C - 1

APPENDIX C

Committee Invitation Letter, Advisory CommitteesComposition, Meeting Summaries, and Comments

C - 2

TECHNICAL ADVISORY COMMITTEE INVITATIONLETTER

C - 3

July 10, 1998

Re: Source Water Assessment ProgramTechnical Advisory CommitteeMeeting

The West Virginia Bureau For Public Health, Department for Health and Human Resources(DHHR), the lead agency for the Source Water Assessment Program (SWAP), is committed todeveloping and implementing a source water assessment program in concert with affiliated inter- andintra-agency programs and interested stakeholders. The DHHR is currently convening the StateTechnical Advisory Committee and would like to invite you to serve. Your role as a member of theTechnical Advisory Committee is very important and will address the technical aspects, feasibility andeffectiveness of the program.

The mission and goal of the SWAP are to assess, preserve, and protect the state’s sourcewaters which are used to supply water for the state’s public water systems. The program is specialitycomponent of the Safe Drinking Water Act and is integrated with the Wellhead Protection Programand the West Virginia Watershed Management Framework which networks with many state andfederal agencies as well as other governmental entities. The stakeholder mosaic of the SWAP willinclude and encourage full participation extending from the largest governmental entity through localgovernments and individual members of the public. The goal of the SWAP is to prevent degradationof source waters which may preclude present and future users of our drinking water supplies and toprovide safe water in sufficient quantity to users.

The SWAP will primarily consist of source water delineation, contamination source inventoryand a susceptibility analysis to each public water supply with public input throughout. The DHHRwould like to receive input from the technical committee concerning the following important stepsin the program:

1. Delineation of the Source Water Protection Area (SWPA) from available datafor each water source or group of water sources and develop a map showingthe location of the SWPA.

2. Compilation of the inventory from available information and location of

significant potential sources of contamination.

C - 4

SWAP Technical Advisory CommitteePage 2July 10, 1998

3. Development of the Source Water Assessment and Susceptibility Analysis foreach public water supply. The assessment will consist of a map showing theSWPA and locations of source water intake and significant potentialcontamination sources; a list of significant potential contamination sources;and a brief narrative. The assessments will be made available to the public.

This letter is our invitation for you or an associate to attend the meeting. Please contactWilliam J. Toomey at 304-558-2981 as to your availability on July 30, 1998 and your acceptance toparticipate on this committee. We appreciate receiving your response by July 21, 1998. If youprefer, you may send a written response to the address shown on the letterhead or fax a response to304-558-0691.

Thank you for your interest in the Source Water Protection Program. We hope to see youJuly.

Sincerely,

William J. Toomey, P.G.Wellhead Protection ProgramEnvironmental Engineering Division

WJT:scwpc: C. Russell Radar, Jr., P.E., Director - OEHS

Donald A. Kuntz, P.E., Director - EED

T:\WP61WIN\WJT\SWAP\SWAPDR~1\C1_APPEN.WPD

C - 5

T E C H N I C A L A D V I S O R Y C O M M I T T E ECOMPOSITION

C - 6

SOURCE WATER ASSESSMENT PROGRAMTECHNICAL ADVISORY COMMITTEE

Ms. Chris DaughertyDEP/Watershed Basin Coordinator 1201 Greenbrier StreetCharleston, West Virginia 25311

District Engineer (Rotating) Mr. James D. Douglas, P.E.Office of Environmental Health ServicesSt. Albans District Office 808 B Street, Suite GSt. Albans, West Virginia 25177

Mr. Bob FrameWVDA1900 Kanawha Boulevard, EastBuilding 7Charleston, West Virginia 25305

Ms. Teresa BylerWest Virginia Soil and Water Conservation1900 Kanawha Boulevard, East Charleston, West Virginia 25305-0193

Mr. Randy LewisMr. Lewis BakerWV Rural Water Association PO. Box 225Teays, West Virginia 25569

Mr. James Wesolowski, ChairpersonAWWA-WVP.O. Box 1270St. Albans, West Virginia 25177

Mr. Ben Borda, CELRH-PD-RUS Army Corps of EngineersHuntington District502 8th StreetHuntington, West Virginia 25701

C - 7

SOURCE WATER ASSESSMENT PROGRAMTECHNICAL ADVISORY COMMITTEE

(Page 2)

Mr. Larry Evans DEP/TAGIS10 McJunkin RoadNitro, West Virginia 25143

Mr. Dave WatkinsDEP/Office of Water Resources1201 Greenbrier StreetCharleston, West Virginia 25311

Mr. Charles RilingDepartment of Transportation/Engineering Division1900 Kanawha Boulevard, EastCharleston, West Virginia 25305

Mr. Mark KozarU. S. Geological SurveyWater Resources Division West Virginia District11 Dunbar StreetCharleston, West Virginia 25301

Mr. Jim WarrenDivision of Forestry 1900 Kanawha Boulevard, EastBuilding 13Charleston, West Virginia 25301

Ms. Jane McCollochWV Geological and Economic SurveyP.O. Box 879Morgantown, West Virginia 26507-0879

Mr. Pravin SanganiDEP - Engineering Division1201 Greenbrier StreetCharleston, West Virginia 25311

C - 8

SOURCE WATER ASSESSMENT PROGRAMTECHNICAL ADVISORY COMMITTEE

(Page 3)

Mr. Sanjay Saxena, DirectorNational Drinking Water ClearinghouseP.O. Box 6064Morgantown, West Virginia 26506-6064

Mr. Mike LawlessDraper Arden2206 South Main StreetBlacksburg, Virginia 24060

Mr. Thomas W. HolbrookWest Virginia American Water CompanyP.O. Box 1906Charleston, West Virginia 25327

Mr. Rick ShaverDEP/OWR - Groundwater1201 Greenbrier StreetCharleston, West Virginia 25311

Mr. Clifton BrowningDEP/OWR - Permits1201 Greenbrier StreetCharleston, West Virginia 25311

Mr. Victor Wilford, P.E.Office of Environmental Health Services815 Quarrier Street, Suite 418Charleston, West Virginia 25301-2616

C - 9

TECHNICAL ADVISORY COMMITTEE MEETINGSUMMARIES

C - 10

MEETING SUMMARYWEST VIRGINIA SOURCE WATER ASSESSMENT AND PROTECTION PROGRAM

TECHNICAL ADVISORY COMMITTEEJULY 30, 1998

I. INTRODUCTION

A. Bill Toomey, West Virginia Bureau for Public Health (WVBPH) convened theSource Water Assessment Program (SWAP) Meeting at 9:15 a.m. on July 30,1998 in the Office of Environmental Health Service (OEHS) conference roomin Charleston, WV. The meeting began with each of the SWAP - TechnicalAdvisory Committee Members introducing themselves. A completeattendance list is attached at the end of the minutes.

II. SAFE DRINKING WATER ACT (SDWA)

A. Don Kuntz, P.E., WVBPH, gave an overview of the Safe Drinking Water Act(SDWA) that was authorized in 1974. The 1996 amendments to the SDWAestablished the SWAP requirements. The Drinking Water State RevolvingFund (DWSRF) is traditionally used to build or improve wastewater treatmentplants but was expanded to include SWAP. Katy Mallory, P.E., WVBPH,reported that West Virginia has been awarded a 12 million-dollar DWSRFaward from EPA and that 10% of the DWSRF can be used to administer orprovide technical assistance for implementation of the SWAP.According to the SWAP guidance, West Virginia plans must be submitted tothe EPA by February 1999. All assessments for all public water systems afterapproval of the SWAP Plan must be completed within two years (Year 2001)with a possible 18 mouth extension to the Year 2003.

