Protecting Sources of Drinking Water

Chuck Kanetsky, EPA Region 3

Goal: Improve Source Water Quality

Minimize risk to public health through risk reduction in source water areas Develop prevention & protection strategies, achieve substantial implementation of strategies for individual CWS

Comprehensive Source Water Protection

MULTIPLE RISKS REQUIRE MULTIPLE BARRIERS

SDWA PROTECTING AMERICAS PUBLIC HEALTH

RISK RISK
RISK RISK

RISK RISK

RISK RISK

PROTECTION PROTECTION BARRIERS BARRIERS

RISK RISK PREVENTION PREVENTION

RISK RISK RISK INDIVIDUAL RISK INDIVIDUAL MONITORING/ MONITORING/ MANAGEMENT ACTION MANAGEMENT ACTION COMPLIANCE

COMPLIANCE

EPAs Water Quality Laws

Clean Water Act (CWA) 1972
Water Quality Standards Discharge Permits Waste Water Treatment Wetlands Nonpoint Source Pollution Assessment of water Assessment of impaired waters

Safe Drinking Water Act (SDWA) 1974

Standard Setting for Drinking Water Public Water Supply Supervision Underground Injection Control Sole Source Aquifer Program Wellhead Protection Program Source Water Assessment Program

Source Water Assessment Programs

Required through SDWA Section 1453, 1996 Amendments

Comprehensive assessment / prioritization of potential threats for every Public Water Supply System (PWS) All States developed programs for EPA approval

Required extensive public involvement in program design Wellhead Protection Programs cornerstone of SWP Programs Funded through Drinking Water State Revolving Fund Diversity from State to State/system type by system type

Challenges
No requirement for protection Resources Numbers of systems change

SWAP Basics
State assessment program plans were due in early 1999 EPA approval within 6 months of submittal States assess sources for all public water systems by 2003 21,000 public water systems in EPA Region 3, servicing > 25 million people

Source Water Assessment Dollars

Delaware District of Columbia Maryland Pennsylvania $5,327,070 Virginia West Virginia $674,604 $405,778 $1,764,090

$2,944,240 $1,255,880

Key SWA Elements

Delineation Contaminant Source Inventories Susceptibility Analyses

Public participation and public access to assessment results

SWAP Delineation
Immediate area of impact
Well
5 year time of travel 1 mile radius

Surface water
Watershed boundaries
Intake

SWAP Contamination Source Inventory

Permit Compliance System Toxic Release Inventory Underground Storage Tanks RCRA Superfund Land Use Information

SWAP Susceptibility Analysis

Analysis of risk
Hydrogeology/hydrology Understanding of contaminants Effectiveness of existing protection programs

SWAP Public Participation

Public access to assessment results
Educate public on potential problems Protection activities

Source Water Assessments Availability

Target completion September 2003
Region 3 States have completed assessments for about 99.5% of 21,0000 Public Water Systems

Use Assessments for Surface & Ground Water Source Protection

Source water protection strategies to address actual & potential contaminant sources Target substantial implementation of protection strategies for 50% of CWS and 62% population by 2011

R3 SWAP Findings (GW) DE, DC, MD, PA, VA, WV

Most Prevalent Sources: Ground Water
Commercial/Industrial, Residential Housing, Agriculture Highest rankings from R3 states: Residential septic systems, UST

Most Threatening Sources: Ground Water

Commercial/Industrial, Residential Housing, Agriculture Highest rankings from R3 states: UST, septic systems, crop production

R3 SWAP Findings (SW) DE, DC, MD, PA, VA, WV

Most Prevalent Sources: Surface Water
Commercial/Industrial, Agriculture, Wastewater, Transportation Highest rankings from R3 states: General agriculture, grazing, overall transportation

Most Threatening Sources: Surface Water

Agriculture, Commercial/Industrial, Wastewater Highest rankings from R3 states: General agriculture, Residential

Strategic Actions
Complete & improve assessments Use assessments as basis for SW & GW protection plans Integrate actions:
Federal, State, local CWA & SDWA

