joint groundwater report - Texas Commission on Environmental ...

More documents

Recommendations

Info

Describing an agency's enforcement actions presents only half the regulatory picture. Enforcement isineffective if the required corrective actions are not carried out. Therefore, agency activities dealing withcontamination incidents are assigned an activity status code. This code represents the current actionaddressing the assessment and mitigation of the contamination case. These two indicators (the enforcementstatus and activity status codes) are plotted graphically as a matrix to illustrate their combined effect on theenforcement status of each contamination case. The results of each agency's table are summarized in a matrix,the enforcement status summary, at the end of each <strong>groundwater</strong> contamination case table. The enforcementstatus matrix, enforcement status codes, and activity status codes are discussed in detail in the section entitledUsers’ Guide on pages 23 through 29. Specific enforcement actions are typically described in each agency'sprogram description.All of the 7,459 cases listed in the Appendix have documented <strong>groundwater</strong> contamination summarized inFigure 1. The activity status for each case is identified in the tables. "No activity" has occurred in 34 <strong>report</strong>edcases which are awaiting confirmation of contamination. Detection of contamination is being confirmed(validated) in 1,100 cases. The largest number of cases (3,911) are involved in ongoing investigations.Additionally, there are 311 cases which are in corrective action planning. Action has been implemented in518 cases and there are 348 cases which have an activity status of "monitor action.” No further action isnecessary for 1228 cases that are designated as "action completed." No activity status was given for 9 caseswhere information was not provided.The total number of, and activity status for, <strong>groundwater</strong> contamination cases documented and identified bythe TGPC in this and previous <strong>report</strong>s are tabulated in Figure 1. Figure 2a is a graphical representation of thetotal number of documented contamination cases and the number of new cases of contamination, as well asthe number of sites where ongoing investigation is occurring. Figure 2b is a graphical representation of thehistorical activity status of <strong>groundwater</strong> contamination cases.Several general observations can be drawn from the limited data represented in Figures 1, 2a, and 2b. Thelimited data do not allow for forecasting of probable trends. In addition, the use of the term "trend" may betoo definitive, and should only be considered as a general observation of the historic data compiled to date.The dramatic increase in the total number of contamination cases up to 1992 was closely related to releasedetection monitoring requirements in the TNRCC’s Petroleum Storage Tank (PST) Program. A majority ofthe milestone dates for the implementation of PST release detection monitoring were achieved during thistime-frame. A similar increase has resumed since 1996, due to initiation of milestone deadlines related todetection monitoring and cleanup expense reimbursement.6
Figure 1. Groundwater Contamination Case History TableACTIVITY 1989 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997STATUSTOTAL 2241 3191 4759 5597 5646 5675 5849 6427 7459CASESNEW -- 1303 1247 998 583 376 421 992 1356CASESNO -- 12 8 2 9 12 21 28 34ACTIVITYCONTAMINATION 1237 1349 1717 1284 1407 1598 1481 1163 1100CONFIRMEDONGOING 401 1178 1657 2195 2138 2069 2153 3093 3911INVESTIGATIONCORRECTIVE ACTION 48 85 454 825 749 760 780 674 311PLANNINGACTION 301 329 408 524 717 732 743 663 518IMPLEMENTEDMONITOR -- 193 324 466 264 255 278 296 348ACTIONACTION 254 45 172 273 342 226 371 493 461COMPLETEDNO STATUS -- -- 19 28 20 23 22 17 9GIVENNote: The numbers indicated in the 1997 data include information on the 121 multiple-listed cases.Historically, the number of new <strong>groundwater</strong> contamination cases documented each year is greater than thenumber of cases in which action was completed during the same year. This trend has held since the initialpublication of the <strong>report</strong>. The number of new cases had annually decreased up to 1994, but increased in 1995,in 1996, and again in 1997. These increases are chiefly attributed to increased release detection activity in theTNRCC’s PST program. The reversal is also partially attributed to new cases being <strong>report</strong>ed under theVoluntary Cleanup Program of the TNRCC, established in 1995. The number of cases where action has beencompleted has annually increased (with exceptions in 1994, due to a lack of funding in the PST Program, anda slight decline in 1997). The elevated number of cases where action had been completed in the initial <strong>report</strong>was cumulative up to the end of 1989 (i.e., this <strong>report</strong>ing period was open-ended on the front).7
