DOCSLIB.ORG

Ground -Water Contamination and Legal Controls in Michigan

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Ground -Water Contamination and Legal Controls in Michigan NOV18 W63 Ground -Water Contamination and Legal Controls in Michigan GEOLOGICAL SURVEY WATER-SUPPLY PAPER 1691 Ground -Water Contamination and Legal Controls in Michigan By MORRIS DEUTSCH GEOLOGICAL SURVEY WATER-SUPPLY PAPER 1691 UNITED STATES GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE, WASHINGTON : 1963 UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR STEWART L. UDALL, Secretary GEOLOGICAL SURVEY Thomas B. Nolan, Director The U.S. Geological Survey Library has cataloged this publication as follows: Deutsch, Morris, 1925- Ground-water contamination and legal controls in Michi­ gan. Washington, U.S. Govt. Print. Off., 1963. v, 79 p. maps, diagrs. 24 cm. (U.S. Geological Survey. Water- supply paper 1691) Bibliography: p. 72-75. 1. Water Pollution Michigan. 2. Water Laws and legislation Michigan. I. Title. (Series) For sale by the Superintendent of Documents, U.S. Government Printing Office Washington, B.C., 20402 CONTENTS Page Abstract-.-.._____________________________________________________ 1 Introduction._____________________________________________________ 1 Previous investigations.._______________________________________ 3 Acknowledgments _____________________________________________ 4 Summary of ground-water occurrence in Michigan.____________________ 5 Ground-water contamination in Michigan ____________________________ 9 Contaminants introduced from the surface._______________________ 12 Injection into aquifers____________________________________ 13 Sanitary wastes at Elkton______________________________ 14 Fuel oil at Holt_________________________________.___ 15 Well reconditioning at Mount Morris.___________________ 15 Air-conditioning return or recharge wells _________________ 15 Dug wells_ ___________________________________________ 17 Contaminated surface waters____________________________ 18 Ponded storm water at Bad Axe___________________ 18 Flood water at Saugatuck-_________________________ 18 Backflooding at Minden City- ______________________ 19 Drain wells___________________-______________-____ 19 Disposal or storage in the zone of aeration.___________________ 21 Phenols---__-__-_______________-__________-_.___-_--- 23 Creosotes at Reed City___________________________ 23 Charcoal wastes at Mancelona______________________ 24 Refinery wastes at Alma__________________-_-__--- 24 Picric acid at Lansing._____________________________ 25 Electroplating wastes__________________________________ 25 Chrome-plating wastes at Douglas___________-_-_--_- 26 Chrome-plating wastes at Bronson___________________ 26 Gasoline at East Saugatuck..___________________________ 29 Oil-field brines in Isabella County--______-_-_____--_--_- 30 Untreated sanitary wastes______________________________ 30 Septic tank effluent_____________________________-__--_- 31 Detergents in Muskegon County.______-_-______---- 33 Sewage in the Manistique-Gulliver area___________--- 34 Hepatitis epidemic at Posen_ _______________________ 34 Spilling or spreading on the land surface____________________ 35 Pickle brines at Edmore______-_______-____-----________ 36 Milk wastes at Trenary________________________________ 36 Raw liquid fertilizer near Holland-____________--_-__---- 37 Land-surface dumping__ _________________,___---___---- 37 Salt used for snow removal__ ________________--__-___--- 37 Manistee County______________________________-__- 38 Kent County____________________________.______ 38 Chromium compounds contained in land fill at Grandville. _ 39 Percolation of leached nitrates into shallow aquifers.__-_-_- 39 in IV CONTENTS Ground-water contamination in Michigan Continued Contaminants introduced from the surface Continued Page Leaking sewers or pipelines_________________________________ 41 Sanitary sewer at Lansing industrial plant._______________ 41 Leaking municipal sewers at Sturgis_____________________ 41 Pipeline sealant at Ionia__________-_-___-__----_______ 42 Induced infiltration or leakage of contaminated surface waters _ _ 42 Discharged softening-plant effluent in Paris Township._____ 42 Discharged mine water at Ironwood-____________________ 44 Sewage contaminated creek at Norway.__________________ 44 Bacterial contamination in collector system at Grand Haven. 45 Stagnant floodwaters at Benton Harbor __________________ 45 Insecticides, herbicides, and windblown wastes ________________ 46 Chrome-laden dust in Wyoming Township._______________ 46 Contaminants induced from natural sources-....