This is a layer of water service boundaries for 45,973 community water systems that deliver tap water to 307.7 million people in the US. This amounts to 97% of the population reportedly served by active community water systems and 93% of active community water systems. The layer is based on multiple data sources and a methodology developed by SimpleLab and collaborators called a Tiered, Explicit, Match, and Model approach–or TEMM, for short. The name of the approach reflects exactly how the nationwide data layer was developed. The TEMM is composed of three hierarchical tiers, arranged by data and model fidelity. First, we use explicit water service boundaries provided by states. These are spatial polygon data, typically provided at the state-level. We call systems with explicit boundaries Tier 1. In the absence of explicit water service boundary data, we use a matching algorithm to match water systems to the boundary of a town or city (Census Place TIGER polygons). When multiple water systems match to the same TIGER boundary, we employ a "best match" algorithm that assigns one water system to one TIGER place based on features like population served and other locational information about the water system. Finally, in the absence of an explicit water service boundary (Tier 1) or a TIGER place polygon match (Tier 2), a statistical model trained on explicit water service boundary data (Tier 1) is used to estimate a reasonable radius at provided water system centroids, and model a spherical water system boundary (Tier 3). Water system centroids are taken from the ECHO database; however, where a system centroid is labeled as a county or state centroid, we take several steps to assign a better centroid (using sources like UCMR or TIGER). A summary of the systems and population assigned to different tiers is as follows:

Population coverage rates per Tier, for systems with population reported: - Tier 1: 49.3% population covered (155,869,771 people) - Tier 2: 35.13% population covered (111,074,087 people) - Tier 3: 12.9% population covered (40,771,645 people)

Active community water systems coverage rates per Tier: - Tier 1: 35.7% system covered (17645 systems) - Tier 2: 22.42% system covered (11079 systems) - Tier 3: 34.9% system covered (17249 systems) - No Tier/Geometry: 6.98% system covered (3451 systems)

Several limitations to this data exist–and the layer should be used with these in mind. The case of assigning a Census Place TIGER polygon to the "best match" water system first introduced in v2.0.0 requires further validation. Tier 3 boundaries have modeled radii stemming from a lat/long centroid of a water system facility; but the underlying lat/long centroids for water system facilities are of variable quality. It is critical to evaluate the "geometry quality" column (included from the EPA ECHO data source) when looking at Tier 3 boundaries; fidelity is very low when geometry quality is a county or state centroid– but we did not exclude the data from the layer. Since v 2.0.0 we have improved the percentage of Tier 3 geometries with state centroids and county centroids from 50% of Tier 3 boundaries to 30% of Tier 3 boundaries. Missing water systems are typically those without a centroid, in a U.S. territory, or missing population and connection data. Finally, Tier 1 systems are assumed to be high fidelity, but rely on the accuracy of state data collection and maintenance.

Changelog:

3.0.0 (2022-10-31)

• Adding manually-contributed systems from the Internet of Water's Github: https://github.com/cgs-earth/ref_pws/raw/main/02_output/contributed_pws.gpkg
• Refactored to use geopackage through most of pipeline instead of geojson
• Added geometry_source_detail column to, where possible, include notes provided by the data sources themselves about how the geometry was sourced

Terms of Use:

Data Limitations Disclaimer

The MassDEP Estimated Sewer System Service Area Boundaries datalayer may not be complete, may contain errors, omissions, and other inaccuracies, and the data are subject to change. The user’s use of and/or reliance on the information contained in the Document (e.g. data) shall be at the user’s own risk and expense. MassDEP disclaims any responsibility for any loss or harm that may result to the user of this data or to any other person due to the user’s use of the Document.

All sewer service area delineations are estimates for broad planning purposes and should only be used as a guide. The data is not appropriate for site-specific or parcel-specific analysis. Not all properties within a sewer service area are necessarily served by the system, and some properties outside the mapped service areas could be served by the wastewater utility – please contact the relevant wastewater system. Not all service areas have been confirmed by the sewer system authorities.

This is an ongoing data development project. Attempts have been made to contact all sewer/wastewater systems, but not all have responded with information on their service area. MassDEP will continue to collect and verify this information. Some sewer service areas included in this datalayer have not been verified by the POTWs, privately-owned treatment works, GWDPs, or the municipality involved, but since many of those areas are based on information published online by the municipality, the utility, or in a publicly available report, they are included in the estimated sewer service area datalayer.

Please use the following citation to reference these data

MassDEP. Water Utility Resilience Program. 2025. Publicly-Owned Treatment Work and Non-Publicly-Owned Sewer Service Areas (PubV2024_12).

We want to learn about the data uses. If you use this dataset, please notify staff in the Water Resilience program (WURP@mass.gov).

Layers and Tables:

The MassDEP Estimated Sewer System Service Area data layer comprises two feature classes and a supporting table:

Publicly-Owned Treatment Works (POTW) Sewer Service Areas feature class SEWER_SERVICE_AREA_POTW_POLY includes polygon features for sewer service areas systems operated by publicly owned treatment works (POTWs)Non-Publicly Owned Treatment Works (NON-POTW) Sewer Service Areas feature class SEWER_SERVICE_AREA_NONPOTW_POLY includes polygon features for sewer service areas for operated by NON publicly owned treatment works (NON-POTWs)The Sewer Service Areas Unlocated Sites table SEWER_SERVICE_AREA_USL contains a list of known, unmapped active POTW and NON-POTW services areas at the time of publication.

ProductionData Universe

Effluent wastewater treatment plants in Massachusetts are permitted either through the Environmental Protection Agency’s (EPA) National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) surface water discharge permit program or the MassDEP Groundwater Discharge Permit Program. The WURP has delineated active service areas served by publicly and privately-owned effluent treatment works with a NPDES permit or a groundwater discharge permit.

National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) Permits

In the Commonwealth of Massachusetts, the EPA is the permitting authority for regulating point sources that discharge pollutants to surface waters. NPDES permits regulate wastewater discharge by limiting the quantities of pollutants to be discharged and imposing monitoring requirements and other conditions. NPDES permits are typically co-issued by EPA and the MassDEP. The limits and/or requirements in the permit ensure compliance with the Massachusetts Surface Water Quality Standards and Federal Regulations to protect public health and the aquatic environment. Areas served by effluent treatment plants with an active NPDES permit are included in this datalayer based on a master list developed by MassDEP using information sourced from the EPA’s Integrated Compliance Information System (ICIS).

