DWQ-2024-005439

WASHINGTON COUNTY
WATER CONSERVANCY DISTRICT
and
COOPERATING AGENCIES
DETERMINATION OF RECOMMENDED
SEPTIC SYSTEM DENSITIES
FOR
GROUNDWATER QUALITY PROTECTION
Final Report
July 1997
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
Hansen, Allen & Luce extends its appreciation to the PROJECT STEERING COMMITTEE,
which consisted of the following agencies and individuals, for the splendid cooperation and support provided
during completion of this study.
LEAD AGENCY
Washington County Water Conservancy District
Ronald W. Thompson, General Manager
Morgan S. Jensen, Environmental Coordinator
Julie Breckenridge, Receptionist / Secretary
COOPERATING AGENCIES
Ash Creek Special Service District
Darwin Hall, General Manager
Hurricane City
Mac J. Hall, Building Inspector
La Verkin City
Dale Wilson
Santa Clara City
Mayor Fred Rowley
St. George City
Wayne McArthur, Director
Water and Power Department
Washington City
Ralph McClure, City Manager
Town of Ivins
Mayor Chris Blake
Town of Leeds
Joanne Thornton, Council Member
(Continued)
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS (Continued)
Town of Toquerville
Mayor Charles Wahlquist
Washington County
Commissioner Alan Gardner
John Willie, County Planner
Five County Association of Governments
Robert Hugie
Southwest Utah Public Health Department
Bill Dawson, Environmental Health Director
Utah Department of Environmental Quality
Wayne Thomas, District Engineer
Utah Division of Water Quality
Bill Damery, Environmental Geophysicist
and Principal Agency Project Coordinator
John R. Kennington, Environmental Engineer
Utah Division of Drinking Water
Mark E. Jensen, Environmental Scientist
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency - Region VIII
Richard Muza, Environmental Scientist
AGENCIES PROVIDING TECHNICAL DATA
Utah Geological Survey
U.S. Geologic Survey
HANSEN, ALLEN & LUCE
PROJECT TEAM
Project Manager / Project Engineer
William A. Luce, M.S., P.E.
Internal Steering Committee
Marvin E. Allen, M.S., P.E.
David E. Hansen, Ph.D., P.E.
Gregory J. Poole, M.S., P.E.
Task Leaders
David E. Hansen, Ph.D., P.E. (Hydrogeology / Author - Chapter II)
William S. Bigelow, M.S., P.E. (Characterization of Existing Water Quality)
John D. Bjerregaard, M.S., P.E. (Land Use and Septic System Projections)
Staff Engineers
Darek O. Kimball, M.S.(pending), P.E.I. (Risk & Mass Balance Analyses)
Eric E. Dursteler, B.S., P.E.I. (Mass Balance Analyses)
Steven L. Anderson, B.S., P.E. (Quality Control)
Delmas Johnson, M.S., P.E.I. (Existing Water Quality)
Graphics
David R. Bruse
R. Guy Anderson
Administrative Support
Paula Roberts
Phyllis Eardley
Evelyn Luce
Project Engineer - Phase I Study
Gregory J. Poole, M.S., P.E.
Subconsultant
Spencer Reber (Geology)
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Chapter Title Page
ES EXECUTIVE SUMMARY .............................ES-1
I INTRODUCTION
Background .....................................I-1
Authorization ......................................I-1
Purpose ........................................I-1
Scope of Work ...................................I-1
II HYDROGEOLOGY
Introduction ....................................II-1
General Conditions ..............................II-2
Hydrogeology ..................................II-5
III EXISTING GROUNDWATER QUALITY
General .......................................III-1
Existing Culinary Water Wells ......................III-1
Septic System Related Concern .....................III-1
IV LAND USE AND SEPTIC SYSTEM PROJECTIONS
Land Use ......................................IV-1
Septic System Use ...............................IV-1
V SEPTIC SYSTEM RELATED POLLUTION
Background ....................................V-1
Effectiveness of Septic Systems .....................V-1
Selection of Key Contaminant Indicator ...............V-1
VI REGULATORY CONSIDERATIONS
Policy Considerations ............................VI-1
Washington County ..............................VI-1
State of Utah ...................................VI-2
Other States ....................................VI-7
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Continued
Chapter Title Page
VI REGULATORY CONSIDERATIONS (continued)
Recommended Regulatory Approach .................VI-7
VII SEPTIC SYSTEM DENSITY ANALYSIS
General ......................................VII-1
Risk Analysis .................................VII-1
Mass Balance Analysis ..........................VII-5
Implementation Considerations ....................VII-7
Recommended Septic System Densities ..............VII-7
REFERENCES ..................................................R-1
APPENDIX
A MASS BALANCE EQUATION
B MASS BALANCE ANALYSIS
Page ES - 1
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
This section contains a brief description and summary of the background, regulations and
analytical methodology, as well as subsequent conclusions and recommendations for the
Determination of Recommended Septic System Densities for Groundwater Quality Protection. The
information is presented by report chapter. Also included are letters from the Utah Water Quality
Board and the United States Environmental Protection Agency regarding their review of the final
draft report.
SECTION I - INTRODUCTION
o Washington County, Utah, is one of the fastest growing areas in the United States. The
current County population is approximately 50,000. Projections indicate that by the year
2040 the population will likely exceed 200,000. A significant portion of the area’s culinary
water supplies are obtained from groundwater. Reliance on groundwater as a culinary supply
will likely continue well into the future. Therefore continuing to provide a high quality
source of water to both current and future population is of great concern. Many rural parts
of Washington County are now served by septic systems. The Washington County Water
Conservancy District (the District), and several communities in the area have raised the
question as to whether continued use of septic systems poses a threat to regional groundwater
supplies.
o During 1995 HA&L was selected by the District to complete a preliminary analysis to
determine whether there was potential risk related to septic systems. That effort, referred to
as the Phase I Study, indicated that the potential did exist for contamination of regional
groundwater supplies.
o During 1996 HA&L was retained to complete Phase II of the study. The purpose of the
Phase II portion of the study was to recommend appropriate septic system densities that may
be used to help ensure long term protection of regional groundwater quality, with specific
emphasis on the Navajo aquifer.
SECTION II - HYDROGEOLOGY
o Several governmental and private entities have completed research to define area geology.
In general, local geologic conditions are highly variable and extremely complex.
o The majority of ground water wells developed for public water supply in the study area have
been developed either in the Navajo Sandstone or in adjacent formations which are recharged
to some extent by the Navajo Sandstone. Other consolidated and unconsolidated formations
have been developed but in most cases they have not been as productive for culinary purposes
either from a quantity or quality standpoint.
Page ES - 2
o Most of the Navajo Sandstone in the study area is poorly cemented which, together with local
fracturing and jointing, contributes to the relatively high overall porosity and permeability
of the Navajo compared to other consolidated rock formations in the area.
o Recharge to ground water in the study area occurs through infiltration of streamflow,
infiltration of precipitation, infiltration from irrigation, and subsurface flow from adjacent
areas.
CHAPTER III - EXISTING GROUNDWATER QUALITY
o Much of the groundwater obtained from existing public water supply wells in the study area
is of a high quality. The aquifers associated with these wells could likely be classified Class
IA or “Pristine” according to the new State of Utah Groundwater Protection Regulations.
A lesser number of existing public water supply wells obtain groundwater from aquifers
which could likely be classified Class II or “Drinking Water Quality”, which is a lower
classification but still acceptable for public water supplies. A small number of wells in the
study area obtain water from aquifers of poorer quality.
CHAPTER IV - FUTURE LAND USE AND SEPTIC SYSTEM USAGE
o Recent population and land use projection studies have been completed by Washington
County and the Washington County Water Conservancy District.
o The current number of septic systems in the study area is estimated to be nearly 3,500. The
projected number of septic systems at build out varies between approximately 7,200 and
21,100. The projections depend on a number of factors including the availability of water for
future development.
CHAPTER V - SEPTIC SYSTEM RELATED POLLUTION
o Septic systems, if designed, installed, and maintained correctly, can be an effective means
of preventing the spread of pathogens and other harmful substances. However, they do not
remove 100% of the contaminants associated with residential wastewater. Their overall
effectiveness from a groundwater quality standpoint depends on the ability of groundwater
to assimilate the remaining pollutants. The assimilative capacity is dependent in part on the
groundwater potential to dilute the remaining pollutants.
o Nitrate nitrogen was selected as the key pollutant indicator to be used in determining
appropriate densities (number of acres required per septic system) for septic systems.
CHAPTER VI - REGULATORY CONSIDERATIONS
o Current Washington County, Southwest Utah Public Health Department, State of Utah and
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency land use and water quality related regulations provide
Page ES - 3
a general basis for addressing the protection of groundwater quality.
o For the purposes of this study, the State of Utah Drinking Water Standards, the State of Utah
Groundwater Protection Regulations and the State of Utah Wastewater Disposal Regulations
were selected as the most applicable regarding the determination of recommended septic
system densities.
CHAPTER VII - SEPTIC SYSTEM DENSITY DETERMINATION
o Prior to completing the mass balance analysis, an analysis of the potential for contamination,
or risk analysis, was completed for each subarea. This analysis provided a more subjective
review of the conditions in each subarea according to a number of risk related factors
associated with septic system use. Each risk factor was rated either low, medium or high
with respect to its potential risk to local surface water, local groundwater, and regional
groundwater. Based on the combined risk for each geographical area, an allowable
degradation of groundwater was selected. The allowable degradation was expressed in terms
of an increase in nitrate concentration in groundwater
o Following completion of the risk analysis, a mass balance analysis was conducted to
determine the recommended septic system densities. The mass balance considered the flow and
nitrate loading associated with septic system effluent, rainfall, irrigation, and existing
groundwater. Analysis criteria were varied to account for the different physical
conditions that exist throughout the study area. These included groundwater velocity,
thickness of the groundwater mixing zone, and the amount of precipitation and
irrigation received in specific areas. In addition, the quantity and strength of the
septic system effluent was varied to account for current water conservation trends.
o Consideration was also given as to how the proposed density recommendations would be
implemented. It was concluded that even though the study area varies greatly with respect
to physical conditions, it would be most practical, economical, and fair to all concerned to
combine subareas with similar risks and hydrogeological conditions.
o Consideration of the risk analysis, mass balance analysis and implementation factors resulted
in the range of septic system densities included in the following table. A range of densities
was provided to allow local decision makers the opportunity to make final determinations
based on a chosen level of risk, the cumulative effect of combined subareas, and local
economic and environmental priorities.
Page ES - 4
RECOMMENDED SEPTIC SYSTEM DENSITIES
(number of acres required per septic system)
COMBINED SUB AREAS
Pine Valley Brookside
Veyo
Gunlock
Ivins
Santa Clara
St. George
Washingto
n
Dameron Valley
Diamond Valley
Winchester Hills
New
Harmony
Anderson Junction
Hurricane
La Verkin
Leeds
Pintura
Sky Ranch - Bench Lake
Area
Toquerville
Apple
Valley
AL
L
O
W
A
B
L
E