Chris Daugherty, DEP - Watershed Coordinator, asked if there were anyadvantages or disadvantages to have our SWAP plans done before thedeadline: Answer: To receive the full time allotment for the SWAP Processit is recommended to turn the plans in near the last submittal day.

Lewis Baker, WVRWA, asked about the Year 2005 deadline: Answer: That is EPA’s goal of having 60% of the total Source Water AssessmentPrograms completed nationwide. In West Virginia, the SWAP for all thePublic Water Supply Systems must be completed by Year 2003 and theminimum requirements completed for each Public System.

C - 11

III. SOURCE WATER ASSESSMENT PROGRAM (SWAP)

A. Elements

1. Duties of Federal, State, and Local Agencies

a. The Bureau for Public Health is the lead agency responsiblefor the Development and Implementation of SWAP.

(1). Many State Federal, Local Agencies and PrivateIndividuals will be involved in various programaspects to protect the state’s water fromcontamination.

2. Public Participation

a. Vital to the success of the program. A Technical and CitizensAdvisory Committee will be established to help with the publicparticipation aspect of the SWAP.

3. Program ImplementationThere are three minimum requirements to implement the SWAP.They include:

a. Delineate the Source Water Protection Area

The Source Water Protection Areas is the total spatial area ofland surface contributing water to a drinking water intake (forground water and surface water systems).

(1). All Public Water Systems have to be delineated. Thisapplies to all ground and surface water systems.

(2). Use the Wellhead Protection Program (WHPP) 5 yearTravel of Time (TOT) for groundwater delineations.

(3). USGS will review and evaluate the currentgroundwater delineation techniques and new surfacewater techniques.

C - 12

b. Inventory of potential sources of contamination

(1). Identify the most significant contamination sources indelineated areas.

(2). Compile an organized inventory data list and mapshowing location.

c. Perform Susceptibility Analysis

(1). Process for quantifying and prioritizing actual andpotential sources.

(2). USGS will review and evaluate the susceptibilityprocess.

4. Source Water Assessment Report

a. Each system(s) must have a brief report presenting the resultsto the public. This report may include hydrogeologic setting,maps of the delineated area, inventory and susceptibility.

Vic Wilford, P.E., WVBPH, asked who will write this report.Answer: At this point the WVBPH is writing the brief report.

5. Source Water Protection - Management and Contingency Plans

a. In addition to the required delineations, source inventory andsusceptibility determination. An additional part of SWAP mayinclude local teams (help guide the process), managementmeasures (eliminate the potential threat) and contingencyplanning (short and long term replacement strategies). Howthis section will be incorporated into SWAP will be discussedat the next SWAP meeting.

B. Public and Regulated Community Participation

1. The Technical Advisory Committee (TAC) was asked if any additionalpersonnel should be added to the committee.

2. In the process of assembling the Citizen’s Advisory Committee, a list

C - 13

of the committee members has been prepared. A meeting with thiscommittee is foreseen later in August 1998.

3. Public Hearings are projected for November. A mini grant has beenprovided by EPA for enhancing the public participation in the SWAPdevelopment. National Water Clearinghouse will act as facilitators forpublic meetings and generate an informational brochure or manual.

4 Another grant from EPA will allow a website to be developed for theSource Water Assessment Program. This website should be up andrunning in 2-3 weeks.

5. The TAC was asked to review or comment on the SWAP Key Issuesfor public participation. Comments or suggestions will be reviewedat the next meeting.

6. Randall Lewis, West Virginia Rural Water Association (WVRWA),stated that they fully supported the Wellhead Protection Program.

Mark Kozar, USGS, asked the procedure on how the WellheadProgram evaluates the individual system, by themselves or with acontractor. Answer: The state does the delineation of the 5 yeartime of travel and the system does the potential contamination listing.Many systems have done this part independently, others with theassistance of the WVRWA or contractors.

C. Program Implementation - Source Water Assessments

1. Initial State Actions - Review of available data for the SWAP.

a. Hydrogeology/Hydrology - Review of potential data sources,web sites and maps that we have access to use.

b. Ambient Surface and Groundwater Data - Review ofinformation source and type.

c. Potential Contamination Sources - Review of informationsource and type.

d. The committee was asked to review the handouts, listings andadd any additional information they may have.

2. Differential Approach

C - 14

a. Different levels of assessment - Not all systems have to beaccessed the same.

b. Previous assessment efforts - Implement the information fromthe WHPP by using the same delineation and contaminantsources list.

c. Type and Extent of Threat - should rate some systemsdifferent?

d. Type and size of Public Systems - smaller systems vs. largersystems.

e. Overall objectives - management phase

3. Wellhead Protection Program - History and Status

The Wellhead Protection Program is only associated withgroundwater systems not surface water.

a. Six steps involved to implement the program:

(1). Collection of Background Information - Well DataSheet.

(2). Public Participation - Committee is formed to dopublic outreach.

(3). Delineation Pumping a well in an alluvial setting we look at the 5year TOT to delineate the area.

Chris Daugherty asked what the TOT is for the otherstates? Answer: The majority use the 5 year TOT forgroundwater systems. That is the minimum time set by

the EPA.

Reviewed the Paden City WHPP Groundwater Model

(4). Contamination Source Inventory - Inventory list -Code Number is used to cross reference with the

C - 15

common sources of groundwater contamination. Theform consists of name and address, description,distance from well and if a Groundwater ProtectionPlan (GPP) is in place.

The GPP is handled by DEP - Water Resources. Itonly applies to industrial and mining and notmunicipal. Dave Watkins, DEP-OWR, said that thelaw requires a GPP. He said that as a permits comesup for renewal they are required to submit a GPP orwhen a new permit application comes in their office.

(5). Management/Contingency Planning

(6). Contingency PlanningShort form used in the WHPP for plan development.

4. Watershed Framework Summary

a. Chris Daugherty, DEP-OWR, Watershed Coordinatorsummarized the watershed framework. The program involves12 state and federal agencies. It is a 5 year/phase process,(consisting of 32 watershed groups) in Groups A- E.

(1). The first phase is scoping and screening with assessing

land usage and industrial usage. The goal is to restoreand protect a groundwater source and protecting thewater from contamination.

(2). The second phase is strategic monitoring. That islooking at a target area. Look at more specific data orwhere the source is.

(3). The third stage is management strategy development.

(4). The fourth stage is priority watershed managementplan. Develop and finalize management plans.

(5). The fifth stage is implementation.

b. Linkage between watershed and source water assessmentprogram.

C - 16

Watershed Management involves a committee for publicoutreach. This same committee could also include a briefbackground of the source water assessment program to thepublic. Don Kuntz, WVBPH, stated that a small segment ofa Watershed Meeting could include SWAP. Chris Daughertyemphasized that they are in the process of putting the linktogether. Dave Watkins, DEP-OWR, Mark Kozar, USGS,and Bill Toomey will test raw water quality analysis inconjunction with priority watershed. Some of the same datafrom other groups can incorporated into SWAP.

5. Surface Water Systems

a. Delineation of the source water protection area to include theentire watershed area upstream of the PWS’s intake structure,up to the boundary of the state borders.

b. A breakdown of types of surface intakes was discussed and isshown on the attached figure.

6. Prioritization of Systems

a. Link with the Department of Environmental ProtectionWatershed Assessment program

(1). Start the SWAP evaluation process with the finishedGroups A and B in the DEP watershed framework.Process the larger population community systems first.

7. The TAC was asked to review or comment on the SWAP Key Issuesfor the State’s Strategic Approach. Comments or suggestions will bereviewed at the next meeting.

D. Delineation of Source Water Assessment Areas

1. Public Water Supply - Groundwater

a. Reviewed the Aquifer Types and different delineation methodsused in the WHPP. See the attached WHPP delineationfigure.

b. The recommendation for groundwater delineations are asfollows:

C - 17

Community System - If the system serves more than 500population served the area is delineated by one of the WHPPmethods.