Groundwater Discharge (GWD) Permits

In addition to surface water permittees, the WURP has delineated all active systems served by publicly and privately owned effluent treatment works with groundwater discharge (GWD) permits, and some inactive service areas. Groundwater discharge permits are required for systems discharging over 10,000 GPD sanitary wastewater – these include effluent treatment systems for public, district, or privately owned effluent treatment systems. Areas served by an effluent treatment plant with an active GWD permit are included in this datalayer based on lists received from MassDEP Wastewater staff.

Creation of Unique IDs for Each Service Area

The Sewer Service Area datalayer contains polygons that represent the service area of a particular wastewater system within a particular municipality. Every discharge permittee is assigned a unique NPDES permit number by EPA or a unique GWD permit identifier by MassDEP. MassDEP WURP creates a unique Sewer_ID for each service area by combining the municipal name of the municipality served with the permit number (NPDES or GWD) ascribed to the sewer that is serving that area. Some municipalities contain more than one sewer system, but each sewer system has a unique Sewer_ID. Occasionally the area served by a sewer system will overlap another town by a small amount – these small areas are generally not given a unique ID. The Estimated sewer Service Area datalayer, therefore, contains polygons with a unique Sewer_ID for each sewer service area. In addition, some municipalities will have multiple service areas being served by the same treatment plant – the Sewer_ID for these will contain additional identification, such as the name of the system, to uniquely identify each system.

Classifying System Service Areas

WURP staff reviewed the service areas for each system and, based on OWNER_TYPE, classified as either a publicly-owned treatment work (POTW) or a NON-POTW (see FAC_TYPE field). Each service area is further classified based on the population type served (see SECTOR field).

Methodologies and Data Sources

Several methodologies were used to create service area boundaries using various sources, including data received from the sewer system in response to requests for information from the MassDEP WURP project, information on file at MassDEP, and service area maps found online at municipal and wastewater system websites. When MassDEP received sewer line data rather than generalized areas, 300-foot buffers were created around the sewer lines to denote service areas and then edited to incorporate generalizations. Some municipalities submitted parcel data or address information to be used in delineating service areas. Many of the smaller GWD permitted sewer service areas were delineated using parcel boundaries related to the address on file.

Verification Process

Small-scale pdf file maps with roads and other infrastructure were sent to systems for corrections or verifications. If the system were small, such as a condominium complex or residential school, the relevant parcels were often used as the basis for the delineated service area. In towns where 97% or more of their population is served by the wastewater system and no other service area delineation was available, the town boundary was used as the service area boundary. Some towns responded to the request for information or verification of service areas by stating that the town boundary should be used since all, or nearly all, of the municipality is served by one wastewater system.

To ensure active systems are mapped, WURP staff developed two work flows. For NPDES-permitted systems, WURP staff reviewed available information on EPA’s ICIS database and created a master list of these systems. Staff will work to routinely update this master list by reviewing the ICIS database for new NPDES permits. The master list will serve as a method for identifying active systems, inactive systems, and unmapped systems. For GWD permittees, GIS staff established a direct linkage to the groundwater database, which allows for populating information into data fields and identifying active systems, inactive systems, and unmapped systems.

All unmapped systems are added to the Sewer Service Area Unlocated List (SEWER_SERVICE_AREAS_USL) for future mapping. Some service areas have not been mapped but their general location is represented by a small circle which serves as a placeholder - the location of these circles are estimated based on the general location of the treatment plant or the general estimated location of the service area - these do not represent the actual service area.

Sources of information for estimated wastewater service areas:

EEOA Water Assets Project (2005) sewer lines (these were buffered to create service areas) Horsely Witten Report 2008 Municipal Master Plans, Open Space Plans, Facilities Plans, Wastewater and Sewer System Webpages, reports and online interactive maps GIS data received from POTWs and NON-POTWs Detailed infrastructure mapping completed through the MassDEP WURP Critical Infrastructure Initiative

In the absence of other service area information, for municipalities served by a town-wide sewer system serving at least 97% of the population, the municipality’s boundary was used. Percent served information and determinations of which municipalities are 97% or more served by the wastewater system were made based on the Percent Sewer Service Map created in 2018 by MassDEP based on various sources of information including but not limited to:

The number of services as a percent of developed parcelsTaken directly from a Master Plan, Sewer Department Website, Open Space Plan, etc. found online Calculated using information from the town on population served MassDEP staff estimateHorsely Witten Report 2008 or Pioneer Institute 2004 Calculated from Sewer System Areas Mapped through MassDEP WURP Critical

Data updated daily between midnight and 6 am.The Ohio Source Water Protection Program is intended to protect Ohio's streams, rivers, lakes, reservoirs, and ground waters used for public drinking water from future contamination. To protect drinking water supplies, a protection area is delineated based on the area that supplies water to the well or surface water intake. A Drinking Water Source Water Protection Area for a public water system using ground water is the surface and subsurface area surrounding a public water supply well(s) which will provide water from an aquifer to the well(s) within five years as delineated or endorsed by the agency under Ohio's Wellhead Protection and Source Water Assessment and Protection Programs. The Inner Management Zone is the surface and subsurface area surrounding a public water supply well(s) that will provide water to the well(s) within one year as delineated or endorsed by the agency under the wellhead protection program and the source water assessment and protection program. This data is updated, as needed, on a continual basis.

