DOCSLIB.ORG

Groundwater Resource Guide

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Groundwater Resource Guide Oregon Public Water Systems Groundwater Resource Guide For Drinking Water Source Protection October 2017 Version 1.0 Oregon Department of Environmental Quality Environmental Solutions Division Watershed Management Oregon Health Authority Center for Health Protection Drinking Water Services A Call to Action - A Recommitment to Assessing and Protecting Sources of Drinking Water “Our vision…Federal, state, and local actions reflect the high value of safe drinking water: the high value of drinking water is widely recognized at all levels of government and among the general public…” (Appendix 1, Source Water Collaborative, 2014) This report prepared by: Oregon Department of Environmental Quality Environmental Solutions Division Watershed Management Section 811 SW 6th Avenue Portland, OR 97204 1-800-452-4011 www.oregon.gov/deq Contact: Sheree Stewart [email protected] NOTE: This document is “Version 1.0” and dated October 2017. It will be made available on DEQ’s Drinking Water Protection website in October 2017. DEQ anticipates there will be frequent revisions and updates on this document. Please feel free to make suggestions for improvements so that we can make the document more valuable to the public water systems in Oregon. Groundwater Resource Guide TABLE OF CONTENTS PROJECT JUSTIFICATION EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 1.0 DRINKING WATER REGULATORY OVERVIEW ...........................................5 Safe Drinking Water Act .........................................................................................................5 Clean Water Act .....................................................................................................................6 Groundwater Under the Direct Influence of Surface Water .................................................7 2.0 GROUNDWATER CHARACTERIZATION AND RISKS ...................................8 Groundwater Susceptibility ...................................................................................................9 Oregon Public Water Systems ...............................................................................................11 Source Water Assessments ..............................................................................................11 Updated Source Water Assessments ..............................................................................12 Using Oregon Data to Identify Priorities ................................................................................13 Nitrate Data and Susceptibility ........................................................................................19 Pesticide Data and Susceptibility .....................................................................................26 3.0 PARTNERS, RESOURCES, AND FUNDS ......................................................30 Technical Assistance - Partner Organizations by County.......................................................30 Resources and Funds .............................................................................................................36 4.0 PLACE-BASED PLANNING FOR SOURCE WATER .......................................51 Planning Process for Protection .............................................................................................52 Data Available to Support Groundwater Protection Efforts..................................................54 5.0 POLLUTANT REDUCTION TOOLS ...............................................................57 Land Cover Maps ...................................................................................................................58 Urban Homeowners and Pesticides .......................................................................................61 Nitrate Leaching Potential Rating ..........................................................................................62 Common Crop-Pesticide Associations ...................................................................................70 Conservation Practices ...........................................................................................................77 Nutrient Management ...........................................................................................................77 Potential Goals and Outcomes for Using Tools .....................................................................79 6.0 LAND USES AND REGULATORY AUTHORITIES ..........................................79 Aggregate & Mineral Mining / Extraction Wells ....................................................................80 Agricultural Lands ..................................................................................................................81 Commercial and Industrial Lands ..........................................................................................82 Federal Lands .........................................................................................................................82 Forest Lands ...........................................................................................................................83 Onsite Septic Systems ............................................................................................................84 Pesticide Regulations .............................................................................................................85 Private Domestic Wells ..........................................................................................................87 