Wafer qualify, a complex issue - University of Arizona

Vol. 1 No.2

Wafer qualify,a complex issue

' C ure and simple" is an expressionthat does not fit when water

quality is the topic. To assure the deliv-ery of good quality, pure water is not asimple matter at all, as water qualitymanagers well know.

Water quality managers confront acomplex array of issues that defy simplesolutionsrapidly changing conditionsof water use, water chemistry waterstandards, and social calculations of risksand benefits And these issues are fur-ther complicated wheñ a new source ofwater arrives. For example, water qualitymanagers and decision makers in south-em Arizona must decide how to manageColorado River water flowing to theirtowns and cities through the canals ofthe Central Arizona Project The newsource must be integrated into the ongoing management process so that con-sumers continue to receive water of ac-ceptable quality at reasonable cost

Presently a variety of options exists formaintaining or enhancing the quality ofwater supplies A water manager may de-cide on conventionai and advanced, in-plant water treatment; artificial recharge;mixing or blending various water sup-plies; matching water supplies of variousqualities to appropriate uses; and others.The water quality manager must evalu-ate this array of options and select thetechnique (or to make matters morecomplicated, combination of techniques)most fitting for his or her situatioa

And there is more. The water qualitymanager has numerous criteria to con-sider when assessing the suitability ofwater quality management approaches.First, the selected approach must beeffective; that is it must be capable ofproducing finished water of adequatequality for its intended uses. Second, themethod must be reliable and yield waterof adequate quality on a consistent basis.Third, the selected method must be eco-nomically efficient Fourth, any waterquality management alternative must becompatible with environmental, institu-tional, legal and political constraints.Finally, the approach must be flexibleenough to accomodate changingconditions

Summer 1987

The last criterion mentioned above-a flexible approach to accomodatechangeis a key consideration for watermanagers. Water quality decisions aremade in an environment of changing andexpanding informatioa For example, thequality of water is constantly changingSome changes are small and transient;others represent long-term trends affect-ing the quality of a particular supply.Short-term fluctuations in well-knownwater constituents usually can be han-died through competent monitoring andtemporary adjustments in the manage-ment process. Some water qualitychanges however, represent new or quitedifferent issues for managers. The identi-fication of novel contaminants or rapidincreases in water pollution leve1s mightrequire the selection of quite differentmanagement approaches than those em-ployed in the past Water quality man-agers must be prepared for both types ofchanges in water quality

In addition, new information about theeffects (human health, environmental, oreconomic) of even familiar water constit-uents may pose new challenges to waterdecision makers Also, societal interpreta-tions of water quality information maychange. For example, public opinion maybecome less tolerant of a certain type ofwater-related risk that was previously ac-cepted. Frequently such new information(or new interpretations) is translatedinto new standards and regulations forwater quality, and management ap-proaches must be able to adapt to suchchanging conditions.

One last point for the water managerto consider is that the mix of intendedwater uses is also subject to change overtime. A good example is the intended use

WATER RESOURCES RESEARCH CENTER . UNIVERSITY OF ARIZONA

of CAP water Originally conceived as aproject to preserve irrigated agriculturein portions of Arizona, CAP is now pri-marily intended to provide water for mu-nicipal and industrial purposes Clearlythe water quality requirements for muni-cipal (including drinking water) uses aresubstantially different than those for irri-gated agriculture. Again, flexibility is akey to a successful managementprogram.

Confronted by options and criteria, thewater manager cannot even count on se-cure, definitive information to guide hisor her choices Complete information israrely available The selection of manage-ment alternatives, therefore, inevitablywill occur with substantial uncertaintySome types of uncertainty can be clar-ified by additional research. Managers,however, will often be confronted by de-cisions for which additional research wifibe unable to provide guidance. In thesecases the policy process must be reliedupon to make the necessary trade-offs.