If the system serves less than 500 population served the areahas a fixed radius of 1500'.

Non-Transient - If the system serves more than 500population served the area is delineated by one of the WHPPmethods.

If the system serves less than 500 the areas has a fixed radiusof 1000'

Transient - Fixed radius of 500'

Please note that in a Karst area fixed radius will be 2000' forless than 500 population served.

Dave Watkins, DEP-OWR, wanted to know if there was anyjustification for a fixed radius? Answer: The USGS willevaluated the fixed radius approach to the small systems.Many of these systems have limited hydrogeolgic data andvery low quantities of water they produce.

2. Public Water Supply - Surface Water

a. The recommendation for surface water delineations for surfacewater delineations are as follows.

Zone 1 a. 1/4 mile buffer

b. 5 hour/TOT on average max. Streamflow (Ohio River High Flow - 25miles)

c. 1/4 below intake

Zone 2 a. All 14 Digit Hydrologic Unit Codes(HUCs) adjacent to the stream and all14 Digit HUC’s Adjacent to MajorTributaries.

C - 18

b. 1/4 below intake.

Zone 3 Watershed Upstream of Intake

Hydrologic Unit Code (HUC) are hydrographic in nature anddetermined by the size of the drainage. The HUC 8 wouldhave a greater drainage area than the HUC 14.

Sources of contamination will be determined by the zone.

Some suggestions were to go from the middle of the streamand set different values for the buffer zone. Mark Kozar,USGS, commented on the 1/4 mile buffer, he said that youare not going to encompass entire areas. Lewis Baker,WVRWA, stated that the 1/4 mile distance is arbitrary. Itwould be more defensive if you could expand it. Have aPriority Zone that would not be based on a mileage buffer.ORSANCO uses the 1/4 mile buffer, suggestions indicatedusing the 14 Digit HUC is more practical. ORSANCO doesonly the delineations not assessments. Along the Ohio Riverand the major tributaries for SWAP. Reuben Gillispie,WVBPH, suggested that Zone 1 be ground checked and Zone2 be data based.

b. Recommendations included going to a two tier approach onthe surface intakes as follows:

River/Streams -

Zone 1 “Hot Zone” - extends 1/4 mile below a surface waterintake to 25 miles upstream (based on 5 hours time of Travel,high flow). The lateral distance encompasses the area of 14-digit hydrologic units adjacent to the stream and tributaries.This area is were a contamination event will quickly affect thewater supply.

Zone 2 The area of the basin upstream from an intake.

** based on maximum Ohio River velocities nearSurface Intakes from February 1995 toFebruary 1998.

C - 19

c. Delineations procedures for reservoirs will be discussed at thenext meeting.

E. Inventory of Potential Sources of Contamination

1. Contaminants of Concern - Reviewed the raw water contaminantsregulated and unregulated under the SDWA, contaminants regulatedunder the SWTR.

a. Will discuss Cryptosporidium at the next meeting.

2. Groundwater - Two different zones:

a. Zone 1 - “Hot Zone” - Level of detail that is more complete.

Use the list of the Common Sources of GroundwaterContamination used in the WHPP. From that list we canassign certain contaminations that may occur. Break down thepotential - high, middle, low. Vic Wilford, WVBPH,suggested that you can determine it by breakdown of the sizeof operation and management facilities. Dave Watkins, DEP,pointed out that waste disposal also makes a difference.

b. Zone 2 - More General Sources - areas you can find on theweb. Such as CERCLIS, RCRIS, Toxic Release InventorySites, Coal NPDES, Mining Permits, Landfill, Oil & GasWells.

If the data is readily available, include as much data as youcan. Boundary of Zone 2 could be the HUC 14 or 11delineation.

c. Reviewed the Kentucky Source Water Assessment Program.Reviewed the land use and the risk to the groundwatersection. They broke down the contamination into 3 categories- high, medium, low risk. It was written very general and notspecific at all.

d. Bill Toomey asked Lewis Baker, WVRWA, for an opinion ofthe Groundwater Contamination List. He suggested supplyingthe individual with a list. Out of that list some things will bea priority.

C - 20

e. Other suggestions included:

• Prioritize the list• Make a checklist• Have it rated - high, medium, low

Vic Wilford, WVBPH, commented that on transient systemsyou are only looking at a small number of items, so you will be

able to progress fast in that category. Sanitary surveys are required.

3. Surface Water - Two Different Zones

a. Zone 1 - “Hot Zone” - Level of detail that is more complete.Compares with the Zone 1 Area in Groundwater model.

b. Zone 2 - More general sources - comparable to theGroundwater Zone 2.

IV. Subcommittee

A. A technical subcommittee was formed to review the contamination source listand susceptibility analysis. The committee is scheduled to meet on August 17,1998.

V. Next Meeting

A. The next meeting will be scheduled for the beginning of September 1998.

VI. Adjournment

a. Meeting was adjourned at 3:00 pm.

C - 21

MEETING SUMMARYWEST VIRGINIA SOURCE WATER ASSESSMENT AND PROTECTION PROGRAM

TECHNICAL ADVISORY COMMITTEESeptember 10, 1998

I. INTRODUCTION

1. Bill Toomey, West Virginia Bureau for Public Health (WVBPH) convened theSource Water Assessment Program (SWAP) Meeting at 10:00 a.m. onSeptember 10, 1998 in the Office of Environmental Health Service (OEHS)conference room in Charleston, WV. A complete attendance list is attachedat the end of the minutes.

II. REVIEW OF THE SOURCE WATER ASSESSMENT PROGRAM

1. Program Implementation

There are three minimum requirements to implement the SWAP. Theyinclude:

a. Delineate the Source Water Protection Area

The Source Water Protection Area is the total spatial area of landsurface contributing water to a drinking water intake (for groundwater and surface water systems).

(1). All Public Water Systems have to be delineated. This appliesto all ground and surface water systems.

(2). Use the Wellhead Protection Program (WHPP) 5 year Travelof Time (TOT) for groundwater delineations.

(3). USGS will review and evaluate the current groundwaterdelineation techniques and new surface water techniques.

b. Inventory of potential sources of contamination.

(1). Identify the all significant contamination sources in delineatedareas.

(2). Compile an organized inventory data list and map showing

C - 22

location.

c. Perform Susceptibility Analysis

(1). Process for quantifying and prioritizing actual and potentialsources.

(2). USGS will review and evaluate the susceptibility process.

2. Memorandum of Understanding

A working agreement between the agencies.

III. DISCUSSION OF THE GROUNDWATER SWAP

1. Resource Characterization

Compile and evaluate existing information of West Virginia geology,groundwater resources and public water systems.

This will facilitate a more cost effective and systematic approach fordelineation of the groundwater SWAP areas.

Collection of existing and site specific hydrologic data and well data.

Dave Watkins - DEP/OWR - stated that the DEP already has a contract tocollect this information.

Lew Baker - WVRWA - stated that USGS has a database that has thisinformation.

The Bureau for Public Health is currently working with USGS to make it astatewide database.

2. Delineation

Fixed Radius Method - fast and inexpensive

2 Zones ÷ Zone 1 - Delineated AreaZone 2 - HUC Code - it is defined by the 14 Digit HUC’s

C - 23

Watershed.

Since the last meeting USGS is in the process of forming GIS for Zone 2.

Looking at a bigger area, recharge into an aquifer. The drainage does notimpact wellhead area, based on a 5 year TOT.

Dave Watkins - DEP/OWR - questioned the 5 year TOT. He stated thatsome contaminants travel slow. He wanted to know if we have a contingencyplan that state what contaminants are in a system. He said not to make it adefinite 5 year TOT.

