1

The Rock River Basin covers over 3,700 square miles and is located in the south central part of Wisconsin. The Basin's natural resources are the legacy of the last period of Wisconsin glaciation. Many Native American tribal peoples lived here because of the outstanding land, water, and wildlife resources in the Basin. European settlers described the Basin as a paradise of fertile soils, large forests, and many clear sparkling rivers and lakes. Much has changed over the last 150 years. Today, most of the prairies and oak savannas are gone, the wetlands are diminished by 50%, and most forests have been cut down to make way for agriculture. Currently, agriculture dominates the land use; however urbanization in the Basin is growing rapidly. Overall, some of the Rock River Basin's natural resources are slightly improved compared to 20 years ago. Land management and forestry law changes have supported a small increase in forests in the Basin. Better treatment at wastewater treatment plants has improved water quality in some stretches of streams. Yet today, most water bodies in the Basin remain significantly impacted by soil and nutrients washing into the streams and lakes from urban and rural storm water runoff. Wildlife habitat continues to be lost and fragmentation of habitat accelerates. Today, the most serious challenges facing the Basin include:

Water quality impacts and increased runoff quantity from agriculture and urban land uses, such that many of the rivers and streams are not meeting water quality standards.

Loss of agricultural lands, with its effect on wildlife habitat, recreational usages, the rural landowners, and economy. Loss of critical sensitive habitat and connection between habitats. Lower urban groundwater levels due to increased use and decreased groundwater infiltration due to more acres of impervious land. Significant groundwater contamination in areas of the Basin.

From Wisconsin DNR Lower Rock Groundwater

Groundwater is an important resource of the Lower Rock River Basin. It is the source of almost all water used for domestic, agricultural, commercial and industrial purposes in the basin. All of the basin's residents rely on groundwater for a potable water supply. The rural population typically uses shallower, less protected aquifers than the urban population, which is served by public water supplies and typically deeper wells. The reliance on groundwater in this basin is similar to use patterns throughout the state. The primary use of groundwater is for residential purposes such as drinking water, cleaning, and sanitation, followed by industry and irrigation. Groundwater is stored in aquifers and is also discharged to streams, lakes, and wetlands as base flow. Groundwater discharges an estimated 16 billion gallons of water per day to lakes and streams in Wisconsin (Holt). Base flow can be a major source of stream flow and its contributions are vital to stream ecology. Because of its importance, we need a greater understanding of groundwater and of existing and potential threats to its quality and quantity. The Lower Rock River Basin includes 15 watersheds encompassing parts of Columbia, Dane, Rock, Jefferson, Washington, Waukesha and Walworth Counties. The overall drainage basin encompasses 1,857 square miles (4,809 square kilometers). Maintaining the basin's groundwater quality is essential to make the Lower Rock River Basin an attractive place to work and live. The key to groundwater protection is prevention of groundwater contamination. Contamination prevention is the best public policy and is more cost-effective than remediation of contaminated groundwater.

Groundwater Recommendations for the Lower Rock River Basin

The Dane County Regional Planning Commission has developed a set of recommendations specific to communities in Dane County. This list should also be considered when planning water quality work and budget items.

WDNR Groundwater Section (GS) staff should work with regional staff to develop wellhead protection plans for communities in the Lower Rock River Basin. For Wellhead Protection plans in Dane County, WDNR Groundwater Section (GS) staff and others should utilize data and information from the Dane County Hydrologic Model to develop wellhead protection plans for communities in the Lower Rock River Basin. GS staff should work with communities in the Lower Rock River Basin to identify potential funding sources for wellhead protection plan implementation.

GS staff should work with regional staff to identify important source water areas in the Lower Rock River Basin. GS staff should work with regional staff and the WDNR Bureau of Communication and Education Strategy to evaluate the adequacy of existing materials concerning Lower Rock River Basin-specific groundwater educational information. GS staff should work with regional staff to identify and inventory pollution sources and potential sources in the basin. GS staff should work with regional staff to prepare and analyze maps of nitrate, pesticide, volatile organic compounds, metals and radioactive detects in the watersheds of the Lower Rock River Basin. GS staff should continue to support sampling and inventorying of wells, including the use of Wisconsin Unique Well Numbers.

Groundwater Concepts
Only 3 percent of the world's water supply is available to humans as fresh water. Of this small amount, 98 percent exists as groundwater. To understand the occurrence and movement of groundwater in a particular locality, it is first necessary to understand the interactions between water, the land and the atmosphere, called the hydrologic cycle. This cycle begins as water evaporates from waterbodies, land surfaces and vegetation on a continental scale. The water vapor moves through the atmosphere until it condenses into droplets, which then fall onto the land or sea as precipitation. Precipitation that falls on land continues through the hydrologic cycle via a number of different paths. If the ground is impermeable or already saturated, some water will flow across the land surface to streams and lakes as overland flow. If the land surface is permeable and not fully saturated, water will filter into the ground. Some of that water will be taken up by growing plants and transpired back into the atmosphere. Excess water will continue to move downward under the influence of gravity. At some depth, the downward moving water will reach the water table where the formation is saturated. Groundwater is water found in saturated rock and soil formations. These formations may be consolidated bedrock, such as limestone or sandstone, or they may be loose unconsolidated deposits of sand, gravel or silt and clay. Water is stored in areas between rock and soil particles ("interstitial spaces"). The relative volume of these spaces is known as porosity. Groundwater moves via gravity through porous materials and discharges to lakes, streams, wetlands or pumping wells. The size and interconnection of the spaces within the rock and soil controls the rate water flows through the material and is known as permeability. The layer where useable water is stored is called the aquifer. "Unconfined" aquifers occur where unsaturated porous material overlies saturated material. Where this occurs, the upper surface of the saturated zone is called the water table. The water table generally follows the contour of the ground surface terrain and can be mapped by examining well depth in these contoured areas. Aquifers may also be bounded at the top and bottom by impermeable layers called aquitards or confining beds. These beds are typically of clay or shale, but may be composed of granite or other impermeable rock. Under confining conditions the water table does not determine flow directions. A map of the piezometric surface can be made by comparing the levels to which the water rises in wells, reflecting the pressure the water is under in that portion of the aquifer.

4
Groundwater is made up of rainfall or snowmelt that percolates down through the soil until it reaches the saturated zone of an aquifer. This process is known as aquifer recharge. Recharge may take place throughout the aquifer, but occurs principally in aquifer recharge areas. These are usually located in the uplands. Lowlands tend to be discharge areas where groundwater is discharged to surface waters. Surface watersheds can usually be used to approximate shallow groundwater hydrologic boundaries when specific information is not available. Surface watershed boundaries and groundwater divides do not, however, always coincide. Specific site investigations require the use of detailed hydrologic maps or field data to properly identify groundwater flow patterns. Regional groundwater flow in Wisconsin is similar to surface topography. Groundwater usually enters the aquifer in upland areas and flows toward low points in a drainage basin. Sometimes it reaches the surface in the form of springs or artesian wells or seeps into swamps or rivers and lakes. These are called discharge areas. That portion of stream flow comprised of groundwater contributions is called base flow. Streams in the Lower Rock River Basin are comprised of base flow and overland flow.