__________________ 4? Vertical leakage through open holes____________-_____________ 49 Brines from oil wells and test holes at Lowell.____________ 49 Saline water in the Saginaw Lowlands _________________ 53 Saline water in the Grand Rapids area___________________ 54 High-chloride water at Lansing_________________-__-_-.__ 55 High-chloride water at Grand Ledge and Eaton Rapids.___ 56 Overpumping.____________________________________________ 56 Intrusion of high-chloride water_________-__-_--_____-___ 57 Royal Oak area___________________________________ 57 Flint area_-___________________--_---__-_-___-_-__ 58 Intrusion of high-sulfate water._________________________ 59 Pontiac __________________________________________ 59 Holland. _________________________________ 59 Manistique _______________________________________ 60 Dewatering operations___________________---_-__------_____ 60 Sulfide water at Flat Rock____________________________ 60 Channel deepening or dredging__________-_----__---___--____ 62 Legal safeguards against ground-water contamination in Michigan______ 64 Actions of the Michigan Supreme Court-_________________________ 64 Act creating the Water Resources Commission.__ ________________ 65 Conservation laws_______________________________---__-----__-- 66 Act 190 of the Public Acts of 1889-_-___-__-__-_-_________ 66 Act 107 of the Public Acts of 1905_________.-__-__-____-_ 66 Act 326 of the Public Acts of 1937____________.____-____--_ 66 Act 61 of the Public Acts of 1939.-__-____-_--_-_________ 67 Public health laws_________________________________________ 68 The Drain Code of 1956___________________.___----------___ 68 Waterworks and sewerage system law__________---_-_-_--____ 68 Regulatory powers of the State Health Commissioner-_________ 69 Federal interest-__________________-______---______---------_-_ 69 Summary and conclusions._________________________________________ 70 References cited_______________________-____-_____-_-_------------_ 72 Index_ ____________________--_-__-_----------_.__---------------_- 77 CONTENTS V ILLUSTRATIONS Page FIGURE 1. Geologic map of Michigan_____-_.-_____-._________---___ 6 2. Several types of rock interstices- -_-__-__--_-------__--.-_ 8 3. Hydrogeologic conditions of aquifiers- _____________________ 9 4. Reversal of interformational leakage by pumping___________ 10 5. Hydrologic cycle---_______--____--____----_-----_------ 11 6. Distribution of cases of ground-water contamination in Michigan _ _________________________________________ 13 7. Spread of contaminants injected through wells _____________ 14 8. Movement of contaminants to a nearby pumping well- ______ 16 9. Floodwater entering well_ _______________________________ 19 10. Drainage of a pond into an aquifer. ---__--____----_----__ 20 11. Percolation of contaminants through the zone of aeration____ 22 12. Lines of flow from recharge mound- -_-_-----__--------_-_ 29 13. Movement of contaminants from a septic tank through lime­ stone or dolomite-_______-__-_---___----_--.-----_---__ 33 14. Contamination by leaching of surface solids-__-____ ________ 35 15. Leaching of contaminated land fill by floodwater and precipi­ tation. ______________________________________________ 40 16. Contaminated water induced to flow from a surface source to a well- -__-________________-_--__-____---_-__-_-__ 43 17. Mode of entry of windblown wastes--____-___-___--_--_-_- 48 1 8. Interformational leakage through open holes -_-__-_____-___ 50 19. Southeastern Michigan areas of mineralized shallow water--- 51 20. Southern Peninsula fresh- and saline-water interface relations. 52 21. Fresh-water aquifer contaminated by saline water from under­ lying rocks___-___-___-____-____-_--__-____-----_----_ 58 22. Migration of saline water caused by dewatering______ _______ 61 23. Migration of saline water caused by lowering of water levels in a stream. __________________________________________ 63 GROUND-WATER CONTAMINATION AND LEGAL CONTROLS IN MICHIGAN By MOKKIS DEUTSCH ABSTRACT The great importance of the fresh ground-water resources of Michigan is evident because 90 percent of the rural and about 70 percent of the total popula­ tion of the State exclusive of the Detroit metropolitan area are supplied from underground sources. The water-supply and public-health problems that have been caused by some cases of .ground-water contamination in the State illustrate the necessity of protecting this vital resource. Manmade and natural contaminants, including many types of chemical and organic matter, have entered many of the numerous aquifers of the State. Aquifers have been contaminated by waste-laden liquids percolating from the surface or from the zone of aeration and by direct injection to the aquifer itself. Industrial and domestic wastes, septic tanks, leaking sewers, flood waters or other poor quality surface waters, mine waters, solids stored or spread at the surface, and even airborne wastes all have been sources of ground-water con­ tamination in Michigan. In addition, naturally occurring saline waters have been induced into other aquifers by overpumping or unrestricted flow from artesian wells,
