Geology Reports⌕ Search

USGS · sir20115197

Source-water susceptibility assessment in Texas—Approach and methodology

Abstract

Public water systems provide potable water for the public's use. The Safe Drinking Water Act amendments of 1996 required States to prepare a source-water susceptibility assessment (SWSA) for each public water system (PWS). States were required to determine the source of water for each PWS, the origin of any contaminant of concern (COC) monitored or to be monitored, and the susceptibility of the public water system to COC exposure, to protect public water supplies from contamination. In Texas, the Texas Commission on Environmental Quality (TCEQ) was responsible for preparing SWSAs for the more than 6,000 public water systems, representing more than 18,000 surface-water intakes or groundwater wells. The U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) worked in cooperation with TCEQ to develop the Source Water Assessment Program (SWAP) approach and methodology. Texas' SWAP meets all requirements of the Safe Drinking Water Act and ultimately provides the TCEQ with a comprehensive tool for protection of public water systems from contamination by up to 247 individual COCs. TCEQ staff identified both the list of contaminants to be assessed and contaminant threshold values (THR) to be applied. COCs were chosen because they were regulated contaminants, were expected to become regulated contaminants in the near future, or were unregulated but thought to represent long-term health concerns. THRs were based on maximum contaminant levels from U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA)'s National Primary Drinking Water Regulations. For reporting purposes, COCs were grouped into seven contaminant groups: inorganic compounds, volatile organic compounds, synthetic organic compounds, radiochemicals, disinfection byproducts, microbial organisms, and physical properties. Expanding on the TCEQ's definition of susceptibility, subject-matter expert working groups formulated the SWSA approach based on assumptions that natural processes and human activities contribute COCs in quantities that vary in space and time; that increased levels of COC-producing activities within a source area may increase susceptibility to COC exposure; and that natural and manmade conditions within the source area may increase, decrease, or have no observable effect on susceptibility to COC exposure. Incorporating these assumptions, eight SWSA components were defined: identification, delineation, intrinsic susceptibility, point- and nonpoint-source susceptibility, contaminant occurrence, area-of-primary influence, and summary components. Spatial datasets were prepared to represent approximately 170 attributes or indicators used in the assessment process. These primarily were static datasets (approximately 46 gigabytes (GB) in size). Selected datasets such as PWS surface-water-intake or groundwater-well locations and potential source of contamination (PSOC) locations were updated weekly. Completed assessments were archived, and that database is approximately 10 GB in size. SWSA components currently (2011) are implemented in the Source Water Assessment Program-Decision Support System (SWAP-DSS) computer software, specifically developed to produce SWSAs. On execution of the software, the components work to identify the source of water for the well or intake, assess intrinsic susceptibility of the water- supply source, assess susceptibility to contamination with COCs from point and nonpoint sources, identify any previous detections of COCs from existing water-quality databases, and summarize the results. Each water-supply source's susceptibility is assessed, source results are weighted by source capacity (when a PWS has multiple sources), and results are combined into a single SWSA for the PWS.'SWSA reports are generated using the software; during 2003, more than 6,000 reports were provided to PWS operators and the public. The ability to produce detailed or summary reports for individual sources, and detailed or summary reports for a PWS, by COC or COC group was a unique capability of SWAP-DSS. In 2004, the TCEQ began a rotating schedule for SWSA wherein one-third of PWSs statewide would be assessed annually, or sooner if protection-program activities deemed it necessary, and that schedule has continued to the present. Cooperative efforts by the TCEQ and the USGS for SWAP software maintenance and enhancements ended in 2011 with the TCEQ assuming responsibility for all tasks.

Explore related subjects

90° N90° S · 180° W ← longitude → 180° E
Source-reported bounding extent: 25.75° to 36.5° latitude; -107° to -95° longitude. This indicates report coverage, not an exact sampling location. View area on OpenStreetMap.

Keep this discovery

Explore connections, maps & timelines

BibTeXRIS

Randy L. Ulery, John E. Meyer, Robert W. Andren, Jeremy K. Newson. 2011. Source-water susceptibility assessment in Texas—Approach and methodology. https://doi.org/10.3133/sir20115197

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related USGS reports

Baseline water-quality inventory and summary for the Paterson Great Falls National Historical Park, New Jersey