Geologic and Geographic Setting

The Lower Rock River Basin includes the portion of the Rock River below Fort Atkinson and its tributaries. The Bark River originates in Washington County and traverses the southern Kettle Moraine region before emptying into the Rock at Fort Atkinson. From the northwest, the Yahara River drains much of central Dane county toward its intersection with the Rock just south of Edgerton. Most of the basin lies in the Eastern Ridges and lowlands Geographic Province. A small portion in western Rock County is in the Western Upland Province. A dominant feature of the basin is the Green Bay terminal moraine and interlobate moraine of the Green Bay and Lake Michigan Lobes, also known as the Kettle Moraine. The moraine runs southeast through Dane County and sweeps across northern Rock and Northeastern Walworth Counties before turning north through Waukesha. Surficial deposits to the south are primarily outwash, isolated patches of older till and loess over residual bedrock materials. To the north are sandy tills with patches of outwash and lacustrine deposits, the largest of which is located east of Whitewater. Aside from the heavily wooded topographic high of the moraine, and the wetlands associated with lacustrine deposits, the landscape is rolling and intensely farmed. The bedrock geology of the basin includes all but the very oldest Precambrian and the youngest rocks of the state, Devonian shale and limestones. Cambrian sandstones underlie glacial deposits in Dane County and in the deeply incised ancient Rock River valley in Rock and Jefferson Counties. The entire Paleozoic sequence dips along the Precambrian surface and thickens to the southsoutheast where total thickness of Cambrian rocks exceed 1,800 feet near Beloit. Rocks of the Ordovician system overlie the Cambrian sandstones. These rocks are a repeating cycle of Limestones (dolomites), sandstones and shales. Rocks of this age are present over much of the remaining area of the basin. In the very eastern reaches of the Bark River there is Silurian dolomite. The Silurian Escarpment location coincides with the Kettle Moraine glacial feature.

Glacial Deposits

5
Glaciers of the Pleistocene Era were formed by the continental accumulation of snow and reached a maximum thickness of two miles. The ice sheet that spread over Canada into Wisconsin during this time transported a great deal of rock debris called drift. As the ice melted, large amounts of sand and gravel were deposited forming outwash plains. The glacial drift that forms the surface layer of the Rock River Basin is either stratified or unstratified. Stratified drift is from ice-contact deposition or from outwash ("outwash drift") carried by glacial meltwater. This stratified drift occurs primarily in areas of lakes and impoundments in river headwaters. Unstratified drift consists of ground moraine, a sheet of unsorted sandy clay till laid down directly by ice; end moraine, ridges of boulder-strewn till laid down by ice during pauses in glacial advance or retreat; and unpitted or pitted outwash, or lake deposits. Pits were formed in the outwash where buried blocks of ice melted; many of these pits are now lakes or wetlands. Large lakes formed in front of the glaciers and clayey lacustrine deposits settled out in these basins. These glacial deposits were transported by glacial ice or meltwater within the last million years. The most recent deposits were left as the Green Bay and Lake Michigan Lobes retreated from the area around 10,000 years ago. The entire basin falls within the glaciated part of the state, although much of the older till in southern Rock County has been eroded away. South of the terminal moraine the glacial deposits consist of patchy old clayey tills, pitted outwash to the southeast and deep alluvial sand and gravel in the river valley. The moraine is composed of course gravel, sand and stony till. To the north are lacustrine deposits, spotty outwash and sandy till. A large drumlin field--hills elongated in the direction of ice flow--and several recessional moraines cross eastern Dane and Jefferson Counties.

Aquifers
Most of the basin is covered by a layer of glacial deposits. Glacial deposits often supply sufficient amounts of water for domestic purposes where they are thicker and more extensive. Within the basin, sand and gravel deposits are abundant, particularly in the river valleys. Wells finished in the unconsolidated materials can supply sufficient amounts of water for domestic supplies and municipal supplies in the river valley. A well at Janesville yields 5,450 gallons per minute (gpm) for 24 hours with only seven feet of drawdown. Aquifer tests in Beloit indicated a transmissivity of 1,200,000 gpd per foot. The underlying sandstone has a has a transmissivity of about 33,000 gpd per foot sustaining yields up to 1,200 gpm. The dolomite aquifers are much more variable and will range from 0-50,000 gpd per foot depending on the amount of fracturing and karst development. Wells in the basin are finished, or draw water from three of the four aquifers of the state. Sand and gravel wells are distributed throughout the basin, but are less common in Dane County. Most of these wells are shallower and the majority are domestic with the exception of high capacity wells in the alluvial deposits in Rock County. The shallow wells are susceptible to contamination. Many subdivisions have histories of nitrate and other human-caused contamination. The Eastern Dolomite Aquifer is confined to the very eastern part of the basin. The aquifer is well protected from surface contamination by fairly thick clayey till deposits. Moving west, bedrock wells are finished in the upper part of the sandstone aquifer. The upper sandstone aquifer is comprised of the Sinnippe group (dolomites), the St. Peter sandstone and the Prairie du Chien dolomite. This aquifer is the most commonly drilled to in the

6
basin. The distribution of wells in this aquifer is even throughout the basin except where the formations are absent, such as in the Yahara and Rock valleys. The lower sandstone aquifer is primarily tapped by municipal systems in the western and southern parts of the basin. In Dane County, where the Cambrian rocks are nearer the surface, many domestic wells also draw water from these formations.

Sand and Gravel Aquifer

The sand and gravel aquifer is a relatively shallow aquifer consisting of permeable sediments of unconsolidated glacial deposits. The aquifer is thickest in the buried bedrock valleys of the basin. It is locally important as a source of groundwater for private use and public supplies where thick saturated unconsolidated deposits exist. Within the basin, deposits of high permeability sand and gravel are found in the Kettle Moraine area and in the outwash plains and alluvial filled valleys in Rock County. The deposits range up to 400 feet thick in several areas. These thick deposits consist mostly of alluvial sands and gravel that are excellent aquifers. Thinner deposits are generally sandy tills with less extensive localized outwash, which are adequate producers for domestic uses. Groundwater collects and moves in the pores and open spaces between the grains of silt, sand and gravel.

Silurian Dolomite Aquifer

The Silurian dolomite is found only in the far eastern tip of the basin. The rock dips to the southeast. Bedding planes and fractures have a great influence on groundwater flow. Many of the fractures have been enlarged by dissolution of the carbonate rock matrix. This secondary porosity is referred to as "karst." Since the dolomite is buried quite deep beneath glacial deposits the fracture flow is not as great of a concern in this basin as in other less protected areas.

Sandstone Aquifer
The Sandstone is made up of the Cambrian and Ordovician sandstones and dolomites. It is separated from the Silurian aquifer by the Maquoketa shale, which subcrops in a north-to-south line through western Waukesha and central Walworth Counties. The younger Ordovician system has more dolomite formations than the Cambrian system. This makes the hydrologic properties somewhat different than the lower system as well as making the shallower system more vulnerable to contamination. Yields are variable depending on the formation and well construction, but they are always sufficient.

Agricultural Practices
Agriculture accounts for 73 percent of the land use in the basin. The use of best management practices (BMPs) can help protect groundwater resources. The UW-Extension and the Department of Agriculture Trade and Consumer Protection (DATCP) provide assistance in the application of agricultural BMPs.

