosophy, can coexist if the municipalities use the water where proposed regulations call for treatment of first and agriculture uses the renovated sewage sewage effluent to reduce the total organic carbon effluent for irrigation. A good way to achieve content (TOC) to less than 3 mg/liter (TOC of this would be to concentrate the urban develop- secondary effluent is about 20 to 30 mg/liter) ments in the higher areas (desert, foothills, etc.) before it is applied to land from which it can around the irrigated lands, leaving the agricultural enter aquifers used for drinking water. Concentra- land intact. Each town around the valley would tions of arsenic, barium, cadmium, chromium, then have its own sewage treatment plant, and lead, mercury, nitrate, and selenium must also the effluent would be applied to rapid-infiltration meet drinking-water standards. While such basins for ground-water recharge. This would treatment is laudable from the standpoint of produce renovated water that would move ground-water protection, it may lead to costlier downgradient through the aquifer to the lower, systems than necessary because it does not take agricultural areas, where it would be pumped for advantage of the organic carbon removal, irrigation. The aquifer would then serve as a denitrification, and other quality-improvement medium for receiving, renovating, transmitting, processes that take place on a renewable basis in a and storing effluent water. soil-aquifer system. More research is needed to In summary, we see that controlled degrada- determine the optimum combination of pre- tion eventually may lead to ground-water contamina- and post-treatment in rapid-infiltration land tion. There may only be two choices: complete treatment systems. protection of aquifers and high-quality ground- Where degradation of ground water by water resources, or degradation and eventual man's activities is inevitable, and controlled abandonment of aquifers as sources of high-quality degradation only means delay of execution, the ground water. Since restoring contaminated ground solution may well be abandonment of aquifers water to drinking-water quality will be more as sources of high-quality water. The best use of expensive than conventional drinking-water the aquifers may then be to receive, store, and treatment, there may be no in-between. renovate waste water. This sounds like heresy, but it is already done for surface water-for * * * * example in West Germany, where the Ruhr is protected but the parallel flowing Emscher is Herman Bouwer received B.S. and M.S. degrees in used as a waste disposal stream. Both streams land reclamation, drainage, and irrigation from the National Agricultural University at Wageningen, The Netherlands, are tributaries to the Rhine. This is a good solution andaPh.D. degree in agricultural engineering (water and a Ph.D. degree in agricultural engineering (water for the Emscher-Ruhr area, but it does nothing management) from Cornell University. He was associated for the downstream users of Rhine water, who with Auburn University's agricultural engineering depart- get the dirty water anyway. ment in Alabama from 1955 to 1959. He then joined the Abandoning aquifers as sources of high- U.S. Water Conservation Laboratory, U.S. Department of quality ground water may be the best ultimate Agriculture, in Phoenix, Arizona, where he was appointed Director in 1972. He is leader of a research group in solution in irrigated areas that are becoming subsurface water management and ground-water recharge urbanized. The amount of land that was with sewage effluent, and teaches ground-water hydrology originally irrigated in such areas, and the population at Arizona State University. 138 * ~Audience Response to Session VII. - Controlled * ~Degradation and/or Protection Zones Richard Dalton, Principal Geologist, New Jersey Division of first of all is garnered from retrospect; in other words, how Water Resources, 1474 Prospect St., Trenton, New Jersey well have we been able to control our programs in the 08623: First, I was quite shocked when I saw the delineation past? We've had quite a bit of discussion on the value, the and writing off of the Raritan outcrop area under Dave performance, and accountability at the State and Federal Miller's controlled diagram. What happens when this unit levels-whether or not the job is getting done, who is going is also the most heavily utilized ground-water source for to be doing the monitoring and enforcing the rules. Are the State of New Jersey? the consultants going to be more biased for their Second, many times when we get plans in for a employers? Are the relevant facts going to be brought forward landfill or a ground-water control system, the consultant so that we actually know some of the truisms that exist appears to slant his argument toward the client. Do you in particular ground-water aquifers that are going to be think this is fair? degraded? Retrospect also from the standpoint that David Miller, Geraghty & Miller, lnc.,44 Sintsink Dr. prevention is a goal in public health and unfortunately, E., Part Washington, Now York 11050: I knew you were prevention is very seldom ever achieved. going to attack me. That is shocking isn't it. The concept In prospect our problems must include the catastrophic for eventually writing off an area is what I was trying to consequences of earthquakes, floods, etc. Perhaps if we put across; eventu ally a very large portion of that yellow were talking just about aquifers in glacial drift materials, section, and some of it very quickly, is already being it might not be a tremendous problem, but aquifers in written~ off. Actually, to put down on a slide the entire granitic rock will be a much greater problem. Are we area was an exaggeration to put a point across. I don't have going to continue to perpetuate the myth that our society the power to write off anything. New Jersey is actually continue to waste tremendous amounts of material without doing it, however, whether they know it or not. They looking towards resource recovery or in fact, lowering our are zoning the pine barrons. There are certain areas in that expectations? Are we, in fact, going to encourage ground yellow band where people are beginning to talk about water to be a repository for waste by voting for "controlled abandoning ground water, and either going to surface degradation"? We have it on the land, we had it in the air, water or going to the next zone and taking ground water. we had it in the surface waters. Out of sight, out of mind, New Jersey is protecting that area that they can move has been mentioned many times. What are we going to do into, and that's really zoning. about this? As far as clients are concerned, yes, I try and represent my client. Ronald Landon, Roy F. Weston, Inc., Weston Wing, West Chester, Pennsylvania: just a couple of quick points on Ronald Spong, Environmental Specialist, Bloomington that. I happen to feel, with respect to domestic waste, that Health Department, 1772 Ashland Ave., St. Paul, Minnesota land treatment, land disposal of waste, is in fact a resource 55104: I'm not persuaded by the argument that controlled recovery operation by the fact that we are recovering some degradation is a good idea. I speak from a public health of the nutrients out of that waste, and again, I think it's point of view that perhaps is not well represented here putting the balance in perspective that we're not among the hydrogeologists, geologists, consultants, etc.- necessarily going to get locked into preserving all waters to not from the standpoint so much as a technical problem be of drinking-water quality. There can be use of the land but more from the standpoint of perspective. Perspective for waste treatment or a waste disposal facility and use of 139 the underlying water for such things as irrigation, as Dr. Daniel P. Waltz, Hydrogeologist, Layne-Western Company, Bouwer mentioned, or for industrial pumping, which Dave Inc., P.O. Box 1322, Mission, Kansas 66222: I compare has mentioned, where drinking-water standards are not "controlled degradation" to being only a "little pregnant." necessary. One other item you mentioned earlier, I think Either the water being affected is polluted or it isn't we all have to share the blame for being a little too late, polluted. There can be nothing in between. In the past but we can begin to close a few loops here. You questioned there has been too much leniency as far as water pollution the technology; certainly, we have to question the is concerned. I feel that there is no good reason for polluting technology, but we've also heard comments here that any water. If the industrial process requires special treatment many of the State programs are not adequately staffed or of waste water being produced by the company then the funded. If they are adquately staffed the proper staff cost of such treatment must be passed on to the consumer. personnel does not in fact, make the regulations or get The consumers must be aware that the product they are involved with the implementation of those regulations. buying is difficult to produce and that if they intend to use These are very real problems as well. the product they must be responsible for the pollution it produces, at least financially, I repeat: "There is no just Fred Lahman, Lahman Well Drilling Co., Hines, Minnesota reason for pollution. All water should be returned to its 56647: What happens to a land disposal system using an original state, or at least as close as possible." I enthusi- aquifer for the filter that is set up to run for 20 years? astically support recycling of industrial water and Eventually the water in the aquifer runs into a river or a pretreatment of industrial waste water for pollutants which lake. If this is set up to operate 20 years, then the system are not removed in normal municipal waste-water is abandoned and the water is returned to the natural static treatment processes. I do not endorse the idea of controlled water level. The irrigation pumps are shut off; what degradation and/or protection zones. happens to the contamination that's in the system that moves further down into the ground-water system? Lloyd H. Woosley, Jr., Water Quality and Ecology Branch, Herman Bouwer, U.S. Water Conservation Lab., Tennessee Valley Authority, Chattanooga, Tennessee 4331 E. Broadway, Phoenix, Arizona 85040: Most of the 37401: It is quite evident that many waste disposal accumulation of pollutants in a land treatment system facilities, such as surface impoundments and landfills, are occurs in the top 3 or 4 feet of the soil. And primarily capable of degrading local ground-water quality. The area what you get is really a mineralization of the organic affected may require a-management technique such as matter and you get precipitation of phosphates and then zoning for controlled degradation and limited use. But, reversion through insoluble pumping of the phosphates, Mr. Miller, the investigation you presented dealing with the so it will remain immobilized. I don't think there's much of implementation of such a management technique failed to a chance really that when abandoned, some of these evaluate water quality degradation in an integrated fashion- materials like phosphates and metals that have accumulated that is, surface and ground waters were not considered as a in the soil will be remobilized and show up in the ground total resource. Aren't the investigations by the hydro- water. Same as bacteria and viruses that have been removed geologic industry deficient in the same way as those of by the system, they usually don't survive longer than half environmental engineers by neglecting to evaluate ground a year or so. So the ground water will not pick up any large water and surface water as a single resource? amount of bacteria. 140 Ground-Water Computer Models - State of the Art by Thomas A. Prickettb ABSTRACT INTRODUCTION This paper addresses both the pros and cons of ground- I was invited to this conference to present water modeling and is presented from a neutralist's stand- the neutralist's viewpoint on the subject of ground- point. The list of individual modeling pros and cons iswaemoligsaprccltolrasn extensive but is condensed into three main points for each watermdlinle rctical toolIe both ars and ost h side of the ledger.inelcultyIsebohpsadcnsote The three main characteristics that put the use of modeling business and am glad to point these out ground-water models into the class of intellectual toys are in writing. This paper is assembled in four parts. as follows. First, the wrong model is frequently chosen The first part is a quick state-of-the-art report on p ~~~for problem solving of which overkill by use of an overly ground-water modeling. The second part includes sophisticated model is an example. Secondly, the paying the discussion of ground-water models as practical agency or client is often disillusioned with the model results because of frequent modeler oversell in the early stages of tools. The third part includes the discussion of project planning and budgeting. Thirdly, the problems are models as intellectual toys. The final part includes often solved with a numerical code that is a mystery to all a summary of the main points and some thoughts except the modeler himself. about ground-water modeling in the future. The three main characteristics that make ground- water models very practical tools are as follows. First, STATE-OF-THE-ART OF there is no doubt that the models of today can solveGRUDATRMELN extremely complex ground-water flow problems. Having GONWTRMDLN methods available for solution of complex problems is an Let me begin by stating my definition of what advantage that we have not always had. Secondly, the a ground-water model is. Any system that can models of today are available to virtually everyone in the duplicate the response of a ground-water reservoir ground-water business. The days of specialty laboratoriescabetrda"melofheesvi.Te for complex ground-water model solving are over and the o peatin of thermoel an "maniulai" of the rsror h tools are now in the hands of those doing the local work. oeaino h oe n aiuaino h And thirdly, having a computer code and data deck results is termed "simulation." Various models for available is a perfect tool for transferring information to simulating ground-water flow are used to the another person as to how a problem was solved. There is extent that they simplify solution of ground-water no doubt as to the exact assumptions used and the polm.Peety hr r orbodcasso step-by-step solution of the problem which produces the g roblm.ursndwtltere mode incudigr broalytcalasso results of the entire analysis. formuaoupld-withxerimoelincein (2) anumerical- This paper also includes a very brief description of frua ope iheprec,()nmrcl the state-of-the-art of ground-water modeling and a very including finite-difference and finite-element comprehensive reference list of useable models. models, (3) analogs, and (4) physical. In my opinion, the order above is by the often used model. a Presented at The Fourth National Ground Water Let me quickly discuss each type of model and Quality Symposium, Minneapolis, Minnesota, September comment on its state-of-the-art. The following 20-22, 1978. bRegional Manager, Water Resources Division, Camp discussion is brief. Dresser & McKee, 302 E. John St., Suite 1605, Analytical formulais coupled with experience. Champaign, Illinois 61820. This is the first time that I have written a paper and included experience as any type of a model for 141 solving ground-water problems. I am mentioning the electrical resistor and resistor-capacitor networks, this since the "experience" model is always one of viscous fluid-parallel plate, and thermal systems are the first to be applied in solving a ground-water hard to find. To my knowledge, only a few problem and, at the same time, is the model very universities teach analog design beyond a very few speak about. Again, this particular model can cursory level. The versatility, availability, and greatly reduce the time and effort necessary in convenience of the digital computer for solution assembling a solution to a ground-water problem. of ground-water problems were the main reasons In some cases, you simply don't need any other why analogs lost popularity. model other than experience coupled with use of It is interesting to note that recent advances in available analytical formulas to get a solution to electronic miniaturization and printed circuitry a problem. The state-of-the-art of the analytical technology has not caused a resurgence of use of formulas-experience model is user dependent electrical analogs. One of the greatest advantages and ranges from completely missing the point on of the analogs is that time does not need to be up to getting one to within 20 percent or so of discretized. The necessity of using time increments the correct answer. The references of this paper list in numerical modeling is always somewhat of an several textbooks and articles that give analytical aggravation and source of possible error that you solutions. In combination with recent journal didn't have to be concerned with greatly when using article reviews, the analytical formulas available in analogs. textbooks are extremely valuable models. The physical models that I am referring to are Numerical models of the finite-difference and of the scaled-down sand tank type. These models finite-element type are commonly available today have been around since Darcy's time and will to solve almost any type of ground-water problem. continue to be used, especially in the area of The numerical techniques only differ from one ground-water quality and pollution research. A another in the way the applicable differential great deal of work is still needed in the area of equations are approximated and solved with a dispersion, diffusion, ion exchange mechanisms, digital computer. and heat transport phenomena. The physical sand Most of the numerical modeling was conceived tank model will continue to play a part in this in the last 10 years. Computer codes have become needed work area. available and are being used by nearly all ground- One development in the sand tank model area water hydrologists. Published articles on the worth special note has been the recent fresh-water subject of numerical methods in ground water are storage in saline-water aquifers study by Kimbler presently coming from nearly all corners of the et al. (1975). Kimbler includes both design of world. The references of this paper give a so-called "mini-aquifers" and finite-difference collection of published articles that contain models for studying two liquid flows in porous computer codes that cover solution methods for a media. large segment of common ground-water problems. There is, however, a problem with finding GROUND-WATER MODELS AS computer codes in useable form (listing, operator's PRACTICAL TOOLS manual, thoroughly debugged programs, comparisons In assembling ideas for this paper, I made a with theory, and practical applications example). list of pros and cons of modeling. That list was I believe this situation exists because most authors quite lengthy with all of the details. Upon