Load more

Recommended publications
  • A Preliminary Assessment of the Montréal Process Indicators of Air Pollution for the United States
    A PRELIMINARY ASSESSMENT OF THE MONTRÉAL PROCESS INDICATORS OF AIR POLLUTION FOR THE UNITED STATES JOHN W. COULSTON1∗, KURT H. RIITTERS2 and GRETCHEN C. SMITH3 1 Department of Forestry, North Carolina State University, Southern Research Station, U.S. Forest Service, Research Triangle Park, North Carolina; 2 U.S. Forest Service, Southern Research Station, Research Triangle Park, North Carolina; 3 Department of Natural Resources Conservation, University of Massachusetts, Amherst, Massachusetts ∗ ( author for correspondence, e-mail: [email protected]) (Received 11 October 2002; accepted 9 May 2003) Abstract. Air pollutants pose a risk to forest health and vitality in the United States. Here we present the major findings from a national scale air pollution assessment that is part of the United States’ 2003 Report on Sustainable Forests. We examine trends and the percent forest subjected to specific levels of ozone and wet deposition of sulfate, nitrate, and ammonium. Results are reported by Resource Planning Act (RPA) reporting region and integrated by forest type using multivariate clustering. Estimates of sulfate deposition for forested areas had decreasing trends (1994–2000) across RPA regions that were statistically significant for North and South RPA regions. Nitrate deposition rates were relatively constant for the 1994 to 2000 period, but the South RPA region had a statistically decreasing trend. The North and South RPA regions experienced the highest ammonium deposition rates and showed slightly decreasing trends. Ozone concentrations were highest in portions of the Pacific Coast RPA region and relatively high across much of the South RPA region. Both the South and Rocky Mountain RPA regions had an increasing trend in ozone exposure.
    [Show full text]
  • Michigan's Infrastructure
    MICHIGAN BUSINESS SUSTAINABILITY ROUNDTABLE State of the State: Michigan’s Infrastructure Olivia Rath January 2021 TABLE OF CONTENTS Executive Summary 3 Introduction 4 Transportation & Mobility 5 Energy 8 Water 11 Information & Communications 14 Infrastructure & Justice 17 Conclusion & Discussion 19 Appendix A: Potential Infrastructure Investments 21 Appendix B: Resource Guide 23 MICHIGAN BUSINESS SUSTAINABILITY ROUNDTABLE | State of the State of Michigan’s Infrastructure 2 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY he State of Michigan is well positioned for economic, social and environmental leadership: The combination of engineering talent, powerhouse academic institutions, unparalleled T freshwater ecosystems, automotive and mobility leadership and more distinguish the state on a national level. Appropriately caring for and investing in its infrastructure can help drive the state toward an economically robust, environmentally sustainable and socially just future. • Transportation & Mobility: Building on its history of mobilizing the world, Michigan has an opportunity to demonstrate leadership in future mobility that prioritizes carbon neutrality, public health and safety, and economic strength. Addressing rapidly deteriorating transportation infrastructure is key. • Energy: Given Michigan’s stated goals on carbon neutrality, shifting the state’s energy system to become increasingly digital, decarbonized and distributed is essential. Efforts to upgrade and expand existing aging infrastructure are important as well. • Water: A severe public health crisis has illustrated the consequences of underinvestment and decision-making without adequate community representation. The state has an opportunity to use machine learning to identify and replace hazardous water lines and address stormwater and wastewater vulnerabilities, and move toward a Michigan that is purer for all. • Information & Communications: Enhanced information and communications infrastructure can enable proactive, real-time asset management across all infrastructure.