The Paterson Great Falls National Historical Park (PAGR), established in 2011 in the City of Paterson, New Jersey, contains many cultural, historical, and natural resources. Because of the PAGR’s young age and limited resources, a long record of natural resource data is not available for use to guide future park management and planning decisions. A detailed natural resource inventory was identified as an immediate need in the “Foundation Document—Paterson Great Falls National Historical Park,” given the history of extensive industrial activity throughout the PAGR and the Passaic River Basin. The U.S. Geological Survey, in cooperation with the National Park Service and the Urban Waters Federal Partnership for the Lower Passaic River, inventoried water-quality monitoring efforts and compiled historical water-quality data from secondary data sources to define baseline conditions in the PAGR and the surrounding study area. This report documents the methods used to harmonize water-quality data aggregated from multiple sources for the PAGR study area. Procedures implemented during data harmonization include compiling data from multiple sources, assessing the dataset for completeness, addressing metadata concerns, and creating a consistent and quality-assured dataset for future analysis. The harmonized dataset contains 14 aggregated surface-water sites, 1,103 individual sampling days, and 32,000 water-quality records throughout the period of record defined for this study (1952–2021). Summary statistics and comparison to water-quality criteria are provided for focus parameters that can support PAGR management, including field properties, suspended material, total dissolved solids, specific conductance, chloride, sulfate, Escherichia coli, nutrients, contaminants of concern related to fish consumption advisories, and litter and floatable debris. A spatial data gap was identified for the recreational area near the base of the Great Falls and immediately downstream from a known combined sewer overflow discharge location. Analytic data gaps were identified for continuous streamflow and water-quality parameters, floatable debris characterization, and harmful algal blooms identification. Continuous collection of contaminants of concern was identified as a temporal data gap, as these parameters were not consistently collected within the study area. The water-quality data synthesis and summary presented in this report can assist PAGR staff in understanding the complex baseline water resources within the study area and can serve as a baseline to design future water-quality monitoring efforts and evaluate changes in water quality over time. The harmonized dataset, as well as future New Jersey Department of Environmental Protection and New Jersey Harbor Discharge Group monitoring data and assessments, can also be used to examine the status and trends in surface-water quality, support compliance with the Clean Water Act (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), and further investigate changes to park water resources that can affect ecological and human health.

New Jersey↗

Slip tendency and dilation tendency of Quaternary faults in the Great Basin region, Arizona, California, Idaho, Nevada, Oregon, Utah, and Wyoming

This report presents the results of slip tendency and dilation tendency analysis of Quaternary faults in the Great Basin region, in the states of Arizona, California, Idaho, Nevada, Oregon, Utah, and Wyoming. This effort was undertaken as part of two studies: the U.S. Department of Energy Geothermal Technologies Office-funded Innovative Geothermal Exploration through Novel Investigations of Undiscovered Systems (INGENIOUS) project, which is a multidisciplinary, multi-institution effort to develop new methodologies and best practices to accelerate the discovery of new, commercially viable hydrothermal resources; and the U.S. Geological Survey Geothermal Resources Investigations Project. The goal of this work is to identify faults and fault segments that are appropriately oriented to be stress-loaded for slip or to dilate under the ambient stress conditions. Both conditions may make such faults more likely to host permeability and fluid flow relative to other faults in the region. Slip tendency and dilation tendency were calculated for all fault segments in the study area from the U.S. Geological Survey Quaternary Fault and Fold Database. Results demonstrate that faults with high slip tendency and dilation tendency are common in the Great Basin region. The areas containing many high slip tendency and dilation tendency fault segments are associated with high strain rates. These areas also host a relatively high proportion of the known hydrothermal systems. This indicates that faults with high slip tendency and dilation tendency in areas with high strain-rate are potentially most prospective for hosting hydrothermal systems. The database published in coordination with this report contains the slip tendency and dilation tendency results data, including the fault geometry and stress data used to calculate these quantities, for both the Great Basin study area and the smaller INGENIOUS study area.

Arizona, California, Idaho, Nevada, Oregon, Utah, ↗

A spatial analysis of the groundwater emergence flood hazard in Long Island, New York, and coastal areas surrounding Long Island Sound in New York, Connecticut, and Rhode Island

Long Island, New York, and nearby coastal areas surrounding Long Island Sound are densely populated and, like other coastal areas, are susceptible to flooding from several potential sources, including stormwater from precipitation events, tidal flooding and storm surge, and groundwater emergence flooding. Groundwater emergence fooding refers to the intersection of a rising water table with land surface or critical infrastructure. Many studies of flood drivers either neglect or only briefly discuss how shallow groundwater conditions may contribute to or exacerbate flood conditions. As a part of a comprehensive study of compound flood hazards in the coastal areas of Long Island and Long Island Sound, a spatial analysis was completed by the U.S. Geological Survey, in cooperation with the Environmental Protection Agency’s Long Island Sound Partnership, formerly called the Long Island Sound Study, using available regional datasets to characterize the potential hazard for groundwater emergence flooding. The approximately 3,100 square mile study area was subdivided into 11,407 grid cells that were 900 meters by 900 meters (approximately 3,000 feet by 3,000 feet), for the purpose of integrating the spatial datasets to calculate and map the groundwater emergence flood hazard. The depth to the water table, hydrologic soil groups, and National Land Cover Database were harmonized to the common grid. A groundwater emergence flood hazard score was calculated for each grid cell for current average conditions following a set of rules accounting for the depth to the water table and the percentage of area within each cell with slow infiltrating soils. A scenario with a higher sea-level position was also calculated for the Long Island part of the study area. The calculated groundwater emergence flood hazard score was reviewed in conjunction with the National Land Cover Database to identify developed areas and associated infrastructure that may be at risk of potential groundwater emergence flooding. Study results indicate that the groundwater emergence flood hazard is highest in coastal areas and near surface water where the water table is close to ground surface. Inland areas away from surface waterbodies are not likely to be exposed to groundwater emergence flooding. For Long Island, in the scenario with higher sea-level position, a greater groundwater emergence flood hazard is calculated for some locations closer to the coast and where land is submerged. Away from the coast and surface-water drainage, the groundwater emergence flood hazard is similar between the current average sea-level condition and the higher sea-level position scenario.

Connecticut, New York, Rhode Island↗