find that the solution to a problem is most reflection on these ideas, I realized that most of the important and there is rarely enough money individual items on the list were actually related. alloted for proper documentation. There is, I Upon final analysis I reduced the list to three main believe, also an attitude of unimportance attached points on each side of the practical tool/intellectual to the rather boring job of documentation. It toy ledger. appears that the arguments between finite- In my opinion, there are three main character- difference versus finite-element techniques for istics that make ground-water models very practical solving ground-water problems are presently fairly tools. First, there is no doubt that the models well settled. Each technique has its advantages and of today provide a means for solving extremely disadvantages and neither one is the universal complex ground-water problems. Having methods panacea for solving ground-water problems. available for solution of complex problems, without Analog modeling techniques had their hayday making a large number of gross approximations, is in the 1950s and 1960s. Today, such models as an advantage that we have not always had. 142 Secondly, the models of today are available to exist is a good indication that ground-water models virtually everyone in the ground-water business. are very practical tools. The days of the specialty laboratories are over It may seem strange to consider a ground-water and the tools are now in the hands of those doing model computer code itself a practical tool other the local work. And thirdly, having a numerical than as a means of solving a problem. I believe, code and data deck available is a perfect record and however, that the actual code contains information tool for transferring information as to how a just as important, if not more important, than the problem was solved. With this information, there solution of the problem under study. The computer is no doubt as to the exact assumptions used and code contains the precise method by which the the step-by-step solution of a problem. Let me problem was solved. The code does not contain expand on these thoughts. assumptions, differential equations, or the jargon It is not hard to remember the time when associated with a written report. You thus have a analytical formulas and experience formed the perfect means for transferring information. Never principal means for ground-water problem solving. mind the claims made in the accompanying report However, in applying these formulas the number as to what the model can do; see exactly what it can of assumptions that had to be made was large do by looking at the program code. concerning such items as aquifer heterogeneity, Studying a ground-water model computer code boundary geometry, multiple layering effects, and reveals a great deal about the validity of the solution other geologic conditions. Presently, digital com- and the care in which the author solves problems puter modeling techniques can include the variation and documents exactly the model capabilities. The in these parameters and there is no longer a need shape of the model code is not only a very good (other than not having sufficient data) to make means of transferring information, but it reveals these assumptions. If you know that these information as to the degree to which the model is parameters change in space or with time, it is a a practical tool or an intellectual toy. In summary, relatively straightforward process of entering these having a precise record of how a problem was variations as computer data input. There are existing solved makes computer modeling very practical. computer models that can accommodate extremely complex geologic and hydrologic conditions. Since GROUND-WATER MODELS AS about 1972, there has been an avalanche in develop- INTELLECTUAL TOYS ment of numerical modeling techniques. Both water In my opinion, there are three main character- quantity and water quality modeling techniques istics that put the use of ground-water models into are now available. Simply stated, present ground- the class of intellectual toys. First, the wrong model water models provide a means for solving complex is frequently chosen for problem solving of which problems. There may be differences in opinion as overkill by use of an overly sophisticated model is to whether the models are suitable for practical an example. Second, the paying agency or client is application, but it is my thought that a sufficient often disillusioned with model results because of number are to the extent that present ground- frequent modeler oversell in the early stages of the water models are indeed very practical tools for project planning and budgeting. Finally, the prob- solving complex problems. lems are often solved with a numerical code that A problem solving technique can be judged is a mystery to all except the modeler himself. An practical if it is used by a large percentage of all amplification on these thoughts follows. ground-water hydrologists. Presently, ground-water Using a model which is overly sophisticated models are, in fact, being used by the majority for the problem at hand is a common occurrence. of ground-water people. Ten years ago you could Probably, lack of geohydrologic input data accounts not say that. Today, the ground-water modeling is for the largest number of these occurrences. The done locally where the problem area exists. There choice of model for the solution of a problem is no longer a need to send the data to a distant should be based upon matching the two together. specialized laboratory for a solution as was the As mentioned previously, there are many problems case 10 years ago when labs such as the Analog that can be solved by experience and application of Model Unit of the USGS existed. The use of formulas. On occasion a computer model is chosen ground-water models is commonplace now. Thus, when an application of a formula would do. On the the facts that ground-water models are being- used other hand, I am aware that public relations and by so many researchers and men in the field and audience impact are sometimes important and that central specialized equipment labs no longer choosing a computer model is done for these 143 purposes. In these cases, one has to be cautious. as very practical tools, are in evidence today since In any event, choosing an overly sophisticated most every investigator now has available models to model which doesn't fit the problem is a case of solve very complex problems. Furthermore, the applying the wrong model. The result becomes existence of the computer code precisely tells the more of an intellectual exercise than anything else. entire story of how a problem was solved. Excessive modeler claims and oversell of the In my opinion, the future looks exciting as power of computers, can lead to client disillusion- more models will be developed, more investigators ment with the over-all modeling process. Most of at the grass-roots level will be effectively using these panacea-oversell problems come to light soon models, and low-priced computer equipment will after the results of the field-computer calibration become commonplace for nearly everyone's use. runs become known. Because the data base for ground-water studies quite often is something else to be desired, this situation often occurs and backlash from the paying agency or client results. The references listed below have been chosen from published articles that contain the three elements of theory, I believe this oversell problem is a serious one at documented program codes or model construction features, times and requires restraint on the part of those and applications. Articles that do not have these three in charge of project budgeting and planning. elements are somewhat limited in scope and have been Solving a ground-water problem and not purposely avoided. giving an adequate description as to how it was The type of model described in the reports is listed immediately following the citation. done is a situation that commonly occurs in the This reference list would make a small library which modeling business. Documentation of computer would represent the state-of-the-art in ground-water codes is not a popular job. The usual procedure modeling from a practical viewpoint. is to explain the problem in a report, discuss the differential and approximating equations involved, Afshar, A. and M. A. Marino. 1976. Mathematical model explain in words that a computer program was for simulating soil moisture flow considering evapo- transpiration. Water Science & Engineering Papers developed and used to solve the equations, and Number 6002. Department of Water Science and then give the results. The missing gap is the corm- Engineering, University of California, Davis, puter program. From my own experience, that is a California. (Finite difference) big gap that needs work. There are problems that Amerman, C. R. 1976. Waterflow in soils: A generalized need solving, and if someone has taken the time steady-state, two-dimensional porous media flow to write a program and publish the results, why not model. Agricultural Research Service, U.S. Department of Agriculture Report ARS-NC-30, 62 pp. (Finite let us benefit by that work and also publish the difference) code? The answers vary around the theme that it Bear, Jacob. 1972. Dynamics of fluids in porous media. would be easier to develop your own code. American Elsevier, 764 pp. (Textbook) It is my opinion that undocumented program- Brock, R. R. 1976. Hydrodynamics of perched mounds. ming, other than providing the immediate solution Journal of the Hydraulics Division, Proceedings of ASCE. v. 102, HY8, pp. 1083-1100. (Finite sought, is mostly a wasted effort. In addition, if difference) the documentation is not done along with the Carslaw, H. S. and J. C. Jaeger. Second Edition, 1959. development of the code, six months afterwards Conduction of heat in solids. Oxford. 510 pp. when your memory has faded, the code is (Textbook) virtually worthless. Then, it would be easier to Cecen, K. and E. Omay. 1973. Three dimensional viscous flow analogy. Proceedings of the Fifteenth Congress develop your own code. With the one exception of of the International Association for Hydraulic . . . s of the International Association for Hydraulic immediate necessities that will not need to be Research, State Hydraulic Works of Turkey, Istanbul. repeated, the undocumented ground-water model is v. 3, pp. C10-1 to C10-8. (Viscous fluid) an intellectual toy of the first magnitude. Coe, J. J. (District Engineer, Southern District, Department of Water Resources, State of California). 1974. Mathematical modeling of water quality for water SUMMARY resources management-v. 1, Development of the In summary, ground-water models, in my groundwater quality model. District Report. Depart- opinion, are mainly intellectual toys when principal ment of Water Resources. (Finite difference) investigators choose an overly sophisticated model Collins, M. A., L. W. Gelhar, and J. L. Wilson III. 1972. for the problem at hand, when the paying customer Hele-Shaw model of Long Island aquifer system. Proceedings of ASCE, Journal of the Hydraulics finally realizes that the model is not a panacea for Division. v. 98, HY9, pp. 1701-1714. (Viscous fluid) his problem, and when the principal investigator Cooley, Richard and John Peters (Hydrologic Engineering does not adequately document his work. Models, Center, Corps of Engineers, U.S. Army, Davis, 144 California). 1972. Finite element solution of steady method of the influence of fractures in confined state potention flow problems. In Hydrologic aquifers. Society of Petroleum Engineers Journal. Engineering Methods for Water Resources Develop- v. 15, pp. 181-191. (Finite element) ment. v. 10: Principles of Groundwater Hydrology. Hansen, V. E. 1952. Complicated well problems solved by (Finite element) the membrane analogy. Transactions of the American Cooley, Richard L. 1974. Finite element solutions for the Geophysical Union. v. 36, pp. 912-916. (Rubber equations of groundwater flow. Technical Report membrane) Series H-W. Hydrology and Water Resources, Hantush, M. S. 1964. Hydraulics of wells. Advances in Publication no. 18. Center for Water Resources Hydroscience, v. 1. V. T. Chow, Editor. pp. 281- Research. Desert Research Institute, University of 432. (Textbook) Nevada. (Finite element) Huang, Y. H. and S-J. Wu. 1974. Analysis of unsteady flow Croley, T. E., II. 1977. Hydrologic and hydraulic computa- toward artesian wells by three-dimensional finite tions on small programmable calculators. Iowa elements. University of Kentucky Water Resources Institute of Hydraulic Research. 837 pp. (Textbook) Research Institute Report no. 75, 164 pp. (Finite Davis, S. N. and R.J.M. DeWeist. 1966. Hydrogeology. John element) Wiley & Sons, Inc. 463 pp. (Textbook) Huntoon, P. W. (Hydrogeologist, Wyoming Water Resources DeMeier, W. V., A. E. Reisenauer and K. L. Kipp (Battelle, Research Institute, University of Wyoming, Laramie, Pacific Northwest Laboratory, Richland, Washington Wyoming). 1974. Finite difference methods as 99352). 1974. Variable thickness transient ground- applied to the solution of groundwater flow problems. water flow model user's manual. BNWL-1704. (Finite difference) (Finite difference) Intercomp Resource Development and Engineering, Inc. Earlougher, R. C., Jr. 1977. Advances in well test analysis. (1201 Dairy Ashford, Houston, Texas 77079). 1976. Society of Petroleum Engineers AIME. 264 pp. A model for calculating effects of liquid waste disposal (Oil field textbook) in deep saline aquifer. Part I-Development. Part II- Evans, D. H., B. M. Harley, and R. Bras. 1972. Application Documentation. U.S.G.S. Technical Water Resources of linear routing systems to regional groundwater Investigations 76-61. (Finite difference) problems. Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Javendel, K. and P. A. Witherspoon. 1967. Use of thermal Ralph M. Parson Laboratory Report no. 155, 197 model to investigate the theory of transient flow to pp. (Linear routing) a partially penetrating well. Water Resources Research. Evenson, D. E. and A. E. Johnson. 1975. Parameter estima- v. 3, pp. 591-597. (Thermal) tion program. Texas Water Development Board Jorgensen, D. G. 1975. Analog-model studies of groundwater Contract with Water Resources Engineers, Inc., hydrology in the Houston District, Texas. Texas Water Walnut Creek, California. (Inverse problem) Development Board Report 190, 84 pp. (Resistor Fayers, F. J. and J. W. Sheldon. 1962. The use of a high- capacitor) speed digital computer in the study of the hydro- Karanjac, J., M. Altunkaynak, and G. Ovul. 1976. Mathe- dynamics of geologic basins. Journal of Geophysical matical model of Elazig-Ulova Plain. Ministry of Power Research. v. 67, pp. 2421-2431. (Finite difference) and National Resources, Ankara, Turkey. (Finite Freeze, F. A. 1970. Moire pattern techniques in ground- difference) water hydrology. Water Resources Research. v. 6, Karplus, W. J. 1958. Analog simulation. McGraw-Hill, pp. 634-641. (Graphical technique) (Textbook) Freeze, R. A. 1972. A physics-based approach to hydrologic Karplus, W. J. 1967. Hybrid computer simulation of response modeling: Phase I: Model development. groundwater basins. American Water Resources Completion Report, Contract No. 41-31-001-3694, Association National Symposium on Groundwater Office of Water Resources Research, Washington, Hydrology, San Francisco, pp. 289-299. (Resistor- D.C. (Finite difference) digital) Gambolati, Giuseepe. 1976. Transient free surface flow to a Kimbler, O. K., R. G. Kazmann, and W. R. Whitehead. well: An analysis of theoretical solutions. Water 1975. Cyclic storage of fresh water in saline aquifers. Resources Research. v. 12, pp. 27-39. (Formulas) Louisiana State University, Water Resources Research Gelhar, L. W., P. Y. Ko, H. H. Kwai and J. L. Wilson. 1974. Institute Bulletin 10, 78 pp. (Sand tank-finite Stochastic modeling of groundwater systems. difference) Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Ralph M. Knowles, T. R., B. J. Claborn and D. M. Wells. 1972. A Parsons Laboratory Report no. 189, 313 pp. computerized procedure to determine aquifer (Stochastic technique) characteristics. Water Resources Center Publication Green, D. W., H. Dabin, and J. D. Khare. 1972. Numerical WRC-72-5, Texas Tech University, Lubbock, Texas. modeling of unsaturated groundwater flow including (Inverse problem) effects of evapotranspiration. Completion Report, Lehr, Jay H. 1963. Ground-water flow models simulating Contract no. 14-31-0001-3084, Office of Water subsurface conditions. Journal of Geological Education. Resources Research, Washington, D.C. (Finite v. 11, pp. 124-132. (Sand tank) difference) Mack, L. E. 1957. Evaluation of a conducting-paper analog Gupta, S. D., K. K. Tanji, and J. N. Luthin. 1975. A three- field plotter as an aid in solving groundwater dimensional finite element groundwater model. problems. State Geological Survey of Kansas Bulletin California Water Resources Center Contribution no. no. 127, part 2, 47 pp. (Resistance paper) 152, 119 pp. (Finite element) Marmion, K. R. 1962. Hydraulics of artificial recharge in Gureghian, A. B. 1975. A study by the finite-element non-homogeneous formations. University of 145 California, Berkeley Water Resources Center Contribu- Springfield, Virginia 22161. (Finite element) tion no. 48, 88 pp. (Glass beads sand tank) Remson, I., G. M. Hornberger, and F. J. Molz. 1971. Meyer, W., J. P. Reussow, and D. C. Gillies. 1975. Availability Numerical methods in subsurface hydrology. John of ground water in Marion County, Indiana. U.S.G.S. Wiley & Sons, Inc. 389 pp. (Numerical textbook) Open-File Report 75-312, 87 pp. (Finite difference) Rogers, W. E. 1954. Introduction to electric fields. Molz, F. J. 1974. Practical simulation models of the McGraw-Hill. 333 pp. (Viscous fluid) subsurface hydrologic system with example applica- Rovey, C.E.K. 1975. Numerical model of flow in a stream- tions. Water Resources Research Institute Bulletin aquifer system. Colorado State University Hydrology 19, Auburn University, Alabama. (Finite difference) Paper no. 74, 73 pp. (Finite difference) Morel-Seytoux, H. J. and C. J. Daly. 1975. A discrete kernel Saleem, Z. A. 1973. Method for numerical simulation of generator for stream-aquifer studies. Water Resources flow in multiaquifer systems. Water Resources Research Research. v. 11, pp. 253-260. (Finite difference) 9151, pp. 1465-1469. (Finite difference) Murty, Vadali Venkata Narasimha. 1975. A finite element Santing, G. 1958. A horizontal scale model based on the model for miscible displacement in groundwater viscous flow analogy for studying groundwater flow in aquifers. Ph.D. Dissertation, University of California, an aquifer having storage. International Association of Davis, California. (Finite element) Scientific Hydrology Publication 43, pp. 105-114. Muskat, M. 1949. Physical principles of oil production. (Viscous fluid) McGraw-Hill. 922 pp. (Textbook) Segol, Genevieve, G. F. Pinder and W. G. Gray (Water Neuman, S. P. and P. A. Witherspoon. 1970. Variational Resources Program, Princeton University, Princeton, principles for confined and unconfined flow of ground New Jersey 08540). 