# Presentation: 675233

**“****Ground Water Level and Quality Monitoring”**
**National Ground Water Association**
***Presentation for:***
**Advisory Committee on Water Information**
**January 19, 2006**

**Notes:**
Thank chair, membership and Toni for opportunity to address the group.  

## NGWA Vision

**To be the leading community of ground water   **
**professionals that promotes the responsible ****development, use and management of **
**ground water resources**

**Notes:**
NGWA’s vision is to be the leading community of ground water professionals that promotes the
Responsible development, use and management of ground water resources

## NGWA Mission

**Dedicated to advancing the expertise of all **
**ground water professionals and**
** ****to furthering ground water awareness and **
**protection  through education and outreach.**

**Notes:**
NGWA mission or what we do is
Work to advance the expertise of all ground water professionals and work to further ground water awareness and protection  through education and outreach. 

## NGWA Programming

**Information Transfer**** **
**Research**** **
**Professional Certification**** **
**Networking**** **
**Public Awareness and Advocacy**

## NGWA Membership

*15,455 members as of 10/25/05*

**Notes:**
NGWA’s membership strength comes from not only its numbers but also its diversity.  The Association represents ground water professionals involved in all aspects of the resource management, protection, supply and remediation.  Coming from both  public and private sector. Uniting scientific researchers, regulators, consultants,  equipment manufacturers and suppliers and the practitioners in the field.  

## Ground Water	

**25% of total fresh water is ground water; 1% is surface water and rest is locked in polar ice and glaciers**** **
**47.9% of America’s population uses ground water as drinking water source**** **
**42.4% of country’s irrigation water is ground water**** **

**Notes:**
Ground water is an important source of water supply for the nation

25% of total fresh water is ground water; 1% is surface water and the rest is locked in polar ice and glaciers 

47.9% of America’s population uses ground water as its drinking water source

42.4% of the country’s irrigation water is ground water.

The resource holds the promise for helping to meet the nation’s future water needs as competition for water increases.

## NGWA Priorities and Activities

**NGWA members and state geologists surveyed**** **
**White paper to agencies and Congress**** **
**Testimony before Senate and House**** **
**Response to White House questions on ground water monitoring**

**Notes:**
More than two years ago, NGWA began a member-wide collaborative effort to identify what ground water professionals viewed as the most important factors affecting ground water supply; what are currently the most promising strategies to address those factors; and what support is needed from the federal government to ensure ground water professionals have the tools to both continue and improve efficient/effective ground water management practices.

NGWA member and state geologist surveys provided us with an initial benchmark regarding perspectives on ground water availability issues and how to address them.  

Survey results informed a “Ground Water Sustainability White Paper” the Association finalized in early 2004. 

We’ve also used these surveys and three other state surveys in our discussions with Congressional members and staff at the NGWA Washington fly-ins and throughout the year during our conversations on the Hill

We’ve testified before the Senate and House on water supply issues.    

After seeing the surveys, staff working at the White House approached NGWA with a series of questions regarding ground water monitoring.  

It is our intention to continue to talk with members of Congress and engage others in a dialogue about the survey results, ground water monitoring needs and approaches and gather feedback and input, with a goal of ensuring that both the government and ground water professionals have the data support and tools that will allow for effective ground water management.   

We appreciate this opportunity to talk with you and share what we have done, our goals and initial thoughts and get feedback on those efforts

## Today’s Discussion Agenda

**NGWA ground water supply surveys **
**NGWA’s response to White House  questions on ground water quality and quantity monitoring**

**Notes:**
Rest of my time I would like to provide
An overview of NGWA surveys on Ground Water Supply Issues and How to Address Them

As well as provide an overview of NGWA response to White House staff questions on ground water quality and quantity monitoring.  