Public Drinking Water Wells ..................................................................................................89 Residential Lands ...................................................................................................................90 Water Quality Permits ...........................................................................................................90 7.0 RELATED WATER QUALITY ISSUES/PROJECTS ..........................................91 Climate Change Impacts ........................................................................................................91 Groundwater Management Areas .........................................................................................92 Total Maximum Daily Loads ..................................................................................................93 Statewide Toxics Monitoring and Assessment ......................................................................93 Sole Source Aquifer Protection Program ..............................................................................94 Collaborative Projects in Agriculture .....................................................................................94 Corrosivity and Lead Exposure ..............................................................................................94 Other Example Groundwater Projects ...................................................................................96 8.0 REFERENCES .............................................................................................98 TABLES Table 1. Factors Influencing Pesticide Transport and Groundwater Vulnerability ...................... 29 Table 2. Example Land Characteristics and Cover Identified through Imagery............................ 59 Table 3. Example Nitrate Leaching Potential Data Summary ....................................................... 64 Table 4. Common Crop-Pesticide Associations in Oregon............................................................ 71 FIGURES Figure 1. Drinking Water Source Areas for Public Water Systems Using Groundwater .............. 10 Figure 2. Approximate Percentage of Land Uses within Drinking Water Source Areas ............... 15 Figure 3. Compilation of Oregon Data for Nitrates in Groundwater ............................................ 21 Figure 4. Statewide Predicted Groundwater Vulnerability to Nitrate Contamination ................. 23 Figure 5. Statewide Nitrate Leaching Potential – Non-irrigated .................................................. 25 Figure 6. Percentage of Pesticide Active Ingredient by Land Use / Activity in Oregon ................ 28 Figure 7. Process Diagram for Drinking Water Source Protection ............................................... 53 Figure 8. Land Cover Map - Example ............................................................................................ 60 Figure 9. Nitrate Leaching Potential Map – Example ................................................................... 63 APPENDICES APPENDIX 1. Source Water Collaborative -- Call to Action ......................................................... 102 APPENDIX 2. Pollutant Reduction Strategies for Land Uses / Activities ..................................... 105 APPENDIX 3. Categorical Crop-to-Pesticide Table ...................................................................... 120 APPENDIX 4. Corrosivity Potential – Oregon Monitoring Data Map .......................................... 121 APPENDIX 5. Drinking Water Protection Websites..................................................................... 122 PROJECT JUSTIFICATION Why is there a need for a “Groundwater Resource Guide”? Oregon faces many challenges with water quantity, water quality, and ecosystem needs. Oregon’s people rely upon water to drink, to irrigate and grow food, to supply livestock, to build products, to move goods, to recreate, to produce energy. Clean water is essential to Oregon’s environmental health—for the trees, native plants, wetlands, aquatic life, and human health.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Evaluating Vapor Intrusion Pathways
    Evaluating Vapor Intrusion Pathways Guidance for ATSDR’s Division of Community Health Investigations October 31, 2016 Contents Acronym List ........................................................................................................................................................................... 1 Introduction ........................................................................................................................................................................... 2 What are the potential health risks from the vapor intrusion pathway? ............................................................................... 2 When should a vapor intrusion pathway be evaluated? ........................................................................................................ 3 Why is it so difficult to assess the public health hazard posed by the vapor intrusion pathway? .......................................... 3 What is the best approach for a public health evaluation of the vapor intrusion pathway? ................................................. 5 Public health evaluation.......................................................................................................................................................... 5 Vapor intrusion evaluation process outline ............................................................................................................................ 8 References… …......................................................................................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • National Primary Drinking Water Regulations