Collaboration among Federal agencies/programs

Water Safe to Drink

Measure #: Strategic Target SP-4 National Office Lead: OGWDW Measure Description: Percent of community water systems and percent of the population served by
community water systems where risk to public health is minimized by source water protection.
(SP-4a) Community water systems:
2005 Baseline 2006 Commitment 2006 Adjusted Commitment 2006 End-of-Year 2007 Commitment 2007 End-of-Year 2008 Target Universe (FY 07) Reg 1 51% 33% 51% 52% 52% Reg 2 30% 15% 30% 56% 56% Reg 3 12% 7% 12% 14% 18% 21% 22% 4,592 Reg 4 21% 10% 21% 22% 25% Reg 5 19% 15% 19% 32% 23% Reg 6 19% 10% 19% 13% 18% Reg 7 13% 10% 13% 14% 15% Reg 8 20% 15% 20% 32% 30% Reg 9 1% 5% 5% 1% 10% Reg 10 28% 20% 28% 28% 28% Total % 20% 12.7%* 20%** 24% 25% 30% 9,175 7,482 8,097 4,123 3,151 4,672 4,418 52,349 Total # 10,281 6,734 10,567 12,616 13,087

2,734

3,905

(SP-4b) Population:
2005 Baseline 2006 Commitment 2006 End-of-Year 2007 Commitment 2007 End-of-Year 2008 Target Universe (in millions) Reg 1 78% 77% Reg 2 54% 58% Reg 3 35% 53% 54% 55% 24.7 Reg 4 27% 24% Reg 5 34% 47% Reg 6 17% 26% Reg 7 18% 23% Reg 8 5% 21% Reg 9 0% 0%

2011 Target: 50%

Reg 10 50% 67% Total % 28% n/a 34% n/a n/a 37% 100% Total # 78.9 n/a n/a n/a 104.3 281.8

14.5

32.0

54.3

42.2

36.1

11.7

9.9

46.1

10.3

National Program Manager Comments:

2011 Target: 62%

Target measure; FY 08 State Grant Template measure. SP-4a is a PART measure. Note: Minimized risk is achieved by the substantial implementation, as determined by the state, of actions in a source water protection strategy. The universe is the most recent SDWIS inventory of community water systems. * FY 06 national commitment total adjusted to reflect weighted regional commitments. ** 2006 Adjusted is adjustment of the FY 06 commitment to reflect FY 05 results.

2007 End of Year Report for Strategic Target "F" / SP-4

A
REGION & STATE REGION 3 DELAWARE DIST. OF COL. MARYLAND PENNSYLVANIA VIRGINIA WEST VIRGINIA

CWSs NUMERATOR DENOMINATOR % CWSs 956 48 DNR 308 431 77 92 4,561 211 5 494 2,092 1,248 511

POPULATION NUMERATOR DENOMINATOR% POPULATION 54% 54% DNR 65% 63% 36% 60%

21% 13,402,342 24,696,946 23% 479,662 882,041 606,730 DNR DNR 62% 3,191,894 4,888,853 21% 6,675,333 10,627,826 6% 2,297,288 6,429,469 18% 758,165 1,262,027

State Definition for Substantial Implementation Region 3 Strategies substantially implemented These strategies refer to enforceable protection measures or standards adopted at the local or state level that require protection of water quality or quantity in a source water areas ( wellhead and watershed). (Examples would be local ordinances with SWP regulations, County wide ordinances with SWP regulations, UST Secondary containment policy). Strategy developed and initially implemented means that a local planning team has been established agreed upon a strategy and implemented a portion of the strategy. Substantially implemented means that the most significant risks were or are being addressed by implementing a strategy. For example if a community purchased the recharge area for a well or spring source for protection then the strategy is substantially implemented, even if it was accomplished many years ago. Establishment of an approved local Source Water Protection Plan or the undertaking of relevant and sustainable actions/efforts that address priority risks as identified in the source water assessment. Waterworks has developed a watershed or wellhead protection plan. Plan does not have to be approved or certified by state but should include all elements of source water strategy such as: a. management team or advisory group that meets on a regular basis, b. identified potential contaminate source(s) [results of SWAPs], c. recommended action(s), and contingency planning [may be already stipulated in VA Waterworks Regulations] Any community public water supply system or a group of systems that has a protection plan in place and is addressing at least three of the top protection measures identified in its state supplied source water protection plan and/or locally defined protective measures approved by the state is considered substantial implemented. For systems serving 3,000 or fewer people, substantial implementation will be determined on a system by system basis.

