HomeMy WebLinkAboutNYS Wellhead Protection 1990Department of Environmental Conservation
NEW YORK STATE
WELLHEAD PROTECTION
PROGRAM
Submittal
to
United States Environmental Protection Agency
New York State Depadment of Environmental Conservation
MARIa M. CUOMO, Governor THOMAS C. JORLING, Commissioner
September 1990
NEW YORK STATE
WELLHEAD PROTECTION PROGRAM
SUBMrlTAL
TO
UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
IN
APPUCATION FOR IMPLEMENTATION FUNDS
NEW YORK STATE
DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL CONSERVATION
DIVISION OF WATER
ALBANY, NY
SEPTEMBER 1990
TABLE OF CONTENT~
PREFACE
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
CHAP I I=R 1
WI=I ! HEAD PRO'FECTION PROGRAM SUMMARY AND PURPOSE
1.1. Introduction
1.2. Background - Groundwater and Groundwater
Management in New York State
1.3. Wellhead Protection Program: Purpose and Goal
1.4. Wellhead Protection Program: Summary
1.5. Evaluation of Wellhead Protection
Program Progress
CI-IAy, ~-H 2
2.1.
2.2.
2.3.
2.4.
2.5
2.6.
2.7.
2.8.
CHAPTER 3
3.1.
3.2.
3.3.
3.4.
CHAPTER 4
4.1.
4.2.
CHAFTER 5
5.1.
5.2.
5.3.
5.4.
DUTIES AND RESPONSIBIUTIES
Introduction
Federal Agencies: General Responsibilities
State Agencies: General Responsibilities
Regional Planning Agencies
County and Local Governments
Public Water Supply Systems
Coordination
Summary
W~=I "HEAD PROTECTION AREA DEUNEATION
Introduction and Institutional Processes
Delineation Criteria, Thresholds and Methods
Phasing Considerations
Summary
,SOURCE IDENTIRCATION
Categories of Potential Groundwater
Contamination Sources
Contamination Source Inventory Procedures
Completion, Refinement and Update of
Contamination Source Inventory
SOURCE M.N~IAGEMENT
Introduction
Existing Source Control Programs
Future Management Considerations
Summary
1
3
4
6
7
7
8
10
10
11
11
12
15
17
25
25
26
31
31
38
43
TABLE OF OON ~ J:NI'S
OHAi~ii~I 7
OHAI"'i I~1 8
CONTINGENCY PLANNING
6.1. Introduction
6.2. Emergency Planning Program
6.3. Emergency Equipment Stockpiles
6.4. Wellhead Protection Program Submittal
NEW W~ ~ -~
7.1. Instltutlona~ Processes
7.2. Wellhead Protection for New Wells
SUMMARY OF PUBUC PARTICIPATION IN
THE DEVELOPMENT OF THE WI~ I HEAD
PROTECTION PROGRAM
48
48
49
50
51
52
PREFACE
This report represents a revision of the Proposed
New York State Wellhead Protection Program,
submitted to the U.S. Environmental Protection
Agency on June 19, 1989. Following the June
1989 submittal, there was an additional review by
the New York State Wellhead Protection Advisory
Committee (see ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS1 and by
key program managers and regional staff of the
NYS Department of Environmental Conservation.
The Initial comments of the USEPA concerning
the submittal were received by New York in
January 1990. In March 1990, the USEPA, in
accordance with the provisions of the Safe
Drinking Water Act amendments, notified the state
that the submittal was Incomplete. A public
hearing was held in August, 1990 to complete the
process. Comments received were used in
revising this document, and are also discussed in
an attachment to this Submittal. The revisions
contained in this document primarily include
many clarifications of statements made in the
original document, but also Include additional
items to complete the original submittal (e.g.,
public participation summary) and items to
address the adequacy concerns of USEPA.
The wellhead protection activities of the
Department of Environmental Conservation In the
intervening pariod have Included further
development of new source management pro-
grams (e.g., chemical bulk storage), Incorporation
of wellhead protection In existing programs (e.g.,
water supply permit program), assistance to
regional planning agencies In wellhead protection
activities (e.g., 205(j) projects on source
identification), regional and statewide outreach
and education efforts, and providing geologic
information and unconsolidated aquifer
delineation information.
Most importantly, the Interest of county agencies
and municipal governments in New York in well-
head protection has grown considerably elnce the
June 1989 submittal, with significant activity by
key counties and municipalities In Upstate New
York, by the Long Island Regional Planning Board
concerning Long Island's Special Groundwater
Protactlon Areas, and by Long Island's major
water suppllera. Substantial interest In training
(including delineation models and management
tools), and In developing protection ordinances
has been expressed.
Agencies and local govemment associations apart
from the Department of Environmental Conser-
vation have initiated public discussion and training
activities concerning wellhead protection and
groundwater management.
These activities demonstrate the desired evolution
of local wellhead protection programs that the
New York State Wellhead Protection Program is
designed to foster.
A(~KNOWLED(~EMENTS
The New York State Department of Environmental Conservation gratefully acknowledges the assistance
and recommendations of the members of the Wellhead Protection Advisory Committee. To date, these
members have Included the following:
- Aldo Andreoll, Suffolk County Dept. of Health Services
- Donald Beavers, Temporary Commission on Tug Hill
- Donald Blngham, U.S. Geological Survey
- Jesslca Bralten, Herklmer-Oneida Planning Dept.
- James Coon, NYS Dept. of State;
- Robert Denz, Broome County Health Dept
o Hope Donovan, League of Women Voters
- John Edwards, Long Island Water Conference
- James Feuss, Cortland Co. Dept. of Health
- Robert Fickles, NYS Geological Survey
- William Gollnitz, Chautauqua Co. Health Dept.
- Bernard Gorman, Long Island Water Conference
- Nancy Jarvis, Cortland Co. Planning Dept.
- Richard Kasprowicz, NYS Dept. of Health
- Margaret Kavanaugh, Schenectady Co. Planning Dept.
- John Kent, Herklmer-Onaida Planning Dept.
- William Lee, American Water Resources Association
- Sarah Meyland, Suffolk Co. Water Authority
- Todd Miller, U.S. Geological Survey
- Jacquelina Moody, NYS Dept. of Agriculture & Markets
- James Napoll, Dutchess Co. Health Dept.
- Donald O'Dell, NYS Dept. of State
- Francis Padar, Nassau Co. Dept. of Health
- Kenneth Pokalsky, Business Council of NYS
- Keith Porter, NYS Water Resoumes Institute-Cornall University
- George Proios, NYS Legislative Comm. on Water Resoume Needs of L.I.
- Thomas Reamon, NYS Dept. of Health
- Joseph Salvato, American Water Works Association
- Ronald Slotkln, Broome Co. Health Dept.
- David Stern, NYS Legislative Comm. on Water Resource Needs of L.I.
- John Stonabanks, Suffolk Co. Water Authority
- Edith Tannanbaum, Long Island Regional Planning Board
- Mark Walker, NYS Water Resources Instltute-Cornell University
- Patrlcia Walsh, Association of Towns of the State of New York
- John Williams, U.S. Geological Survey
- Donald Zlzzi, Schenectady Co. Planning Dept
The original submittal (June 19, 1989) was prepared by Allan Tedrow, Kevln Roberts and James Lister
of the NYS Department of Environmental Conservation, Division of Water, Groundwater Management
Section. The revised document (September, 1990) was prepared by Kevin Roberts and Allan Tedrow.
The typing of this document by Barbara J. Crier, of the Department of Environmental Conservation,
is also gratefully acknowledged.
CHAPTER 1
WELLHEAD PROTECTION PROGRAM SUMMARY AND PURPOSE
1.1. Introduction
Responsible and effective environmental
management demands careful focus on
geographic areas where resource management is
most needed to achieve the greatest benefit for a
given level of effort. This is the overriding
objective of wellhead area protection. The
resource is groundwater. The benefit is reducing
the risk of contamination of drinking water supply
wells for the greatest number of people. The level
of effort includes the cost of activities ranging
from planning and assessment to the
implementation and enforcement of appropriate
groundwater quality protection controls at all
levels of government. The issues to be evaluated
and resolved include better defining the federal,
state and local government partnership in
groundwater protection, sstablishlng the most
rational geographic targeting and preventive
management framework, and determining the
optimum allocation of funds, if they become
available, to achieve results.
This report is intended to satisfy the requirements
of Section 1428 of the Safe Drinking Water Act in
describing New York State's overall goal and plan
for groundwater resource and wellhead area
protection. Many important elements of wellhead
area protection will evolve as local plans are
designed and evaluated, especially aspects
involving education, local government roles, and
data collection and assessment. This submittal Is
intended to serve as supporting information in
application for assistance funds from EPA to
further develop and implement the plan. It
presents the basic direction for using additional
support obtained through new funding or
reallocation of existing resources.
The elements of this report Include the following:
Duties of state agencies, local governments
and public water supply systems
(Chapter 2).
Delineation of wellhead protection areas
(Chapter 3).
Identification of potential groundwater con-
tamination sources (Chapter 4).
Discussion of groundwater management ap-
preaches (Chapter 5).
Discussion of groundwater-dependent pub-
lic water system contingency planning
(Chapter 6).
Discussion of wellhead protection planning
for new wells (Chapter 7).
Discussion of public participation aspects
(Chapter 8).
It is Important to recognize that the proposed
Wellhead Protection Program is not the first
groundwater resource protection program in New
York State. It does not replace the state's
existing groundwater management program.
Indeed, its goals and structure are already
contained within that comprehensive program.
This submittal refines and extends the geographic
targeting framework already adopted as a
principal groundwater protection policy. The
basic groundwater program will continue to apply
to the entire groundwater resource of the state
and thus will provide a significant degree of
protection for all groundwaters.
The remainder of this chapter provides additional
introductory background on New York State's
groundwater resources, Its existing groundwater
management program, and the general meaning
of wellhead area protection.
1.2. Bacicaround: Groundwater and Ground-
water Manaaement kl New York State
Groundwater is a critically important and uniquely
vulnerable source of drinking water for over six
million people In New York State, roughly one-
third of the state's residents. These people draw
their water from over 5,000 community wellfields
or wells (serving over four million people), and
more than 10,000 non-community public wells
and an unknown number of private wells (serving
-1-
over two million people). In recent years,
increased use of chemicaJs in our society has
been accompanied by increasing evidence of
contamination of groundwater resources. This
contamination, in some cases, has been caused
by chemicals of significant toxicological concern
and has been sufficient to require closure or
treatment of public and private water supplies.
New York State recognized the Importance of
groundwater resource and drinking water
protection relatively early and began the
development of Its groundwater quality
management programs In the years following
World War II. Groundwater blassifications and
standards evolved into groundwater discharge
limitations and early wellhead protection area
approaches. The adoption of 83 ambient
groundwater quality standards in 1978,
supplemented by drinking water quality standards,
coincided with the development of comprehensive
groundwater protection programs. This
culminated in the final publication of two major
reports, the Long Island Groundwater
Management Program (1986), and the Upstate
New York Groundwater Management Program
(1987).
These comprehensive programs form the
foundation for all groundwater management
efforts in the state. They encompass many major
groundwater protection programs, including but
not limIted to solid waste, hazardous waste,
pesticides, petroleum, hazardous substances,
mining, and wastewater disposal and discharge.
They include the activities of all relevant state
agencies and form a bridge to local government
activities. Most Importantly, the comprehensive
program reports specifically describe geographic
targeting frameworks for groundwater protection
that are the basis for wellhead area protection.
More recently, the New York State Water
Resources Planning Council published a
comprehensive New York State Water Resources
Management Strategy (1989). This Strategy,
prepared wIth major Input from the New York
State Departments of Environmental Conservation
and Health, from local govemment and public
representatives, and from slx other state agencies,
comprises 14 volumes and addresses specific
issues in 13 regions of the state. It endorses the
geographic targeting frameworks of the previous
Groundwater Management Program reports and
supports the adoption of Watershed Rules and
Regulations as a protective management
approach for public water supplies.
As a general rule, wellhead area protection is a
targeting approach to protect groundwater
supplying specific wells. In certain cases,
wellfields with multiple wells or regions with high
densities of wells and complicated recharge
characteristics must be considered together.
Aquifer-level or aquifer segment targeting is a
potentieliy useful approach for wellhead pro-
tection in New York because the aquifers are
typically not geographically extensive (Upstate
New York) or are pumped using a great number
of wells (Long Island).
An important aspect of New York State's ground-
water program is that all fresh groundwaters in
the state are classified for best usage as a source
of potable water supply (Class GA) regardless of
location or current use. The comprehensive set
of ambient groundwater quality standards and
guidelines apply to all groundwater. These stan-
dards and guidelines (which include drinking
water standards) underlie all major groundwater
protection programs currently operating or under
development.
New York's groundwater management programs
have either already adopted or have begun to set
a targeting framework that goes beyond common-
ly recognized wellhead area concepts, in Nassau
and Suffolk counties (which share a single aquifer
system on Long leland), considerable effort has
been devoted to the delineation and revision of
the boundaries of eight hydrogeologic zones.
The Deep Flew Recharge Area (which comprises
three of these zones) is considered to be the
highest priority area for protecting wells in the
deeper Magothy and Uoyd aquifers. Manage-
ment program targeting on Long Island is keyed
to these eight zones.
Additionally, nine Special Groundwater Protection
Areas ($GPAs) have been delineated on Long
island and are the subject of an extensive
planning effort funded in part by New York State
and by the Long Island Regional Planning Board.
Suffolk County has also defined 'Water Supply
SensItive Areas' for protecting wells in the Glacial
aquifer. The implementation of wellhead area
-2-
protection on Long Island will not replace this
targeting approach. Additional geographic
assessment may be included in the Wellhead
Program for Long Island. It Is important to
emphasize that management program targeting
and Implementation are ultlmatalythe most critical
aspects of wellhead protection. The groundwater
protection accomplishments of county-wide
ordinances on Long Island must also be
recognized.
In Upstate Now York, unconsolidated aquifers are
not as extensive as on Long Island. A consid-
erable degree of geographic targeting has been
achieved by the mapping and categorizing of
Upstate aquifers. Many of these are ralatively thin
deposits of glacial drift In narrow valleys (less
than one or two miles wide). Certain state4eval
programs, particularly waste management and
disposal, ars already strongly tied to these
delineations.
The partnership between federal, state and local
government is perhaps the most Important part of
a successful wellhead protection effort. Certain
local land use control elements of a successful
program are not within the state's statutory
authority and are more appropriately implemented
at the local level. Under the home rule provisions
of New York State Law, towns, cities and villages
ara responsible for regulating land use. Land use
controls ara an important component of wellhead
protection plans.
The state/local partnership is also Important In
adjusting protection efforts to be sensitive to local
and regional differences In the groundwater
resources and vulnerability, uses, programs, and
local capacity for management. Local authorltlea
in many areas of the state also have the principal
authority for inspecting and testing potential
contamination sources and have Important roles
in enforcement.
1.3. Wellhead Protection Prooram:
The purpose and goal of Now York State's
Wellhead Protection Program are to protect
wellhead areas within Now York State from
contaminants which may have any adverse effects
on the health of persons, as described in the
federal Safe Drinking Water Act. This goal is
more explicitly described in the adopted New
York State Groundwater Management Program as
follows:
Protect and conserve aroundwater
resoureea for the best use as ddnldna water
suadv.
2. Emphasize oroblem orevention.
T~et ~ araundwe~er amamm to ma~
~tively use ~w~de amamm resour~e~
bv focuelna soec~l emofm.~s on ~
hiah-vleldina a~uifer svetems.
4. FoYer a ~ate/iooal eartnershlo.
The quantity management goal of the compre-
hansive program has been deleted from this list.
However, the Wellhead Protection Program,
essentially a quality management effort, is
Indirectly supportive of the quantity goal because
protection of existing wells reduces the need to
abandon supplies and develop now sources.
The key goal for emphasis In the Wellhead
Protection Program is the third, that of
geographic targeting, which has been left in the
original groundwater program wording above.
Part of the emphasis of the Wellhead Protection
Program will be to refine and strengthen this goal.
The Wallhead Protection Program will promote
targeting of staffing and funding resources and
adjust program oparatlona to achieve the
maximum water quality protection benefits.
Determining the optimum balance between
expenditures on geographic assessment
(dalineatlon and mapping) and expenditures on
Improved enforcement of existing programs and
development of new programs is the key
challenge In developing the wellhead protection
effort. This balance will differ In different areas of
the state. In all areas of the state, a major need
Is actual program implementation and
enforcement.
Wellhead protection cannot be viowed In a
discrete, piecemeal fashion. The steps of
delineation, source inventory and source
management and control must be considered
together. A scheme of very costly groundwater
flow delineation analyses cannot be consistent
-3-
with the overall wellhead protection objectives if
they unduly diminish funds available for
management program implementation or if the
management program does not require great
sophistication. Increased refinements of delin-
eations are justifiable to the extent that
corresponding refinements in management and
enforcement are practical and possible.
1.4. Wellhead Protection Prooram Summary
This summary is an overview of material
developed in more detail in Chapters 2 through 8.
1.4.1.
The Department of Environmental Conservation
(DEC) is the principal agency responsible for
developing and Implementing state-level aspects
of the Wellhead Protection Program and for
coordination. The Department of Health (DOH) is
responsible for certain aspects related to public
water supply well data, contingency planning, new
well planning, and Watershed Rules and
Regulations. Regional and county planning
agencies and county governments are
responsible for county-level planning,
management and educational outreach elements
in the overall program, in addition to any county-
level ordinances developed for wellhead
protection. Town, village and city governments
ara responsible for local land use control, local
ordinances and other local-level aspects of
wellhead protection. Water suppliers will have a
role in developing local Watershed Rules and
Regulations, education, land acquisition and other
program aspects determined by DEC and DOH.