## The Survey:  What We Asked

**Type of organization**
**Is a ground water supply shortage expected?  Why?**
**How good is your information?**
**What additional information is most important?**
**What should the federal government do to help meet information gaps?**

**Notes:**
The surveys asked
The Type of Organization
Whether the respondent expected ground water supply shortages in the next 20 years?
The respondent’s views on the reasons for the expected or current shortages
How good is the ground water information and data currently available
What types of additional information are most important to gather
What the federal should do to help meet the information gaps, if any, identified

So what was the response?

## State Geologist Response

**Research**
**Regulatory**
**Both**

**State Geologist Response**

**Notes:**
We received response from 28 states 

## NGWA Member Response

**# responding**
**1 **** ****2**** **** ****3**** **** ****4**** **** ****5****  ****6**

**Notes:**
74 NGWA members responded to the survey, representing 34 states
The slide provides information on the number of responses received per state

In total between the two surveys, we received responses were received from individuals in 43 states. 

## NGWA Members’ Organization Type

**Notes:**
The NGWA member responses represented the range of NGWA member types from government, to consultants to industry representatives

## Shortage Forecast: Combined Responses

**Statewide now**
**Statewide future**
**Urban & rural now**
**Urban now, both future**
**Urban Now**** **
**Urban future**
**Rural Now**** **
**Rural now, both future**
**Urban and rural future**
**No problems/other**
**No response**

**Notes:**

This slide represents the combined responses of both the state geologists and the NGWA members to the question of “Do you anticipate your state will experience a ground water supply shortage within the next 20 years?” 

If there were multiple responses from a state and they differed, the “worst” response is portrayed in this slide

The following are notes from Bev’s talk – don’t know if you need to cover
AZ: 3 of 5 (a consulting eng, acad, public provider) rated this; 
Ark other: Excessive drawdowns in urban and rural areas.
CA: 1/3, all 3 are consultants; 
CO: 1 cons says urban now, 1 rural now, 1 urban later, all consultants
FL: 3/3 say this; GA: 2 of 4, consultants say rural now, water bottler says urban now; 
IL: driller says urban now, acad & state gov’t say urban later
ID: 1/3, a drilling contractor; LA: 1⁄2, retired fed; 
ME: 1⁄2, equipment supplier MA: 1⁄2, public water suppliers; 
MT: acad say urban now, contr says rural now, cons. Says local now, another acad says urban & rural future
NV: public int group says statewide now, cons & acad say urban now
NY 1⁄2 drillers says statewide now, the other says urban now
OH: 1⁄2, from local government says local urban & rural now; 
PA: 2/4, both consultants say urban future, 1 supplier says rural future
RI: stream depletion, but no gw shortage
TN: 1/3 said urban now, all say rural or urban later 
WA: 3/4 ,; WY: both, contractor & consultant
TX 3/6, consultant, local gov’t & acad 
5 total respondents saw no shortage

## Reasons for Shortages: Combined Responses

**Quantity **
**Quality**
**Legal**
**Quantity & Quality**
**Quant. & Legal****  **
**All 3 reasons**
**No Shortage**

**Notes:**
The surveys showed that there is no one cause for ground water shortages nationwide but rather a combination of reasons. The gray indicates a combination of ground water quality, quantity and legal issues leads the way based on the combined results.

Bev’s notes:  
IL: 1 says quant & qual, 1 says quant & legal, one say quant
NM: 1 says all 3, one says quantity
TN: 3 different answers, none said all 3 but all three covered

## Information Available: State Geologists’ Responses

**Most information**
**Water level monitoring network (3.36)**
**Statewide aquifer maps **
**Hydraulic properties **
**Water quality**
**Water use data **
**Consumptive use data (2.96)**

**Least information**
**Quality monitoring network (2.78)**
**Ground water Flow models**
**On-line data**
**Recharge rates**
**3-D aquifer maps/models**
**Artificial recharge opportunities (1.96)**

**1=no information            5=met goal**

**Notes:**
This slides shows how state geological survey respondents ranked the availability of various types of information. 