Animal Feedlots

7
Animal feedlots are outdoor areas where animals are concentrated for feeding or other management purposes. The principal groundwater pollutants originating from feedlots are nitrates, chlorides, bacteria, oxygen demanding materials, and phosphorus. Water percolating through soil into groundwater may also carry a bad odor and taste. The potential for groundwater pollution from feedlots depends on the design and construction of the lot as well as characteristics in the immediate area and the depth to groundwater. Abandoned feedlots/barnyards contribute more nitrate to groundwater as soil permeability increases. Surface permeability is low as long as livestock are trampling or compacting the surface soils. Factors that may inhibit or increase the occurrence of groundwater contamination are:

Soil characteristics of the feedlot Geology at or near the lot (e.g. depth to bedrock, depth to groundwater) Runoff control practices present Waste handling practices Rainfall Number of animals Spreading waste on snow-covered and sloping terrain that results in runoff to streams and groundwater

Livestock Waste Storage

Livestock wastes stored or disposed of improperly can seriously affect surface and groundwater. For example, many farm operators do not have adequate livestock waste storage facilities. During the winter months, many farms pile waste until spreading it prior to spring cultivation. Rainfall and snowmelt on unprotected manure stacks can generate runoff that degrades surface and groundwater quality. Potential pollutants from livestock wastes are nitrates, chlorides, bacteria, oxygen-demanding materials, and phosphorus. In general, properly designed, located, operated and managed livestock waste storage facilities have little potential for causing groundwater and/or surface water pollution. The UW-Extension and DATCP provide materials and assistance with proper management of feedlot and livestock waste storage facilities.

Land Spreading Of Livestock Waste

Animal waste land spreading practices can result in groundwater and surface water pollution. The most common poor practices are:

Spreading waste on shallow permeable soils. Spreading waste at rates that exceed crop needs or the soil's ability to attenuate nitrogen. Not crediting nitrogen from livestock waste when calculating crop fertility needs.

Spreading livestock waste upgradient from a potable well, allowing runoff to carry wastes to the well. Polluted runoff may infiltrate along the well casing if the casing is not properly grouted. Spreading in areas of bedrock outcrops or known sinkholes.

Fertilizer Application, Storage, and Handling

The over-application of nitrogen-based fertilizers to cropland leads to fertilizer leaching to groundwater. Nitrate leaching usually occurs in coarse permeable soils with low water holding capacity. To minimize groundwater contamination originating from fertilizer application, several factors must be considered. Before fertilizers are applied, a soil test should be performed to determine the nutrient needs of the crop to be planted in a given year. The form of fertilizer applied should also be considered. For example, ammonia is a less soluble and less mobile form of nitrogen than nitrate and may be more suitable for areas with highly permeable soils. Ammonia will nitrify to nitrate and then leach. Crediting of nitrogen in manure and crop residues should be credited. Finally, fertilizers should be applied during times of greatest nutrient uptake. Groundwater contamination by fertilizers often occurs at fertilizer storage and transfer stations. Spills of bulk fertilizer can cause significant surface water and groundwater pollution problems. Carelessness and faulty equipment are the primary causes of such spills.

Pesticide Application, Storage, and Handling

Pesticides types and application rates should be determined only after considering soil, geologic, hydrologic and agrichemical characteristics. Significant surface and groundwater contamination by pesticides occurs as a consequence of over application, as well as poor practices in the storage, transport, mixing and loading of pesticides. Illegal disposal of pesticides and containers also contributes to pollution. In 1990, DATCP conducted a pesticides usage survey. This survey showed which pesticides and herbicides were most widely used and which are of most interest in the context of groundwater pollution. Atrazine was, and still is, the most commonly found pesticide in groundwater. The UW Extension technical bulletin Nutrient and Best Management Practices for Wisconsin Farms provides general guidance for pesticide and nutrient management in Wisconsin. It provides a review of recommended practices for pesticide applications and handling. There is still a critical need for more funding for research on pesticide transport, degradation pathways and toxicity of metabolites (breakdown products). Atrazine prohibition areas are established under the authority of DATCP under AG 30. The prohibition on use of atrazine is instituted in response to groundwater standards of 3 milligrams/liter or parts per billion being exceeded. Pesticide sampling has shown several areas prone to atrazine contamination. Atrazine prohibitions areas have been established within the basin: two areas are in Rock county in the southern part of the town of Lima. In all of the basin in Columbia County and all but the eastern edge of Dane County, atrazine use is prohibited.

Irrigation

9
Irrigation contributes to groundwater contamination in two ways. First, irrigation water percolating down may carry pollutants such as fertilizers and pesticides through the soil to the groundwater. Second, the malfunction or lack of back-siphoning valves on the irrigation wells may permit contaminated water to flow back into the well, affecting groundwater directly. Studies conducted in the heavily irrigated Central Sands Region of Wisconsin have identified higher concentrations of nitrogen in the soil and groundwater relative to levels in non-irrigated areas. It also found increased levels of pesticide residues in ground and surface water as a result of irrigation. Irrigated agriculture is not very common in most of the basin. The exceptions is on outwash plains south of the terminal moraine in Rock County. Numerous agricultural management strategies and practices have been developed and/or suggested to minimize groundwater contamination. These strategies are addressed in publications from the UW-Extension's Environmental Resource Center, Agricultural Management Practices to Minimize Groundwater Contamination (1987) and Nutrient and Pesticide Best Management Practices for Wisconsin Farms (UW-Extension and DATCP 1989).

Forestry
Forestry is limited in the basin. Logging operations can have adverse affects on groundwater by altering infiltration and recharge rates. Best Management Practices for Water Quality (PUB-FR-093 95) has been developed to assist loggers and landowners in minimizing impacts of logging operations on water quality. It is available from the WDNR Bureau of Forestry. WDNR provides training on the use of best management practices for forestry at sites around the state.

Materials Storage and Handling

Materials Storage
A wide variety of materials, both solids and liquids are temporarily stored on the ground. Examples include stockpiles of raw materials, chemicals and waste at industrial sites; piles of raw materials at construction sites; stockpiles of chemicals, manure, agricultural products and empty containers in agricultural and industrial areas; and stockpiles of salt for road de-icing (Wis. Admin. Code Trans. 277 regulates storage of highway rock salt piles). Materials are kept in the open or in enclosures such as tanks or sheds. Many of these materials are hazardous, even toxic. If the stored material or waste is water soluble, it will leach out when exposed to rain and infiltrate the soil, which may lead to groundwater pollution.

Chemical Storage Tanks

Storage and transmission of a wide variety of fuels and chemicals is inherent in many industrial and commercial activities. Petroleum products are the most common potential pollutants stored in tanks. Throughout Wisconsin, underground storage tanks installed during the 1950s and 1960s have reached or exceeded their life expectancy of 20 to 30 years. Some tanks leak, polluting groundwater, because they were not made of the corrosion-resistant materials required today. Leaks in buried tanks and pipelines at industrial facilities are a particular problem because they can go undetected for some time. Gasoline is less dense than water and tends to "float" on top of the groundwater. It may penetrate basements and sewers, creating a fire hazard or causing explosions, and may contaminate wells and springs, rendering drinking water unsafe.

10
The large volume and high concentration of hazardous materials that can be released in a small area from a storage tank creates a high on-site pollution risk. These leaks are not usually detected until a large amount of the chemical has been released. Water supply wells near leaking storage tanks may become contaminated. Industry sources estimate the average cost of "simple" tank cleanup is $70,000 (Knopp). If cleanup operations entail removing and disposing of the leaking tanks and surrounding soil, installing pumping wells and subsequently treating the contaminated water, the cleanup cost can become astronomical.