1975. Numerical simulation of water. Water Resources Research. v. 6, pp. 1376- salt-water intrusion in coastal aquifers. Part II- 1382.(Finite element) Technical completion report. (Finite element) Neuman, S. P. and P. A. Witherspoon. 1971. Analysis of Sherwani, Jabbar K. (Department of Environmental Sciences nonsteady flow with a free surface using the finite and Engineering, University of North Carolina at element method. Water Resources Research. v. 7, Chapel Hill). 1973. Computer simulation of ground- pp. 611-623. (Finite element) water aquifers of the Coastal Plain of North Carolina. Patten, E. P., Jr. 1965. Design, construction, and use of (Finite difference) electric analog model. In Analog Model Study of Shibasaki, T. (editor). 1976. Groundwater basin management. Groundwater in Houston District, by L. A. Wood Tokai University Press, Japan, 73 pp. (Japanese version and R. K. Gabrysch, Texas Water Commission has Fortran code). (Finite difference) Bulletin no. 6508, 103 pp. (Resistor capacitor) Stallman, R. W. 1956. Numerical analysis of regional Pinder, G. F. 1970. A digital model for aquifer evaluation. water levels to define aquifer hydrology. Transactions Techniques of Water-Resources Investigations of the of the American Geophysical Union. v. 37. (Finite U.S.G.S., Book 7, Chapter C1, 18 pp. (Finite difference) difference) Task Force on Environmentally Hazardous Wastes. 1974. Pinder, G. F. and W. G. Gray. 1976. Is there a difference Disposal of environmentally hazardous wastes. in the finite element method? Water Resources Environmental Health Sciences Center, Oregon Research. v. 12, pp. 105-107. State University, Corvallis. (Finite difference) Pinder, G. F. and W. G. Gray. 1977. Finite element Thrailkill, J. 1972. Digital computer modeling of limestone simulation in surface and subsurface hydrology. groundwater systems. University of Kentucky Water Academic Press. 295 pp. (Finite element) Resources Institute, Research Report no. 50, 71 pp. Prickett, T. A. and C. G. Lonnquist. 1971. Selected digital (Finite difference) computer techniques for groundwater resource Todd, D. K. and J. Bear. 1959. River seepage investigation. evaluation. Illinois State Water Survey Bulletin 55, University of California, Berkeley Water Resources Urbana, IL.62 pp. (Finite difference) Research Center Contribution no. 20, 163 pp. Prickett, T. A. and C. G. Lonnquist. 1973. Aquifer simula- (Electrolytic tank) tion model for use on disk supported small computer Trescott, Peter C. 1975. Documentation of finite-difference systems. Illinois State Water Survey Circular 114, model for simulation of three-dimensional ground- Urbana, IL. (Finite difference) water flow. U.S.G.S. Open-File Report 75-438. Prickett, T. A. and C. G. Lonnquist. 1976. Metodos de (Finite difference) ordenador para evaluacion de recursos hidraulicos Trescott, P. C., G. F. Pinder, and S. P. Larson. 1976. subterraneous. Boletin number 41, Ministerio de Finite-difference model for aquifer simulation in Obras Publicas, Direccion General de Obras Hidraulicos, two dimensions with results of numerical experiments. Madrid, Spain. (Finite difference) Techniques of Water-Resources Investigations of the Prickett, T. A. 1975. Modeling techniques for groundwater U.S.G.S., Book 7, Chapter C1, 116 pp. (Finite evaluation. In Advances in Hydroscience. Edited by difference) V. T. Chow. Academic Press. v. 10, pp. 1-143. (General Tyson, H. N., Jr., and E. M. Weber. 1964. Groundwater state-of-the-art of models to 1973) management for the nation's future-computer Reeves, M. and J. O. Dygyid (Oak Ridge National Labora- simulation of groundwater basins. Proceedings of tory, Oak Ridge, Tennessee 37830). 1975. Water ASCE, Journal of the Hydraulics Division. v. 90, movement through saturated-unsaturated porous HY4, pp. 59-77. (Finite difference) media a finite-element Galerkin model. National U.S. Army Corps of Engineers. 1970. Finite element Technical Information Service, U.S. Department of solution of steady-state potential flow problems. Commerce. 15285' Port Royal Road, Hydrologic Engineering Publication Center 146 Report 723440, Sacramento District, Davis, national Association of Scientific Hydrology, California. (Finite element) Symposium Publication no. 81, pp. 687-698. (Finite Vandenberg, A. 1974. Program FLONET, Flownet element) contouring for well fields near a recharge boundary. Wright, D. E. 1968. Nonlinear flow through granular media. Inland Waters Directorate, Water Resources Branch, Proceedings of ASCE, Journal of the Hydraulics Ottawa, Canada. (Mathematical-finite difference) Division. v. 94, HY4, pp. 851-871. (Sand tank) Veeruijt, A. 1972. Solution of transient groundwater flow Zienkiewicz, P., P. Mayer, and Y. K. Cheung. 1966. problems by the finite element method. Water Solutions of anisotropic seepage by finite elements. Resources Research. v. 8, pp. 725-727. (Finite element) Proceedings of ASCE, Journal of the Engineering Walton, W. C. 1970. Groundwater resource evaluation. Mechanics Division. v. 92, EMI, pp. 111-120. (Finite McGraw-Hill. 664 pp. (Textbook) element) Wiggert, D. C. 1974. Two-dimensional finite element modeling of transient flow in regional aquifer systems. * * * * Michigan State University Institute of Water Research, Technical Report no. 41, 51 pp. (Finite element) Thomas A Prickett received his Bachelor's degree from Wilson, John L. and L. W. Gelhar. 1974. Dispersive mixing the University of Illinois in 1960. He was employed as a in a partially saturated porous medium. Report no. ground-water hydrologist with the Illinois State Water 191. Ralph M. Parsons Laboratory for Water Resources Survey for 17 years where his responsibilities were resource and Hydrodynamics, Massachusetts Institute of evaluation and developing basic methodologies for solving Technology (Finite difference) problems. He received the National Water Well Association Winslow, J. D. and C. E. Nuzman. 1966. Electronic simula- Science Award in 1977for his contributions to the science tion of groundwater hydrology in the Kansas River of ground-water hydrology. In 1977, he became Midwest Valley near Topeka, Kansas. State Geological Survey Regional Manager of the Water Resources Division of the of Kansas Special Distribution Publication no. 29, environmental consulting firm of Camp Dresser & McKee 24 pp. (Resistor network) located in Champaign, Illinois. In this new position, he has Witherspoon, P. A., I. Javandel, and S. P. Neuman. been involved mainly in projects related to regional systems 1968. Use of finite element method in solving analysis for municipalities and in the analysis of impacts of transient flow problems in aquifer systems. Inter- mining on ground-water resources. 147 Ground-Water Computer Models- Practical Tools a by Russell E. Darrb ABSTRACT There is little doubt that the hand-held machine One of the most valuable and practical tools the falls into the computer category. ground-water manager can use is the computer model, be it We think of a model as a description or weilfield, conjunctive, solute transport, or statistical. analogy used to help visualize something that Although these models vary in complexity, the endcantbdielyosrdsdfndbyWse. product is purely a function of the user's ability to selectcantbdielyosrdsdfndbyWse. the appropriate level of modeling for a particular project. The word practical has been defined as something Any professional working in the field of hydrogeology being in effect, not theoretical, and capable of being should adapt to and use ground-water models to be truly put to use. A model is a tool, an instrument efficient. necessary for the practice of a profession, and a means to an end. Therefore, we see a very broad There are a number of terms in the title of definition, as used in this paper, of computer models this paper which need defining. For example, at one as practical tools. time a computer was a very sophisticated, expensive, Ground-water management must be practiced cumbersome machine. Nowadays, there are hand- effectively and efficiently if we are to bring about held units capable of performing everything that the best possible applications for our valuable the machine called the computer could do a few g round-water resource. One of the most valuable years ago. These hand-held machines are also tools to the ground-water manager is the computer called computers. Are they computers? Webster model. The model may be a mental conceptualiza- defines a computer as a programmable electronic tion; an empirical relationship; a physical device; device that can store, retrieve and process data. It or a collection of mathematical, statistical, and/or is this definition that is used throughout this paper. empirical statements. Models can be programmed on small or large computers and programmable calculators. Management models fall into four basic categories: wellfield models, conjunctive use models, solute transport models, and statistical models. There are many levels of complexity in aPreseted at The Fourth National Ground Water cmue oeiga ela ievreyo Quality Symposium, Minneapolis, Minnesota, September coputrmodeigrams avalaletth user aTwie stariet ofthar 20-22, 1978. porm vial oteue.Tesaeo h r bVice-President, Groundwater Division, Wright Water today is such that any professional working in the Engineers, 2420 Alcott, Denver, Colorado 8021 1. field of hydrogeology should adapt to and use ground-water models in order to be truly efficient. 148 Wellfield models may range from the simple, characteristics successfully predicted the areal single well model in a homogeneous, isotropic, extent relative to the concentration of contaminants infinite, aquifer to complex models requiring the traveling from the pond to a nearby stream through pumping of several points having multiple boundary the alluvial aquifer. conditions, both barriers and recharge. The purpose The fourth practical modeling technique to be of the wellfield model can range from simply a discussed in this paper is the statistical models. These desire to determine the drawdown at a given point models have been discussed in literature for the last due to a given pumping scheme; to maximizing the couple of decades. However, it has been in the last efficiency of a pumping schedule for an entire decade that significant advances have been made wellfield comprised of several wells. These wellfield in this field of hydrogeology due to digital models can and, if used effectively, will decrease computers and calculators. For example, it is now the operating costs both from the standpoint of quicker, more efficient and accurate to determine energy consumption as well as pump maintenance. transmissivity using a Jacobs Simplification Method Conjunctive use modeling is a necessity in the with a hand-held calculator and statistical methods, State of Colorado. A specific example is the South than it is to do the entire solution graphically and Platte Rules and Regulations Case which requires mathematically. Using the method of linear the determination of stream depletion due to well regression, the time drawdown data can be analyzed pumping. Items taken into consideration for in the form of Y = A + B natural logarithm of X. It modeling are the pumping schedule, the application thus works out that A = the intercept at T = 1 minute, of the water (i.e., sprinkler or flood irrigation), B = the slope of the line necessary in determining consumptive use, and the return flows back to the the transmissivity. Using an additional statistical aquifer and eventually to the river system. The method called Coefficient of Determination, a input from a conjunctive model is then used to comparison of the fit of the data to the least develop an augmentation plan. This augmentation squares line can be made and R2 value of 1 would plan provides for the pumping of the well in the indicate a perfect fit. Another beauty of this method alluvial aquifer without creating injury to senior is that the intercept time of the intersection of the vested surface-water rights. One of the most line with the static water level can be mathematical- common equations used to model stream depletion ly determined with high accuracy. Therefore, the is the complimentary error function. Work pub- transmissivity and Coefficient of Storage are lished on this subject can be found in Transient statistically modeled in order to determine Groundwater Hydraulics by Professor Robert E. more accurate values. GClover. In order to analyze hydrologic data where the Another use for conjunctive modeling would be data are extensive, statistical models have been used models developed for entire basins including to reduce that data and give it meaning. Some of hundreds or even thousands of square miles. Such the statistical models used include: frequency models have been developed in Colorado to look at analysis, scatter diagram analysis, bivariate correla- the effects of well pumping on recharge to and tion, factor analysis, discriminate function, and discharge from the aquifers. A number of nodal trend analysis. All of these methods have been used points on such a model and the number of layers in modeling the ground-water conditions within the can produce a model which could be cost pro- Piceance Creek Basin of Colorado. hibitive, because of the amount of input data In summary, the digital computer, as well as required, number of iterations, and total number of the analog, and combinations thereof, can and are calculations. being used throughout the United States very Solute transport models can be used to effectively. There are also, however, many determine the rate and area of flow from discharges documented cases of what we have all known for a such as those associated with leaky landfills. In long time, garbage in and garbage out. There are addition, such models can also be used to study two basic fundamentals that must not be violated salt-water intrusions into fresh-water aquifers. when using the wellfield, conjunctive use and solute A great deal of work has been done in studying transport computer models. These are a mass the plumes associated with ponds containing rather balance i.e., that of any given cell or any given toxic materials. An example is the Colorado point in a model, the water in must equal the water State University study of pollutant leakage from a out plus the water stored. This continuity require- waste disposal pond from a chemical plant located ment is essential and often overlooked. The second near Denver. A model utilizing the method fundamental is of course, Darcy's Law. Many people 149 will argue that if you have enough data to build a summarizing wellfield history. Trans. Amer. Geophys. computer model, you already have the answer. But, Un. 27, pp. 526-5 34. on the other hand, computer models are most useful Davis, J. C. 1973. Statistics and data analysis in geology. John Wiley and Sons, Inc., New York, pp. 550. when there is little data. Computer simulation John wiley and Sons, Inc., New York, pp. 550. mwoen tcaner be isd ltl cdata. Computer simulatiyon aHodgson, F. D. 1978. The use of multiple linear regression models can be used to conduct a sensitivity analysis in simulating ground-water level responses. Ground quickly and efficiently, thereby allowing the Water. v. 16, no. 4, pp. 249-25 3. researcher to determine a range of values for which Pinder, G. F. and J. D. Bredehoeft. 1968. Application of an answer should be reasonable. the digital computer for aquifer evaluation. Water Ground-water computer models, which can be Resources Research. 4 (5). Prickett, T. A. and C. G. Lonnquist. 1971. Selected digital classified as practical tools, vary in complexity computer techniques for groundwater resource from a Theis Solution of a single well, programmed evaluation. Bull. Illinois State Water Survey, Urbana. on a hand-held calculator to multilevel finite 55, pp. 62. element or difference codes programmed in a large Theis, C. V. 1935. The relation between the lowering of the computer such as a CDC 7600. The cost of such piezometric surface and the rate and duration of discharge of a well using ground-water storage. Trans. practical tools and their use can be minimal or Amer. Geophys. Un. 16, pp. 519-524. extensive, i.e., a few dollars or a few tens of Thiem, G. 1906. Hydrologische metoden. Gebhardt, thousands of dollars. The practicality of such Leipzig, pp. 56. models and their results is purely a function of the Walton, W. C. 1970. Groundwater resource evaluation. intelligence of the user, his ability to select an McGraw-Hill Book Co., New York. pp. 664. Witherspoon, P. A. and S. P. Neuman. 1973. Finite element methods in hydrogeology. Bull. B.R.G.M., Paris. project, and his ability to communicate the results 4, pp. 294. to those who need the information. Models do not eliminate the need for data gathering efforts, practical human experience, * * * * judgement evaluations and common sense. They are only tools, which are practical when these criteria are combined with the speed and accessi- Russell E. Darr is the Vice President of Wright Water bility made available by the use of modern day Engineers, Inc., where he is the consulting ground-water hydrologist-geologist. He obtained his B.S. in Geology from the University of Washington in 1967. He performed graduate work in Ground-Water Geology at the University REFERENCES of Colorado in 1973. Mr. Darr has served on various Cooper, H. H. and C. E. Jacob. 1946. A generalized graphic committees with the National Water Well Association and method for evaluating formation constants and is a member of the American Geophysical Union. 