The educational effort will be shared by all levels,
including Cooperative Extension, the universities
and the State Education Department. Federal
agencies and other state agencies will participate
as appropriate, as coordinated by DEC with the
assistance of EPA for federal agencies.
1.4.2. Wellhead Protection ~ Delineation
The Safe Drinking Water Act defines a Wellhead
Protection Area ONHPA) as 'the surface end
subsurface area surrounding a water well or
wellfield, supplying e public water system, through
which contaminants are reasonably likely to move
toward and reach such water well or wellfields."
This definition is not specific because there is no
time framework and because there is a
requirement that contaminants be reasonably
likely to reach the well, a condition that is very
difficult to accurately predict. States are given
flexibility by the Safe Drinking Water Act in
determining delineation approaches.
New York State proposes that unconsolidated
aquifer boundaries serve as the fundamental
delineation of wellhead protection areas and that
a multiple zone approach be used within the total
WHPA for varying management relative to risk.
This approach is modified for Long Island and for
bedrock aquifers, as described in Chapter 3. New
York's approach proposes to allow local flexibility
in an evolutionary process of delineation
refinements, and to allow utilization of previously
delineated protection areas, where appropriate.
There are many distinct advantages In this overall
approach. A very important advantage is that
considerable aquifer characterization and
mapping work has already been accomplished.
Second, it is consistent with the evolution and
principal policies of both the comprehensive New
York State Groundwater Management Program
(1987) and New York State Water Resources
Management Strategy (1989), in addition to the
New York State Watershed Rules and Regulation
policies. Third, it focuses attention of local
governments on the entire aquifer resource and
facilitates contingency planning and new (or
future) well protection. Finally, it provides a base
within which more sophisticated delineations (e.g.,
subdividing the overall WHPA) can be made as
programs require and funding permits.
A possible drawback of using aquifer boundaries--
that aquifers may be broad regional systems-is
not a major problem in most of New York State.
In Upstate New York most public water supplies
using groundwater ara in unconsolidated aquifers
of rather limited areal extent. Most important
recharge areas ara within the boundaries of the
unconsolidated aquifers, another advantage of
this approach.
Chapter 3 provides further details and back-
ground on wellhead protection area delineation.
-4-
1.4.3. Po~'~del Contamination Source
The New York State Wellhead Protection Program
proposes to use the classification of potential
contamination sources based on process or
operation proposed by the Office of Technology
Assessment and endorsed by USEPA.
Many source Inventory and identification
programs are already In place or are being
developed for Individual groundwater protection
programs. These Include but are not limited to
registries of h~emlous waste disposal sites,
petroleum storage locations, the Industrial
Chemical Survey, records of the State Pollutant
Discharge Elimination System (SPDES), and the
hazardous material storage registry (in
development). Similar information is available for
other potential sources (mining, municipal waste,
etc.). Other inventories (pesticides, salt storage)
are needed and certain improvements (Iocational
data, data formats) are needed In the existing
registries.
The effort expended in pinpointing and mapping
any possible source will be determined In balance
with the effort needed to manage the most
important sources. The current registries will be
used as much as possible at the greatest level of
geographic detail feasible within the constraints of
the registry. Using these registries, some soumes
outside of the actual wellhead protection areas
may be listed. An effort will be made to explore
new formats for processing ava~able registry data
to maximize compatibility and ease of
interpretation.
Chapter 4 provides further detail on potential
contaminatlon source Inventory.
1.4.4.
The emphasis in groundwater management efforts
from the state level will be to continue to develop
and implement the program recommendations
made as part of the comprehensive groundwater
management program, with a special focus on
aspects relevant to geographic targeting of
program elements.
Groundwater protection for ail fresh groundwaters
in New York is accomplished in the existing state
regulatory programs by classifying all fresh
groundwaters as potential drinking water sources,
and using the stringent 6 NYCRR Part 703
groundwater standards as the management
objectives statewide. Solid and hR~rdous waste
management programs formally utilize geographic
targeting as a management tool. Other state-level
programs (e.g., spill response) have integrated
major water supply aquifer targeting into day-to-
day functions even though such targeting may not
be explicitly stated in written policy.
Current and developing state-level programs will
be evaluated to determine useful new approaches
or cost-effective methods for targeting
management practices. The needs identified will
be considered in allocating available funds or
staff, soliciting new funds, and in regulatory and
program development.
Local governments, with the authority to regulate
land use, have the capability of controlling new
facilities through zoning and site plan review.
Density of new development can also be
controlled through zoning. Adoption of specific
groundwater protection ordinances is also an
avenue available to municipal and county
governments, through sanitary codes or other
approaches. Finally, land acquisition for
groundwater protection is a viable management
tool for local governments and water suppliers.
Watershed Rules and Regulations can be promul-
gated by the New York State Health Department
following initiation and development by public
water puweyors, whether municipal or privately-
owned. The WHPA delineation proposals in this
submittal are compatible with the models for
Watershed Rules and Regulations.
The state will also uss its available resources and
explore new approaches for technical assistance,
outreach and education to local govamments to
encourage participation and local initiatives. The
potential for using "facilitated training", or training
intermediate parties to train local groups, will be
considered.
Management aspects are described in further
detail In Chapter 5.
-5-
t.4.5.
The existing contingency planning requirements of
the New York State Department of Health's
emergency planning program meet and exceed
the requirements of Section 1428(a)(b) of the
Safe Drinking Water Act. The existing New York
program deals with ell forms of water supply
emergencies. In addition, the Superfund
Amendments and Reauthorization Act (SARA) Title
III emergency planning actlvitias In New York
support contingency planning needs for wellhead
protection.
Chapter 6 further discusses contingency planning.
The existing New York State Water Supply Permit
Program enables the Department of Environ-
mental Conservation to require, as part of the
permit approval process, the adoption of a
groundwater (or wellhead) protection plan for
proposed new wells. The New York State
Wellhead Protection Program proposes that
development of such a plan be required for new
wells. The plan may include Watershed Rules and
Regulations, local ordinances (town, village, or
city), or county ordinances. Such plans often will
entail the collection of hydrogeofogic information
to support WHPA delineations. Such plans must
be consistent with existing authorities of the water
supplier and they may include Intermuniclpat or
county-level agreements or Watershed Rules and
Regulations (NYSDOH).
This aspect of the Wellhead Protection Program
is further discussed in Chapter 7.
1.4.7. P~ Pa~c~43alJon
There has been substantial public participation in
the evolution of these proposals, particularly in
the two major planning and strategy development
projects from which New York's Wellhead
Protection Program was derived. The public
participation In both the New York State
Groundwater Management Plan and the New York
State Water Resoumes Management Strategy fully
adhered to public participation procedures.
In addition, the Wellhead Protection Program
development has estabitshed a Wellhead
Protection Advisory Committee to assist in
development of the submittal.
Public participation is further discussed in
Chapter 8.
1.5. Evalualk~ ~ Wellhea¢l ~
Program progress reports which evaluate
Wellhead Protection Program development and
implementation will follow one of two alternative
approaches, in the event that an Assistance
Agreement is adopted between EPA and DEC in
accordance with the provisions of the Safe
Drinking Water Act, three types of reports will be
submitted to EPA which are specific to the
Wellhead Protection Program and which follow
the "Guidance for Applicants for State Weiihaad
Protection Program Funds Under the Safe
Drinking Water Act" (EPA 440/6-87-011).
These are:
a. Interim and End-of-Year Progress Reports;
b. Biennial Status Report; and
c. Annual Financial Status Report.
The precise content and schedule for these
reports would be negotiated as part of the
Assistance Agreement.
If EPA does not provide assistance and an
Assistance Agreement is not established, the
progress of the Wellhead Protection Program will
be reported within the context of the already
established procedures for reviewing the DEC
Division of Water Management Plan between DEC
and EPA.
-6-
CHAPTER 2
DUTIES AND RESPONSIBILITIES
2.1. Introductlo~
New York State's designation of the wellhead area
as the highest priority area for groundwater
protection is documented in New York State's
Groundwater Management Program. Wellhead
protection is a concept that has been utilized by
a number of environmental and public health
programs in New York State for decades. The
passage of the 1986 Amendments of the Safe
Drinking Water Act creating the Wellhead
Protection Program serves as an opportunity for
New York State to build on previous efforts and to
foster a coherent and consistent statewide
approach for a wellhead protection program
through additional management efforts.
New York State's proposed Wellhead Protection
Program 0NHPP) has been developed from
existing regulatory and management structures.
Within the state there are agencies and programs
at all levels of government established to regulate,
enhance and manage natural resources and
protect the public health. As in the State's
Groundwater Management Program, it will be
largely these agencies and programs that will be
called upon to implement an effective WHPP.
There are two principal federal agencies with
important roles and responsibilities relating to
groundwater protection In New York State. These
are the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
(USEPA) and the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS),
a unit of the Department of Interior.
2.2.1. Envlro~mefltal Pr~ecflon Aoencv
The USEPA is the agency responsible for most of
the major federal regulatory programs which
provide for protection of the environment and
public health. These include: the Clean Water ACt
(CWA), the Safe Drinking Water Act (SDWA), the
Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA),
Superfund (CERCLA), the Federal Insecticide,
Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act (FIFRA), the Toxic
Substances Control Act ('FSCA), and the Clean Air
Act (CAA).
EPA generally delegates many of the specific
program activities to the states upon request and
upon attainment of legislative requirements. This
allows the state to be flexible in tailoring the
program to local environmental needs (to the
extent permitted by statute). EPA continues to
play a role in overseeing state performance in
carrying out delegated national programs which
use federal grants and in supporting the states
through technical expertise and research.
New York State has received delegation of
programs under the Clean Water Act, the Safe
Drinking Water Act, RCRA, and the Clean Air Act.
The authorities in the Acts are generafly mirrored
by comparable state legislation, and the
delegated programs have in the past decade
provided essential funding support to assist
strong state programs in water pollution control,
public water supply regulation, air pollution
control, and solid and hazardous waste
management.
Not all elements of federal programs have been
delegated. Examples of program activities for
which USEPA maintains direct responsibility in
New York include:
Development of national drinking water
quality standards (note that New York
maintains a more comprehensive set of
state drinking water standards);
Designation of "sole source" aquifers
under the Safe Drinking Water Act;
Underground injection control under the
Safe Drinking Water Act;
Registration of pesticides for use under
FIFRA;
-7-
Administration of federal Superfund.
2.2.2. . .
The second federal agency with major responsi-
bility relating to groundwater in New York State is
the U.S. Geological Survey - Water Resources
Division (USGS-WRD). The mission ofthe USGS-
WRD, which is a non-regulatory agency, is to
develop and disseminate scientific knowledge and
understanding ofthe Nation's water resources. In
cooperation with federal, state and local agencies,
the USGS-WRD maintains an observation-well
network for collection of groundwater levels and
conducts interpretive investigations of the
groundwater resources in New York State. The
USGS-WRD maintains extensive files of
groundwater data Including computerized
databases containing information from over
40,000 wells In the state.
The USGS-WRD will provide technical support to
the Wellhead Protection Program by providing
groundwater data and through cooperatively
funded investigations. Wellhead protection-related
investigations include regional studies of the
hydrogeology and water quality of the state's
aquifers and demonstration projects involving the
delineation of contributing areas and sources of
recharge to wellflelds In selected representative
hydrogeologic settings.
2.2.3. F '
Several other federal agencies have Indirect
relationships to wellhead protection in New York.
With respect to technical support, the soil
information collected by the U.S. Department of
Agriculture - Soil Consewation Service (SCS) may
be utilized in various aspects of the program.
This information is generally available in published
form. Coordination between NYS and the SCS
State Office In Syracuse is generally routine and
direct, and no new arrangements are needed.
Them is relatively little federal land In New York
State outside of several military facilities. Of
these, only Fort Drum in Jefferson County is a
significant user of groundwater for public water
supply. In such cases, the policies described in
this submittal apply. The WHPA's have already
been determined according to the delineation
approach in Chapter 3. General coordination with
the facility will be through the Department of
Environmental Conservation's Regional Office.
Such coordination has been routine in the past.
For other coordination with federal agencies not
related to site-specific concerns, the USEPA-
Region Ii office (New York City) will be
responsible for assisting the Central Office of the
Department of Environmental Conservation in
communications and issue resolution.
2.3. State A(]eflctea: GenemJ Rss~xmsibllltise
There am a variety of state agencies with interests
and responsibilities relating to groundwater and
wellhead protection. The two agencies with the
most direct responsibilities are the Department of
Environmental Conservation (DEC) and the
Department of Health (DOH).
2.3.1. Deomtment ~ Environmental
Conse~ation
The DEC is the state's environmental agency, with
responsibility for administering a full army of
environmental quality and natural resource
programs. The Department is the state's cus-
todian for water in the environment. It is charged
with the 'coordinated management of water
resources' (ECL Section 3-03031), the control of
water pollution and the maintenance of
reasonable standards of purity of the state's
waters, both ground and surface (ECL Article 17).
The DEC is also the agency that has been
delegated authority to administer a number of
EPA programs under the CWA and RCRA such as
the SPDES program and the municipal and
hazardous waste programs. The DEC has been
designated by the Governor to be responsible for
the wellhead protection elements of the Safe
Drinking Water Act.
Integral elements of the Department's
groundwater management and wellhead
protection programs include water resources
planning, issuing water supply permits, setting
ambient water quality standards and
classifications, water quality monitoring and
surveillance, issuing municipal and industrial
-8-
wastewater discharge permits (SPDES), spill
response, regulating hazardous substance and
petroleum bulk storage, regulating the
development, operation and maintenance of
municipal wastewater facilities, and the nonpolnt
source management program.
Several other programs regulate important
potential sources of groundwater contamination.
Principal among these are programs in the areas
of solid and hazardous waste (including waste
facilities regulation) permitting of industrial waste
transport, state Superfund (relating to hazardous
waste site remediatlon), and hazardous waste
enforcement.
Other programs which have a relationship to
wellhead protection Include those in the areas of
pesticides and other hazardous substances
regulation, mineral resources, and oil and gas
regulation.
2.3.2. Del3artment of Health
The Department of Health (DOH), under the New
York State Public Health Law, Is responsible for
the protection of public health and more
particularly, to assure a potable supply of drinking
water for the state's citizens. Genarally, it Is
responsible for water which has been withdrawn
by public water suppliers for distribution to the
consumer.
EPA delegated the water system supervision
aspects of the Safe Drinking Water Act to the
DOH inthe late 1970's. The DOH implements thls
aspect of the SDWA through Part $ of the State
Sanitary Code. Under the Public Health Law and
Part 5, the DOH inspects public water supply
systems in the state to ensure proper operation
and maintenance and delivery of a potable and
adequate supply of water. This program includes
regulation of public water supply facility design
and construction; monitoring of the quality of
waters delivered to the tap; inspection
surveillance, and evaluation of all public water
systems; emergency response to water supply
systems experiencing critical water quality or
quantity problems; laboratory services;
establishment of state drinking water standards;
and enforcement of both state and federal
drinking water standards. In addition, the DOH
plays an Integral role In DEC's water supply
permit program through the review of water
quality and plans for any needed treatment
process, well construction or other Improvements
needed as part of the water supply permit.
The DOH evaluates available health effects data
and establishes appropriate drinking water
standards and guidelines.
Standards for installing on-site domestic sewage
disposal systems ara promulgated by the DOH
with protection of public health and groundwater
protection as goals.
The DOH has statutory authority for two programs
which will play a significant role in the state's
WHPP. These two programs ara the Emergency
Planning Program, and the Watershed Rules and
Regulations Program.
2.3.3. Other State Aeenciea
Other state agencies also have roles and
responsibilities which form parts of the state's
current program for groundwater management
and thus have a role in the state's WHPP. For
example, the Department of State Is responsible
for many aspects related to local government,
particularly training of zoning and planning board
officials. The NYS Geological Survey is
responsible for mapping the bedrock and surficial
deposits of the state, and providing geologic
advice and data to the various federal, state and
local agencies concerned with protection of the
state's groundwater resource. The Attorney
General represents the state in cases of litigation
to enforce regulatory controls and obtain clean-up
by responsible parties. The New York State Soil
and Water Conservation Committee provides
guidance and training for managing certain
nonpolnt source threats. The NYS Legislative
Commission on Water Resource Needs of Long
island Is authorized to recommend groundwater
protection approaches, new legislative or
administrative actions for groundwater protection,
and to investigate and evaluate water resource
studies.
-9-
2.4. R~nal Plannin~ A(~nciea
Regional planning agencies exist in many areas of
New York State, including most of the areas
which contain heavily utilized aquifer systems.
These agencies prepare regional plans for a
variety of public purposes, and undertake
planning-related studies. In many cases, their
activities have included water quality management
planning under Sections 208 and 205(j) of the
federal Clean Water Act. Regional planning
agencies have supported wellhead protection
program goals through assisting in coordination
with counties, towns and municipalities, compiling
hydrogeologic and contamination soume location
data, and applications of geographic information
systems.
Land use controls are within the regulatory
jurisdiction of local government, and are an
important aspect of groundwater protection.
Such land use controls may prohibit or otherwise
manage activities that adversely affect wellhead
areas and sensitive aquifer systems.
County agencies In many parts of New York State
play an important role in assisting the
administration of state-level regulatory programs,
thereby effectively augmenting the effort devoted
to these activities, as well as carrying out
important management activities which cannot be
accomplished within available state or federal
resources.
2.5.1. ~,ountv Government ~
Planning agencies and health agencies exist in
most of New York State's counties.
