1 / 35

Source Water Protection Case Studies

Source Water Protection Case Studies. Leah G Walker, P.E. Senior Sanitary Engineer California Department of Health Services Drinking Water Technical Programs Branch. California Examples. Protection Sebastopol Anaheim Lake Berryessa Assessment and Protection Yosemite Valley.

jimmyz
Download Presentation

Source Water Protection Case Studies

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Source Water ProtectionCase Studies Leah G Walker, P.E. Senior Sanitary Engineer California Department of Health Services Drinking Water Technical Programs Branch

  2. California Examples • Protection • Sebastopol • Anaheim • Lake Berryessa • Assessment and Protection • Yosemite Valley

  3. Protection Case Studies

  4. Sebastopol First test of DWSAP assessment procedures

  5. Sebastopol - Background • Population 7,800 • Regional “urban” center for surrounding rural area • Water System: • 5 wells = 483 MG/year • Well 5 off-line due to PCE • Well 4 has shown 1,2-DCA and MTBE • Well 7 – new well • Hydrogeologic setting • Unconfined, porous media aquifer • High transmissivity, steep gw gradient from west

  6. Sebastopol - Vulnerability • Sources are most vulnerable to PCAs associated with detected contaminants: • Dry Cleaners (PCE) • Known Contaminant Plumes (PCE and 1,2-DCA) • LUFTs (1,2-DCA and MTBE) • Gas Stations (1,2-DCA and MTBE) • And …

  7. Sebastopol - Vulnerability • And to those PCAs not associated with detected contaminants from the top of the vulnerability ranking: • Chemical storage • Metal plating/finishing • Plastics/synthetics producers • Septic systems on parcels < 1 acre • Sewer Lines

  8. Sebastopol – After the Assessment • No formal plan or ordinance adopted, but • Invited a public committee; held some meetings • More vigorously pursuing cleanup of contamination • Prioritizing sewer line repairs in Zone A • Eliminated use of pesticides on city-owned property • Evaluating all proposed development in City for possible GW impacts • Evaluating land use proposals outside city limits, but in zones, for possible impacts • Considers allowing hookup to city sewer if septic system fails in Zone A

  9. Lake Berryessa Purpose: • Federal/ State/ Local Partnership for SWP and Coordinated WQ Monitoring

  10. Lake Berryessa - Background • Lake developed and operated by US Bureau of Reclamation for flood control and water supply • Water supply users • Solano County Water Agency (360,000 population in 5 communities) • 9 small resorts and subdivisions • Meeting initiated by DHS and EPA as demonstration project

  11. Lake Berryessa - Background • Meeting Participants: • US Bureau of Reclamation • Solano County Water Agency • Resort owners • Napa County Public Works • DHS • EPA • RWQCB • Fish & Game • Napa County Environmental Health Key participants

  12. Lake Berryessa - Results • Key participants: • Regular meetings (now run by SCWA) • Contaminant Management Plan • Coordinated WQ Monitoring Plan • Communication on spills, accidents • Coordinated review of development proposals • Hazardous waste collection day • Marina operator workshop • Signs, brochures (boaters, campers, day users, home owners)

  13. City of Anaheim/ Orange County Water District Purpose: • “Establish Public/ Private/ Community partnership to protect public health through a proactive process to prevent groundwater contamination”

  14. Anaheim - Background • Began in 1993 – Pre-DWSAP • Local Groundwater Protection Pilot Program • Population = 290,000 • 29 wells providing more than 2/3 of water supply • 6 GW basins recharged by OCWD through an elaborate system • 8 wells out of service: • 4 Nitrates • 2 Benzene • 2 Chlorinated hydrocarbons

  15. Anaheim – Project Objectives • Establish Technical Advisory Committee (TAC) • Select Pilot Project Area • Delineate Capture Zones • Identify Potential Pollution Sources • Manage Potential Pollution Sources • Prepare a Contingency Plan • Implement Public and Industry Public Education and Participation Program

  16. Anaheim – TAC • City of Anaheim • Orange County Water District • Orange County Environmental Health • Orange County Environmental Management • DHS • Regional Water Quality Control Board • Dept. of Toxics Substances Control • EPA Region IX