These data are a summary of Public Water Systems (PWS) and populations receiving surface drinking water supply from National Forest System (NFS) lands managed by the USDA Forest Service in the conterminous United States (CONUS). The PWS in these data include only those receiving some portion of their surface water supply from NFS lands, either through the intakes they manage or through water purchases from other PWS that receive some portion of their surface water supply from NFS lands. To generate these data, unique model input databases were created for each of the 172 NFS units in the CONUS and water supply from each NFS unit and other non-NFS lands were simulated and tracked through the river network using the Water Supply and Stress Index (WaSSI) model while including inter-basin transfers (IBTs). Water supply outputs were then linked to the Environmental Protection Agency’s Safe Drinking Water Information System (SDWIS) database of public surface drinking water intakes. When a PWS had more than one intake, the percentage of the total surface drinking water originating on the individual NFS unit for the public water system was calculated from the total available water and the total water from the individual NFS unit across all intakes for the public water system. In addition to results at the NFS unit level, Watershed Boundary Dataset (WBD) Watershed 12-digit Hydrologic Unit Code (HUC12) subwatersheds that contain NFS units and provide surface drinking water supply to PWSs are identified and summarized. Purchasing PWS in the SDWIS were included for those PWS that had an associated selling PWS with surface water intakes that received some portion of their water from NFS lands, and the purchasing PWSs did not have their own surface water intakes and therefore would already be in the database. Also included are results aggregated across all NFS units in each Forest Service Region.The objectives of this analysis were to (1) estimate how much fresh surface water supply originates from NFS lands, and (2) estimate how many people and which communities receive this fresh surface water supply.This data publication (second edition) was published on 03/31/2022 and supersedes that of https://doi.org/10.2737/RDS-2021-0098 (first edition). Changes to the original version include the following. The first edition included information on PWS intake facilities whose PWS-level primary water source was surface water or groundwater under the influence of surface water but whose facility-level water type was groundwater or groundwater purchased. Those facilities whose facility-level water type was groundwater or groundwater purchased were removed from this second edition. Secondly, this new edition includes three additional tables: All_NFS_Purchased.csv, FS_Region_Purchased.csv, and NFS_Unit_Purchased.csv. These tables provide additional information for those PWSs in the SDWIS that had an associated selling PWS with surface water intakes that received some portion of their water from NFS lands, and the purchasing PWSs did not have their own surface water intakes and therefore would already be in the database.

On 07/22/2022 this second edition was updated to include two additional tables (NFS_Unit_HUC12.csv and NFS_Unit_HUC12_PWS.csv) that provide additional information about PWSs that receive surface drinking water supply from particular HUC12 subwatersheds containing NFS units. Also added were geospatial files containing the HUC12 subwatershed boundaries corresponding to those referenced in the new tables. On 09/20/2022 the metadata for this second edition was updated to include reference to the newly published General Technical Report by Liu et al. (2022).

For more information about these data see Liu et al. (2022).

As included in this EnviroAtlas dataset, the community level domestic water use is calculated using locally available water use data per capita in gallons of water per day (GPD), distributed dasymetrically, and summarized by census block group. Domestic water use, as defined in this case, is intended to represent residential indoor and outdoor water use (e.g., cooking, hygiene, landscaping, pools, etc.) for primary residences (i.e., excluding second homes and tourism rentals). Two reports were used with city- or water supply authority- level domestic water demand data, in addition to county level data. The 2013 Jefferson County Data Book provides detailed publicly, privately, and self supplied water use and population served for 2013 and covers the Jefferson County, MO portion of the EnviroAtlas study area. The 2019 Census of Missouri Public Water Systems provides detailed publicly supplied water use and population served for 2019 and covers all of Missouri. The 2010 USGS Estimated Use of Water in the United States in 2010 report covers the missing areas, including counties in Illinois within the study area. Data from these reports were weighted across publicly, privately, and self-supplied sources by population served, resulting in a single water use estimate between 25 and 427 GPD for each of the subregions in the study area. This dataset was produced by the US EPA to support research and online mapping activities related to EnviroAtlas. EnviroAtlas (https://www.epa.gov/enviroatlas) allows the user to interact with a web-based, easy-to-use, mapping application to view and analyze multiple ecosystem services for the contiguous United States. The dataset is available as downloadable data (https://edg.epa.gov/data/Public/ORD/EnviroAtlas) or as an EnviroAtlas map service. Additional descriptive information about each attribute in this dataset can be found in its associated EnviroAtlas Fact Sheet (https://www.epa.gov/enviroatlas/enviroatlas-fact-sheets).

This map displays predicted probability of a 12-digit Hydrologic Unit (HUC12) being at risk of violating the drinking water nitrate standard. Risk is defined as there being greater than a 50% chance of having a drinking water violation. Observed violations of the nitrate standard in public drinking water was used to make predictions across the conterminous United States. The data on nitrate violations comes from the EPA's Safe Drinking Water Information System (SDWIS) and the data used as predictor variables in the prediction models comes from EPA's StreamCat database. The original predictions were made at the National Hydrography Dataset (NHD) Catchment scale and summarized at the HUC12 scale and/or 300 m pixel scale. The maps show that 19% of the conterminous United States is at risk of groundwater sourced drinking violations, while 16% of the U.S. is at risk of nitrate violations from surface water sources. Regions with the highest risk of nitrate drinking violations from groundwater sources are found in the southwest, south central plains, parts of north west, mid-Atlantic. Surface water sourced nitrate violations have the greatest risk primarily in the southwest and south-central areas of the U.S. This dataset was produced by the US EPA to support research and online mapping activities related to EnviroAtlas. EnviroAtlas (https://www.epa.gov/enviroatlas) allows the user to interact with a web-based, easy-to-use, mapping application to view and analyze multiple ecosystem services for the contiguous United States. The dataset is available as downloadable data (https://edg.epa.gov/data/Public/ORD/EnviroAtlas) or as an EnviroAtlas map service. Additional descriptive information about each attribute in this dataset can be found in its associated EnviroAtlas Fact Sheet (https://www.epa.gov/enviroatlas/enviroatlas-fact-sheets).