Spills of Hazardous Materials

Waste is considered hazardous if it has the potential to cause or contribute to an increase in mortality or irreversible illness, or if it poses a threat to human health and the environment (Chapter NR 700 series, Wis. Admin. Code). Hazardous wastes are produced in many segments of society including hospitals, research facilities, industries and government agencies. Industry is by far the largest generator of hazardous waste. Common hazardous contaminants include volatile organic compounds (VOCs), hydrocarbons, pesticides, pesticide production residues and heavy metals. In the past the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency estimated that 90 percent of hazardous materials are disposed of unsafely, leading to groundwater problems. About 1,400 accidental or intentional spills of hazardous materials were reported in Wisconsin in 1994. An unknown number of additional spills and illegal dumpings go unreported. Statewide, petroleum products are the pollutants most commonly involved in spills. Spills can occur anywhere at any time: on or off site, on highways, runways, waterways or railroads. Most spills are small and can be quickly cleaned up before much of the substance reaches groundwater. Unfortunately, in many cases, the first people on the scene of a hazardous spill are not trained to properly deal with the situation. All spills should be immediately reported to WDNR (1-800-943-0003) or the local emergency government office. The number of hazardous spills indicates existing preventive controls are not working to the degree necessary to protect groundwater. There is a high risk to nearby wells if the spills are not quickly and adequately cleaned up. Once groundwater is contaminated, remedial actions to clean up the problem can be very costly. Because remedial technology is limited, some spills cannot be adequately cleaned up at all; any contaminated wells are then abandoned and bottled water is used until new wells are constructed. The risk of groundwater pollution can be minimized through better management of all facilities and equipment used for storing hazardous materials, more careful transport of these materials, improved training of people working with these materials, and immediate response and containment of spills by trained individuals.

Metallic and Nonmetallic Mining

Mining of nonmetallic materials and metallic minerals can impair groundwater quantity and quality. Gravel pit or mine operation typically involves lowering the water table for materials extraction. Removing topsoil and other materials reduces the area's ability to attenuate contaminants, while the operation of heavy equipment and illegal waste disposal increases the likelihood of a release. Shallow groundwater flow changes can also occur in these situations.

11
Nonmetallic mining includes sand and gravel operations and crushed rock quarries. WDNR is developing rules regarding these operations. Metallic mining is regulated in five distinct parts: 1. exploration--searching for minerals by drilling is regulated under NR 130; 2. prospecting--collection of bulk samples for analysis is regulated under NR 131; 3. mining--the extraction of the minerals is under NR 132; 4. waste disposal-- management of materials and process wastes is regulated under NR 182; 5. and finally the long-term liability of mining companies is established in Stats. 107.30 107.35. Several deposits have been discovered within the basin.

Storage And Use Of Salt For Road De-icing

Salt storage, road salting and snow dumping are all commonly used to de-ice roads and improve winter driving conditions. These activities may result in high salt concentrations in both surface and groundwater. Sodium chloride and calcium chloride are the salts most often used. Sand is readily available, is relatively easy to store and handle, is non-toxic and is the least expensive de-icing material commercially available (Wis. DOT). Leaving salt piles uncovered allows rain to dissolve the salt, which may then seep into shallow aquifers. Road salt storage is regulated by Wis. Admin. Code Trans. 277, which requires storage on an impermeable surface and in a covered container that prevents contact with water. Storage sites should be located in areas that have deep impermeable soils with a low water table and should be designed to reduce surface water runoff and minimize infiltration of salt to groundwater. Snow removal piles can also threaten groundwater. Snow removed from streets is often contaminated with salt, oil, heavy metals and toxic substances. Proper siting of these piles is important to protecting both surface and groundwater. WDNR has developed guidance on selecting sites for snow disposal.

Groundwater Contaminants
WDNR maintains a groundwater database. Sampling is conducted for the purpose of problem assessment, at risk monitoring and some regulatory monitoring. Many of the sampling events are focused on problem areas. The Groundwater Retrieval Network (GRN) inventories more than 10,000 wells within the basin. Sampling for specific parameters is not uniform across the basin and some watersheds have had very little sampling done. Following are the most common categories of groundwater contaminants:

12

Biological Hazards
Several areas within the basin have potential for contamination due to shallow depth to fractured dolomite bedrock. Biological agents include bacteria, viruses and parasites. These agents can cause acute illness and life-threatening conditions in some people. Statewide, 23 percent of private well samples test positive for coliform bacteria, a non-pathogenic organism. While not harmful itself, its occurrence indicates the possible presence of dangerous pathogenic organisms. Groundwater contamination by bacteria can occur wherever conditions are favorable, primarily shallow soils and fractured bedrock. Unabandoned wells, open to the surface, serve to directly inject surface bacteria to the aquifer. This may occur also in areas of permeable soils spread with large amounts of manure. Contamination problems are usually worse during groundwater recharge, usually in spring or fall). Note: the highest detection rate is in August and September. Sources of bacterial contamination include animal waste, wastewater from land disposal systems, on-site systems, sewer systems, septage and wastewater spreading, and naturally occurring bacteria. Bacteriological problems affecting humans can usually be avoided if wells are constructed and located according to code. WDNR recommends that well owners test for biological quality annually or when there is a change in water taste, color or odor.

Nitrate
Nitrate-nitrogen is the second most commonly found groundwater contaminant, and frequently exceeds the state drinking water enforcement standard (ES) of 10 milligrams/liter (mg/l) for nitrate + nitrite nitrogen. (Nitrate + nitrite nitrogen will henceforth be referred to as nitrate in this section.) Consumption of water containing high concentrations of nitrate by infants under 6 months can induce methemoglobinemia or "blue baby syndrome," a condition in which hemoglobin is oxidized to a form unable to carry oxygen to body tissues. All infants under 6 months of age are at risk of nitrate poisoning, but some babies may be more sensitive than others. Serious poisonings in infants have occurred following ingestion of water containing nitrate concentrations as low as 50 mg/l, just 5 times the current standard. Fatal poisonings usually involve ingestion of water containing 100-150 mg/l nitrate. The effects of ingesting lower concentrations are not known, but some experts believe a chronic oxygen shortage could result, which could injure an infant's nervous system. Some scientific studies have found evidence suggesting that women who drank nitrate-contaminated water during pregnancy are more likely to have babies with birth defects. Nitrate ingested by the mother may also lower the amount of oxygen available to the fetus. Nitrate is not usually harmful to adults or older children. Although scientists are unsure about the chronic health effects of nitrate, long-term ingestion of water containing high nitrate levels is not recommended. The Department of Health and Family Services (DHFS) and WDNR recommend that all newly constructed private wells and wells that have not been tested during the past five years be tested for nitrate. Testing is recommended for wells used by pregnant women and is essential for wells that serve infants under 6 months old. One study in humans has reported an association between increased methemoglobin levels and spontaneous abortions. Spontaneous abortions were found to possibly be related to ingestion of nitrate contaminated well water (MMWR).