The ranking scale used is from 1 to 5, with 1 meaning no information is available and 5 meaning the state has this type of information readily available.  

## Knowledge of Ground Water Availability  

**Notes:**
This slide summarizes the response to the question “At what level of detail is there information in your state about how much ground water is available?

Survey choices ranged “know the potential yield from all major and minor aquifers”  to “having only very limited aquifer information.”

The response which the highest percentage of state geologist selected was “have reasonable estimate about the potential yield from all major aquifers.”

The response which the highest percentage of NGWA members  selected was “have a reasonable estimate of the potential yield from all aquifers”

It would seem from this that NGWA members believe there is more information available than the state geologist. 

## Most Important Data to Expand: Combined Response

**Accurate Water Use Data**** **
**Water Quality for All Aquifers**** **
**Hydraulic Properties of Major Aquifers**** **
**Ground Water Recharge Rates**** **

**Notes:**
Both the State Geological Surveys and the NGWA Member Survey respondents identified the following as the most important types of data to expand and continue:

Accurate Water Use Data
Water Quality for All Aquifers
Hydraulic Properties of Major Aquifers
Ground Water Level Monitoring Networks
Ground Water Recharge Rates

## Most Important Data to Expand: Differences in Response

**State geologists highlighted the need to expand statewide aquifer mapping**** **
**NGWA members highlighted the need for on-line aquifer data**

**Notes:**
While the state geologists and NGWA members agreed on the previous four types of data as the most important to expand or continue, the state geologists also highlighted the need to expand statewide aquifer mapping efforts while    NGWA members highlighted their interest in seeing on-line aquifer data.  

## Top 5 Desired Federal Actions

**Increase funding for cooperative ground water quantity data collection**** **
**Increase funding for cooperative ground water quality data collection**** **
**Increase funding for aquifer mapping**** **
**Increase ground water availability research**

**Notes:**
Respondents to both the surveys agreed that the most useful federal actions to help meet information gaps in their states are:

Increase funding for cooperative ground water quantity data collection
Increase funding for cooperative ground water quality data collection
Increase funding for aquifer mapping
Increase ground water availability research.  Examples of such research include that related to desalination, aquifer storage and recovery or models to inform local policy decisions)

 Bullet three and four were switched for the two groups, with the state geologists ranking funding for aquifer mapping ahead of ground water availability research and the NGWA members results in opposite order.

## Top 5 Desired Federal Actions (cont.) 

**State geologists’ #5: Fund public education and outreach on water conservation**** **
**NGWA members’ #5: Develop a national ground water clearinghouse**

**Notes:**
State geological survey and NGWA member respondents differed on their number five choice.  

State geological survey respondents selected “fund public education and outreach on water conservation” as their number 5 desired federal action.

NGWA members instead selected development of a national clearinghouse for ground water quality and quantity information as their #5 priority

## Survey Conclusions

**Most states are experiencing at least local shortages now.**** **
**Most states have at least a reasonable estimate of the potential yield of major aquifers.**** **
**Few states have met any goals in collecting any type of ground water data.**

**Notes:**
Most states are experiencing at least local shortages now.
Respondents from 41 of 43 states reporting expect at least localized ground water shortages within 20 years.
29 of these currently indicate there are at least localized shortages now.  
This is far more than a July 2003 GAO report that surveyed state water managers found.  GAO included surface water, only looked at next ten years, and ignored potential droughts.
Most states have at least a “reasonable” estimate of the potential yield of major aquifers.
Few states have met any goals in collecting any type of ground water data.

## Survey Conclusions (cont.)

**Priorities for collecting more data parallel types of data already being collected, perhaps because goals are not met.**
**Cooperative federal and state programs for ground water data collection**** ****favored**

**Notes:**
Priorities for collecting more data parallel types of data already being collected, perhaps because goals not met.