    National Primary Drinking Water Regulations Potential health effects MCL or TT1 Common sources of contaminant in Public Health Contaminant from long-term3 exposure (mg/L)2 drinking water Goal (mg/L)2 above the MCL Nervous system or blood Added to water during sewage/ Acrylamide TT4 problems; increased risk of cancer wastewater treatment zero Eye, liver, kidney, or spleen Runoff from herbicide used on row Alachlor 0.002 problems; anemia; increased risk crops zero of cancer Erosion of natural deposits of certain 15 picocuries Alpha/photon minerals that are radioactive and per Liter Increased risk of cancer emitters may emit a form of radiation known zero (pCi/L) as alpha radiation Discharge from petroleum refineries; Increase in blood cholesterol; Antimony 0.006 fire retardants; ceramics; electronics; decrease in blood sugar 0.006 solder Skin damage or problems with Erosion of natural deposits; runoff Arsenic 0.010 circulatory systems, and may have from orchards; runoff from glass & 0 increased risk of getting cancer electronics production wastes Asbestos 7 million Increased risk of developing Decay of asbestos cement in water (fibers >10 fibers per Liter benign intestinal polyps mains; erosion of natural deposits 7 MFL micrometers) (MFL) Cardiovascular system or Runoff from herbicide used on row Atrazine 0.003 reproductive problems crops 0.003 Discharge of drilling wastes; discharge Barium 2 Increase in blood pressure from metal refineries; erosion 2 of natural deposits Anemia; decrease in blood Discharge from factories; leaching Benzene
    [Show full text]
  • Groundwater Overdraft, Electricity, and Wrong Incentives : Evidence from Mexico
    Groundwater Overdraft, Electricity, and Wrong Incentives : Evidence from Mexico Vincente Ruiz WP 2016.05 Suggested citation: V. Ruiz (2016). Groundwater Overdraft, Electricity, and Wrong Incentives : Evidence from Mexico. FAERE Working Paper, 2016.05. ISSN number: 2274-5556 www.faere.fr Groundwater Overdraft, Electricity, and Wrong Incentives: Evidence from Mexico by Vicente Ruiz⇤ Last version: January 2016 Abstract Groundwater overdraft is threatening the sustainability of an increasing number of aquifers in Mexico. The excessive amount of groundwater ex- tracted by irrigation farming has significantly contributed to this problem. The objective of this paper is to analyse the effect of changes in ground- water price over the allocation of different production inputs. I model the technology of producers facing groundwater overdraft through a Translog cost function and using a combination of multiple micro-data sources. My results show that groundwater demand is inelastic, -0.54. Moreover, these results also show that both labour and fertiliser can act as substitutes for groundwater, further reacting to changes in groundwater price. JEL codes:Q12,Q25 Key words: Groundwater, Electricity, Subsidies, Mexico, Translog Cost ⇤Université Paris 1 - Panthéon Sorbonne, Paris School of Economics (PSE). Centre d’Économie de la Sorbonne, 106-112 Boulevard de l’Hopital, 75647, Paris Cedex 13, France. Email: [email protected] Introduction The high rate of groundwater extraction in Mexico is threatening the sustainability of an increasing number of aquifers in the country. Today in Mexico 1 out of 6aquifersisconsideredtobeoverexploited(CONAGUA, 2010). Groundwater overdraft is not only an important cause of major environmental problems, but it also has a direct impact on economic activities and the wellbeing of a high share of the population.
    [Show full text]
  • Effectiveness of Virginia's Water Resource Planning and Management
    Commonwealth of Virginia House Document 8 (2017) October 2016 Report to the Governor and the General Assembly of Virginia Effectiveness of Virginia’s Water Resource Planning and Management 2016 JOINT LEGISLATIVE AUDIT AND REVIEW COMMISSION Joint Legislative Audit and Review Commission Chair Delegate Robert D. Orrock, Sr. Vice-Chair Senator Thomas K. Norment, Jr. Delegate David B. Albo Delegate M. Kirkland Cox Senator Emmett W. Hanger, Jr. Senator Janet D. Howell Delegate S. Chris Jones Delegate R. Steven Landes Delegate James P. Massie III Senator Ryan T. McDougle Delegate John M. O’Bannon III Delegate Kenneth R. Plum Senator Frank M. Ruff, Jr. Delegate Lionell Spruill, Sr. Martha S. Mavredes, Auditor of Public Accounts Director Hal E. Greer JLARC staff for this report Justin Brown, Senior Associate Director Jamie Bitz, Project Leader Susan Bond Joe McMahon Christine Wolfe Information graphics: Nathan Skreslet JLARC Report 486 ©2016 Joint Legislative Audit and Review Commission http://jlarc.virginia.gov February 8, 2017 The Honorable Robert D. Orrock Sr., Chair Joint Legislative Audit and Review Commission General Assembly Building Richmond, Virginia 23219 Dear Delegate Orrock: In 2015, the General Assembly directed the Joint Legislative Audit and Review Commission (JLARC) to study water resource planning and management in Virginia (HJR 623 and SJR 272). As part of this study, the report, Effectiveness of Virginia’s Water Resource Planning and Management, was briefed to the Commission and authorized for printing on October 11, 2016. On behalf of Commission staff, I would like to express appreciation for the cooperation and assistance of the staff of the Virginia Department of Environmental Quality and the Virginia Water Resource Research Center at Virginia Tech.