13
Nitrate can enter groundwater from many sources, including nitrogen-based fertilizers, animal waste storage and feedlots, municipal and industrial wastewater and sludge disposal, refuse disposal areas, and private sewage systems. Recent studies have shown that about 10 percent of private wells in the state contain nitrate above the ES. This number can be highly variable between counties, but if true, 75,000 of Wisconsin's 750,000 wells exceed the standard of 10 mg/l of nitrate. The rate of 10 percent above the ES was confirmed by work done through the Wisconsin Geologic and Natural History Survey (WGNHS) and DHSS as a summary project using data from existing databases at the Central Wisconsin Groundwater Center (CWGWC), the U. S. Geological Survey (USGS), the Department of Agriculture, Trade and Consumer Protection (DATCP), WGNHS, and WDNR. This summary work indicated that the rate at which nitrate exceeds the ES from each of these existing agency databases ranges from 9 to 14 percent, depending on the dataset used. This data summary project was initiated to compare or validate the data from a U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) sampling project, which indicated a statewide rate of 6 percent above the ES. In response to widespread flooding in the summer of 1993, the CDC sponsored a private well sampling program across the nine Midwestern flood-affected states. WDNR Water Supply staff took 636 private well samples--at least eight in each county. Each well was analyzed for nitrates, coliform bacteria, E. coli bacteria, atrazine, radon and some for sulfates and arsenic. A GIS coverage consisting of point locations for each private well sampled was created by the WDNR Water Resources Management Program. The CDC study showed that concentrations of nitrate in groundwater are not uniform across the state. Some undeveloped areas have low nitrate levels, whereas up to 50 percent of rural wells in some agricultural areas of southern Wisconsin exceed the ES for nitrate. Statewide data compiled for the "Nitrate in Wisconsin's Groundwater: Strategies and Challenges" conference in 1994 shows the percentage of wells exceeding the ES range from 3.8 percent in the Bark River watershed to more than 65 percent in the Blackhawk Creek subwatershed. Local areas may have substantially higher percentages of wells exceeding the ES. Data from GRN indicates 24 percent of the wells or 379 wells sampled in the basin had nitrate levels exceeding the ES. Many of the watersheds have had less sampling done and more data is required to fully evaluate groundwater quality. Many of the differences across the basin can be related to variations in nitrogen loading and to differences in soil, geology and groundwater conditions. Due to the concern over nitrate, the Groundwater Coordinating Council (GCC) endorsed a resolution in 1989 recommending that newly constructed water supply wells be sampled for nitrate in addition to coliform bacteria. Also, the Department of Industry, Labor and Human Relations (DILHR) continues evaluating state-of-the-art septic system designs for nitrate removal. DILHR drafted revised private system regulations that would require compliance with the groundwater standards in NR 140. In addition, DATCP has been evaluating the need for regulation of nitrogen-based fertilizers. WDNR and DHSS produced a joint Nitrate in Drinking Water brochure (PUBL-WS-00793REV) to address nitrate education concerns. As is the case with any contaminant in groundwater discharging to a stream, nitrate loading from groundwater can be a significant source in surface water. A study in the Missouri Valley showed groundwater accounted for 84-95 percent of nitrate loading to surface water. Up to 40 percent of the

14
nitrates in Chesapeake Bay are attributed to groundwater discharge (USEPA 1994). Locally, research is being conducted on this problem in the Little Plover River watershed.

Pesticides
Pesticide contamination of groundwater may result from general field use according to label directions, or from spills, misuse or improper storage and disposal. Serious concerns about pesticide contamination from runoff in Wisconsin were first raised in 1980 when aldicarb was detected in groundwater near Stevens Point. WDNR, DATCP and other agencies responded to these concerns by implementing monitoring programs and conducting groundwater surveys. WDNR expanded its sampling programs in 1983 to include analysis of pesticides commonly used in Wisconsin. Since many of the pesticides are known to be carcinogenic and some to have a disrupting effect on endocrine systems, federal and state groundwater quality standards for many of these compounds were also adopted. To date, standards for more than 30 pesticides are included in Chapter NR 140, Wis. Adm. Code. Beginning in 1985, DATCP installed about 150 monitoring wells at 50 highly susceptible sites across the state where pesticide use characteristics (e.g., specific compounds and application rates) were known. Data from these wells have been collected quarterly and are used to identify problem pesticides and field use activities that may contribute to groundwater contamination in Wisconsin. To date, the herbicide atrazine has been found at 29 of 40 monitoring sites, with the ES being exceeded at 12 sites. Alachlor (trade name Lasso) has been detected at 10 of 27 sites. Since the late 1980s, DATCP has also initiated a number of surveys to investigate runoff-related pesticides in groundwater. In 1994, DATCP completed a groundwater survey of alachlor and its metabolite or breakdown product, ethane sulfonic acid (ESA), in southern Wisconsin. The study was funded by DATCP, WDNR and Monsanto, and was designed to determine the extent of alachlor and ESA contamination in Wisconsin private wells most at risk. The study was conducted in the following 11 counties where alachlor sales and use have been concentrated: Columbia, Dane, Dodge, Grant, Green, Jefferson, Iowa, Lafayette, Rock, Sauk and Walworth. Immunoassay test kits were sent to about 1,300 homeowners whose wells had either a previous detection of triazines or nitrates above 10 mg/l. A total of 669 samples were returned for immunoassay analysis at DATCP's Bureau of Laboratory Services. Triazines, a class of herbicides including atrazine and simazine, were detected in 45 percent of these samples. Well owners with a detection were offered free follow-up sampling and more comprehensive laboratory analysis for alachlor, ESA, nitrate and other commonly used pesticides. Follow-up analysis indicated that about 1.8 percent of the original 669 wells had detections of alachlor and 32 percent had detections of ESA. Alachlor was detected above the ES of 2.0 micrograms/liter (g/l) in six follow-up samples, while ESA was detected above the Interim Health Advisory of 20 g/l in two follow-up samples. DATCP plans to conduct site investigations around wells that exceed the alachlor ES, or around those that exceed the ESA Interim Health Advisory to identify the source(s) of groundwater contamination. Information from the investigations will be used to determine what actions DATCP will take in response to alachlor and ESA contamination in groundwater. In 1994, DATCP also completed Phase 1 of a survey designed to evaluate the effectiveness of the atrazine rule (Chapter ATCP 30, Wis. Adm. Code). This evaluation is required in ATCP 30 and will attempt to determine if a "statistically significant change" has occurred in groundwater concentrations of atrazine and its three chlorinated metabolites between Phases 1 and 2 of the

15
survey. The focus of this evaluation is groundwater exploitable by private water supply wells. In Phase 1, DATCP collected 289 groundwater samples statewide to establish a statistically reliable basis for comparison with samples that will be collected in 1996 for Phase 2. The private wells were chosen using a stratified-random selection process, and groundwater samples were analyzed for atrazine, its breakdown products, and a number of other pesticides. Phase 1 survey results indicate that between 8 and 16.4 percent of wells in Wisconsin contain detectable levels of atrazine and/or its metabolites, with .6 to 2.8 percent exceeding the ES of 3.0 g/l. In addition, 4.2 to 9.4 percent of private water supply wells in Wisconsin had detections of alachlor's ESA metabolite; 50.7 to 67.8 percent of private wells contain nitrate, with between 6.7 and 13.1 percent exceeding the ES of 10 mg/l. DATCP also collects groundwater samples from private wells that are associated with pesticide investigations. Most of these investigations are initiated based on wells exceeding the pesticide ES. DATCP investigators may take confirmation samples from those wells or from wells on adjacent property. The sample data help DATCP staff identify probable sources of pesticides in groundwater, provide background water quality information and assist in the development of regulatory actions, such as atrazine rule amendments. In addition to runoff sources of pesticides in groundwater, a significant point source problem was identified during two surveys of groundwater quality at pesticide storage and handling facilities. The Agricultural Chemical Cleanup Program (ACCP), administered by DATCP, was created in 1993, primarily to address point source contamination at these facilities and in nearby wells. Point source contamination on farms is also handled by ACCP. To date, more than 200 cases involving soil or groundwater remediation related to spills, misuse, improper storage and other point sources have been initiated at facilities and farms. Monitoring groundwater from adjacent private wells and/or installation of monitoring wells are often associated with these cases. GRN sample records indicate that 1,083 wells sampled in the Lower Rock River Basin had detects of one or more of the major pesticides. Of the 1,636 wells sampled, 105 exceeded the preventive action limit (PAL) for some form of pesticide. Another 80 wells exceeded the ES.