  17. Anaheim - Delineation • Done by OCWD • Used QuickFlow groundwater model • Defined capture zones for wells in project area

  18. Anaheim – PCA Checklist • Did not have DWSAP checklists • Identified chlorinated solvents as primary contaminant of concern • Collected data from a variety of sources • Amount of data was overwhelming • Developed a list of 1,000 businesses • Narrowed list to those associated with chlorinated solvents in protection areas

  19. Anaheim – Field Inspections • Inspected facilities from list • Used a checklist to verify: • Type of activity • Regulatory status • Presence of Class V UIC wells • underground injection wells • shallow disposal wells • Materials handled or stored • Underground storage tanks • Presence, storage, and disposal of hazardous materials

  20. Anaheim – Vulnerability Analysis • Using information from databases and field inspections, did a risk assessment to rank the facilities • Considered: • Presence in zone • Presence of Class V well • Presence and quantity of chlorinated solvents • Presence and status of UST • Presence and compliance of hazardous materials • Presence and compliance of hazardous waste • Industrial discharge compliance

  21. Anaheim – Well Identification Project • Goals: • Verify the existence, location, and condition of “unknown status” wells within project area • Determine if wells were potential source of groundwater pollution • Use retired senior volunteers • Results: • Enough volunteers (20) to do project throughout city • 251 wells researched, 49 found, 17 possible findings, 10 additional wells found • 245 volunteer hours

  22. Anaheim – Managing Pollution Sources • Verify status of existing UST, industrial, and VOC cleanups in capture zones • Prioritize inspections of facilities by risk assessment • Provide compliance and technical assistance to businesses • Identify if enforcement action necessary • Develop public education and participation programs

  23. Anaheim – Education and Participation • Industry • Business newsletters • Fact sheets • Technical libraries • Workshops • Groundwater Star program • Well construction and closure guidelines • Technical assistance

  24. Anaheim – Education and Participation

  25. Anaheim – Education and Participation • Community • Bus shelter posters • Groundwater protection educational posters • Environmental First Aid Kit • Water Quality research project at high school • Water works summer reading program • Groundwater guardian program • Used oil recycling program • Speakers Bureau • Community events

  26. Orange County Water District – Current Activities • Children’s Drinking Water Festival • 7,000 students, teachers, volunteers, presenters • 2-day event • Sponsor of the Blue Planet Foundation • Interactive water exhibit at Discovery Museum of Orange County

  27. Assessment and Protection Case Study

  28. Yosemite Valley Purpose: • Another test of DWSAP procedures and demonstration of a federal/state partnership for SWP

  29. Yosemite Valley - Background • Yosemite National Park • Total = 1,169 sq. miles • Undeveloped wilderness = 1,100 sq. miles • 4 million visitors/year • 1,500 – 3,000 employees of NPS and YCS • Water Systems • 21 public water systems • 4 community systems, 17 non-community

  30. Yosemite Valley - Background • Yosemite Valley Water System • Permanent Population = 2,500 • Visitors = 3.2 million/year • Service connections = 235 • 3 Wells • Confined aquifer of glacial porous media • Artesian conditions for most of year until late summer, early fall

  31. Yosemite Valley – Working Group • National Park Service • DHS • EPA Region IX • Concessionaire* • Public Meeting • Counties • Other interested parties

  32. Yosemite - Delineation Buffer Zone Zone B10 Zone B5 Zone A Zone B10 Buffer Zone

  33. Yosemite Valley – Assessment Tasks • PCA Inventory • Done w/ field review and maps by DHS, NPS and EPA • PBE Confined aquifer + Artesian = High • Vulnerability • No contaminants detected • Historic gas stations • Known contaminant plumes

  34. Yosemite Valley - Protection • Evaluation of current practices • NPS and YCS are already implementing most SWP activities we could recommend, due to other programs or planning • Recommended public education • Get these messages across: “Yosemite Valley water is Naturally Protected From the Ground Up” “Fill up on Valley water before heading to back country”

  35. Yosemite Valley – Public Education • Water Fountain with tap for filling water bottles • Includes a source water protection message • Installed at the Visitor Center • Dedicated to the late John Clark, a Park Service employee who was instrumental in the project

More Related