D
O
W
N

G
R
A
D
I
E
N
T

N
O
3-

C
O
N
C
E
N
T
R
A
T
I
O
N

(
m
g
/
L
)
2
t
o

3
*
4 11 12 15 10 12 11
2
t
o

4
*
3 8 8 12 5 9 7
2
t
o

5
*
2 6 6 10 4 7 5
* Range associated with risk analysis (see Chapter VII)
Page I - 1
CHAPTER I
INTRODUCTION
BACKGROUND
Washington County, Utah, is one of the most rapidly growing areas in the United States. Its
temperate climate and picturesque surroundings make it a most desirable place to live. Projections
indicate that by the year 2040 the County population may increase from the current 50,000 people to
more than 200,000. Currently, the more urbanized areas of the County are served by sewer systems.
However, many parts in the County are served by septic systems, with no immediate plans to sewer
those areas. The Washington County Water Conservancy District (the District) and several other public
entities in the area, decided to determine whether the rapidly increasing number of septic systems might
pose a potential threat to regional groundwater supplies.
AUTHORIZATION
During 1995 Hansen, Allen & Luce (HA&L) was retained by the District and Cooperating
Agencies to complete a preliminary analysis to determine whether the potential existed for a problem
related to septic systems. This effort, referred to as the Phase I Study, indicated that the potential did
exist for contamination of regional groundwater supplies. During 1996, HA&L was selected to
complete Phase II of the study.
PURPOSE
Generally stated, the purpose of the Phase II portion of the study was to recommend a range of
septic system densities (number of acres required per septic system) that could be considered by local
authorities. To help ensure long term protection of regional groundwater for use as a public drinking
water supply, with primary emphasis on protection of the Navajo aquifer.
SCOPE OF WORK
Major tasks included in the scope of work are as follows:
Task 100 - Estimate Groundwater Flow Rates in Selected Areas
Task 200 - Assess Septic System Pollution Potential
Task 300 - Predict Septic System Effects on Water Quality
Task 400 - Prepare Septic System and Land Use Recommendations
Task 500 - Provide Aquifer Classification Information
Page II - 1
CHAPTER II
HYDROGEOLOGY
INTRODUCTION
This chapter of the report includes a geohydrologic assessment of the Washington County
area summarizing ground water flow patterns and occurrences within the area generally bounded on
the north by New Harmony, on the south by St. George, on the east by Apple Valley, and on the west
by Gunlock Reservoir. The specific task of this report chapter is to identify to the degree possible
ground water occurrence, flow direction, and flow rates for subsequent use in estimating the potential
for contamination of local and regional domestic ground water supplies. Specifically, the areas of
focus for which a geohydrologic summary has been made include:
Anderson Junction Ivins Santa Clara
Apple Valley La Verkin St. George
Brookside Leeds Toquerville
Dameron Valley New Harmony Veyo
Diamond Valley Pine Valley Washington
Gunlock Pintura Winchester Hills
Hurricane Bench Lake Area
The conclusions found herein are based upon several data sources which include personal
and HA&L knowledge of the area including: historic reports; documentation obtained directly from
municipalities participating in the study; personal communications with project personnel;
communications with local experts; communications with State regulators; local, state and federal
publications; and printed literature. A more complete list of data and information sources is
provided in the Reference section of this report.
Local development pressures in the rural areas of Washington County have for some time
raised concern over the impacts said development may be having upon local and regional ground
water systems. The majority of these developments continue to use septic systems for wastewater
disposal and are therefore defined herein as “unsewered”. As the concentration of these unsewered
systems increases, the potential for contamination of existing and future ground water supplies
increases. This is especially true in regions underlain by porous or fractured geologic strata wherein
liquid waste transmits freely. Local geologic conditions are prone to rapid transmission of ground
waters since much of the area consists of fractured sandstone and basalt units. A map depicting the
overall generalized relative hydrogeology is included as Figure II-1.
Page II - 2
GENERAL CONDITIONS
Geology
Local geologic conditions are extremely complex and highly fractured. A general
stratigraphic overview, including the relative elevation of local towns and communities is shown in
Figure II-2.
Geologic descriptions have been provided in numerous levels of detail, and in several sources
over the years. The geologic descriptions provided in the USGS Technical Publications seem to be
relatively comprehensive for the purposes of this report and are quoted directly herein. The
following information came from Technical Publication No. 70.
“Geologic units exposed in the upper Virgin River and Kanab Creek basins range in age from
Permian to Holocene and consist of consolidated and unconsolidated rocks. Sandstone is the
dominant exposed rock type with progressively lesser amounts of unconsolidated rocks,
siltstone, mudstone, shale, limestone, igneous rocks, conglomerate, and coal. Many of those
rocks have been noted in drillers' logs of wells... Most of the sandstone units are loosely to
moderately cemented and contain impurities such as weathered feldspar, as well as quartz
sand grains. The Navajo Sandstone of Triassic and Jurassic age is the most extensive
sandstone formation in the area.”
“...The main body of the Navajo ... consists of a lower red member and an upper white
member. In the study area, the maximum thickness of the red member is 800 ft (240 m) and
that of the white member about 1,000 ft (300 m).”
“Petrographic analyses of selected rock samples... show that the Navajo Sandstone includes
subarkoses (sandstone with significant feldspar) and orthoquartzite (sandstone with small
amounts of feldspar and other minerals). Almost all the Navajo samples were poorly
cemented, indicating generally poor cementation in much of the formation. This, along with
local fracturing and jointing, contribute to the relatively high overall porosity and
permeability of the Navajo compared to the other consolidated-rock units. However,
well-cemented, poorly permeable horizons exist locally in the Navajo Sandstone aquifer ...
that impede vertical movement of ground water. This is indicated by springs that emerge
from above those horizons.”
“Geologic formations in the study area generally dip to the north, northeast, or northwest at
angles of less than 5E ( commonly about 3E ) and from 5E to 10E adjacent to faults. The dips
probably have some local control on the movement of ground water.”
“Faults, which also have some control on the movement of ground water, are common
throughout the study area. Most are normal faults and strike northeasterly and
Page II - 3
FIGURE II-2.
GENERALIZED STRATIGRAPHIC OVERVIEW
SHOWING COMMUNITY LOCATIONS
GEOLOGIC AGE FORMATION TOWN / COMMUNITY
Quaternary Muddy Creek New Harmony, Pintura
Tertiary
Volcanics Pine Valley
Claron
Grapevine Wash
Cretaceous Iron Springs Gunlock, Veyo
Dakota
Jurassic
Carmel Dameron Valley
Temple Cap Diamond Valley
Navajo Sandstone Anderson Jtn, Hurricane, Toquerville, Winchester Hills
Kayenta St. George
Moenave Ivins, Leeds, Washington
Triassic
Chinle Santa Clara
Shinarump Apple Valley
Moenkopi
Permian
Kiabab La Verkin
Toroweap
Queantoweap
Pakoon Dolomite
Pennsylvanian Callville LS Virgin River Gorge
Mississippian Redwall LS
Devonian Devonian
Silurian Nopah Dolomite
Cambrian Muav LS
Bright Angel
Pre-Cambrian Tapeats Quartzite
Vishnu Schist
northwesterly. They include the Hurricane, ... which are of major scale in both length and
vertical displacement.”
“Joints are common in the study area, and open joints are especially common in the
sandstone formations like the Navajo Sandstone and the Shinarump Member of the Chinle
Formation. However, jointing is not consistently well developed throughout the study area.
Jointing seems to be more highly developed in the upper Virgin River basin than in the upper
Kanab Creek basin. This is especially true of the Navajo which is highly jointed in Zion
National Park.”.
Page II - 4
Ground Water
Both unconsolidated and consolidated aquifers are found within the study area. A general
description of both unconsolidated and consolidated aquifers taken from Technical
Publication No. 40 follows.

Unconsolidated-rock aquifers

“Unconsolidated rocks crop out in about 20 percent of the project area and supply about 80
percent of the water discharged by wells. Most of these rocks were deposited by streams as
alluvial fans and channel fill... Most wells and springs in the unconsolidated rocks yield less
than 250 gpm (gallons per minute). Larger yields are reported from a few areas. The fairly
large range in yield from wells results mainly from differences in the amounts of gravel
penetrated. The largest yields are from zones containing large amounts of gravel.”

“Two extensive and thick deposits of unconsolidated rocks ... are in Warner Valley and on
the Santa Clara Bench. The only well drilled in Warner Valley did not reach the water table,
although it did penetrate the full thickness of unconsolidated rocks. This suggests that the
unconsolidated rocks in Warner Valley do not contain aquifers. The few wells drilled
through the unconsolidated deposits on the Santa Clara Bench indicate that these deposits
differ in thickness locally, and where thickest they do contain ground water. The local
differences in thickness are shown by the logs of wells (C-42-16) 5bbb 1, (C-42-16) 6ada-1,
and (C-42 16)22 baa-1. The first well penetrated 17 feet of unsaturated unconsolidated rock
and bottomed in shale; the second well, about 1,800 feet away from the first, penetrated 40
feet of saturated unconsolidated rock and bottomed in shale; the third well bottomed in
saturated unconsolidated rock at 100 feet. The differences in thickness, especially in short
distances, suggest that erosional depressions, perhaps old stream channels, locally lie buried
beneath the surface and may be potential sources of water to wells. The extent of such
channels could be determined by test drilling or by geophysical study.”
“Thin channel fill deposits, which are generally of small areal extent, are common in
drainage ways throughout the project area. Some of these thin deposits discharge water to
springs and wells that supply small amounts of water for irrigation, industry, and public
supply...”

Consolidated-rock aquifers

“The principal consolidated rock aquifers in the area are in the Moenkopi, Chinle Moenave,
and Kayenta Formations, the Navajo Sandstone, igneous rocks in the Pine Valley Mountains,
and the basalts of Quaternary age. Most springs in the area discharge from the consolidated
rocks, and generally yield less than 50 gpm. A few large springs, mostly in areas underlain
by basalt, yield more than 1,000 gpm. Although about half the wells in the area derive their
water from consolidated-rock aquifers, most of them yield only small amounts of water for
stock and domestic use. A few public-supply and irrigation wells yield from 500 to 3,000
Page II - 5
gpm, but only about 20 percent of the water withdrawn by wells in the project area comes
from the consolidated rocks.”
“The large range in yield results mainly from movement of water through fracture systems,
which vary widely in their cross-sectional size and lateral extent. Hard, brittle rocks, such
as basalt and sandstone, generally contain larger and more extensive fractures than softer,
less brittle rocks such as shale and siltstone. In addition, some sandstone formations, such
as the Navajo Sandstone, probably locally contain a significant amount of intergranular
openings through which water moves.”