150 Ground-Water Computer Models- a Intellectual TOYS by Henry A. Baskib ABSTRACT I believe that ground-water computer models Ground-water computer models are, certainly, toys can destroy our ground-water profession! which provide intellectual stimulation. They can be useful They are, certainly, intellectual toys that can keep tools for advancement of the ground-water profession, pol netie o ogproso ie but I believe that they have been blown out of proportion Therpe enteradiseas foreeping peinodths omputier * ~~~and that this might cause irreparable damage to our Teei ies reigit hscmue profession. modeling business and I'll call it "computerism." It is important to see where computer models fit Some of the symptoms-misapplication, oversell and into the ground-water problem-solving process. I believe mysterious methods-were brought up by Tom that ground-water computer programs are simply a Prickett. Also, there is an important item Tom * ~~~complicated "turn the crank" tool for making projections. didn't mention. I think that there are occasions They're one type of tool out of several which requireswhncmuemolsaedibrtyuedo * ~~~aquifer and confining bed characteristics to facilitatewhncmuemolsaedibrtyuedo making projections. A second approach for making keep people busy and to spend time and money. projections involves the direct extrapolation or manipulation This has to stop! of data which does not require transmissivity, storage Models can be practical tools; but when they coefficient, leakance, and other interpreted characteristics. are used as toys, it can destroy people's confidence, Further, I believe that the collection and evaluation ofbohutieadwhnorpofso.Inom data are of greater importance than the projection methods bohutieadwhnorpofso.Inom and/or tools in arriving at answers. parts of this country people have more confidence Advantages of ground-water computer models in water witches (or dowsers) than they do in include: speedy analyses once a program is working, ability ground-water professionals and their computer to handle many parameters, and utilization of a large data models. This is because the dowser goes out there base. The disadvantages include: use of computer models with a stick and these people see something as end goals, tendency for misapplications, time-consuming hpeigwt htsik hntedwe as * ~~~setup, a waste of time and money in some cases, and hpeigwt htsik hntedwe as diversion of human talent from useful ground-water work. "If you drill here, you're going to get water." Lo and behold, they drill there and they do get water! And the water witch gets credit for it! Actually, he could hardly go wrong. When my brother, Dad, aPresented at The Fourth National Ground Water and I were drilling in northeastern Minnesota, we * ~~Quality Symposium, Minneapolis, Minnesota, September encountered only one completely dry hole out 20-22, 1978. o fao t 2 00Anwypepedntse bGround-Water Consultant, 1586 S. Robb Way,ofaut20.Anwypeledntse * ~~Denver, Colorado 80226. something happening with a ground-water computer model, though it comes up with answers (four or 151 five significant figures). They seldom have a you will have your answer. Now, that is the reliability attached to them. The reliability of the simplest; but it takes too long! Let me work back- answers cannot go beyond the reliability of the wards to indicate what extrapolation means. Suppose data base. However, there is a tendency to make you pump six wells for ten years, and plot the projections beyond the data base and this is where data. It is not difficult to extend the plots to we get into trouble. twenty years. Furthermore, you can pump one I have to mention an article which was on the well for one year or less and extrapolate it for front page of the Denver Post on December 1, 1977. six wells for twenty years. Eventually, we might see According to it, a complex computer program computer models use this extrapolation method. was proposed for the Denver Basin. Study for it I believe that the collection and interpretation was estimated to take seven years and cost $687,000. of data are more important than any projection Three years would be for collecting data; then method. Projection methods include flow nets, well during the fourth year, the characteristics of the formulas, heat flow formulas, computer programs, aquifers would be measured. The model would extrapolations, etc. I have found that projections be designed to simulate the water levels and are usually within plus or minus 20 percent providint movements in the fifth and sixth years-maybe. one starts with the same data and assumptions. This is absurd! It shouldn't take seven years to However, the data, aquifer and confining bed study the Denver Basin. I think that the purpose of characteristics, and assumptions can easily vary by a this proposal is to crank out a ground-water factor of 2 to 10. This emphasizes the absurdity of computer model . . . it's a disease! And it can many computer printouts which have answers with adversely affect our profession. four to five significant figures and no reliability Where do computer models fit in? We have indicated. Does this mean an accuracy of plus or our ground-water hydrogeology business which minus one part on 10 thousand? No! It doesn't involves everything from drilling, collecting data, mean that. But it could be misleading. I cannot evaluating data to making projections. Concerning stress enough the importance of the collection and the latter, there are two classes of projection interpretation of good basic data. methods. The first class of projection methods Short-term and long-term projections are which is most familiar uses aquifer and confining different. I push things to their extreme to simplify bed characteristics as input to models. It is vital problems and make them easier to solve. Short-term to have transmissivity and storage coefficient, productions depend on transmissivity values- boundary conditions, recharge effects, etc. when forget recharge; forget storage coefficient. What is using models. Tom had a very good list of models. the production of the well for the first day, or for However, he had experience as a model by itself; the first couple of months? It's a function of I beg to differ with him. I think experience is a transmissivity! For a well field, it's transmissivity! vital part of all of the models. You cannot use Computer programs have their nodes, finite models effectively without experience. If a elements, finite differences, and equations of computer model doesn't work, the hydrologist water going in and out, but transmissivity is a key who has experience and good judgment can make item. We all feel confident on short-term analysis. it work. Computer models are one type of many What happens on long term? Transmissivity models used in the first class of projection methods. becomes much less important. We have to know This is where they fit ... though, the importance recharge and storage. If you fill a bath tub with of computer models is sometimes blown out of water, it will resemble the kind of ground-water proportion. basins we have in the western United States' We do The second class of projection methods which not care what the transmissivity is, nor do we care is not so familiar uses direct extrapolation of data. whether you use two or ten straws, when it is I don't know if it is being taught in any of the pumped the water levels drop! Recharge is college ground-water courses. But I frequently negligible. Who needs a computer model for that! solve problems (like dewatering of mines) using It's mining of the water! There may be some field data, and trends of data plus ground-water socioeconomic and legal consideration on how fast flow theory without knowing aquifer and confining we mine it. Conversely, in areas like Florida, the bed characteristics. For example, if you're going to Floridan aquifer's long-term pumping rate is a have a well field with six wells and you want to function of storage and recharge; on the longer know what is going to happen at the end of twenty term it is dependent on recharge of precipitation years, put in six wells and at the end of twenty years (leakance). With leakance values being more 152 difficult to obtain than storage coefficient, it is a up? Or will mine dewatering be more or less than problem to arrive at valid projections ... with or 5,000 gpm? (3) Does the data base justify the without computer models. method of analysis that is used? Or are you The above discussion illustrates that cranking out that program just to keep busy? computer models are only one type of model which (4) Is the cost in line with the purpose, accuracy may be applied in one class of projection methods. and data base of the ground-water program? In addition, I believe that the collection and (5) The last question is, "Are any of the symptoms analysis of data are more important than the two of computerism present in the jobs which you classes of projection methods for arriving at valid are working on?" If so, do something about it! answers. Therefore, the over-all importance of computer models is limited and they can be * * * * intellectual toys of the highest order. I'd like you to ask yourself the following Henry A. Baski has 17 years experience ranging questions regarding your projects. They are from drilling of wells to completion of technical reports. related to stopping or, at least, reducing this He has worked in 12 States and his specialties include: data collection programs, air lift pumping tests, surface- disease which we have. (1) What is the purpose of water/ground-water interactions, short- and long-term the ground-water program or study that you are projections, and mine dewatering analyses. Prior to working on? Is it to go out and collect data? Is it becoming an independent ground-water consultant, he was to come up with an answer? Or is it to keep busy? a senior hydrologist with Dames & Moore, and he had been (2) How accurate should your answer be? Believe an associate of Wright Water Engineers, Inc. Previously, he had been a partner in a family well drilling business. it or not, there are ground-water problems in which Mr. Baski received a bachelor of Geophysics from the yes or no is all the client needs to know. Like, is the University of Minnesota, and he is a member of the NWWA, water level going to go down or is it going to come GSA, SPE, RMAG, and AWWA. 153 Audience Response to Session VIII - Ground-Water Computer Models Raphael Kazmann, Louisiana State University, 231 Duplantier E. Glover's name by Mr. Darr brought to mind a number Blvd., Baton Rouge, Louisiana 70808: One of the big of refreshing incidents associated with some of the early troubles with computer models of all sorts is that it is work in mathematical and computer hydrology. Since I possible that something is going on that you don't under- won't be around much longer, I thought the audience stand. I remember an organization made a big analog model might enjoy hearing several of these in the form of of the Gulf Coast and they didn't take into account that anecdotes. some of the clays acted as osmotic membranes and are Well the first occurred at an NWWA annual meeting losing water to the Gulf, although the water level on the about 25-odd years ago. Bob Stallman had become very land is below sea level already. We saw water coming into excited about the finite-difference approach to solving the Gulf, the potentiometric surface was measured hydrologic problems. He recognized that many of the regularly and we could tell you exactly where it intersected practical problems were too complicated to resolve by at sea level and it kept on going down. Water was moving rigorous mathematics. Having an engineer's background, and we didn't know where it was going and for 10 years Bob was greatly influenced by Southworth's book on we were puzzled about that until finally Paul Jones figured numerical analysis and he proceeded to wear out numerous out that there was an osmotic relationship between the mechanical calculators in the process of "reducing the fresh water in the aquifer and the salt water in the Gulf residual to zero" at the nodes of a relaxation net. Pretty and the water was moving straight up into the Gulf, with a soon he got bored with wearing out his fingers on the hand driving force of about 600 lbs psi. This big model didn't calculators and began monkeying around with electronics- take this into account, and this phenomenon existed over first with Teledeltos paper, silver paint, a razor blade, a 150 miles of shore. So there's one big deficiency in many power supply, and a voltmeter. Then he really went into of our models. They don't take all of the natural the electronics business, learned how to build constant- phenomenons into account. My own feeling about these current and constant-voltage power supplies, etc., and put things is that we don't trust any model, mathematical together a machine with nodes, as I recall, about 10 by 10- or otherwise until we test it out with a physical test of a total of 100 nodes. This was all built up in a big some sort and make sure that we haven't omitted any of 6-foot-tall electronics rack with all kinds of meters and the major assumptions. Furthermore, many fine volume control knobs, etc.-a very impressive piece of mathematical program results are likely to be very, very machinery on which boundary conditions could be wrong, simply because someone is always coming in simulated and which could be used to measure and doing something that was not assumed in any of the simulated heads on the water table, drawdowns at pumping initial configurations. wells, withdrawal rates, and so on. Well, Bob was demonstrating this to anyone who would listen as part Tim Cleath, James M. Montgomery Consulting Engineers, of the U.S.G.S. exhibit at the NWWA meeting. And as it Inc., 555 E. Walnut, Pasadena, California 91101: I have so happened, an interested passerby was a crusty, old, one simple question based on an experience I had recently leather-faced well driller. Bob carried on, explaining and with a ground-water model in the south San Francisco demonstrating with meter readings and knob turnings, Bay area. There was a ground-water model made by the and lauding the wonderful things this machine could Department of Water Resources with which we really had a accomplish. Well, after about 15 minutes, Bob thought he lot of problems. Because of this ground-water model, one had really made a conquest and asked if there were any of the local agencies has drawn up ground-water basin water questions. The well driller promptly spoke up: "But how level contour maps. They've combined both the unconfined in hell do you get it down the well?" aquifer water levels and the artesian wells all in the same The second anecdote is related to Robert Glover map. I don't know if you can imagine what that would whose name was mentioned here a couple of times by Mr. look like, but it is definitely a wrong interpretation and Darr. Hilton Cooper headed up the U.S.G.S. salt-water my question is, once you've got one of these models and diffusion project, and I had been involved with field it isn't right, what do you do with it? studies of salt-water encroachment in Florida. As anyone Russ Darr, Wright Water Engineers, 2420 Alcott, who has been involved with hydrology knows, Hilton is Denver, Colorado 80211: I've seen the same thing done not an insignificant mathematician in his own right- by the U.S.G.S. which came out with a composite water more or less oriented toward rigorous mathematics. As level map. It has value. I think if you know the trans- part of the studies, Hilton invited Professor Glover to missivities of the two aquifers you can separate the various visit Miami to get familiar with the field test site at Cutler; heads by a formula developed by Dr. Dan Foegle. I and after he returned home, he wanted me to give think there's a discussion of that in Professional Paper some comments about his approach-so I wrote a long 908. What do you do with a model that doesn't work? letter about our discussions and sent it through Hilton. My guess is that you throw it away and start all over again. This was before Xerox, I think, because Hilton proceeded to cut up my letter with scissors and passed along the Francis A. Kohout, U.S.G.S., Water Resources Division, remainder of it. One of the surviving things was something Woods Hole, Massachusetts 02543: The mention of Robert to the effect that we needed to hit the mathematics 154 head-on. Now, rigorous mathematicians confronted with models. In fact, I use them in my work. However, I think difficulty rarely ever did hit things head-on. If a technique you should be aware of one danger of computer models was found to work, it was used over and over until a dead which has not been addressed. That danger is that people end was reached. Then they would usually find a sneaky put a tremendous amount of faith in computers. After little way of catching up to the problem by making an building or calibrating a model, you may discover that assumption, or sliding sideways around the problem. The you have written a new gospel which some will believe report came from Hilton that Professor Glover's comment with fervor equal to belief in the other four, Matthew, was an emphatic, "Well, I just can't hit this problem Mark, Luke, and John. Even if you explain the error limits, head-on." you may find them ignored unless you make them But things have changed. With modern day computers, abundantly clear. It is easy to lose sight of the error limits problems can be solved that could not possibly be attempted in a model just as is often the case with radiometric age before. But one shouldn't overlook some of the questions dates. How often have you seen a rock dated as, for of boundary conditions-for example, those which I example, 20 + 5 million years and then heard a geologist presented earlier in this meeting in regard to the occurrence describe it as a 20 million-year-old rock? And don't of relatively fresh ground water under the Atlantic criticize planners for misusing models; even hydrologists Continental Shelf. We believe this water was recharged into or hydrogeologists who build the models may lose sight of the offshore aquifers during low stand of sea level in the difference between what the computer tells them and Pleistocene time and that it is now serving as a buffer for what they tell the computer. I listened to a speaker on present-day salt-water encroachment. We have Atlantic Wednesday say that the computer model told him City pumped down to a hundred feet below sea level: there was no flow from one side of a basin to the other. It Savannah, Georgia, pumped down to 100 feet below sea seems to me that he identified the boundary conditions in level; and more-and yet we have not had extensive the field and then he told the model that ground water did salt-water encroachment in these aquifers. And I say this in not flow from one side of the basin to the other. In another spite of the fact that Henry Barksdale, 40 years ago, instance a colleague recently related to me a case of a predicted that Atlantic City was in imminent danger of glacier model in which the author said that the model salt-water encroachment. It may well be, but the fact of indicated the glacier would not advance beyond a certain the matter is that we are just beginning to find the point. However, the modeler had overlooked the fact that whereabouts of the fresh-salt transition zone in the he had built in that requirement. It was a requirement of offshore area. Clearly, a very fundamental aspect of any the model, not the glacier. Again he had lost sight of the computer analysis is to have a realistic idea of what your difference between what he told the komputer and what initial boundary conditions are. the computer told him. My last example of the pitfalls of Now, the last item I wanted to mention is again modeling is a basin-runoff model in which the modeler had related to Professor Glover. You know I have the greatest such complete faith in the model that he told a field respect for him, because we are coauthors on a U.S.G.S. hydrologist that he had failed to measure a flood peak. Water-Supply Paper. Nevertheless, I can't resist passing along In this case the hydrologist who had been up this anecdote. to the top of his hip boots in an icy stream did not take This again dates back about 20 years. Hilton Cooper, kindly to the statement that the discharge measurement at the time, wanted to have a laboratory experiment and was a figment of his imagination. I guess the main point of analysis of the dispersion process, so he got Ivan Johnson, this last example is, don't change the data to fit the model, then head of the U.S.G.S. Hydrologic Lab at Denver, to and