As included in this EnviroAtlas dataset, the community level domestic water use is calculated using locally available water use data per capita in gallons of water per day (GPD), distributed dasymetrically, and summarized by census block group. Domestic water use, as defined in this case, is intended to represent residential indoor and outdoor water use (e.g., cooking, hygiene, landscaping, pools, etc.) for primary residences (i.e., excluding second homes and tourism rentals). Three reports were used with city- or water supply authority- level domestic water demand data, in addition to county level data. The 2011 Northern Virginia Regional Water Supply Plan provides detailed publicly, privately, and self supplied water use and population served for 2007 and covers most of the Virginia side of the EnviroAtlas study area. The 2011 Fauquier County Regional Water Supply Plan provides detailed publicly, privately, and self supplied water use and population served for 2007 and covers Fauquier County, Virginia. The 2010 Washington Metropolitan Area Water Supply Reliability Study, Part 1 from the Interstate Commission on the Potomac River Basin provides detailed publicly, privately, and self supplied water use and population served for 2008 by water supplier for suppliers drawing from the Potomac River. Data from these reports were weighted across publicly, privately, and self-supplied sources by population served, resulting in a single water use estimate between 25 and 204 GPD for each of the subregions in the study area. This dataset was produced by the US EPA to support research and online mapping activities related to EnviroAtlas. EnviroAtlas (https://www.epa.gov/enviroatlas) allows the user to interact with a web-based, easy-to-use, mapping application to view and analyze multiple ecosystem services for the contiguous United States. The dataset is available as downloadable data (https://edg.epa.gov/data/Public/ORD/EnviroAtlas) or as an EnviroAtlas map service. Additional descriptive information about each attribute in this dataset can be found in its associated EnviroAtlas Fact Sheet (https://www.epa.gov/enviroatlas/enviroatlas-fact-sheets).

This data layer is an element of the Oregon GIS Framework. This map includes Oregon Department of Environmental Quality (DEQ) and Oregon Department of Human Services’ (DHS) Drinking Water Program Source Water Assessment results for community and non-transient non-community public water systems (PWS) for surface water systems that were active in June 1999 (when Oregon's Source Water Assessment Plan was approved by EPA). Subsequently, post-1999 systems have been added including some non-community systems.

As included in this EnviroAtlas dataset, the community level domestic water use was calculated using locally available water use data per capita in gallons of water per day (GPD), distributed dasymetrically, and summarized by census block group. Domestic water use, as defined in this case, is intended to represent residential indoor and outdoor water use (e.g., cooking hygiene, landscaping, pools, etc.) for primary residences (i.e., excluding second homes and tourism rentals). For the purposes of this metric, these publicly-supplied estimates are also applied and considered representative of local self-supplied water use. Specific to Florida, oversight of water resources is handled by five water management districts, each comprised of a board of Governor-appointed volunteers. These Districts focus on water supply, flood protection, water quality, and natural system preservation. Tampa is in the Southwest Florida Water Management District (SWFWMD). Within the EnviroAtlas Tampa boundary, there are 67 service providers with 2003-2007 estimates ranging from 59 to 230 GPD. This dataset was produced by the US EPA to support research and online mapping activities related to EnviroAtlas. EnviroAtlas (https://www.epa.gov/enviroatlas) allows the user to interact with a web-based, easy-to-use, mapping application to view and analyze multiple ecosystem services for the contiguous United States. The dataset is available as downloadable data (https://edg.epa.gov/data/Public/ORD/EnviroAtlas) or as an EnviroAtlas map service. Additional descriptive information about each attribute in this dataset can be found in its associated EnviroAtlas Fact Sheet (https://www.epa.gov/enviroatlas/enviroatlas-fact-sheets).

The Facility Registry Service (FRS) provides quality facility data to support EPA's mission of protecting human health and the environment by identifying and geospatially locating facilities, sites, or places subject to environmental regulations of environmental interest. Facility data is improved with geospatial processing of incoming data and data curation tools to provide an integrated, dataset to partners and the public through a variety of methods and products. For more detailed information about these facilities, use the FRS Query tool.This publicly available FRS data is part of the FRS Sub Facility map service and has been created for ESRI Living Atlas. The Sub facility map service is comprised of the EPA National Pollutant Discharge Elimination Systems Sites (NPDES), authorized by the Clean Water Act by regulating point sources that discharge pollutants into the waters of the United States. The NPDES data set provides outfall locations (or discharge points) of various pollutants into water systems from facilities being monitored by the EPA.

As included in this EnviroAtlas dataset, the community domestic water use was calculated using locally available water use data per capita in gallons of water per day (GPD), distributed dasymetrically, and summarized by census block group. Domestic water use, as defined in this case, is intended to represent residential indoor and outdoor water use (e.g., cooking, hygiene, landscaping, pools, etc.) for primary residences (i.e., excluding second homes and tourism rentals). For the purposes of this metric, these publicly-supplied estimates are also considered representative of local self-supplied water use. Specific to Durham, NC, the Division of Water Resources (DWR), part of the North Carolina Department of Natural Resources (NCDENR), has made local water supply plans centrally available online. All local governments are required to provide public water service. Community water systems with 1,000+ service connections or 3,000+ residents are required to prepare a local water supply plan. These plans include residential, also known as domestic, water usage. To account for variations due to weather, a ten-year average was calculated for Durham, Hillsborough, and the Orange Water and Sewer Authority (OWASA), which supplies southeast Orange County, including Chapel Hill and Carrboro. The ten-year average included available data between 2000 and 2010. This dataset was produced by the US EPA to support research and online mapping activities related to EnviroAtlas. EnviroAtlas (https://www.epa.gov/enviroatlas) allows the user to interact with a web-based, easy-to-use, mapping application to view and analyze multiple ecosystem services for the contiguous United States. The dataset is available as downloadable data (https://edg.epa.gov/data/Public/ORD/EnviroAtlas) or as an EnviroAtlas map service. Additional descriptive information about each attribute in this dataset can be found in its associated EnviroAtlas Fact Sheet (https://www.epa.gov/enviroatlas/enviroatlas-fact-sheets).