    [Show full text]
  • Reference: Groundwater Quality and Groundwater Pollution
    PUBLICATION 8084 FWQP REFERENCE SHEET 11.2 Reference: Groundwater Quality and Groundwater Pollution THOMAS HARTER is UC Cooperative Extension Hydrogeology Specialist, University of California, Davis, and Kearney Agricultural Center. roundwater quality comprises the physical, chemical, and biological qualities of UNIVERSITY OF G ground water. Temperature, turbidity, color, taste, and odor make up the list of physi- CALIFORNIA cal water quality parameters. Since most ground water is colorless, odorless, and Division of Agriculture without specific taste, we are typically most concerned with its chemical and biologi- and Natural Resources cal qualities. Although spring water or groundwater products are often sold as “pure,” http://anrcatalog.ucdavis.edu their water quality is different from that of pure water. In partnership with Naturally, ground water contains mineral ions. These ions slowly dissolve from soil particles, sediments, and rocks as the water travels along mineral surfaces in the pores or fractures of the unsaturated zone and the aquifer. They are referred to as dis- solved solids. Some dissolved solids may have originated in the precipitation water or river water that recharges the aquifer. A list of the dissolved solids in any water is long, but it can be divided into three groups: major constituents, minor constituents, and trace elements (Table 1). The http://www.nrcs.usda.gov total mass of dissolved constituents is referred to as the total dissolved solids (TDS) concentration. In water, all of the dissolved solids are either positively charged ions Farm Water (cations) or negatively charged ions (anions). The total negative charge of the anions always equals the total positive charge of the cations.
    [Show full text]
  • A Public Health Legal Guide to Safe Drinking Water
    A Public Health Legal Guide to Safe Drinking Water Prepared by Alisha Duggal, Shannon Frede, and Taylor Kasky, student attorneys in the Public Health Law Clinic at the University of Maryland Carey School of Law, under the supervision of Professors Kathleen Hoke and William Piermattei. Generous funding provided by the Partnership for Public Health Law, comprised of the American Public Health Association, Association of State and Territorial Health Officials, National Association of County & City Health Officials, and the National Association of Local Boards of Health August 2015 THE PROBLEM: DRINKING WATER CONTAMINATION Clean drinking water is essential to public health. Contaminated water is a grave health risk and, despite great progress over the past 40 years, continues to threaten U.S. communities’ health and quality of life. Our water resources still lack basic protections, making them vulnerable to pollution from fracking, farm runoff, industrial discharges and neglected water infrastructure. In the U.S., treatment and distribution of safe drinking water has all but eliminated diseases such as cholera, typhoid fever, dysentery and hepatitis A that continue to plague many parts of the world. However, despite these successes, an estimated 19.5 million Americans fall ill each year from drinking water contaminated with parasites, bacteria or viruses. In recent years, 40 percent of the nation’s community water systems violated the Safe Drinking Water Act at least once.1 Those violations ranged from failing to maintain proper paperwork to allowing carcinogens into tap water. Approximately 23 million people received drinking water from municipal systems that violated at least one health-based standard.2 In some cases, these violations can cause sickness quickly; in others, pollutants such as inorganic toxins and heavy metals can accumulate in the body for years or decades before contributing to serious health problems.
    [Show full text]
  • WHO Guidelines for Indoor Air Quality : Selected Pollutants
    WHO GUIDELINES FOR INDOOR AIR QUALITY WHO GUIDELINES FOR INDOOR AIR QUALITY: WHO GUIDELINES FOR INDOOR AIR QUALITY: This book presents WHO guidelines for the protection of pub- lic health from risks due to a number of chemicals commonly present in indoor air. The substances considered in this review, i.e. benzene, carbon monoxide, formaldehyde, naphthalene, nitrogen dioxide, polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons (especially benzo[a]pyrene), radon, trichloroethylene and tetrachloroethyl- ene, have indoor sources, are known in respect of their hazard- ousness to health and are often found indoors in concentrations of health concern. The guidelines are targeted at public health professionals involved in preventing health risks of environmen- SELECTED CHEMICALS SELECTED tal exposures, as well as specialists and authorities involved in the design and use of buildings, indoor materials and products. POLLUTANTS They provide a scientific basis for legally enforceable standards. World Health Organization Regional Offi ce for Europe Scherfi gsvej 8, DK-2100 Copenhagen Ø, Denmark Tel.: +45 39 17 17 17. Fax: +45 39 17 18 18 E-mail: [email protected] Web site: www.euro.who.int WHO guidelines for indoor air quality: selected pollutants The WHO European Centre for Environment and Health, Bonn Office, WHO Regional Office for Europe coordinated the development of these WHO guidelines. Keywords AIR POLLUTION, INDOOR - prevention and control AIR POLLUTANTS - adverse effects ORGANIC CHEMICALS ENVIRONMENTAL EXPOSURE - adverse effects GUIDELINES ISBN 978 92 890 0213 4 Address requests for publications of the WHO Regional Office for Europe to: Publications WHO Regional Office for Europe Scherfigsvej 8 DK-2100 Copenhagen Ø, Denmark Alternatively, complete an online request form for documentation, health information, or for per- mission to quote or translate, on the Regional Office web site (http://www.euro.who.int/pubrequest).