don't put more faith in the model than in real data. set up a hydraulic model in which the fresh-salt interface All of us here today are professional hydrologists, was to be modeled-no oils or other substitute fluids- hydrogeologists, and engineers, and most of you probably just plain fresh and salt water, dyed for visibility. The feel that you wouldn't make such mistakes. All I can say interface was then going to be oscillated back and forth to that is: "GOOD," neither would I, I hope! to form a zone of diffusion in a permeable medium. Hilton was at the lab looking over this model with Ivan and Graham E. Fogg, Research Associate, The University of talking about how it was to be operated. Professor Glover Texas at Austin, Bureau of Economic Geology, University was there also. Hilton said, "Well, I'd like to have some Station, Box X, Austin, Texas 78712: As a hydrologist little holes drilled in this model so we can stick some who has both studied and used ground-water models, I hypodermic needles through rubber plugs and suck out have learned that they can be either practical tools or some water, and make some chemical analyses on the intellectual toys, depending on the competence of the dispersion zone." Whereupon Glover's response was: "But, modeller. Hilton, you don't have to bother with that. I've already Mr. Prickett pointed out that ground-water models calculated that distribution." have existed for years in the forms of mathematical models and experience. However, the controversy about Gordon Nelson, Hydrologist, U.S.G.S., 1209 Orca St., the practicality of ground-water models has become Anchorage, Alaska 99501: I am not opposed to computer heated only recently, reflecting the increased usage of 155 numerical models. The numerical models are by far the prescribed head boundary conditions, there are an infinite most powerful tools ever available for solving ground-water number of different transmissivity distributions which problems. Naturally, the chief drawback of any powerful yield the same model-computed values of head. To tool is that with only slight misuse it can bring disastrous successfully calibrate such a model, the modeller must results. Such misuse of numerical modelling has resulted have good initial estimates of transmissivity and head in in many models which are no more relevant than intellectual addition to the earlier mentioned qualifications. Above all, toys. modellers and water managers should realize that the A user of numerical ground-water models needs a ability of a calibrated model to mimic past ground-water firm understanding of the following: (1) ground-water conditions does not necessarily verify its ability to predict hydraulics and the complexities of geology that affect future conditions. ground-water flow, (2) field data collection, (3) the theory (4) Numerical models constructed for large regions of well hydraulics, (4) the theory behind numerical are sometimes being used to solve site-specific problems. ground-water models, and (5) sound scientific judgment. This is improper because inherently the regional models are In other words, the modeller should understand how too general to represent local conditions reliably. natural ground-water systems work and how accurately (5) Recently much work has been devoted to these systems can be represented by numerical models. developing numerical models for the simulation of solute Items 2 and 3 are needed to help assess the worth of model transport in ground water. This is very worthwhile research input data, which are usually sparse and often inadequate. from which we can learn much about the solute transport A mastery of the theory of well hydraulics (item 3) is problem. However, there exist several unresolved problems requisite for assessing results of aquifer pumping tests. which limit the usefulness of numerical solute transport Most ground-water modellers appear to be weakest in models as practical tools. One such problem involves the either 1 or 4. ground-water velocity field, usually the most important Below are listed several basic mistakes and mis- input into a solute transport model. Heterogeneous aquifer conceptions which seem to reduce the validity of many characteristics cause considerable variations in the numerical modelling studies. direction and magnitude of velocity (in both two and (1) As mentioned by Mr. Prickett, the wrong type of three dimensions). These velocity variations are generally model (i.e., experience, mathematical or numerical) is often critical controls on the movement and dilution of a ground- chosen. One needs competence in numerical modelling not water contaminant. Unfortunately, the velocity field is only to use numerical models, but also to know when not to seldom known in sufficient detail to make a solute trans- use them. port model reliable. Usually the best method of estimating (2) Many hydrologists believe the sole purpose of the velocity field in any detail is through ground-water constructing a ground-water model is to predict future flow modelling (numerical); and therefore the construction conditions. In most cases even numerical ground-water of a solute transport model should in most cases be models are not representative enough of field conditions to preceded by construction of a valid flow model. Other justify their use for predicting the future. Then what is so serious difficulties in solute transport modelling include: powerful about numerical models? They are the only means the estimation of representative dispersion coefficients (on of collectively analyzing a large quantity of ground-water both the regional and local scales), estimation of rates of data as a coherent system. Some ground-water systems solute adsorption onto the solid matrix, and accurate can be adequately understood only by this approach. representation of the solute transport equation through Once a system is adequately understood, many of the numerical methods. crucial problems can often be reduced to (using Mr. I agree with Mr. Baski's statement that our Baski's terms) yes or no questions. profession of hydrology may be damaged by numerical (3) Many hydrologists believe numerical models can modelling. My fears stem from the following disturbing be calibrated to accurately predict future ground-water observations: (1) many ground-water models are poorly conditions, regardless of the available data. This is false, constructed and interpreted, (2) in some cases water Model calibration, or the adjustment of model input data managers are using these models to make broad reaching (e.g., transmissivity, recharge, storativity) such that model decisions regarding their ground-water resources, and output (i.e., hydraulic head) matches field measurements, (3) many hydrologists and administrators are now can improve the predictive capability of a model. However, distinguishing the good ground-water studies from the bad the success of a calibration is directly proportional to the ones by assuming the former are those in which numerical amount of reliable input data and the skill of the modeller. models are employed. Surely, these actions can only Calibrations commonly entail the simultaneous adjustment produce untenable ground-water studies and management of more than one input parameter. These generally yield programs; and the end result may be a loss of confidence unreliable results, since two or more parameters cannot be in hydrologists and their models. Such consequences can adjusted in a unique fashion. In fact, it is usually difficult be avoided through a rational and deliberate approach to to adjust one parameter in a unique fashion. For example, modelling, careful model calibration through testing, in a steady-state model with known pumpage and and realistic applications of model results. 156 Waterborne Disease - A Status Report Emphasizing Outbreaks in Ground-Water Systemsa by Gunther F. Craunb ABSTRACT available on waterborne outbreaks in the United A total of 192 outbreaks of waterborne disease States during 1971-77 emphasizing outbreaks in affecting 36,757 persons were reported in the United ground-water systems. It is nevertheless important States during the period 1971-1977. More outbreaks to remember that chronic diseases, such as cardio- occurred in nonmunicipal-water systems (70%) than municipal-water systems; however, more illness (67%) resulted from outbreaks in municipal systems. Almost half physiologic changes have been epidemiologically of the outbreaks (49%) and illness (42%) were caused by associated with long-term exposure to various either the use of untreated or inadequately treated ground drinking-water contaminants and types and water. An unusually large number of waterborne outbreaks treatment of water supplies. It is much more affected travelers, campers, visitors to recreational areas, and restaurant patrons during the months of May-August and involved nonmunicipal-water systems which primarily these diseases because the data are often incomplete depend on ground-water sources. The major causes of in regard to specific populations affected or outbreaks in municipal systems were contamination of the incomplete in that additional research is required. distribution system and treatment deficiencies which For example, although much research has been accounted for 68% of the outbreaks and 75% of the illness that occurred in municipal systems. Use of untreated ground water was responsible for only 10% of the areas have lower mortality due to cardiovascular municipal system outbreaks and 1% of the illness. The disease than populations in soft-water areas, it is major cause of outbreaks in nonmunicipal systems was use still unclear whether the high concentrations of of untreated ground water which accounted for 44% of calcium or magnesium in hard waters offer some the outbreaks and 44% of the illness in these systems. protection or whether the higher concentrations Treatment deficiencies, primarily inadequate and of metals leached from water piping in soft, interrupted chlorination of ground-water sources, were responsible for 34% of the outbreaks and 50% of the corrosive waters are detrimental (Craun and illness in nonmunicipal-water systems. McCabe, 1975; Craun, Greathouse et al., 1977). Recent epidemiologic studies have indicated a INTRODUCTION relationship between the type of water source This report deals exclusively with acute and treatment, especially chlorination, and cancer waterborne disease and summarizes the data of certain sites; however, these have generally been hypothesis generating studies of large population groups and additional studies are required to account for confounding variables due to individual a Presented at The Fourth National Ground Water life styles and patterns (Cantor, 1975; Cantor and Quality Symposium, Minneapolis, Minnesota, September McCabe, 1978; Cantor, Hoover et al., 1978; Cooper, 20-22, 1978. bChief, Epidemiology Branch, Field Studies Division, Kanarek et al, 1978). Health Effects Research Laboratory, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Cincinnati, Ohio 45268. DEFINITIONS Only outbreaks associated with water used or 157 intended for drinking or domestic purposes are SURVEILLANCE SYSTEM included. To be considered an outbreak, at least A cooperative effort between the Health two cases of infectious disease must be reported Effects Research Laboratory, Environmental before a common source can be noted and Protection Agency (EPA), in Cincinnati, Ohio, investigated. Except in unique circumstances, and the Center for Disease Control (CDC) in such as a case of chemical poisoning in which Atlanta, Georgia, to investigate, document, and the chemical was identified in the water, a single report waterborne-disease outbreaks in the case cannot be recognized as having been caused United States has been in existence since 1971. by drinking water. The waterborne outbreaks Local and State health departments investigate reported here are those in which drinking water waterborne outbreaks and at times request has been implicated epidemiologically as the assistance from CDC and the EPA. As part of the vehicle of transmission of the illness. In most of reporting system, State epidemiologists and the outbreaks the water was also found to be engineers in State water supply surveillance agencies bacteriologically or chemically contaminated. In cooperate in providing data on waterborne only a few outbreaks, however, was an etiologic outbreaks to EPA and CDC annually. agent isolated from drinking water. Although reporting has generally improved For analysis the water systems were classified since 1971, it is recognized that more water- as municipal, semipublic, or individual. The borne disease outbreaks occur than are reported. definitions of municipal and semipublic differ Reporting depends upon many factors, including slightly for the periods 1971-75 and 1976-77. The the type of water system, severity of disease, definitions used for the 1971-75 data are consistent number of individuals affected, and interest and with reports from previous years (Craun and capabilities for recognition and investigation at McCabe, 1973; Craun, McCabe and Hughes, 1976; the State and local level. For example, 28% of all Craun, 1977). Definitions used for classifying water waterborne outbreaks since 1975 were reported systems involved in outbreaks during 1976-77 by Pennsylvania. It is felt that the primary were modified to correspond to those used in the reason for this large number of outbreaks in Safe Drinking Water Act (P.L. 93-523). Municipal Pennsylvania is the diligent surveillance and systems are now defined as public or investor-owned investigation by State and local public health water supplies that serve large or small communities, officials of problems in smaller-water systems. It subdivisions, and trailer parks of at least 15 service is difficult to ascertain the number of waterborne connections or 25 year-round residents regardless outbreaks that go undetected or unreported. One of the number of service connections. This estimate, based on data collected from 1945-70, corresponds to the Act's definition of community- indicated that about one-half of the waterborne water system. Semipublic-water systems are those outbreaks in municipal-water systems and about systems that serve transients and include institu- one-third of those in nonmunicipal systems are tions, industries, camps, parks, hotels, and service detected and reported (Craun and McCabe, stations which have their own water supply available 1973). A study of foodborne outbreaks in for use by the general public. This corresponds to Washington State after initiation of an improved the Act's definition of noncommunity-water system. surveillance system and investigation indicated The definition of individual system remains that only one outbreak in ten had been recognized unchanged. Individual-water systems are those used and reported (Barker, Sagerser et al., 1974). This by single residences in areas without municipal number may be applicable to waterborne systems or by persons travelling outside of populated outbreaks as well, since both depend upon the areas (e.g., backpackers). recognition of acute illness in several individuals The major effect of this definition change will to initiate an investigation. be in the analysis of trends because small subdivisions Outbreaks in municipal-water systems, and trailer parks which had previously been classified which number about 40,000 and serve about 177 as semipublic systems are now classified as municipal million people, are probably the most likely to be systems. This change in definition resulted in the reported. Outbreaks in semipublic systems, which reclassification of only one system in 1976 (e.g., number about 200,000 and serve numerous one system classified as municipal in 1976 would transients, are the next most likely to be reported. have been classified as semipublic had the 1975 The least likely to be reported are outbreaks in definitions been applied) and two systems in individual-water systems, which number about 1977. ten million. 158 Table 1. Waterborne Disease Outbreaks in the U.S., 1971-1977 1971 1972 1973 1974 1975 1976 1977 Total Outbreaks 19 29 26 25 24 35 34 192 Cases of Illness 5,182 1,638 1,774 8,356 10,879 5,068 3,860 36,757 OUTBREAKS protozoan responsible for giardiasis. Twenty During the period 1971-77 a total of 192 waterborne outbreaks of giardiasis were documented outbreaks of waterborne disease, affecting 36,757 during 1971-77; 18 involved surface-water systems. persons were reported (Table 1). Two deaths All but two of the giardiasis outbreaks in surface- were associated with these outbreaks. water systems occurred as the result of drinking Historical data on waterborne disease over the untreated surface water or surface water whose only past five decades indicate that outbreaks are no treatment was simple disinfection. Small municipal longer on the decline in the United States (Craun systems or semipublic systems in recreational areas and McCabe, 1973; Craun, McCabe and Hughes, were primarily affected. 