Recharge

Recharge to the ground-water reservoir in the central Virgin River basin occurs through
either infiltration of precipitation that falls on the area, infiltration of irrigation applied to an
area, infiltration of streamflow from adjacent areas, and/or subsurface inflow from adjacent
areas.
HYDROGEOLOGY
Local hydrogeology has been evaluated using available information provided from local, state
and federal agencies, as well as from in-house files and reports. Where available, ground water
potentiometric surface information has been taken or developed directly from existing USGS or State
reports and/or databases. Spring and/or stream elevation data taken directly from USGS 7 ½ minute
quadrangle maps were used to approximate ground water contours in areas where no data was
available. These contours were then adjusted to match local stream flow elevations for major
waterways to represent non artesian conditions. The use of these two varying data sources is
believed consistent and valid for the purposes of this report as long as it is remembered that they
represent two varying aquifer systems. The analysis made herein accounts for these two sources of
information. A brief summary of data sources is provided in Table II-1 with aquifer characteristics
being summarized in Table II-2.
Page II - 6
TABLE II-1.
GROUNDWATER DATA SOURCE BY LOCATION
Location Ground Water Table
Data Source Comment
SANTA CLARA RIVER DRAINAGE
Pine Valley Spring Data Spring data used exclusively
Brookside Spring Data Spring data used
Veyo Spring/Stream Elevations.Stream data is combined with spring data
Dameron Valley Extrapolation of USGS
Data
USGS data for Navajo Aquifer was
extrapolated northward
Gunlock USGS Data
USGS data shows local conditions likely
impacted by well drawdown. Spring data
shows potential regional flow
Ivins Spring/Stream Elevations.Spring and Stream data integrated
Santa Clara Spring/Stream Elevations.Stream data is combined with spring data
Diamond Valley Extrapolation of USGS
Data
USGS data for Navajo Aquifer was
extrapolated northward
Winchester Hills Extrapolation of USGS
Data
USGS data for Navajo Aquifer was
extrapolated northward
VIRGIN RIVER DRAINAGE
La Verkin Spring/Stream Data USGS data extrapolated into area using stream
and spring data
Hurricane S. Reber - Geologist USGS, Spring and Stream data all combined to
obtain generalized flow pattern
Apple Valley Spring/Stream Elevations.Stream data is combined with spring data
Sand Mountain (Bench Lake
Area)USGS Data USGS records used as most recent data
Washington USGS Data.USGS data extrapolated using stream and
spring data
St. George USGS Well Data USGS data used exclusively
TABLE II - 1.
GROUNDWATER DATA SOURCE BY LOCATION
(continued)
Location Ground Water Table
Data Source Comment
Page II - 7
ASH CREEK DRAINAGE
New Harmony USGS Data Unpublished well data used
Pintura Stream Data Stream data only
Anderson Junction USGS Data USGS data is combined with local stream and
spring data
Toquerville Spring/Stream Elevs.USGS data extrapolated using stream data
Leeds USGS/Spring Elev.ations.USGS data extrapolated using stream data
Page II - 8
TABLE II-2.
GROUNDWATER CHARACTERISTICS
Location Gradient
i (%)
Principal
Flow
Direction
Hydraulic
Conductivity
k (ft/day)
Darcy Velocity
v=ki
(ft/day)
Comment
SANTA CLARA RIVER DRAINAGE
Pine Valley 6.7 Westward 10 - 25*0.67 - 1.68 Alluvial Flow - Lies above Navajo
Brookside 2.2 SW 10 - 25*0.22 - 0.55 Alluvial over Basalts / Fracture Flow - Lies
Above Navajo
Veyo 2.1 SW 10 - 25*0.21 - 0.53 Alluvial over Basalt / Fracture Flow - Lies
above Navajo
Dameron Valley
2.4 S to SW 5 - 10*0.12 - 0.24 Alluvial Flow - Lies Above Navajo
0.5 S to SE 5*0.025 Flow within Deep Navajo
Gunlock 2.2 Southward 20 0.44 Alluvial / Fracture Flow - Lies in Iron
Springs Formation above Navajo
Ivins 1.0 SE 200 2.0 Alluvial Flow - Lies below Navajo outcrop
Santa Clara 1.0 SE 200 2.00 Alluvial Flow - Lies below Navajo outcrop
Diamond Valley 2.0 S to SW 5 - 10*0.10 - 0.20 Alluvial Flow - Lies Above Navajo
0.5 S to SE 5*0.025 Flow within Deep Navajo
Winchester Hills 0.5 S to SE 5*0.025
Alluvial / Bedrock Flow - Lies within
Navajo outcrop area
VIRGIN RIVER DRAINAGE
La Verkin 3.0 S to W 5 - 10*0.15 - 0.30 Alluvial over Basalts/ Fracture Flow - Lies
above Navajo
Hurricane 2.2 NW to SW 15 0.33 Alluvial over Basalts / Fracture flow - Lies
above Navajo
Apple Valley - Upper 0.9 NW 5*.05 Alluvial flow - Lies below Navajo outcrop,
east of Hurricane faultApple Valley - Lower 1.9 W 0.10
Sand Mountain
(Bench Lake Area)0.1 - 1.1 NW to NE 1 0.001 - 0.011 Alluvial flow - Lies within Navajo outcrop
area
Washington 2.8 SE to SW 100 2.80 Alluvial flow - Lies below Navajo locally,
recharge from Navajo to North
TABLE II-2.
GROUNDWATER CHARACTERISTICS
(continued)
Location Gradient
i (%)
Principal
Flow
Direction
Hydraulic
Conductivity
k (ft/day)
Darcy Velocity
v=ki
(ft/day)
Comment
Page II - 9
St. George - Navajo 0.5 - 6.0
SW to SE
12 0.13 - 1.5 City Lies below Navajo locally, recharge
from Navajo to North
St. George - Alluvial 3.2 5 - 10 0.16 - 0.32 City built on Alluvial Deposits
ASH CREEK DRAINAGE
New Harmony - No.
1.5 - 6.7 Southward
200 3.0 - 13.4 Alluvial Flow - Lies above Navajo -
Believed to drain through fracture system
near Ash Creek ReservoirNew Harmony - So.35 0.53 - 2.35
Pintura 2.2 SW 10-25*0.22 - 0.55 Alluvial over Basalts / Fracture flow - Lies
within Navajo
Anderson Junction 2.8 S to SE 1 - 32 0.028 - 0.90 Alluvial over Basalts / Fracture flow - Lies
within Navajo outcrop area451.26
Toquerville 3.3 S to SE 10 - 25*0.33 - 0.83 Alluvial Flow - Lies within Navajo zone -
Fracture flow along east boundary
Leeds 2.2 S to SE 45 0.99 Alluvial / Fracture flow - Lies within and
below Navajo
* - Indicates that the data given has been estimated based on engineering judgement.
Page II - 10
It is important to remember when reviewing the data in this report that the data has been
summarized from multiple sources, and that the data should be considered to be generalized and not
site specific. It is also important to note that data is presented in Table II-2 as found in existing
reference documents listed at the end of this report. For discussion purposes the following material
related to each area has been organized into drainage basins, moving in an upstream to downstream
direction. Drainage basins, and the sub-basin areas assigned to those drainage basins are:
Santa Clara River Drainage Virgin River Drainage Ash Creek Drainage
Pine Valley La Verkin New Harmony
Brookside Hurricane Pintura
Veyo Apple Valley Anderson Junction
Dameron Valley Bench Lake Area Toquerville
Gunlock Washington Leeds
Ivins St. George
Santa Clara
Diamond Valley
Winchester Hills
It should be noted that although some of the communities/areas identified above are not
within a direct flow path of the identified drainage, they do tie into the drainage and have therefore
been included within the categories as shown.
The following discussion provides additional insight and conclusions reached regarding each
specific study area. Within the following discussion, reference is made at select locations to recent
data which was sampled for chlorofluorocarbon content. This analysis is often used as a technique
to aid in dating the sampled waters. Reference to this sampling program is considered herein to be
very preliminary and subject to revision as the data is further reviewed and analyzed by the
collecting agency. Several factors which could affect the results of the testing have not yet been
taken into account including the mixing of young and old waters, the effect of large unsaturated
zones, and possible inaccuracies in analysis assumptions, etc.. Reference is only made herein to this
sampling program as an additional bit of information which may help clarify statements made.
Results of the chlorofluorocarbon testing program will be made available in the future by the
collecting agency as their study is completed.
Page II - 11
Santa Clara River Drainage
Pine Valley. Pine Valley, a mostly summer home development, lies approximately 19 miles
due north of St. George. The valley is generally located within a Tertiary sedimentary and igneous
rock formation which in turn is underlain by the Claron, Grapevine Wash, Iron Springs, Dakota,
Carmel and Temple Cap Formations before reaching the Navajo Sandstone.
Ground water flow patterns within the valley area are generally controlled by alluvial flow
systems with ground water gradients of 6.7% to the west toward the Town of Central. With a
developed zone 4,500 feet wide, an average saturated thickness on the order of 200 feet, and a
permeability of between 10 and 25 feet/day, the total ground water flow moving westward would
be between 5,050 and 12,630 acre-feet/year.
The hazard to down gradient communities as a result of local development could potentially
impact two communities. The first would be through the conveyance of a contaminant westward
within the alluvial flow system towards the town of Central. Using an average linear velocity
(developed by dividing the average Darcy velocities shown in Table II-2 by a porosity of 0.3), it is
estimated that it would take an approximate 18.5 years for a contaminant originating in Pine Valley
to travel the 5 miles to Central.
The second community potentially impacted by Pine Valley contamination may be those
utilizing the ground water well field located within the Millcreek drainage north of Washington. A
review of geologic mapping shows strong north-south trending fracture systems which have been
documented to traverse at least 2/3 the distance between Pine Valley and the city of Washington.
It would appear that this fault system continues southward from Washington. A contamination
source therefore within Pine Valley that entered an “open” fault system, may find its way to the
Millcreek well field. Current development levels with Pine Valley, and the potential for confining
geologic strata to be present along the supposed flow path, are believed to be contributing factors
which limit the significance of this flow scenario, and the potential for contamination. Should such
a flow path exist, it is estimated that it would take an estimated 75 to 80 years for the contaminant
to show up in the Millcreek drainage (assuming k=25ft/day, 0=0.3, and i=4.3%). It is acknowledged
that the actual flow scenario between these two systems is highly complex, and that the above
assumptions have introduced some significant simplifying conditions making the contamination
potential speculative. Even though the contamination potential is speculative, it should at least be
considered as a potential during future evaluations and management decisions.
Brookside. Brookside, a small community northeast of Veyo, has hydrogeologic conditions
similar in nature to Veyo. The community is founded upon a relatively thin layer of alluvial deposits
underlain by 50 to 150 feet of volcanics. The Navajo Sandstone lies about 2,000 feet below the
community and would likely receive little if any impact from development within the community,
unless a heavy contaminant were discharged and travel vertically downward. The danger to
contamination from Brookside would likely be upon the surface water system and Gunlock reservoir.
Interflow between the shallow unconfined ground water table characteristic of alluvial systems and
the Santa Clara river system would dilute and convey contaminants downstream.
Page II - 12
The annual flow rate which would be attributed to the Brookside area is based upon a 4,000
foot width of development and an aquifer thickness of 150 feet. Using the Darcy velocity and area
defined by the equation Q=kiA where, k=10 to 25 feet/day, and i=2.2%, gives an average flow rate
of between 1,100 and 2,770 acre-feet/year (1.5 to 3.8 cfs). This flow moves to the southwest and
follows the general gradient of the land surface contour.
Veyo. The city of Veyo is located approximately 18 miles northwest of St. George along
Highway 18 at the point where the highway crosses the Santa Clara river. The city is built upon a
thin alluvial layer underlain by fractured volcanics and limestones and is generally within the Iron
Springs Formation, and above the Navajo Formation. The Santa Clara River passes just south of the
main section of town and has created a deep incision through the basaltic layer. This deep cut is
shown on 7 ½ minute mapping to have been named “The Gulch”. The erosional channel created by
the river is as much as 180 feet deep in the area just south of town to as deep as 360 feet just
upstream from its confluence with Moody Wash just over a mile southwest of town. The presence
of this gulch could potentially act as a ground water drain which collects percolating water from the
Veyo area before continuing down gradient toward Gunlock Reservoir.
According to data shown on mapping provided by the Utah Geological Survey the top of the
Navajo Formation is located 1900 feet below land surface datum. Local recharge moving vertically
downward would have to move through a zone of bentonitic clay followed by the Dakota, Carmel
and Temple Cap Formations before entering the Navajo Sandstone unit. The presence of the clay
unit would limit local deep recharge from the Veyo area.
The local potentiometric surface is projected on Figure II-1 to be interconnected with the
Santa Clara River and local spring systems. General local water table gradients just north of the
town are on the order of 4.6% to the south while the gradient in the immediate vicinity of Veyo along
the Santa Clara River is about 2.1% with the gradient following the river channel to the southwest.
Darcy ground water velocities as shown on Table II-2 have been estimated to be between 0.21 and
0.53 feet/day. Average linear velocities, calculated by dividing the Darcy velocity by a porosity of
0.3, are estimated to be between 255 and 645 feet/year.
The potential for ground water contamination within the Veyo area appears to have three
possible sources. The first and most important from a “local” perspective is that there is a potential
danger for all development down gradient from any local septic system. The base material upon
which Veyo is built (fractured volcanics) has the potential to be highly permeable, and as such will
convey large quantities of subsurface water quickly. The average linear velocity used in the earlier
paragraph assumes ground water is moving through alluvial material with a lower hydraulic
conductivity. However, according to textural references, fractured igneous rock including fractured
basalt can convey water at rates between less than 1 to over 22,000 feet per year. Care should be
taken when placing a well in the Veyo area down gradient of any potential source of contamination
including septic systems.
The second component of flow involves the surface conveyance of a contamination source
into the Santa Clara River and eventually into Gunlock Reservoir. The impacts of this flow path
Page II - 13
would be diluted by the large volumes of water conveyed in the river system. The third potential
flow path involves the conveyance of a contamination source through fracture systems. A review
of geologic mapping shows the presence of a north-northeast to south-southwest fault just north of
the town of Veyo. This fault appears to be in the same general orientation of, and lines up with the
Gunlock fault system documented to start approximately 3 to 4 miles to the southwest. A
contaminant from Veyo which entered this fault system could (assuming the fault system to have
transmissive characteristics) have the potential of moving towards the Gunlock area aquifer system
as a direct conveyance source.
The potential for dilution of any contaminant source is dependent upon the underlying flow
rate. An estimate of flow rate was made through the equation Q=kiA. In the equation, hydraulic
conductivity was estimated to be between 10 and 25 feet/day, the gradient to the south was
determined to be 2.1%, and the flow area was taken as a developed width times a saturated thickness.
The developed zone width producing the potential contaminant source was assumed to be 5,000 feet
within the community of Veyo, and a saturated depth through the limestones unit was calculated to
be 425 feet. Given these estimates, there would be an estimated 3,740 to 9,440 acre-feet/year (5.2
to 13.0 cfs) recharge water moving beneath the community of Veyo which would dilute a
contamination source.
Dameron Valley. Dameron Valley is located approximately 11 to 12 miles north northwest
of St. George along Highway 18. Information available for this area indicates that the valley lies
within the upper portions of the Navajo Formation in the western and southern portions of the valley,
and just above the Navajo within the northern and eastern portions. It is also estimated that there
is upwards of about 200 feet of alluvium in some locations which would produce localized alluvial
or perched flow to the southwest. This general ground water movement could potentially be
interrupted by local north-south trending faults which have been identified within Snow Canyon
lying to the south (if they connect far enough north to intercept the flow). If this faulting is present
within Dameron Valley, it is possible that it could be a direct source of connection with down
gradient water supplies within the lower portions of Snow Canyon.
Ground water flow paths within the Navajo are projected to be to the south-southeast at an
overall gradient of about 0.5%.
Local subsurface flow rates within the limited alluvial flow system were estimated by
assuming a contribution width from development of approximately 6,000 feet, and a contributing
depth of 100 feet. Using the equation Q=kiA where k=varies between 5 and 10 feet/day in the
alluvial system, and is estimated at 5 feet/day in the deeper Navajo aquifer; and where i=2.4%, gives
average flow rates of between 600 to 1,200 acre-feet/year (0.83 to 1.7 cfs) for the alluvial system.
Applying a porosity of 0.3 to the aquifer parameters yields average linear velocities of between 145
and 290 feet/year. If contaminated, water reaching the Navajo aquifer would travel at an estimated
average linear velocity of approximately 30 feet/year. This estimate is based on a k=5 feet/day,
i=0.5%, and an 0=0.3.
Page II - 14