County health agencies may administer major
elements of state-level (DEC and DOH) programs
for water pollution control and water supply
regulation. In some cases, county health
agencies also administer their own programs,
resulting in a more comprehensive overall
program than that administered by the state. A
major example is Suffolk County on Long Island,
where the County's Article 12 Program provides
for comprehensive regulation of the storage and
handling of toxic and h~7~rdous chemicals.
County planning agencies are often involved in
environmental or natural resource planning
activities, as well as in providing expertise and
technical assistance to local government on the
development and implementation of local land use
controls. In many cases, these agencies can
assist in tailoring environmental management
activities, such as wellhead or groundwater
management, to best meet local needs and
conditions. They also may be able to provide an
important program linkage with local government
on the development and implementation of land
use controls to better protect wellheads and
groundwaters.
County planning boards, under the General
Municipal Law (Sections 239:1, m, n), must review
certain municipal zoning actions and, where the
county legislative body has so authorized,
subdivision plats before the municipal board can
take final action. While this is a limited power (if
the county planning board opposes a certain
action, the municipal board needs a majority plus
one of the full board to approve said action), it
can serve as a tool to raise the awareness of
municipalities concerning groundwater and
wellhead protection.
Several counties, such as Chautauqua and
Cortland, have established the position of county
groundwater coordinator. This position may be
located either in the County Health Department or
Planning Department. The general role of the
position is to serve es a focal point for all
groundwater protection and ralated activities
within the county and to provide assistance to
towns and municipalities. These positions are
proving to be significant positive steps in
furthering groundwater protection efforts in these
counties.
All counties, except those in New York City, in
New York State have County Soil and Water
Conservation Districts (SWCDs) as well as
Cooperative Extension offices. These agencies
have strong working relationships with the
rural/agricultural community in the state and
increasingly with local governments in urbanizing
-10-
areas. The SWCDs work directly with farmers to
develop farm conservation plans which include
soil erosion control and nonpoint source control.
SWCDs also review environmental data pertaining
to soil properties, terrain, and associated
watershed characteristics.
Cooperative Extension is an important vehicle for
providing public education and Information in
rural areas. In its work with individual farmers,
Cooperative Extension implementslntegrated Pest
Management and soil testing programs through-
out the state. Where fertilizer and pesticide use in
wellhead areas or over critical aquifer systems
may be an issue, or where public education may
be an appropriate means of addressing wellhead
concerns generic to rural areas, these agencies
represent Important potential participants in the
wellhead program.
2.5.2. Towns. Cities and Vlllaae~
Towns, cities and villages in New York State are
vested under state law with responsibility for
regulation of land use. Local land use controls
(e.g., zoning) are not used widely at present for
wellhead/groundwater protection, although a few
important examples have recently emerged. In
the future, however, effective local land use
control powers must be an important element of
management programs.
Zoning requirements which have been used for
groundwater and wellhead area protection
include: use restrictions; density limits; lot
coverage; setbacks; special use permits; and
performance standards.
In addition to zoning, municipalities also have
authority for site plan and subdivision review and
local ordinance adoption, all of which can play a
significant role in wellhead/groundwater
protection.
2.6. Public Water Suo~v Systems
While public water system purveyors generally do
not have regulatory authority, they do have roles
to play in the protection of water supply sources.
Two specific areas of responsibility fall to the
water purveyor; compliance with terms of the
water supply permit authorizing the taking of
water (administered by DEC), and the decision to
develop Watershed Rules and Regulations (which
are ultimately promulgated by the State
Department of Health). Water supply permits for
wells generally require the control of lands close
to the well through ownership or easement.
Water purveyors also share the responsibility to
educate their consumers about wellhead
protection and what the consumer can do to
promote groundwater and wellhead protection. It
is therefore essential that the officials of public
water supply systems be aware of potentially
contaminating activities within their wellhead
areas. It is further Incumbent on these officials to
identify the need for local wellhead protection
programs. Without strong support by these
officials, local programs may be difficult to
establish.
The Department of Environmental Conservation
will have the central coordination role in the
Wellhead Protection Program. Wellhead
protection activities of the U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency within New York State,
including those related to local governments and
the New York State Water Resoumes Institute's
activities in New York State's WHPP, will be
coordinated through the Department of
EnvironmentaIConservation'sWellhead Protection
Program unit. The DEC's interactions with local
governments will be through its existing agency
structure, including both the DEC regional offices
and direct coordination bytha Central Office. The
Department of Environmental Conservation will
also be responsible for coordination with other
NYS agencies and with other adjacent states
concerning wellhead protection issues.
Interstate wellhead protection issues In actuality
will be a rare concern in New York State. A
review of public water supply well locations shows
that very few systems are in the vicinity of state
boundaries. In addition, there are relatively few
interstate aquifer systems. The Department of
Environmental Conservation will have the lead
-11-
responsibility for interstate coordination, where
needed. Chapter 5 further discusses this issue.
2.8. Summaw
The existing institutional structure in New York
State can accommodate the program activities
required to provide wellhead protection. Most of
the required program elements already exist.
Major new programs are not required. It is more
important to provide adequate funding and carry
out existing programs and responsibilities, with
appropriate adjustment and targeting to provide
a high level of wellhead protection. The following
listing summarizes ma]or responsibilities in
wellhead protection.
SPECIFIC DU'rlE~ IN WEM.HEAD
PROTECTION PROGRAM
Federal Aclenclea
1. EnvironmentaJ Pro~ectJon Agency
Oversight and approval of WHPP's
Technical guidance and assistance
Funding
Assist NYS in coordination with
federal agencies
2. U.S. GeologicaJ Suwey
Development of information on
groundwater resources
Assessing utility of various technical
procedures for delineating wellhead
areas
Determining usefulness of generic
wellhead delineations using aquifer
classification systems or other
parameters
Implementation of NYS WHPP (as
appropriate)
1. Department of Environmental
Lead agency responsibility for
WHPP as delegated by Governor.
Administering the major statewide
environmental protection programs
which regulate potential sources of
groundwater contamination.
Installing and implementing
wellhead protection concepts in
environmental management
programs.
Establishing wellhead protection
area delineation policies, and
review of enhanced local
delineations.
Providing available records of
potential contamination sources to
local wellhead protection programs.
Providing guidance for local
agencies for wellhead protection
area delineations and management
and promoting local WHPP's.
Reviewing and commenting on
local programs.
Funding assistance for regional and
local efforts to develop wellhead
programs.
Oversight of reporting requirements
and recordkeeping for Superlund
Amendments and Reauthorization
Act Title III data. Planning
oversight is the responsibility of the
State Emergency Management
Office.
Oversight of the Water Supply
Permit Program for new wells, and
coordination with wellhead
protection.
-12-
Coordination (local governments,
other state agencies, EPA and
federal agencies, other states).
Funding USGS cooperative
program to continue groundwater
and wellhead infor-cna'tion
development.
~. I~u~mmen~ ~ H~h
Promulgating watershed rules ara
regula:lons for groundwater'
supplies.
Promoting local initiatives for
watershed rules and regulations.
Administering emergency planning
requirements of State Law and
SDWA.
~roviding assistance for water
supply pr~rams administered by
counUas.
Local government interactions and
training of zoning and planning
officials.
4. State Geological Suwey
Miscellaneous aspects of geologic
information management and
assessment.
New Ymk State W~ar R___~c4Jmes
Univen~llea
Community and local govemment
education.
· Research
Guidance and outreach for certain
nonpoint source threats.
7. New YoU( Slate LegislalNe
on Win_m- Resource Needs of Long Island
Education.
Recommending State legislation.
1. M~Govemments
Adopting local groundwater
protection ordinances (including
delineation), Implementing and
enforcing the ordinances.
Using zoning, site plan review,
subdivision review powers to
protect groundwater and wellhead
areas.
Inventorying sources of contam-
Ination, as coordinated with water
supplier and other state and local
agencies, and as determined by
local management programs for
wellhead protection.
P- CourW Govemmants
Implementing NYSDEC and
NYSDOH programs that are related
to wellhead protection (as
coordinated by the relevant state
agency).
Adopting ordinances to supplement
existing state regulations (6 NYCRR
and 10 NYCRR), as appropriate,
and Implementing and enforcing
the ordinances.
Providing local assistance to
municipal and town govemments
related to wellhead protection.
Inventorying sources of contam-
Ination, as coordinated with water
supplier and other state and local
-13-
agencies, and as determined by
local management programs for
wellhead protection.
Educating county citizens and
commercial sector concerning
groundwater and wellhead
protection.
3. Regional Planning Agencies
Promoting and supporting local
wellhead protection efforts.
Inventorying sources of contam-
ination, as coordinated with water
supplier and other state and local
agencies, and as determined by
local management programs for
wellhead protection.
4. Public Water Supply Systan Purveyors
Evaluating need for and initiating (if
appropriate) adoption of watershed
rules and regulations including
definition of prote~ion zones.
Inventorying sources of contam-
ination, as coordinated with other
state and local agencies, and as
determined by local management
programs for wellhead protection.
Enforcing Watershed Rules and
Regulations, in coordination with
relevant state and local agencies.
Implementing conditions of water
supply permits, in coordination with
relevant state and local agencies.
Complying with emergency
planning requirements of DOH.
Participating in water user and
public education efforts.
-14-
CHAFTER 3
WEI [HEAD PROTECTION AREA DEUNEATION
3.1. Introduction and Institutlonal Processes
3.1.1. Introduction
The comprehensive New York State Groundwater
Management Program, developed in the early
1980's and published in revised and final
documents in 1986 (for Long island) and 1987
(for Upstate), recommended key policies and
program initiatives endorsing geographictargefing
and critical area protection. These concepts were
forerunners of the Safe Ddnklng Water Act's
Wellhead Protection Program. Significant pro-
grass has been made in different aspects of
geographic targeting of programs and in different
parts of New York State. New York acknow-
ledges these accomplishments as an integral part
of its overall Wellhead Protection Program.
Delineation determines geographic areas for
which different levels of groundwater protection
activities ara to be Instituted. The Wellhead
Protection Program in New York State Is Intended
to accomplish a wider recognition of targeting
objectives by all levels of government, by citizens
in general, and to begin an evolutionary process
toward improved targeting and protective
program Implementation.
The basic wellhead protection dallneation
approach in New York State recognizes aquifers
as the fundamental geographic unit for targeting
management efforts. This approach must be
modified where aquifers are broad regional
systems (DEC considers this case to occur only
on Long Island), or where aquifers are not well
character[zed (considered to be the case for
bedrock aquifers, In general), Elsewhere, the
unconsolidated aquifers of New York tend to be
of limited areal extent and they generally include
the Important recharge areas within their
boundaries. These unconsolidated aquifers also
are the source of the large majority of
groundwater-derived public water supply systems.
The New York State Wellhead Protection Program
proposes that unconsolidated aquifer boundaries
(the land surface overlying the aquifer) serve as
the baseline definition for the overall wellhead
protection area (WHPA). For the baseline
definition, both confined and unconfined
unconsolidated aquifers are grouped together.
Revisions are allowable based on site-specific
evaluations. This aquifer boundary approach is
proposed to be modified on Long Island and for
wells in bedrock aquifers as described in Section
3.2. For all public water supply wells, specific
proposed WHPA delineation policies are
described in Section 3.2.
The aquifer boundary approach for the overall
WHPA has several distinct advantages. It takes
advantage of considerable recent and ongoing
work in mapping and detailed assessments of
aquifer boundaries. Incorporating this work
directly Into the Wallhead Protection Program
provides a practical way for more effective
targeting to move forward rapidly rather than
being constrained by the need to perform
modaling to delineate protection areas.
The aquifer approach also encompasses other
non-public walls and potential future well sites,
and places major focus on the high-yielding
groundwater resources which are most important
and most vulnerable. This last aspect is
considered very important in the education
component of wellhead protection, both for local
officials and for the general public.
Wellhead protection area dalineation is an
evolutionary process. The first need for
refinement is the further subdivision of the total
wellhead protection area, as required for
differentiated management objectives. A second
area for potential refinement is delineation of the
overall WHPA in the Glacial Aquifer on Long
Island and in bedrock aquifers. Issues related to
these topics are reviewed In both Sections 3.2
and 3.3. Flexibility for refinement or revlelon is
very Important due to the wide variability in
-15-
hydrogeologic settings, data availability, and local
degree of contamination threat in New York State.
3.1.2. Institutl(mal Proceseas for (;)vemll
Delineation PoIIole~
Advisory committee and work group input into the
originalcomprehensiveGroundwaterManagement
Program was substantial. The basic concept of
geographic targeting was set forth in that
program. The groups included:
· Federal Agencies (EPA, USGS)
State Agencies (DEC, DOH, DOT,
Agriculture & Markets, Energy Office,
Geological Survey)
· Cornell University
· County Agencies (Health, PLanning)
Associations (Conference of Mayors,
American Water Works Association,
Business Council)
· Citizen Groups (NRDC, League of Women
Voters)
DEC reconvened most of the original contributors
into an advisory committee to assist in guiding
the Wellhead Protection Program, with particular
emphasis on delineation issues. Added to the
original group have been:
· State Agencies (Department of State)
· County Agencies (a wider range of county
participants)
Regional Agencies and Commissions
(additional planning and legislative
commissions)
· Associations (Association of Towns,
American Water Resources Association)
The new group, the Wellhead Protection Advisory
Committee, has also included additional partic-
ipation from the U.S. Geological Survey and DEC
geological staff.
The delineation approach proposed in this
submittal was recommended by the DEC
Groundwater Management Section (responsible
for developing the program) and agreed to by the
Wellhead Protection Advisory Committee
(members listed in front of submittal). The
delineation approach directly conforms with the
policies in the formally adopted Upstate New York
Groundwater Management Program and Long
Island Groundwater Management Program.
The DEC has also established a Memorandum of
Understanding (MOU) with the DOH concerning
the development of the Wellhead Protection
Program. Additional MOU's will be developed as
needed to institutionalize interagency working
arrangements.
To support the technical needs of DEC and of
local governments in carrying out and refining
delineations, DEC plans to convene an ongoing
Delineation Technical Workgroup consisting of
geologists and groundwater management staff of
DEC, DOH, State Geological Survey, USGS, and
local governments. This group would consider
revisions or improvements in the overall
delineation approach, and would essentially be
concerned with hydrogeologic aspects of the
program rather than administration or
contamination source control. The mission of this
group is to provide recommendations to the DEC
staff responsible for the overall Wellhead
Protection Program. it will be convened upon
EPA approval of New York State's submittal and
will meet on at least a semi-annual basis or as
needed.
Local authorities Involved in wellhead protection
may vary, as discussed elsewhere in this
submittal. Therefore, uniform institutional
processes at the local level will not be proposed
across the entire state. Local agencies may act
according to their own needs and authority.
However, in ell oases where Watershed Rules and
Regulations are utilized as the local wellhead
protection approach, the existing requirements of
the New York State Department of Health (DOH)
will be followed. Similarly, for all new wells, the
institutional requirements of the New York State
Department of Environmental Conservation's
(DEC) Water Supply Permit Program will apply.
-16-
The proposed responsibility for initiating refine-
ments of the baseline delineations described in
this submittal will depend upon the regulatory
approach adopted. Delineation refinements to be
incorporated in Watershed Rules and Regulations
approaches will be initiated and performed by
water purveyors. Delineation refinements to be
incorporated in county, town, village or city
ordinances (including local public health ordinanc-
es) will be initiated and performed by the corre-
sponding political authority. Delineation refine-
ments to be incorporated in stata-iavel regulatory
programs will be performed by DEC.
In practice, most local activities will involve coor-
dination with the State DEC and DOH. Each
Department routinely reviews local activities to
ensure that there are no conflicts with respect to
policies and procedures and advises on the
availability of technical information for delineation
purposes. The overall coordination for aspects
specifically related to the WHPP Is the responsibil-
ity of DEC.
Other institutions, particularly the U.S. Geological
Survey and Comell and other universities, may be
involved in special projects or case studies, as
coordinated by DEC.
3.2. Delineation Cr~er~. Thresholds
and Methods
The existing, and still evolving, geographic target-
ing framework for groundwater protection pro-
vides a priority system for managing risks to
groundwater. Following is a brief summary:
Groundwater Classification -
6 NYCRR Part 703
Ambient water quality standards and guide-
lines apply to all Class GA (fresh)
groundwaters. Class GA groundwaters are
defined as having best use as a source of
drinking water and must meet New York
State's drinking water standards In addition
to the ambient standards. State manage-
ment programs use this framework for
-17-
protection of all fresh groundwaters In New
York State.
· Unconsolidated Aouifers
Mapping of unconsolidated aquifers has
progressed significantly including State-
defined primary and principal aquifers
which are subsets of the unconsolidated
aquifers. Site-specific detailed mapping is
still in progress.
Primary and principal aquifers are generally
similar geologically (both ara highly produc-
tive unconsolidated deposits); primary
aquifers are those which have large popula-
tions using them as drinking water sources.
Pdmary aquifers have high priority for
mapping additional hydrogeologic data
through the DEC/USGS cooperative pro-
gram, and in special Long Island programs.
These delineations are used in the process
for siting new waste disposal facilities.
· Lon~ Island Hvdrooeofoofc Zones
Eight hydrogeologic zones have been
delineated, covering all of Long Island.
Three of these together comprise the Deep
Flow Recharge Area. Management pro-
gram initiatives (e.g., h~7~rdous substance
storage) ars based on this Deep Flow Re-
charge Area.
Special Groundwater Pro~ecflon Ar-
eas
Nine Special Groundwater Protection Areas
have been delineated within the Deep Flow
Recharge Area in both Nassau and Suffolk
Counties and are currently the subject of a
planning project by the Long Island Region-
al Planning Board.
