m |
|||
Line 5: | Line 5: | ||
==Description of Emergency Response Areas, DWSMAs, and vulnerability of DWSMAs== | ==Description of Emergency Response Areas, DWSMAs, and vulnerability of DWSMAs== | ||
[[file:Wellhead protection example.png|300px|thumb|alt=image illustrating designations for public supply protection|<font size=3>Example map illustrating different protection designations for public supply wells with wellhead protection plans.</font size>]] | [[file:Wellhead protection example.png|300px|thumb|alt=image illustrating designations for public supply protection|<font size=3>Example map illustrating different protection designations for public supply wells with wellhead protection plans.</font size>]] | ||
+ | [[File:ERA and vulnerability.png|300px|thumb|alt=schematic|<font size=3>Schematic illustrating the concepts of vulnerability and Emergency Response travel time.</font size>]] | ||
The figure at the right illustrates protection designations used to manage public water supply wells that have wellhead protection plans. | The figure at the right illustrates protection designations used to manage public water supply wells that have wellhead protection plans. | ||
*Drinking Water Supply Management Area (DWSMA) - the surface and subsurface area surrounding a public water supply well, including the wellhead protection area, that must be managed by the entity identified in a wellhead protection plan. This area is delineated using identifiable landmarks that reflect the scientifically calculated wellhead protection area boundaries as closely as possible. | *Drinking Water Supply Management Area (DWSMA) - the surface and subsurface area surrounding a public water supply well, including the wellhead protection area, that must be managed by the entity identified in a wellhead protection plan. This area is delineated using identifiable landmarks that reflect the scientifically calculated wellhead protection area boundaries as closely as possible. | ||
Line 27: | Line 28: | ||
==Rationale for requiring a higher level of engineering review== | ==Rationale for requiring a higher level of engineering review== | ||
+ | There are two conditions in which infiltration is prohibited under the Construction Stormwater General Permit unless a higher level of engineering review is conducted and demonstrates that a functioning treatment system will prevent adverse impacts to groundwater. | ||
+ | #An Emergency Response Area (ERA) within a DWSMA classified as moderate vulnerability | ||
+ | #Outside of an ERA within a DWSMA classified as having high or very high vulnerability | ||
− | + | It is important to understand limitations of maps depicting vulnerability. These maps are typically based on a limited number of borings that have been drilled and analyzed by geologic experts. Although in some locations there are numerous well boring logs, these logs are compiled by well drillers. Well logs therefore lack sufficient detail and expert interpretation to provide precise interpretations by geologic experts reviewing the boring logs. In addition, soils and geologic deposits can vary widely over short vertical and horizontal distances, particularly in more complex geologic settings. Consequently, classification of vulnerability represent best professional judgement. | |
+ | |||
+ | In the first condition above, a contaminant will potentially be transported to an underlying aquifer within a moderate time frame (e.g. one year to a decade). The concern is that contaminants reaching an aquifer within the ERA can be transported to a public supply well within a short time (less than one year). It is therefore important to collect additional information about the geologic materials overlying the aquifer or ensure a minimal risk of contaminant exposure in these settings. | ||
+ | |||
+ | In the second condition, contaminants will potentially be transported quickly to an aquifer, but the public supply well is outside the ERA. Determinations of ERA are based on sound geologic analysis and modeling, but other receptors beyond the public water supply well are not considered. Thus, private wells in these settings are at risk. Engineering review in this situation entails either conducting more detailed geologic analysis or modeling or conducting a well receptor survey. | ||
==Guidance and recommendations for conducting a higher level of engineering review== | ==Guidance and recommendations for conducting a higher level of engineering review== | ||
+ | The two conditions requiring higher levels of engineering review differ. | ||
+ | |||
+ | 1. '''Condition 1: Moderate vulnerability overlying an ERA'''. Because there is a high degree of certainty regarding the boundaries of the ERA, the purpose of the engineering review in this case is to conduct a detailed geologic analysis or provide reasonable assurances that risk of contaminant exposure is limited. | ||
+ | |||
*Identify hotspots | *Identify hotspots | ||
*Conduct a hydrogeologic assessment of the proposed location | *Conduct a hydrogeologic assessment of the proposed location |
The Construction Stormwater Permit requires a higher level on engineering review for proposed infiltration projects in areas overlying an Emergency Response Area (ERA) where the vulnerability of the DWSMA (Drinking Water Supply Management Area) is classified as moderate, or in areas outside the ERA where the vulnerability of the DWSMA (Drinking Water Supply Management Area) is classified as high or very high. This page provide guidance and recommendations for conducting a higher level of engineering review.
The figure at the right illustrates protection designations used to manage public water supply wells that have wellhead protection plans.
A public water supply well is vulnerable if:
Five classes of vulnerability exist: very low, low, moderate, high, and very high. Within high and very high vulnerability designations, contaminants at the land surface have the potential to move quickly to the underlying aquifer.
There are two conditions in which infiltration is prohibited under the Construction Stormwater General Permit unless a higher level of engineering review is conducted and demonstrates that a functioning treatment system will prevent adverse impacts to groundwater.
It is important to understand limitations of maps depicting vulnerability. These maps are typically based on a limited number of borings that have been drilled and analyzed by geologic experts. Although in some locations there are numerous well boring logs, these logs are compiled by well drillers. Well logs therefore lack sufficient detail and expert interpretation to provide precise interpretations by geologic experts reviewing the boring logs. In addition, soils and geologic deposits can vary widely over short vertical and horizontal distances, particularly in more complex geologic settings. Consequently, classification of vulnerability represent best professional judgement.
In the first condition above, a contaminant will potentially be transported to an underlying aquifer within a moderate time frame (e.g. one year to a decade). The concern is that contaminants reaching an aquifer within the ERA can be transported to a public supply well within a short time (less than one year). It is therefore important to collect additional information about the geologic materials overlying the aquifer or ensure a minimal risk of contaminant exposure in these settings.
In the second condition, contaminants will potentially be transported quickly to an aquifer, but the public supply well is outside the ERA. Determinations of ERA are based on sound geologic analysis and modeling, but other receptors beyond the public water supply well are not considered. Thus, private wells in these settings are at risk. Engineering review in this situation entails either conducting more detailed geologic analysis or modeling or conducting a well receptor survey.
The two conditions requiring higher levels of engineering review differ.
1. Condition 1: Moderate vulnerability overlying an ERA. Because there is a high degree of certainty regarding the boundaries of the ERA, the purpose of the engineering review in this case is to conduct a detailed geologic analysis or provide reasonable assurances that risk of contaminant exposure is limited.