Triazine Screening
Triazines are a class of herbicides that include atrazine and simazine. Beginning in January, 1991, the Wisconsin State Laboratory of Hygiene (SLOH) initiated a testing program for the public based on the immunoassay screening test for triazine-based compounds. This program is available to the public through a toll-free telephone number (1-800-442-4618). Since the start of this program, about 10,000 groundwater samples have been screened for triazine compounds. SLOH has expanded the immunoassay screening program to include other pesticides as requested. Data from the SLOH program indicate that about 18 percent of the samples have exceeded the PAL for atrazine of .3 g/l, and about 2.2 percent have exceeded the ES of 3 g/l for atrazine. These numbers are used only for reference since the test screens for compounds other than atrazine specifically and does not screen for two of the three breakdown metabolites included in the groundwater standard.

16

Metals
Metals in groundwater can be naturally occurring or the result of human activities. For example, iron is a common, naturally occurring metal, while cadmium and chromium are associated with metal plating operations. Other elements are often found affiliated with metals. Arsenic and lead were commonly used in pesticides on orchards. The geology of the basin does not include any major sources of naturally occurring metals and levels in groundwater are relatively low. Several localized areas have shown elevated levels of metals associated with plating and foundry operations.

Volatile Organic Compounds (VOCs)

VOCs, which vaporize readily under normal ambient temperatures and pressures, are present in gasoline, diesel fuel, industrial solvents and many other common products such as paints, paint thinners, drain cleaners, air fresheners, spot and stain removers. Many VOCs are suspected carcinogens when exposure is long-term. In the short term, high concentrations of VOCs can cause nausea, dizziness, tremors or other health problems. Within the basin, Groundwater Retrieval Network (GRN) records indicate that 218 of the 592 wells sampled have detects of one or more VOC, 169 of these wells had exceeded the preventive action limit (PAL) and 80 wells exceeded the enforcement standard (ES). Sources of VOCs include landfills, underground storage tanks, and hazardous substance spills. WDNR's Emergency and Remedial Response Section conducts problem assessment and at-risk monitoring at state Environmental Repair Fund sites, abandoned facilities, CERCLA (Superfund) sites, leaking underground storage tank (LUST) sites and spill sites. WDNR has sampled thousands of wells for VOCs. More than 60 different VOCs have been found in Wisconsin groundwater. Trichloroethylene is found most often. Wisconsin has 101 active licensed solid waste landfills, of which 99 are required to undergo groundwater monitoring. Two studies conducted over four years revealed that of 51 landfills, including engineered and unengineered industrial and municipal landfills, 27 (53 percent) had VOCcontaminated groundwater. Of the 26 unengineered municipal solid waste landfills included in the two studies, however, VOC contamination occurred in groundwater at 21 (81 percent) of the 26 wells. While 20 different VOCs were detected overall, 1,1-dichloroethane was the most commonly occurring VOC at all landfills. Two WDNR publications, Volatile Organic Compounds in Groundwater and Leachate at Wisconsin Landfills (1988) and VOC Contamination at Selected Landfills - Sampling Results and Policy Implications (1989) describe the research findings. In a follow-up VOC study conducted from July, 1992, through June, 1994, WDNR reviewed historical data and sampled groundwater at 11 closed, unengineered landfills and at six older, engineered landfills. VOC levels have decreased at all but two of the unengineered landfills, although at many of the sites VOC levels do not show continued decline, and the level of contamination remains high at several sites. There was no VOC contamination attributable to leachate migration at any of the six older, engineered landfills. Wisconsin requires underground storage tanks to be registered with DILHR if their capacity is 60 gallons or more. This registration program identified 151,865 tanks statewide as of October, 1993. Of these, 69,157 are regulated by the federal underground storage tank program. By July, 1994, about 37,450 federally regulated underground storage tanks were removed. About 3,940 underground storage tank cleanups have been completed to date. There are about 7,800 currently

17
active cleanups. Of the active sites, 1,029 are in a long-term monitoring phase that precedes site close-out. The contaminants most commonly associated with leaking underground storage tanks (LUSTs) are components of gasoline and diesel fuel including benzene, toluene, ethyl benzene, and xylene (i.e. BTEX compounds). There are more than 3,000 LUST sites that exceed BTEX groundwater standards. About 285 private water supply wells have been affected by contamination from LUST sites. Another VOC source is hazardous waste storage and handling facilities. The WDNR Hazardous Waste Section is investigating or remediating 28 of these contamination sites. Statewide, 140 sites have been identified as subject to corrective action authorities. Not all of these sites will undergo the corrective action process, due to minimal contamination at the site or to jurisdiction under other regulatory authorities. VOC-containing petroleum products comprise 65 percent of all reported spills in Wisconsin. Section 144.76, Wis. Stats, the Hazardous Substance Spill Law requires those who spill hazardous substances to report spills and to take immediate actions necessary to restore the environment. The number of spills reported per year has increased from 360 during 1978 to around 1,400 in 1993. Groundwater monitoring is performed when necessary to delineate the contamination extent.

"Natural" Groundwater Quality

Natural groundwater quality within the state's major aquifers tends to be fairly uniform (Born 1987). Calcium bicarbonate and calcium magnesium bicarbonate are the predominant basin water types (Kammerer). The many exceptions to this uniformity are due to variation in geologic environments. Undesirable, but naturally occurring constituents commonly found in Wisconsin groundwater include radioactive compounds, iron and chloride. High levels of manganese, arsenic and sulfates are less commonly found and more localized in extent.

Hardness
The quality or chemical composition of groundwater largely depends upon the composition and physical properties of the rocks and materials through which the water moves and on the duration of the contact. Generally, the deeper the water penetrates into the ground, the more minerals it is likely to pick up. In Wisconsin, the chemistry of groundwater results from the water's interaction with the unconsolidated materials and the rock formations that contain large amounts of calcium and magnesium carbonates. This makes the groundwater fairly high in calcium-magnesium carbonate. Groundwater that exhibits this characteristic is said to be "hard," having dissolved solids greater than 200 milligrams/liter (mg/l). This is a natural phenomenon of groundwater and poses no adverse health effects, although excessively hard water can corrode pipes and reduce the cleaning ability of detergents and soaps. As a result, water softening is required, or at least recommended for many uses. Water throughout most of the basin is classified as very hard (more than 180 mg/l calcium carbonate). Slightly harder water can be found to the northeast due to more dolomite bedrock and in the glacial deposits.