This issue of Arroyo examines severalfacets of water quality management, par-ticularly in the context of the arrival ofCAP water. The wide variety of concernsprovides a glimpse of the complexity ofthis vital water management activity y

INVITE DCOMMENT

EPA Proposes Water-Quality Standards

Charles Gerba, professor of micro-biology and immunology, andnutrition and food science at theUniversity of Arizona, provided theInvited Comment for this issue.

The Safe Drinking Water Act, whichwas passed last year by Congress, re-quires that the Environmental ProtectionAgency issue permanent standards for83 drinking-water contaminants hi

Sign for water in earty chemistry

response to this legislation, EPA recentlyissued a ruling about surface watertreatment for the control of Giardiaand viruses

I am a member of the EPA scienceadvisory board which meets every twomonths to review EPA research pro-grams and pending regulations affectingdrinking water. Recently we reviewed thesurface-water-treatment niling whichwill be published in the Federal Registerin September. At that time commentswill be invited.

EPAs draft ruling requires that utifitiesfilter and disinfect when treating surfacewaters Disinfection is interpreted to as-sure 999 percent inactivation of Giardialamblia cysts and 99.99 percent inactiva-tion of enteric viruses Both ifitration anddisinfection are required because filtra-tion best controls Giardia and disin-fection best controls viruses

This ruling wifi affect utilities in variousways:

Since half the water suppliers in thecountry do not now filter and disinfect,compliance will result in added costsNew construction costs for utilities areestimated to be between $2 and$6 billion.

The new requirements will encourageutilities to increase the amount ofchlorine used in the disinfection process.This, in turn, may increase trihaiometh-anes in drinking water. If more chlorineis not added, the size of the contactchamber will have to be increased: Thiswould be difficult and expensive sincemany utilities may not have the necessaryland to increase the contact chamber

The reluctance to rely on traditionaldisinfection methods that use chlorinewill encourage some water suppliersto try alternative disinfectants suchas ozone.

2

If utility companies use any innova-tive technology or any technology otherthan the standard treatment train of fil-tration and disinfection, they would haveto demonstrate to EPA through pilotplant studies, literature or documentationthat the required removal was achieved.

Water suppliers may have to performbetter and more frequent monitoringof their turbidity coliforms and totalbacterial numbers.

These rulings will undoubtedlyinfluence decisions on how CAP water isto be treated because the new require-ments will have to be considered as CAPtreatment methods and facilities areplanned.

Other pending water quality regula-tions will also affect CAP water treat-ment. Groundwater regulations are beingdeveloped but will not be finalized until1991. Arizona water quality planners haveto start thinking about what this rulingwill involve because these groundwaterregulations wifi affect recharged CAPwater treatment The regulations willprobably require mandatory disinfectionbut with variances allowed. This wouldindicate that even if CAP water is re-charged, it would still have to bedisinfected upon recovery.

If a variance were allowed, disinfectionmay not be required Variances, however,would depend on such factors as 1) theavailability of a pristine source of water;2) the absence of septic tanks in thearea; and 3) the absence of any water-borne outbreaks iii the system.

Many water utilities are beginning toplan now to assure they will meet theevolving water treatment regulations 'w

Medieval sign for watefl one of the four elements

LEGISLATIVENEWS

Water quality is not easily managecLFor example, water managers with plansto develop a water quailty strategy forCentral Arizona Project water must con-tend with economic, engineering andenvironmental factors as well as a thicketof institutional and legal issues

The legal concerns have to do withlaws at various levels Two federal lawshave special authority in the matter ofwater quality: the Safe Drinking WaterAct, amended in 1986, and the 1977 CleanWater Act Water managers must alsocheck on state legal requirements Forexample, Arizona EnvironmentalQuality Act, whose passage coincidedwith the arrival of CAP water in Arizona,covers a broad area of water qualityconsiderations

In addition to the laws and regulationswhich affect water quality directly, vari-ous legal constraints influence the selec-ton, design, construction and operationof any facility or activity to manage

water quality whether a treatment plantor recharge facility. These constraints arethe result of legislation at federal, stateand local levels Policy makers working toidentify CAP water qualitiy managementoptions must be aware of the require-ments of each of the following:

Federal Legislaflon

National Environmental Policy Act; CleanWater Act; Safe Drinking Water Act;Resource Conservation and RecoveryAct; Toxic Substance Control Act; Insec-ticide, Fungicide, Rodenticide Act; CleanAir Act; National Historic PreservationAct; Wild and Scenic Rivers Act; Fishand Wildlife Coordination Act; Endan-gered Species Act; Executive Order 11988(floodplain management considerations);Executive Order 11990 (wetlandsprotection)

Ailzona LegislationEnvironmental Quality Act; GroundwaterManagement Act; Recharge and Under-ground Storage and Recovery Act;Arizona Native Plant Law; Dry Well Reg-ulations (HB2229)

Local Ordinances

and Requirements

Floodplain use pemtits; zoning ordi-nances; county pretreatment ordinance

3

(for disposal of hazardous ingredients inused water); Pima County ordinance onsecondary standards

Many of the above laws and regula-tions outline specific permit processesand requirements that must be consultedto manage CAP water quality. Therefore,they determine the nature and type ofactivities that may take place. Activitiesmust be reviewed on a case-by-casebasis to determine which laws, regula-tions, and permit processes apply.

Obvious questions arise: What prob-lems may result from the existence of amultitude of rules and regulations? Howwill they affect the development of awater quality management plan?

A major concern is that as variousagencies or bodies issue regulations, rulescoming from one source may conflictwith rules from another. For example, if acity were to apply for permits under theRecharge and Underground Storage andRecovery Act and the EnvironmentalQuality Act to operate a recharge projectinvolving effluent, applications wouldhave to be submitted to the Departmentof Water Resources and the Departmentof Environmental Quality DWR, con-cerned with conservation, might want apercentage of the water left in the aqui-fer to contribute to its replenishmentDEQ, on the other hand, is concernedabout the quality of the treated effluentin the aquifer and might want over 100percent of the recharged water pumpedout to assure that all possible impuritieswere removed.

Conflicts may also develop betweenagencies at different levels of govern-ment Pima County's Board of Super-visors recently enacted secondarydrinking water standards for sulfatelevels that are more stringent than stateor federal standards This action, whichis being contested, may severely limitCAP water use in Pima County since thewater would not meet the newly estab-lished local standards

The CAP project involves water man-agers with new situations to work outSolutions some untested and untriedwill have to be attempted within thecontext of various laws and regulationsUndoubtedly some details will have tobe settled y

RESEARCH NEWS

Each issue of Arroyo presents brief de-scnptions of water research projectsrelevant to Arizona. This issue pro-vicies a summary of Tucson Water'sRecharge Fèasibfflty Assessment study.A unique and comprehensive effort,the Recharge Feasibility Assessmentprogram thoroughly evaluates the fea-szb'ilzty of conducting groundwaterrecharge activities within the TucsonActive Management Area.

The project staff gathered andorganized a vast quantity of informa-tion that is available to researchers,government agencies, consultants, etc.

The study will be implemented inthree phases. Phase A consists of atechnwal and institutional evalua-tion Phase B will include the design,construction, and operation ofdemonstration recharge projects toevaluate variables that would affectTucson& recharge program. Phase Cwill involve assessment of alternativeplans and develop a comprehensivemaster planto recharge water sup-plies from identified feasible sources.

Phase A, which is in draft-reportform, is summarized here and wasprepared by CH2M Hill, Inc. in asso-ciation with Errol L Montgomery &Associates, Inc and LG Wilson, re-charge specialist. Phase A is dividedinto various tasks.

Recharge Methods Evaluation

The initial task or phase of the studyconsists of three subtasks: 1) literaturereview and survey; 2) area survey evalua-tion; and 3) recharge site visits.