Cooperative federal and state programs for ground water data collection are favored

## Subcommittee on Water Availability and Quality

**Report released early 2005 **** **
**Questions posed to NGWA**

**Notes:**

We completed the surveys we just discussed, and provided summaries  to staff at the White House at their request.  Then in early 2005 about the time the Subcommittee on Water Availability and Quality under the National Science and Technology Council out of the Executive Office of the President released a report titled  Science and Technology to Support Fresh Water Availability in the United States and was working on action plans, we were asked to respond to a series of questions related to ground water quality and quantity monitoring

The rest of my talk I will focus on NGWA’s response to those questions.

The report is a “state of the science” assessment

The Subcommittee  then began work on an action plan to implement the reports findings

Aware of NGWA’s survey and activities related to ground water, ground water availability and monitoring data, the Association was asked to respond to a series of questions related to ground water monitoring

Subcommittee on Water Availability and Quality under the National Science and Technology Council out of the Executive Office of the President released in February 2005 a report titled

“Science and Technology to Support Fresh Water Availability in the United States”

State of the science report on fresh water availability

Subcommittee is working on an action plan.

Some of you around the table may know more about and be actively involved in this process.  

From the NGWA perspective, given the previously discussed surveys and our role as a ground water professional organization, NGWA was asked to respond to a series of questions providing further detail on what a national approach to ground water level and quality monitoring may look like.     

## Questions Posed to NGWA

**What information needs does long-term ground water quality and quantity monitoring address?**** **
**What are the long-term ground water monitoring needs?**** **
**What should the federal role be as regards long-term quality and quantity ground water monitoring?**** **

**Notes:**
This slide and the next identifies the questions posed to us.

Read from slide or discuss general idea that it is the why, what, who, for a ground water monitoring and the federal role in it as well as ideas to help ensure effectiveness and efficiency of effort. 

## Questions Posed to NGWA cont. 

**How does the federal government integrate its role with private sector, local and state government monitoring efforts?**** **
**What are the priority actions that the federal government should take relative to long-term quality and quantity ground water monitoring?**

**Notes:**

The last two questions posed were ..... 

In order to develop an answer to these questions, NGWA assembled a work group at San Antonio’s Ground Water Summit of some of the various constituent groups with interest and expertise in ground water monitoring including federal, state and local entities, private sector firms and academics. 

NGWA’s response was also vetted through other NGWA member groups reflecting the broad, diversity of ground water professionals who constitute our membership.

We will briefly go through the questions and responses, but wanted to share with you the themes that came out of discussions and follow up reviews:

Recognize need for efficiency and effectiveness especially as budgets at all levels are stretched, so there was interest, for example, in building on existing efforts and identifying data already being collected.

Early on the importance of integrating ground water quality and quantity was noted.

Equally the importance of a truly collaborative, cooperative effort among all levels of government and the private sector was seen a necessary ingredient 

## Why Undertake Long Term Ground Water Monitoring?

**Assess the resource’s ability to support  population growth and development**** **
**Help design and assess effectiveness of mgmt and protection programs**** **
**Identify short and long-term changes to ground water **
**Identify artificial ground water recharge opportunities**

**Notes:**
The first question – why undertake long-term ground water monitoring.   We’ve identified in this slide and the next some of the reasons, including: 

Assess the resource’s ability to support population growth and development – especially important with overall population growth, movement toward arid and semi-arid states and also changing distribution patterns with more concentration in urban areas.

Help in designing and assessing the effectiveness of management and protection programs – may want to stress this as efficient and effective way for spending and allocating not only monitoring resources but overall environmental protection and management resources.

Identify short and long-term changes to ground water.

NEXT SLIDE

## Why Undertake Long Term Ground Water Monitoring cont.

**Assess ground water and surface water interactions **** **
**Provide data for modeling **
** **
**Provide a more accurate estimate of actual ground water withdrawals**** **

**Notes:**
Assess ground water and surface water interactions

Provide data for modeling

Provide a more accurate estimate of actual ground water withdrawals.   There was rather lengthy discussion regarding our current water use estimates.   Of course, this has huge implications for estimating current and future use and the ability to support population growth, development and ecosystems.   

