[Federal Register Volume 62, Number 230 (Monday, December 1, 1997)]
[Notices]
[Pages 63545-63548]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 97-31273]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
[FRL-5928-3]
Sole Source Aquifer Designation of the Guemes Island Aquifer
System; Skagit County, Washington
AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency.
ACTION: Notice of final determination.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: Notice is hereby given that pursuant to section 1424(e) of the
Safe Drinking Water Act, and in response to a petition from the Guemes
Island Property Owners Association, the U.S. Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA) Region 10 Administrator has determined that the Guemes
Island aquifer system, in Skagit County, Washington, is a sole or
principal source of drinking water, and that if contaminated, would
create a significant hazard to public health. As result of this action,
all Federal financially-assisted projects proposed over the designated
aquifer system will be subject to EPA review to ensure that they do not
create a significant hazard to public health.
EFFECTIVE DATE: This determination shall be effective for purposes of
judicial review at 1:00 p.m. Eastern time on December 15, 1997.
ADDRESSES: The information upon which this determination is based is
available to the public and may be inspected during normal business
hours at the EPA Region 10 Library, 1200 Sixth Avenue, Seattle,
Washington, 98101.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Scott E. Downey, Environmental
Protection Specialist, Ground Water Protection Unit, OW-137,
Environmental Protection Agency, Region 10, 1200 Sixth Avenue, Seattle,
Washington, 98101, 206-553-0682.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
I. Background
Section 1424(e) of the Safe Drinking Water Act, 42 U.S.C. 300h-
3(e), Public Law 93-523, states:
If the Administrator determines, on his own initiative or upon
petition, that an area has an aquifer which is the sole or principal
drinking water source for the area and which, if contaminated, would
create a significant hazard to public health, he shall publish
notice of that determination in the Federal Register. After the
publication of any such notice, no commitment for Federal financial
assistance (through a grant, contract, loan guarantee, or otherwise)
may be entered into for any project which the Administrator
determines may contaminate such aquifer through a recharge zone so
as to create a significant hazard to public health, but a
[[Page 63546]]
commitment for Federal assistance may, if authorized under another
provision of law, be entered into to plan or design the project to
assure that it will not so contaminate the aquifer.
On August 1, 1994, EPA Region 10 received a petition from the
President of the Guemes Island Properties Association requesting that
EPA designate the Guemes Island aquifer system as a sole source aquifer
(SSA). The petition expressed several reasons for interest in a
designation, including concern that an increasing island population
could adversely affect both ground water quality and quantity due to
impacts from logging, road building, and onsite septic systems on
aquifer recharge areas, and from the impact of ground water withdrawals
from new wells; a desire to raise public awareness about the
vulnerability of the aquifer system; a desire to raise awareness about
existing and future problems of the water supply to Skagit County
government; and the value of SSA status in future grant applications
for further study of the island's ground water.
A detailed review of the petition by EPA was delayed for about
three years due to work on an earlier designation request. In July of
1997, the Guemes Island review was completed and the area appeared to
meet all criteria for SSA designation. The legal and technical basis
for the proposal was outlined in an EPA publication titled: ``Support
Document for Sole Source Aquifer Designation of the Guemes Island
Aquifer System,'' EPA 910/R-97-006.
II. Basis for Determination
Among the factors to be considered by EPA in connection with the
designation of an area under section 1424(e) are: (1) Whether the
aquifer is the area's sole or principal source of drinking water; and
(2) whether contamination of the aquifer would create a significant
hazard to public health.
EPA Region 10 has further interpreted the statutory language so
that ``sole or principal'' means that the aquifer must supply at least
50 percent of the drinking water for the area. Furthermore, there
should be no alternate drinking water source(s) which can physically,
legally, and economically supply all those who depend upon the aquifer
for drinking water, should it become contaminated. In addition, aquifer
boundaries should be delineated based on sound hydrogeologic principles
and the best available scientific information.
Although designation determinations are largely based on science-
based criteria, the Regional Administrator may also consider the
overall public interest and net environmental and public health
benefits in making a sole source aquifer determination.
On the basis of information available to this Agency, the Region 10
Administrator has made the following findings:
(1) The aquifer system is the principal source of drinking water
(close to 100%) for people on the island and there are no alternate
sources which can physically, legally, and economically supply all
those who depend upon the aquifer for drinking water, should it become
contaminated. Potential alternate sources considered include surface
water, water piped in from the mainland, bottled water, rainwater
catchment, and reverse osmosis of seawater. None of these drinking
water sources are considered by EPA to be feasible replacements for the
entire aquifer system due to economic barriers or because these sources
are not consumed or utilized for domestic purposes in significant
quantities.
(2) Contamination of the aquifer system would create a significant
hazard to public health. The aquifer system is vulnerable to
contamination through its recharge zones from various sources and
activities including onsite septic systems, stormwater runoff, animal
wastes, and pumping wells which can cause intrusion of seawater into
freshwater aquifers. Scientific information indicates there is a
hydrogeologic interconnection between the aquifers underlying the
island, and collectively, they may be considered as a single aquifer
system. Because they are interconnected, there is the potential for
cross- contamination from one aquifer to another.