1976; Craun, 1977). The number of waterborne Outbreaks occurring in ground-water systems outbreaks decreased steadily from an average were examined separately to determine if the of 41 per year in 193 6-40 to 10 per year in etiologic agents were different. The diseases in 1951-55; however, since then, an increase in the ground-water systems were generally similar to number of waterborne outbreaks has occurred, those in surface-water systems with the exception especially during the 1970's, to an average of 35 of giardiasis. Only two outbreaks of waterborne per year in 1976-77. The reason for this apparent giardiasis occurred in ground-water systems: in one, increase is difficult to ascertain, but it may be the well was influenced by water from an adjacent primarily the result of increased reporting and stream and in the other the well was heavily follow-up by engineers and epidemiologists. contaminated by human sewage. The percentage of outbreaks categorized as acute gastrointestinal ETIOLOGY illness was slightly higher in ground-water systems, An etiologic agent was determined in only no outbreaks of illness caused by toxigenic 43% of the 192 outbreaks (Table 2). The remaining E. coli were identified in ground-water systems, and outbreaks were categorized as acute gastrointestinal the percentage of illness due to shigellosis (30%) illness. This category included outbreaks character- was higher in ground-water systems. ized by symptoms including abdominal cramps, Many individual wells in some areas of the nausea, vomiting, and diarrhea occurring 24 to 48 United States have high nitrate concentrations. hours after comsumption of water and outbreaks Infantile methemoglobinemia, a disease related of "sewage poisoning" which is presumably caused to the nitrate concentration of drinking water, is by coliform organisms or enteric viruses that have not included in the tabulation. This disease is not yet to be fully characterized. In many of the reportable in the United States and its incidence outbreaks the search for an etiologic agent is not known. Numerous cases associated with included only stool cultures for Salmonella and individual wells high in nitrate were reported in Shigella; in others the investigation and collection the United States in the 1940's and 1950's; of clinical specimens were delayed because of late notification that an outbreak had occurred or Table 2. Etiology of Waterborne Disease Outbreaks samples were not collected because the outbreak in the U.S., 1971-1977 was investigated after the illness had subsided. Outbreaks Cases of Illness Twelve percent of the outbreaks were chemical (Percent) (Percent) poisonings involving arsenic, chlordane, chromate, Acute Gastrointestinal Illness 57 58 copper, cutting oil, developer fluid (hydroquinone, Chemical Poisoning 12 3 paramethylamino phenol), ethyl acrylate, Giardiasis 10 18 fluoride, fuel oil, furadan, lead, leaded gasoline, a Shigellosis 9 14 mixture of lubricating oil and kerosene, phenol, Hepatitis A 8 1 Salmonellosis 2 3 polychlorinated biphenyl, selenium, and an Typhoid 2 <1 unidentified herbicide. Enterotoxigenic E. coli <1 3 The most commonly identified pathogen was Giardia lamblia. Giardia lamblia is a flagellated 159 however, only three investigators have been seasonal variation for outbreaks in municipal motivated in the past 17 years to describe cases systems during this period or in previous years. that have come to their attention (Comly, 1945; A large number of waterborne outbreaks each Waring, 1949; Walton, 1951; Vigil et al., 1965; year affects the travelling public using semipublic Miller, 1971; Jones et al.,(1973). Cases in water systems which depend primarily upon European countries continue to be described in ground-water sources. In 1971-77, 78% of the the literature (Jablonska-Ulbrych and Frelek-Karska, outbreaks in semipublic-water systems affected 1974; Faivre, et al., 1976; Kantecka, 1976; travelers, campers, and visitors to recreational Bochynski et al., 1977). Our laboratory is currently areas or restaurant patrons. Seventy-five percent conducting a study to determine the incidence of (75%) of the outbreaks involving this transient this disease in areas of the United States with high population occurred in May-August, the period nitrate ground water and the influence of health when outdoor activities such as picnicking, camping, education and changes in infant feeding practices and vacationing are most common. on this disease. Outbreaks in systems using untreated ground or surface water were also examined by month of OUTBREAKS BY TYPE OF WATER SYSTEM occurrence to determine if contamination is more More outbreaks (70%) occurred in the prevalent during certain seasons (Table 5). There nonmunicipal-water systems, but most of the appeared to be little variation by season for illness (67%) resulted from outbreaks in municipal outbreaks caused by use of untreated surface water. systems (Table 3). Outbreaks attributed to municipal However, a distinct increase in outbreaks caused systems affected an average of 425 persons per by the use of untreated ground water and springs outbreak compared to 106 persons in semipublic was noted in the summer; 34 (53%) of the 64 systems and 10 persons in individual systems. outbreaks occurred in June-August. This implies Consistent with previous trends, outbreaks in there is either increased contamination of these semipublic systems peaked during the summer water sources during this period or if it is assumed months (Table 4). There appeared to be little that the supplies are always contaminated, use by greater numbers of susceptible individuals during Table 3. Waterborne Disease Outbreaks in the U.S., this period. 1971-1977, by Type of System CAUSE OF OUTBREAKS Outbreaks Cases of Illness (Percent) (Percent) The majority of outbreaks (79%) and illness (73%) were caused by the use of untreated or Municipal Systems 30 67 inadequately treated water (Table 6). Use of Semipublic Systems 58 32 Individual Systems 12 1 untreated, contaminated water resulted in 90 (47%) Individul- Soutbreaks and 11,534 (31%) illnesses; deficiencies 100 100 Table 5. Seasonal Distribution of Waterborne Disease Table 4. Waterborne Disease Outbreaks in the U.S., Outbreaks in the U.S., 1971-1977, Use of Untreated Water 1971-1977, Seasonal Distribution Ground Water Surface Municipal Semipublic & Springs Water January 2 3 January 4 0 February 3 2 February 0 2 March 6 2 March 1 1 April 4 8 April 3 0 May 4 15 May 7 2 June 5 23 June 14 3 July 9 25 July 10 4 August 7 15 August 10 3 September 4 4 September 2 6 October 4 5 October 5 0 November 6 5 November 5 2 December 3 5 December 2 2 Unknown 1 - Unknown 1 0 58 112 64 25 160 Table 6. Causes of Waterborrie Disease travelled through limestone or fissured rock. in the U.S., 1971-1977 Contamination of ground water by various Outbreaks Cases of Illness chemicals (arsenic, ethyl acrylate, leaded gasoline, 1. Use of Untreated Water: phenol, polychlorinated biphenyl, selenium) and Surface Water *25 6,060 surface runoff or flooding resulted in 12 (2 1%) Ground Water 57 4,5 39 outbreaks and 421 (9%) illnesses. There were Springs 8 935 insufficient data to establish a source of contamina- 90 11,534 tion for the remaining 21 (37%) outbreaks in 2. Treatment Deficiencies: systems using untreated ground water, emphasizing Surface-Water Systems 19 3,599 the need for better investigation and reporting if Ground-Water Systems 38 10,829 these problems are to be understood and corrective Spring-Water Systems 4 1,179 action taken. 61 15,607 The removal of iron and manganese for 3. Distribution System aesthetic reasons and disinfection only are the Deficiencies: 26 9,058 primary means of treatment for ground water. 4. Miscellaneous and Unknown is 558 Ground-water systems usually depend on a relative- *Includes outbreaks of giardiasis in which surface water ly good quality water, and disinfection is sometimes was chlorinated but not filtered. provided to protect against possible contamination of the distribution system. In these situations in treatment, primarily inadequate or interrupted unexpected contamination of the source could chlorination, accounted for 61 (32%) outbreaks and completely overwhelm the disinfection provided. 15,607 (42%) illnesses. Distribution system defi- For ground-water systems using a source known ciencies such as backsiphonage, cross-connections, to be frequently or intermittently contaminated water main breaks, contamination of treated water with bacteria, continuous disinfection is necessary storge rservirs ere esposibl for26 (3%)to insure potability of the water. Outbreaks in these soutraeak anr,5(5)ilesservis. were responsibng 2 1% systems are caused by interruption of disinfection outbreaks and 90825)illnesses. Theremcausdb iselneous due to the malfunction of equipment or lack of problems such as contaminated ice or containers mandinaeuteaisingasffictiont becauseo disinfectant and unknown or undetermined causes. adiaeut iifcinbcuedsnetn Almost half of all outbreaks (49%) and dosages had been reduced below prescribed levels illness (42%) were caused by either the use or no attention was paid to maintaining the of untreated or inadequately treated ground water. proper residual of disinfectant. Fifty-seven (63%) of the 90 outbreaks that were Interruption of disinfection was responsible caused by the use of untreated, contaminated for most of the outbreaks (74%) and illnesses (86%) water occurred in ground-water systems compared caused by treatment deficiencies in ground-water to 25 (28%) outbreaks in surface-water systems. Of systems. Seven (18%) outbreaks resulting in 1,176 the 61 outbreaks that were caused by treatment (II%) illness occurred because of inadequate deficiencies, 38 (62%) outbreaks affecting an disinfection of the ground-water sources. Most of average of 285 persons per outbreak occurred in the outbreaks were usually the result of improper systems using ground water compared to 19 (3 1%) chlorination since this is the most widely used outbreaks affecting an average of 189 persons in systems using surface water. Table 7. Waterborne Disease in the U.S. Due The 95 outbreaks in ground-water systems to Source Contamination of Untreated were further examined to determine the specific Ground-Water Systems, 1971-1977 causes responsible for the outbreak (Table 7, 8). Cases Of Distribution-systemn related outbreaks can occur Outbreaks Illness in any type of water system and were excluded Flooding I 88 from this analysis. Also excluded were outbreaks Contamination through limestone caused by miscellaneous deficiencies and unknown or fissured rock 4 138 causes. Overflow or seepage of sewage, primarily Chemical contamination 6 102 from septic tanks or cesspools, was responsible Contamination by- surface runoff 5 23 1 Overflow or seepage of sewage 20 3,100 for 42% of the outbreaks and 7 1% of the illness Data insufficient to classify 21 880 caused by use of untreated ground water. This 574 3 includes the four outbreaks where contaminants 5 161 Table 8. Waterborne Disease in the U.S. Due to Treatment finished water primarily through cross-connections Deficiencies in Ground-Water Systems, 1971-1977 and backsiphonage. Most of the resulting outbreaks Outbreaks Cases of Illness were quite contained, affecting relatively few Problems in chemical addition 3 3 7 4 people. However, two large outbreaks in 1975 Inadequate disinfection: Inadequate disinfection: ~~accounted for most of the illness in this particular Iodine 1 72 category: an estimated 5,000 cases of acute gastro- Chlorine 6 1,104 enteritis in Sewickley, Pennsylvania, felt to be Interruption of disinfection: related to contamination of an uncovered storage Iodine 3 71 reservoir for treated water and 1,400 cases of a Chlorine 2_5 9,208 similar illness in Sellersburg, Indiana, traced to 38 10,829 sewage contamination of a water main during construction. Use of untreated ground water was responsible method of disinfection in the United States, for most illness in municipal-water systems during however, four outbreaks resulted from inadequate previous years; however, during 1971-77, there were or interruption of iodine disinfection. In these only 6 (10%) outbreaks and 151 (1%) cases of outbreaks, iodination was used by small semipublic illness because of the use of untreated ground water systems serving a primarily transient population. by municipal systems. In other municipal system There were three outbreaks caused by the outbreaks in 1971-77, 28% of the outbreaks and addition of other chemicals to ground water. The 39% of the cases of illness were related to treatment two largest are of interest because they illustrate deficiencies; 14% of the outbreaks and 23% of the the need for increased surveillance and operator cases of illness were related to use of untreated training in fluoridation practices. Both outbreaks surface water; 8% of the outbreaks and 1% of the involved semipublic-water systems at elementary cases of illness were related to miscellaneous schools. In one, 201 students and 12 adults became problems such as ice contamination or unknown ill minutes after consuming orange juice made from deficiencies. the school's water supply. Laboratory analysis In nonmunicipal-water systems, use of of the juice revealed a fluoride concentration of untreated ground water was responsible for most 270 mg/I. Investigation of the water system showed of the outbreaks and illness during previous years. that fluoride feeder pump at the well site had Use of untreated ground water was still an important malfunctioned, causing fluoride to be fed continu- problem in 1971-77, but deficiencies in treatment ously even while the water pump was not operating. were also responsible for many outbreaks and illness The second outbreak involved 150 children who in nonmunicipal systems during that period. In became ill after drinking Kool Aid made with 1971-77 use of untreated ground water accounted school water. It was later found that the fluoride for 44% of the outbreaks and 44% of the cases of feeder was purposely run while the water pump illness in semipublic systems, and deficiencies in was off because the operator was concerned that treatment were responsible for 34% of the outbreaks the fluoride level was not high enough in the and 50% of the cases of illness. Use of untreated system. The third outbreak also involved a surface water accounted for 13% of the outbreaks semipublic system serving a school. The pH of the and 4% of the illness in nonmunicipal systems. ground water was 4.9 and pH adjustment was applied at the well site. Prior to the outbreak, CASE HISTORIES chemical feed was interrupted and high levels of The three largest outbreaks involving ground- copper (12.5 mg/1) were leached from the copper water systems occurred in Pico Rivera, California plumbing. The concentration of copper in the (3,500 cases), Comerio, Puerto Rico (2,150 cases) ground water prior to distribution through the and Richmond Heights, Florida (1,200 cases). plumbing was 0.3 mg/I. Between July 20 and August 7, 1971, The causes of outbreaks and resulting cases approximately 62% of the people living within a of illness were also classified by type of water 1l�-square-mile area of Pico Rivera became ill system. As in previous years, the major cause of with gastroenteritis (McCabe and Craun, 1975). outbreaks in municipal-water systems was con- The outbreak was confined to the Pico County tamination of the distribution system; 40% of the Water District (PCWD) and did not affect any outbreaks in municipal-water systems occurred part of Pico Rivera served by other water because of deficiencies in the distribution of companies. Within the PCWD, the outbreak was 162 most severe in the west portion of the water district, community 48 hours before the epidemic close to a reservoir. A chlorinator provided disinfec- began. This outbreak is a good example of why tion to water entering the reservoir via a gravity good disease surveillance is necessary to detect line from a well. It was discovered that the outbreaks. Initially only ten cases of shigellosis chlorinator had broken on July 20 and was not were recognized by health authorities, but upon repaired for approximately one week. Water further investigation 1,200 illnesses were found samples taken from the reservoir, from a gravity to have occurred. If local health authorities had water line feeding the reservoir, and from a not been conducting shigellosis surveillance, the trailer park within the area revealed heavy initial ten cases might never have been contamination by fecal coliforms, but no pathogens. recognized as an unusual occurrence and a water- The most likely source of the contamination was borne outbreak as large as this might not have along the gravity line serving the reservoir, since been detected. samples collected from the well supplying On November 16, 1971, a trailer court tenant the gravity line yielded no fecal coliforms. in Anchorage, Alaska, telephoned local health The second largest outbreak, an estimated authorities to complain of water that was "dirty" 2,105 cases of shigellosis, occurred in Comerio, and had a bad odor (McCabe and Craun, 1975). Puerto Rico in 1976. Shigella sonnei was isolated That morning a sanitary engineer investigated from clinical specimens but could not be isolated the complaint and found what appeared to be gross from water samples collected two weeks after sewage contamination of the well-water supply. the epidemic peaked. High coliform counts were Raw sewage was found standing in the well house found in the water distribution system during to the top of the well casings. Further investigation the outbreak, and during the investigation one of revealed 89 of 114 persons exposed were ill. seven wells supplying the system was found to be Symptoms included nausea, vomiting, abdominal contaminated with total coliforms of > 4900/100 pain, fever, and diarrhea caused by S. sonnei. ml and fecal coliforms of 230/100 ml. Although The water source was two approximately 242-feet the wells were chlorinated, insufficient chlorine deep wells, steel cased and enclosed in a well contact time was provided prior to distrubution, house. The well house floor was 3 feet below and the facilities were not maintained to provide ground level; the well casings extended to 1 continuous, effective disinfection. ECHO 8 virus foot above the well-house floor. Routine was also found in the water from the contaminated periodic water samples from the trailer court had well; however, its significance was not evaluated by consistently been negative. Sorrietime prior to epidemiologic studies. the morning of November 16, a "soft plug" had Between January 17 and March 15, 1974, obstructed the borough sewer and caused a approximately 1,200 cases of acute gastrointestinal backup of sewage in the trailer-court sewage illness occurred in Richmond Heights, Florida, a system. Sewage backed up through the drain in residential community of 6,500 (Weissman, Craun the well-house floor and spilled over the casings et al., 1976). Stool specimens from ten ill into the wells. Subsequently, raw sewage was individuals yielded Shigella sonnei, and since pumped into the trailer-park water system. symptoms of other patients correlated closely Another outbreak of shigellosis occurred with those of culture-positive cases, S. sonnei in November 1972 at a junior high school in was considered as the most likely cause of the Stockport, Iowa (Baine et al., 1975). Some 208 cases reported as gastrointestinal illness. Epidemio- cases of gastrointestinal illness were reported logic investigation disclosed that consumption of among the 289 students and 25 staff members. tap water was significantly associated with illness, A similar illness affected 12 of 26 visiting and it was found that one of the two wells providing basketball players. Rectal swab specimens were water to the community was continuously con- found to be positive for S. sonnei. Epidemiologic taminated with excessive levels of fecal coliforms. investigation revealed the vehicle of infection to The source of the contamination was traced by be the water supply, a shallow well in the school- dye studies to the septic tank of a church and a day- yard. Fluorescein dye introduced into a shower care center located approximately 150 feet from drain appeared in the well water within 30 minutes. the well. A breakdown in chlorination enabled A sample of tap water at the school showed high approximately 1 million gallons of unchlorinated levels of coliforms and yielded S. sonnei. or insufficiently chlorinated water from the A waterborne outbreak of gastrointestinal contaminated well to be distributed to the illness where Yersinia enterocolitica was isolated 163 from well water occurred during this period (Eden mentally retarded child who developed typhoid et al., 1977). An epidemiologic survey estimated fever in January and who attended a day-care that some 750 cases of gastroenteritis occurred center located adjacent to the well was felt to be among 1,550 guests and 350 employees at a the index case and source of contamination. Montana ski resort during December 6, 1974, Between April 4 and May 22, 1972, five cases through January 17, 1975. A significant association of typhoid occurred in a residential area near was found between drinking water and the illness. Yakima, Washington, that