Suffolk County has specifically defined
"Water Supply Sensitive Areas' which In-
clude zones 500 feet downgradiant to 1,500
feet upgradient of public wells In the Upper
Glacial Aquifer.
Watershed Rules and Regulations are
promulgated by the NYS Department of
Health upon initiation by local water pur-
veyors. These include delineations of
protection management zones for public
water supply wells. The WRR delineations
do not conflict with the wellhead protection
area delineation policies proposed in this
submittal.
The NYS Solid Waste Management
Program, in 6 NYCRR Part 360, has defined
"public water supply wellhead area" as the
surface and subsurface area between a
public water supply well or wellfield and the
99% theoretical maximum extent of the
stabilized cone of depression of that well or
wellfleld considering ell flow system
boundaries and seasonal fluctuations. New
landfills ara banned in these areas, in
addition to all primary and principal
aquifers in the Upstate area. Special
provisions are defined in law for Long
island siting. As with the Watershed Rules
and Regulations, there is no conflict in
terminology between the Part 360 public
water supply wellhead area and the overall
wellhead orotection area proposed in this
submittal. The overall protection area
includes, and is larger than, the Part 360
wellhead itself. For landfill siting, Part 360
regulations will prevail. Part 360
determinations ara made only for proposed
landfill siting cases.
Other setback requirements have bean
utilized in various state or local
management programs. When used, such
as for pesticides (e.g., aldicarb) or septic
tanks, the setbacks apply to all wells, public
or private. As with the other targeting
approaches, such setbacks do not conflict
with the proposed wellhead protection area
policies.
Direct protection of the wellhead itself is
achieved through adoption of construction
specifications and standards. These are
administered by the New York State
Department of Heelth and follow the
"Recommended Standards for Water
Works' (NYS Health Department Bulletin
· 42, 1982). They apply to public water
supply wells.
3.2.2. W P
Defineation Obieeffves
The USEPA guidance for development of
wellhead protection programs (Guidance for
Applicants for State Wellhead Protection Program
Assistance Funds under the Safe Drinking Water
Act, EPA 440/6-87-011) contains the expectation
that proposed programs will be designed to
provide protection from three types of threats:
direct introduction of contaminants in the
immediate well area, microbial contaminants, and
chemical contaminants. The first is dealt with
through well construction and completion
standards to be applied at the wellhead itself.
The second is managed by delineating a zone to
keep potential sources sufficiently distant from the
well to allow die-off of the microorganisms.
Establishing a minimum distance by measurement
or by time-of-travel is the most common
procedure for delineating areas for protection
against microbial contamination.
To achieve protection against chemical
contamination, EPA suggests three delineation
approaches: delineation of weltfield management
areas, contamination attenuation zones, or
remedial action zones. Since chemicals can
travel long distances, all or part of the recharge
area for a well becomes the zone to be delineated
for protection efforts.
The overall goals of New York State's delineation
approach ara essentially a combination of the
wellfield management and remedial action zone
goals described by EPA.
Wellfleld management is used to define areas
where heightened levels of protection will be
-18-
emphasized. A number of different zones may be
delineated for a single water supply to provide
different levels of management. The management
options may range from selected land use
prohibitions to specialized design specifications,
enhanced facility Inspections, or Increased
monitoring and education.
The remedial action area approach excludes high
risk actlvitlas from a specifically defined zone but
still allows them in more distant recharge areas.
This may be refined by varying exclusions in
different zones according to risk or the
importance of the activity. The remedial action
area concept Is best applied to new or changing
land uses, whereas wellfleld management may be
applied to existing or new land uses.
The contamination attenuation zone approach
described by EPA Is difficult to strictly apply due
to limited capabilities to accurately predict
chemical migration and persistence. In addition,
the New York State groundwater standards apply
to all fresh groundwatars, reducing the utility of an
attenuation zone approach.
3.2.3. Delineation Poligy
The underlying objective of delineation is to use
different degrees of management to contro/risks
to water supplies. The significant diversity in
geological conditions, aquifer use, and In local
govemment capabilitlas across New York State
indicates that the approach to delinaation can not
be uniform and rigid for ell locations.
The ideal technical goal of wellhead delineation is
to have sufficient knowledge of the hydrogeology
of each public water supply well or wellfleld to
allow precise determination of the catchment area
elong with accurate timas-of-travel for the entire
flow system. Such information is not uniformly
available across the state. New Information will
become available unevenly as funding from
various local, state and federal sources Is applied
to specific priority areas.
In this setting, the New York State Wellhead
Protection Program proposes general recognition
of high-yielding aquifers (both confined and
unconfined) as the fundamental wellhead
protection area units. As described in Sectlon
3.2.4., this policy recognizes that more targeted
delineations will be necessary on Long Island
because it is entirely an aquifer. AJso, bedrock
aquifers are not adequately characterized now to
ellow this approach; however, most of the major,
high-yielding aquifers in New York are in
unconsolidated deposits. Within the wellhead
protection area, delineation of an area designated
as the remedial action area is proposed, as
described in Sectln 3.2.5.
This policy is Intended to reinforce public and
management program recognition of the need to
protect high-yielding aquifers. It takes advantage
of considerable pest and ongoing work on aquifer
mapping and delineation and will permit further
progress in communities which have elready
delineated aquifer boundaries and protection
areas. These communitlas may directly proceed
to management Implementation or may utilize
available funds on more advanced hydrogeologlc
eveluations within the WHPA, depending on local
needs and goals.
Within this framework, utilization of elternative
delineation approaches (such as time-of-travel) is
ellowed and encouraged. In most cases, such
elternative approaches would be applied to
subdividing the WHPA within the unconsolidated
aquifer boundaries for applying different levels of
management The WHPA Itself would remain the
area defined by aquifer boundaries. In some
cases, such as for bedrock aquifem, the
alternative approaches may be used to redefine
the WHPA Itself. The Department of
Environmental Conservation will be responsible
for providing guidance for such elternative
approaches.
3.2.4. ~aEiJ..E~E~
Delineations
The wellhead protection area delineation
approach is summarized In Table 3.1. It
recognizes that the aquifer system on Long Island
and bedrock aquifers In Upstate New York must
be treated differently than the unconsolidated
aquifem in Upstate. The unconsolidated aquifer
boundaries for the wellhead protection areas are
those delineated on a series of maps titled
-19-
TABLE 3.1.
WELLHEAD PROTECTION AREA
DELINEATION SUMMARY
Wellhead Protection Area
Geographic Region Aquifer Area Baseline Delineation
Long Island Magothy & LJoyd Aquifers Deep Flow Recharge Area
Glacial Aquifer Simplified Variable Shape:
1,500 ft. radius upgradient
500 ft. radius downgradient
Upstate Unconsolidated Aquifers Aquifer Boundaries
(land surface)
Bedrock Aquifers Fixed Radius: 1,500 ft. radius
-20-
'Potential Yields of Wells In Unconsolidated
Aquifers in Upstate New York' by the U.S.
Geological Survey. Specifically, these maps,
distributed for sale by the U.S. Geological Survey,
are as follows:
Bugliosl, E.F., et al.. 1988. Potential Yields
gf Wells Itl Unconsolidated Aauffers in
~lnstate New York - Lower Hudson Sheet.
Water Resources Investigations Report 87-
4274. U.S. Department of the Interior,
Geological Survey, Albany, NY.
Bugliosi, E.F., et al.. 1988. Potential Yields
of Wells in Unconsolidated Aouifers In
Uostate New York - Hudson Mohawk
Sheet. Water Resources Investigations
Report 87-4275, U.S. Department of the
Interior, Geological Survey, Albany, NY.
Bugllosl, E.F., et al.. 1988. P~t~ntlal Yields
of Wells in Unconsolidated Aouifers In
I, Jnstate New Ygrk - Adirond{~:k Sheet.
Water Resources Investigations Report 87-
4276, U.S. Department of the interior,
Geological Survey, Albany, NY.
Miller, T.S., 1988. I,Jn(:Onsblidated Aauffers
in Uostate New York - Finaer Lakes Sheet.
Water Resources Investlgatlona Report 87-
4122, U.S. Department of the Interior,
Geological Survey, Albany, NY.
Miller, T.S., 1988. PQtentlal Yields of Wells
In Unconsolidated Aauifers In Uostate New
York - Nlaaare Sheet. Water Resources
Investigations Report 88-4076. U.S.
Department of the Interior, Geological
Survey, Nbany, NY.
The boundaries Illustrated on these maps serve as
the total wellhead protection areas for public
water supplies utilizing those aquifers. In certain
cases, more detailed aquifer boundary maps or
determinations for primary or principal aquifers
(subsets of the full range of unconsolidated
aquifers) have been or will be made by the U.S.
Geological Survey or NYS Department of
Environmental Conservation. These more detailed
boundary determinations will generally supersede
boundaries illustrated on the above referenced
maps as "revised" delineations of wellhead
protection areas.
Both unconfined and confined unconsolidated
aquifers are included on these maps and both are
included in this definition of the overall wellhead
protection area.
For all public water supplies utilizing groundwater,
the overall wellhead protection area (WHPA)
delineation will be subdivided into two parts. The
Innermost zone is referred to as the Remedial
Action Area. The remainder of the WHPA is
referred to as the Wellfield Management Area.
The terminology is derived from the EPA guidance
referenced eadier. Depending on local
management objectives for groundwater protec-
tion, local hydrogeology, and data availability and
resource availability, the Welifield Management
Area may be further subdivided. This further
subdivision of the Welifield Management Area
would be considered a refinement of the
'baseline' delineation. Methodologies, criteria and
thresholds used for such revisions are flexible.
Approaches proposed by local water purveyors
will be evaluated and approved or disapproved
upon submittal to the New York State Department
of Environmental Conservation.
The term "baseline" delineation, as used In this
submittal, Is Intended to represent the Initial
WHPA delineation advocated by the Department
of Environmental Conservation. The delineation
may be directly utilized in implementing manage-
ment activities for groundwater protection.
However, if sEe-specific conditions suggest that
alternative delineations are appropriate (including
the further subdivision of the Wellfield
Management Area already cited), those delin-
eations may be accepted by the Department of
Environmental Conservation. The evolution of
Improved delineation techniques, the growing
availability of hydrogeologlc Information, and the
longer-term enhancements of groundwater protec-
tion programs may lead to a redefinition of the
baseline delineations by the Department of
Environmental Conservation.
These basalina delineations apply to public water
supply wells. Applicants for new public water
supply wells may be required to perform
-21-
alternative sEe-specific delineations according to
conditions stipulated through the Water Supply
Permit Program (refer to Chapter 7).
The proposed WHPA delineations are described
according to the following geographic and
hydrogeologic settings. They are also
summarized in Table 3.1.
Unconsofidated Aaulfem - Uastate New
Y~;~rk
1. WHPA Definition:
The boundaries of wellhead protection
areas for public water supplies in
unconsolidated aquifers in Upstate New
York are the land surface boundaries of the
aquifers as illustrated on the five-aquifer
sheet maps for Upstate published and
distributed by the U.S. Geological Survey
(see earlier reference). These boundaries
may be revised in accordance with more
detailed primary and principal aquifer maps
and boundary determinations as approved
by the Department of Environmental
Conservation. The maps provide definition
for both unconfined and confined aquifers.
Revisions of these boundaries may be
made, pending approval by the Department
of Environmental Conservation.
2. Rationale:
The delineations proposed above are
hyd rogeologically-based and are consistent
with the policies and goals of the Upstate
Groundwater Management Program already
adopted and certified by the Governor of
New York as an element of the New York
State Water Quality Management Plan.
3. Maooln(~ and Case Studies:
Mapping of these areas is already
completed and published. Case studies
are not considered appropriate, as the
maps have been reviewed and approved by
the U.S. Geological Survey and the
Department of Environmental Conservation
as part of the publication process.
4. Public Water SUODIV Sionificance:
The large majority of public water supplies
using groundwater, particularly for
municipal and community systems, are
located in unconsolidated aquifers. It is
expected that a significant proportion of
additional future supplies will also tap these
systems.
Bedrock A(~uifem - Uostate New York
1. WHPA Definition:
The baseline boundaries of wellhead
protection areas for public water supplies in
bedrock aquifers are fixed radius areas with
a radius of 1,500 feet from the wellhead.
Revisions based on site-specific information
are desirable, with the goals being to
identify and delineate principal recharge
areas. Revisions may be developed,
pending approval by the Department of
Environmental Conservation.
2. Rationale:
The fixed radius approach for the initial
WHPA is not based on estimated times-of-
travel or drawdown. It provides a
substantial increase in protection over more
commonly existing protection zones
(typically 100 feet or 200 feet). The
principal rationale is that the baseline
delineation gives a basis for immediate
action on wallfiald management without
requiring expensive site-specific
delineations. Revisions based on local
conditions are encouraged, particularly for
municipal community systems, of which
there are relatively few in the State. The
geographic targeting benefits of uniformly
delineating substantially larger fixed radius
areas for all bedrock wells are very
questionable. Many of the bedrock public
water supply wells are among the approxi-
mately 10,000 non-community public wells
(e.g., isolated public buildings, roadside
rest areas, etc.). There will be little
geographic targeting advantage for
groundwater protection programs if
-22-
numerous 3 to 12 square mile WHPA's (1-2
mile radius) for non-community wells
intersect or nearly intersect across the
State. It must be recognized that all fresh
groundwaters in bedrock aquifers ara
classified as GA groundwaters and thus are
already protected by substantial statewide
protection programs which use rigorous
ambient water quality standards In their
design.
3. Maccino and Case Studle~:
Mapping will be performed according to the
phasing priorities described in Section 3.3.
Case studies of fixed radius approaches
are not considered to be of significant
benefit. As proposals for revisions based
on alternative approaches are submitted to
the Department of Environmental
Conservation, they will be evaluated for
potential use as models for comparable
hydrogeologic conditions.
4. Public Water SUDOIV Sionificance:
Relatively few municipal community
systems utilize bedrock aquifers In New
York State and those that do are generally
with Iow population dependence. Public
water supplies in bedrock aquifers are
typically non-community wells serving small
numbers of people.
Ma(xXhv and Uovd A~uifera - ~ Island
1. WHPA Definltign:
The boundaries of the wellhead protection
area for public water supplies using the
Magothy and Uoyd aquifers are the
boundaries of the Deep Flow Recharge
Area as recognized by the Department of
Environmental Conservation. Refinements
within the overall WHPA may include further
definition of Wellfleld Management Areas,
pending approval by the Department of
Environmental Conservation.
2. Rationale:
The Deep Flow Recharge Area was
determined to be the most important
overall groundwater protection araa for
wells in the Magothy and Lloyd aquifers in
the Long Island Groundwater Management
Program already adopted and certified by
the Governor of New York as an element of
the New York State Water Quality
Management Program. The delineations
have also been adopted in the Suffolk
County Sanitary Code.
3. In t I :
Mapping of the Deep Flow Recharge Area
Is already completed. Additional case
studies are not considered appropriate.
4. Public Water SUDclV Slonificance:
Most public water in Nassau County is
withdrawn from the Magothy aquifer. The
majority of public water supplies in Suffolk
County ara also withdrawn from the
Magothy aquifer. Of those public water
supplies in Suffolk County utilizing the
Glacial aquifer, approximately half are
located within the Deep Row Recharge
Area. Thus, these wells ara included within
the overall wallhead protection area for the
deeper aquifers.
Glacial Aoul u' - Lon Ill,and
1. WHPA Definition:
The boundaries of the wellhead protection
area for public water supplies using the
Glacial aquifer ara defined as a fixed
variable shape zone with a fixed radius in
the upgradient groundwater flow direction
of 1,500 feat and a fixed radius In the
downgradient direction of 500 feet.
Revisions may be made, pending approval
by the Department of Environmental
Conservation.
2. Rationale:
Fixed-shape zones are not based on
calculated time-of-traval or drawdown. The
proposed definition is consistent with Water
Supply Sensitive Areas already dellnaated
by Suffolk County (which contains nearly all
of the Glacial wells on Long island) and for
which enhanced protection programs have
already bean implemented in the Suffolk
County Sanitary Code. Approximately half
of the Glacial wells ara within the Deep
Flow Recharge Area and are thus protected
within a larger overall WHPA. Significant
expansion of the WHPA for all Glacial wells
may not provide any reasonable
geographic targeting benefits, as most of
the WHPA's would intersect or nearly
intersect. All frash groundwaters in the
Glacial aquifer are already covered by
substantial protection programs which
utilize a rigorous set of ambient water
quality standards.
3. MaDDina and Case Studies:
Mapping of the WHPA's for Glacial wells in
Suffolk County has been completed
through the Water Supply Sensitive Area
dalinaations. For the relatively few Glacial
wells In Nassau County, mapping will be
completed according to the phasing
priorities described in Section 3.3. Case
studies of fixed-shapa delineations ara not
considered to be of significant benefit. As
proposals for revisions based on alternative
approaches are submitted to the
Department of Environmental Conservation,
they will be evaluated for potential use as
models for other Glacial well dallneations.
4. Public Water SUDOlV Sionlflcance:
As stated previously, approximately one-
fourth of the public water supplies in
Suffolk County are based in Glacial wells
that are outside of the Deep Flow Recharge
Area. If Nassau County is included, only
about one-eighth of the water supply
dependency is from Glacial wells outside of
the Deep Flow Recharge Area.
For all community public water supply wells,
regardiass of setting, a remedial action area will
be delineated within the WHPA. For those supply
wells, the proposed baseline delineation of this
area will be a fixed radius zone of 200 feat radius
from the wall Revisions may be made after
evaluation by the Department of Environmental
Conservation. For non-community public water
supply wells (e.g., isolated public buildings, etc.),
the existing New York State Department of Health
standards for well separations (e.g., from waste
disposal facilities) ara to be fbllowed.
