Deriving Drinking Water Resources for Unusually Sensitive Areas

1999 ◽  
Vol 1999 (1) ◽  
pp. 825-827
Author(s):  
Joanne N. Halls ◽  
Miles O. Hayes ◽  
Jacqueline Michel ◽  
Christina Sames

ABSTRACT The Research and Special Programs Administration (RSPA) of the Department of Transportation is required to identify areas that are unusually sensitive to environmental damage in the event of a hazardous liquid pipeline accident, in accordance with pipeline safety laws (49 U.S.C. Section 60109). Accordingly, workshops were held with regulatory agencies, pipeline operators, and the public during which a process was developed to identify “unusually sensitive areas” (USAs) for drinking water resources. This process, which has been adopted by RSPA, consists of first identifying environmentally sensitive drinking water resources and other primary concerns, and then applying the following five filtering criteria to determine which of the drinking water source locations should be USAs:, Filter Criterion #1. If the public water system is a Transient Noncommunity Water System (TNCWS), the water intakes shall not be designated as USAs. Filter Criterion #2. For Community Water Systems (CWS) and Nontransient Noncommunity Water Systems (NTNCWS) that obtain their water supply primarily from surface water sources, and do not have an adequate alternative source of water, the water intakes shall be designated as USAs. Filter Criterion #3. For CWS and NTNCWS that obtain their water primarily from ground water sources, where the source aquifer is identified as a Class I or Class IIa, as defined in Pettyjohn et al. (1991), and do not have an adequate alternative source of water, these wells shall be designated as USAs. The wellhead protection area for each well will be used to define the area of the USA. Filter Criterion #4. For CWS and NTNCWS that obtain their water primarily from ground water sources, where the source aquifer is identified as a Class IIb, IIc, III, or U, as defined in Pettyjohn et al. (1991), these wells shall not be designated as USAs. Filter Criterion #5. For CWS and NTNCWS that obtain their water primarily from ground water sources, where the source aquifer is identified as a Class I or Class IIa, as defined in Pettyjohn et al. (1991), and the aquifer is designated as a sole source aquifer, these wells are also USAs, an area twice the wellhead protection area shall be designated as a USA.

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Polona Vreča ◽  
Klara Nagode ◽  
Tjaša Kanduč ◽  
Branka Bračič Železnik ◽  
Brigita Jamnik

<p>The key to understand the deterioration of the quality of urban water resources is to know the impact of urbanization on the entire waterway, which can change dramatically during the extreme climatic events. Various geochemical parameters, including stable isotope ratios of light elements (H, O, C), represent an important tool to investigate water sources, transport routes, and the mixing of individual components of the water cycle. They are indispensable in urban hydrology, both for characterizing drinking water resources and for evaluating changes within a complex water system.</p><p>In Slovenia, the majority of the population is supplied with drinking water from groundwater. In Ljubljana, the capital city of Slovenia, groundwater represents the main drinking water resource.  Therefore, the knowledge and understanding of the groundwater vulnerability is important for the protection and management of water resources. In Ljubljana, the water is supplied through the central water system (WSS), more than 1.000 km long, according to the legislation and the latest standards from five different wellfields (Kleče, Hrastje, Brest, Jarški prod and Šentvid). Despite the established water protection areas, the water supply areas are exposed to the pressures of urbanization, industry, transport, agriculture and old environmental burdens, which are often unknown.</p><p>In the past, various short-term isotopic studies have been conducted and the Ljubljansko polje and Ljubljansko barje aquifers were characterized. In addition, the sources, paths and interactions of water were determined and the obtained data were used to improve the conceptual model.</p><p>However, isotopic studies of water circulation in the drinking water supply system (WSS), which would cover the simultaneous characterization of water sources and changes within the WSS, have not been performed so far. In order to assess the usefulness of isotopes more systematically, we performed the first more detail sampling of water from WSS of Ljubljana in autumn 2018. Sampling was carried out at 103 locations that were selected according to the type of facility in the WSS (i.e. 41 wells, 7 joint exits from water pumping station, 22 water reservoirs, 2  water treatment locations, 13 fountains, and 19 taps) and according to 9 different WSS areas. Additional samples were collected on River Sava, important infiltration source of groundwater, and at outflow from Ljubljana central wastewater treatment plant. This contribution focuses on presentation of changes of different parameters (i.e. temperature, electrical conductivity, pH, total alkalinity, δ<sup>18</sup>O, δ<sup>2</sup>H and δ<sup>13</sup>C) in WSS of Ljubljana.</p>


Water ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 13 (6) ◽  
pp. 860
Author(s):  
Konstantinos Simeonidis ◽  
Manassis Mitrakas

Elevated concentrations of heavy metals in drinking water resources and industrial or urban wastewater pose a serious threat to human health and the equilibrium of ecosystems [...]


2011 ◽  
Vol 84 (1) ◽  
pp. 20-29 ◽  
Author(s):  
Kristen E. Gibson ◽  
Yayi Guo ◽  
James T. Schissler ◽  
Melissa C. Opryszko ◽  
Kellogg J. Schwab

2015 ◽  
Vol 15 (6) ◽  
pp. 1405-1413 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ivan Muñoz ◽  
Erik de Vries ◽  
Janneke Wittebol ◽  
Jens Aamand

A prospective environmental life cycle assessment (LCA) and financial cost assessment is performed to the application of bioaugmentation to sand filters in Danish waterworks, to remove 2,6-dichlorobenzamide (BAM) from drinking water resources. Based on pilot-scale and laboratory-scale data, we compare bioaugmentation to current alternative strategies, namely granular activated carbon (GAC) adsorption, and well re-location. Both assessments identified well re-location as the least preferred option, however, this result is very sensitive to the distance from the waterworks to the new well. When bioaugmentation is compared to GAC, the former has a lower impact in 13 impact categories, but if immobilized bacteria are used, the impacts are higher than for GAC in all impact categories. On the other hand, from a cost perspective bioaugmentation appears to be preferable to GAC only if immobilized bacteria are used.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document