A majority of the work performed by ADEQ's Nonpoint Source Program is funded by Clean Water Act grants, awarded by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency which requires States to report annually on progress in meeting the schedule of milestones contained in their nonpoint source management plans, and report reductions in nonpoint source pollutant loadings and improvement in water quality resulting from program implementation.

This study involved the review of 417 ADEQ LUST site files and compilation of relevant data from 323 of these sites into an electronic database. It also involved the collection and analysis of over 700 supplemental groundwater samples, the assessment of aquifer flow properties from 32 wells at 11 sites, and more detailed characterization at six LUST sites representative of a range of conditions at AZ LUST facilities. In addition, over 300 groundwater level measurements were performed and 175 monitoring wells were re-surveyed in order to assess errors in standard practice and their impact on groundwater flow direction determination. An empirical analysis of groundwater impacts at AZ LUST sites was conducted using these data sets, with emphasis on identifying relationships between site conditions (e.g., geology, depth-to-groundwater, etc.) and groundwater impacts. Finally, a combined theoretical-spatial (GIS) analysis was performed to identify LUST scenarios posing the greatest threats to use of groundwater resources.

The best way to evaluate job quality would be to analyze a dataset that presents both occupational and industrial data, but the only dataset of this nature available by state comes from the decennial census. It is severely limited by small sample size, the latest data are for 1999, and the 1999 data are not consistent with the 1989 data. Thus, the initial work by the Seidman Institute on job quality ("Job Quality in Arizona," March 2005) presented data on Arizona job quality from several sources of either industrial or occupational data. "Job Quality in Arizona Compared to All States" (June 2005), is an extension of the March 2005 report. Arizona’s job quality in the latest year and its change over time is compared to the national
average and is ranked among the 51 “states” (including the District of Columbia).

Available data on the cost of living indicate that living costs in Arizona are close to the national average — thus, the state’s lower-than-average wages are not offset by low living costs. No productivity data exist for Arizona. Worker productivity in Arizona could be below the national average due to lesser investments in physical or human capital, which would result in lower wages. Labor market supply and demand factors are a likely cause of the low wages in Arizona. A substantial number of people seem willing to move to Arizona and accept a substandard wage in exchange for perceived qualitative advantages to living in Arizona, primarily climate.

The long-term trend toward lower-quality jobs in the United States continued between 2001 and 2004. Industrial job quality fell 1.6 percent nationally between 2001 and 2004. The decrease in occupational job quality was not quite as great at 0.9 percent. Thus, overall U.S. job quality dropped 2.5 percent during the three years, causing the U.S. average wage to be 2.5 percent less than it otherwise would have been. Arizona’s job quality fell between 2001 and 2004 at a pace worse than the national average. Relative to the national average, the industrial and occupational job mixes each slipped a bit more than 0.3 percent during the three years, for an overall decline of 0.7 percent. In Arizona, job quality in 2004 was 2.0 percent below the national average, but Arizona ranked 23rd among all states.

The quality of jobs in the United States became a national concern in the 1980s after a long period of losses of relatively high-paying manufacturing jobs and gains of frequently low-paying service jobs. National job quality remains a concern today, as witnessed by the debate in the 2004 presidential campaign. The overall average wage is a measure of prosperity or well-being, but is not in itself a measure of job quality since job quality is just one of several factors — including cost of living, productivity, and desirability of an area — that affect the overall average wage. Little information on these factors is available by state. Adjusting for job quality reduces the state-by-state variation in wages. However, even after adjusting for job quality, the average wage still varies substantially by state.

In March 2004, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency requested information on efforts to monitor and protect children from exposure to lead in drinking water at schools. The Arizona Department of Health Services reviewed the state lead poisoning registry, and analyzed drinking water samples from 45 randomly selected schools. The Office of Environmental Health provided this consultation to help document our findings and supplement our response to the EPA. This work was also undertaken to help provide useful information should hazardous waste sites be discovered in the future near these schools. We also wanted to apply the ATSDR health assessment process in support of state and federal efforts to protect the health of children.

This Additional Site Characterization Work Plan presents a strategy for collecting site characterization information at the closed Maricopa County Cave Creek Landfill to support ongoing remedial action planning for trichloroethene-impacted groundwater underlying the site. The Work Plan supplements previous remedial investigation work plans prepared to characterize the nature and extent of site contamination.