    [Show full text]
  • Evaluation of EPA's Temporally Integrated Monitoring of Ecosystems (TIME) and Long‐Term Monitoring (LTM) Programs: Evaluation Methodology
    May 2009 EVALUATION OF EPA’S TEMPORALLY INTEGRATED MONITORING OF ECOSYSTEMS (TIME) AND LONG-TERM MONITORING (LTM) PROGRAMS Promoting Environmental Results Throu gh Evaluation Acknowledgements This evaluation was conducted by Industrial Economics, Incorporated (IEc) and Ross & Associates Environmental Consulting, Ltd. (Ross & Associates) for EPA’s Office of Policy, Economics, and Innovation under Contract EP‐W‐07‐028. An Evaluation Team guided the effort consisting of David LaRoche, Jerry Kurtzweg, Michael Hadrick, and Michele McKeever of EPA’s Office of Air and Radiation; Matt Keene of EPA’s Office of Policy, Economics, and Innovation; and Nancy Tosta, Jennifer Major, Shawna McGarry, and Tim Larson of Ross & Associates. Matt Keene also served as the technical program evaluation advisor. Keith Sargent, EPA National Center for Environmental Economics; Jay Messer, EPA Office of Research and Development; and Kent Thornton, FTN Associates also provided important historical context and input regarding analysis of economic data. We would also like to thank TIME/LTM program principal investigators who agreed to be interviewed for this evaluation. This report was developed under the Program Evaluation Competition, sponsored by EPA’s Office of Policy, Economics and Innovation. To access copies of this or other EPA program evaluations, please go to EPA’s Evaluation Support Division’s website at http://www.epa.gov/evaluate . TABLE OF CONTENTS ACRONYMS........................................................................................................................................i
    [Show full text]
  • Sulfates and Hydrogen Sulfide
    University of Nebraska - Lincoln DigitalCommons@University of Nebraska - Lincoln Historical Materials from University of Nebraska-Lincoln Extension Extension 1996 G96-1275 Drinking Water: Sulfates and Hydrogen Sulfide David L. Varner University of Nebraska at Lincoln, [email protected] Sharon Skipton University of Nebraska–Lincoln, [email protected] Paul J. Jasa University of Nebraska at Lincoln, [email protected] Bruce I. Dvorak University of Nebraska–Lincoln, [email protected] Follow this and additional works at: https://digitalcommons.unl.edu/extensionhist Part of the Agriculture Commons, and the Curriculum and Instruction Commons Varner, David L.; Skipton, Sharon; Jasa, Paul J.; and Dvorak, Bruce I., "G96-1275 Drinking Water: Sulfates and Hydrogen Sulfide" (1996). Historical Materials from University of Nebraska-Lincoln Extension. 1425. https://digitalcommons.unl.edu/extensionhist/1425 This Article is brought to you for free and open access by the Extension at DigitalCommons@University of Nebraska - Lincoln. It has been accepted for inclusion in Historical Materials from University of Nebraska-Lincoln Extension by an authorized administrator of DigitalCommons@University of Nebraska - Lincoln. Nebraska Cooperative Extension G96-1275-A Drinking Water: Sulfates and Hydrogen Sulfide This NebGuide discusses recommended practices to manage sulfur in a domestic water supply. Dave Varner, Extension Educator; Sharon Skipton, Extension Educator; Paul Jasa, Extension Engineer; Bruce Dvorak, Extension Environmental Engineering Two forms of sulfur are commonly found in drinking water supplies: sulfate and hydrogen sulfide. Both forms are nuisances that usually do not pose a health risk at the concentrations found in domestic water supplies. Sources of Sulfate and Hydrogen Sulfide in Drinking Water Sulfate Sulfates are a combination of sulfur and oxygen and are a part of naturally occurring minerals in some soil and rock formations that contain groundwater.
    [Show full text]
  • Annotated Flint Water Crisis Timeline 2009 2010
    Annotated Flint Water Crisis Timeline *Enclosed Document ^Referenced in Documentary 2009 February o Michael Brown serves as Temporary Mayor.^ August o Dayne Walling elected as Mayor.^ September Preliminary Engineering Report Lake Huron Water Supply Karegnondi Water Authority*^ o The third study of the Karegnondi Water Authority (KWA) plan. Prior reports were in 1992 and 2006. This report was meant to study 2 alternatives, continuing purchase of water from Detroit Water and Sewage Department (DWSD) or to build a new pipeline to supply raw water from Lake Huron. o This report clearly states the differences between raw and treated water, and explains in detail the construction costs needed to upgrade Flint’s Water Treatment Plant (WTP) in order to properly treat water. o Additionally, in Appendix 7, the report mentions the lead and copper program and corrosion control requirements, even including the chemical composition of orthophosphate. o An upgrade to the WTP of approximately $7 million would be required in order for the plant to properly treat water on a continuous basis. o These upgrades are necessary to destroy bacteria, viruses, and prevent waterborne disease. Note: At the time of the inception of the KWA, the requirements of treating raw water, upgrades needed to be done for the WTP to properly treat water, and cost estimates of DWSD being more cost effective than the KWA were clear and known to at least two persons, Drain County Commissioner Jeff Wright and Mayor Walling. Both of whom had clear legal, ethical, and patriotic duty to the citizens of Flint as their elected representatives.