Background:"Under a new Ohio law enacted in June 2016, community and nontransient noncommunity public water systems are required to identify areas that are known to contain or likely to contain lead service lines by March 9, 2017. The law requires community water systems to identify and map areas of their distribution systems that are known or likely to contain lead service lines. These systems also are required to identify and provide a description of the characteristics of buildings served by the system that may contain lead solder, fixtures or pipes. Single building community and nontransient noncommunity water systems are required to map areas of the system that have solder, fixtures and pipes containing lead. The maps will be used by Ohio EPA to ensure that the proper lead and copper sampling is done in areas of lead service lines."Ohio EPA Lead Lines MappingDetails of our mapping project are available at this letter:http://edocpub.epa.ohio.gov/publicportal/ViewDocument.aspx?docid=576867ExplanationFebruary 28, 2017 Re: Lead Service Line & Fixture Mapping Narrative To whom it may concern: The City of Marysville Division of Water along with the City of Marysville IT Department has completed the mapping of our distribution system that best depicts our understanding of Lead service lines, Leadbased Solder and Fixtures assembled with Lead-based solder. The map has been symbolized to indicate the following: Red Stars: 30 sites included on the City’s sampling plan Yellow Stars: locations of known Lead Service lines. Tan shaded area: locations of possible Lead Fixtures. Green shaded area: locations where there are no known Lead Service lines, lead solder, or fixtures Gray shaded area: locations where the presence of Lead service lines, lead solder or fixtures is currently unknown. The City of Marysville’s map is web based and can be reached at the following link. Hover your cursor over the link for instructions to open the link. http://map.marysvilleohio.org/lead/ We based our map symbology on records that are kept in the Water Division office and in the City’s Engineering department. We also utilized the Union County Auditors website to determine the age of the structures in town and then used the guidance provided by the OEPA which generalized building construction dates with associated plumbing characteristics. Should you have any questions on the mapping or this narrative, please call the Marysville Division of Water at (937) 645-7330 Monday- Friday between the hours of 7:00 a.m. and 3:30 p.m. or send an email to ssheppeard@marysvilleohio.org Sincerely, Scott Sheppeard Water Superintendent City of Marysville Division of WaterMore Info at https://epa.ohio.gov/ddagw/pws/leadandcopper

This EnviroAtlas dataset includes a number of Discharge Monitoring Report (DMR) metrics summarized by watershed for a given year (https://echo.epa.gov/help/loading-tool/watershed-statistics-help). These metrics include the number of facilities and wastewater discharges located within watersheds according to the Integrated Compliance Information System National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (ICIS-NPDES), to track the permit compliance and enforcement status of facilities regulated by the NPDES under the Clean Water Act (https://echo.epa.gov/tools/data-downloads/icis-npdes-download-summary). This dataset was produced by the US EPA to support research and online mapping activities related to EnviroAtlas. EnviroAtlas (https://www.epa.gov/enviroatlas) allows the user to interact with a web-based, easy-to-use, mapping application to view and analyze multiple ecosystem services for the contiguous United States. The dataset is available as downloadable data (https://edg.epa.gov/data/Public/ORD/EnviroAtlas) or as an EnviroAtlas map service. Additional descriptive information about each attribute in this dataset can be found in its associated EnviroAtlas Fact Sheet (https://www.epa.gov/enviroatlas/enviroatlas-fact-sheets).

Public Supply Source Protection Areas Ireland (ROI) ITM. Published by Geological Survey Ireland. Available under the license Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 (CC-BY-4.0).Public Water Supplies (PWSs) are managed by Irish Water, Ireland's national water utility, since 2013. Before this, public water supplies were managed by Local Authorities. More than 70% of public supplies take groundwater from boreholes, springs and infiltration galleries. This accounts for about 23% by volume (Irish Water, 2018).

Source Protection Areas (SPAs) are areas outlined around groundwater abstraction points (e.g. borehole or spring) which provide drinking water. The aim of the SPAs is to protect groundwater by placing tighter controls on activities within all or part of the zone of contribution (ZOC) of the source. The Zone of Contribution (ZOC) is the land area that contributes water to the well or spring.

Two Source Protection Areas (SPAs) are outlined. The Inner Protection Area (SI) aims to protect against the effects of human activities that might have an immediate effect on the source and, in particular, against microbial pollution. The Outer Protection Area (SO) covers the rest of the zone of contribution (ZOC) to the groundwater abstraction point.

Not all groundwater-fed public supply sources have SPAs outlined around them. Most studies (more than 125) have been carried out by the Geological Survey Ireland as part of County Groundwater Protection Schemes. The Environmental Protection Agency carried out more than 40 studies as part of the national groundwater monitoring network characterisation. Further studies have been carried out by consultancies for Local Authorities and Irish Water.

Different methods are used to map the entire Zone of Contribution to a spring, borehole or well, resulting in different degrees of confidence associated with the boundaries of the delineated area. To be able to specify the Inner Protection Zone within the entire Zone of Contribution, knowledge or estimates of groundwater travel time within the aquifer are needed (e.g. from site-specific hydrogeological parameters or tracer tests).

Source Protection Areas have been mapped by the GSI and EPA following the ‘GSI method’ (e.g., GSI/EPA/IGI Source Protection Zonation course, 2009; Kelly, 2010; DELG/EPA/GSI, 1999). These SPAs were mapped as part of County Groundwater Protection Schemes or as part of the WFD Groundwater Monitoring network characterisation. Other SPAs have been mapped by consultants for Local Authorities/Irish Water. They have not been peer-reviewed by the GSI.

The Zone of Contribution and the Source Protection Area account for the ‘horizontal’ movement of groundwater. Source Protection Zones are obtained by integrating the Source Protection Areas with the groundwater vulnerability categories. The Source Protection Zone includes the complete pathway, both vertical and horizontal, for re-charge and any entrained contaminants to the abstraction point.

Whereas the aim of delineating ZOCs is to define approximate areas that contribute water to an abstraction point, the aim of SPZs is to geo-scientifically characterise the pathway and receptor elements of risk to groundwater within the ZOC of a given source (Kelly, 2010). EPA prepared an advice note on “Source Protection and Catchment Management to protect Groundwater Supplies” that outlines the key measures and policies in place in Ireland (EPA, 2011).

This map shows the location of SPA's which have been mapped around public supplies of groundwater in Ireland.

This map is to the scale 1:20,000. This means it should be viewed at that scale. When printed at that scale 1cm on the map relates to a distance of 200m.

It is a vector dataset. Vector data portray the world using points, lines, and polygons (areas).

The data is shown as polygons. Each polygon holds information on Source Protection Area such as name, code, id, data source, county, reviewed by GSI and links to online reports....