Page 5: Table of ContentsACRONYMS .........
Page 8 and 9: ACRONYMSAgencies, Divisions, and Pr
Page 10 and 11: The report further
Page 12 and 13: groundwater qualit
Page 16 and 17: Figure 2a. Groundwater Contaminatio
Page 19 and 20: GROUNDWATER PROTECTIONThe following
Page 21 and 22: core program compliance, thus provi
Page 23 and 24: ability to remove or treat all cont
Page 25 and 26: approach that will expedite remedia
Page 27 and 28: Reporting Unauthorized Discharges a
Page 29 and 30: county judges and county health ent
Page 31 and 32: USER’S GUIDEThe remaining portion
Page 33 and 34: Figure 3. Contamination Case Descri
Page 35 and 36: Figure 4. Enforcement Status Matrix
Page 37 and 38: Activity Status CodesOnce g
Page 39 and 40: GROUNDWATER PROTECTIONPROGRAM DESCR
Page 41 and 42: Status of Groundwater Monitoring Pr
Page 43 and 44: Industrial and Hazardous Waste Divi
Page 45 and 46: Since 1975, when the first Class II
Page 47 and 48: supplies from IHW's Class I Undergr
Page 49 and 50: 29 chemical parameters. Subsequent
Page 51 and 52: due to completed action from this a
Page 53 and 54: Status of Groundwater Monitoring Pr
Page 55 and 56: state agencies which have jurisdict
Page 57: systems have 8,131 entry points sup
Page 60: Figure 7. Texas Wa
Page 63 and 64: The RCT also responds to citizen co
Page 65 and 66:
aquifers and stream baseflow. At th
Page 67 and 68:
Texas Department o
Page 69 and 70:
Texas State Soil a
Page 71 and 72:
Texas Alliance of
Page 73 and 74:
Prior to the plugging of six monito
Page 75 and 76:
egan a research study of the fresh
Page 77 and 78:
High Plains Underground Water Conse
Page 79 and 80:
Hill Country Underground Water Cons
Page 81 and 82:
An artesian brine aquifer called th
Page 83 and 84:
Plateau Underground Water Conservat
Page 85 and 86:
effort will allow the district to c
Page 87 and 88:
and methods to better evaluate wher
Page 89:
Texas Department o
Page 93 and 94:
Table 1Texas Natur
Page 95 and 96:
TABLE 1GROUNDWATER CONTAMINATION CA
Page 97 and 98:
Page 99 and 100:
Page 101 and 102:
Page 103 and 104:
Page 105 and 106:
Page 107 and 108:
Page 109 and 110:
Page 111 and 112:
Page 113 and 114:
Page 115 and 116:
Page 117 and 118:
Page 119 and 120:
Page 121 and 122:
Page 123 and 124:
Page 125 and 126:
Page 127 and 128:
Page 129 and 130:
Page 131 and 132:
Page 133 and 134:
Page 135 and 136:
Page 137 and 138:
Page 139 and 140:
Page 141 and 142:
Page 143 and 144:
Page 145 and 146:
Page 147 and 148:
Page 149 and 150:
Page 151 and 152:
Page 153 and 154:
Page 155 and 156:
Page 157 and 158:
Page 159 and 160:
Page 161 and 162:
Page 163 and 164:
Page 165 and 166:
Page 167 and 168:
Page 169 and 170:
Page 171 and 172:
Page 173 and 174:
Page 175 and 176:
Page 177 and 178:
Page 179 and 180:
Page 181 and 182:
Page 183 and 184:
Page 185 and 186:
Page 187 and 188:
Page 189 and 190:
Page 191 and 192:
Page 193 and 194:
Page 195 and 196:
Page 197 and 198:
Page 199 and 200:
Page 201 and 202:
Page 203 and 204:
Page 205 and 206:
Page 207 and 208:
Page 209 and 210:
Page 211 and 212:
Page 213 and 214:
Page 215 and 216:
Page 217 and 218:
Page 219 and 220:
Page 221 and 222:
Page 223 and 224:
Page 225 and 226:
Page 227 and 228:
Page 229 and 230:
Page 231 and 232:
Page 233 and 234:
Page 235 and 236:
Page 237 and 238:
Page 239 and 240:
Page 241 and 242:
Page 243 and 244:
Page 245 and 246:
Page 247 and 248:
Page 249 and 250:
Page 251 and 252:
Page 253 and 254:
Page 255 and 256:
Page 257 and 258:
Page 259 and 260:
Page 261 and 262:
Page 263 and 264:
Page 265 and 266:
Page 267 and 268:
Page 269 and 270:
Page 271 and 272:
Page 273 and 274:
Page 275 and 276:
Page 277 and 278:
Page 280 and 281:
Table 2Railroad Commission<
Page 282 and 283:
Page 284 and 285:
Page 286 and 287:
Page 289 and 290:
Table 3Texas Allia
Page 291 and 292:
Page 294 and 295:
APPENDICESAppendix 1. Texas
Page 296 and 297:
Appendix 1. Texas
Page 298 and 299:
Texas State Soil a
Page 300 and 301:
Appendix 2. Texas
Page 302 and 303:
Appendix 3. Groundwater Classificat
Page 304 and 305:
Figure 15. Groundwater Classificati
Page 306 and 307:
Appendix 4. Texas
Page 308 and 309:
Appendix 5. TNRCC Spill Prevention
Page 310 and 311:
working days of the discovery of th
Page 312 and 313:
A-19
Page 314 and 315:
A-21
Page 316 and 317:
A-23
Page 318 and 319:
Appendix 7. Agency and District Con
Page 320 and 321:
Edwards Aquifer AuthorityEmerald Un
Page 322 and 323:
Appendix 8. Agency Central Records
Page 324 and 325:
Appendix 9. Other Reports and Publi
Page 326 and 327:
impact on the quality of the state'
Page 328:
This report docume
show all

joint groundwater report - Texas Commission on Environmental ...

Create successful ePaper yourself

Delete template?

Save as template?