During the literature review and sur-vey, available material on artifIcialrecharge activities was compiled and re-viewed to determine relevance to the'fticson area and Thcson Water's goalsAfter 640 references were examined, ascreening process reduced the numberof relevant references to 493. 'Ib helporganize the literature, the material was

abstracted and divided mto seven catego-nes: 1) case studies, 2) natural resourcestudies 3) feasibfflty studies, 4) reviews;5) technical research studies; 6) healtheffects studies, and 7) economic studiesEach abstract includes a statement onthe relevance of the abstract to Thcsonarea conditions and to other projecttasks A computerized index was de-veloped for efficient access to author,date of publication, relevance andrecharge method.

The purpose of the second subtaskwas to evaluate the suitability for Thcsonconditions of the recharge methods iden-tified during the literature review Themethods identified were: water spreadingin shallow basins; water spreading inditches and canals; spreading in deepbasins; and spreading and inducedrecharge in natural channels, rechargewells, injection wells, and recharge shafts.Each method was examined for specificconstraints in the Thcson area, includingeffects of the available water sources onthe operation of spreading areas The lit-erature review of recharge methods andconstraints concluded that known re-charge methods could operate with somedegree of success in the 'Pacson area

The third subtask was to visit operat-ing recharge facilities to provide projectstaff with a complete background in theimplementation of well recharge andspreading methods Eleven major wateragencies were visited during the fallof 198(1

Research of Water QualdyRequirements for Recharge

Water qwlity significantly affectsartificial groundwater recharge, regard-less of the recharge method Therefore, areview of the operational experiences ofvarious projects involved with theimpacts of water quality on recharge isan important task The informationgathered wifi help lay the groundwork toplan, design, implement and monitorgroundwater recharge projects con-ducted by the City of 'Pacson.

Two water-quality conoerns that affectthe operation of a recharge programare 1) potential reduction in the abilityof the soil and rock strata to transferrecharge water to the aquifer and 2)potential degradation of existinggroundwater quality

Artificial recharge, if properly man-aged, may improve the quality of therecharge water. The water quality re-quirements pnor to recharge, the long-tena treatment capabilities of the soil-aquifer system, and ultimately, the ac-ceptability of adding recharged water toa community potable water supply aremajor health-related issues

The potential sources for rechargewater for the City of 'llicson are runoffwater, reclaimed water and CAP water.Each is associated with a major water-quality concern With runoff it is thehigh suspended solids content of runoffwater in surface-water drainages Re-claimed water in recharge projects raisespublic health issues, and the rechargingof CAP water that has a total dissolvedsolids content higher than the in situgroundwater will be a major concernif Pima County continues to requirethat federal secondary drinking waterstandards be met.

The recharge methods are groupedinto two categories: spreading methodsand recharge wells. The two mostimportant water quality factors affectingrecharge performance using spreadingmethods have to do with the soil-aquifermatrix and the recharge water. Theongoing performance of recharge wellsalso depends on the quality of therecharge water.

The report discusses the suitability ofeach of the potential recharge watersources with respect to water qualitystandards, degradation of existinggroundwater quality interactionsbetween source waters and the matrixmaterials of the vadose zone, and theconstraints associated with variousrecharge methods

Evaluation of Existing Water System

and Wells for Recharge ofTreated CAP Water

The potential to utilize the existing(and near future) city potable water dis-tribution system and wells for recharge oftreated CAP water was evaluated. Thistask consisted of three principal areasof investigation

First, the suitability of utilizing exist-ing wells for recharge together with anestimation of probable rates and volumesof recharge was determined Basic

information on the wells such as location,construction detai1s annual pumpage,groundwater levels, aquifer test data, andsystem operational data was obtainedfrom 1Ùcsor computer-based well datasystem and well files.

Next; the ability of the distributionsystem to move water toward proposedpoints of recharge was analyzed with theuse of the city's hydraulic model Themodel provided an analysis of the 1995distribution system, and three separateconditions were evaluatedpea1 aver-age, and minimum annual demand forthe distribution system.