Gunlock. The community of Gunlock and Gunlock Reservoir, located approximately 15
miles northeast of the town of St. George lies within a highly geologically complex area. Gunlock
Reservoir itself lies within the Navajo Sandstone Formation while the Town of Gunlock lies above
the Navajo within the Iron Springs Formation. The Navajo Formation west of the Gunlock Fault (a
north-south trending fault which lies east of the Santa Clara River, reservoir and town) dips
approximately 20 degrees to the north-northeast. According to the Utah Geological Survey, the
Gunlock Fault is a vertical slip fault displaced along the west side just over 2 miles.
Water movement within the area is believed to be generally parallel to the Santa Clara River
with some variation occurring in the vicinity of wells below Gunlock reservoir. The potentiometric
surface within the Navajo Formation in the immediate area of the reservoir is believed to be
generally directed to the southeast, while data from USGS shows localized contours within the well
field to be to the southwest.
Ground and surface water contamination resulting from development in and around the Town
of Gunlock would appear to be mostly confined to surface water impacts. It is believed that any
infiltration into the subsurface strata would remain at or near the surface, or be returned to the
surface as waters move southward. Projections of ground water contours within the Navajo both east
and west of the Gunlock fault do not provide a good match, thereby indicating the influence of the
fault system. Ground water contours west of the fault seem to be generally higher than those found
to the east based on preliminary available data plotted and reviewed by Hansen, Allen & Luce, Inc..
This is likely due to the local interconnection between shallow alluvial systems and the Navajo
Formation.
A projection of potential ground water flow is made by estimating the overall width and
depth of local channel alluvium. It is estimated from topographic and geologic mapping that the
alluvial fill is triangular in nature, is approximately 2,000 feet wide, and has a maximum depth of
150 feet. These values give an area of 3.4 acres (½*2,000*150/43,560) and a corresponding flow
rate of 545 acre-feet/year (0.75 cfs). The flow rate was determined using the equation Q=kiA where,
k=20 feet/day, i=2.2%, and A=3.4 acres. As indicated earlier, it is believed that the major issue of
contamination at Gunlock is not ground water, but surface water impacts since flows will likely stay
near the surface due to local confining conditions as the water makes its way toward Gunlock
reservoir.
Ivins. The town of Ivins is located 4 to 5 miles northwest of the City of St. George and lies
below the Navajo Formation. The community lies within the lower Kayenta Formation which
consists of siltstones and sandstones. Since the town lies below the Navajo Formation there is no
chance of direct contamination to major local water supplies tapping the Navajo aquifer.
As shown on Figure II-1, the potentiometric surface generally follows the land surface
topography. Ground water typically moves towards the Santa Clara River after which it moves down
through the Santa Clara valley. The overall ground water gradient shown is about 1% to the
southeast, which when combined with the reported permeability of 200 ft/day translates to an overall
ground water velocity of 2.0 feet/day. Assuming a porosity of 0.3 flows would then travel
Page II - 15
approximately 2,433 feet/year, and within 4.5 years could potentially reach the city of Santa Clara
located approximately 11,000 feet downstream.
Uncontrolled contaminants deposited in Ivins have the potential of entering the shallow
ground water system and moving within one of two flow mechanisms. The first is where the ground
water moves southward towards the Santa Clara river where it is mixed and diluted with surface
waters. The second flow scenario consists of water moving southward towards the river, then
southeastward towards the town of Santa Clara. If ground water were used as part of the Santa Clara
culinary supply, there might be a potential for the capture of contaminants originating in Ivins. The
potential for contamination however is understood to be small since the town of Ivins currently
utilizes a sewer collection system. The potential for contamination from Ivins would then be no
more than the potential contamination from any other city with a sewer system.
The ground water flow rate for Ivins is calculated assuming a 4,000 foot wide band of
development with an average saturated alluvial depth of 25 feet, as approximated from 1997
mapping produced by the Utah Geological Survey. Using an average k=200 feet/day and i=1% gives
a Darcy velocity of 730 feet/year, an average linear velocity of 2,430 feet/year, and a flow rate of
1,680 acre-feet/year (2.3 cfs).
Santa Clara. The town of Santa Clara is located 2 to 3 miles west-northwest of the City of
St. George and lies below the Navajo aquifer system within the Chinle Formation. Since the town
lies below the Navajo Formation there is no chance of direct contamination to major local water
supplies tapping the sandstone aquifer.
As shown on Figure II-1, the potentiometric surface generally follows the land surface
topography. Flows typically move towards the Santa Clara River after which they move down
central valley areas. The overall ground water gradient shown is about 1% to the southeast, which
when combined with the reported permeability of 200 ft/day translates to an overall ground water
Darcy velocity of 2.0, and linear velocity of 6.7 feet/day (assuming 0=0.3). Within a one year
period, ground water could potentially travel an approximate 2,500 feet. At this flow rate, it would
take 10 years for ground water originating in Santa Clara to potentially reach the Bloomington area.
Uncontrolled contaminants deposited in Santa Clara have the potential of moving within one
of two flow mechanisms. The first is where the water moves from outlying areas towards the Santa
Clara river where it is mixed and diluted with surface and shallow alluvial waters. Downstream
contamination would then be impacted where possible by the surface and shallow alluvial sources.
The second flow scenario exists for the southeastern portions of the Santa Clara area. In this area,
ground water contours are suggesting, given the proper conditions, that contaminants may potentially
move in a southeasterly direction away from the river towards the Bloomington area. If ground
water were pumped in the areas north of Bloomington, there might be an increased potential for the
capture of contaminants originating in, or south of the Santa Clara. The potential for contamination
however is understood to be small since the town of Santa Clara currently utilizes a sewer collection
system. The potential for contamination from Santa Clara would then be no more than the potential
contamination from any other city utilizing a sewer system.
Page II - 16
The ground water flow rate for Santa Clara is calculated assuming a 3,000 foot wide band
of development with an average saturated alluvial depth of 50 feet as given by 1997 mapping
produced by the Utah Geological Survey. Using an average permeability of 200 feet/day, an average
gradient of 1%, and a porosity of 0.3, the calculated Darcy and linear velocities are estimated to be
2.0 feet/day (730 feet/year) and 6.7 feet/day (2,430 feet/year) respectively. Using the equation
Q=kiA gives a flow rate of 2,500 acre-feet/year (3.4 cfs).
Diamond Valley. Diamond Valley is located approximately nine miles almost due north of
St. George along highway 18 and is similar in nature to the Winchester Hills area which lies to the
south. General information available for this area indicates that the valley lies within the upper
reaches of, and just above the Navajo Formation with upwards of about 200 feet of alluvium in some
locations. No regional faulting has been identified within the general Diamond Valley area which
could be a direct source of connection with down gradient water supplies. Some aquitards capable
of limiting downward water movement are believed by some local experts to be present within the
alluvium. The depth to water within the Navajo Formation is approximately 1,400 to 1,600 feet, and
ground water flow paths within the Navajo are projected to be to the southeast at an overall gradient
of about 0.5%. Alluvial flow is believed by some local professionals to be only a minor portion of
any total flow.
Local subsurface flow rates within the limited alluvial flow system are estimated by assuming
a contribution width from development of approximately 8,000 feet, a contributing depth of 200 feet,
and a Darcy velocity of between 36 and 72 feet/year. Using the equation Q=kiA gives average flow
rates between 1,320 and 2,645 acre-feet/year (1.8 and 3.6 cfs). The average linear velocity,
calculated using a 0=0.3 ranges between 120 and 240 feet/year.
Winchester Hills. Winchester Hills is located approximately 6 miles north-northeast of St.
George within the limits of the Navajo Formation with a cap of alluvium and basalts and is generally
similar in nature to the Diamond Valley area which lies to the north. Although no significant
regional faulting has been identified within the general area, there is prominent fracturing which
could be a direct source of connection with down gradient water supplies.
The depth to water within the Navajo Formation is approximately 750 feet, and ground water
flow paths within the Navajo are projected to be to the southeast at an overall gradient of about
0.5%. Alluvial flow is believed by some local professionals to be only a minor portion of any total
flow. The limited amount of alluvial flow that exists within the area is believed to move to the
southwest, following the general trend of the land surface topography.
Local subsurface flow rates within the Navajo flow system were estimated by assuming a
contribution width from development of approximately 4,000 feet, a hydraulic conductivity of 5
feet/day (1,825 feet/year), and various mixing depths as shown in the tables included within the
appendices. A 50 foot aquifer and mixing depth was initially assumed for this area as a reasonable
estimate of aquifer flow potential which gave a flow rate are estimate of 42 acre-feet/year (0.06 cfs)
(using a velocity of 30.4 feet/year). The 50 foot depth was estimated based on engineering
Page II - 17
judgement taking into account consideration the known conditions regarding shallow alluvium and
basalts that overlie the local Navajo formation.
After further review, a slight alteration was made to the general model developed for this
area. Water collecting within shallow alluvium and basalts will move vertically downward until it
joins the deeper Navajo formation. Once this shallow water joins the deep aquifer system, it has the
potential for mixing over greater depths as the water moves downstream.
Virgin River Drainage
La Verkin. The town of La Verkin lies approximately 1 to 2 miles northeast of Hurricane
and is bounded on the east by the Hurricane fault. La Verkin lies upon a relatively shallow bed of
alluvial deposits which are believed to be locally about 30 feet thick. A 50 to 200 foot thick
fractured basalt layer underlies the alluvium which in turn is underlain by the Upper Cetaceous Iron
Springs Formation. The Utah Geological Survey has projected the Navajo Formation to lie at an
approximate depth of 1,700 feet below land surface.
Overall hydrologic conditions of La Verkin are very similar to those at Hurricane except that
the overall shallow ground water gradient is believed to be south and west towards the Virgin River.
Flow is believed to be entering the ground water system from the Hurricane fault system as well as
potentially out of the Virgin River east of the Hurricane fault.
There is a potential for direct flow path contamination of the La Verkin ground water system
from ground water originating in New Harmony, Leeds, Anderson Junction, and Toquerville. It is
believed at this time that significant concentrations of contaminants along these flow paths could
directly impact the La Verkin ground water system.
Contamination of the ground water system at La Verkin would potentially move south and
west where it could be recaptured by local well systems. Table II-2 shows an overall potential
ground water gradient of approximately 3% and a ground water Darcy velocity ranging from 0.15
to 0.30 feet/day. Dividing by porosity (0=0.3), the calculated linear velocity becomes 185 to 370
feet/year). Assuming a potential development zone 4,000 feet wide and an average saturated aquifer
depth (consisting of alluvium and basalts) of 175 feet, there would be between 880 and 1,760 acre-
feet (1.2 to 2.4 cfs) of flow which could potentially dilute any contamination source entering the
local ground water system.
Hurricane. Hurricane is located approximately 14 miles east-northeast of St. George and
1,250 feet above the top of the Navajo aquifer. The Hurricane area is underlain by several geologic
layers including in descending order up to 100 feet of alluvial deposits, 50 to 200 feet of basalts, and
900 feet of mixed Cetaceous and Upper Jurassic Formations. The most dominant local and regional
feature however is the Hurricane fault system. This fault is a major feature which has its down thrust
side to the west. The Navajo Sandstone Formation which is at a depth of approximately 1250 feet
west of the fault is upthrust 1,500 feet to the east. As is the case with most fault systems, there is
also some parallel fracturing at distance from the fault which can affect local hydrogeology.
Page II - 18
Ground water is believed to be confined within an aquifer lying below the shallow alluvial
system in the Hurricane area. Projections of ground water contours shown on Figure II-1 indicate
a westerly flow radiating away from the fault zone along the south border of Hurricane City. Local
ground water flow paths therefore may be to the northwest, west and southwest. Local permeability
is thought to be moderate with average reported permeabilities of 15 feet/day. With a local ground
water gradient of 2.2%, this translates to a velocity of 0.33 feet/day.
Ground water recharge would appear to be derived from the Hurricane fault zone in the
immediate area of Hurricane, and/or from unconsumed irrigation water diverted from the Virgin
River. As indicated within the New Harmony discussion it is believed that waters leaving New
Harmony enter the Ash Creek drainage west of the Hurricane Fault system and move southward
towards Toquerville and Hurricane, potentially along or within the Hurricane Fault system. Ground
water data within the Leeds and Anderson Junction area also show a ground water gradient towards
the Ash Creek drainage. These waters would appear to be a major potential source of supply to the
area north of Hurricane. Some waters may also be entering the ground water system from up
gradient leakage out of the Virgin River at, or east of the fault zone.
There is a potential for direct flow path contamination of the Hurricane ground water system
from New Harmony, Leeds, Anderson Junction, Toquerville and La Verkin. Significant
concentrations of contaminants along these flow paths could directly affect the Hurricane ground
water system should the local ground water table be lowered such that flow moves southward from
the Virgin River towards Hurricane.
A local ground water contamination potential also includes the possible conveyance of
contaminated water from the Hurricane area towards wells penetrating the Navajo aquifer west of
town. This conveyance may occur as shallow alluvial waters move westward on localized perched
(less permeable) geologic strata. Waters would then move horizontally and vertically when they
reach the edge of the perched system thereby introducing the potential for contamination of deeper
Navajo wells. The presence of fractured basalts underlying the alluvial system increases the
potential for contaminant transport.
General flow calculations can be made assuming that the alluvial system is underlain by a
less permeable aquitard, and that all flow moves horizontally until it reaches the border of the
aquitard. If the zone of potential contamination consists of a band of land 15,000 feet wide
paralleling the Hurricane fault, the aquifer depth is assumed to be 250 feet, and the Darcy velocity
as shown in Table II-2 is 0.33 ft/day, then the average linear velocity and flow rate are 400 feet/year
and 10,375 acre-feet/year (14.3 cfs) respectively. If these waters were not influenced by artificial
stresses, such as well drawdown cones, the flow would move both north and west toward the Virgin
River. An area of drawdown identified by USGS (located west of town and believed to have been
created by well withdrawals), will have the effect of intercepting some westward moving waters.
A preliminary flow path analysis using the contours shown on Figure II-2 indicates that
approximately ½ of the total flow would move north to northwest toward the Virgin River while the
other ½ would travel westward and likely be captured by the localized cone of depression.
Page II - 19
Apple Valley. Little overall information is available in the Apple Valley area which lies east
of the Hurricane fault and below the outcrop area of the Navajo Sandstone. It is believed however
based on personal communications with local experts that the area is characteristic of relatively thin
alluvial deposits of less than 100 feet in thickness. Ground water generally flows in a direction
paralleling the valley bottom. Upper valley locations generally have a ground water flow to the
northwest at a gradient of approximately 0.9%. Lower valley locations have a westward flow pattern
with a gradient of about 2% (see Table II-2). Local geology generally dips to the east limiting the
potential for significant regional recharge. Recharge to the Apple Valley unconsolidated aquifer
appears to be from local drainages bordering the valley.
Overall ground water velocities within Apple Valley are believed to be on the order of 0.05
to 0.1 feet per day based on information provided in Table II-2. These velocities translate to Darcy
velocities of between 18 and 36 feet per year, and average linear velocities of between 60 and 120