Because the aquifer system is vulnerable to contamination and
restoring ground water quality can be difficult or even impossible; and
because the aquifer system is the principal source of drinking water
for the area and there are no other sources which can economically
supply all those who depend upon it for drinking water; EPA believes
that contamination of the aquifer system would pose a significant
hazard to public health.
These findings are based on information from various sources
including the petition, EPA guidances, a U.S. Geological Survey report,
public comments, the Skagit County Health Department, and the
Washington State Department of Health.
III. Description of the Guemes Island Aquifer System
The following is a summary of information from the Support Document
available upon request from EPA Region 10. Much of the hydrogeological
information in the Support Document is taken from the petition and from
``Hydrogeology and Quality of Ground Water on Guemes Island, Skagit
County, Washington,'' U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) Water-Resources
Investigations Report 94-4236, by Kahle and Olsen, 1995.
Guemes Island is a small island in Puget Sound, located north of
the City of Anacortes in the western part of Skagit County, Washington.
The total area of the island is approximately 8.2 square miles. The
year-round population of the island is approximately 540, with a summer
population which nears 2,200. The southeastern part of the island is
hilly and composed of bedrock and fractured rock; the remainder is
gently rolling and overlain by glacial drift.
There are eight distinct geologic units present on Guemes Island:
consolidated bedrock, glacial deposits comprised of the Double Bluff
Drift, Whidbey Formation, Vashon advance outwash, Vashon till, and
Everson drift, and more recent units composed of peat and beach
deposits. There is considerable variation in the thickness of
individual units, and not all units are necessarily present at any one
location. Glacial and recent deposits are at the land surface over most
of the island, with bedrock exposed only on the southeastern end of the
island. Highly permeable units within the glacial deposits also
function as the main aquifers under the island. These units are
hydraulically connected and thus perform as an aquifer system.
Ground water quality on Guemes Island is considered to be generally
of good quality. The aquifer system underlying the island is considered
to be vulnerable to contamination due to the highly heterogeneous
nature of the sand and gravels making up the aquifers, and the
inconsistent confining nature of the surficial confining unit and the
Whidbey confining unit. Chlorides and nitrates are the contaminants of
the most concern. High chloride concentrations in well water on the
island are due to either the presence of relict seawater in aquifer
materials, or seawater moving inward from Puget Sound (seawater
intrusion). Excessive ground water withdrawal in a near-shore area can
cause large local movement of the freshwater-seawater interface
especially if the aquifer is thin. Nitrates in ground water can
originate from septic tanks, animal wastes, and fertilizer.
The Guemes Island SSA boundaries are representative of an aquifer
system that encompasses the entire Guemes
[[Page 63547]]
Island area. The aquifer system is bounded on all sides by Puget Sound.
The vertical extent of the aquifer system at depth includes all potable
water-bearing geologic units underlying the island, including both the
unconsolidated glacial deposits and the bedrock unit. Please see the
Support Document for a more detailed hydrogeologic description.
IV. Project Reviews
The Safe Drinking Water Act authorizes EPA to review proposed
Federal financially-assisted projects which have the potential to
contaminate a designated SSA. Federal assistance may be denied if EPA
determines that a project may contaminate the SSA through its recharge
zone so as to create a significant hazard to public health. Outright
denial of Federal funding is rare as most projects pose limited risk to
ground water quality or can be feasibly modified to prevent ground
water contamination. Proposed projects that are funded entirely by
state, local, or private concerns are not subject to SSA review by EPA.
EPA does not review all possible Federal financially-assisted
projects, but tries to focus on those projects which pose the greatest
risk to public health. Memorandums of Understanding have been developed
between EPA and various Federal funding agencies to help identify,
coordinate, and evaluate projects. EPA relies to the maximum extent
possible on existing local and state mechanisms to protect SSAs from
contamination. Whenever feasible, EPA coordinates project reviews with
local and state agencies that have a responsibility for ground water
protection. Their comments are given full consideration in the Federal
review process.
V. Public Participation and Response to Comments
The following is a summary of information from the ``Response to
Public Comments for the Guemes Island Sole Source Aquifer Proposal''
available upon request from EPA Region 10.
EPA used various methods to notify and involve the public and
others in the Guemes Island SSA designation process. The outreach
effort included briefings to local and State government, distribution
of EPA facts sheets, placing information in local libraries, a public
advertisement in the local newspaper, and providing information for
several newspaper and newsletter articles.
A public comment period was in effect from August 27 to October 11,
1997, and a public meeting was conducted on the island by EPA staff on
September 19, 1997. The purpose of the meeting was to present
information about the proposal, answer any questions, and take public
comments directly from the island community or other interested
parties. About 40 people attended the meeting. Written comments were
accepted on the proposal until the end of the public comment period.