Finally, a review of available literatureand project experiences abstracted froma previous task was used to evaluate theretrofitting of existing wells for use asrecharge facilities

A preliminary analysis indicates that;given certain assumptions, the capabffityexists to recharge available CAP suppliesover and above the amounts of water tobe served directly. However, many as-pects of long-term recharge rates, costs,and efficiencies of recharge wells mustbe more thoroughly documented to re-fine the estimates contained in this sec-tion of the Recharge Assessment report.

Hydrogeological Evaluolionfor Recharge Sites

A hydrogeologic investigatioi of thestudy area was conducted The initialwork involved an intensive data searchand compilation Thcson Water's filesprovided substantial relevant informationwhich was supplemented with data fromthe US Geological Survey, ArizonaDepartment of Water Resources and thePima Association of GovernmentsNumerous investigations and reportswere also reviewed relating to the geol-ogy groundwater hydrology water chem-istry surface water hydrology andinfiltration characteristics of streamchannels of the area.

This task also included the followingactivities: evaluation of hydrogeologiccharacteristics which impact rechargewithin the study area; assessment ofgroundwater quality characteristics; de-velopment of criteria for recharge poten-tial; estimation of recharge rates andquantities; mapping of aquifer param-eters and flow patterns; evaluation ofstream channel recharge characteristics;

and providing Thcson Water with a rank-mg of potential recharge sites based onthese work products In addition,recommendations were provided whichidentified requirements for subsequentinvestigations.

The principal hydrogeologic units ofrelevance to this study for recharge po-tential are the recent alluvium associatedwith modern streams and washes, theFort Lowell Formation and the upperTinaja beds Transmissivity andpermeability computations were madebased on selected dath The direction ofgroundwater movement and altitude ofgroundwater levels above mean sea levelwere also developed for the study area.

The entire study area was evaluatedfor potential recharge through injectionwells Areas were identified where thepercent fines in the aquifer to be re-charged are small The areas were alsorated for the following: thickness of theunsaturated zone; potentially large aqui-fer transmissivity; and favorable chemicalquality of groundwater.

Evaluation of the chemical quality ofthe indigenous groundwater involved theconstruction of approximately 2,700 Stiffdiagrams. These were analyzed and usedto classify principal water types andbasic water quality characteristics

Based on the hydrogeologic data eval-uated, a number of areas have been iden-tiled as potential recharge for long-termstorage and recovery of water

Waler Source Evaluationsfor Recharge Sites

The objective of this task was to evaluatethe issue of using various recharge watersourccs runoff water, reclaimed waterand CAP water at recharge sites identi-fled in previous Phase A tasks The loca-tion, availability, and quality of rechargewater sources are defined. The potentialwater quality impacts of rechargingthese water sources are also discussed

Using available information, the poten-tial for geochemical reactions with thestudy area was assessed Equilibrium cal-culations for mineral saturation levelsindicate no anticipated precipitation ofmineral species involving dissolved ionsin either CAF recharge water or ground-water. For CAP water, the chemistry willchange slightly when recharged and

mixed with in-situ groundwater. Theonly potential problem associated withCAP water would be m areas whereLaveen soils exist such as in Avra ValleyIn these areas recharge by injectionmethods should be considered.

The different facilities needed to de-liver recharge source water to desiredrecharge sites are described The facili-ties needed for each type of rechargesource water are identified. Volume ofstored recharge water was incorporatedinto the analyses together with amountof recoverable groundwater. Relative costestimates were developed for each sitewith appropriate source waters which in-clude both capital and operational costs

A ranking of potential recharge sitesthat takes into account all technicalfactors is provided

Institutional andRegulcitoty Requiremenisfor Recharge

This task identified regulatory and per-mitting requirements for recharge pro-jects in the Thcson Active ManagementArea Also, institutional impediments torecharge projects were identified andmodifications and planning approachesrecommended Institutional constraintsare discussed in terms of the federal,state, county, and city legislation affectingthe construction, operation, mainten-ance, and monitoring of an artificialrecharge operation