    [Show full text]
  • AP Environmental Science Scope and Sequence
    AP Environmental Science Scope and Sequence Grading Period Unit Title Learning Targets Throughout the I. Earth Systems and Resources (10–15%) School Year A. Earth Science Concepts (Geologic time scale; plate tectonics, earthquakes, volcanism; seasons; solar intensity and latitude) B. The Atmosphere (Composition; structure; weather and climate; atmospheric circulation and the Coriolis Effect; atmosphere–ocean interactions; ENSO) C. Global Water Resources and Use (Freshwater/saltwater; ocean circulation; agricultural, industrial, and domestic use; surface and groundwater issues; global problems; conservation) D. Soil and Soil Dynamics (Rock cycle; formation; composition; physical and chemical properties; main soil types; erosion and other soil problems; soil conservation) II. The Living World (10–15%) A. Ecosystem Structure (Biological populations and communities; ecological niches; interactions among species; keystone species; species diversity and edge effects; major terrestrial and aquatic biomes) B. Energy Flow (Photosynthesis and cellular respiration; food webs and trophic levels; ecological pyramids) C. Ecosystem Diversity (Biodiversity; natural selection; evolution; ecosystem services) D. Natural Ecosystem Change (Climate shifts; species movement; ecological succession) E. Natural Biogeochemical Cycles (Carbon, nitrogen, phosphorus, sulfur, water, conservation of matter) III. Population (10–15%) A. Population Biology Concepts (Population ecology; carrying capacity; reproductive strategies; survivorship) B. Human Population 1. Human
    [Show full text]
  • 1980 Ground-Water Data Michigan
    � 1980 GROUND-WATER DATA FOR MICHIGAN BY G.C. HUFFMAN U.S. GEOLOGICAL SURVEY Open - File Report 81-811 PREPARED IN COOPERATION WITH THE MICHIGAN DEPARTMENT OF NATURAL RESOURCES GEOLOGICAL SURVEY DIVISION CONVERSION FACTORS The following factors may be used to convert the inch-pound units published in this report to the International System of Units (SI). Multiply inch-pound units By To obtain SI units acres (a) 0.4047 hectares (ha) feet (ft) .3048 meters (m) inches (in) 25.4 millimeters (hut) miles (mi) 1.609 kilometers (km) million gallons (106 gal) 3,785 cubic meters (m3) gallons (gal) 3.785 liters (L) UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR GEOLOGICAL SURVEY GROUND-WATER DATA FOR MICHIGAN 1980 by G. C. Huffman U.S. GEOLOGICAL SURVEY OPEN-FILE REPORT 81-811 Prepared in cooperation with the Michigan Department of Natural Resources Lansing, Michigan 1981 UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR JAMES G. WATT, Secretary GEOLOGICAL SURVEY Doyle G. Frederick, Acting Director For additional information write to: Office of the District Chief Water Resources Division U.S. Geological Survey 6520 Mercantile Way, Suite 5 Lansing, Michigan 48910 CONTENTS Page Introduction 1 Purpose 1 Scope 1 Uses of data in this report 1 Availability of records 2 Other ground-water reports 2 Well-numbering system 9 Ground-water levels 10 Area ground-water data 10 Alpena County 12 Branch County -city of Coldwater 13 Calhoun County -city of Battle Creek 14 Clinton County -city of St. Johns 15 Eaton County -Delta Township 16 Grand Traverse County 17 Ingham County city of Lansing 18 city of Mason 19 East Lansing-Meridian Water Authority 20 Lansing Township 20 Michigan State University 21 Jackson County city of Jackson 22 Kalamazoo County city of Kalamazoo 23 city of Portage 24 Marquette County - Iron Range area 25 Oakland County - Huron-Clinton Metropolitan Authority 26 Oceana County 27 Sanilac County 28 Van Buren County 29 Washtenaw County - city of Ann Arbor 30 -city of Ypsilanti 31 -Ypsilanti Township 32 Tables 33 Selected references 51 iii FIGURES Page 1.