was served by driven Two 60-foot deep wells developed in sand and well points and septic tanks (McCabe and Craun, gravel supplied water to the resort. A sewer line 1975). Upon investigation, a typhoid carrier was was found to pass near the wells and samples identified in the area, and dye flushed through collected from the wells after the outbreak the sewage system in his home was traced within yielded Y. enterocolitica and coliform organisms 36 hours to numerous wells in the area including from 1 to more than 16 per 100 ml. Routine the ill family's well which was 210 feet away. The bacteriological surveillance during the previous water from this well also yielded typhoid bacillus three years had not detected coliform contamina- and coliforms. The soil in the area is extremely tion of the wells. Chlorination of the wells stopped pervious gravel, and at the time of the outbreak, the outbreak. Although Y. enterocolitica was the ground-water level was at or near its seasonal isolated from well-water samples, the significance peak. of this finding was unclear because rectal swab The following example illustrates the need cultures from acutely ill persons were not examined for chemical surveillance of ground-water supplies for this organism. (McCabe and Craun, 1975). In May 1972, a An outbreak of 98 cases of viral hepatitis in contractor built a warehouse and an office structure Polk County, Arkansas, in 1971 is a good example on the outskirts of a small town in Minnesota. A of how waterborne outbreaks may occur in areas well was drilled to supply water. During the next where geological formations allow drainage of 21/2 months, 11 of the 13 individuals employed by septic-tank effluents into ground-water supplies the contractor became ill; two were hospitalized. (McCabe and Craun, 1975). The outbreak was The hospitalization led to the discovery of traced to commercially made pellet ice, either elevated urine-arsenic levels in both patients. through patronage of a restaurant that used the Samples obtained from the well on two occasions ice or by direct purchase of ice from a general yielded arsenic concentrations of 21.0 and 11.8 store. The ice was made from well water at the mg/I. Area residents reported that grasshoppers general store. Both the ice and well water showed had been a serious problem in the late 1930's and heavy coliform contamination. Dye studies that a grasshopper bait composed of arsenic, bran, revealed that sedimentary rock strata in the area and sawdust had been prepared and stored on the permitted lateral drainage of a septic tank property now occupied by the warehouse and effluent from a nearby home occupied by residents office. The bait was apparently kept on the ground who had infectious hepatitis six weeks previously. and was believed to have been buried in the area. The largest reported outbreak of typhoid Soil samples on the property revealed arsenic fever in the United States since 1939 occurred concentrations of 3,000 mg/l at 20 cm-2 m and during this period at the South Dade Migrant 12,600 mg/l at 2 m. Farm Labor Camp, Florida (Pfeiffer, 1973; Chemical spills have also affected ground-water Saslaw et al., 1975). Epidemiologic investigation quality and caused outbreaks. Two that occurred of the 210 cases which occurred in February during this period are described. Accidental spillage and March 1973 implicated the camp's water of 10,000 gallons of 100% phenol in 1974 resulted supply as the vehicle of infection. Two wells, in the chemical contamination of a number of 6.1 meters deep, supplied water to the camp; wells in a rural area of southern Wisconsin the water was disinfected prior to distribution. (Horwitz, Hughes and Craun, 1976). An illness An engineering evaluation revealed that in early characterized by diarrhea, mouth sores, burning of February, chlorination of the water was interrupted the mouth, and dark urine was reported by 17 for a period of time, and it was felt that contamina- persons exposed to the phenol-contaminated water. tion of the water supply occurred then. The aquifer Gasoline spilled at a service station in Pennsylvania was composed of solution channels, and the wells affected ten individuals using private wells near had a history of intermittent contamination. Fecal the station; 10 mg/l leaded gasoline was detected in coliforms were found as late as March 2. A young the wells. 164 DISCUSSION Craun, G. F., L. J. McCabe, and J. H. Hughes. 1976. Waterborne outbreaks continue to occur in Waterborne disease outbreaks in the U.S.-1971-1974. J. Amer. Water Works Assoc. v. 68. the United States. A significant number of outbreaks J. Amer. Water Works Assoc. v. 68. Craun, G. F. 1977. Impact of the coliform standard on the and illnesses occur because of the lack of treatment transmission of disease. Symposium on Evaluation of ground water and because of the interruption of of the Microbiology Standards for Drinking Water. disinfection and inadequate disinfection of con- U.S. Environ. Protect. Agy. April 13-14. taminated ground water. Additional surveillance Craun, G. F., D. G. Greathouse, et al. 1977. Preliminary of small ground-water systems is necessary to report of an epidemiologic investigation of the relationships between tap water constituents and prevent outbreaks from occurring. Emphasis must cardiovascular disease. Proceedings Amer. Water cardiovascular disease. Proceedings Amer. Water be placed on obtaining water quality data for all Works Assoc. 97th Annual Conf. May 8-13. ground-water sources, insuring through sanitary Eden, K. V., et al. 1977. Waterborne gastrointestinal surveys that wells are adequately protected from illness at a ski resort. Pub. Health Repts. v. 92. surface water and sources of contamination, such Faivre, J., et al. 1976. Methemoglobinemias caused by as septic tanks; providing adequate treatment when ingestion of nitrates nd nitrite Ann. Nur. Aliment. v. 30. required; and providing for proper operation to Jablonska-Ulbrych, A. and M. Frelek-Karska. 1974. maintain continuous, effective disinfection when Methemoglobinemia in two infants caused by ground-water sources are known or suspected to nitrates in well water. Pol. Tyg. Lek. v. 29. be intermittently or continuously contaminated Jones, J. H., et al. 1973. Grandmother's poisoned well: with bacteria, report of a case of methemoglobinemia in an infant in Oklahoma. Okla. Med. Assoc. J. v. 66. ACKNOWLEDGMENTS Horwitz, M. A., J. M. Hughes, and G. F. Craun. 1976. Outbreaks of waterborne disease in the United States, The assistance and cooperation of epidemiolo- 1974. J. Inf. Dis. v. 133. gists, engineers, and public health officials in the Kantecka, B. K. 1976. Methemoglobinemia in poisoning States and my colleagues at EPA (L. J. McCabe, with nitrogen compounds in a 4-week-old infant. E. W. Akin, W. Jakubowski, E. C. Lippy, D. A. Ped. Pol. v. 51. White, S. A. Underwood) and CDC (M. H. Merson, Miller, L. W. 1971. Methemoglobinemia associated with J. H. Hughes, M. A. Horwitz, R. E. Black, R. A. well water. J. Amer. Med. Assoc. v. 216. McCabe, L. J. and G. F. Craun. 1975. Status of waterborne Gunn) during this period are gratefully acknowledged. disease in the U.S. and Canada. J. Amer. Water Works Assoc. v. 67. REFERENCES Pfeiffer, K. R. 1973. The Homestead typhoid outbreak. J. Baine, W. B., et al. 1975. Waterborne shigellosis at a public Amer. Water Works Assoc. v. 65. school. Amer. J. Epidemiol. v. 101. Saslaw, M. S., et al. 1975. Typhoid fever public health Barker, W. H., Jr., J. C. Sagerser, et al. 1974. Foodborne aspects. Amer. J. Pub. Health. v. 65. disease surveillance. Washington State. Amer. J. Pub. Vigil, J., et al. 1965. Nitrates in municipal water supply Health. v. 64. cause methemoglobinemia in infant. Publ. Health Bochynski, K., et al. 1977. Chemical mass poisoning caused Repts. v. 80. by sodium nitrite. Pol. Tyg. Lek. v. 32. Walton, G. 1951. Survey of literature relating to infant Cantor, K. P. 1975. The epidemiologic approach to the methemoglobinemia due to nitrate contaminated evaluation of waterborne carcinogens. Proceedings water. Amer. J. Pub. Health. v. 41. Conference on Environ. Impact of Water Chlorination. Waring, F. H. 1949. Significance of nitrates in water Oak Ridge National Lab. Oct. 22-24. supplies. J. Amer. Water Works Assoc. v. 41. Cantor, K. P., R. Hoover, etal. 1978. Associations of Weissman, J. B., G. F. Craun, et al. 1976. An epidemic of cancer mortality with halomethanes in drinking water. gastroenteritis traced to a contaminated public water J. Natl. Cancer Inst. v. 61. supply. Amer. J. Epidemiol. v. 103. Cantor, K. P. and L. J. McCabe. 1978. Epidemiologic studies * * * * on the carcinogenicity of organics in drinking water Gunther F. Craun received the B.S. degree in Civil supplies. Proceedings Amer. Water Works Assoc. Engineering (1965) and M.S. degree in Sanitary Engineering 98th Annual Conference. June 25-30. (1971)from Virginia Polytechnic Institute, and has taken Comly, H. H. 1945. Cyanosis in infants caused by nitrates in numerous courses in epidemiology and public health at the well water. J. Amer. Med. Assoc. v. 129. University of Minnesota, University of Cincinnati, and the Cooper, R. C., M. Kanarek, et al. 1978. Asbestos in domestic Center for Disease Control (Atlanta). His Public Health water supplies in five California counties. Final Service career has included assignments with the Indian Report R-804366. U.S. Environ. Protect. Agy. Health Service and Chicago Regional Office, and be is Craun, G. F. and L. J. McCabe. 1973. Review of the causes currently Chief of the Epidemiology Branch at EPA 's of waterborne-disease outbreaks. J. Amer. Water Health Effects Research Laboratory in Cincinnati. He has Works Assoc. v. 65. published extensively on the subject of waterborne disease Craun, G. F. and L. J. McCabe. 1975. Problems associated and initiated a cooperative program with the Center for with metals in drinking water. J. Amer. Water Works Disease Control in 1971 to investigate and report water- Assoc. v. 67. borne disease in the United States. 165 Waterborne Disease - Current Threat'a by Robert C. Cooperb ABSTRACT can reduce the number of known pathogens to Control of epidemic waterborne disease of an infectious levels that presently render the water acceptable nature has been made practical through modern drinking- from a public health point of view. This latter water treatment practices. Certainty of such control statement assumes treatment plant reliability, an depends upon treatment plant reliability. The possibility of assumption which may be questioned. For example, the transmission of newly recognized infectious diseases by the water route must be considered. The presence of trace of the 969 water supplies examined in the United amounts of chemicals in drinking water that are potential States in 1969, 12 percent were not meeting agents of chronic disease, particularly cancer, poses many bacterial standards (Taylor, et ali., 1972). qluestions concerning the safety of our water supplies. In situations in which drinking water is not treated there is always the possibility for contamina- Durig te lst hlf f te nnetenthcenurytion and resultant epidemics such as occurred in thrurigh the oberastionl of suhe nietentaJhn cenowr Riverside, California, in which 18,000 cases of throgh te obervaion f suh me as ohn now Salmonellosis was associated with a nondisinfected (1 8 54), William Budd (I187 3) and William Sedgwick ground-water supply (Ross, eit ali., 1966). One (1900) it became clear that certain infectious should not overlook the chances of cross connections diseases were associated with fecal material and in which even a well-treated water supply could be that drinking water was an important vehicle in the grossly contaminated. Thus even in this practiced transmission of these diseases. These observations area of drinking-water management, acute gave impetus to the development of the art and waterborne disease is always a threat and quality science of water treatment as we know it today. control must be maintained. Because of the long-term interest in the infectious During the past few years much concern has agents present in contaminated water and because been expressed regarding animal viruses in waste of extensive experience in their control, it is water and in drinking water. This concern has reasonable to state that modern practical water been stimulated because of the recognition that treatment technology, particularly disinfection, certain enteric viruses are proportionately more resistant to chlorination than are the standard coliform indicators. Thus processed water that a ~~~~~~~~~~~meets coliform requirements may be contaminated aPresented at The Fourth National Ground Water with viruses. With the exception of the incident in Quality Symposium, Minneapolis, Minnesota, September New Delhi, India, in the 1950's (Viswanathan, 20-22, 1978. bProfessor of Biomedical and Environmental Health 1957), in which thousands of cases of infectious Sciences, School of Public Health, University of California, hepatitis were associated with treated municipal Berkeley, California 94720. drinking water, there have been no recorded incidents in which an epidemic of viral disease has 166 been associated with properly treated municipal et al., 1961; Crawford et al., 1968; and Neri et al., drinking water. However, it can be hypothesized 1971). that with some frequency a small number of A negative correlation between water hardness viruses may be introduced into a distribution and infant mortality has been reported by Morris system. There is a probability that a member of the et al. (1961) and Crawford et al. (1968, 1972). exposed community will receive this viral dose in a These investigators point out that it has been known glass of water and concomitantly that the dose for a long time that social conditionshave a received will produce disease in some significant impact upon infant mortality; however, proportion of those exposed. This results in a when these factors are accounted for, there appears case of viral disease which then may be trans- to be a significant negative correlation between mitted horizontally through the family. Because of neonatal mortality and water hardness, and with the less than explosive nature of such an episode, calcium in particular. One suggestion was that the it would be unlikely that an epidemiologist would more corrosive soft water might increase the heavy associate the incident with the drinking-water metal content of drinking water in low calcium supply. Thus, it may be that water supplies that areas. meet bacterial standards produce point sources of In 1957 Penrose suggested that anencephalus disease which are then spread from the primary (a condition in which major portions of the brain contact to other members of the community via are missing) might be associated with the amount personal contact, food, etc. of calcium in water supplies. In 1970, Fredrick We cannot allow ourselves to become over- examined the relationship between anencephalus confident of our knowledge concerning microbial among children born in certain areas of the United diseases transmitted by water. Newly recognized Kingdom and water hardness and found a negative microbial phenomena are continually being correlation. He also pointed out a significantly uncovered such as the occurrence of enteropatho- higher incidence of death from spina bifida (a genic Escherichia coli in waterborne disease disease related to anencephalus) iln soft water areas outbreaks (Morbidity and Mortality Report, 1975), of the United States. the apparent increasing incidence of waterborne Asbestos is an inorganic substance found in giardiasis in the United States (Craun, et al., 1976) certain waters, originating from natural sources and the recent recognition that the legionnaires' or from industrial pollution, which has been disease bacterium is associated with cooling tower suspected as a possible contributor to the cancer water and surface water (Morbidity and Mortality incidence in exposed populations (Cooper and Report, 1978a, 1978b). Copper, 1978). Recently in our laboratory, indirect There are a number of chemical agents in epidemiological evidence has been developed which water which may affect man's health. A number of shows a significant positive correlation between inorganic chemicals are known to be toxic at levels of asbestos in domestic drinking water of the certain concentrations. These would include such San Francisco Bay Area and cancer incidence agents as arsenic, cyanide, lead, mercury, and (Kanarek, 1978). Table 1 is a summary of these nitrates. This latter ion has been recognized to be results. As is the case in the water hardness-cardio- associated with methemoglobinemia in young vascular disease relationship, cause and effect is not infants. proved but the data are very suggestive. Other inorganic substances in water are Since the early 1970's, there has been a growing suspected of being associated with chronic disease concern among Federal, State and local agencies in man. In 1960, Schroeder (Schroeder, 1960a regarding the health implications of organic chemical and 1960b) examined the 1949-1951 vital statistics compounds in the country's drinking-water supplies. dealing with the annual age-adjusted death rate A large number of these chemical compounds from cardiovascular disease in the United States have been found and generally their concentrations and compared these data to the weighted average have been in the microgram per liter range. The hardness in water used for human consumption. He trihalomethanes, and chloroform in particular, have found a negative correlation (higher disease rate been singled out as target compounds since they with softer water) between deaths from cardio- seem to be formed during water disinfection with vascular disease and hardness in the water supply. chlorine. The public health implications of the Since that time, there have been a number of presence of trace amounts of many of these organic studies in various parts of the world that, for the compounds in water is uncertain at the present time. most part, substantiate this relationship (Morris This is so because of the chronic nature of diseases 167 Table 1. Cancer Sites in White Males and Females That disease regardless of dose and that risk increases Correlate with Asbestos Levels in Drinking Water in the with increased exposure; i.e., is dose related. Such San Francisco Bay Area (adapted from Kanarek, 1978) risks are determined using a variety of statistical Cancer Site Male Female methods. Mantel and Bryan suggested that one Stomach + + extrapolate from high dose response data to an Peritoneum** + + appropriate risk level using a probit slope of 1 to Pleura* + - 1.5 probit per 10-fold increase in dose. This Trachea, bronchus, lung** + - assumes that response frequency is normally All respiratory** + - distributed. Probits are calculated as standard Digestive related organs* - + deviations about the mean of normal distributions Gall bladder* * - + Kidney* - + giving zero deviation (the 50 percent response Esophagus* - + point) a value of 5. This method is commonly Pancreas** - + used and is considered to give conservative values * p < 0.05. as