All comments were reviewed and considered by EPA, but did not lead to
any changes to EPA's determination that Guemes Island qualifies for SSA
status.
During the comment period, EPA received fourteen written comments
in the mail and ten oral comments at the public meeting. Of the written
comments, ten persons expressed support for the designation, while four
opposed it. Formal comments at the public meeting were evenly split
with five persons supporting the designation and five opposed.
Individuals submitted most of the comments, but a community
organization and a State agency also commented.
The primary reason given for supporting the proposed action was a
belief that the designation would increase protection of the islands
ground water. Many cited the educational benefit that SSA status would
have on island residents and on Skagit County government on the source
of the island's drinking water, its value and vulnerability, and the
need for protection and conservation. Some people commented that
protection of the island's ground water was important because there are
no feasible alternate sources of drinking water. Some people felt that
ground water would be better protected because of additional
environmental review of proposed projects, or because it could hinder
the siting of future landfills on the island. Some supported the
designation because they felt that added protection of the island's
drinking water could help to protect property values.
Several people opposed the designation because they did not want an
increase of Federal involvement in local affairs. In response, the SSA
program can increase Federal involvement, but only in a very limited
way--if Federal assistance is proposed for a project, EPA can review
the proposal and ask for changes if drinking water supplies are
endangered. This review process is meant to support and enhance, rather
than duplicate or supplant, local ground water protection measures.
Many communities welcome the technical assistance and coordinating
services they receive from EPA to protect their drinking water.
Some people commented that the designation would not contribute to
further ground water protection. In response, the SSA program is not
intended to be a comprehensive ground water protection program. EPA
authority is limited to the review of Federal projects, which are
likely to be minimal in number and scope for the island. However, there
are many other benefits from an SSA designation, that can be locally-
driven, such as greater awareness and stewardship of a community's
drinking water supply. This can lead to an increase of both individual
and local governmental actions to protect the resource.
Two persons commented that SSA designation was unnecessary because
the island's ground water was not already contaminated. In response,
the SSA program is a pollution prevention program. Experience has shown
that it is much smarter, and considerably less expensive, to prevent
ground water pollution in the first place, rather than trying to clean
up a degraded water supply after a problem is discovered.
Two persons objected to the designation because they believed that
the petitioner had requested a part of the island be excluded from the
designated area. In response, the original petition correctly
identified that at least one portion of the island (a bedrock tip area
that discharges ground water to Puget Sound) could be viewed as a
hydrogeologically separate part of the island. However, the petition
specifically requested that the entire island be designated as a sole
source aquifer. EPA concurred that it made better technical and
programmatic sense to designate the entire island.
One person raised questions on the technical basis for the
designation, claiming that the extent and accuracy of the data used in
the petition and in EPA's Support Document was lacking and flawed. In
response, EPA used the best available scientific information and best
professional judgement and believes that the technical basis for the
designation is based on sound hydrogeologic principles.
VI. Economic and Regulatory Impact
Pursuant to the provisions of the Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA),
5 U.S.C. 605(b), I hereby certify that this final determination will
not have a significant impact on a substantial number of small
entities. For purposes of this Certification, the ``small entity''
shall have the same meaning as given in section 601 of the RFA. This
action is only applicable to Guemes Island.
The only affected entities will be those businesses, organizations,
or
[[Page 63548]]
government jurisdictions that request Federal financial assistance for
projects which have the potential for contaminating the aquifer system
so as to create a significant hazard to public health. EPA does not
expect to review small isolated commitments of Federal financial
assistance on an individual basis, unless a cumulative impact on the
aquifer is anticipated. Accordingly, the number of affected small
entities will be minimal.
For those small entities which are subject to review, the impact of
today's action will not be significant. Major projects subject to this
review will be proceeded by a ground water impact assessment required
pursuant to other Federal laws, such as the National Environmental
Policy Act (NEPA) as amended 42 U.S.C. 4321, et seq. Integration of
those related review procedures with SSA review will allow EPA and
other Federal agencies to avoid delay or duplication of effort in
approving financial assistance, thus minimizing any adverse effect on
those small entities which are affected. Finally, today's action does
not prevent grants of Federal financial assistance which may be
available to any affected small entity in order to pay for the redesign
of a project to assure protection of the aquifer system.
Under Executive Order 12866, EPA must judge whether a regulation is
``major'' and therefore subject to the requirement of a Regulatory
Impact Analysis. This action is not major because it will not have an
annual effect of $100 million or more on the economy, will not cause
any major increases in costs or prices, and will not have significant
adverse effects on competition, employment, investment, productivity,
innovation, or the ability of United States enterprises to compete in
domestic or export markets.
VII. Summary
This determination affects only the Guemes Island aquifer system
located in Skagit County, Washington. As a result of this
determination, all Federal financially-assisted projects proposed in
the designated area will be subject to EPA review to ensure that they
do not create a significant hazard to public health.
Dated: November 18, 1997.
Chuck Clarke,
Regional Administrator,U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region 10.
[FR Doc. 97-31273 Filed 11-28-97; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-F