    [Show full text]
  • Geology of Michigan and the Great Lakes
    35133_Geo_Michigan_Cover.qxd 11/13/07 10:26 AM Page 1 “The Geology of Michigan and the Great Lakes” is written to augment any introductory earth science, environmental geology, geologic, or geographic course offering, and is designed to introduce students in Michigan and the Great Lakes to important regional geologic concepts and events. Although Michigan’s geologic past spans the Precambrian through the Holocene, much of the rock record, Pennsylvanian through Pliocene, is miss- ing. Glacial events during the Pleistocene removed these rocks. However, these same glacial events left behind a rich legacy of surficial deposits, various landscape features, lakes, and rivers. Michigan is one of the most scenic states in the nation, providing numerous recre- ational opportunities to inhabitants and visitors alike. Geology of the region has also played an important, and often controlling, role in the pattern of settlement and ongoing economic development of the state. Vital resources such as iron ore, copper, gypsum, salt, oil, and gas have greatly contributed to Michigan’s growth and industrial might. Ample supplies of high-quality water support a vibrant population and strong industrial base throughout the Great Lakes region. These water supplies are now becoming increasingly important in light of modern economic growth and population demands. This text introduces the student to the geology of Michigan and the Great Lakes region. It begins with the Precambrian basement terrains as they relate to plate tectonic events. It describes Paleozoic clastic and carbonate rocks, restricted basin salts, and Niagaran pinnacle reefs. Quaternary glacial events and the development of today’s modern landscapes are also discussed.
    [Show full text]
  • 2019 State of the Great Lakes Report Michigan
    MICHIGAN State of the Great Lakes 2019 REPORT 2019 STATE OF THE GREAT LAKES REPORT Page 1 Contents Governor Whitmer’s Message: Collaboration is Key ............................................................... 3 EGLE Director Clark’s Message: New Advocates for the Great Lakes Community ................. 4 New Standards Ensure Safe Drinking Water in the 21st Century ............................................ 5 Public Trust Doctrine and Water Withdrawals Aim to Protect the Great Lakes ........................ 8 High Water Levels Put State on Alert to Help Property Owners and Municipalities .................11 Asian Carp Threat from Chicago Area Looms Over Health of Lakes and Aquatic Life ............ 13 EGLE Collaborates on Research into Harmful Algal Blooms and Response Measures .......... 15 Initiatives Foster Stewardship, Raise Water Literacy for All Ages.......................................... 18 Michigan Communities Empowered to Take Action for Great Lakes Protection ...................... 22 EGLE Strengthens Michigan’s Sister State Relationship With Japan’s Shiga Prefecture ....... 24 Soo Locks Project Finally Underway with 2027 Target Date for Opening............................... 25 Great Lakes Cruises Make Bigger Waves in State’s Travel Industry ............................................. 26 MICHIGAN.GOV/EGLE | 800-662-9278 Prepared by the Michigan Department of Environment, Great Lakes, and Energy on behalf of the Office of the Governor (July 2020) 2019 STATE OF THE GREAT LAKES REPORT Page 2 Collaboration is Key hroughout the Great Lakes region, the health of our communities and the strength of our T economies depend on protecting our shared waters. The Great Lakes region encompasses 84 percent of the country’s fresh surface water, represents a thriving, $6 trillion regional economy supporting more than 51 million jobs, and supplies the drinking water for more than 48 million people.
    [Show full text]
  • NYSERDA) Is a Public Benefit Corporation Created in 1975 by the New York State Legislature
    MONITORING THE DEPOSITION AND EFFECTS OF AIR POLLUTION IN THE HUDSON VALLEY, NY FINAL REPORT 05 -01 FEBRUARY 2005 NEW YORK STATE ENERGY RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY The New York State Energy Research and Development Authority (NYSERDA) is a public benefit corporation created in 1975 by the New York State Legislature. NYSERDA’s responsibilities include: • Conducting a multifaceted energy and environmental research and development program to meet New York State’s diverse economic needs. • Administering the New York Energy $martSM program, a Statewide public benefit R&D, energy efficiency, and environmental protection program. • Making energy more affordable for residential and low-income households. • Helping industries, schools, hospitals, municipalities, not-for-profits, and the residential sector, including low-income residents, implement energy-efficiency measures. • Providing objective, credible, and useful energy analysis and planning to guide decisions made by major energy stakeholders in the private and public sectors. • Managing the Western New York Nuclear Service Center at West Valley, including: (1) overseeing the State’s interests and share of costs at the West Valley Demonstration Project, a federal/State radioac- tive waste clean-up effort, and (2) managing wastes and maintaining facilities at the shut-down State- Licensed Disposal Area. • Coordinating the State’s activities on energy emergencies and nuclear regulatory matters, and monitoring low-level radioactive waste generation and management in the State. • Financing energy-related projects, reducing costs for ratepayers. NYSERDA administers the New York Energy $martSM program, which is designed to support certain public benefit programs during the transition to a more competitive electricity market. Some 2,700 projects in 40 programs are funded by a charge on the electricity transmitted and distributed by the State’s investor-owned utilities.