## What Are the Long-Term Monitoring Needs?

**National ground water **_**quality **_**monitoring network**
**National ground water**_** level**_** monitoring network**

**Notes:**
What are the long term monitoring needs?

Generally it was believed that : 
An integrated approach should be taken to ground water quality and quantity monitoring
Networks should also include:
Ambient ground water monitoring
Impacted areas monitoring
Targeted monitoring

Supporting ambient networks was especially noted as one that may not take as many resources but which is often overlooked. 

## What Is the Federal Role?

**Support a collaborative framework ****(Ground Water Monitoring Subcommittee under ACWI raised as possible framework)**
** **
**Develop guidelines for data collection, quality control, storage and retrieval**** **

**Notes:**

What is the federal role 

We’ve identified four areas that are covered on this slide and the next:

Support a collaborative framework among federal, state, local and non-government entities to assess available data, identify ground water monitoring level and quality data gaps, and ground water level and quality data needs (NGWA, 2004). A Ground Water Monitoring Subcommittee under the Advisory Committee for Water Information (ACWI) should be explored as a possible framework for federal agency, inter-governmental and non-governmental collaboration. Because of potential differences in the issues and entities involved in ground water quality versus ground water quantity monitoring, additional discussion of Subcommittee structure would be valuable. 

Develop guidelines for ground water use, quantity, and quality data collection, quality control, storage, and retrieval. A control step is needed prior to data storage to assure data quality. However, developing a complicated oversight function that unnecessarily impedes data flow should be avoided. Development and adherence to the guidelines should lessen, although not eliminate, the extent of quality control oversight needed prior to data storage. 

## What Is the Federal Role? cont.

**Provide federal funding for cooperative monitoring network development and operation**** **** **
**Establish a national clearinghouse**

**Notes:**
Provide federal funding for the cooperative development and operation of monitoring networks.

Provide federal funding for cooperative development and operation of monitoring networks along the lines of the National Cooperative Geologic Mapping Program, for the cooperative development and operation of (1) a national ground water quality monitoring network and (2) a national ground water level monitoring network that addresses the needs identified in Question 2. The National Cooperative Geologic Mapping Program is suggested as a model because it includes federal, state, and educational components with federal money requiring a match. Additional programs that provide grants or which feature federal-state cooperative funding are the Water Resources Research Institutes Program and the Cooperative Water Program, respectively 

Establish a national clearinghouse to store data from the national ground water monitoring networks.  The report suggests that these data should be available from links on already existing National Spatial Data Infrastructure (NSDI) sites to make the information easier to find and assure that the proper documentation of these data is maintained. Metadata should also be collected and made available through the national clearinghouse so as to identify additional ground water data sources and data gathering efforts. Collecting and compiling metadata would help avoid duplication of effort. 

Elaborating further on the discussions regarding federal funding for cooperative development and operation of monitoring networks, NGWA participants suggested that:
Federal Monitoring Component: A portion of the federal funding should go to federal agencies to support the federal backbone of the national ground water quality monitoring network and the federal backbone of the national ground water level monitoring network. The funding would be used by federal agencies to build on and augment, as needed, state and local ground water monitoring data collection so as to help address national and regional (multi-state) scale questions.  
State Monitoring Component: A portion of the federal funding should be designated for grants to the states.  The federal grants to the states would be used to help support state ground water quality monitoring networks and state ground water level monitoring networks. The state monitoring networks would be designed to help address state and local scale questions. The state monitoring networks, which are partially supported by federal funding, would serve as the state and local component of the national ground water quality monitoring network and national ground water level monitoring network, as applicable. In return for receiving federal grants, the states would be required to commit to cooperative development and operation of the long-term national ground water quality monitoring network and the long term national ground water level monitoring network, as applicable. 
Education Component: A portion of federal funding should be set aside for guidelines development, and education programming. Education programming would include, among other activities, train-the-trainer sessions by the federal government on the national guidelines. Training grants under the education portion would be available to state, local or not-for-profit entities to provide the training at local levels using federally trained trainers. Public-awareness programming and outreach should also be eligible for federal funding under the education component. Public education provides the necessary background to understand monitoring results. With analytical capabilities in the parts-per-trillion range, public education will help avoid unnecessary confusion and concern while building support for needed actions as appropriate. 