it does not include: (1) the probabilities that the * p < 0.01. individual involved will be overshadowed by some + = correlation exists. competitive health risk; (2) the probability that an - = no correlation exists. individual will receive a given exposure; and (3) the age of the individual when the cancer will occur. The risk of developing cancer during a lifetime suspected to be associated with these chemicals of exposure to known or suspected carcinogens (such as cancer); because health risk data are that might be found in water was reported by the usually generated using animals receiving relatively National Academy of Science (1977). These values high doses of suspect compounds; because such were determined using a mathematical risk data must be extrapolated to estimate dose response model which would allow an estimation of the at much lower concentrations; and because such increment of risk of disease due to consumption of extrapolated data must be further extrapolated suspect compounds in water. Selected values are from animal to man. shown in Table 2. The evaluation of the impact upon the Thus, based upon these calculations, there morbidity of cancer in populations exposed to would be one excess case of cancer per 37 million low concentrations of known or suspected carcino- people who drink water containing 1 pg/l of gens present in drinking water is plagued with the chloroform. If these are accurate estimates, then as same difficulties as just noted for toxic organic the level of compound increased to 100 gg/l, it chemicals. Added to the problem is the question as could mean an increase of more than 600 excess to whether or not the concept of a threshold dose deaths among this country's 220 million due to is valid. This question arises because of: (1) the chloroform in drinking water. Tardiff (1977) self-replicating nature of the cancer cell, (2) the estimates the disease risk from the daily probability that the tumor-causing event is consumption of 0.01 mg of chloroform per irreversible, and (3) the possible occurrence of kilogram of body weight using a variety of risk cancer long after the disappearance of the carcino- gen from the body (W.H.O., 1974). Igen from the body (W.H.O., 1974). stated Table 2. Estimated Lifetime Risk of Cancer from In a recent article, Stokinger (1977) stated Consumption of Selected Carcinogens in Water his conviction that threshold concentrations do exist for carcinogenic compounds and that Upper 95% Confidence drinking-water standards should be developed from Compound Estimate of Risk* that point of view. He draws most of his supporting Vinyl chloride 5.1 X 10-7 data from industrial exposures and animal experi- Dieldrin 2.6 X 104 mentation. He strongly feels that toxic response is Heptachlor 4.2 X 105 DDT/DDE 1.2 X 10-5 frequently much different at low concentration of Lindane 9.3 X 106 toxic chemicals and therefore extrapolation from Chloroform 3.7 X 10-7 "high" dose experiments to estimate "low" dose Trichloroethylene 1.3 X 10-7 response is invalid. * Risk per microgram per liter of water consumed over a Others such as Mantel and Bryan (1961) feel lifetime. that a no-response dose of carcinogen may not Source: National Academy of Science, Drinking Water exist; rather, there is some risk of contracting the and Health, 1977. 168 models including probit, log linear, and two-step certainly poses a waterborne disease threat to methods. A dose of 100 pg/l per day to a 10 Kg those exposed. infant would be equivalent to 0.01 tpg/Kg which, Major concern is presently being expressed from human data, should not cause any liver about the presence of inorganic and organic damage. Using such models, it was calculated that chemicals that may be present in water and their the incidence of cancer should be increased by association with chronic disease, particularly cancer. 1.6 per million population per year, or of At this time there is growing evidence that a health approximately 300,000 cancer deaths annually in threat exists but its magnitude is at present poorly the United States, 252 might be attributed to defined. One of the major tasks before those chloroform in tap water. Tardiff concludes that interested in water quality and health is to define the risk lies somewhere between zero and the above the risks involved when these compounds are figure at a chloroform concentration of 100 pg/l. present in a community water supply. At present there are no time proven standards Is waterborne disease still a threat? The answer for acceptable levels of trace organics in water. is, of course, yes. It will always be a threat. We Recently, the Environmental Protection Agency has cannot afford to allow ourselves ever to become put forth a target level for trihalomethanes lulled into a complacent attitude towards this (including chloroform) in drinking water of question. 100 pug/l. The level of THM will be greatly affected by chlorination procedures in both the waste-water REFERENCES and drinking-water treatment plants and by the Cooper, R. C. and W. C. Cooper. 1978. Public health aspects amount of precursors of THM present in the raw of asbestos fibers in drinking water. J. Am. Water Works water. Assoc. 70:338. Epidemiological evidence is accumulating Craun, G. F., L. S. McCabe, and J. M. Hughes. 1976. Water- borne disease outbreaks in the U.S., 1971-1974. J. Am. that indicates correlations between trihalomethane Water Works Assoc. 68:420. level in drinking water and cancer morbidity/ Crawford, M., M. Gardner, and J. Morris. 1968. Mortality mortality at various anatomical sites (Environmental and hardness of local water supplies. Lancet i. 827. Protection Agency, 1978). Correlations between Crawford, M., D. Gardner, and P. A. Sedgwick. 1972. water source (surface and ground) and cancer have Infant mortality and hardness of local water supplies. also been shown (Page et al., 1976). In this latter Lancet i. 988. Environmental Protection Agency. 1978. Statement of basis case the cancer rates are frequently higher among and purpose for an amendment to the National Interim populations that take their drinking water from Primary Drinking Water Regulations on Trihalo- surface streams than among those who use ground methanes. Jan. 1978. water. The difference is assumed to be due to the Fedrick, J. 1970. Anencephalus and the local water supply. generally poorer chemical quality of surface water Nature. 227:176. Kanarek, M. 1978. Asbestos in water and cancer incidence. because of its greater vulnerability to contamination. Ph.D. Thesis, University of California, Berkeley, CA. There will always be a threat of waterborne Mantel, N. and W. R. Bryan. 1961. Safety testing of disease. The magnitude of the threat is our major carcinogenic agents. J. Nat. Cancer Inst. 27:455. concern. Modern water treatment practices have Morbidity and Mortality Weekly Report. 1975. Center for certainly reduced the threat of infectious disease Disease Control. 24:31. and in this regard it is a question of treatment Morbidity and Mortality Weekly Report. 1978a. Center for ,.and in this regard it is a questionoftreatment Disease Control. 27:283. process reliability and quality control. A quote Morbidity and Mortality Weekly Report. 1978b. Center for from Sir John Simon's report to the London privy Disease Control. 27:317. council in 1867 is appropriate: Morris, J. N., M. Crawford, and J. A. Heady. 1961. Hardness The public is hitherto very imperfectly protected of local water supplies and mortality from cardiovascular against certain extreme dangers which the malfeasance of a disease. Lancet i. 860. water company, supplying perhaps half a million customers, Neri, L. C., D. Hewitt, and J. S. Mandel. 1971. Risk of may suddenly bring upon great masses of population. Its sudden death in soft water areas. Am. J. of Epidemiol. colossal power of life and death is something for which till 94:101. recently there has been no precedent in the history of the Page, T., R. H. Harris, and S. Epstein. 1976. Drinking water world; and such power, in whatever hands it is vested, and cancer mortality in Louisiana. Science. 193:55. ought most sedulously to be guarded against abuse. Penrose, L. S. 1957. Genetics of anencephaly. J. Ment. Newly recognized microbial disease agents Defic. Res. 1:4. arise from time to time and under certain circum- Ross, E. C., K. W. Cambell, and H. J. Ongerth. 1966. Salmonella typhimurium contamination of Riverside,- stances can be associated with water, as for example, California water supply. J.A.M.A. 58:165. legionnaires' disease with cooling tower water. This Schroeder, H. A. 1960a. Relation between mortality from 169 cardiovascular disease and treated water supplies. World Health Organization (W.H.O.). 1974. Assessment of J.A.M.A. 172:1902-1908. the carcinogenicity and mutagenicity of chemicals. Schroeder, H. A. 1960b. Relations between hardness of Report of W.H.O. Scientific Group, Geneva, W.H.O. water and death rates from certain chronic and Technical Report Series 566, 19 pp. degenerative diseases in the United States. J. Chronic Dis. 12:586. * * * * Simon, John. 1867. Ninth report of the medical officer to the Privy Council. p. 28, London. Robert C. Cooper holds the following degrees: B.S., Stokinger, H. E. 1977. Toxicology and drinking water University of California, Berkeley, 1952 (Public Health); contaminants. J. Am. Water Works Assoc. 69:399. M.S., Michigan State University, East Lansing, 1953 Tardiff, R. G. 1977. Health effects of organics: risk and (Microbiology and Public Health); Ph.D., Michigan State hazard assessment of ingested chloroform. J. Am. University, East Lansing, 1958 (Microbiology and Public Water Works Assoc. 69:658. Health). He is presently Professor, Department of Biomedical Taylor, A., G. F. Craun, G. A. Faech, L. J. McCabe, and and Environmental Health Sciences, School of Public E. J. Gangarosa. 1972. Outbreaks of waterborne Health and Head, Graduate Group in Environmental disease in the U.S. 1961-1970. J. Infect. Dis. 125-329. Health Sciences, School of Public Health, University of Viswanathan, R. 1957. Infectious hepatitis in Delhi (1955- California, Berkeley, He has held teaching positions with 1956): A critical study. Indian J. Med. Res. 45:1 Michigan State University and University of California- (Supplement 1). Berkeley since 1953. 170 Waterborne Disease -Historical Lesson a by Ira M. Markwoodb ABSTRACT In discussing whether waterborne disease is a While it is true that waterborne diseases are still with current threat or a historical lesson, it must be borne us, and probably always will be, we cannot classify them as in mind that, in this case, the semantics are quite a current threat in the sense that they were 100 years ago. important. If we define a current threat as one The discovery that chlorine would disinfect water supplies where great activity must be taken in new areas, removed these diseases from a "current threat" category to the "historical lesson" category. We are not faced with where there is much to learn in order to control unknowns which we are unable to attack. We have only to the problem, and where, in many cases, we are look at what others have done to protect themselves and helpless to protect ourselves against the ravages of follow the same or improved practices. the threat, then it immediately becomes obvious if the record of waterborne outbreaks in public water that waterborne disease in the United States does supplies in this country from the end of World War if up not fall into this category. to the present is examined, it will be found that all are caused by breakdowns in disinfection procedures or One hundred years ago there were great carelessness. The record is replete with statements such epidemics of typhoid and cholera, to name two of as "improper disinfection after repair," "breakdown or lack the most common waterborne diseases, which of disinfecting equipment," "back siphonage," and otherragethconyadwihwreomley similar statements all pointing to failure to follow practices ravaged the abilitry and thic ee pompulatontoehltyo which the history of water treatment has shown to bebeodteaityfthpputonohltr necessary for protection against waterborne disease. minimize with the knowledge then available to Carelessness allows recurrence of disease outbreaks. if the them. Since then, particularly in the first quarter lessons of history were followed, the conquest of waterborne of this century, much has been learned. We now disease transmission by public water systems could be know that these diseases can be prevented by complete. proper precautions, and that these terrible epidemics need no longer occur. We are not faced with unknowns which we are unable to attack. We have only to look at what others have done to protect a ~~~~~~~~~~~themselves and follow the same or improve aPresented at The Fourth National Ground Water practices. Quality Symposium, Minneapolis, Minnesota, September If the record of waterborne outbreaks in public 20-22, 1978. water supplies in this country from the end of World bDivision Manager, Division of Public Water Supplies, War II up to the present is examined, it will be Illinois Environmental Protection Agency, 2200 Churchill Road, Springfield, Illinois 62706. found that all are caused by breakdowns in disinfection procedures or carelessness. The record 171 is replete with statements such as "improper waterborne disease is now in the class of a historical disinfection after repair," "breakdown or lack of lesson. We need only to look back to see what has disinfecting equipment," "back siphonage," and been done to prevent transmission of disease by other similar statements, all pointing to failure to water, and use these methods as the lesson to follow practices which the history of water continue such prevention for the protection of treatment has shown to be necessary for protection the water consumers. against waterborne disease. Modern technology Carelessness allows recurrence of disease presents methods for removing any substance from outbreaks. If the lessons of history were followed, water. The only limiting factor is cost. However, the conquest of waterborne disease transmission even the most common methods, such as by public water systems could be complete. flocculation, coagulation and sedimentation, * * * * will remove a high percentage of the microbiological Ira M. Markwood, Manager of the Public Water contaminants. In addition, the pathways by which Supplies Division, Illinois EPA, received his Bachelor's contaminants can enter drinking water are well degree in Chemical Engineering from New York University known, and, with reasonable precaution, be closed and his Master's degree in Chemical Engineering from so that the water will be protected against the Virginia Polytechnic Institute. He is a Registered Professional entrance of pathogens. The use of proper disinfection Engineer in New York, New Jersey and Illinois. In 1972, methods, in addition, allow 100% protection against Markwood joined the Illinois EPA and was named Division Manager two years later. He is a member of a number of the transmission of waterborne disease by this professional societies, and has been active in working with method. the U.S. EPA to promote reasonable regulations for public Therefore it can be said conclusively that water systems under the Safe Drinking Water Act. Audience Response to Session IX - Waterborne Disease Elmer E. Jones, Jr., Agricultural Engineer, USDA, Beltsville typhoid requires about 100,000 organisms in a glass of water Agricultural Research Center, Beltsville, Maryland 20705: for a 50% incidence among individuals lacking immunity. At I believe the incidence of waterborne disease in rural areas lower doses most individuals acquire immunity. That herd is much higher than generally suspected. Many diseases are immunity is a factor in control of waterborne disease in treated symptomatically without full diagnosis. Normally rural areas is indicated by the high percentage of waterborne two or more cases must occur to be considered an outbreak. disease cases in rural areas that involve transients. Herd One case in a family of four is a 25% incidence. If this immunity offers no protection to new diseases. occurred in a city of 10,000 it would probably make all It is important for regulatory officials to recognize the major papers in the world. that within the well bore is a man-made structure involved For some diseases the number of organisms required in the protection of public health. As such it should be to produce a clinical case is extremely high. I believe subject to periodic inspection and maintenance as required. 172 TECHNICAL REPORT DATA (Please read Instructions on the reverse before completing) 1. REPORT NO . 23. RECIPIENT'S ACCESSIOsNO. EPA-60079-79-029 4. TITLE AND SUBTITLE 5. REPORT DATE PROCEEDINGS OF THE FOURTH NATIONAL GROUND Auqust 1979 issuing date WATER QUALITY SYMPOSIUM 6. PERFORMING ORGANIZATION CODE 7. AUTHOR(S) 8. PERFORMING ORGANIZATION REPORT NO. 9. PERFORMING ORGANIZATION NAME AND ADDRESS 10. PROGRAM ELEMENT NO. National Water Well Association ICC824 500 West Wilson Bridge Road 11. CONTRACT/GRANTNO. Worthington, Ohio 43085 Grant No. R-805747 12. SPONSORING AGENCY NAME AND ADDRESS 13. TYPE OF REPORT AND PERIOD COVERED Robert S. Kerr Environmental Research Lab. - Ada, OK Final (02/06/78 - 02/05/79) Office of Research & Development 14. SPONSORING AGENCY CODE U.S. Environmental Protection Agency EPA/600/15 Ada, Oklahoma 74820 15. SUPPLEMENTARY NOTES 16. ABSTRACT The Fourth National Ground Water Quality Symposium was held in Minneapolis, Minnesota, September 20-22, 1978, in conjunction with the annual convention of the National Water Well Association. The Symposium was dedicated to the late George Burke Maxey and the keynote address was given by Courtney Riordan, Associate Deputy Assistant Administrator, Office of Air, Land & Water Use, Office of Research and Development, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. Nine sessions highlighting the theme "The Issues of Our Time" were conducted through a debate format featuring national authorities presenting neutral, pro, and con views followed by audience participation. 17. KEY WORDS AND DOCUMENT ANALYSIS a. DESCRIPTORS b.IDENTIFIERS/OPEN ENDED TERMS c. COSATI Field/Group Water Quality Ground Water Movement 13B Water Resources Artificial Recharge Water Pollution Ground Water 18. DISTRIBUTION STATEMENT 19. SECURITY CLASS (ThisReport) 21. NO. OF PAGES Release to public. Unclassified 179 20. SECURITY CLASS (This page) 22. PRICE Unclassified EPA Form 2220-1 (9-73) 173 U.S. GOVERNMENTPRINTINGOFFICE:1979 -657-060/5425 United States Environmental Research Information Postage and Environmental Protection Center Fees Paid Agency Cincinnati OH 45268 Environmental Protection Agency EPA-335 Official Business Penalty for Private Use $300 Special Fourth-Class Rate Book NCN Dr.' De Brown, (P) 0001 DNeartment of co nerce Env Data Serv. Dx86 5 Wash'ington, DC 20235 _ Please make all necessary changes on the above label, detach or copy, and return to the address ,n the upper left-hand corner. If you do not wish to receive these reports CHECK HERE 0; detach, or copy this cover. and return to the address in the upper left-hand corner. EPA-600/9-79-029