The rationale for this baseline delineation is based
upon general observations in the past that such a
zone has been adequate for protection against
microbiological contamination. An alternative
time-of-travel basis for dalineating revised
remedial action area boundaries would be to use
a time-of-traval from a minimum of 60-days up to
one year. The 60-day period has been used in
New York State and in many European countries
(USEPA, EPA 440/6-87-010, Guidelines for
Delineation of Wellhead Protection Areas). A one-
year period is considered conservative. In certain
cases, the site-specific hydrogeoiogy (e.g.,
confined aquifer conditions or tong times-of-travel)
and the nature of existing land uses and
management options may allow ramedial action
areas smaller than 200 feat radius.
3.?-6. P '
Table 3.1 summarizes the baseline delineations for
wellhead protection areas.
Refinements may include:
Subdivision of the Wallflald Management
Area portion of the WHPA, to allow
application of different levels of
management within the WHPA.
Revision of the RemecliaJ Action Area
portion of the WHPA, according to
alternative methods, including time-of-travel
or drawdown analysis.
-24-
Revised boundary determinations of the
unconsolidated aquifem in Upstate,
Including primary and principal aquifers, or
of the Deep Flow Recharge Area on Long
Island.
Alternative hydrogeologlc determinations of
appropriate WHPA's in bedrock aquifers or
for wells in the Glacial aquifer on Long
Island.
3.3. Phasing Consid~
The published unconsolidated aquifer maps cited
in the previous section complete the baseline
WHPA delineations for all public water supply
wells within those aquifers. The completed
delineation of the Deep Row Recharge Area on
Long Island has been defined according to read
boundaries. That delineation defines the WHPA
for all public water supply wells In the Magothy
and Uoyd aquifers. The baseline WHPA
boundaries for public water supply wells using the
Glacial aquifer in Suffolk County have been
determined by the Suffolk County Department of
Health Services through its Water Supply
Sensitive Area designations.
The remaining baseline WHPA boundary
determinations that are needed consist of a
relatively small set of Glacial aquifer wells and
public water supply walls In bedrock aquifers.
The phasing priorities for these groups are, in
order:
1. Municipal community walls
2. Non-municipal community wells
3. Non-community public wells
Within each priority group additional phasing may
be generally ordered by population dependency
with modifications made if there are significant
known or suspected threats to the wells.
It is emphasized that the baseline WHPA
delineations for the very large majority of public
water supply wells (by population served) are
completed. The delineations for the remaining
bedrock wells and Glacial wells will be performed
as resources permit.
3.4. Summary
The baseline wellhead protection area delineations
are considered to be completed through the
published aquifer maps cited in this chapter.
These cover both confined and unconfined
aquifers and Iow- and high-yielding aquifers. The
Deep Flow Recharge Area on Long Island has
also been delineated. It Is noted that the Deep
Flow Recharge Area on Long Island also Includes
many wells using the shallow Glacial aquifer, and
thus provides an added layer of protection.
Refinements (i.e., delineation of additional sub-
zones of the overall WHPA) have been completed
in many areas. However, such refinements are
optional. Their evaluation and delineation will be
a goal of future efforts in wellhead protection
-25-
CHAPTER 4
SOURCE IDENTIFICATION
4.1. Cate(reties of Potanlial Groundwater
4.1.1. I~uction
Potential contamination sources as described in
the federal Safe Ddnking Water Act include those
anthropogenic sources, both point and nonpoint,
which involve the manufacture, usa, storage,
handling, transport, or disposal of toxic and
hazardous substances which may have any
adverse effect on human health. Certain activities
(e.g., mining) may also be considered potential
soumes, becausa they may Increase vulnerability
to contamination and may be associated with
other activities of concern.
In the broadest sense, potential contamination
sources may include nearly all commercial, and
many governmental and domestic activities. To
be useful in guiding the management of
contamination sources to maximize groundwater
protection benefits, some differentiation or priority
system is needed.
Priorities are based on the significance of the
source and the intended management application
of the inventory. Source significance is based on
the type of contaminant (mobility in groundwater,
known impacts on public water supplies,
toxicology, pathogenicity), the quantity of the
contaminant at that location, and the potential of
that source type to releasa contaminants to
groundwater and impact water supplies.
The management applications of the source
inventory may include:
Developing local awareness and support for
groundwater protection program adoption;
Emergency response planning;
Inspection planning or sequencing;
Monitoring design;
Enforcement; tracking compliance;
Targeting education efforts;
· Regional and local planning;
· Local land use regulations development; and
Identifying new program or program improve-
ment needs.
4.1.2_. Cla~ of= Sou~
Potential contamination sources may be classified
in many ways. The major need for groundwater
protection is to provide a structure for collecting
and interpreting data regarding existing
contamination sources which is readily useable
in a variety of programs.
The United States Office of Technology
Assistance developed a comprehensive listing of
potential contamination sources, including 33
types within six major groups (1'able 4.1). This
classification has bean included in wellhead
protection program guidance manuals prepared
by USEPA. All of thesa source types occur within
New York State, although mine tailings, mine
waste and mine drainage are less important than
in many other states. Mining (e.g., sand and
gravel) is still considered to be a potential source
in that may be associated with other activities
(fuel usage) that can contaminate groundwater.
The OTA classification in Table 4.1 is endorsed by
the Department of Environmental Conservation as
a usafui structure for collecting data related to
potential contamination sources.
A long-term goal of contamination source
inventory is to utilize computer geographic
information systems (GIS) to manage and
interpret the data collected. The mapping keys of
GIS methods or other maps wilt not be required
to explicitly duplicate the OTA classification, as
this would be counterproductive if more efficient
-26-
T/~BLE 4.1
SOURCES OF GROUNDWA[P-~ CONTAMINATION
CATEGORY 1: ff~.J~J~{~l~
- Subsur[ace pemolatlon (e.g., septic tanks
and cesspools)
- Injection wells
· Hazardous waste
· Non-hazardous waste (e.g., brine disposal
and drainage)
· Non-waste (e.g., enhanced recovery,
artificial recharge solution mining
and in-situ mining)
- Land application
· Wastewater (e.g., spray Irrigation)
· Wastewater by-products (e.g., sludge)
· Hazardous waste
· Non-hazardous waste
CATEGORY 2: Sources Deslanatad to Store.
Treat. and/or Dispose
'l'hrou~h Unolanned Release
- Landfills
· Industrial hazardous waste
· Industrial non-hazardous waste
· Municipal Sanitary
- Open dumps, Including litega[ dumping (waste)
- Residential (or local) disposal (waste)
- Surface impoundments
· H~Tnrdous waste
· Non-hazardous waste
- Waste tailings
- Waste piles
· Hazardous waste
· Non-hazardous waste
- Materials stockpiles (salt, coal, etc.)
- Graveyards
- Animal burial
- Aboveground storage tanks
· Hazardous waste
· Non-hazardous waste
· Non-waste (petroleum, etc.)
- Underground storage tanks
· Hazardous waste
· Non-hazardous waste
· Non-waste (petroleum, etc.)
- Containers
· Hazardous waste
· Non-hazardous waste
· Non-waste
- Open burning and detonation sites
- Radioactive disposal sites
CATEGORY 3: Sources Deslaned to R~aln
oat or Transmission
- Pipelines
· Hazardous waste
· Non-hazardous waste
· Non-waste (petroleum, etc.)
SOURCE:
Offi~TechnologyAssessme~,protectlnatheN~ion'sGrou~waterEomCo~amln~ion,
October1984.
TABLE 4.1
8OURCE$ OF GROUNDINATER CONT/~IINATION
(Continued)
- Materials transport and transfer operations
· Hazardous waste
· Non-hazardous waste
· Non-waste (petroleum, etc.)
CATEGORY 4: ,~jrces Di~charaina
Substances as a Consequence
of Other Planned Activities
- irrigation practices (e.g., return flow)
- Pesticide applications
- Fertilizer applications
- De-icing salts applications
- Urban runoff
- Pemolation of atmospheric pollutants
- Mining and mine drainage
· Surface mine-related
· Underground mine-related
CATEGORY 5: Sources Provtdina Conduit or
Inducir~ Dtscharae Thrmmh
- Production wells
· Oil (and gas) wells
· Geothermal and hast recovery wells
· Water supply wells
- Other wells (non-waste)
· Monitoring wells
· Exploration wells
- Construction excavation
CATEGORY 6: Naturally occurrina ,~
Whose Discharae 19
- Groundwater-surface water interactions
- Natural leaching
- Saltwater intrusion/brackish water upconing
(or intrusion of other poor quality natural
water)
SOURCE:
Office of Technology Assessment, Protectino the Nation's Groundwater from Cont~min{tti0n,
October 1984.
-28-
keys are developed. However, the goal of all
acceptable source inventory approaches will be to
include the categories in the OTA listing.
4.2. Contamination Source Inventory Procedures
Mapping of sources should use a minimum base
map scale of 1:24,000 for printed map or map
overlays. The use of alternative larger scale base
maps which enable more precise locations (e.g.,
tax maps) should be considered on a case-by~
case basis. GIS methods may be accepted,
pending approval by the Department of
Environmental Conservation. Overall GIS
compatibility will be a major concern.
Extensive source-related data systems and
registries for the most important potential
contamination sources already exist in New York
State. However, these vary in design and
geographic specificity. These important data
systems include, but are not limited to:
· Groundwater discharge permits
Industrial Chemical Survey: Locations of
usage, handling and storage of industrial and
toxic chemicals
Underground Injection Control (UIC) Prograrn
data, especially UlC Class V wells (USEPA
program)
Emergency management and response data,
including the Superfund Amendments
Reauthorization Act (SARA) Title III data
· Solid waste facility locations
Hazardous waste site Iocatlona (inactive and
active)
· Hazardous waste generators
· Mining operation locations
Oil and gas production locations
· Petroleum storage locations
· Petroleum and chemical spill or leak locations
· Hazardous substance storage locations
· Radioactive waste storage locations
The recommended procedure for contamination
source inventory at the local leval is as follows:
The lead responsible local authority obtains
the location data for the major categories
listed above with the assistance of DEC and
other local, state and federal agencies. The
lead responsibility is determined by the
Intended management approach (e.g., county
agency if county ordinances are intended,
town officials if town ordinances are intended,
water purveyor if Watershed Rules and
Regulations are intended, etc.).
Lead responsible local authority collects
available information on other categories of
sources listed in the OTA classification in
Table 4.1.
General field survey performed to confirm or
revise collected Information and to fill in
information gaps.
4. If used, GIS mapping methods are
coordinated with DEC to ensure compatibility.
If GIS methods are not directly used, hard
copy maps ara prepared on a 1:24,000 scale
or larger.
Baseline wellhead protection areas have already
been determined by the policies described in
Chapter 3. In certain cases, where a locality has
further subdivided the overall wellhead protection
area into higher priority and lower pdorlty areas,
source inventory activities may be phased to
focus on the higher pdority area. Contamination
source inventories should generally follow
delineation activities to focus those efforts. The
inventory stage may collect information from
areas larger than the WHPA itself, depending on
the geographic specificity of the available data
bases cited above.
The general priorities for source Inventory, if
phasing Is necessary, should be to focus on
waste disposal sites, petroleum storage sites,
hazardous/toxic substance usage, storage and
handling locations first, as most known public
water supply well contaminations have been
related to these sources. Out of the wide array of
hazardous substance locations, first priority
should be given to the chlorinated solvents,
because these are the most common type of
public water supply well contamination.
Alternatively, higher priorities may be placed on
inventorying sources of chemicals Included in the
New York State drinking water quality standard
category known as "Principal Organic
Contaminants" (10 NYCRR Part 5), which includes
the chlorinated solvents and other high priority
chemicals of concern to public water supplies.
4.3. Comoletiolt Reltnement and Undate of
Contamination Source Inv~orV
A major goal of source inventory is to support the
needs of a groundwater prote~ion management
program. Therefore, the ideal completion target
for source inventory is prior to final adoption or
promulgation of groundwater protection ordin-
ances or Watershed Rules and Regulations.
Source inventory should be performed in support
of and as pert of the overall management
planning process for local protection programs.
In some cases, as in complex commercial or
industrial areas, phasing of source inventory
activities will be necessary. The first level should
be identifying industrial or commercial zones.
More detailed phases may categorize the
industrial or commercial land uses. The ideal,
exhaustive inventory of all specific sources may
not ultimately reside within a wellhead protection
program data base. Rather, the most detailed
data bases will reside with the appropriate
regulatory program (e.g., petroleum bulk storage
registry, etc.). Unnecessary duplication of efforts
should be avoided.
The adoption of GIS mapping procedures will
allow continuous updating of the source
inventory. In the absence of GIS capebilitias,
printed or overlay updates should be completed
at least every five years by the entity assuming
the lead role in local protection program
implementation (county, town, municipality, or
water supplier). Management program staff at the
local and state level ordinarily maintain
continuously updated files regarding regulated
sources of contamination.
The Depertment of Environmental Conservation
has initiated systematic inventories for several
areas of the state by contracting with regional
planning and development boards or councils
utilizing Clean Water Act, Section 205(j)(5) pess-
through funds. In eight different regions, the
boards have selected municipal water supply
systems and are inventorying contamination
threats generally within a mile of the wells. This
will be a beginning for a statewide system with
some of the boards prepering their information in
a GIS format as well as on 1:24000 maps.
For Nassau and Suffolk Counties on Long Island,
Region 1 staff of DEC has been perticipeting in a
GIS user's group, comprised of representatives of
federal, state, county, and local agencies. The
group is building a shared data system which will
result in an inventory of many groundwater
contamination threats and of known groundwater
quality problem areas in relation to public water
supply wells. Additionally, the Long Island
Regional Planning Board, in conjunction with
other local agencies, is assessing major threats to
groundwater as pert of a comprehensive planning
project for nine Special Groundwater Protection
Areas covering large areas of Long Island.
-30-
CHAP[ER 5
SOURCE MANAGEMENT
5.1.
Water resource protection programs in New York
State have a long history. It was largely within
the structure of New York State's existing
programs and institutions that the state's
groundwater management program was
developed and it is within this structure that the
Wellhead Protection Program will evolve. The
provisions of the New York State Environmental
Conservation Law and Public Health Law provide
adequate authorities and mechanisms for
Wellhead Protection Program implementation in
New York at both the state and local levels. For
example, statutory authority exists for
promulgating watershed rules and regulations for
local programs. The principal local needs are for
local governments (including counties) to obtain
staff resources to further implement protection
activities. Adoption of local ordinances may be
needed as well as support from the state through
technical assistance, financial assistance and
training.
The foundation of needy all groundwater
protection programs Is New York's stringent sets
of standards and guidelines for ambient
groundwater quality and drinking water quality.
The standards themselves include broad classes
of compounds, substantially reducing the
possibility of unforeseen problems and the need
for their revision. The availability of guidelines as
a tool enables quick response to concerns with
new substances. All fresh groundwatare In New
York State are classified as potential sources of
ddnking water and are protected through
statewide application of programs designed to
prevent degradation with respect to these
stringent standards. Anti-degradation goals are
applied to all groundwater. It is important to
recognize that groundwatars outside of wellhead
protection areas are not left unprotected.
New York State has already adopted stringent
protection programs for the most important
categories of potential contamination sources.
Certain nonpolnt source cetegodes are not
directly controlled through specific state-level
regulatory overelght (e.g., fertilizer applications,
road salt applications). However, for these
soume categories (and anv source category) any
harm (e.g., contamination) Is actionable through
'public nulsence", a long standing common law
doctrine in New York State. Liability, therefore,
does exist even for sources not diractJy regulated.
In these cases, best management practices
(BMPs) and other tools may be more viable than
direct regulation. The New York State Nonpoint
Source Management Program, a new effort, is
designed to address these needs.
A complete identification and evaluation of all
existing federal, state and local source
management programs that have bearing on
groundwater protection or potential contamination
sources Is far beyond the scope of this submittal
or of any single work. Rather, major programs
ara briefly summarized In Section 5.2. Section
5.3. summarizes future source management
considerations and management coordination.
5.2. Extstlna Source Control Proorams
5.2.1. ~ Aaonclea
The USEPA is responsible for most of the major
federal regulatory control programs for
groundwater protection. These programs are
given authority under tha Ciean Water Act (CWA),
the Safe Drinking Water Act (SDWA), the
Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA),
SuperhJnd (CERCLA), the Federal Insecticide,
Fungicide, and Rodentlclde ACt (FIFRA), and the
Toxic Substances Control Act ('I'SCA). An
overview of the coverage of these Acts is
provided in Table 5.1.
EPA policy in administering these programs is
generally to delegate many of the specific
program activities to the states upon request and
upon attainment of legislative requirements; to
provide flexibility for states to tailor the programs
-31-
Table 5.1
OVERVIEW OF USEPA STATUTORY AUTHORITY
RELATING TO GROUNDWATER
Clean Water Act
Safe Drinking Water Act
Resource Conservation
and Recovery Act
Superfund (Comprehensive
Environmental Response
Compensation, and
Liability Act of 1980)
Toxic Substances Control Act
FIFRA (Federal Insecticide, Fungicide
and Rodenticide Act)
Principal regulatory programs focus primarily on
surface water. The Act contains only general
references to groundwater. However, the Act
provides major sources of funding for state
water pollution control programs.
Authorizes EPA to set maximum contaminant
levels and monitoring requirements for public
water systems; provides for regulation of
underground injection wells to protect drinking
water aquifers; provides for designation of 'sole
source" drinking water aquifers; provides source
of funding for sts~e programs of public water
supply regulation. Authorizes states to develop
Wellhead Protection Programs.