## How to Optimize and Leverage Resources?

**Federal government is “glue” to hold collective efforts together**** **
**States should develop state ground water availability and quality picture**** **
**Private sector firms should perform exploratory drilling and install monitoring wells  **

**Notes:**
Together local, state and federal government are part of a mosaic with each level playing an integral role in the long-term monitoring of the nation’s ground water.
Federal Government: The federal government can and should serve as the “glue” that holds data collection efforts together. Federal leadership is needed to promote better coordination among federal agencies as well as among federal, state and local agencies. Promoting greater coordination and cooperation would help avoid duplication, make greater use of existing data, and pinpoint data gaps and future needs 

State and Local Government:  The state and local government role should be to develop and operate state or sub-state ground water quality and ground water level monitoring networks, unless the state or local government lacks the capability. 

To the extent possible, federal, state and local governments should contract with private-sector firms for the performance of exploratory drilling, and the installation of wells for monitoring ground-water quality and elevation 

## What Should Federal Priorities Be? 

**Federal funding of cooperative ground water quantity monitoring**
**Federal funding of cooperative ground water quality monitoring**

**Notes:**
What should federal priorities be relative to long-term ground water quality and quantity monitoring?

As noted when going over the state geologist and NGWA member surveys 

federal funding for cooperative ground water quantity data collection was identified as the most useful action for the federal government followed by federal support of cooperative data collection of ground water quality (NGWA 2004).  

## What Should Federal Priorities Be? cont.

**Others**
**Demonstrating a commitment to collaborative ground water quality and quantity data collection **
**Ensuring the availability of quality data at appropriate scale**
**Supporting research and development**
**Promoting public education and outreach**

**Notes:**
Additional priorities for federal action related to ground water monitoring include: 

Demonstrating leadership and commitment to collaborative ground water quality and quantity data collection including: 
Publicly acknowledging the importance of and committing to provide long-term sustained support and funding for ground water quality and quantity data collection, analysis and information dissemination 
Matching declarations of federal interest with federal funding

Ensuring the availability of quality data at appropriate scale in order to make sound ground water planning, management and development decisions including:
Synthesizing, in coordination with state and local government, existing data and identifying data gaps. 
Developing guidelines setting out a consistent methodology for data collection 
Establishing milestones to measure progress in reaching data collection goals and committing to provide adequate funding to reach those milestones. 
Promoting the use of more robust data sets to better inform and reduce the uncertainty of incorporating federal requirements into state and local ground water decision-making, such as decisions regarding the application of the Endangered Species Act

Supporting research and development related to ground water availability and quality including
Providing  a forum to integrate and bring together a multi-disciplinary (e.g. economic) approach to ground water availability
Supporting research and development into improved sensor technology so as to lower monitoring costs

Promoting public education and outreach so individuals have the background to interpret monitoring results, and provide informed input into decision-making.

## Thank you!

**Robert Masters and David Wunsch**
**National Ground Water Association**
**601 Dempsey Rd**
**Westerville, OH 43081**
**800/551-7379, ext. 560**
**614/898-7786 fax**
**rmasters@ngwa.org**

**Notes:**
Thank you on behalf of the ground water professionals of NGWA

Click on mouse
The NGWA  member Scientists and Engineers

Click on mouse
The NGWA member Manufacturers and Suppliers

Click on mouse
The NGWA member contractors

Working together – providing and protecting the nation’s ground water resource.