Vic Wilford - WVBPH - stated that the information needed to be updated.

Lew Baker - WVRWA - stated that it should be done case by case.

Possibility of adding a buffer around Zone 1 - maybe a 1000' foot radius.

A. Selecting the Delineation Method

Reviewed the guidelines for the community, non-transient andtransient water systems.

Areas of delineation for the smaller systems will be less than500' foot radius.

Lew Baker - WVRWA - suggested to give have an interimradius. There is not enough data to give a fixed radius.

For the transient systems you do not have the resourcecharacterization.

Vic Wilford - WVBPH - suggested that some systems have afixed radius and others have a interim radius.

Chris Daugherty - DEP/OWR - suggested using a fixed radiusuntil other information comes through and we do a moresophisticated analysis. If and when we deem it necessary.

B. Who will Delineate the SWAP Areas?

Should the Public Water Systems (PWS) do their own delineations?

C - 24

Vic Wilford - WVBPH - suggested having someone authorized orcertified in hydrogeology assist the water systems.

Dave Watkins - DEP/OWR - Give the PWS guidelines and then justdouble check it.

Lew Baker - WVRWA - Let the PWS have it done by a contractor.

Future delineations - Redelineations should be done when there is anaverage 15% water increase. It should not be a one-time deal but anongoing process or base it on a set time.

Lew Baker - WVRWA - Future Delineations should be viewed aslong term. Be clear about it.

Chris Daugherty - DEP/OWR - base it on more customers instead ofwater increase.

J.D. Douglas - WVBPH - stated that the sanitary survey showedmaximum pumping rates. Tie this information together.

Vic Wilford - WVBPH - suggested a time frame - 15% over the last12 months.

Conjunctive Delineations - hydraulically connected.One delineation for both surface and ground water from one intakesystems.

3. Potential Contaminant Survey

Contaminants of Concern

Dave Watkins -DEP/OWR - mentioned something about a health advisory??

Significant Sources

The susceptibility analysis will pinpoint the areas.

Inventory

C - 25

Produce maps and inventories by looking at the different sources.

No current existing regulations on municipal lagoons? No regulations forgroundwater.

In the First Step of the InventoryTake the word regulated out. Develop general land use - general inventory.

Step Two - Detailed Inventory Checklist and Source Maps

Dave Watkins - DEP/OWR - when you ask for the latitude andlongitude ask what method is used. Credibility is a question.

Vic Wilford - WVBPH - suggested that the Source Inventory title onthe database be changed to Contaminant Source Inventory

Reviewed the Contaminant Listing Checklist

Dave Watkins - DEP/OWR - the list needs more details. For examplesumps - place where water collects.Looking at existing and past contaminants.

Vic Wilford - WVBPH - asked about future land use. It will go in themanagement phase - go to the committee that deals with local areas.Active Source Water Team that handles it.

Lew Baker - WVRWA - in the past we did this anything new happensjust call the health department.

Data Capture based on 7.5 minute topo

Information will be made to the public.

4. Susceptibility Analysis

Originally defined as the potential (likelihood) for a PWS’s to draw watercontaminated by inventoried sources at concentrations that would poseconcern.

C - 26

The committee decided to add to the original definition - susceptibilityanalysis is a primer or pointer to those sources taking into consider thefollowing:

• Hydrologic and Hydrogeologic Characteristics• Land Cover Characteristics• Potential Significant Contaminant Sources• Physical Integrity of the Well or Surface Intake

Discussed the various flowcharts:

• System Construction - It is recognized that a well has goodconstruction characteristics can prevent the occurrence ofcontamination even in the presence of potentially significantcontaminant sources and high hydrologic sensitivity. This section willsummarize the well construction parameters.

• Contaminant/Land Cover - The various potential significant sourcesor land cover characteristics represent activities or features that couldlead to detentions of those raw water contaminations regulated underthe Safe Drinking Act.

• Hydrologic Screening

Use these charts in-house. Write a narrative on anything that stands out.

Bill Toomey - WVBPH - asked Vic Wilford about the data system SDWIS

Vic Wilford - WVBPH - replied that at this point the data system has toomany errors. The bacteriological data or raw water quality data is not able tobe put in the SDWIS data system. He also said that individuals that areimmune compromised should be advised to see their physician. Supply themsupporting data and give them some to compare it with.

IV. DISCUSSION OF THE SURFACE WATER SWAP

1. Review of the Resource Characterization

Dave Watkins - DEP/OWR - questioned the potential for Surface Runoff -heasked about storms.

C - 27

Lew Baker - WVRWA stated that there should be a cutoff for soil. Soil typecannot be used for delineation.

Dave Watkins - DEP/OWR - commented that you may not be able todelineate surface water areas.

Permeability Concerns vs. Susceptibility. What is going on in the water?

Vic Wilford - WVBPH - suggested adding a fifth item to the list of resourcecharacterization: land use. Land use is in the inventory.

2. Delineation

Reviewed the Zone Areas for Surface Water delineations.

Zone 2 will be a corridor area.

Zone 1 will be modified to an 11 digit HUC’s code. The delineationtechniques are consistent with ORSANCO’s techniques. ORSANCOrecommends one more zone/area. ORSANCO has three zones. Their Zone2 will be our Zone 1.

Vic Wilford - WVBPH questioned the technical standpoint. He said that 25miles is quite a distance to cover.

Lew Baker - WVRWA suggested that once the delineation is done, send it tothe system for an update.

Vic Wilford - WVBPH - commented that if you do that there is quite of bit ofground to try to determine if there is something more. He suggested doingsomething realistic, because you will have a better product. The public wouldbe more willing to do it.

The width of 1320 feet will be OK on some systems. Make it fit according tothe watershed boundary. The maximum would be 1/4 mile or the boundaryof the watershed.

Lew Baker - WVRWA said that some questions could be answered at theWVRWA Conference. Ask if the 25 mile is feasible. Right now do notchange anything.

C - 28

Technical vs. Practical Standpoint - Not enough vs. too much.Big Discussion on the 25 mileTributaries

Dave Watkins - DEP/OWR asked what is manageable or realistic?

Some suggestions:• For each surface system calculate the TOT individually• Ask for the opinions/suggestions at the WVRWA conference.• The USGS will go into the watershed and calculated the high stream

flow rates.

Discussed the ORSANCO 100 foot buffer between streams and tributaries.

Who will delineate the SWAP areas? Sanitary Survey

Contaminants of Concern - similar to ground water

3. Potential Contaminant Survey

Form a management committeeInventory - produce a map

similar to groundwater - add transportation

Lew Baker - WVRWA suggested maps will have a level of accuracy to 100foot. You want to show on the map the railroads, streams, etc. Provide amap with highlighted information.Would this be more confusing that it is worth?

Dave Watkins- DEP/OWR - data should be based on 1: 100,000 scale.

Step 2 is similar to Ground Water System.

Let the system complete the inventory and return it to us. Going to use 7.5map with 2000 scale.

Data Capture - feasibility of using 7.5 topo maps.

4. Susceptibility

Use same flow charts.

C - 29

Dave Watkins - DEP/OWR - Water quality standardsUIC under remediation the permits are more stringent.

Lew Baker - WVRWA - water systems may have data that they do not havereports. Raw water vs. treated water.Use other agencies to the data.

V. WRAP-UP

Bill Toomey, WVBPH will start on the Source Water Assessment and ProtectionProgram draft. The Technical Subcommittee will meet on September 25, 1998. Theywill be discussing conjunctive delineations and the standards for the MaximumContaminant List.

The SWAP Citizen’s Advisory Committee Meeting is scheduled for September 10,1998.