    [Show full text]
  • Indoor Air Quality: a Time for Recognition
    EMFeatureFeature Indoor Air Quality: A Time for Recognition by Richard L. Corsi It can be argued that the field of indoor air quality has not progressed to the same extent as other environmental fields. It can also be argued that IAQ deserves far more attention than it has received. So, starting this month and running through December, EM will publish a series of articles that discuss some of the many issues now facing those working in the indoor environmental sciences. century and a half ago, John Griscom, a New York While important progress has been made in our under- surgeon, described the effects of indoor air on hu- standing of indoor air pollution, it can be reasonably argued A man health in his book, The Uses and Abuses of Air: that the field of indoor air quality, especially in nonindustrial Showing its Influence in Sustaining Life, and Producing Disease; settings, has not progressed to the same extent as other envi- with Remarks on the Ventilation of Houses.1 Much of what ronmental fields in the past 150 years. In this paper, I have Griscom described in 1850 continues to concern those in the attempted to provide a broad overview of the importance of indoor air quality field today. Consider his description of in- indoor air quality and some of the sources that contribute to fant exposure to impure indoor air: “First, as a tender infant, its degradation. I have also attempted to make an argument he scarcely has made his entrance into the great ocean of air, for why the field of indoor air quality deserves far more atten- and uttered his plaintive petition for a portion of the new tion than it has received, including the need for an immedi- element to expand his little chest, ere, by the careful nurse, he ate and significant expansion of public education, research, is tucked away under the coverlid ….
    [Show full text]
  • Freshwater Resources
    3 Freshwater Resources Coordinating Lead Authors: Blanca E. Jiménez Cisneros (Mexico), Taikan Oki (Japan) Lead Authors: Nigel W. Arnell (UK), Gerardo Benito (Spain), J. Graham Cogley (Canada), Petra Döll (Germany), Tong Jiang (China), Shadrack S. Mwakalila (Tanzania) Contributing Authors: Thomas Fischer (Germany), Dieter Gerten (Germany), Regine Hock (Canada), Shinjiro Kanae (Japan), Xixi Lu (Singapore), Luis José Mata (Venezuela), Claudia Pahl-Wostl (Germany), Kenneth M. Strzepek (USA), Buda Su (China), B. van den Hurk (Netherlands) Review Editor: Zbigniew Kundzewicz (Poland) Volunteer Chapter Scientist: Asako Nishijima (Japan) This chapter should be cited as: Jiménez Cisneros , B.E., T. Oki, N.W. Arnell, G. Benito, J.G. Cogley, P. Döll, T. Jiang, and S.S. Mwakalila, 2014: Freshwater resources. In: Climate Change 2014: Impacts, Adaptation, and Vulnerability. Part A: Global and Sectoral Aspects. Contribution of Working Group II to the Fifth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change [Field, C.B., V.R. Barros, D.J. Dokken, K.J. Mach, M.D. Mastrandrea, T.E. Bilir, M. Chatterjee, K.L. Ebi, Y.O. Estrada, R.C. Genova, B. Girma, E.S. Kissel, A.N. Levy, S. MacCracken, P.R. Mastrandrea, and L.L. White (eds.)]. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, United Kingdom and New York, NY, USA, pp. 229-269. 229 Table of Contents Executive Summary ............................................................................................................................................................ 232 3.1. Introduction ...........................................................................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Water Resource Management Policy
    Corporate Policy: Water Resource Management Policy Statement Water is an essential resource for sustaining Exelon’s operations and creating shareholder value. Ensuring access to affordable, reliable and adequate water supplies is imperative. The water resources we depend on are shared with the communities and customers where we operate and accordingly we will act responsibly to protect them for others, ourselves and future generations. We recognize that effective water resources management must address present and long-term considerations and competing demands. Policy Intent Exelon shall: • Institutionalize the management of water as an essential natural resource for sustained operations; • Continuously improve our management of water resources, prevent pollution, and comply with all applicable water use laws and regulations, with the objective of advancing water resource management beyond compliance to create or protect value; • Understand natural and man-made impacts on water resources, including climate change, and continuously adapt strategies and plans to address these issues; • Engage local and other relevant stakeholders when addressing water issues including those related to operational changes, development of strategic plans, or public policy advocacy; and • Build goodwill and enhance the Exelon brand by collaborating with communities and other interested parties to address opportunities for protecting and enhancing watershed resources. Implementation: This policy shall be implemented by: • Identifying and assessing relevant