Provides for establishment of standards for
hazardous waste treatment, storage, and
disposal facilities; and requirements for ensuring
that land disposal of solids or hazardous waste
protects groundwater. Establishes the Federal
Underground Storage Tank Program.
Creates a trust fund to provide for emergency
dean-up of chemical spills or h~TArdous waste
dumps for which no responsible perb/can be
immediately found. Trust fund money is derived
from taxes on oil and 42 other specific chemical
compounds.
Authorb. es EPA to restrict or prohibit the
manufacture, distribution, or use of products
which may aclven~ affect the environment.
Gives EPA the responsibility to oontrol the use
of pesticides; specifioally, EPA is responsible for
registering, canceling, suspending, or changing
the classification of Individual pesticides for use,
and considering a broad range of environmental
impacts Including impacts as groundwater.
-32-
to most effectively meet environmental needs
within each state, to the extent permitted by
statute; to oversee state perl:ormance In carrying
out delegated national programs which use
federal grants; and to support the states through
provision of technical expertise and research.
The Underground Injection Control (UIC)
program, a program not delegated to New York
State, may benefit the Wellhead Protection
Program through Inventory activities, particularly
for existing UtC Class V wells.
The DOH must also approve the subdivision of
land when more then 4 new lots ara created
within a three-year time period and when the lots
are smaller then 5 acres each. Through this
review process, development within a protection
zone of a public water supply well is strictly
control[ed or prohibited.
The two state agencies with the major
responsibility for managing potential threats to
groundwater are the Department of Environmental
Conservation (DEC) and the Department of Health
(DOH).
DEPARTMENT OF
ENVIRONMENTAL CONSERVATION
The DEC is responsible for administering a full
array of environmental programs to be used in
implementing the Wellhead Protection Program,
An overviaw of these programs follows:
· SPDES
The New York State Pollutant Discherge
Elimination System (SPDES) Is a program
for the Issuance of permits and regulaton/
control of dlschergas of appropriately
treated sanitary, Industrial, or commercial
wastewater into the surface or
groundwaters of the state. It is a
comprehensive program for protecting
water quality encompassing effluent
limitations, monitoring requirements, and,
for existing discherges not yet meeting
effluent limitations, a schedule for
achieving compliance. The SPDES
Program is authorized by Article 17, Title
8 of the New York State Environmental
Conservation Law (ECL) as amended in
1973. All groundwater discherges must
be permitted with the exception of those
which are less then 1,000 gallons per day
and are composed entirely of domestic
wastewater.
Pc:Moleum Bulk Stomue
In effect since December 1985, the
program regulates the storage and
hendling of petroleum. Major provisions
of the program include registration of all
stationary tanks over 1,100 gallons thet
store petroleum; establishment of
standards for retrofitting; operation and
closure of existing facilities; and
establishment of standards for new and
substantially modified petroleum facilities.
The program is authorized by Article 17,
Title 10 of the ECL.
H~Ious ~ubetance Stomoe and
Handllm ~Che~ical Bulk Storaoe)
Phese I of the program (effective July 15,
1988) and Phese II (expected to be
effective during 1991) will regulate the
storage and handling of h~TArdous
substances. Phase I requires the
registration of all underground tanks and
those abovegrouod stationary tanks
storing 185 gallons (750 kilograms) or
greater. Phese II will regulate the storage
and hendling of h.~TArdous substances
and Include standards for dikes, piping
systems, vents, transfer stations,
monitoring, Inventory record keeping,
closure, container storage and the
storage of bulk solids. The program is
authorized under Articles 37 and 40 of
the ECL
The program, started in 1978, is designed
to protect both public health and the
environment from the effects of petroleum
and chemical spills and leaks. Major
-33-
omponents of the program include
reporting requirements, a 24-hour hotline
telephone/responea network, on-site
response by regional staff, stand-by
clean-up contractom, a data management
system, and coordination with the other
public agencies. The program also
provides assistance to local governments
in emergency planning related to spills
and leaks and monitors compliance with
Superfund Amendments and
Reauthorlzatlon Act Title III requirements.
The Department maintains geotechnical
services to assist the program, both in
the central off'me and in regional offices.
The program is authorized by Article 12
of the Navigation Law.
The Water Supply Permit Program, also
discussed in Chapter 7, Is primarily a
quantity management program. How-
ever, it indirectly controls potential
contamination sources by controlling the
influences on groundwater flow. The
most important is the control on intrusion
of naturally-occurring saline groundwater.
The program is authorized by the ECL
Article 15, Title 15 and is regulated under
6 NYCRR Parts 601 and 602.
The program, which Is consistent with the
Natural Flood Insurance Program,
includes performance standards for water
supply systems. Water systems within
the lO0-year flood plain are required to
be dealgned to minimize or eliminate
inf'~ration of flood waters into the
systems. Over 1,350 cifles, towns and
villages In New York State have adopted
local laws containing the federal
standards for flood protection of water
supply systems. In addition, the state
flood plain regulations (6 NYCRR Part
500) are applicable within 136 towns and
villages. The New York State Flood Plain
Management Program maintains an
outreach and education effort to assist
local govemments in implementing flood
protection, including water supply
protection. The program is authorized by
ECL Article 36.
The program regulates the collection,
transport, processing, incineration and
ultimate disposal of municipal solid
waste. Pertinent landfill requirements
include: limitations on acceptance of
hazardous waste; geological siting
standards, including a minimum verticle
separation between the base of the
constructed landfill liner and groundwater
of five feat and between the base of the
constructed landfill liner and bedrock of
ten feet; environmental monitoring of
facilities; engineering standards, including
design provisions for impermeable liners
and leachata collection systems to
restrict subsurface migration of
contaminants and closure provisions for
Iow permeability caps to minimize
infiltration in the waste mass and
subsequent leachate generation; and
hydrogeologic siting restrictions on new
landrdls and landfill expansions including
prohibitions within public water supply
wellhead areas and primary and principal
aquifers. The program is authorized by
the ECL, A~ticle 27.
The program regulates the entire scope
of industrial and commercial h~Tnrdous
waste management. Hazardous wastes
ara identified, regulated at the point of
generation, tracked in transport from
generation to point of ultimate disposal,
and regulated with regard to treatment,
storage and disposal. The siting of new
facilities for eff-Nte treatment, storage and
disposal (i.e., those facilities receiving
h~7~rdous waste from other facilities)
must conform to stringent siting
requirements in accordance with 6
NYCRR Part 361. The overall program is
authorized by the ECL, Articles 19, 23
and 27.
The program deals with the problems
associated with inactive hazardous waste
sites. The three major aspects of the
program include identifying, evaluating
and remediating h~TArdous waste sites.
The 1986 Environmental Quality Bond Act
provided the program with access to $1.2
billion for remediation costs. The
program is authorized by the ECL, Article
27, Title 13.
The program develops and Implements
Iow-level radioactive waste regulations,
reviews permit applications for radioactive
waste discharges, Issues permits for
transporters of Iow-leval radioactive
waste, provides technical support on Iow-
level radioactive waste and assists in the
siting of a Iow-level radioactive waste
disposal facility. The program is also
responsible for oversight of ground and
surface water quality at extant disposal
sites such as West Valley, New York, and
potential new sites such as the proposed
Iow-level radioactive disposal facility. The
existing siting regulations ban new sites
overlying primary and principal aquifers
and require evaluation of potential
groundwater impacts In all other areas.
The program is authorized by the ECL,
Articles 27 and 29.
Pesticides
Under the state program, pesticides must
be registered, and a permit is required for
the distribution, sale, or offer-for-sale of
'restricted use' pesticides, as defined by
DEC. A permit is also required for the
purchase, possession, or use of these
products, and all applicators must be
cartEied. The primary emphasis of the
program is on the certification of
pesticide users and on Issuing permits to
distributors of *restricted use' products.
Nearly all pesticides registered in New
York State have bean previously
registered by EPA. The existing
registration procedure in New York State
relies heavily on EPA review,
supplemented by additional state DEC
and DOH review. The USEPA's pesticide
registration procedures include the
evaluation of a variety of chemical
characteristics, such as water solubility
and chemical persistence, relating to
potential leaching to groundwaters. The
New York State program is authorEed by
the ECL, Articles 15 and 33.
The DEC administers New York State's
Mined Land Reclamation Program under
Article 23, Title 27 of the ECL The
program Involves the permitting of all
mining operations In the state from which
more than 1,000 tons of mineral ara
extracted within twelve successive
calendar months. DEC's rules and
regulations require the praperatlon and
·lng of plans and, through the process of
an application review and field Inspection,
the detarmlnatlon that the mining
operation will be conducted in an
envlronmantally sound manner and that
upon completion of mining, the affected
land will be returned to a condition which
encourages future productive use.
Provisions for protection of ground and
surface waters from potential adverse
Impacts of mining activity are included
within the program.
The program regulates the drilling,
operation, and plugging and
abandonment of o11, natural gas,
underground gas storage, solution salt
mining, brine disposal, geothermal and
stratlgraphlc wells. Pertinent parts of the
program include Inspections of
operations and facilities; financial security
requirements that ensure availability of
-35-
funds for wall plugging and surface
restoration costs; wall construction and
plugging requirements; drilling,
completion and production requirements;
and the Imposition of supplementary
permit conditions for all drilling in primary
and principal aquifers and other
environmentally sensitive areas. The
program is authorized under the ECL,
Article 23.
The Now York State Department of Health is
responsible for the protection of public health and
assuring provision of potable public water
supplies. While most of the DOH's water supply
program attention is on water delivered to the
consumer, the Public Health Law authorizes the
Commissioner of Health to promulgate rules and
regulations for the protection of any public water
supply from contamination. It Is under this
authority that the DOH's Watershed Rules and
Regulations Program is based. Under the
program, the DOH enacts state regulations to
protect a specific water supply upon request from
the water supplier. Existing and proposed
Watershed Rules and Regulations for groundwater
sources limit specific activities, set requirements
for existing operations and facilities, and prohibit
potential sources of contamination from locating
within specifically defined areas and may include
design specifications for groundwater protection
for new facilities allowed in the areas. The level of
protection for each ares reflects the vulnerability
of the source to contamination by activities within
the area. Watershed Rules and Regulations are
considered to be fully compatible with the
Wellhead Protection Program.
5.2.3.
County health agencies in many of the counties in
New York State assist, through delegation, in
administering major elements of state level (DEC
and DOH) programs for water pollution contrci
and water supply regulation. In some cases,
county health agencies administer more
comprehensive overall programs than those
administered by the state. One example is Suffolk
County, which provides for enhanced regulation
of the storage and handling of toxic and
h~:'~rdous chemicals. A similar program is also
provided by Nassau County. In such cases,
county health agencies perform the bulk of the
day-to-day activities required for groundwater
management, either through delegation from the
state or directly under their own statutory
authority. Although these counties have more
extensive programs than most Upstate New York
counties, they illustrate the important role
potential for county health agencies in
groundwater management.
An important management role may also be
assumed by county planning departments, either
through overall coordination of groundwater
protection activities among towns or through
direct assistance in drafting ordinances or other
activities. Among the examples are Schenectady
County and Corlland County.
Each county also maintains a County Emergency
Management Office as part of the statowide
network of emergency planning, data
management and response. Their activities are
an integral part of local wellhead protection
efforts.
A key management issue for counties is to
evaluate the potential adol~lon of county-wide
groundwater protection ordinances. Such
approaches may be more efficient than town-by-
town ordinance implementation. Examplos where
this has been utilized include counties on Long
Island.
TOWNS. CITIES AND VILLAGES
Municipal and town govemments have two
significant management tools that can be used to
provide protection of groundwater and wellhead
areas - land use controls and municipal or town
ordinances. Under state law, towns, cities and
villages are vested with the power to regulate land
~se. By the home rule provisions of NOW York
State law, the state government will not impose
zoning controls and land use requirements on
Iocel governments. The enactment of land use
controls or zoning allows a municipality to
prescribe the type of permitted land use and
related activities in a specific land area. Thus, it
can prohibit Inappropriate land uses such as
industrial use in sensitive groundwater areas,
while allowing more appropriate land uses. Within
this framework, the site plan review mechanism
may be used to require specific engineering
designs to protect groundwater for an allowed
land use. In addition to zoning, municipalities can
adopt local ordinances to control or prohibit
activities which may contaminate groundwater
such as sewage disposal, hazardous material
storage, etc. The devalopment of zoning
ordinances and other groundwater protection
ordinances at the local government level is
voluntary. Statewlde groundwater protection
controls prevail In all areas. In New York State,
the Office of Local Government Services of the
Department of State provides training and
guidance to local officials in the use and
development of zoning and site plan review.
The groundwater management activities of water
purveyors, whether municipally-owned or
privately-owned, are described in Chapter 2,
under "'Public Water Supply Sy~_ _~ns'. Briefly,
these include compliance with conditions of the
water supply permit, initiation and development of
optional Watershed Rules and Regulations for
submittal to the state DOH, and consumer and
water-user education. Because of their exclusive
responsibility for providing a potable water supply,
water purveyors can and should play a central
role in motivating other local officials to implement
groundwater protection efforts, and motivating the
general public to assist in the effort.
5.2.4. Existin~ Technical
Technical assistance is available for local
govamments and water purveyors from a variety
of sources. This assistance varies from basic
information about groundwater resources to
assistance with data Interpretation and analysis.
· Groundwater Re~xxts and Maps
The DMslon of Water maintains a limited
inventory of reports and maps which are available
for loan or poesesalon. In some cases, when a
particular item Is scarce and cannot leave the
office, citations are provided for library seamhes.
The USGS also has much of the same
information.
Data regarding the potential contamination
sources controlled by the various programs
described in Section 5.2.2., above, are available to
local management agencies. The nature, size,
and location of the facility, in addition to
requirements Imposed by permits, can be
retrieved on request. There are limitations with
the ease of retrieval and with the Ioc. ational
information, as discussed in Chapter 4.
Assistance from geologists in the Division of
Water is available on a limited basis to interpret
and analyze groundwater information. This can
include modelling ot groundwater flow.
· [~ A~]uiai~on ~ Intem~an
The Division of Water maintains a cooperative
program with the USGS whereby water resources
data are co#ected, organized, and interpreted.
Information developed In this program can be
used In the creation of local wellhead protection
programs.
Other types of useful data are available from such
sources as county Soil and Water Conservation
Districts (soils, land usa) and the NYS Geological
Survey (geology). Various data sets are available
In a geographic Ioformatlon system format
through the State Office of Equalization and
-37-
NYSDEC has contracted with a number of
regional planning and development agencies to
undertake a series of demonstration projects in
association with the Wellhead Protection Program.
The projects include collection and Information on
public groundwater supplies, inventorying and
mapping contamination threats, and meeting with
local officials to explore the development of local
protection programs.
, Ns, w York State F_nviranmenlM Quelitv
Bond Act ~f 1986
The Act provides money for acquisition of aquifer
recharge areas when in association with an
appropriate local groundwater protection
program.
· NonD~int Source Control Pro.mm
Under both the federal Section 319 Program and
the state-enacted Nonpoint Source Law, there is
the potential for funding wellhead protection
activities.
Federel Clean Wator Act - Secl~n 106
Funds
The 1990 appropriation of 106 funds provides
monies for wellhead protection.
5.2.6. Exiatlna Education and Trainino
Education and training activities are carried out by
a number of agencies through publication and
distribution of guidance materials, presentations at
meetings, and direct 'one-on-one' assistance.
NYSDEC has underwritten the preparation of a
document for guiding the development of local
water supply protection programs and distributes
it on request and at relevant workshops. The
NYSDOH provides guidance on the writing of
watershed rules and regulations, which are a
pdmary tool for implementing water supply
protection measures. The State Water Resources
institute at Comell University (WRI) produces
written materials and computer software products
to provide self-help support to local government.
The NYS Department of State distributes a range
of guidance manuals on zoning, site plan review,
and other aspects of land use control and
instructs local officials on these tools at statewide
and regional conferences and workshops.
Presentations on wellhead protection options are
made by DEC staff at such places as the
meetings of the NYS Planning Federation and the
Association of Towns of New York State where
training workshops for local officials are held.
WRI stages short courses and training sessions
as part of their educational programs.
Finally, direct assistance is provided by NYSDEC
and WRI as resources are available and as
demand exists.
5.3. Futura Manaaement Considerations
Given the variety and extent of programs available
at the federal, state and local level, there are no
totally uncontrolled sources of contamination for
wellhead areas. The basic structure exists for
addressing ail formats.
The primary task for the future is to bring the
available program toola to bear on the threats to
wellheads, and improve the controls end
regulations where needed. This will be
accomplished as a result of increased recognition
of threats, outreach and training programs to
inform government officials at all levels
concerning contrbl options, further development
of information on groundwater resources, and
development of efforts to focus particular
attention of existing programs on wellhead areas.
The future management conalderations for
wellhead protection areas may be divided into
state-level activities and local govemment
activities. In New York State, the principal needs
for state-level activities do not entail developing
new legislation or regulations, as the existing
structure is eseantiaJly adequate for protection of
all fresh groundwatere, Including the wellhead
comprehensive implementation of the existing
groundwater protection programs and carrying
out the remaining implementation
recommendations of the adopted Groundwater
Management Program relevant to wellhead
protection.
Local government activities have a broader range
of future management considerations, because
current activities are not usually as highly
developed as the state-level protection programs.
The needs range from coordination and education
to developing, implementing and enforcing the
appropriate mix of land use controls and
contamination source controls. Generally, the
greatest need is implementation and enforcement
staff development. Local groundwater and
wellhead area protection plans and ordinances,
including the preparatory delineation and source
Inventory, will have little benefit If Implementation
and enforcement staff resources are Inadequate.