Delaware

Maryland

Pennsylvania

Virginia

West Virginia

Integrate Federal, State & Local Actions

Region 3 pilot projects
Schuylkill Action Network: PADEP, Philadelphia Water Department, EPA Potomac Partnership: DW utilities, MDE, VDH,VADEQ, DCDOH, ICPRB, WVDHHR, PADEP, EPA Source Water/UST Collaboration

SAN Structure Reflects Priorities

Executive Steering Committee
(PADEP, Phila. Water Dept, EPA, DRBC)

Planning Committee

Education/ Outreach

Storm Water

Agriculture
Acid Mine Drainage Pathogen/ Compliance Data Team

Watershed Land Protection

Collaborative

Potomac Partnership Mission

Cooperative and Voluntary Partnership Improve Source Water Protection Multi-barrier Approach Safe Guard Public Health

Potomac Partnership Workgroups

Strategy Ag/Pathogens DBP Early Warning Emerging Contaminants Urban Funding

Wellhead Protection
4 biennial cumulative reports from 91 99 WHP program used by states as foundation for SWP program WHP biennial data provides benchmark for progress on WHP and SWP Funded through CWA 106 and SDWA SRF Integral to groundwater protection in watersheds

Protecting Public Health: Leaking USTs - a major threat to groundwater supplies

MOU with WCMD and EAID. Underground Storage Tank Efforts: Prioritize inspections Clean up priority tanks

Resources & Funding

Drinking Water State Revolving Fund: grants for SWP staff, wellhead protection projects; loans for surface water protection projects Clean Water State Revolving Fund: loans for point & nonpoint source projects, land acquisition CWA grants: Sect. 106, 104(b)(3), 319, 604(b) Farm Bill

Drinking Water State Revolving Fund

The SDWA, as amended in 1996, established the DWSRF to make funds available to drinking water systems to finance infrastructure improvements. Funds are also provided to small, disadvantaged communities and to programs implementing pollution prevention as a tool for ensuring safe drinking water. Nationally about $800 Million (20% State Match)

Drinking Water State Revolving Fund

Grants for SWP staff, wellhead protection projects; loans for surface water protection projects through setasides 15 % - Land acquisition, Capacity Development, Wellhead Protection 10% Administer or provide technical assistance through SWP programs 2% Set-a-side Technical Support For Small Systems

Springdale, PA - Stormwater,
UST
Storm event caused a salt storage pile to leach into the ground and into drinking water supply. Due to leaking UST, benzene contaminated ground water. Trichloroethylene (TCE) from another source also contaminated GW well. Springdale needed to improve management of land use.

Springdale, PA continued
The Water Department set-up the Springdale Borough WHP Committee, with guidance from PRWA, and Allegheny County Health Department, to make recommendations to town Council and Planning Division of Allegheny County. With assistance from PA DEP SWP grant, the Committee developed a WHP plan, approved by PA DEP in 2003. Established a student education program with brochures and newsletters for residents

Zoning and Ordinances, Town of Townsend, DE

Townsend is in southwestern NCC, in Middletown-Odessa-Townsend (M-O-T) Planning Region. Recently M-O-T has had accelerated growth and development. Townsend increased area through recent annexations, from original size of 111 acres to 587 acres today. Result is primary land use inside the town boundaries is Vacant Developable

Zoning and Ordinances, Town of Townsend, DE continued

In 2002 the Town adopted a source water protection land use ordinance. Comprehensive environmental ordinance protects all wetlands, recognizes critical natural resource areas, promotes reforestation and preserves buffers Requires new building in water resource protection areas to discharge all roof runoff into underground recharge systems and limits the surface area that can be covered by asphalt, cement or other impermeable surfaces.

Parkersburg, WV
Prepared a Wellhead Protection Plan assisted by the Great Lakes Rural Community Assistance Program Participated in the Source Water Assessment Plan Partnered with the USGS in developing a generic ground water model for water systems which use radial collector wells Abandoned three city wells by safely and properly closing them

Contact Information Kanetsky.charles@epa.gov

215-814-2735