The next Technical Advisory Committee Meeting is scheduled for November 5, 1998at 10:00 a.m. at the Northgate Business Park in the WV Water DevelopmentAuthority Conference Room.

C - 30

MEETING SUMMARYWEST VIRGINIA SOURCE WATER ASSESSMENT AND PROTECTION PROGRAM

TECHNICAL AND CITIZENS’ ADVISORY MEETINGNovember 5, 1998

I. INTRODUCTION

A. Bill Toomey, West Virginia Bureau for Public Health (WVBPH) convened theSource Water Assessment Program (SWAP) Meeting at 10:00 a.m. onNovember 5, 1998 in the Water Development Authority conference room inCharleston, West Virginia. The meeting began with each of the SWAP -Technical and Citizens’ Advisory Committee Members introducingthemselves. A complete attendance list is attached at the end of the minutes.

II. REVIEW OF THE SOURCE WATER ASSESSMENT AND PROTECTIONPROGRAM DRAFT

A. Potential Contaminant Source Inventory Ranking

The committee members divided into three groups. Each group was to lookat the Potential Contaminant Source Inventory List and determine a rankingof high, medium, or low in relation to a threat to groundwater and surfacewater. The ultimate goal was to recognize the relative threat level to thesusceptible intake from the potential contaminant sources. The results of therankings are attached at the end of the minutes.

B. Phase One

1. Resource Characterization - Source Water Assessment

Lewis Baker, WVRWA, commented that for the determination of theboundary of the surface water intake watershed area we shouldincorporate the USGS data.

Bill Toomey, WVBPH, indicated that all available data from USGSwill be used.

Vic Wilford, WVBPH, said that if two utilities overlap, communitiesneed to work together.

C - 31

SummaryNovember 5, 1998 Meeting Page Two

2. Delineation Procedure

Conjunctive Delineation - hydraulic connection of surface water toa well pumping ground water.

A type of utility defined as Ground Water Under the Direct Influence(GWUDI) must install a surface water filter treatment technique.

3. Inventory

Ken Spence, WV Farm Bureau wanted to know how many potentialcontaminant sources in each public water system.

Lew Baker, WVRWA, responded that the number depends on howintense you want to be. The input would come from the propertyowner.

Bill Toomey, WVBPH, said that the procedure for inventory wouldbe similar to the wellhead protection program. With source water,“SWAP Teams” will help survey certain areas.

Tom Holbrook, WVAWC, wanted to know what will make asystem cooperate?

Bill Toomey, WVBPH, responded that we would have todevelop a line of communication.

Helen Gibbins, League of Women Voters, wanted to know ifthe committee members could help.

Bill Toomey, WVBPH, responded that the committeemembers can help on the local level.

a. Database - Potential Contaminant Listing

Reviewed and discussed the form. Bill Toomey,WVBPH, asked for any suggestions.

C - 32

SummaryNovember 5, 1998 MeetingPage Three

4. Susceptibility

Reviewed the draft definition and the determination of the fourcritical factors of susceptibility. The four steps for ground andsurface water systems:

a.) Hydrogeologicb.) Land Cover and Potential Contaminant Sourcesc.) Physical Integrity of the intake/welld.) Water Quality

5. Assessment Report

A summary report with an assessment report, map and inventorylisting will be available to the community.

C. Phase Two

1. Management Approaches

Vic Wilford, WVBPH, said that we could use the ConsumerConfidence Rule (CCR). The requirement begins in 1999. Theutilities have to report in October 1999 and then every July. It will tellconsumers about source water, raw water, contaminants in water andthe effects. The message goes to the people who receive the utilitybill. The utilities only have to say that a Source Water AssessmentProgram has been prepared and tell where it can be obtained.

Helen Gibbins, League of Women Voters, suggested having theSWAP Program read by literacy groups to see if it is meaningful to thepublic. Many times, technical issues are hard for people tounderstand. She also suggested that the Source Water Message bedelivered by television and radio. She said that if you limit it only tothe Internet you will only a target a limited audience.

Summary

C - 33

November 5, 1998 MeetingPage Four

2. Contingency Plans

a. Spill response phone number will be updated.

b. Better communication between agencies for spill events.

c. Reviewed existing emergency plan provisions.

D. USDA Animal Feeding Operations

Asked for a letter from SWAP about their feeding operations.

Chris Daugherty, WVDEP, said that the agency can directly comment or wecould compile our opinions together and send it. Bill Toomey, WVBPH,asked that opinions be submitted within two weeks.

III. Adjournment

Public Meetings will begin by the end of November. About four to five meetings arescheduled at target locations in West Virginia.

Bill Toomey, WVBPH, asked the committee members to review the SWAP draft andrespond with comments within two weeks.

The next meeting is projected to be in early January.

C - 34

MEETING SUMMARYWEST VIRGINIA SOURCE WATER ASSESSMENT AND PROTECTION PROGRAM

TECHNICAL AND CITIZENS’ ADVISORY MEETINGJanuary 12, 1999

I. INTRODUCTION

A. Bill Toomey, West Virginia Bureau for Public Health (BPH) convened theSource Water Assessment Program (SWAP) Meeting at 10:00 a.m. on January12, 1999 in the Water Development Authority conference room in Charleston,West Virginia. The meeting began with each of the SWAP - Technical andCitizens’ Advisory Committee Members introducing themselves. A completeattendance list is attached at the end of the minutes.

II. DEADLINES

A. The deadline to submit the draft to the EPA for approval is February 8, 1999.EPA has reviewed the West Virginia Source Water Assessment Draft and wewill discuss their susceptibility comments during this meeting.

III. REVIEW OF PUBLIC MEETING

A. In late November and early December public meetings were held on theSource Water Assessment and Protection program. Locations of the meetingswere as follows: Martinsburg, Morgantown, Wheeling, Beckley andCharleston.

The attendance varied at each location. Overall, the discussions at themeetings were informative concerning the SWAP program.

IV. SURFACE DELINEATION - RESERVOIRS AND LAKES

A. Reuben Gillispie, BPH led the discussion on the issue of surface delineation. The surface delineation method of reservoirs and lakes needs to be finalizedfor the SWAP report. The major concern of the surface delineation is how todelineate the Zone of Critical Concentration. The standard equation wedecided to use is 90% of the maximum measure flow velocity multiplied bythe 5-hour time of travel for distance. For a watershed we will calculate what

C - 35

is the five-hour travel time and draw a path which is a quarter of a mile oneither side of the bank which will then be known as the Zone of CriticalConcern. For example, the Ohio River is arbitrarily defined as 25 milesbecause the maximum movement is 5 miles per hour. For the other streams inthe State we will get the 90% flow velocity. For the impoundments and damsyour velocity is zero at the outer portion of the dam but you have a velocity onthe free-flowing portions. The neighboring states are going to simply try tocalculate the longest period of time it would take a molecule of water to movefrom the farthest part of the lake to the intake using a travel time of a year orlonger. This method is determined by dye studies, but we have decided not touse this technique. The process we are going to look at is the feeder streamsby finding the main tributary and averaging velocity of this portion and use thisvelocity and multiply it by the five-hour time of travel. The time of travel isthe straight line of distance up a stream. The cutoff point could be about fourmiles and then proceed one thousand yards from the bank in all directions intoabout a quarter of a mile downstream of the intake. This will help usdetermine the impoundment setting a distance upstream rather than anarbitrary number for where the water comes to a stop. Lew Baker -WVWRA, wanted flexibility on reservoirs. The biggest impactsof water quality were organic and other nutrients. Not related to travel time.

Reuben Gillispie, BPH, asked the committee where the fastest water is goingto be. Is it going to be from the dam or from the steeper part of tributaries?

Mark Kozar, USGS, if you are looking at a percent the water is at a dischargeupstream sites are going to have the higher discharge. If you are looking at themaximum that could occur, it could be downstream.