feet per year (using 0=0.3). Ground water flow rates within the valley can be estimated by applying
the equation Q=kiA where it is assumed that the maximum alluvial thickness is 100 feet, the average
flow width is 5,000 feet (both taken from topographic mapping), k=5 feet/day (1,825 ft/yr), and i=0.9
to 1.9%. Estimates using the Darcy velocity as shown indicate a flow of between 190 and 400 acre-
feet/year (0.26 - 0.55 cfs).
Sand Mountain (Hurricane Bench, Bench Lake Area). Sand Mountain is generally
located within the area between the Hurricane fault on the east and the Washington fault of the west.
The area is mostly found within the Navajo Formation overlain by sand, and in some areas by
fractured basalts.
The local ground water flow paths are believed to be generally oriented northward at a
gradient of about 1.1% with a few exceptions as shown on Figure II-1. The exceptions appear to be
related to the well field located west of Hurricane which result in the projected drawdowns shown
on Figure II-1. Ground water gradients within the northern portions of Sand Mountain resulting
from the well field are much lower and average 0.1%.
As shown in Table II-2, the average permeability of 1 foot/day (USGS, 1997). Darcy
velocities for the range of gradients shown are estimated to be between 0.001 and 0.11 feet per day
(0.37 and 40.1 feet/year). Average linear ground water velocities based on a porosity of 0.3 are
estimated to be 1.2 to 130 feet/year. Based on information shown in Figure II-1, steeper gradient
zones seem to dominate southern areas while flatter zones dominate northern zones. A ground water
flow path analysis indicates that an approximate 25,000 foot wide zone could potentially be captured
by the well field west of Hurricane as the water moves northward. Assuming that the saturated
aquifer thickness is 1,350 feet as determined by 1997 USGS aquifer testing, the area has the potential
of moving between 930 and 103,000 acre-feet (1.28 to 142.0 cfs) of water per year toward the well
field.
It is understood that Sand Mountain may be the preferred site for a future surface water
reservoir. It would be anticipated that such a reservoir would enhance northward flow and would
essentially eliminate the potential for the development of a concentrated source of contaminants.
Page II - 20
Increased flow to the north would also increase the dilution potential in down gradient wells thereby
reducing contaminant hazards.
Washington. The city of Washington lies generally south of and below the Navajo
Formation within the Kayenta and Moenave Formations. Since the city lies below the Navajo
Formation, there is no potential for contamination by the City of water supplies tapping the
sandstone unit.
The Washington fault, a north-south trending fault is located along the east edge of the City.
It is possible that this fault system and other potential fractures within the area are contributing to
subsurface flows within the Millcreek drainage, although it is the general opinion of the USGS that
local faults have little flow potential. Several culinary wells now use and depend upon a continued
and protected water source within this drainage.
Ground water contours within the Navajo Formation in the vicinity of Washington City
would, without the influence of the Millcreek well field follow a southern flow path toward the
Virgin River. The Millcreek well field is however creating a localized cone of depression which has
influenced the local water table significantly (see Figure II-1). The influence is not believed to be
detrimental to the developed water supply.
1997 geologic mapping provided by the Utah Geological Survey indicates that the average
unconsolidated fill depth within the Washington City area (south of the Navajo Formation) to be
generally less than approximately 25 feet (20 feet of which is assumed to be saturated). The overall
local ground water gradient within this unconsolidated fill material is about 2.8% in the vicinity of
the Millcreek drainage, which with the locally high permeability creates a relatively high flow
condition. Local ground water has an estimated Darcy velocity of 2.8 feet/day (1,020 feet/year), and
an average linear velocity (using 0=0.3) of 3,400 feet/year. The approximate ground water flow
gradient between the central city area and the Virgin River is 2.5%. Using a developed width of
6,000 feet, a saturated thickness of 20 feet, and a hydraulic conductivity of 100 feet/day, there is an
estimated 2,500 acre-feet (3.5 cfs) of water per year moving beneath the city which is potentially
diluting local contamination sources.
Unless there is now, or will be a future culinary water supply well located within Washington
or the area immediately south to the river, there is little likelihood for contamination to a drinking
water supply. The quantity of contaminant which could theoretically discharge from the city to the
river is far outweighed by the dilution potential of the Virgin River.
St. George. The city of St. George lies within the Kayenta Formation immediately below
the Navajo Sandstone Formation. Since the city lies below and south of the Navajo Formation, there
is no potential for contamination of water supplies tapping the sandstone unit. 1997 geologic
mapping provided by the Utah Geological Survey indicates that the average unconsolidated fill depth
within the St. George city area is approximately 30 feet. No faulting has been mapped in the
immediate area of the city with the exception of a small north-south fault starting in the general area
Page II - 21
of the east I-15 interchange and heading north. It is not believed that this identified fault has a
significant impact upon the local hydrogeology.
Ground water contours in the vicinity of the city generally follow a southern flow path toward
the Virgin River. The overall ground water gradient varies from between 0.5 to 6.0% north of the
city with the flat gradients being located in excess of one to two miles to the north. The steep
gradients are typically found within the bottom margins of the Navajo Formation as shown on Figure
II-1. Darcy ground water velocities in excess of one mile north of the city are estimated to be 0.06
feet/day (22 feet/year) with velocities near the base of the Navajo Formation in the area of St. George
City estimated at 0.7 feet/day (260 feet/year). Dividing these velocities by the appropriate value for
porosity gives linear velocities for the Navajo aquifer north of St. George, and in the alluvial system
within and south of St. George of 130 feet/year (using 0=0.17 as documented in previous technical
publications) and 870 feet/year (using an estimated 0=0.3) respectively.
The approximate ground water flow gradient between the north edge of the city and the
Virgin River is 3.2%. Using a developed width of 10,000 feet and a saturated thickness of 30 feet,
there is an estimated 900 to 6,000 acre-feet (1.2 to 8.3 cfs) of water per year moving beneath St.
George which is diluting any local contamination source.
Unless there is now, or will be a future culinary water supply well located within St. George
or the area immediately south to the river, there is little likelihood for contamination to a drinking
water supply. The quantity of contaminant which could theoretically discharge from the St. George
area to the river is far outweighed by the dilution potential of the Virgin River.
Ash Creek Drainage
New Harmony. New Harmony, located within the northeastern portion of the study area is
located above the Navajo Sandstone Formation and is controlled mostly by alluvial flow
mechanisms. Recharge from the local watershed contributes to the local water supply which
generally follows the ground surface contour in a southerly flow pattern, beginning on the north at
a ground water divide located just north of Kanarraville. Local ground water is expected to be of
relatively young age considering its recharge source. Raw results of a recent chlorofluorocarbon
sample taken on a well within the New Harmony area indicate that the waters may be as young as
5 to 10 years old which if true, would help verify the recharge assumption. However, the
chlorofluorocarbon analyses completed at this time are very preliminary in nature. Young water
mixing with older water could be tainting the results thereby giving an apparent reading
characteristic of younger water. Water quality testing and analysis for this and other parameters will
be documented by the USGS over the course of the next few years.
Surface flows travel southward until they enter Ash Creek Reservoir and are either used or
lost to subsurface strata. Ground water flowing within the unconsolidated deposits moves from high
to low topographic areas in a manner similar to surface water. Upon reaching the Ash Creek
Reservoir area, it is believed that the ground water flows southward along the Ash Creek drainage
which then conveys the water southward towards Toquerville. Communications with project
Page II - 22
personnel and State representatives have indicated that a dye test was completed several years ago
with no evidence of a direct connection between Ash Creek Reservoir and Toquerville springs. No
documentation was found regarding the dye test and therefore no conclusion could be made
regarding its accuracy or validity. In spite of the dye test, it is believed possible that some
interconnection exists between Ash Creek reservoir and the down gradient Ash Creek drainage,
especially when reviewing reservoir and spring locations with fault and fracture mapping.
Unconsolidated deposits within the basin have been documented by the Utah Geological
Survey to be as much as 500 feet thick near the town of New Harmony, to as deep as 2,000 feet near
to, and paralleling the Hurricane fault. The threat of ground water contamination by septic systems
within this basin is believed to be controlled by alluvial flow systems. Any residual contaminant
which leaves the basin however could potentially travel great distances in short periods of time
through the fracture systems associated with local faulting.
The preliminary chlorofluorocarbon dating analysis discussed earlier shows that water within
Toquerville springs may be approximately 15 years old. If this is the case, and if New Harmony is
the source of water for the spring, then the water is flowing at an average velocity of one (1) mile
per year. It must be remembered that the dating analysis at this point in time is very preliminary and
subject to several assumptions which could affect conclusions reached. One such conclusion may
very well be that the water is assumed to be relatively young, when in reality, the water may be a mix
of both young shallow, and old deep waters.
An estimate of ground water velocity and flow rate made from data shown in Table II-2 has
been made. Assuming an average ground water gradient measured near Ash Creek Reservoir of
1.75% and an average permeability of 35 ft/day gives a Darcy velocity of 220 feet/year. Dividing
by a porosity of 0.3 gives a ground water average linear velocity of 730 feet/year. An estimated flow
rate of 22,700 acre-feet/year (31.3 cfs) was determined using the Darcy velocity and an average
width and depth at the reservoir site of 3,000 and 1,500 feet respectively.
Pintura. The community of Pintura is located along I-15 approximately 23 miles northeast
of St. George and lies within the upper portions of the Navajo Formation with an overlying zone of
fractured basalts, debris and rubble. Since the community lies directly within the Navajo Formation
it is a potential contamination source to down gradient water supplies. Geologic mapping shows
several small fractures and fault systems which generally parallel I-15 and the Hurricane fault in the
Pintura area. These fault and fracture systems may be contributing to both local recharge and
discharge. It is believed that the area between Pintura and Toquerville is highly transmissive.
Recharge waters originating within the New Harmony area and points south have the
potential of being conveyed to the Pintura area through these fault systems. General ground water
flow direction appears however to be southward from the upland drainage basin. A southward
ground water flow would potentially convey waters to either the Hurricane fault and/or Anderson
Junction.
Page II - 23
Projected local ground water gradients found within the shallow ground water system are on
the order of 2.2% giving estimated Darcy velocities ranging between 0.022 and 0.70 feet/day (8.0
and 255 feet/year), and average linear ground water velocities ranging between 26 and 850 feet/year.
Assuming a band of development 12,000 feet wide and a saturated depth of 300 feet, there would
be an estimated flow rate of 660 to 21,150 acre-feet/year (0.9 to 29.2 cfs) available for the dilution
of a potential contamination source. Most of any potential contamination source would be expected
to move southward towards the Hurricane fault with some potential for flows to follow the smaller
fault systems paralleling the Hurricane fault. This being the case, water moving southward has the
potential of contributing a contamination source to the Toquerville, La Verkin and Hurricane areas
while water moving to the southwest could potentially impact the Anderson Junction and Leeds
areas.
Anderson Junction. Anderson Junction is a growing area located along I-15 at the north
end of Toquerville and one mile west of the Hurricane fault. It lies within an alluvial fill area, is
believed to be underlain by fractured basalts, and within the limits of the Navajo aquifer. According
to existing mapping, there are several local faults having a northeast-southwest orientation generally
paralleling the local extent of the Hurricane fault.
Local ground water is likely recharged from two potential sources. The first is from local
precipitation recharge being derived from the drainage basins to the northwest. The second is from
a potential connection with north-south flows associated with the Hurricane fault.
According to available ground water contour data, local ground water contamination having
the ability to move through alluvial deposits would have the potential of traveling towards the
Toquerville spring area. The overall ground water gradient between Anderson Junction and
Toquerville City appears to be relatively consistent at approximately 2.8 percent to the southeast.
Since local geology consists of alluvial fill, basalts and fractured Navajo Sandstone, the potential for
the conveyance of a contamination source would appear to be relatively high.
An estimate of average linear ground water velocity is calculated for any given area using the
equation v_=ki/0. Given an alluvial fill with a local permeability (k) of 1 to 32 feet per day, an
assumed porosity (0) of 0.3, and a gradient (I) of 2.8%, a contaminant source would have the
potential of traveling between 34 and 1,090 feet per year. However, once a contamination source
reaches fractured basalts, it could take as little as 6.5 years to travel the 10,000 feet to Toquerville
(based on an average permeability of 45 ft/day and a 10,000 foot travel distance). The average
dilution potential based on flow rate can be calculated by multiplying the average flow velocity by
aquifer area.
Aquifer flow area for this location is assumed to have a flow width equal to the approximate
width of development and a flow depth equal to the average local aquifer thickness. The best
available information indicates the average width and thickness to be 4,000 and 250 feet
respectively. Using these numbers one can estimate the potential volume of water moving through
the ground water zone by multiplying the area by the Darcy velocity (v=ki). The equation for flow
through the ground water aquifer then becomes Q=vA=kiA. For example, if k=1 ft/day (365 ft/yr),
Page II - 24
i=2.8%, A=4,000*250=1,000,000 ft2 (23 acres), then Q=365*0.028*23=235 acre-feet/year.
Applying this equation to the range of “k” values identified in Table II-2, there would be an
approximate 235 to 7,500 acre-feet (0.32 to 10.3 cfs) of water per year potentially moving toward
Toquerville if flow were in alluvium, and up to 10,560 acre-feet/yr (14.6 cfs) if the flow were
moving through fractured basalts. The total volume of water moving southeastward is likely
between the two estimates.
Toquerville. The town of Toquerville lies approximately 4 miles north of Hurricane and is
bounded on the east by the Hurricane fault. Toquerville lies upon a relatively shallow bed of alluvial
deposits which are believed to be about 20 to 30 feet thick. This alluvial deposit is underlain by a
zone of fractured basalt which in turn is underlain by the Navajo Sandstone Formation. The Navajo
Formation rises to the surface locally west of the Town.
Overall hydrologic conditions of Toquerville are very similar to those at La Verkin. Water
is believed to be entering the ground water system from the Ash Creek drainage as well as from the
Anderson Junction area.
As was the case with the La Verkin and Hurricane areas, there is a potential for direct flow
path contamination of the Toquerville ground water system from New Harmony, Leeds, and
Anderson Junction. Significant concentrations of contaminants along these flow paths could directly
affect the Toquerville ground water system.
Contamination of the ground water system at Toquerville would potentially move south along
the Ash Creek drainage where it could be recaptured by local water supplies near La Verkin. Table
II-2 shows an overall potential ground water gradient of approximately 3.3% and a Darcy ground
water velocity ranging from 0.33 to 0.83 feet/day. Dividing the Darcy flow rates by a porosity of 0.3
gives average linear velocities in the range of 400 to 1,010 feet/year. Assuming a potential
development zone 3,000 feet wide and an average saturated aquifer depth of 50 feet, there would be
between 408 and 1,030 acre-feet (0.56 to 1.42 cfs) of flow per year entering the area from Anderson
Junction which could potentially dilute any contamination source entering the ground water system
at Toquerville.
Leeds. The community of Leeds is located along I-15 approximately 15 miles northeast of
St. George and lies within the Petrified Forest of the Chinle Formation. Since the community lies