The study indicates that institutionalimpediments may be the greatest obsta-cle to overcome when implementingrecharge projects Concerns such as thefollowing, which can be formidableobstacles to various recharge methodsand source waters, must be considered.the balance between chemical waterquality of existing groundwater andsource waters; the right to recover therecharged waters; the right to collect anddivert appropriable surface waters, thepossible impact stream channel rechargewill have on flooding; and complexpermitting and reporting requirementsThese constraints on recharge projectsmust be evaluated and resolved as theCity of 'Tùcson moves toward implement-ing its recharge programs

RESOURCESAND

IN FORMATION

Arroyo features in each issue a re-source or source of information of in-terest to people concerned with waterissues. The intent is to inform readersof the varied water-related resourcesand information sources available toboth professionals involved with wa-ter projects and to the generai public.

This issue features the publication,Central Arizona Project Water Quality:An Examination of Management OptionsAn issue paper published by the WaterResources Research Cente the pub-lication discusses various topics ofimportance to people involved withmanaging CAP water quality and willbe a helpfui resource to them. (SeePublications section of this newsletterfor the publication information on theissue paper)

As Central Arizona Project water flowsinto Arizona, water managers confrontan important question: How is CAP wa-ter to be managed to assure that it meetsthe water quality standards applicable toits intended uses? The question is com-plex since CAP is intended to be used forvarious municipal, agricukural and in-dustrial purposes

Central Arizona Project WaterQuality: An Examination of Manage-ment Options is a valuable resource toassist water managers to wisely choose asuitable water-quality strategy for vari-ous CAP water uses. To do this, a watermanager must be knowledgeable aboutthe various water-quality managementoptions available. This publication dis-cusses available choices, evaluating therelative advantages and disadvantages,strengths and weaknesses, and costs andbenefits of various water-quality manage-ment methods.

The report has six objectives: 1) toidentify questions to be addressed whenevaluating alternative management strat-egies for Arizona's use of Colorado River

water; 2) to answer questions for whichprevious research and experienceprovides appropriate guidance; 3) to in-terpret those answers for policy makingand provide an assessment of the neces-sary trade-offs; 4) to identify areas of re-maining uncertainty; 5) to identify areasneeding further scientific research toremove uncertainty; and 6) to identifyareas where further research will not beproductive, and that will require, instead,policy judgments to guide choices.

The following topical areas are ad-dressed: water quality management con-ditions; water quality constituents; healtheffects of water constituents; non-healtheffects of water constituents; water treat-ment considerations; economic, engineer-ing, and environmental factors; andinstituional and legal issues

The publication reports no new re-search. instead, the authors evaluateexisting information and evidence,intending to encourage the kind of re-search that will provide the informationneeded to understand more fully variouspolicy choices At the same time, infor-mation relevant to water quality manage-ment options is identified and reviewed.

The report draws upon a variety of in-formation sources It looks at the experi-ences of other Colorado River basinstates, particularly California Publishedliterature was reviewed, and peopleknowledgeable about relevant issueswere consulted. The preparation of thereport involved two review panels: onepanel made up of university facultymembers and other water scientists andthe other composed of federal, state andlocal government representatives, andmembers of various interest groups

It is not the intention of the report toprovide definitive solutions to particularcases because there is no single, simpleanswer. The selection of a water qualityapproach must be based on a carefulassessment of a wide variety of factorsAlso, the selection of a management al-ternative is inherently a political ratherthan an analytic function As such theselection process belongs in the policy-making arena

The proper function of a report of thistype is to provide on a timely basis themost accurate and complete informationpossible, and to provide it in a formatthat is accessible to policy makers

6

PUBLICATIONS

Ceniral Aiizona ProjectWater QuaIÍIy:An Examination ofManagement Options

byK James DeCookandMan/in Waterstone

This publication evaluates the relativeadvantages and disadvantages, strengthsand weaknesses, and costs and benefitsof various CAP water-quality manage-ment methods available to water man-agers it is of special use to watermanagers as they develop a water-qualitymanagement approach to prepare CAPwater for various usesmunicipal,agricultural and industrial.