Vic Wilford, BPH - An example is a PWSS located 10 miles below the damarea. If the ZCC delineation exceeds the dam, it should include the dam andinclude the segments.

Tom Holbrook, WVAWC, you give the utilities downstream some amount oftime to figure out what is going upstream.

After discussion it was decided to use the fastest velocity (90%) foundupstream - within 25 miles of the dam.

V. EPA COMMENTS ON THE DRAFT

C - 36

A. Susceptibility Concerns

Current susceptibility approach relied on the individual who was making thedetermination of susceptibility for the system. EPA would like it to be moreconsistent when determining the susceptibility.

BPH requested the USGS to help determine a method to determine anapproach to susceptibility. This approach was handed out and discussed at themeeting. The main part of the change is using a susceptibility table to evaluatethe susceptibility of each system.

There will be two tables for determining the susceptibility. There will be onetable for the groundwater systems and the surface water systems. Incorporatethe vulnerability concept into this. The table is set up to assign points topotential threats of contamination.

Reuben Gillispie, BPH, discussed each item on the table. Tables would issuea ranking or point system of 3,2,1 to a scheme to determine susceptibility.

Lew Baker, WVRWA, and Mark Kozar, USGS, do not like ranking scores.

Tom Holbrook, WVAWC, wanted an area where the system can addcomments and concerns.

Vic Wilford, BPH, suggested having an introductory verbiage for the public.Tell the purpose of ranking and let them know that it is not an absolutenumber.

Dave Watkins, WVDEP-OWR, said submit what we have to the EPA. If itdoes not meet their approval, EPA will then send it back. In the meantime, wecould have worked on it.

After a long discussion by the TAC and CAC committees on the USGSapproach to susceptibility it was determined it was very difficult to use if notimpossible to design a quantitative ranking technique which will accuratelyassess the susceptibility of a ground or surface water supply to contamination.

Vic Wilford, BPH suggested that EED should try to develop a better andsimplified susceptibility process and submit this to the TAC subcommittee.This committee would make any final comments or suggestions to the

C - 37

simplified susceptibility approach. Bill Toomey, BPH, would revise thesusceptibility section of the SWAP draft and let the subcommittee review.They would then fax or mail our office their recommendations to develop thefinal approach. We will send a copy of the revised susceptibility section toeach of the TAC and CAC committee members for comments and suggestions.

B. Assessment Report - Glossary

Decided to add a short listing of terms in the assessment report.

C. Management and Contingency Plans

How to improve the plan to develop a better linkage among the differentagencies through the use of MOU’s.

Vic Wilford, BPH, recommended reinstating the Emergency Spill ResponseNetwork with the DEP- Office of Water Resources that was originally used.It is still active but it needs updated.

VI. CONSUMER CONFIDENCE REPORT (CCR) ADDITION

A. Starting in 1999, owners of community water systems will be required toprepare and distribute an annual Consumer Confidence Report (CCR). TheCCR must contain information about what is in the water and the source(s) ofthe water.

Vic Wilford, BPH, wanted to emphasize the importance of having the SWAPavailable to the public. The CCR requires each public water supply to makeavailable notification of the water.

VII. POSSIBLE FINANCIAL ASSISTANCE TO PUBLIC WATER SUPPLY SYSTEM

$1.2 million for assessment and delineation work.

Tom Holbrook, WVAWC, paperwork is hard for smaller systems. Suggestions: managements, smaller utilities, mini-grants, give to University schools,templates - training classes/seminars, and other sources of funding.

IX. ADJOURNMENT

The meeting was adjourned at 3:00 p.m. The next TAC and CAC meeting will be heldsome time in the spring after submittal of the SWAP draft.

C - 38

C - 39

CITIZENS ADVISORY COMMITTEE INVITATIONLETTER

C - 40

September 1, 1998

Re: Source Water Assessment ProgramC i t i z e n s ’ A d v i s o r y C o m m i t t e eMeeting

The West Virginia Bureau For Public Health, Department for Health and Human Resources(DHHR), the lead agency for the Source Water Assessment Program (SWAP), is committed todeveloping and implementing a source water assessment program in concert with affiliated inter- andintra-agency programs and interested stakeholders. The DHHR is currently convening the StateCitizens’ Advisory Committee and would like to invite you to participate. Your role as a memberof the Citizens’ Advisory Committee is very important and will address the appropriateness andeffectiveness of the program. The SWAP will primarily consist of source water delineation,contamination source inventory and a susceptibility analysis for each public water supply with publicinput throughout.

The mission and goal of the SWAP are to assess, preserve, and protect the state’s sourcewaters which are used to supply water for the state’s public water systems. The program is aspeciality component of the Safe Drinking Water Act and is integrated with the Wellhead ProtectionProgram and the West Virginia Watershed Management Framework which networks with many stateand federal agencies as well as other governmental entities. The stakeholder mosaic of the SWAPwill include and encourage full participation extending from the largest governmental entity throughlocal governments and individual members of the public. The goal of the SWAP is to preventdegradation of source waters which may preclude present and future users of our drinking watersupplies and to provide safe water in sufficient quantity to users.

We have convened the Technical Advisory Committee and will present their recommendationsand proposals to the Public Advisory Committee.

This letter is our invitation for you or an associate to attend the meeting. Please contactReuben Gillispie at 304-558-2981 as to your availability on September 17, 1998 and your acceptanceto participate on this committee. An alternate person from your agency could be just as valuable. Weappreciate receiving your response by September 10, 1998. If you prefer, you may send a writtenresponse to the address shown on the letterhead or fax a response to 304-558-0691.

C - 41

SWAP Citizens’ Advisory CommitteSeptember 1, 1998Page 2

Thank you for your interest in the Source Water Protection Program. We hope to see youSeptember 17, 1998 in Room 234, 815 Quarrier St., Charleston at 9:00 a.m. A map is enclosed foryour information.

Sincerely,

Reuben Gillispie, GeologistWellhead Protection ProgramEnvironmental Engineering Division

RJG/scwEnclosurepc: C. Russell Rader, Jr., P.E., Director - OEHS

Donald A. Kuntz, P.E., Director - EED T:\WP61WIN\WJT\SWAP\SWAPDR~1\C1_APPEN.WPD

C - 42

CITIZENS’ ADVISORY COMMITTEE COMPOSITION

C - 43

SOURCE WATER ASSESSMENT PROGRAMCITIZEN’S ADVISORY COMMITTEE

Ms. Helen GibbinsLeague of Women Voters6128 Giddeon StreetHuntington, West Virginia 25705

Mr. Pat BowenNatural Resource Conservation ServiceRoute 1, Box 503Philippi, West Virginia 26146

Ms. Laura SpadaroSierra ClubP.O. Box 2134Buckhannon, West Virginia 26201

Mr. Herbert AndrickSoil and Conservation Society75 High Street, Room 301 Morgantown, West Virginia 26505

Mr. Steve HannahWV Farm Bureau1 Red Rack RoadBuckhannon, West Virginia 26201

Ms. Cinda FrancisWV Forestry AssociationP.O. Box 718Ripley, West Virginia 25271

Ms. Karen PriceWV Manufacturers’ Association2001 Quarrier StreetCharleston, West Virginia 25311

C - 44

SOURCE WATER ASSESSMENT PROGRAMCITIZEN’S ADVISORY COMMITTEE

Mr. Ed CrumTrout Unlimited180 Oriole RoadFraziers Bottom, West Virginia 25082

Ms. Pam MerrittWest Virginia Rivers Coalition801 North Randolph AvenueElkins, West Virginia 26241

Mr. Bruce McDanielsLeague of MunicipalitiesP.O. Box 1428Fairmont, West Virginia 26555-1428

Dr. Carl Berryman, DVMDivision of Surveillance and Disease ControlBureau for Public Health1422 Washington Street, EastCharleston, West Virginia 25301-1978 Mr. George Hartman AARP1084 Highland DriveSt. Albans, West Virginia 25177

Mr. W. D. SmithRegional IV Planning Council500 B Main StreetSummersville, West Virginia 26651

Mr. Rick RobertsWest Virginia Rural Water AssociationLogan PSDWhite and Browning BuildingSuite 507Logan, West Virginia 25601

C - 45

CITIZENS ADVISORY COMMITTEE MEETINGSUMMARIES

PLEASE NOTE: THE CITIZENS’ ADVISORY COMMITTEE MERGED WITH THE TECHNICALADVISORY COMMITTEE AFTER THE SEPTEMBER 17, 1998 MEETING. PLEASE SEE THECOMBINED COMMITTEE SUMMARIES LOCATED IN THE TECHNICAL COMMITTEEMEETING SUMMARIES.