Education and provision of guidance to local
governments are important responsibilities of the
state programs.
The key recommendation to local govemraents in
developing wellhead protection management Is to
first assess local needs and goals for groundwater
protection. As part of this process, local officials
should familiarize themselves with the basics of
the existing groundwater protection efforts at all
levels of government and establish a
communication and coordination 'network' with
the many parties that may assist them. These
include county health and planning officials,
regional planning agencies, DEC, DOH, Soil and
Water Conse~/ation Districts, Cooparetive
Extension, and many of the other parties cited In
this document. The importance of communica-
tion cannot be overemphasized. Local offlclaJs
would benefit from the experience of other
communities within the state.
From this needs and goals assessment, and from
a basic knowledge of available state programs
and local management options, local officials can
best select a preferred 'framework' and general
plan for local wellhead protection (e.g., Watershed
Rules and Regulations, zoning, local ordinances,
county ordinances, etc.).
The basic stages of a wellhead protection effort
described In the Safe Drinking Water Act (e.g.,
delineation refinements, Inventory, etc.) should be
executed within this framework. It is anticipated
that localities could waste considerable resources
If they proceed directly into advanced delineation
refinements or inventories without doing any
preliminary goal assessment or coordination with
other groundwater management officials.
The following sections briefly highlight three
aspects of wellhead protection management
relevant to future program considerations.
5.3.1. State Environnlmltal Quality
SEQR is a required review process for all levels of
govemment within the state for considering the
environmental impact of various decisions early in
the planning stages. It applies to actions which
are undertaken, funded, or approved by state,
regional, and local government agencies.
A particular feature of SEQR which may have use
in wellhead protection and groundwater
management is the provision for designation of
Crlticei EnvironmentaJ Areas. Any unlisted action
proposed In a CEA must be reviewed as a Type
I action under SEQR. This means that any state
or local agency action within or contiguous to the
Area will be more likely to be considered
environmentally significant and requires the
preparation of a full environmental assessment
form and coordinated review. This provision of
SEQR has potential application in areas with
sensitive groundwater resources, especially
wellhead protection areas. The Division of
Regulatory Affairs in the DEC oversees the SEQR
program and provides training and assistance
conceming SEQR procedures.
5.3.2. Onttons and Tools for Pr~ectlen
The o~ and tools for protection program
enhancement may have applicability In both state-
level and local government programs. They
include both regulatory and non-regulatory
approaches. The following review is necessarily
brief. Further details ere available through the
appropriate programs (e.g., zoning assistance
-39-
from Department of State, emergency planning
from State Emergency Management Office and
DEC, source reduction from DEC Resource
Recovery Program and Pollution Prevention
Program, etc.). Among the options and tools are:
s~g~;~g~]~: New facilities may
be designed, or existing facilities may be
retrofitted, with specific groundwater
protection barriers or controls that enable
continued operation or siting of facilities.
Examples Include: secondary and/or
tertiary containment for petroleum or
h~7~rdous materials storage; structural
coverage of stockpiles; leak detection
systems; etc. Approaches may include
special permitting, performance
standards, septic system upgrades, and
other methods. Continued enforcement
is needed for these approaches.
.~: A wide range of
management options may be titled
source reduction. Existing facilities may
continue to operate with emphasis on
reducing the threat to groundwater by
methods that supplement prohibitions
and engineering design. Among the
source reduction options are: (1)
reducing quantities of chemicals used; (2)
conversion to lower-risk alternative
chemicals; (3) modifying methods of use
to Increase efficiencies, Including better
targeting of applications (e.g., pesticides,
coatings, cleaning operations); (4) waste
reduction and recycling; (5) updating
equipment, replacing storage tanks and
container, and more frequent equipment
calibration and Inspection; (6) improving
site plan and layout to reduce accident
probability; and (7) Improving site to
reduce rainfall or runoff entedng critical
areas. There are many other options.
Education and specifically targeted
technology transfer and outreach (e.g.,
material prepared for specific types of
businesses) are Important tools In soume
reduction. Approaches may include both
voluntary and mandatory elements.
T : Increasing the
frequency or intensity of inspections and
testing of facilities and oparetlons is a
straightforward approach to enhancing
protection. Options for managing the
costs of these approaches should be
explored, including the potential for
utilizing consulting 'environmental
monitors" as inspectors, funded by a fee
system.
R._~: More frequent or more
detailed reporting requirements for
specific facilities and oparations is a
potential protection tool. However, this
option is only useful to the extent that the
information can be evaluated and
propedy stored, and that appropriate
responses can be cerr~d out. Staff
resources for public agencies is again an
important concern. The key need is for
improvements in electronic data
management, automated transfers of
information, developing automated
interpretive techniques, and in quality
assurance efforts. Improved accuracy
and completeness of reporting is an
important concern. Solutions may
include redesign of reporting
requirements and formats and improved
guidance.
prolMbitions: Prohibitions are evaluated
based on the relative risk of the facility or
oparetion and the availability of
engineering design alternatives.
Prohibitions may also target specific
chemicals themselves, such as solvent
septic tank oleanars, rather than entire
types of land use. Prohibitions may be
adopted es part of Watershed Rules and
Regulations, zoning ordinances, or other
municipal, county or state ordinances.
~ Land use controls
Include c~her options and tools beside
prohibitions. Zoning density changes for
residential development may be used.
Transfer of development rights, whereby
certain commercial or Industrial
development rights are transferred
-40-
outside of wellhead protection areas (or
portions of the overall WHPA) or
designated groundwater protection
districts, Is another tool. Cluster or
planned unit development (PUD) design
may also be used to guide residential
development outside of more sensitive
groundwater areas or to allow better
management of wastewater disposal and
nonpoint sources. Various growth
controls may be utilized to allow more
comprehensive development of local
groundwater and wellhead protection
programs. Subdivision rules may be
used to better control drainage and runoff
in subdivisions in sensitive groundwater
areas. Site plan review may be utilized to
require engineered contamination
prevention barriers and other designs for
permitted development. These
opportunities provide a diverse menu of
tools that enable more sophisticated local
protection programs than generalized
land use prohibitions.
W~ter Withdrawal Conlmls: Water
withdrawal controls are commonly
recognized as a primary tool for water
quantity management, but they also may
play a role In water quality management.
The DEC Water Supply Permit Program,
described In Chapter 7, regulates water
withdrawals for both objectives. Water
withdrawal management is particularly
Impo~ant for cootrblllng saltwater
intrusion in coastal areas, for controlling
the influences of withdrawals on
migration of contaminants from nearby
contamination plumes or contaminated
aquifers (in multiple aquifer systems), and
for altering groundwater flow patterns and
consequently the relevant shapes and
sizes of existing wellhead protection
areas.
~ Groundwater sample
collection and analysis Is a potential
option associated with others cited
above. Monitoring ia useful to the extent
that the sampling is truly representative of
the groundwater regime of concern, that
frequency Is adequate, that data
variability does not prevent determination
of actual contamination, and that
reported data are managed In a
retrievable and interpretable fashion. The
greatest potential for monitoring
applications is in 'source moniforing';
that Is, monitoring at or very close to
known high priority potential
contamination sources. Generalized
ambient monitoring of aquifers or
wellhead protection areas (i.e., not
targeting a potential source or the water
supply well Itself), sometimes called "early
wamlng monitoring', may be conceptually
desirable but is very likely to be
impractical and very inefficient if
attempted for all systems. It may be
appropriate in special circumstances.
The major problem is that truly
representative sampling would require
many locations, several depths at each
location, frequent sampling, and many
chemical constituents. Data variability
and statistical interpretations are serious
concerns In property using monitoring
results. Associated with this Is the major
burden of well installation, hydrogeologic
characterization, proper sample collection
and handling, and data management.
The total analytical costs, themselves,
would be enormous. AJthough ambient
monitoring can have special vaiua in
specific locations and In research, the
total resources for universal adoption
would be far better spent on other
options cited above to achieve greater
degrees of groundwater protection.
~: Emergency
planning Is an ongoing activity to plan for
response to accidents, spills, and other
emergencies. The principal goal in this
case is to facilitate the fastest, most
efficient and most effective proper
response to emergencies that threaten
groundwater quality. The existing
emergency planning and response
programs can be enhanced by various
options including: (1) requiring risk
management and emergency planning for
-41-
a wider range of facilities or operations
than at present; (2) requiring cleady
visible posting at ell facilities of key
contacts (Owners/operators, hazmat
response teams, standby cleanup
contractors, fire departments, etc.); (3)
fire department preplanning for responses
at all important facilities; and (4)
instituting county or regional hazmat
(emergency response) teams to assist in
local emergencies. The keys are speed
and appropriate response. Any approach
that enhances these may have potential.
Facilities and industries may have
standby emergency cleanup contractors
that can mobilize faster than state
government contractors. Local
authorities should maintain records of
these cases. Knowledge of who to
contact is a critical concern.
I.and Acauteltk~ and Censenra~
Easements: Land acquisition is the most
effective method for ensuring control of
sensitive groundwater areas. However, it
is very urgent that lands acquired for
such purposes not be misused for
government activities which represent
potential contamination threats (e.g.,
waste disposal, petrofaum storage, salt
storage, etc.). Donations and
conservation easements should elso be
explored. The passage of a special
additional 0.25% sales tax by a public
vote In Suffolk County to provide funds
for land acquisition should demonstrate
the interest and concern of citizens to
support this approach.
Best Manaaeme~ Pra~m~ IBMPs) and
Guidance: To supplement regulatory
overalght, best management practice
documents and other types of guidance
may be developed and distributed to
specffioally targeted types of facilities or
operatlona, concerning risk reduction and
other forms of protection against
groundwater contamlnetion. These
approaches may require follOw-through,
redistribution and special training to
maintain or enhance their effectiveness.
Educal~n. Guidance and Technical
Assistance: Citizen education, guidance
for local govemment officials and
technical assistance have obvious
benefits for enhancing wellhead
protection efforts. Despite this generally
accepted notion, the potential cost
savings by providing well targeted
guidance are often overlooked. Good
guidance will avoid unnecessary costs
and overspending on less important
elements, and, most importantly, can
save considerably by getting the job
done right much more quickly.
Technology transfer and training
assistance are key areas where a state-
federal partnership can improve local
protection programs. Road sign posting
of protection areas may be a useful
approach to promote public recognition
of wellhead protection.
~lre~n: Directly related to the
issue of guidance and assistance is the
subject of coordination at all levels of
government, in New York State, the level
of govemmant which generally has the
greatest potential for enhancing
groundwater protection through
coordination is the county level. County
agencies ara best suited to assist their
towns and villages directly and frequently.
They are elso an excellent link with state
agencies. It is most cost-efficient for
towns, villages and small cities to rely on
county staff for groundwater coordination.
Counties which have developed this
capability in either their health or planning
agencies (or In environmental agencies,
if thay exist) have benefitted considerably.
The skills that may be tapped or
developed at this level Include both
technical skills (hydrogeology,
environmental chemistry, environmental
engineering) and management skills
(ordinance drafting, public speaking and
writing, enforcement techniques).
Coordination is futther discussed in the
following section.
-42 -
5.3.3. ,Jurisdic~on~ Coord~natk)n in
W P
As with most facets of government and public
authority, multi-jurisdictional issues may occur
with wellhead protection areas. Given the existing
governmental structure In New York State, the
locations of public water supply wells, and other
factors (existence and nature of federal lands, the
nature and extent of aquifers, availability of State
Watershed Rules and Regulations, etc.),
significant problems are considered to be unlikely.
First, one means for resolving multi-jurisdictional
issue among municipalities or counties Is the
promulgation of Watershed Rules and
Regulations. Coordination is directly achieved
through promulgation of the regulations, which
are considered by New York State to represent an
acceptable wellhead protection program.
County govemment is generally strong in New
York State and a significant portion of multi-
jurisdictional coordination Is achieved directly by
county agencies. Among counties, coordination
is achieved through several avenues. First,
regional planning agencies are well established In
New York State and have been increasingly
involved with groundwater protection In recent
years. Second, the State Department of
Environmental Conservation, In particular, and the
State Department of Health have strong regional
presence in New York State with responsibilities
for local coordination with both counties and
municipalities. Finally, coordination is provided
by a wide range of assisting associations and
agencies (including the Association o~ Towns,
Association of Counties, Conference of Mayors,
New York Planning Federation, Cooperative
Extension, Soil and Water Conservation Districts,
Water Resoumes institute, etc.).
Concerning International jurisdictional issues,
problems are nonexistent because public water
supply wells In the general border ama are
extremely fete. Those located there would have
appropriate protection areas entirely within New
York State.
Nearly the same conditions occur along the
interstate borders. Interstate coordination has not
been a problem with respect to groundwater. In
the event that such coordination Is needed, New
York's interstate borders are covered by the
following Interstate compacts of which New York
is a member:
New England Interstate Water Pollution
Control Commission (NEIWPCC)
Ohio River Valley Water Sanitation
Commission (ORSANCO)
Susquehanna River Basin Commission
($RBC)
Delaware River Basin Commission
(DRBC)
Federally-owned land is very limited In New York
State, and the occurrence of public water supply
wells on or in the vicinity of federal land Is very
rare. Coordination with other federal agencies
concerning wellhead protection will be
accomplished by the Department of Environ-
mental Conservation working through the U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency - Region II
Office, and direct Interaction with the federal
authorities on-site where poeslble. This approach
has been successful In the past and no problems
are anticipated.
5.4. Surnma
A simplified summary of existing Institutions
responsible for management of potential
groundwater contamination soumes is presented
in Table 5.2.
TABLE 5.2
EXISTING IN~III UTIONAL RESPONSIBIUTIES FOR SOURCE M/~NAGEMENT
SOURCE
CATEGORY 1: ~
- SubsurFace percolation (e.g., septic tanks
and cesspools)
- Injection wells
· Hazardous waste
· Non-hazardous waste (e.g., brine disposal
and drainage)
· Non-waste (e.g., enhanced recovery,
artificial recharge solution mining
and In-sltu mining)
- Land application
· Wastewater (e.g., spray Irrigation)
· Wastewater by-products (e.g., sludge)
· Hazardous waste
· Non-hazardous waste
CATEGORY 2: Sources Desionated to St~re.
T~
~ IJnl31anned Ralease
- Landfills
· Industrial hazardous waste
· Industrial non-hazardous waste
· Municipal Sanitary
- Open dumps, including illegal dumping (waste)
- Residential (or local) disposal (waste)
- Sur[ace impoundments
· Hazardous waste
· Non-hazardous waste
INSTITUTIONS (See Key)
CHD*, DOH*, MUN
DOH*,EPA*, DEC
DEC*, DOH*
DOH
DEC*
DEC*
DEC*
DEC*, DOH
DEC*, DOH*,EPA*, CHD*, MUN
DEC*,CHD*,DOH, EPA, MUN
DEC*, CHD*, MUN*,EPA
DEC*,CHD*,DOH, MUN
DEC*,CHD*,MUN
DEC*,CHD*,DOH
DEC*,CHD*,DOH
-44-
TN31.E 5.2
EX]STING IN;~I'UTIONAL RESPON$1~Lfl'IES FOR SOURCE MANAGEMENT
SOURCE
- Waste tailings
- Waste piles
· Hazardous waste
· Non-hazardous waste
- Materials stockpiles (salt, coal, etc.)
- Graveyards
- Animal burial
- Aboveground storage tanks
· Hazardous waste
· Non-hazardous waste
· Non-waste (petroleum, etc.)
- Underground storage tanks
· Hazardous waste
· Non-hazardous waste
· Non-waste (petroleum, etc.)
- Containers
· Hazardous waste
· Non-hazardous waste
· Non-waste
- Open burning and detonation sites
- Radioactive disposal sites
CATEGORY 3: Sources De~dmmd to Retain
- Pipelines
· Hazardous waste
· Non-hazardous waste
· Non-waste (petroleum, etc.)
INS'm'uTION (S~e Key)
DEC*
DEC*,DOH*,CHD*,EPA
DEC*, CHD*, DOH
DEC*,CHD*,DOT, MUN, DOH
DOH*,CHD*
DOH*, DEC*
DEC*, MUN, CHD
DEC*, MUN, CHD
DEC*, MUN, CHD
DEC*,MUN, CHD
DEC*,MUN, CHD
DEC*,MUN, CHD
DEC*,MUN, CHD
DEC*,MUN, CHD
DEC*,MUN, CHD
DEC*, CHD*, MUN
DEC*.DOH*,MUN
DEC*
DEC*
DEC*
-45-
T~LE 5.2
EXISTING I1~ I I, U'FIONAL RESPONSIBIMTIES FOR SOURCE ~EMENT
(Continued)
SOURCE INSTITUTION (See Key)
- Materials transport and transfer operations
· H~7~rdous waste
· Non-hazardous waste
· Non-waste (petroleum, etc.)