below the Navajo Formation it is not a potential contamination source to water supplies within the
Navajo aquifer. Geologic mapping shows several small fault systems which generally parallel I-15
between Washington and Pintura. These fault systems may be contributing to both local recharge
and discharge. Recharge waters originating within the New Harmony area and points south have the
potential of being conveyed to the Pintura, Anderson Junction, Leeds, Harrisburg, and Washington
areas through these fault systems. General ground water flow direction appears however to be
southward from the upland drainage basin.
Local ground water gradients are moderately steep within the Leeds area and are on the order
of 2.2% giving an estimated Darcy ground water velocity of 0.99 feet/day. Dividing by a porosity
Page II - 25
of 0.3 gives an average linear velocity of 1,200 feet/year. Assuming a band of development 10,000
feet wide and a saturated depth of 100 feet, there would be an estimated flow rate of 8,300 acre-
feet/year (11.5 cfs) available for the dilution of a potential contamination source. Most of any
potential contamination source however would be expected to move southward towards the Virgin
River where the USGS has documented a gaining reach of stream. If the water moves southward
as believed, any potential contamination source from Leeds would bypass Toquerville, La Verkin
and Hurricane cities. The only potential hazard would appear to be the development of additional
ground water supplies within the area between Leeds and the Virgin River wherein a contamination
source could be picked up. Conveyance of a contamination source to the Virgin River and vicinity
would be rapid once the contaminant left the alluvial fill and entered the underlying fractured basalt
system.
SUMMARY
Hydrogeologic conditions within Washington County are highly complex and variable. This
report has not intended to make hard conclusions, but rather take available verbal and documented
information into account, and provide a general summary of findings and conclusions based on that
data. A generalized summary of findings for the region is provided herein.
o Ground water level data is currently available in published form from federal, state and
private sources for the St. George, Washington, Sand Mountain, and Leeds areas.
o Preliminary ground water level data is being updated for the St. George, Gunlock and New
Harmony areas by the USGS.
o Ground water level projections in other areas were developed through the use of both spring
and stream elevation data.
o Faults and fractures have the potential to increase the interconnectivity, and thereby increase
ground water movement between the communities of New Harmony and Pintura, Anderson
Junction, Toquerville, La Verkin and Hurricane; between Anderson Junction, Leeds,
Harrisburg and Washington; between Pine Valley and the Millcreek well field; and between
the Veyo and Gunlock areas.
Page III - 1
CHAPTER III
EXISTING GROUNDWATER QUALITY
GENERAL
Significant groundwater development has taken place in the study area, particularly in the
Navajo Sandstone as well as in formations that are adjacent to, or fed by, the Navajo Sandstone. As
discussed in Chapter VI of this report, culinary water wells must meet the Primary Drinking Water
Standards established by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and adopted by the State
of Utah. In addition, groundwater aquifers may now be classified for protective purposes in
accordance with the Utah Groundwater Quality Protection Regulations. These requirements are also
discussed in Chapter VI.
EXISTING CULINARY WATER WELLS
The approximate location of prominent culinary wells in the study area is shown as Figure
III-1. High quality groundwater is obtained from many of the existing public water supply wells in
the study area. The aquifers associated with these wells could likely be classified Class IA or
“Pristine” according to the Utah Groundwater Quality Protection Regulations. Representative wells
producing water meeting the requirements of the Pristine classification are included in Table III-1.
A lesser number of existing public water supply wells obtain water from aquifers which could likely
be classified Class II or “Drinking Water Quality”, which is a lower classification, but still
acceptable for public water supplies. Representative wells producing water meeting the
requirements of the Drinking Water Quality classification “Class II” are included in Table III-2. A
few isolated wells in the study area produce water from aquifers containing water of poorer quality
than those included in the tables.
SEPTIC SYSTEM RELATED CONCERN
While this issue is analyzed and discussed at length in subsequent chapters, it is worth
mentioning here because pollutants entering the groundwater from existing septic systems have
likely not yet reached existing culinary wells. It may require 10's or even 100's of years for that to
occur. In other words, studying the water quality of existing wells may provide a False Sense of
Security regarding the potential effects of septic systems on regional groundwater quality.
Page III-2
TABLE III-1
SOURCES INDICATIVE OF CLASS IA GROUNDWATER (PRISTINE) (1)
System Source TDS (mg/l)Cl (mg/l)pH SO4 (mg/l)NO3 (mg/l)
Dammeron Valley North Ridge Well 248 21 8.2 20 0.98
Ivins Town Spring 232 20 8.1 69 0.80
Ivins St. George Well 279 20 7.5 44 0.64
Kanarraville Kanarraville Spring 434 13 7.9 160 0.37
La Verkin Toquerville Spring 464 15 7.8 156 0.94
Pine Valley Mt. Farms Well 288 21 8 17 1.53
Santa Clara Beachem Spring 321 18 8.3 116 1.03
Santa Clara Snow Canyon Well #1 166 13 7.6 20 0.91
St. George Big Pine Canyon Spring 286 8 8.2 23 (2)
St. George Carter Canyon 82 2 8.4 8 0.15
St. George Gunlock Well #1 304 18 8.5 66 0.78
St. George Gunlock Well #4 325 40 8.1 45 0.50
St. George Millcreek No. 1 282 14 7.6 85 0.48
St. George Quaking Aspen Spring 52 (2)8.2 8 0.10
St. George Snow Canyon Well #3 154 15 8 21 0.92
St. George Snow Canyon Well #2 116 11 8.1 23 0.65
Veyo Spring 330 28 8.2 26 1.65
Washington Grape Vine Spring 236 7 (2)28 0.32
Washington Prisbrey Spring #1 362 12 8 132 0.47
Washington Well No. 3 380 8 7.8 88 0.72
Washington Well No. 4 312 8 7.9 114 0.36
Washington Well No. 2 380 11 8.1 93 0.65
Washington Westover Spring #2 364 16 7.9 250 0.47
Note:(1) The requirements associated with the Class IA (Pristine) classification are included in Chapter VI of this report.
(2) Data not available.
Page III-3
TABLE III-2
SOURCES INDICATIVE OF CLASS II GROUNDWATER
(DRINKING WATER QUALITY) (1)
System Source TDS (mg/l)Cl (mg/l)pH SO4 (mg/l)NO3 (mg/l)
Hurricane Ash Creek Spring 548 19 8.1 219 1.60
Hurricane Hurricane West Well 532 22 8.1 245 0.39
Kanarraville Well 510 26 7.7 156 3.60
Leeds Well 720 23 7.9 288 0.55
New Harmony Well 792 6 8.2 4 0.23
Santa Clara Gray Spring #1 554 38 8.3 228 0.86
Santa Clara Miller Spring #1 582 26 8.2 210 0.96
Santa Clara Miller Spring #2 754 137 8.4 250 0.67
Santa Clara Sheep Spring 520 28 8.2 200 0.90
St. George City Creek #1 Well 1120 140 8.1 502 0.46
St. George Gunlock Well #5 886 26 7.8 36 2.23
St. George Millcreek Spring 702 160 8.2 187 0.35
Virgin Spring 3 miles S. of
Town
528 34 7.5 170 0.02
Virgin Goosebury Mesa Well 888 30 8.4 380 0.04
Virgin North Creek 760 62 8.4 356 1.05
Washington Well No. 1 767 16 8 360 2.10
Note:(1) The requirements associated with the Class II (Drinking Water Quality) classification are included in Chapter VI of this report.
Page IV-1
CHAPTER IV
PROJECTED GROWTH AREAS AND SEPTIC SYSTEM USAGE
LAND USE
The Washington County area is one of the fastest growing areas in Utah and in the United
States. Its relatively mild temperatures and picturesque surroundings make it a very desirable
location for permanent and seasonal residences. Planners estimate that by 2040 that the County
population may increase from the current approximately 50,000 to more than 200,000
(Boyle/WWC/Alpha, 1995). This type of growth is unprecedented in the study area and in most of
the intermountain area. It presents a tremendous burden on water resources planning.
Land use projections were obtained from the following sources:
o Meetings with John Willie, Washington County Planner and his administrative
staff.
o “Population Management Study for Washington County, Utah”, completed for the
Washington County Water Conservancy District by GEO/Graphics, Inc. in May of
1994.
o “Purpose and Need Study ” completed for the Washington County Water
Conservancy District by Boyle Engineering, WWC, and Alpha Engineering in
March of 1995.
Figure IV-1 depicts the subareas for which specific land use projections were developed for
use in this study.
SEPTIC SYSTEM USE
Septic systems are used extensively in the study area, particularly in the less urban areas
which tend to be more distant from St. George and the surrounding developed areas. While the
rapidly growing areas closer to St. George are either now sewered or are considering installing sewer
systems, the more distant and relatively undeveloped portions of the study area must use septic
systems for wastewater disposal. As these distant areas experience increased development, they also
require an increased number of septic systems, which in turn may place a greater stress on
groundwater quality.
An estimate of the potential future number of septic systems was obtained by considering
available land throughout the study area, current and likely future zoning patterns, and available
water rights associated with land. In addition a projection was made assuming that the availability
Page IV-2
of water would not be a constraint (requires an external source of water). A summary of these
projections is included in Table IV-1.
TABLE IV - 1
SEPTIC SYSTEM USE PROJECTIONS
Current Buildout Buildout
Private Conditions w/Constraints w/out Constraints
Location Land Area Septic Septic Septic
(acres)Systems Systems Systems
Anderson Junction 653 7 20 660
Apple Valley 13312 486 500 3970
Brookside 5219 620 720 900
Dameron Valley 3497 200 300 3500
Diamond Valley 2064 404 440 620
Gunlock 3536 40 100 300
Hurricane 16130 Ž 56 Ž Ž
Ivins 5240 Ž Ž Ž
La Verkin 3674 Ž 16 Ž Ž
Leeds 3871 200 300 780
New Harmony 15810 300 3000 3160
Pine Valley 2658 350 700 720
Pintura 1935 11 20 200
Bench Lake Area 3480 150 300 360
Santa Clara 8922 Ž Ž Ž
St. George 30325 Ž Ž Ž
Toquerville 4620 Ž 84 Ž Ž
Veyo 4155 100 100 830
Virgin 6193 80 100 2620
Washington 5961 Ž Ž Ž
Winchester Hills 2510 350 600 2510
Total 143872 3454 7200 21130
Notes:Buildout with constraints means development is limited by available water
Buildout without constraints means development is not limited by available water
Ž = Area is either currently sewered or is likely to be sewered in the near future
Page V-1
CHAPTER V
SEPTIC SYSTEM RELATED POLLUTION
BACKGROUND
The septic tank/soil absorption system was originally developed in France during the 1860's
as a means for disposing of human wastes and for preventing the spread of pathogens (Canter and
Knox, 1985 and DeFeo, Wait & Associates, 1991). Septic systems typically consist of a buried tank
(septic tank) and a soil absorption system (leach field). A typical septic system is shown in Figure
V-1. The septic tank is designed to remove scum, grease and settleable solids from wastewater by
gravity separation. Bacteria then treat or reduce the organic portion of these materials anaerobically
(without oxygen). The partially treated wastewater is then evenly distributed by piping to the leach
field for aerobic treatment (with oxygen) of the remaining pollutants in the underlying soils.
EFFECTIVENESS OF SEPTIC SYSTEMS
Septic systems, if designed, installed, and maintained correctly, can be an effective means of
preventing the spread of pathogens and other harmful substances. They function well when
considering the parameters within which they are intended to operate. However, septic systems are
not perfect wastewater disposal systems. They do not remove 100% of the pollutants associated with
residential wastewater. There are some remaining pollutants which are discharged to the
environment. How then do regulators, planners and designers deal with these remaining pollutants
to help ensure that public health and the environment are protected to acceptable levels? In part the
answer lies in the old adage: “Dilution is the Solution to Pollution”. This means that there must be
sufficient groundwater available to decrease, or dilute, the concentration of the remaining pollutants
to an acceptable level.
Therein lies the dilemma associated with septic systems. Septic systems are a good thing, but
can there be too much of a good thing? The answer to that question depends on the assimilative
capacity of the underlying groundwater. That is to say, how many septic systems can, or is the
groundwater able to handle? The overall effectiveness of septic systems, including their impact on
the environment is dependent on the determination of appropriate septic system densities (one septic
system per “x” amount of acres). Appropriate densities help maintain adequate dilution potential in
the underlying groundwater. The lower the development density, the higher the dilution potential.
SELECTION OF A KEY CONTAMINANT INDICATOR
Candidate Indicators
The determination of whether proper conditions exist for adequate dilution of septic system
related pollutants is complex. To help simplify the determination, typical, well understood pollutants
Page V-2
are usually selected as indicators of the effect septic systems may have on the environment. Four of
these include: pathogens, organic compounds, phosphorus and nitrogen. The majority of reported
health problems in the U.S. associated with septic systems are caused by pathogens which have
passed through septic systems to groundwater. Organic compounds such as cleaning solvents have
been identified as possible groundwater contaminants related to septic systems. Phosphorus released
from septic systems can lead to eutrophication problems in surface water impoundments. Previous
work by HA&L and others has indicated that pathogens, organic contaminants and phosphorus all
have significant limitations as indicators and that nitrate nitrogen is an acceptable indicator of
potential pollution from septic systems. A recent study completed for the State of Massachusetts
concluded that “using nitrogen loading as a means of determining acceptable density limits may
be the most effective means of protecting the quality of water in wells or surface water bodies
over the long term” (DeFeo, Wait & Associates, 1991).
Nitrogen Related Health Risk
The United States Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) has determined that nitrate
nitrogen poses an acute health concern at certain levels of exposure (Utah Drinking Water Board,
1993). Excessive levels of nitrate in drinking water may cause serious illness and sometimes death
in infants under six months of age. EPA has set the maximum contaminant level (MCL) for nitrate
in drinking water at 10 mg/L to prevent methemoglobinemia or “blue baby syndrome”. Nitrate
concentrations in public drinking water systems have been monitored on a regular basis for many
years. Treatment for removal of nitrates from contaminated water sources, such a wells, is generally
not cost effective for individual home owners, nor is it a typical form of treatment for public water
suppliers that rely on large producing deep wells.
Sources of Nitrogen
The most common sources of nitrate in groundwater include fertilizer applied to the land, and
sewage and wastes from humans and farm animals. Other typically minor sources of nitrogen to
groundwater may include nitrogen associated with precipitation and naturally occurring nitrogen in
the soil and underlying bedrock structure.
Septic Systems and Nitrogen
Septic systems have generally been found to be relatively ineffective in removing nitrogen
from the wastewater stream. Figure V-2 shows schematically the effect of a typical septic system
on the associated nitrogen compounds. Nitrogen entering the septic system is typically 70% organic
nitrogen and 30% ammonia. The anaerobic environment in the septic tank transforms most of the
organic nitrogen to ammonia nitrogen. The nitrogen leaving the septic tank is typically 25% organic
nitrogen and 75% ammonia. A properly functioning absorption system has a biomat which forms at
the soil interface directly below the absorption system. The biomat has a greatly reduced permeability
and provides an unsaturated zone below the absorption system. This unsaturated zone is critical for
the removal of pathogens. The unsaturated zone typically is an aerobic environment in which the
ammonia is oxidized to nitrate (nitrification). An adequate depth of unsaturated flow, necessary for
Page V-3
bacteriological treatment and for phosphorus removal, also establishes conditions which allow for
rapid nitrification which converts ammonia and organic nitrogen to nitrate (Canter and Knox, 1985).
Transport and Fate of Nitrate
Figure V-3 represents the fate of nitrogen compounds associated with septic systems. When
nitrate reaches the underlying groundwater, it becomes very mobile because of its solubility and
anionic form. Nitrate moves with groundwater with minimal transformation. Nitrates can be
removed from groundwater through two mechanisms: (1) direct uptake by plants, and (2)
denitrification. Direct plant nitrate uptake adjacent to an absorption field is negligible if the drain
field is installed properly so that an adequate unsaturated soil depth is maintained. Denitrification,
or the bacteriological transformation of nitrate to nitrogen gas requires an oxygen free (anaerobic)
environment. It would be unlikely for such an environment to occur in groundwater aquifers that
typically produce high quality drinking water.
Advantages of Nitrate
Nitrate offers the following advantages as an indicator:
(1)Excessive concentrations of nitrate in drinking water present a well documented
health hazard.
(2)Nitrate is an effective indicator of human activity because the major sources of nitrate
in groundwater are wastewater disposal and application of fertilizer to land.
(3)Nitrate concentrations are relatively easy to measure.
(4)A reliable historical groundwater quality data base exists.
(5)Nitrate generally does not attenuate once it enters groundwater except by dilution.