Iron
About 30 percent of Wisconsin wells exceed the standard for iron of 0.3 g/l. Iron concentrations above recommended limits are objectionable because of taste and discoloration, but have no

18
adverse effects on human health. Problems with iron in groundwater cannot be predicted because of random distribution and conditions under which it can occur. Iron concentrations range from 0 to almost 7,000 mg/l in the state. Levels within the basin are variable but are generally low. Iron tends to vary seasonally and is greatly affected by the oxidation state of the iron and water chemistry. Naturally-occurring iron (and sulfate) bacteria are often associated with iron, manganese and sulfur. These bacteria may form a slime around well screens, causing decreased well yields. They also contribute to staining of plumbing fixtures and odor problems. Brochures about iron and sulfur bacteria and controlling the problem are available from the WDNR Bureau of Drinking Water and Groundwater.

Manganese
Manganese and iron in small amounts are essential to plants and animals. Higher concentrations may cause staining of plumbing fixtures. The distribution of manganese is similar to that of iron. Levels range between 30 and 45 mg/l in the basin.

Radioactivity
Naturally occurring radioactive substances in groundwater-- including uranium, radium and radon--is a concern in Wisconsin. The state has initiated programs to test groundwater for radioactivity. Recent sampling has identified radionucleides in north central Wisconsin groundwater. High levels of radium have also been found in eastern Wisconsin water supplies. These detects are associated with wells drawing from the deeper sandstone aquifer. Elevated levels have not been found in the silurian or sand and gravel aquifers. Studies are examining the occurrence and extent of these naturally occurring contaminants. The WDNR Bureau of Drinking Water and Groundwater has published a brochure about radon and provides guidance on sampling and management of the problem. Two recent studies have examined radon in private wells. The first, discussed earlier as the CDC Private Well Survey, sampled wells in a grid pattern across the state at 10-mile intervals. The second radon study is being conducted by the Department of Health and Family Services (DHFS) and the Wisconsin Environmental Health Association (WEHA). This study involves selecting wells drawing water from specific geological formations. The state's formations are being mapped by WGNHS using a geographic information system. The data layer is called the Primary Bedrock Aquifer coverage. This mapping scheme will be used to select approximately 1,000 wells for radon sampling.

Sulfate
Sulfate is the most common form of sulfur in groundwater. Under reducing conditions, which are often mediated by biologic activity, hydrogen sulfide is produced. Sulfate can have a laxative effect on persons not accustomed to it. It is also reported to reduce milk production in cows. Levels generally increase from west to east in the basin ranging from about 15 to 60 milligrams per liter, with levels elevated to more than 30 mg/l from Janesville south.

19

Chloride
Sources of chloride include weathering of minerals, animal wastes and road salt used for de-icing. Since human activity and animal wastes are the primary source it is often used as an indicator of contamination. Levels within the basin are low and increase slightly to the north. Concentrations range from to just below 10 milligrams per liter to just over 10 mg/l. Higher levels can be found in eastern Dane, southern Rock and Northern Waukesha counties. The secondary drinking water standard for chloride is 250 mg/l.

Fluoride
Fluoride concentrations are low throughout the state. Fluoride is beneficial in preventing tooth decay. The recommended amount for addition to water supplies in Wisconsin is 1-1.2 mg/l. Concentrations in the basin are less than 0.5 mg/l.

Summary of Wisconsins Groundwater Legislation

Wisconsin has a long history of groundwater protection. The culmination of this effort was adoption and implementation of Wisconsin Act 410, Wisconsin's comprehensive Groundwater Protection Act, signed into law May 4, 1984. The law expanded Wisconsin's legal, organizational and financial capacity for controlling groundwater pollution. The Groundwater Protection Act created Chapter 160, Wis. Admin. Code, which serves as the backbone of Wisconsin's program. Chapter 160 provides a multi-agency comprehensive regulatory approach, using two-tiered numerical standards, based on the premise that all groundwater aquifers in Wisconsin are entitled to equal protection. There are a number of major components to Wisconsin's groundwater protection program.

Standards
Under Chapter 160, WDNR must establish state groundwater quality standards based on recommendations from the Department of Health and Family Services (DHFS). Standard-setting is a continuing process based on a priority list of substances established by WDNR and other state agencies. The state groundwater standards are in chapter NR 140, Wis. Admin. Code. An enforcement standard (ES) is a quantitative level indicating when a violation has occurred. If an ES is exceeded, the activity responsible will be stopped. The preventive action limit (PAL) is a selected percentage of the enforcement standard. The PAL serves as a "trigger" for remedial action and allows time to investigate a problem before the enforcement standard is reached.

Regulatory Programs
Once groundwater quality standards are established, all state agencies must manage their regulatory programs to comply. Each state regulatory agency must promulgate rules to assure that the groundwater standards are met and require appropriate responses when the standards are not met. The state regulatory agencies are WDNR (solid and hazardous waste, industrial and municipal wastewater, spills); the Wisconsin Department of Commerce (DCOMM) (private sewage systems, petroleum product storage tanks); the Wisconsin Department of Agriculture, Trade and Consumer Protection (DATCP) (pesticide use and storage and fertilizer storage); and the Wisconsin Department of Transportation (DOT) (salt storage). A summary of state regulatory controls of pollution sources can be found at the end of this report.

20

Aquifer Classification
One of the most important features of Wisconsin's groundwater law is an item that was omitted: aquifer classification. When Wisconsin was debating the groundwater protection legislation, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) tried to develop a nationwide groundwater approach. A keystone of U.S. EPA's proposal was aquifer classification, whereby each aquifer would be classified according to its use, value or vulnerability and would then be protected to that classification level. This would have entailed "writing off" certain aquifers as industrial aquifers not entitled to protection and never again usable for human water supply. Wisconsin said "no" to aquifer classification. The philosophical underpinning of Wisconsin's groundwater law is the belief that all groundwater in Wisconsin must be protected to assure that it can be used for people to drink.

Monitoring and Data Management

When the groundwater legislation was created, there was concern that Wisconsin needed a groundwater monitoring program to determine whether the groundwater standards were being met. Therefore, a groundwater monitoring program was created under s. 160.27, Wis. Stats. Money from the Groundwater Account of the Environmental Fund has been used for problem assessment monitoring, regulatory monitoring, at-risk monitoring and management practice monitoring, as well as establishment of a data management system for collection and management of the groundwater data.

Research
Although all state agencies must comply with the groundwater standards--the processes by which groundwater becomes contaminated--the technology for cleanup, the mechanisms to prevent contamination and the environmental and health effects of the contamination are often poorly understood. In addition, the basic data on geology, soils and groundwater hydrology are often not available. The University of Wisconsin System and other state agencies have recognized that additional efforts in these research areas are badly needed. The Governor and the Legislature included a new groundwater research appropriation for the UW-System beginning with the 19891991 biennial budget. Since then, the UW-System and the Departments of Agriculture, Trade and Consumer Protection, Industry Labor and Human Relations, and Natural Resources have participated in an annual joint solicitation to select groundwater-related research and monitoring proposals for funding during each fiscal year.

Coordination
In establishing the groundwater law, the Legislature recognized that management of the state's groundwater resources was a responsibility divided among a number of state agencies. Therefore, the Groundwater Coordinating Council (GCC) was created in 1984 to advise and assist state agencies in the coordination of non-regulatory programs and the exchange of information related to groundwater.

Local Groundwater Management

The Groundwater Protection Act clarified the powers and responsibilities of local governments to protect groundwater in partnership and consistent with state law.