C - 46

MEETING SUMMARYWEST VIRGINIA SOURCE WATER ASSESSMENT AND PROTECTION PROGRAM

CITIZEN ADVISORY MEETINGSeptember 17, 1998

I. INTRODUCTION

A. Reuben Gillispie, West Virginia Bureau for Public Health (WVBPH)convened the Source Water Assessment Program (SWAP) Meeting at 10:00a.m. on September 17, 1998 in the Office of Environmental Services (OEHS)conference room in Charleston, West Virginia. The meeting began with eachof the SWAP - Citizen’s Advisory Committee Members introducingthemselves. A complete attendance list is attached at the end of the minutes.

II. GENERAL REVIEW OF THE SOURCE WATER ASSESSMENT PROGRAM

A. SAFE DRINKING WATER ACT (SDWA)

Don Kuntz, P.E., WVBPH, discussed the role of public participators -regulatory policy development. Decisions will be based on inputs. Involvingcitizens on the front end. He also gave an overview of the Safe DrinkingWater Act (SDWA) that was authorized in 1974. The 1996 amendments to theSDWA established the SWAP requirements. The Drinking Water StateRevolving Fund (DWSRF) is traditionally used to build or improve wastewatertreatment plants but was expanded to include SWAP.

B. MEMORANDUM OF UNDERSTANDING

The MOU’s will be updated with the participating agencies.

C. ELEMENTS OF THE SOURCE WATER ASSESSMENT PROGRAM

1. Elements

A. Duties of Federal, State, and Local Agencies

1. The Bureau for Public Health is the lead agencyresponsible for the Development and Implementationof SWAP.

C - 47

(a). Many State Federal, Local Agencies andPrivate Individuals will be involved in variousprogram aspects to protect the state’s waterfrom contamination.

B. Public Participation

1. Vital to the success of the program. A Technical andCitizens Advisory Committee will be established tohelp with the public participation aspect of the SWAP.

C. Program Implementation

There are three minimum requirements to implement the SWAP.They include:

A. Delineate the Source Water Protection Area

The Source Water Protection Areas is the total spatial area ofland surface contributing water to a drinking water intake (forground water and surface water systems).

(1). All Public Water Systems have to be delineated. Thisapplies to all ground and surface water systems.

(2). Use the Wellhead Protection Program (WHPP) 5 yearTravel of Time (TOT) for groundwater delineations.

(3). USGS will review and evaluate the currentgroundwater delineation techniques and new surfacewater techniques.

B. Inventory of potential sources of contamination

(1). Identify all significant contamination sources indelineated areas.

(2). Compile an organized inventory data list and mapshowing location.

C. Perform Susceptibility Analysis

C - 48

(1). Process for quantifying and prioritizing actual andpotential sources.

(2). USGS will review and evaluate the susceptibilityprocess.

2. Source Water Assessment Report

a. Each system(s) must have a brief report presenting the resultsto the public. This report may include hydrogeologic setting,maps of the delineated area, inventory and susceptibility.

3 . Source Water Protection - Management and Contingency Plans

a. In addition to the required delineations, source inventory andsusceptibility determination. An additional part of SWAP mayinclude local teams (help guide the process), managementmeasures (eliminate the potential threat) and contingencyplanning (short and long term replacement strategies). Howthis section will be incorporated into SWAP will be discussedat the next SWAP meeting.

III. GROUND WATER SOURCE WATER PROTECTION

A. Resource Characterization

Compile and evaluate existing information on West Virginia geology, groundwater resources, and public water systems.

Collection of existing regional and site specific hydrologic and well data.Examples of the types of information include hydrologic data such as theporosity, permeability, aquifer thickness, etc. Well data information wouldinclude the PWSID number, casing length, pumping rate, well diameter,aquifer type, etc.

Hope to set up a database that can be used by other state agencies.

We need accurate locations. We currently know about 80% of communitywells and only 10% non community wells. Planning dictates that we know thelocations accurately.

C - 49

B. Delineation

Guidelines were revised by the Technical Committee. These will be thechosen methods unless we hear differently.

1. The following guidelines will be followed to delineate a SWAP area.

Community System - If the system serves more than 500population the area is delineated by one of the WellheadProtection Program (WHPP) methods.

Bedrock Systems - Hydrogeologic Mapping

Karst Areas - Hydrogeologic Mapping

Mine Areas - Hydrogeologic Mapping

Alluvial Systems - Numerical or Analytical Mapping

If the systems serves less than 500 population the area has a interimfixed radius of 1500'.

Non-Transient - If the system serves more than 500population the area is delineated by one of the WHPPmethods.

If the systems serves less than 500 population the area has a interimfixed radius of 1000'.

Transient - If the system serves more than 500 population thearea is delineated by one of the WHPP methods.

If the systems serves less than 500 population the area has a interimfixed radius of 500'.

Please note that in a Karst area interim fixed radius will be2000' for less than 500 populations served.

Reuben asked the committee members to take this information back totheir agency to get additional input. This is an area for feedback. Ifthese methods are too restrictive or not protective enough, then thisneeds to be brought up beforehand.

C - 50

The decision of whether to use a interim fixed radius method or a moresophisticated method to delineation these smaller systems will bemade if it is determined necessary once additional reservoir data andthe initial inventory data is acquired.

Calculating the entire area that the water can come from in aparticular source is part of the delineation.

We are in the process of looking at computer modelsdepending on the time frame. Some questions that need to beanswered:

• Is there data available to run this program?• This system has to very well planned because people

may question your assumption• The technical committee should be responsible for

making system work. They can delineate the areas.We do the delineation in house using the analyticalmodeling.

One of the Citizen Advisory Members asked if the technicalcommittee is only there to provide verification of a systemonly?Bill Toomey, WVBPH said that none of the Wellhead planshave been questioned. The Technical Committee is used tohelp create a scientifically designed, well-thought out programthat will deal with most of the issues beforehand.

The Wellhead Protection Program uses the AnalyticalModeling.

The fixed radius method is fast, easy, and inexpensive.

Discussed the geologic settings for public water systems ofWest Virginia.

• discussion of the 6 Hydrologic Regimes in WVC limestone areas will pick up the Karst

Discussed the terminology for Basic Capture Zone Analysis.

Explained the EPA 5 year Time of Travel (TOT). Pumping a well in

C - 51

an alluvial setting we look at the 5 year TOT to delineation the area.Many of the other states use the 5 year TOT for groundwater systems.That is the minimum time set by the EPA.

Reviewed the Paden City WHPP Groundwater Model

2. Conjunctive Delineations - This will be done for systems with bothsurface and groundwater being pumped. Groundwater Under theDirect Influence (GUDI) of surface water systems are being determinedunder an existing program with WVBPH.