Page VI-1
CHAPTER VI
REGULATORY CONSIDERATIONS
The purpose of this chapter is to consider regulatory alternatives that may affect the
determination of allowable or advisable septic system densities.
POLICY CONSIDERATIONS
Currently, the overall State of Utah water quality protection policy is “anti-degradation”. The
following policy alternatives regarding further septic system usage were reviewed with Washington
County:
C Non-degradation = no decrease in groundwater quality
C Anti-degradation = degradation allowed to an acceptable limit
C Selective degradation = degradation allowed in selected areas to an acceptable limit
After consultation with WCWCD and the cooperating agencies, anti-degradation was
recommended as the County’s preferred general policy regarding protection of groundwater quality.
WASHINGTON COUNTY
Southwest Utah Public Health Department
In Utah, local health departments have the primary responsibility for assuring that proposed
individual wastewater disposal systems, including septic tank leachfield systems, will not have an
adverse impact upon groundwater quality. The Utah Department of Environmental Quality provides
minimum standards for local health departments to use in assessing the adequacy of proposed
individual wastewater disposal systems. The Utah Administrative Code gives local health
departments the option to determine the minimum lot size based upon a number of factors including
the “individual and accumulated gross effects on water quality”.
Washington County Planning Department
Current zoning requirements in Washington County dictate that all developable residential
lots utilizing septic systems be one (1) acre minimum. Selected areas including the New Harmony
Area require five (5) acres per lot for septic system use.
Page VI-2
STATE OF UTAH
Drinking Water Standards
The Utah Drinking Water Board and Division of Drinking Water ( a Division of the Utah
Department of Environmental Quality) have primary responsibility for regulating all community water
systems to ensure that public drinking water meets State primary and secondary standards. Source
water drawn from either surface or groundwater supplies must either meet or be treatable such that
compliance with primary and secondary standards is realized. Primary standards specify a maximum
contaminant level (MCL) for organic, inorganic, and microbiological contaminants, as well as for
turbidity and radioactivity. Secondary standards address taste, odor, color, and other conditions
associated with drinking water aesthetics. A summarized listing of the State of Utah standards are
presented in Tables VI-1 and VI-2.
TABLE VI-1
UTAH PRIMARY DRINKING WATER STANDARDS
PRIMARY INORGANIC STANDARDS
Contaminant Maximum Contaminant Level
Antimony 0.006 mg/l
Arsenic 0.05 mg/l
Asbestos 7 Million Fibers/liter(longer than 10
Barium 2 mg/l
Beryllium 0.004 mg/l
Cadmium 0.005 mg/l
Chromium 0.1 mg/l
Cyanide (as free Cyanide)0.2 mg/l
Fluoride 4.0 mg/l
Mercury 0.002 mg/l
Nickel 0.1 mg/l
Nitrate 10 mg/l (as Nitrogen)
Nitrite 1 mg/l (as Nitrogen)
Total Nitrate and Nitrite 10 mg/l (as Nitrogen)
Selenium 0.05 mg/l
Sodium NMCL1
Sulfate 1000 mg/l
Thallium 0.002 mg/l
Total Dissolved Solids 2000 mg/l
1. No maximum contaminant level has been established for sodium
Page VI-3
TABLE VI-2
UTAH SECONDARY DRINKING WATER STANDARDS
SECONDARY INORGANIC STANDARDS
Contaminant Level
Aluminum 0.05 to 0.2 mg/l
Chloride 250 mg/l
Color 15 Color Units
Copper 1 mg/l
Corrosivity Non-corrosive
Fluoride 2.0 mg/l
Foaming Agents 0.5 mg/l
Iron 0.3 mg/l
Manganese 0.05 mg/l
Odor 3 Threshold Odor Number
pH 6.5-8.5
Silver 0.1 mg/l
Sulfate 250 mg/l
TDS 500 mg/l
Zinc 5 mg/l
The complete primary and secondary standards are presented in the Utah Administrative Code,
Rules for Public Drinking Water Systems, Part I, R309-103.
Drinking Water Source Protection Rules
The Utah Drinking Water Board adopted the Drinking Water Source Protection Rule, R309-
113, Utah Administrative Code, to govern the protection of groundwater sources of drinking water.
The rule was established to require a uniform, statewide program for implementation by public water
systems (PWS’s).
The rule requires that each PWS submit a Drinking Water Source Protection (DWSP) Plan
for each of its new groundwater sources and for each of its existing groundwater sources. DWSP
Plans include the following:
Page VI-4
C DWSP Delineation Report
C Prioritized Inventory of Potential Contamination Sources
C Management Program to Control Each Pre-existing Potential Contamination Source
C Management Program to Control or Prohibit Future Potential Contamination Sources for
Existing Drinking Water Sources
C Implementation Schedule
C Resource Evaluation
C Record keeping
Management programs list each of the current controls that are in effect for each potential
contamination source and assess whether current controls are stringent enough to prevent pollution
from a potential contamination source from reaching a groundwater source of drinking water.
Wastewater Disposal Rules
General Policy. The Utah Water Quality Board and Division of Water Quality have
responsibility to provide additional and cumulative remedies to prevent, abate, and control the
pollution of the waters of the state under primacy of the federal Water Pollution Control Act as
amended by the Water Quality Act of 1987. In R317-2-1(a) of the Utah Administrative Code it was
declared public policy of the State of Utah to “...conserve the waters of the state and to protect,
maintain and improve the quality thereof for public water supplies, for the propagation of wildlife,
fish and aquatic life, and for domestic, agricultural, industrial, recreational and other legitimate
beneficial uses; to provide that no waste be discharged into any waters of the state without first being
given the degree of treatment necessary to protect the legitimate beneficial uses of such waters; to
provide for the prevention, abatement and control of new or existing water pollution; to place first
in priority those control measures directed toward elimination of pollution which creates hazards to
the public health...”
Surface Water - Beneficial Use Classification System. The Utah Water Quality Board
(UWQB) has grouped the surface waters of the state into classes so as to protect the beneficial uses
of each designated class against controllable pollution. Surface waters of the state are classified as
follows (Utah Department of Environmental Quality, 1994):
1.Class 1 - Protected for use as a raw water source for domestic water systems.
A.Class 1A - Reserved.
B.Class 1B - Reserved.
C.Class 1C - Protected for domestic purposes with prior treatment by treatment processes
as required by the Utah Department of Environmental Quality.
2.Class 2 - Protected for in-stream recreational use and aesthetics.
A.Class 2A - Protected for primary contact recreation such as swimming.
B.Class 2B - Protected for secondary contact recreation such as boating, wading, or similar
uses.
Page VI-5
3.Class 3 - Protected for in-stream use by aquatic wildlife.
A.Class 3A - Protected for cold water species of game fish and other cold water aquatic life,
including the necessary aquatic organisms in their food chain.
B.Class 3B - Protected for warm water species of game fish and other warm water aquatic
life, including the necessary aquatic organisms in their food chain.
C.Class 3C - Protected for non-game fish and other aquatic life, including the necessary
aquatic organisms in their food chain.
D.Class 3D - Protected for waterfowl, shore birds and other water-oriented wildlife not
included in Classes 3A, 3B, or 3C, including the necessary aquatic organisms in their food
chain.
4.Class 4 - Protected for agricultural uses including irrigation of crops and stock watering.
5.Class 5 - The Great Salt Lake. Protected for primary and secondary contact recreation, aquatic
wildlife, and mineral extraction.
6.Class 6 - Standards for this class are determined based on environmental and human health
concerns.
Numeric criteria for the standards of water quality for the classes of water defined by the
UWQB are listed in R317-2-14 of the Utah Administrative Code.
Individual Wastewater Disposal Systems. Individual wastewater disposal systems (IWDS)
are those systems for underground disposal of domestic wastewater which are designed for a capacity
of 5,000 gallons per day or less and are not designed to serve multiple dwelling units which are owned
by separate owners except condominiums and twin homes. IWDS usually consist of a building sewer,
a septic tank, and an absorption system.
Utah Administrative Code, R317-502-16 indicates that one of the following two methods shall
be used for determining minimum lot size for a single-family dwelling when an individual wastewater
disposal system is to be used:
METHOD 1:-The local health department having jurisdiction may determine minimum lot
size. Individuals or developers requesting lot size determinations under this
method will be required to submit to the local health department, at their own
expense, a report which accurately takes into account, but is not limited to, the
following factors:
A. Soil type and depth.
B. Area drainage, lot drainage, and potential for flooding.
C. Protection of surface and ground waters.
D. Setbacks from property lines, water supplies, etc.
E. Source of culinary water.
F. Topography, geology, hydrology and ground cover.
G. Availability of public sewers.
H. Activity or land use, present and anticipated.
I. Growth patterns.
J. Individual and accumulated gross effects on water quality.
Page VI-6
K. Reserve areas for additional subsurface disposal.
L. Anticipated sewage volume.
M. Climatic conditions.
N. Installation plans for disposal system.
O. Area to be utilized by dwelling and other structures.
Under this method, local health departments may elect to involve other affected
governmental entities and the Division in making joint lot size determinations. The
Division will develop technical information, training programs, and provide engineering
and geohydrologic assistance in making lot size determinations that will be available to
local health departments upon their request.
METHOD 2:-Whenever local health departments do not establish minimum lot sizes for
single-family dwellings that will be served by individual wastewater disposal
systems, the required lot size ranges from 12,000 square feet to 1.75 acres
depending on the type of water supply (public or private) and soil type (the
specific requirements are discussed in the code).
Whenever an individual wastewater disposal system is found by the regulatory authority to
create or contribute to any dangerous or unsanitary condition which may involve a public health
hazard, the regulatory authority may order the owner to take the necessary action to cause the
condition to be corrected, eliminated or otherwise come into compliance. A public health hazard
consists of sufficient types and amounts of biological, chemical, or physical agents relating to water
or sewage which are likely to cause human illness, disorders or disability. These include, pathogenic
viruses and bacteria, parasites, toxic chemicals and radioactive isotopes.
Groundwater Quality Protection Rules
The State of Utah’s Water Pollution Control Committee (now the Utah Water Quality Board)
in 1989 passed the Groundwater Quality Protection Regulations for the protection of Utah’s
groundwater resources. The Utah Administrative Code, Rules for Groundwater Quality Protection,
R317-6 (revised, March 20, 1995) provides for six groundwater classes based upon water quality.
Representative characteristics of each class are described below:
1.Class IA - Pristine Groundwater
Class IA groundwater has the following characteristics:
A.Total dissolved solids of less than 500 mg/l.
B.No contaminant concentrations that exceed the groundwater quality standards.
2.Class IB - Irreplaceable Groundwater
Class IB groundwater is a source of water for a community public drinking water system
for which no reliable supply of comparable quality and quantity is available because of
economic or institutional constraints.
3.Class IC - Ecologically Important Groundwater
Class IC groundwater is a source of groundwater discharge important to the continued
existence of wildlife habitat.
Page VI-7
4.Class II - Drinking Water Quality Groundwater
Class II groundwater has the following characteristics:
A.Total dissolved solids greater than 500 mg/l and less than 3000 mg/l.
B.No contaminant concentrations that exceed groundwater quality standards.
5.Class III - Limited Use Groundwater
Class III groundwater has one or both of the following characteristics:
A.Total dissolved solids greater than 3000 mg/l and less than 10,000 mg/l, or;
B.One or more contaminants that exceed the groundwater quality standards.
6.Class IV - Saline Groundwater
Class IV groundwater has total dissolved solids greater than 10,000 mg/l.
OTHER STATES
Other states including California, Massachusetts, Montana and Washington have enacted and
implemented regulations and constraints on the utilization of septic systems and the minimum lot size
required to reduce the potential impacts on groundwater.
RECOMMENDED REGULATORY APPROACH
Our recommended regulatory approach to determining and controlling the density of septic
systems in the study area includes the following:
1.Use of the individual wastewater disposal system requirements, specifically as they relate
to determining lot sizes by requiring the consideration of “Protection of Surface and
Groundwaters” and “Individual and Accumulated Gross Effects on Water Quality”.
2.Use of the Primary Drinking Water Standards as the absolute limit for degradation of
potential drinking water sources.
3.Use of the Utah Groundwater Quality Protection Rule to provide legal authority for
protecting existing and probable future beneficial uses of groundwater including potential
drinking water sources.
4.Use of the local planning and zoning ordinances to implement recommended septic
system densities.
Page VII-1
CHAPTER VII
SEPTIC SYSTEM DENSITY DETERMINATION
GENERAL
The U.S. Congress Office of Technology Assessment (OTA) stated that “Major factors affecting
the potential of septic systems to contaminate groundwater in general are the density of systems
per unit area and hydro geological conditions. Areas with a density of more than 40 systems
per square mile (1 unit per 16 acres) are considered regions with potential for contamination.”
(OTA, 1984). The purpose of this chapter is to analyze a number of different factors in a effort to
develop recommended septic system densities which will provide a tool to help protect ground water
quality in this study area.
The methodology utilized to develop a range of septic system densities for consideration in this
study incorporates a three step process as follows:
(1)Risk Analysis
(2)Mass Balance Analysis
(3)Implementation Considerations
RISK ANALYSIS
The risk analysis provides a qualifiable approach to considering the different risks that may be
associated with septic system use in the individual subareas within the overall study area. Some
subareas have conditions which make them a higher risk to groundwater quality than other subareas.
Risk Analysis Criteria
In general, the risk analysis criteria are not easily quantifiable and therefore do not lend
themselves to incorporation into the mass balance equation. However, they are important and worthy
of consideration. The criteria included in the risk analysis in this study area are as follows:
Predictability of Mixing Zone Formation Dispersive Potential. This criteria has to do with
the type of formation underlying the study area. Reductions in key contaminant concentrations,
specifically nitrate, are due to dilution and especially mixing or dispersion potential. It is relatively
easy to predict the ability of an alluvial material to disperse pollutants. It is not as easy to make the
same prediction in a bedrock formation.
Page VII-2
Potential to Enter Down Gradient Faults. This criteria is sometimes referred to as “piping
potential”. It refers to the potential for rapid transmission of water and pollutants through faults that
may exist in the study area.
Depth to Water Table. This criteria is considered because a greater depth to the water table may
provide a greater opportunity for dispersion of the pollutants prior to their entering the ground water.
Potential for Pollutants to Travel Vertically to the Water Table. This criteria addresses the
potential for intermediate confining layers that may impede the vertical travel of water and pollutants.
Proximity to Existing Down Gradient Culinary Water Supply. While this study focuses on
the protection of the groundwater aquifer for all potential uses, it was felt that some extra emphasis
on existing drinking water sources would be appropriate.
Potential to Affect Surface Water. Because groundwater and surface water are not really
separate resources, it was felt that some recognition of their potential for interrelationship should be
recognized. Some of the subareas in the study have the potential to discharge subsurface waters to
adjacent surface waters.
Following selection of the risk criteria, a low, medium and high risk ranking was established for
each criteria. Some of the rankings have a general numerical basis, others are simply ranked low,
medium or high based on local conditions. Corresponding to the risk ranking, a risk score associated
with the risk ranking was assigned to each criteria. The scores were weighted according to the
relative importance of individual criteria in this study area. A display of the selected risk analysis
criteria and their relative rankings and possible scores are included as Table VII-1.
The risk analysis criteria, their associated risk rankings and possible scores were then applied to
each sub area. A total risk score was then determined for each sub area. Risk scores for each subarea
are displayed in Table VII-2.
To incorporate the risk analysis into the mass balance analysis, and thus the septic system density
determination, a correlation was developed between the risk scores and the recommended allowable
degradation of groundwater quality. The ground water quality was allowed to degrade, or experience
an increase in nitrate concentration, over a range of values above background (background assumed
to be 1 mg/L based on historical water source data). The ranges were 1 to 2 mg/L above background,
1 to 3 mg/L above background and 1 to 4 mg/L above background. These three ranges resulted in
total down gradient nitrate concentration ranges of 2 to 3 mg/L, 2 to 4 mg/L and 2 to 5 mg/L
respectively.
Page VII-3
TABLE VII-1
RISK ANALYSIS CRITERIA
CRITERIA
RANKING POSSIBLE SCORE
Low Risk Medium Risk High Risk Low Risk Medium Risk High Risk
1 Predictability of Mixing Zone Formation Dispersive Potential (1)High Medium Low 15 30 45
2 Potential to Enter Down Gradient Faults Low Medium High 10 20 30
3 Depth to Water Table > 600 ft 300 - 600 ft < 300 ft 5 10 15
4 Potential for Pollutants to Travel Vertically to Water Table Low Medium High 5 10 15
5 Proximity to Existing Down Gradient Culinary Water Supply > 5 miles 1-5 miles < 1 mile 10 20 30
6 Potential to Affect Surface Water Low Medium High 1 3 5
(1) Dispersive Potential Predictability
High Predictability - Mixing zone composed primarily of alluvial fill
Medium Predictability - Mixing zone composed of a mixture of mostly fractured bedrock with some alluvial fill
Low Predictability - Mixing zone composed primarily of fractured bedrock
Page VII-4
TABLE VII-2
RISK ANALYSIS
AREA CURRENTLY
SEWERED
CRITERIA / SCORE TOTAL SCORE
1 2 3 4 5 6
Anderson Junction 15 30 5 30 20 1 101
Apple Valley 15 10 5 10 10 1 51
Bench Lake Area 30 20 5 15 20 1 91
Brookside 15 10 5 10 30 5 75
Dameron Valley 30 30 5 10 20 1 96
Diamond Valley 30 10 5 10 20 1 76
Gunlock 15 30 5 10 20 5 85
Hurricane Yes 30 10 5 15 30 1 91
Ivins Yes 15 10 5 10 30 3 73
La Verkin Yes 30 30 5 15 30 5 115
Leeds 30 20 5 15 10 1 81
New Harmony 15 20 5 30 10 1 81
Pine Valley 15 10 5 15 10 3 58
Pintura 15 30 5 10 20 1 81
Santa Clara Yes 15 10 5 10 20 5 65
St. George Yes 15 10 5 30 10 1 71
Toquerville Yes 30 30 5 15 20 1 101
Veyo 30 30 5 10 20 5 100
Washington Yes 15 30 5 30 10 3 93
Winchester Hills 45 30 15 10 20 1 121
Page VII-5
The highest and lowest possible risk scores were then plotted versus the down gradient nitrate
concentration ranges. An equation describing the line between them was then determined. Subarea
risk scores were then plotted on the line, and the corresponding allowable nitrate concentrations were
determined. This relationship is displayed in Figures VII-1, VII-2 and VII-3.
Basically the relationship is as follows: the higher the septic system related risk associated
with a particular sub area, the less the allowable degradation. The range of risk based allowable
down gradient nitrate concentrations for each subarea was then entered into the mass balance
equation.
MASS BALANCE ANALYSIS
Mass Balance Equation
The mass balance analysis provides a quantifiable approach to determining recommended septic
system densities and to distinguishing the characteristics of the individual subareas within the overall
study area. The mass balance analysis utilized in this study considers five flow and nitrate loading
components as depicted in Figure VII-4. Those five components are:
1)The flow (Qs) and nitrate loading (Ns) associated with the effluent from the septic
system(s).
2)The flow (Qi) and nitrate loading (Ni) associated with the watering and fertilizing of
residential lawns and agricultural areas (both referred to generally as irrigation).
3)The flow (Qp) and nitrate loading (Np) associated with precipitation.
4)The flow (Qb)and nitrate concentration (Nb) associated with background or ambient
groundwater flow.
5)The total flow (Qt) and nitrate concentration (Nt) resulting from combining the other four
components.
The generalized equation used for analyzing the relationship of these factors is as follows:
QsNs + QiNi + QpNp + QbNb = QtNt
By fixing Nt (the desired or allowable nitrate concentration in down gradient groundwater as
determined in the risk analysis), and by solving the equation for the flow and loading associated with
the septic systems (based on the number of septic systems), the allowable contributors, or septic
systems, can be calculated. Using available land in the sub area, density (one septic system per “x”
amount of acres) of septic systems for a selected area can be determined. The expanded equation,
including conversion factors, is included in Appendix A.
Criteria and Assumptions
A range of resultant densities are possible depending upon the specific assumptions included in
the analysis. A discussion of selected criteria and assumptions follows.
Page VII-6
Down-Gradient Nitrate Concentration. The down-gradient or allowable total nitrate
concentration in the ground water associated with individual sub areas was determined using the risk
analysis.
Mixing Depth. This factor refers to the vertical distance below the ground water table that is
available for dilution. Some researchers and regulatory entities feel that there should be no
allowance for the ability of the groundwater to accept pollutants, particularly where the hydro
geology of the area is not well understood. This means that the nitrate concentration in the combined
flows from sewer, precipitation and irrigation, immediately prior to entering the groundwater should
be at or below the required or desired down gradient concentration. If this approach or restriction
were applied in the Washington County area, the required density would likely exceed one septic
system per 50 acres. Densities would be so high because of the relatively low groundwater flows
and precipitation. Large acreages such as this can be seen on the tables found in the appendix. We
feel that a restrictive approach such as this (i.e. mixing zone depth of “0" feet) is unreasonable for
this study area, primarily because there is a reasonable understanding of local hydro geology. Our
analysis therefore includes a range of analysis values for dilution to a maximum of 100 feet, or extent
of saturated thickness, whichever is less.
Septic System Effluent Flow. Typical values for the amount of flow discharged by the average
residence vary from approximately 200 to 400 gallons per system per day. The increasing awareness
of water conservation will likely result in long term values that are nearer the lower end of this range
or even lower.
Septic System Effluent Strength. Septic system effluent nitrate concentrations typically range
from 30 to 80 mg/l NO3-N. The increasing reality of water conservation practices will force this
value toward the upper end of the range. A value of 40 mg/l was used in this study.
Precipitation. Precipitation values used in this analysis were obtained from historical data
prepared by the U.S. Weather Bureau. Recharge was assumed to be 10% of the total amount of
precipitation received in a year. Nitrate loading associated with precipitation and its entry into the
soil structure was estimated to be 1 mg/l.
Irrigation. Irrigation was assumed to be 6 AF/ acre, as directed by the Steering Committee. The
irrigated area was assumed to be 10% of the land area in each sub area. Nitrate loading associated
with fertilizer applied to irrigated areas was assumed to be 1 mg/l.
Denitrification. Denitrification is the conversion of nitrate nitrogen to nitrogen gas. As
discussed in Chapter V of this report, it would be unlikely for such a conversion to occur in
groundwater aquifers that typically produce high quality drinking water. None of the water quality
problems typically associated with the anaerobic environment required for denitrification are present
in the study area. Denitrification was therefore assumed to be zero in these analyses.
Ambient Groundwater. Groundwater flows used in the analyses were determined using the data
included in Chapter II of this report. Ambient or background nitrate concentration was assumed to
Page VII-7
be 1 mg/l throughout the study area based upon a review of the data included in Chapter III of this
report.
Mass Balance Analysis Results
The results of a typical mass balance for the Pine Valley area are displayed as Figure VII-5. The
assumptions and results of the analysis for all subareas are included in Appendix B.
IMPLEMENTATION CONSIDERATIONS
The recommendation of septic system densities for the study area depends not only upon the risk
and mass balance analyses, but also upon how local regulatory authorities want to manage the
development review process. It would be possible to establish procedures which could be used by
developers to determine the site specific septic system density required for each development. This
would involve the gathering of significant amounts of data, analyses similar to that included in this
study, and review of the results by local officials. This approach, however, would require significant
resources of both the developer and local officials. In addition, it would require longer time periods
for the review of proposed developments. For these reasons, it was felt that the adoption of
acceptable average septic system densities for areas having similar physical conditions and risks
would be the most appropriate. The suggested grouping of subareas is shown in figure VII-6.
RECOMMENDED SEPTIC SYSTEM DENSITIES
Consideration of the risk analysis, mass balance analysis and implementation approach resulted
in the ranges of possible septic system densities shown in Table VII-3.
When selecting a septic system density for individual subareas, local decision makers should
consider the following:
1)The cumulative effects of combined subareas. As groundwater moves down gradient in the
study area, the effect of each subarea is additive with respect to nitrate concentration.
2)The fact that nitrate is only an indicator. Excessive concentrations or other current and future
contaminants may have a similar or more detrimental effect on groundwater quality.
3)Septic systems are not the only source of nitrates. Other sources including animal corrals,
crop production and natural geological sources should be considered.
4)The hydrogeological information included in this report should be considered preliminary
with respect to its level of accuracy and precision. More definitive information will become
available when the United States Geological Survey completes its new groundwater model
of the study area.
With all of the factors to consider, it would be advisable to be somewhat conservative and select
densities that are midrange in Table VII-3.
Page VII-8
TABLE VII-3
RECOMMENDED SEPTIC SYSTEM DENSITIES
(number of acres required per septic system)
COMBINED SUB AREAS
Pine Valley Brookside
Veyo
Gunlock
Ivins
Santa Clara
St. George
Washingto
n
Dameron Valley
Diamond Valley
Winchester Hills
New
Harmony
Anderson Junction
Hurricane
La Verkin
Leeds
Pintura
Sky Ranch - Bench Lake
Area
Toquerville
Apple
Valley
AL
L
O
W
A
B
L
E