21

Zoning authority for cities, villages, towns and counties was expanded to "encourage the protection of groundwater." Counties can adopt ordinances regulating disposal of septage on land, consistent with WDNR requirements. Cities, villages or towns may do so if the county does not. Counties can regulate, under WDNR supervision, well construction and pump installation for certain private wells. Property assessors must consider the time and expense of repairing or replacing a contaminated well or water supply when assessing the market value of real property. They must consider the "environmental impairment" of the property value due to the presence of a solid or hazardous waste disposal facility.

Through the efforts of the GCC, WDNR and other state agencies developed a Comprehensive State Groundwater Program Plan (CSGWPP) and submitted it to U.S. EPA in 1994. Wisconsin received U.S. EPA endorsement of the CSGWPP as a core program plan that same year. The CSGWPP consists of a state profile, a self-assessment and a vision statement. Wisconsin is one of only four states to receive this endorsement.

Local Groundwater Management Planning

Groundwater is an important and necessary resource susceptible to contamination through a variety of land use practices. Groundwater problems are frequently caused by local activities and often remain a local problem. Yet because groundwater contamination is so common, it should be a global concern. Since groundwater use in the basin is extensive, local communities have a high stake in protecting the integrity of their water supply. A variety of regulatory and non-regulatory options are available for citizens and local governments to protect this important resource.

Implementing Local Groundwater Protection Programs

Developing a local groundwater management plan is an excellent start to protecting water supplies. First, identify plan goals and objectives, then select management techniques. Water use patterns, the type of threat to groundwater, and the local hydrologic system must be taken into account. A community initiating a groundwater protection program must make a long-term commitment to protecting its water supply. Communities around the country have used a variety of groundwater protection techniques. Communities should pick techniques best-suited to local situations and financial capabilities to maximize protection and minimize cost. Local officials and citizens must balance the need for and commitment to groundwater protection against competing community activities. Additionally, selection of a groundwater protection strategy must consider a community's available technical ability to administer and enforce a protection program (Dinovo). Where local resources are limited, a community may choose to scale down its program. Contaminant sources, sensitive areas and management options may need to be prioritized to derive the greatest benefit with limited financial resources. Communities may wish to seek outside funding such as state and federal grants.

22
Local units of government in Wisconsin are playing an increasingly larger role in groundwater management and protection. Counties are authorized to adopt private well code and septage disposal ordinances. Cities, villages, towns and counties are authorized to adopt zoning ordinances to protect groundwater. Some Wisconsin counties are developing groundwater management plans with assistance from the University of Wisconsin-Extension, WDNR and the Wisconsin Geological and Natural History Survey. Groundwater protection activities are also incorporated into the state's areawide water quality management plans through WDNR. The publication, A Guide to Groundwater Quality Planning and Management for Local Governments (Born 1987), is available from WDNR and the Wisconsin Geological and Natural History Survey. There is no single best approach to groundwater protection, as local situations vary. One theme should, however, provide the basis for any groundwater planning effort: groundwater management should emphasize prevention and protection of groundwater contamination, not remedial action.

THE ROCK RIVER BASIN AN OVERVIEW (PPT) by JIM CONGDON (UPPER ROCK BASIN SUPERVISOR) 194 Dams on Rock River and Tributaries Population 800,000 and growing 68 Municipal and Industrial Point Source Discharges Construction Site Runoff a Major Source of Pollutants in Developing Urban Areas Over 50% of Wetlands in the Rock River Basin have been destroyed Land Use in the Rock River Basin: Agriculture (73%), Residential (12%), Wetlands (7%), Commercial/Industrial (5.5%), and Woodlands (1.6%) Agriculture in the Rock River Basin a. 19% of Wisconsins farmland b. 22% of Wisconsins agricultural products c. Dane/Dodge Co. in top five dairy, cattle, and hog producers Causes of Impairments in Rock River Basin a. Nutrients (phosphorus) b. Sediment c. PCBs d. Dams (194 dams) e. Habitat (channelization, stream alteration) f. Loss of Wetlands Total phosphorous (2000 estimate) 1,680,000 pounds annually Total sediment (RRP Nutrient Trading Project-August 2000) 160,000 tons annually Soil Phosphorous Levels in Rock River Basin Increasing a. 1974 (37ppm) to 2002 (52ppm) b. NR151 requires that after 2008 all lands draining to impaired waters have a nutrient management plan Soil Phosphorous Sources a. Agricultural Inorganic Fertilizer

23 b. Animal Manure c. Municipal Biosolids a. Example 23 municipal spread in Dodge Co. d. Industrial Biosolids a. Example 15 industries spread in Dodge Co. e. Septic Waste a. Example 11 septic pumpers spread in Dodge Co. Table 1. Nonpoint Source Pollutants and Major Sources a. Sediment a. Construction sites b. Mining Operations c. Croplands d. Logging operations e. Streambank erosion f. Shoreline erosion g. Woodland b. Nutrients (fertilizers, grease, organic matter) a. Croplands b. Nurseries c. Orchards d. Livestock operations e. Gardens, lawns, forests f. Petroleum storage areas g. Landfills c. Acids and salts a. Irrigated lands b. Mining operations c. Urban runoff (roads, parking lots) d. Landfills d. Heavy Metals (Pb, Hg, Zn) a. Mining operations b. Vehicle emissions c. Urban runoff d. Landfills e. Toxic chemicals (pesticides, (in/)organic compounds) a. Croplands b. Nurseries c. Building sites d. Gardens e. Landfills

24

What is nonpoint source pollution?

Nonpoint source pollution generally results from land runoff, precipitation, atmospheric deposition, drainage, seepage or hydrologic modification. The term "nonpoint source" is defined to mean any source of water pollution that does not meet the legal definition of "point source" in section 502(14) of the Clean Water Act. That definition states: The term "point source" means any discernible, confined and discrete conveyance, including but not limited to any pipe, ditch, channel, tunnel, conduit, well, discrete fissure, container, rolling stock, concentrated animal feeding operation, or vessel or other floating craft, from which pollutants are or may be discharged. This term does not include agricultural storm water discharges and return flows from irrigated agriculture. Unlike pollution from industrial and sewage treatment plants, nonpoint source (NPS) pollution comes from many diffuse sources. NPS pollution is caused by rainfall or snowmelt moving over and through the ground. As the runoff moves, it picks up and carries away natural and human-made pollutants, finally depositing them into lakes, rivers, wetlands, coastal waters and ground waters. Nonpoint source pollution can include:

Excess fertilizers, herbicides and insecticides from agricultural lands and residential

areas Oil, grease and toxic chemicals from urban runoff and energy production Sediment from improperly managed construction sites, crop and forest lands, and eroding streambanks Salt from irrigation practices and acid drainage from abandoned mines Bacteria and nutrients from livestock, pet wastes and faulty septic systems Atmospheric deposition and hydromodification States report that nonpoint source pollution is the leading remaining cause of water quality problems. The effects of nonpoint source pollutants on specific waters vary and may not always be fully assessed. However, we know that these pollutants have harmful effects on drinking water supplies, recreation, fisheries and wildlife.

Middleton Economy
The American Girl, Capital Brewery, Springs Window Fashions, andElectronic Theatre Controls company headquarters are located in Middleton. Middleton is also home to Morey Field, a multi-runway,general aviation airport.