    [Show full text]
  • Assessing Groundwater Irrigation Sustainability in the Euro-Mediterranean Region with an Integrated Agro-Hydrologic Model
    19th EMS Annual Meeting: European Conference for Applied Meteorology and Climatology 2019 Adv. Sci. Res., 17, 227–253, 2020 https://doi.org/10.5194/asr-17-227-2020 © Author(s) 2020. This work is distributed under the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License. Assessing groundwater irrigation sustainability in the Euro-Mediterranean region with an integrated agro-hydrologic model Emiliano Gelati1,a, Zuzanna Zajac1, Andrej Ceglar1, Simona Bassu1, Bernard Bisselink1, Marko Adamovic1, Jeroen Bernhard2, Anna Malagó1, Marco Pastori1, Fayçal Bouraoui1, and Ad de Roo1,2 1European Commission, Joint Research Centre (JRC), Ispra, Italy 2Department of Physical Geography, Utrecht University, Utrecht, the Netherlands anow at: Department of Geosciences, University of Oslo, Oslo, Norway Correspondence: Emiliano Gelati ([email protected]) Received: 16 February 2020 – Revised: 27 July 2020 – Accepted: 21 September 2020 – Published: 31 October 2020 Abstract. We assess the sustainability of groundwater irrigation in the Euro-Mediterranean region. After analysing the available data on groundwater irrigation, we identify areas where irrigation causes groundwater depletion. To prevent the latter, we experiment with guidelines to restrict groundwater irrigation to sustainable levels, simulating beneficial and detrimental impacts in terms of improved environmental flow conditions and crop yield losses. To carry out these analyses, we apply the integrated model of water resources, irrigation and crop production LISFLOOD-EPIC. Crop growth is simulated accounting for atmospheric conditions and abiotic stress factors, including transpiration deficit. Four irrigation methods are modelled: drip, sprinkler, and intermit- tent and permanent flooding. Hydrologic and agricultural modules are dynamically coupled at the daily time scale through soil moisture, plant water uptake, and irrigation water abstraction and application.
    [Show full text]
  • Water Quality and Children's Health
    Water Quality and Children’s Health Water pollution impacts all of us, but children and infants are especially at risk of exposure to contaminated water. Children drink more water per pound of body weight than adults, which means they also ingest higher amounts of any harmful chemicals that may be present in the water. In addition, when young children swim, they typically swallow more water than adults, and are therefore at greater risk of exposure to contaminants in lakes, rivers, and bays. Children are also more vulnerable to harm from contaminated water since their metabolic systems and organ systems are still developing. Toxic chemicals are especially harmful to children’s developing organs and tissues because it is harder for their systems to break down and get rid of harmful chemicals that enter their bodies. For instance, long-term exposure to lead, a potent neurotoxicant, can result in permanent neurological damage in young children. Contaminants from industrial farms such as nitrate from fertilizers or atrazine, an herbicide known to disrupt hormone function, can also be very harmful to children when consumed in water. The best line of defense to protect our nation’s water quality is to prevent harmful contaminants from entering our groundwater, rivers, lakes, streams and bays in the first place. Once groundwater or surface water is contaminated, it can be very difficult and expensive to treat that water so that it is safe to drink. When there is a failure to prevent or treat contamination, or treatment is delayed, communities are left to deal with the consequences. Clean Water for All is a broad coalition of environmental, conservation, outdoor recreation, and community groups standing together in support of commonsense protections for clean water and public health.
    [Show full text]