Public Water Supplies (PWSs) are managed by Irish Water, Ireland's national water utility, since 2013. Before this, public water supplies were managed by Local Authorities. More than 70% of public supplies take groundwater from boreholes, springs and infiltration galleries. This accounts for about 23% by volume (Irish Water, 2018).Source Protection Areas (SPAs) are areas outlined around groundwater abstraction points (e.g. borehole or spring) which provide drinking water. The aim of the SPAs is to protect groundwater by placing tighter controls on activities within all or part of the zone of contribution (ZOC) of the source. The Zone of Contribution (ZOC) is the land area that contributes water to the well or spring.Two Source Protection Areas (SPAs) are outlined. The Inner Protection Area (SI) aims to protect against the effects of human activities that might have an immediate effect on the source and, in particular, against microbial pollution. The Outer Protection Area (SO) covers the rest of the zone of contribution (ZOC) to the groundwater abstraction point.Not all groundwater-fed public supply sources have SPAs outlined around them. Most studies (more than 125) have been carried out by the Geological Survey Ireland as part of County Groundwater Protection Schemes. The Environmental Protection Agency carried out more than 40 studies as part of the national groundwater monitoring network characterisation. Further studies have been carried out by consultancies for Local Authorities and Irish Water.Different methods are used to map the entire Zone of Contribution to a spring, borehole or well, resulting in different degrees of confidence associated with the boundaries of the delineated area. To be able to specify the Inner Protection Zone within the entire Zone of Contribution, knowledge or estimates of groundwater travel time within the aquifer are needed (e.g. from site-specific hydrogeological parameters or tracer tests).Source Protection Areas have been mapped by the GSI and EPA following the ‘GSI method’ (e.g., GSI/EPA/IGI Source Protection Zonation course, 2009; Kelly, 2010; DELG/EPA/GSI, 1999). These SPAs were mapped as part of County Groundwater Protection Schemes or as part of the WFD Groundwater Monitoring network characterisation. Other SPAs have been mapped by consultants for Local Authorities/Irish Water. They have not been peer-reviewed by the GSI. The Zone of Contribution and the Source Protection Area account for the ‘horizontal’ movement of groundwater. Source Protection Zones are obtained by integrating the Source Protection Areas with the groundwater vulnerability categories. The Source Protection Zone includes the complete pathway, both vertical and horizontal, for re-charge and any entrained contaminants to the abstraction point.Whereas the aim of delineating ZOCs is to define approximate areas that contribute water to an abstraction point, the aim of SPZs is to geo-scientifically characterise the pathway and receptor elements of risk to groundwater within the ZOC of a given source (Kelly, 2010). EPA prepared an advice note on “Source Protection and Catchment Management to protect Groundwater Supplies” that outlines the key measures and policies in place in Ireland (EPA, 2011).This map shows the location of SPA's which have been mapped around public supplies of groundwater in Ireland. This map is to the scale 1:20,000. This means it should be viewed at that scale. When printed at that scale 1cm on the map relates to a distance of 200m.It is a vector dataset. Vector data portray the world using points, lines, and polygons (areas).The data is shown as polygons. Each polygon holds information on Source Protection Area such as name, code, id, data source, county, reviewed by GSI and links to online reportsGroup Water Schemes (GWSs) are community-run water supply schemes. About 70% of GWSs take their water from a privately-sourced supply. The rest take their water from an Irish Water connection (DHPLG, 2017). 81% of the privately-sourced supplies affiliated to the National Federation of Group Water Schemes (NFGWS) take groundwater from boreholes, springs and dug wells. This is around 54% by volume (NFGWS, 2018).The NFGWS is the representative for community-owned rural water services in Ireland. The NFGWS assists schemes in meeting the challenges of water quality legislation and promotes a ‘multi-barrier approach’ to source protection. The ‘multi-barrier approach’ includes delineation of the Zone of Contribution to a supply source. A Zone of Contribution (ZOC) is the land area that contributes water to a well or spring (Misstear et al., 2006). It can be considered as the ‘catchment’ to the supply source. Like surface water bodies, springs have natural catchment areas, whereas catchment areas to boreholes depend on a number of hydrogeological and meteorological factors plus the abstraction rate. A ZOC accounts for the ‘horizontal’ movement of groundwater and any entrained contamination once it has reached the water table and is moving towards the abstraction point. The aim of delineating ZOCs is to define the area that contributes water to an abstraction point. Knowledge of where the water is coming from is critical when trying to interpret water quality data at the groundwater source. The ZOC also provides an area in which to focus further investigation and is an area where protective measures can be introduced to maintain or improve the quality of groundwater.Different methods can be used to map the ZOC to a spring, borehole or dug well, resulting in different degrees of confidence associated with the boundaries of the de-lineated area. The ZOCs and accompanying reports should be considered as preliminary source protection studies. The work was undertaken by consultants under supervision and review by GSI, and represents a partnership between the GWSs, the NFGWS and GSI. The work was funded through the Rural Water Programme funding initiative of grants towards specific source protection works on GWSs (DECLG Circular L5/13 and Explanatory Memorandum).The ZOCs were delineated in the period 2011 to 2019. The maps produced are based largely on the readily available information in the area, a field walkover survey, and on mapping techniques which use inferences and judgements based on experience at other sites. As such, the maps cannot claim to be definitively accurate across the whole area covered and should not be used as the sole basis for site-specific decisions, which will usually require the collection of additional site-specific data.This map shows the location of ZOCs which have been mapped around GWS supplies of groundwater in Ireland. This map is to the scale 1:20,000. This means it should be viewed at that scale. When printed at that scale 1cm on the map relates to a distance of 200m.It is a vector dataset. Vector data portray the world using points, lines, and polygons (areas).The data is shown as polygons. Each polygon holds information on name, year and consultant.