To purchase this publication write to:Librarian, Water Resources ResearchCenter, Geology 318, Universityof Arizona, Tucson AZ 85721;(602) 621-164&

Water and Povertyin tile Southwest

by F Lee Brown andHelen Ingram

This study of the political economy ofwater use and allocation in the South-west draws on case studies involvingHispanics of northern New Mexico andlbhono O'odham Indians of southernArizona to show how the rural poor havebeen systematically deprived of waterrights to the advantage of Anglo-oedranches, mines and urban centers. TheUniversity of Arizona Press, 1615 EastSpeedway, Tucson, AZ 85719. $19.95 cloth;$12.95 paper.

Proceedings

Hydrology and Water Resources inArizona and the Southwest

Volume 17 of Hydrology and Water Re-sources in Arizona and the Southwest

includes papers presented at the April1987 meeting of the Arizona Section-American Water Resources Associationand the Hydrology SectionArizona-Neveda Academy of Science and theArizona Hydrological Society

To order this volume and other AWRApublications contact: Ms. Dale WrightOffice of Arid Lands Studies, Collegeof Agriculture, University of Arizona,845 N Park Ave., Thcson, AZ 85719.(602) 621-1955. $14.

Government Publications

Hydrogeology of the eastern partof the Salt River Valley area,Mañcopci and Pinol Counes

by R L Laney andMary Ellen Ha/inWater-Resources Invesilgalions Report86-4147This study, carried out in cooperationwith the Arizona Department of WaterResources, determined the location,depth, thickness, and hydrologic proper-ties of the water-bearing units in theeastern part of the Salt River Valley.

Copies are available for inspection atUS Geology Survey offices in Flagstaff,Phoenix, Thcson and Yuma

Water Resources Datafor Aiizona, Water Year 1984

by Natalie D. IMiite andWB. GaneltU S. Geological SuiveyWater-Data Report AZ-84-1

This recently-published report was pre-pared by the US Geological Survey incooperation with the state of Arizonaand other agencies. It provides a compila-tion of surface-water, chemical-qualityand groundwater data.

The report is free from the USDepartment of the Interior, GeologicalSurvey, Water Resources Division,300 W Congress St, FB-44, Thcsori, AZ85701-1393 while supplies last Copies areavailable for mspection at the USGeological Survey offices listed in theprevious entry

CONFERENCES MeetingsAND

SEMINARS

Call for Papers

Cfical Water Issuesand Computer Applicalions

June 1-3, 1988Norfollç Virginia

Abstracts of papers to be consideredmust be submitted by November 1, 1987.For additional information contact: MikeStrech, Technical Program Chainnan,Darmenbaum Engineering Corporation,3100 West Alabama, Houston, Texas77098; (713) 527-6489.

Symposium on Water-Use DataFor Water Resources Management

August 28-3 1, 1988Tucson, Arizona

Papers are invited on various topics;papers are also solicited for a postersessioa The deadline for submissionof abstracts is January 1, 1988.

For additional information about con-ference topics and the submitting of ab-stracts contact: Dr Marvin Waterstone,University of Arizona, Water ResourcesResearch Center, Geology Building, Room318, 'Ricson, AZ 85721; (602) 621-7607

Amencan Wafer ResourcesAssociation and Symposium

November 6-11, 1988Milwaukee, Wisconsin

The theme for AWRAs 24th AnnualCon-

ference and Symposium is Water for theYears AheadQuality and Quantity:1990 and Beyond. The deadline for sub-mitting abstracts is Jaa 15, 1988. Foradditional information contact: MaxAnderson, University of Wisconsin-Plattevifie, College of Engineering,Platteville, Wisconsin 53818

7

Rocky MountainGround Water Conference

October 20-21Cheyenne, Wyoming

The conference is designed to serve asan outlet for state-of-the-art develop-ments in groundwater hydrology Con-ference participation is encouraged fromindustiy, consulting firms, local, state andfederal agencies, and academic institu-tions. The interdisciplinary nature ofhydrology is recognized; many varieddisciplines are commonly representedon conference agendas.