Hydraulic Connection with GroundwaterSurface water systems have additional requirements thangroundwater - filtration is one area.

The SWAP incorporates both surface water and ground water

3. Who will delineate the SWAP areas?

Staff from the WVBPH are expected to complete most of the SWAParea delineation’s for the ground systems.

The WHPP is only associated with groundwater systems not surfacewater. Therefore, the delineation requirements are the same.

It is an ongoing process; it does not end when the assessment is done.The delineations can be changed if circumstances change.

C. Potential Contaminant Survey

1. Contaminants of Concern - Reviewed the raw water contaminantsregulated and unregulated under the SDWA.

Key word is potential when discussing contaminant sources and areas.

What is in the water - chemicals and pathogens? Taste, visual, odorsare secondary M.C.L.

This is another handout that the committee members need to taketo their agencies for feedback/input.

Are there are any contaminants that are not regulated by the EPA that

C - 52

pose a concern?

Reviewed the classes of chemicals that can be in the water (handout)

One of the Citizen’s Advisory members asked who does the virusestesting? Bill Toomey, WVBPH, said that no one does presently.

Reviewed the Contaminant M.C.L. Code List and Significant SourcesHandout. Copies of this Maximum Contaminant Level list wererequested by the members.

2. Potential Contaminant Source Inventory

Identify all significant potential sources of contamination.

Compile and organize an inventory data list and map showinglocations.

a. General Survey Land Use will be put on a map

b. Inventory - Ground Water SystemsC Linking with DEP - to locate injection wells, USTs, etc.C Do not know the exact location, just the street addressC Data is general - Satellite photosC Provide a map with contaminant sourcesC Have a potential contaminant source inventory on fileC Obtained by the ownerC More detailed surveyC Checklist of potential sources - broken down in categories

Reuben Gillispie, WVBPH, asked the committee members totake this information back to their agency to get additionalinput.

D. Susceptibility Analysis

1. Process for quantifying and prioritizing actual and potential sources.Potential for a PWS’s to draw water contaminated by inventoriedsources at concentrations that would pose concern.C Narrative report - Will discuss how well a system is constructed.C Review of the Water Quality Data

C - 53

C Analysis of water tested is done on bottled water not raw water.C Water quality - how will it be tested.

IV. SURFACE WATER SOURCE WATER ASSESSMENT PROGRAM

A. Resource Characterization

For delineated Watershed Areas:

1. Ease at which surface runoff transported material can get into the stream.

Watershed SizeWatershed ShapeTerrain (topography and slope)

2. Potential for Surface Runoff

Soil TypeSoil Parameters

3. Movement of Water through the SWAP area:

Miles of StreamsAverage Stream GradientAverage RainfallAverage RunoffMaximum Time of Travel (Summer, Fall, Winter, Spring)

4. Water Quality

All available water quality chemical and biological data (WVDEP,EPA, Data Bases, Water Utilities) will be collected and used toprovide a direct pointer to a source of contamination.

B. Delineation

Delineation of the SWAP area to include the entire watershed area upstreamof the PWS’s intake structure, up to the boundary of the state borders.

Computer Program given to us by USGS will help determine how to make thecuts of all the watershed intakes. We are presently awaiting results from theUSGS.

C - 54

1. The recommendation for surface water delineations for surface waterdelineation are as follows:

Zone 1 - “Hot Zone” - width to be 1320 feet; length is 10 milesupstream; a more detailed survey is necessary with GPS location of allsources of concern.

Zone 2 - includes the entire watershed upstream, covers a large area.

2. Who will delineate the SWAP area?

Who will Delineate the SWAP areas?WVBPH may contract it to USGS. They have expertise in the SurfaceWater Areas. ORSANCO will use a twenty-five mile upstreamdistance. USGS will report whether this distance is conservative or tooshort for use instate.

Future delineations will be tied in to our in-house engineers. TheInterstate Commission on the Potomac River Basin has already askedus for cooperation with delineation and inventory data sets. Other out-of State groups will likely also ask us for our information.

C. Potential Contaminant Survey

Identify the potential sources and the risks involved.

All of the Sources identified through the inventory process are consideredpotential significant contaminant sources.

The committee members were asked to look over this table and to make anysuggestions.

Inventories are still going to be same as the Groundwater Systems. The landuse will be different in surface water systems.

D. Susceptibility

Inherent (open system with no confining layer, easy access for contaminantmovement and relatively short time of travel) all surface water source of publicdrinking water are susceptible to contamination.

C - 55

Degree based on the hydrologic, physical characteristics and review of thepotential source inventory.

Susceptibility analysis will consist of a narrative/charts to report the results tothe owners/operators of the PWS and the public.

The susceptibility analysis will be completed after the delineations and theinventories are completed.

V. ASSESSMENT REPORTS

Integrate the Hydrologic setting, the Land Cover and Potential Contaminant Sourcesand the System Construction in a format that will help identify areas for additionalevaluation and to direct management activities. This report will help the owner,operator or community understand how protected or under protected their drinkingwater source is. The information provided will also make them aware of the potentialthreats that exist within their source water assessment area that could, if not properlymanaged, impact their drinking water supply.

• Keep the reports simple.• Maps to be developed can be done by the WVBPH - We will have a plotter,

color printer, etc. Our agency will make the maps based on the information wehave available. The systems will amend the inventory information and give itback to us. We will work with the systems to help them develop theirmanagement plan.

• Weekly papers would be a good place to put information• Initial Release have a map

Follow-up with a repeat of the mapShow the changeGuidelinesDo it every 5 years and show the water quality changes

• Publish the information in newspapers or on the Internet

VI. MANAGEMENT AND CONTINGENCY PLANNING

This is an area for comments.

VII. WRAP-UP/NEXT MEETING

Asked the committee members to take the meeting information to your agency and getfeedback. We want it fax it to us. We would like to have the feedback/comments inabout a month - October 10, 1998.

C - 56

The Technical Meeting will be based on the suggestions taken from the CitizensAdvisory Committee. If you can supply additional information let us know.

Reuben Gillispie, WVBPH, asked the members if they wanted to meet again. Themembers agreed that they would supply the feedback requested and then it willdecided whether to have another meeting. Your feedback is essential for us todesign a model program. The attached questions were reviewed at the meetingand if you have any additional suggestions please submit at the next meeting.

The next meeting will be scheduled for Thursday, November 5, 1998 at 10:00 a.m. at the WestVirginia Water Development Authority Conference Room located at the Northgate Business Park.

C - 57

ADDITIONAL COMMITTEE COMMENTS

C - 58

Other Significant Responses to Source Water Assessment Program TAC andCAC Meetings Comments

This includes written comments. The major points of advice that were offered by the stakeholdersare listed below with reference to the appropriate section of this report for the EED response to thatadvice or question:

Could the DHHR get other agencies to work more closely with local SWAP committees/volunteersthrough new interagency MOU’s?

Please see The Wellhead Protection Program section that addressed this topic.

Non-Community systems using GW could have fixed radius WHPA.

Please see the Ground Water delineation section.

Susceptibility should be in a form of a report?

See susceptibility section of the SWAP report.

That the WV Planning Association and the State Emergency Planning Council should be keptinformed ?

Will add to the CAC committee or will at least be kept informed of the SWAP process.

Am concerned about public participation as volunteer inspection teams. Do you expect water plantmanagers to recruit and train volunteers?

The PWSS will serve as the focal point in the recruitment process of volunteers to perform theassessments. Will have a number of training seminars across the state to train and implement theassessment process.

What are the legal implications of local health departments attempting to regulate SWPA’s on privateland or enterprise?

The draft document in the Phase Two Management discusses the possible control measures for aSWAP area beyond the existing programs designed to regulate potential sources of contaminants.