CATEGORY 4: ~
Substances as ~, ~,gnseauence
- Irrigation practices (e.g., return flow)
Pesticide applications
Fertilizer applications
De-icing salts applications
Urban runoff
Percolation of atmospheric pollutants
Mining and mine drainage
· Surface mine-related
· Underground mine-related
CATEGORY 5: S~3orces Provldina Conduit or
- Production wells
· Oil (and gas) wells
· Geothermal and heat recovery wells
· Water supply wells
· Solution Mining Wells
DEC*, DOH
DEC*, DOH, MUN
DOT*, DEC
CE, SWCD
DEC*, DOH, CE, SWCD
CE, SWCD
DEC, DOT, MUN
DEC, MUN
DEC*
DEC*, SWCD
DEC*, SWCD
DEC*
DEC*
DOH*, DEC*,CHD*, MUN*
DEC*
-46-
TABLE 5.2
EXISTING IN~l I i crrlONAL RESPONSIBILITIES FOR SOURCE MN~GEMENT
SOURCE
- Other wells (non-waste)
· Monitoring wells
· Exploration wells
- Construction excavation
CATEGORY 6: N~urallv occuwino Sources
H n
- Groundwater-surfaca water Interactions
- Natural leaching
- Saltwater intrusion/brackish water upconing
(or intrusion of other poor quality natural
water)
INSTITUTION (See Key)
DEC, DOH, CHD
DEC*, DOH
MUN*, DEC, SWCD
DEC*
DEC*
DEC*
KEY: * = Major Responsibility
CE ~ Cooperative Extension
CHD = County Health Departments
DEC == NYS Department of Environmental conservation
DOH = NYS Department of Health
DOT == NYS Department of Transportation
EPA = U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
MUN = Municipal Government
SWCD = Soil and Water conservation Dlstdct
Absence of a designation does not preclude additional or related responsibilities of similar or other local,
state or federal institutions.
-47-
CHAFTER 6
CONTINGENCY PLANNING
In New York State, the Department of Health,
through the authorities provided to it in the Public
Health Law (PHL), oversees and regulates the
development of contingency or emergency plans
for public water systems. In addition, the New
York State Division of Military and Naval Affairs,
Office of Disaster Preparedness, oversees and
coordinates the stockpiles of emergency
equipment that are available to assist in
responding to public water supply emergencies.
The federal Safe Drinking Water Act requirements
for contingency planning (Subsections 1413(b)(5)
and 1428(a)(5)) are satisfied by the program
administered by the Department of Health. An
additional aspect of contingency planning is
required under the federal Superfund
Amendments and Reauthorization Act (SARA) Title
II1. The SARA emergency planning program,
which requires reporting of routine and accidental
releases of toxics to air, water and land, is
administered by the New York State Department
of Environmental Conservation. In actual
practice, this program is most useful for indicating
potential problem areas. Response to immediate
public water supply threats is coordinated with
DOH and water suppliers.
6.2. Ememencv Plannin~ Pro.mm
The new emergency (or contingency) planning
program administered and coordinated by the
New York State Department of Health contains all
four elements suggested by USEPA for
consideration by states in the Wellhead Protection
Program along with additional items. The first two
elements, temporary and Iong4erm alternate
water supply assessment, am included in the
DOH requirement for identification of existing and
future water supply sources in both emergency
and non-emergency conditions. The final two,
coordination and financial responsibility
assessment, are included in the DOH requirement
for specific action plans. The key responsibilities
ara with the water purveyor, with oversight by the
New York State Department of Health.
On September 24, 1988, revisions to Section 5-
1.33 of Part 5 of the New York State Sanitary
Code were promulgated. This section entitled
"Water Supply Emergency Plans" requires the
following:
1. All community water systems with an annual
gross obereting revenue of greater than
$125,000 must develop and submit to the
state a water supply emergency plan by
December 31, 1990 and update the plan every
five years.
2. The plan must Include at a minimum:
The development of procedures for
providing consumer notification during all
phases of the water supply emergency;
The development of criteria and
procedures for determining the
subsequent reporting of critical water
levels of safe yield of the source or
sources of water;
The identification of existing and future
sources of water ava#able during normal
non-emergency and water supply
emergency conditions;
The identification of all available water
storage, including source, transmission
and distribution system storage;
The identification, capacity and location of
existing interconnections. Identification of
additional interconnections needed to
provide potable water during a water
supply emergency;
The development of a specific action plan
outlining all the steps to be implemented,
taken or followed during a water supply
emergency, including state notification,
emergency notification rosters of key
water supply personnel with current
telephone numbers (both business and
home), and follow-up correction action to
minimize the reoccurrence of an
emergency;
The identification and implementation of
procedures for water conservation and
water use restrictions to be put In place
during a water supply emergency;
The identification of and the procedures
for prioritization of potable water use
during a water supply emergency;
The identification of availability of
emergency equipment needed during a
water supply emergency;
A development of criteria and procedures
for determining and the subsequent
reporting of the water supplier's capacity
and ability to meet peak water demands
and fire flow conditions concurrently.
3. A vulnerability assessment must be per[ormed
for the source or sources of water supply, the
public water system, disinfection stations and
water treatment plants to determine the
vulnerability of these water supply
components to a water supply emergency.
The water supplier shall take whatever steps
are necessary to ensure that potable water
can be and is available during a water supply
emergency.
4. The state can require any other community or
non-community water system to develop
emergency plans.
The NYS Department of Health currently is
revising its guidance available for use by public
water systems In developing their emergency
plans. It is not expected that the revised
guidance will deviate significantly from the
existing guidance. The existing guidance includes
a generic outline or framework of worksheets and
checklists that will assist the water system In
developing its plan. This outline includes topics
such as: map of the entire public water system,
including source locations and activities that may
affect the system such as contamination threats,
transportation corridors, etc.; data on sources;
assessments of types of emergencies; component
vulnerability assessment forms; notification roster;
and h~rdous material spill vulnerability checklist.
The DOH has also developed statewide policy
procedures and guidance for dealing with
ongoing water supply emergencies. These
include procedures for dealing with community
water system emergencies, reporting water borne
disease outbreaks and guidance on boil water
notices and blending of sources.
6.3. E~ Eautoment ~toclmilea
The New York State Division of Military and Naval
Affairs, Office of Disaster Preparedness (ODP),
coordinates the New York State Emergency
Equipment Stockpiles. This equipment is
available on an emergency loan basis to local
political subdivisions and other state agencies
primarily to assist In responding to potable water
supply emergencies. The stockpiles consist of
high oapaclty pumps, water filters, chlorination
equipment, generators, light weight-quick
coupling aluminum pipe, water couplings, and
adapters necessary to provide delivery of an
emergency source of drinking water.
In addition to the stockpile maintained by New
York State at Waterford (near Albany) and
Pittaford (near Rochester), each District Office of
Disaster Preparedness coordinates a district
stockpile which is maintained by various counties
in each District. The Distdct stockpile equipment
is federal property and ia considered a Civil
Defense resource. District stockpiles of
emergency equipment are not intended to be
under direct state control In times other than an
emergency. However, this equlpreent is a district
resource available on a cooperative basis to any
jurisdiction which is In need of it. District
stockpile equipment loans are coordinated
through the ODP District Offices.
~.4. Weffheed Pral~ Praoram ,~.d~
Section 1428(a)(5) of the SDWA requires that the
State WHP Program include contingency plans
"for the location and provision of aitemate
drinking water supplies for each public water
system In the event of well or wallfield
contamination.'
The requirements of NYSDOH's emergency
planning program not only meet the state's
requirements of Section 1428(a)(5) of the SDWA,
but actually go beyond them since the state's
program deals with all forms of water supply
emergencies.
For the purposes of meeting the federal Wellhead
Protection Program, New York State will define
those community water systems with an annual
gross operating revenue of greater than $125,000
as 'major' public water systems. The federal
guidance calls for all major public water systems
to have a completed contingency plan at the time
of the state's Wellhead Protection Program
submittal. The recent promulgation of the
revisions to the State Sanitary Code required plan
submittals to the NYSDOH by December 31,
lg90. It is not feasible to revise this schedule, nor
does New York State consider It reasonable or
necessary.
Implementation of the emergency plan
requirements at other groundwater source
community and non-community public water
systems should be accomplished as resources
permit. Remaining community water systems
should be dealt with first on the basis ot
population served - the greater the population
served, the higher the priority. Non-community
systems should then be addressed.
-50-
CHAFTER 7
7.1.
The protection of new public water supply wells
will be accomplished through a variety of
methods from state-level contamination source
controls, to county, town and village or city land
use controls. The Institutional mechanism that will
guide the protection and management of new
wells is the set of procedures for the Public Water
Supply Permit Program, operated by the New
York State Department of Environmental
Conservation.
This program, authorized by the Environmental
Conservation Law Article 15, Title15 and
regulated under 6 NYCRR Parts 601 and 602, Is
more thoroughly described In DEC's Division of
Water Technical Operation Guidance Serlse
(TOGS) 3.2.1., 'Public Water Supply Permit
Program Application Processing.' This document
contains complete descriptions of responsibilities,
technical review, pr(~7,edures for objections and
hearings, and permit conditions along with other
information.
The permit conditions currently Include elements
that ara consistent with Wellhead Protection
Program objectives. The permit conditions will be
revised to strengthen wellhead protection
principles at the time that a new well permit is
approved.
Currently, these permit conditions Include, but ara
not limited to, the following:
4 [;)lr~ot Controf o~ the Wefihead
Construction and installation standards (NYS
Health Department Bulletin 42, 'Recommend-
ed Standards for Water Works'; administered
by NYSDOH).
A strict protection zone of a minimum 200-
foot radius (variances possible in special
circumstances, If approved by DEC) shall be
protected and controlled by direct ownership
of the land, by the acquisition of protection
easements or by other appropriate measures
(to be approved by DEC).
This area shall further be protected from
pollution by surface watem by the
construction of suitable diversion ditches or
embankments, and the development of the
wells shall be carried out that there shall be
no opportunit~ for pollution to enter the
wells.
· Water Quality Mon'~o~na Reeuireme~
Prior to permit approval.
· Watershed Protection Requirement
The permlttee Is required to adopt
Watershed Rules and Regulations, pursuant
to Section 1100 of the NYS Public Health
Law, for all surface water sources. However,
this requirement may be waived by the DEC
Water Supply Permit Program for
groundwater sources If the degree of
protection provided by a specifically defined
zone (fixed radius or calculated) and other
existing control measures is considered
adequate by DEC.
The permit procedure and the permit conditions
designated by DEC provide the best and simplest
means for Including new wells In the Wellhead
Protection Program. The watershed protection
permit conditions, Including potential
enhancements of the above conditions, afford the
best opportunity for refinement of wellhead
protection for new wells. Permit conditions, for
example, enable DEC's Public Water Supply
Permit Program to require new surl~aca water
supply permitteas to adopt Watershed Rules and
Regulations even though they ara otherwise
voluntary under New York State Department of
-51-
Health programs, This and other aspects ara
discussed in the next section.
7.2. Wellhead Protection for New Wells
The current procedures for permit conditions
allow applicants for new wells the option of not
adopting Watershed Rules and Regulations if the
protection zone (fixed radius or calculated) and
other measures are considered adequate by the
DEC Water Supply Permit Program.
The New York State Wellhead Protection Program
proposes that the new well permit conditions be
amended to require the permittes to develop and
adopt a wellhead protection plan to be approved
by DEC. DEC recognizes that these plans may
vary depending on local conditions and
capabilities and that implementation will be an
evolutionary process. This plan may take the
form of local ordinances (town, village, city,
county) or protection program enhancements, or
the form of Watershed Rules and Regulations
(DOH approval), or other options described in
Chapter 5. The local program should be
consistent with the proposed State Wellhead
Protection Program.
In cases where privately-owned public water
systems ara the permltteas, the supplier is still
proposed to be responsible for developing the
required wellhead protection plan. Adoption and
implementation of such a plan will, however,
typically require the endorsement and cooperation
of local govemment authorities. In such cases, it
is proposed that the Water Supply Permit
Program require the permlttes, In cooperation
with the appropriate local authorities, to provide a
wellhead protection Implementation plan. This
may include Watershed Rules and Regulations or
other appropriate agreements with local
authorities, and is sub)eot to DEC approval.
It is also proposed that the permit conditions be
amended to require the permittea to show site-
specific hydrogeologic evidence that the remedial
action area (or Inner zone proposed in the local
plan) is adequately protective against biological
contamlnatlon. For this portion of the wellhead
protection area, a guideline of a 60-day minimum
time-of-travel may be allowed. The 60-day
criterion has been used in New York State and
many European nations to provide adequate die-
off of microorganisms. Time-of-travel should be
considered from the point of potential
contamination discharge. AJternative methods
and criteria may be accepted in delineating this
zone. In certain cases, existing land uses may be
considered in delineating the remedial action zone
as approved by DEC. Finally, it is proposed that
all applicants for new well permits file a well log
with the DEC Water Supply Permit Program at the
time of completion of the well.
This approach for new wells will still allow local
flexibility for delineating further subdivisions with
the overall WHPA, and in determining the
appropriate local management controls. The
overall delineation for the total wellhead protection
area and other policies of the State Wellhead
Program would be retained. Such ifexibility is
necessary due to considerable variation in
hydrogeologlc conditions, contamination threats,
and local authorities and capabilities. However,
the approach is stronger in that wellhead
protection plan adoption is mandatory for new
well permit approval. Many existing wells are
covered or will be covered by local wellhead
protection plans. The Water Supply Permit
Program may reopen the permit process to
include existing wells in this process. The
delineations performed as part of this procedure
may utilize the baseline delineations described in
Chapter 3, but should preferably utilize a three-
zone approach.
Finally, the program accomplishments and
strategies described In the Upstate and Long
island Groundwater Management plans
(Department of Environmental Consen/ation) ara
recognized as part of the W~haad Protection
Program for new wells. Spec~c projects, such as
the Special Groundwater Protection Area project
by the Long Island Regional Planning Board,
target planning for additional protection of
groundwater resounds with potential for future
use. Slmllerty, in Upstate New York, inclusion of
aquifer areas In the Wellhead Protection Program
provides a means of protecting groundwater
resources that may be utilized for future public
water supplies even though specific well locations
may not yet be known.
-52-
The NYS Water Resources Management Strategy
(NYS Water Resources Planning Council, 1989; 14
volumes) also Includes elements related to new
wells. The recommendations of this strategy for
water supply source protection, endorsed by the
Water Resoumes Planning Council representing
both public members and eight New York State
agencies, support the 'multiple-layer"manage-
ment concepts (state and local controls) and the
Watershed Rules and Regulations and local
ordinance options. Comprehensive water supply
system management, which Includes an analysis
of future water needs and creation or revision of
Watershed Rules and Regulations, Is a major
recommendation of the Water Resource Strategy.
The Water Supply Permit Program itself does not
specificeJly manage the sources of contamination.
The permit program Is used to require adoption of
local programs for wallhead protection. The man-
agement of the sources is accomplished first and
most importantly by the comprehensive state4evel
management programs described elsewhere In
this submittal. Local government protection
programs may take various forms, Including
county4eval sanitary codes, town ordinances,
water supplier watershed rules and regulations,
and zoning ordinances. The implementation and
enforcement of these local programs provide
additional levels of source controls, and are the
responsibility of corresponding local authority.
CHAPTER 8
SUMMARY OF PUBUC PARTICIPATION IN THE DEVELOPMENT
OF THE WEII HEAD PROTECTION PROGRAM
Section 1428(b) of the Safe Drinking Water Act
requires that state wellhead protection programs
be developed with the participation of the public
including technical and citizens' advisory
committees.
For partial compliance with the federal re-
quirements and to gain the benef~ of expertise of
people outside the Department, a Wellhead
Protection Advisory Committee was convened by
the Director of the Division of Water October 12,
1988. The advisory committee con-sisted a broad
spectrum of parsons active and interested in
groundwater protection efforts. Included were
representatives of water purveyors, county
government, regional planning boards and
commissions, legislative staff, state agencies and
private citizens. The roster is presented in the
~J~J~,~l~ at the front of this report.
The committee met formally three times to
discuss the issues to be addressed in the
wellhead program. The members also reviewed
draft materials as the document took shape.
Issues which the Advisory Committee raised
included the following:
1. The level of knowledge about groundwater
vahes enormously among local officials
across the state. Some have a soph-
istioated understanding of groundwater and
the tools available to protect public supplies;
some need a basic knowledge of ground-
water hydrology. The wellhead program
must reach both extremes of the audience.
2. DEC should have its data bases on facilities
it regulates organized and available for use
by others to facilitate the understanding of
sources of potential groundwater
contamination.
Authorization for the Wellhead Protection
Program In New York State will not require
new legislation or regulations. Guidance,
education, and promotion should be the
primary means of establishing local
programs.
To effectively daliver the wellhead protection
message, there must be an aggressive
outreach program which goes beyond
printing brochures and reports,
Delineation procedures must be considered
in the context of what is to be accomplished
on the management programs. They are
not purely technical exercises.
For implementing local protection programs,
flexibility should be provided in having
choices available to municipal officials and
water purveyors. Watershed Rules and
Regulations may be appropriate in many
instances, but alternative protection
schemes such as groundwater protection
ordJoances, zoning and site plan review
procedures should be recognized as
legitimate elements of a wellhead protection
program.
While baeatlne delineations are needed, the
program must recognize that where tech-
nical justification is available, deviations from
the basaline criteria must be allowed. For
instance, deep wells in confined aquifers
that tap a horizontal groundwater flow
regime may gain no increased protection
from a 200-ff. radius Zone I than one of
lesser area.
In densely developed areas and in many
areas where critical aquifer segments cross
municipal boundaries, a county-wide ap-
proach to groundwater protection may be
appropriate.
Outreach and education programs should
also focus on groups outside of govemmont
end the water supply industry. Bankers,
Insurance agents and other business
persons should be aware of wellhead
protection issues.
10. To assist the development of a consistent
approach to creation of data bases and
geographic information systems, the state
should provide guidance and specification.
11. The outreach effort should Include input
from other capable agencies such as
Cooperative Extension, Soil and Water
Conservation Districts, the Department of
State, the Water Resources institute, and
others.
12. In selecting source control programs for
adjustment for wellhead protection con-
cerns, the occurrence of problems should
be reviewed so that the most significant
sources am addressed first.
The public hearing procedures and the results of
the Wellhead Protection Program Public Heating
held on August 7, 1990, are provided in an
attachment to this Submittal.
-55-