For additional information contact:Richard Stockdale or Dale van Darn,Wyoming State Engineer's Office, GroundWater Section, Herschler Building,4th East., Cheyenne, Wy 82002;(307) 777-7354.

Water ResourcesResearch Conference

Oct 23, 1987Case Grande, Anzona

See page 3 for conference write up.

American Water ResourcesAssocialionConference and Symposium

Oct 31-November 6Salt Lake dy, Utah

The theme of AWRAs 23rd annual con-ference is Averting Water Crises. WaterResources Related to Mining and En-erg yPrep aring for the Future will bethe topic of discussion at the symposium.

For information about the conferencecontact: A. Bruce Bishop, Dean, Collegeof Engineering, Utah State UniversityLogan, UT 84322-4100 (801) 750-2775.

For information about the symposiumcontact: Richard Dworsky Chief of Plan-ning & Evaluation, US Bureau of LandManagement, 701 "C" Street, Box 13,Anchorage, AK 99513 (907) 271-3349.

Toxic Substances in AgriculiuralWater Supply and Drainage:Searching for Solutions

Ecemtr3-5, 1987Las Vegas, Nevada

Sponsored by the US. Committee on Ini-gation and Drainage, this nationaJmeeting follows a series of four regionalmeetijigs held in 1986 which examinedthe problems associated with toxics inagricultural water. The purpose of thenational meeting is to provide a forumfor those with divergent interests to iden-tify and constructively examine possiblesolutions to the toxics problem.

For additional information contact: US.Committee on Irrigation and Drainage,1kst Office Box 15326, Denver, CQ 80215or call Larry D. Stephens, USCID Exe-cutive Vice President, (303) 235-696Q

The Fifth NationalDrainage Symposium

Decemberl4-15, 1987Chicago, Illinois

Sponsored by the American Society ofAgricultural Engineers, the drainagesymposium covers a broad range oftechnology for design, installation,control and operation of watermanagement systems.

For additional information contact:William R Johnston, Bureau of Reclama-tion, Engineering & Research Center,Building 67 Box 25007 Denver, CO80225; (303) 234-2041

AR ROYOUNIVERSITY OF ARIZONAWater Resources Research CenterTucson, Arizona 85721

¡frWRRC

Water Resources Research Center

On-Se Treatment-FiUti National Symposium onIndividual andSmall CommunitySewage Systems

Gcember 14-15, 1987Chicago, Illinois

Sponsored by the American Society ofAgricultural Engineers, the conference

Arroyo, a quarterly publication,is published cooperatively by:

Arizona Department ofEnvimnrnental Quality2005 North CentralPhoenix, AZ 85004(602) 257-2306

Arizona Department of WaterResources99 East VirginiaPhoenix, AZ 85004(602) 255-1554

Arizona State Land Department1624 West AdamsPhoenix, AZ 85007(602) 255-4629

covers a full range of technology forcomprehensive, cost efficient design andanalysis of on-site waste disposal systemsfor small communities

For additional information contact:Karen Manci, 590 Woody Hayes Drive,Ohio State University, Columbus OH43210; (614) 292-6007

Office of Arid Lands StudiesCollege of AgricültureUniversity of Arizona845 North ParkTucson, AZ 85719(602) 621-1955

Water Resources Research CenterCollege of Engineering and MinesUniversity of ArizonaTucson, AZ 85721(602) 621-7607

Address news items or comments to:

Joe Gelt, EditorArroyoArizona Water Resources CenterGeology Building, Room 314University of ArizonaTucson, AZ(602) 621-7607

NON-PROFIT ORG.

U.S. POSTAGEPAID

PERMIT NO. 190TUCSON. ARIZONA