D
O
W
N

G
R
A
D
I
E
N
T

N
O
3-

C
O
N
C
E
N
T
R
A
T
I
O
N

(
m
g
/
L
)
2
t
o

3
*
4 11 12 15 10 12 11
2
t
o

4
*
3 8 8 12 5 9 7
2
t
o

5
*
2 6 6 10 4 7 5
* Range associated with risk analysis
R - 1
REFERENCES
Aller, Linda, Truman Bennett, Jay H. Lehr, Rebecca J. Petty, and Glen Hackett. DRASTIC: A Standardized System For
Evaluating Ground Water Pollution Potential Using Hydrogeologic Settings. National Water Well Association, Dublin,
Ohio. 1987.
Budding, Karin E. and Steven N. Sommer. Low Temperature Geothermal Assessment of the Santa Clara and Virgin
River Valleys, Washington County, Utah. Utah Department of Natural Resources. Utah Geological and Mineral Survey.
Special Studies 67. 1986.
Butler, Bob. Public Works Director, Town of Ivins, Utah. Personal Communication. 1997.
Boyle Engineering Corporation. Purpose and Need Study. Washington County Water Conservancy District. 1995.
Canter, Larry W., and Robert C. Knox. Septic Tank System Effects on Ground Water Quality. Lewis Publishers, Inc.,
Chelsea, Michigan. 1985.
Carpenter, Kerry. Cedar City, Utah. Personal Communication regarding Apple Valley and Ash Creek Reservoir Dye
Testing and general Hydrogeology. February 1997.
Chaplain, O. Benjamin. Septic Systems Handbook. Lewis Publishers. 1988.
Cook, Earl Ferguson. Geologic Atlas of Utah, Washington County. Utah Geological and Mineralogical Survey, The
College of Mines and Mineral Industries, University of Utah, Salt Lake City, Utah. Bulletin 70. 1960.
Cook, Earl Ferguson, 1960. Geologic Map of Washington County, Utah. Utah Geological and Mineralogical Survey,
The College of Mines and Mineral Industries, University of Utah, Salt Lake City, Utah. Supplement to Bulletin 70.
1960.
Croft, Mack. Utah Division of Water Quality. Salt Lake City, Utah. Personal Communication. 1997.
Damerey, Bill. Utah Division of Environmental Quality. Salt Lake City, Utah. Personal Communication. 1997 and
1998.
DeFeo, Wait & Associates, Inc. Technical Evaluation of Title 5, The State Environmental Code. Massachusetts
Department of Environmental Protection. 1991.
Environmental Protection Agency. Onsite Wastewater Treatment and Disposal Systems. 1980.
Environmental Protection Agency. Handbook of Septage Treatment and Disposal. Washington, D.C. 1984.
Environmental Protection Agency. Manual on Wastewater Treatment/Disposal for Small Communities. Washington,
D.C. 1992.
Ford, Karl L., Julia H. Schott, Thomas J. Keefe, Ph.D., Mountain Residential Development of Minimum Well Protective
Distances of Well Water Quality. Journal of Environmental Health, Vol. 43, No. 3. pp. 130 - 133. November/December
1980.
Freethey, Geoffrey W. USGS. Salt Lake City, Utah. Personal Communication. 1997.
Freethey, Geoffrey W. Maps Showing Recharge Areas and Quality of Ground Water for the Navajo Aquifer, Western
Washington County, Utah. U.S. Geological Survey, Water-Resources Investigations Report 92-4160. 1993.
Freeze, R. Allan and John A. Cherry. Groundwater. Prentice-Hall, Inc. Englewood Cliffs, New Jersey. 1979.
R - 2
Geo/Graphics Inc. Population Management Study - Washington County Utah. Washington County Water Conservancy
District. 1994.
Hansen, Allen & Luce Inc. Hydrogeologic/Water Quality Study - Heber & Round Valleys. Wasatch County, Utah.
1994.
Hantzsche, Norman N. and E. John Finnemore. Predicting Groundwater Nitrate-Nitrogen Impacts. Groundwater -
Volume 30, No. 4. July-August, 1992.
Heilweil, Victor. USGS Salt Lake City, Utah. Personal Communication. 1997.
Hurlow, Hugh A. Schematic Contour Map of Depth to Base of Unconsolidated Deposits, New Harmony-Kanarraville
Area, Washington and Iron Counties, Utah. Utah Department of Natural Resources, Utah Geological Survey. 1997.
Hurlow, Hugh A. Schematic Isopach Map of Unconsolidated Deposits, St. George Basin, Washington County, Utah.
Utah Department of Natural Resources, Utah Geological Survey. 1997.
Hurlow, Hugh A. Structure Contour Map of the Top of the Navajo Sandstone in Southwestern Utah. Utah Department
of Natural Resources, Utah Geological Survey. 1997.
Hurlow, Hugh A. Structure Contour Map of the Base of the Navajo Sandstone in Southwestern Utah. Utah Department
of Natural Resources, Utah Geological Survey. 1997.
Hurlow, Hugh. UGS. Salt Lake City, Utah. Personal Communication. 1997.
Jensen, Mark E. Utah Division of Drinking Water. Salt Lake City, Utah. Personal Communication. 1997 and 1998.
Jensen, Morgan S. Washington County Water Conservancy District, St. George, Utah. Personal Communication. 1997
and 1998.
Kaplan, O. Benjamin. Septic Systems Handbook. Lewis Publishers. 1988.
McCarthur, Wayne. Water and Power Department, St George. Utah. Personal Communication. 1997.
Miller, John C. Nitrate Contamination of the Water-Table Aquifer by Septic Tank Systems in the Coastal Plain of
Delaware. Water Pollution Control in Low Density Areas, Proceedings of a Rural Environmental Engineering
Conference. Jewell, William J. and Rita Swan, editors. University Press of New England, Published for the University
of Vermont. pp. 121-134. 1975.
Muza, Richard. United States Environmental Protection Agency - Region VIII, Denver, Colorado. Personal
Communication. 1997 and 1998.
OTA. U.S. Congress, Office of Technology Assessment, Protecting the Nation's Groundwater From Contamination:
Volume II. OTA-276, Washington, D.C. 1984.
Prins, Christopher J. Innovative Septic-System Management In North Idaho, Proceedings, 6th Northwest On-Site
Wastewater Treatment Short Course University of Washington Seattle, Washington. Seabloom, Robert W. and Lenning,
David editors. pp. 221-246. September 18-19, 1989.
Reber, Spencer. Washington County, Utah. Personal Communication. 1997.
Reber, Spencer. Stratigraphy and Physiographic Features St. George Area, Utah. Unpublished Map. 1997.
Schmidt, Kenneth D. Nitrate in Ground Water of the Fresno-Clovis Metropolitan Area, California, Proceedings of the
National Ground Water Quality Symposium August 25-27, Denver, Colorado. pp. 144-158. 1971.
R - 3
Solomon, Phillip. St. George City, Utah. Personal Communications. 1997.
State of Utah. Utah State Water Plan, Kanab Creek/Virgin River Basin. Public Draft Review, Department of Natural
Resources, Division of Water Resources, November 1992.
State of Utah. State Water Plan. Utah Department of Natural Resources. State Water Plan Coordinating Committee.
January 1989.
State of Utah. Utah State Code. Latest Edition
Tinker, John R. Jr. An analysis of Nitrate-Nitrogen in Groundwater Beneath Unsewered Subdivisions. GWMR, pp.
141 - 150. Winter 1991.
Thomas, Wayne. Utah Department of Environmental Quality, St. George, Utah. Personal Communication. 1997 and
1998.
Thompson, Ronald W. Washington County Water Conservancy District, St. George, Utah. Personal Communication.
1997 and 1998.
U.S. Geological Survey. Geohydrology of the Navajo Sandstone in Western Kane, Southwestern Garfield, and
Southeastern Iron Counties, Utah. Water-Resources Investigations Report 88-4040. 1988.
U.S. Geological Survey. Ground-Water Conditions in the Central Virgin River Basin, Utah. Technical Publication 40.
1972.
U.S. Geological Survey. Ground-Water Conditions in the Navajo Sandstone in the Central Virgin River Basin, Utah.
Technical Publication 61. 1978.
U.S. Geological Survey. Ground-Water Conditions in the Upper Virgin River and Kanab Creek Basins Area, Utah.
Technical Publication 70. 1981.
U.S. Geological Survey. Hurricane Bench Aquifer Test (Winding Rivers Associates Property). 1996.
U.S. Geological Survey. Seepage Study of the Virgin River from Ash Creek to Harrisburg Dome, Washington County,
Utah. Technical Publication 106. 1995.
U.S. Geological Survey. Selected Hydrologic Data for the Beaver Dam Wash Area, Washington County, Utah, Lincoln
County, Nevada, and Mohave County, Arizona, 1991-95. Open-File Report No. 96-493. 1996.
Willie, John. Washington County Planning Department, St. George, Utah. Personal Communication. 1997 and 1998.