Irish Soil Information System National Soils Map. Published by Environmental Protection Agency. Available under the license Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 (CC-BY-4.0).SIS SOIL:The new Irish Soil Information System concludes a 5 year programme, supported by the Irish Environmental Protection Agency (STRIVE Research Programme 2007-2013) and Teagasc, to develop a new 1:250,000 scale national soil map (http://soils.teagasc.ie). The Irish Soil Information System adopted a unique methodology combining digital soil mapping techniques with traditional soil survey application. Developing earlier work conducted by An Foras Talúntais, the project generated soil-landscape models for previously surveyed counties. These soil-landscape (‘soilscape’) models formed the basis for training statistical ‘inference engines’ for predicting soil mapping units, checked during field survey. 213 soil series are identified, each with differing characteristics, having contrasting environmental and agronomic responses. Properties were recorded in a database able to satisfy national and EU policy requirements. The Irish soil map and related soil property data will also serve public interest, providing the means to learn online about Irish soil resources. Use the Symbology layer file 'SOIL_SISNationalSoil.lyr' based on Value Field 'Association_Unit'. SIS SOIL DRAINAGE:In Ireland, soil drainage category is considered to have a predominant influence on soil processes (Schulte et al., 2012). The maritime climate of Ireland drives wet soil conditions, such that excess soil moisture in combination with heavy textured soils is considered a key constraint in relation to achieving productivity and environmental targets. Both soil moisture content and the rate at which water drains from the soil are critical indicators of soil physical quality and the overall functional capacity of soil. Therefore, a natural extension to the Irish Soil Information System included the development of an indicative soil drainage map for Ireland. The soil subgroup map was used to develop the indicative drainage map, based on diagnostic criteria relating to the subgroup categorization. Use the Symbology layer file 'SOIL_SISSoilDrainage.lyr' based on Value Field 'Drainage'. SIS SOIL DEPTH: Soil depth is a measure of the thickness of the soil cover and reflects the relationship between parent material and length of soil forming processes. Soil depth determines the potential rooting depth of plants and any restrictions within the soil that may hinder rooting depth. Plants derive nearly 80 per cent of their water needs from the upper part of the soil solum, i.e. where the root system is denser. The rooting depths depend on plant physiology, type of soil and water availability. Generally, vegetables (beans, tomatoes, potatoes, parsnip, carrots, leek, broccoli, etc.) are shallow rooted, about 50–60 cm; fruit trees and some other plants have medium rooting depths, 70–120 cm and other crops such as barley, wheat, oats, and maize may have deeper roots. Furthermore, rooting depths vary according to the age of the plants. The exact soil depth is difficult to define accurately due to its high variability across the landscape. The effective soil depth can be reduced by the presence of bedrock or impermeable layers. Use the Symbology layer file 'SOIL_SISSoilDepth.lyr' based on Valued Field 'Depth'. SIS SOIL TEXTURE:Soil texture is an important soil characteristic that influences processes such as water infiltration rates, rootability, gas exchanges, leaching, chemical activity, susceptibility to erosion and water holding capacity. The soil textural class is determined by the percentage of sand, silt, and clay. Soil texture also influences how much water is available to the plant; clay soils have a greater water holding capacity than sandy soils. Use the Symbology layer file 'SOIL_SISSoilTexture.lyr' based on Value Field 'Texture'. SIS SOIL SOC:In the previous national soil survey conducted by An Foras Taluntais, 14 counties were described in detail with soil profile descriptions provided for the representative soil series found within a county. Soil samples were taken at each soil horizon to a depth of 1 meter and analyses performed for a range of measurements, including soil organic carbon, texture, cation exchange capacity, pH; however in most cases no bulk density measurements were taken. This meant that while soil organic carbon concentrations were available this could not be related to a stock for a given soil series. In 2012/2013, 246 profile pits were sampled and analysed as part of the Irish Soil Information System project to fill in gaps in the description of representative profile data for Ireland. Use the Symbology layer file 'SOIL_SISSoilSOC.lyr' based on Value Field 'SOC'....

Background:"Under a new Ohio law enacted in June 2016, community and nontransient noncommunity public water systems are required to identify areas that are known to contain or likely to contain lead service lines by March 9, 2017. The law requires community water systems to identify and map areas of their distribution systems that are known or likely to contain lead service lines. These systems also are required to identify and provide a description of the characteristics of buildings served by the system that may contain lead solder, fixtures or pipes. Single building community and nontransient noncommunity water systems are required to map areas of the system that have solder, fixtures and pipes containing lead. The maps will be used by Ohio EPA to ensure that the proper lead and copper sampling is done in areas of lead service lines."Ohio EPA Lead Lines MappingDetails of our mapping project are available at this letter:http://edocpub.epa.ohio.gov/publicportal/ViewDocument.aspx?docid=576867ExplanationFebruary 28, 2017 Re: Lead Service Line & Fixture Mapping Narrative To whom it may concern: The City of Marysville Division of Water along with the City of Marysville IT Department has completed the mapping of our distribution system that best depicts our understanding of Lead service lines, Leadbased Solder and Fixtures assembled with Lead-based solder. The map has been symbolized to indicate the following: Red Stars: 30 sites included on the City’s sampling plan Yellow Stars: locations of known Lead Service lines. Tan shaded area: locations of possible Lead Fixtures. Green shaded area: locations where there are no known Lead Service lines, lead solder, or fixtures Gray shaded area: locations where the presence of Lead service lines, lead solder or fixtures is currently unknown. The City of Marysville’s map is web based and can be reached at the following link. Hover your cursor over the link for instructions to open the link. http://map.marysvilleohio.org/lead/ We based our map symbology on records that are kept in the Water Division office and in the City’s Engineering department. We also utilized the Union County Auditors website to determine the age of the structures in town and then used the guidance provided by the OEPA which generalized building construction dates with associated plumbing characteristics. Should you have any questions on the mapping or this narrative, please call the Marysville Division of Water at (937) 645-7330 Monday- Friday between the hours of 7:00 a.m. and 3:30 p.m. or send an email to ssheppeard@marysvilleohio.org Sincerely, Scott Sheppeard Water Superintendent City of Marysville Division of WaterMore Info at https://epa.ohio.gov/ddagw/pws/leadandcopper

State water quality assessment decisions reported to EPA under the Integrated Report (IR), and Clean Water Act Sections 303(d) and 305(b). This service provides summary information for each Assessment Unit. For more detailed data, please reference the Assessment Total Maximum Daily Load (TMDL) Tracking and Implementation System (ATTAINS) web services. Information on those web services is provided on the public ATTAINS website at https://www.epa.gov/waterdata/attains

The retrospective database is a compilation of historical water-quality and ancillary data collected before NAWQA Study Units initiated sampling in 1993. This coverage contains the point locations of monitoring locations where historical water-quality data was collected. Water-quality data were obtained by study-unit personnel from the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) National Water Information System (NWIS), from records of State water-resource agencies, and from STORET, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency national database. Ancillary data describing characteristics of sampled sites were compiled by NAWQA Study Units or obtained from national-scale digital maps.

Mueller and others (1995) used this data to determine preexisting water-quality conditions in the first 20 NAWQA Study Units that began in 1991. Also, Nolan and Ruddy (1996) used the data to describe areas of the United States at risk of nitrate contamination of ground water.