    [Show full text]
  • Water Quality and Common Treatments for Private Drinking Water Systems
    Water Quality and Common Treatments for Private Drinking Water Systems Revised by Uttam Saha, Leticia Sonon, Mark Risse1 and David Kissel Agricultural and Environmental Services Laboratories 1Marine Extension and Georgia Sea Grant Originally written by Anthony Tyson and Kerry Harrison Extension Engineers CONTENTS 1.0 Introduction 1.0 Introduction ..........................................................1 An abundant supply of clean, safe drinking water is 2.0 Drinking Water Standards ....................................2 essential for human and animal health. Water from 2.1 Primary Drinking Water Standards ...............2 municipal or public water systems is treated and 2.2 Secondary Drinking Water Standards ...........3 monitored to ensure that it is safe for human consump- 3.0 Water Testing ........................................................3 tion. Many Georgia residents, especially in rural areas, 3.1 Mineral Analysis ...........................................4 rely on private water systems for human and livestock 3.2 Microbiological Tests ....................................4 consumption. Most private water systems are supplied 3.3 Pesticide and Other Organic Chemical Tests 4 by wells. 3.4 UGA’s Recommended Guidelines for Testing Drinking Waters ............................................4 Water from wells in Georgia is generally safe for con- 3.5 Collecting a Water Sample ............................5 sumption without treatment. Some waters, however, 3.6 Common Water Quality Problems and may contain disease-causing organisms
    [Show full text]
  • Impact of Energy Development on Water Resources in Arid Lands: Literature Review and Annotated Bibliography
    The Impact of Energy Development on Water Resources in Arid Lands: Literature Review and Annotated Bibliography Item Type text; Book Authors Bowden, Charles Publisher Office of Arid Lands Studies, University of Arizona (Tucson, AZ) Download date 04/10/2021 05:21:56 Link to Item http://hdl.handle.net/10150/238692 Arid Lands Resource Information Paper No.6 University of Arizona OFFICE OF ARID LANDS STUDIES Tucson, Arizona 85719 1975 ADDITIONAL PUBLICATIONS ON ARID LANDS Office of A rid Lands Studies: Seventy-Five Years of Arid Lands Research at the University of Arizona, A Selective Bibliography, 1891-1965 Arid Lands Abstracts, nos. 3, 1972- to date J ojoba and Its Uses, An International Conference, 1972 Remote Sensing Conferences, Proceedings of the 2d (1971) - 4th (1973) Arid Lands Resource Information Papers Nos. 1-5 University of Arizona Press (*= OALS Authors): *Deserts of the World *Arid Lands in Perspective *Food, Fiber and the Arid Lands Coastal Deserts, Their Natural and Human Environments Polar Deserts and Modern Man *Arid Lands Research Institutions: A World Directory Arid Lands Resource Information Paper No. 6 THE IMPACT OF ENERGY DEVELOPMENT ON WATER RESOURCES IN ARID LANDS Literature Review and Annotated Bibliography by Charles Bowden Research Assistant Office of A rid Lands Studies University of Arizona The work upon which this publication is based was supported in part by funds provided by the United States Department of the Interior, Office of Water Research and Technology, as authorized under the Water Resources Research Act of 1964, as amended. University of Arizona OFFICE OF ARID LANDS STUDIES Tucson, Arizona 85721 1975 CONTENTS Page Foreword Author's Preface Abstract iii A cknowledgments iv I.Water and Energy in the Past 1 1.Ancient Energy Systems 1 2.Energy Appetites and Resources 7 3.The Problem of Aridity 16 II.
    [Show full text]