Supplemental_Information:

The retrospective database includes over 22,000 surface-water samples. The surface-water data are for samples collected during 1980-90 at sites that had a minimum of 25 monthly samples. Year of sampling is included in the retrospective database because it was reported most often by the various Study Units. Year of sampling also is convenient because some Study Units reported median constituent concentrations. If sampling date ranges for median values fell within a single year, then year of sampling was retained in the national data set for that sample.

Because sampling, preservation, and analytical techniques associated with these historical data changed during the period of record and are different for different agencies, reported nutrient concentrations were aggregated into the following groups: (1) ammonia as N, (2) nitrate as N, (3) total nitrogen, (4) orthophosphate as P, and (5) total phosphorus. For example, ammonia includes both ammonium ions and un-ionized ammonia. More information on methods used to aggregate constituent data is available in the report by Mueller and others (1995).

Much of the ancillary data, such as well and aquifer descriptions and land-use classification for surface-water drainage basins, were provided by NAWQA Study Units. Data evaluated at the national scale include land use, soil hydrologic group, nitrogen input to the land surface, and the ratios of pasture or woodland to cropland.

Land-use classification of surface-water sites is based on Anderson Level I categories (Anderson and others, 1976). Land use at surface-water sites was classified by NAWQA Study Unit personnel based on the Anderson Level I categories. Many surface-water sites were affected by mixed land uses, such as Forest and Agricultural, or Agricultural and Urban. Surface-water sites with very large drainage areas (greater than 10,000 square miles) were considered to be affected by multiple land uses, and were designated as Integrated land use. More detailed descriptions of the land-use categories in the retrospective database are given by Mueller and others (1995).

Soil hydrologic group was determined from digital maps compiled by the U.S. Soil Conservation Service (1993). The categorical values (A, B, C, and D) from the digital maps were converted to numbers to permit aggregation (Mueller and others, 1995). Surface-water sites were assigned the area-weighted mean for soil mapping units in the upstream drainage basin. Many surface-water sites did not have digitized basin boundaries available, so hydrologic group could not be evaluated.

Fertilizer and manure applications were estimated from national databases of fertilizer sales (U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 1990) and animal populations (U.S. Bureau of the Census, 1989). Nitrogen input by atmospheric deposition was derived from data provided by the National Atmospheric Deposition Program/National Trends Network (1992).

Population data were obtained from the U.S. Bureau of the Census (1991). Total population in the upstream drainage was compiled for the surface-water data set.

Within the database, concentrations less than detection are reported as negative values of the detection limit. Missing values are indicated by a decimal point. (During processing of the tabular data, these decimal points were replaced will NULL values; See Data_Quality_Information section.

Historical data can be of limited use in national assessments because of inconsistencies between and within agencies in database structure and format and in sample collection, preservation, and analytical procedures. For example, changes in sample collection and analytical procedures can cause shifts in constituent concentrations that are unrelated to possible changes in environmental factors. See Mueller and others (1995) for assumptions and limitations associated with the retrospective database.

[Summary provided by the EPA.]

Public Water Supplies (PWSs) are managed by Irish Water, Ireland's national water utility, since 2013. Before this, public water supplies were managed by Local Authorities. More than 70% of public supplies take groundwater from boreholes, springs and infiltration galleries. This accounts for about 23% by volume (Irish Water, 2018).Source Protection Areas (SPAs) are areas outlined around groundwater abstraction points (e.g. borehole or spring) which provide drinking water. The aim of the SPAs is to protect groundwater by placing tighter controls on activities within all or part of the zone of contribution (ZOC) of the source. The Zone of Contribution (ZOC) is the land area that contributes water to the well or spring.Two Source Protection Areas (SPAs) are outlined. The Inner Protection Area (SI) aims to protect against the effects of human activities that might have an immediate effect on the source and, in particular, against microbial pollution. The Outer Protection Area (SO) covers the rest of the zone of contribution (ZOC) to the groundwater abstraction point.Not all groundwater-fed public supply sources have SPAs outlined around them. Most studies (more than 125) have been carried out by the Geological Survey Ireland as part of County Groundwater Protection Schemes. The Environmental Protection Agency carried out more than 40 studies as part of the national groundwater monitoring network characterisation. Further studies have been carried out by consultancies for Local Authorities and Irish Water.Different methods are used to map the entire Zone of Contribution to a spring, borehole or well, resulting in different degrees of confidence associated with the boundaries of the delineated area. To be able to specify the Inner Protection Zone within the entire Zone of Contribution, knowledge or estimates of groundwater travel time within the aquifer are needed (e.g. from site-specific hydrogeological parameters or tracer tests).Source Protection Areas have been mapped by the GSI and EPA following the ‘GSI method’ (e.g., GSI/EPA/IGI Source Protection Zonation course, 2009; Kelly, 2010; DELG/EPA/GSI, 1999). These SPAs were mapped as part of County Groundwater Protection Schemes or as part of the WFD Groundwater Monitoring network characterisation. Other SPAs have been mapped by consultants for Local Authorities/Irish Water. They have not been peer-reviewed by the GSI. The Zone of Contribution and the Source Protection Area account for the ‘horizontal’ movement of groundwater. Source Protection Zones are obtained by integrating the Source Protection Areas with the groundwater vulnerability categories. The Source Protection Zone includes the complete pathway, both vertical and horizontal, for re-charge and any entrained contaminants to the abstraction point.Whereas the aim of delineating ZOCs is to define approximate areas that contribute water to an abstraction point, the aim of SPZs is to geo-scientifically characterise the pathway and receptor elements of risk to groundwater within the ZOC of a given source (Kelly, 2010). EPA prepared an advice note on “Source Protection and Catchment Management to protect Groundwater Supplies” that outlines the key measures and policies in place in Ireland (EPA, 2011).This map shows the location of SPA's which have been mapped around public supplies of groundwater in Ireland. This map is to the scale 1:20,000. This means it should be viewed at that scale. When printed at that scale 1cm on the map relates to a distance of 200m.It is a vector dataset. Vector data portray the world using points, lines, and polygons (areas).The data is shown as polygons. Each polygon holds information on Source Protection Area such as name, code, id, data source, county, reviewed by GSI and links to online reports