United States Office of Water
Environmental Protection Agency (4607)
EPA815-F-00-011
May 2000
x>EPA
Technical Fact Sheet: Proposed Rule for
Arsenic in Drinking Water and Clarifications
to Compliance and New Source
Contaminants Monitoring
1. What are we announcing?
EPA is proposing a new drinking water standard of 5 //g/L for arsenic and taking comment on
regulatory options of 3 /zg/L (the feasible level), 10 /zg/L and 20 //g/L. EPA is proposing a
Maximum Contaminant Level Goal (MCLG) of zero for arsenic. This proposal also clarifies how
compliance is demonstrated for many inorganic and organic containinants in drinking water.
2. What are the requirements of this proposed rule?
Community water systems (GWSs), which are public water systems that serve at least 15
locations or 25 residents regularly year round, will be required to reduce the arsenic concentration
from the current standard of 50 //g/L to 5
At the same time, EPA is proposing that non-transient, non-community water systems
(NTNCWSs) be required to notify people served by these systems :when arsenic exceeds the
drinking water standard. NTNCWSs are public water systems that are not a CWS and serve at
least 25 of the same people more than 6 months per year (e.g. schools and nursing homes).
The proposal will also reduce the ambiguities in some existing regulations. Compliance averages
will be based on actual number of samples collected. New systems and new sources must
demonstrate compliance within the State-specified time and sampling frequencies.
3. How soon after publishing the final rule will the changes take effect?
• For CWSs serving > 10,000 people - compliance 3 years after the final rule.
• For CWSs serving 25 to 10,000 people - compliance 5 years after the final rule.
• For NTNCWSs - required to monitor and notify within 3 years after the final rule.
• Before the effective date, all CWSs will begin providing health information and arsenic
concentrations in their annual consumer confidence report for water that exceeds the new
standard.
-------
4. Why is this rule significant?
In the 1996 amendments to the Safe Drinking Water Act, Congress directed EPA to propose a
new arsenic regulation by January 1, 2000 and to issue the final rule by January 1, 2001. The
1996 amendments also added discretionary authority to adjust the maximum contaminant level
(MCL) if the benefits would not justify the costs (§1412(b)(6)). This is the first drinking water
regulation which will set a standard higher than technically feasible (3 ug/L) because EPA
determined that costs would not justify the benefits. This rule would also only require NTNCWS
to monitor and report (as opposed to treating) because of cost-benefit considerations and because
of the relatively low occurrence for these water systems.
The implementation clarifications will more consistently identify exceedances of many drinking
water standards and codify existing State requirements for new system and new source
compliance.
5. What health effects are associated with exposure to arsenic from drinking water?
In most drinking water sources, the inorganic form of arsenic tends to be more predominant than
organic forms. Inorganic arsenic in drinking water can exert toxic effects after acute (short-term)
or chronic (long-term) exposure. Although acute exposures to high doses of inorganic arsenic
can cause adverse effects, such exposures do not occur from public water supplies in the U.S. at
the current MCL of 50 jUg/L. EPA's proposed drinking water regulation addresses the long-term,
chronic effects of exposure to low concentrations of inorganic arsenic in drinking water. Chronic
effects at low concentrations include:
• Cancer Effects: skin, bladder, lung, and prostate cancer.
• Non-cancer effects: skin pigmentation and keratosis (callus-like skin growths seen earliest
and most often), gastrointestinal, cardiovascular, hormonal (e.g., diabetes), hematological
(e.g., anemia), pulmonary, neurological, immunological, reproductive/developmental
functions.
6.
What are the sources of arsenic contamination in water?
The contamination of a drinking water source by arsenic can result from either natural or human
activities. Arsenic is an element that occurs naturally in rocks and soil, water, air, plants, and
animals. Volcanic activity, the erosion of rocks and minerals, and forest fires are natural sources
that can release arsenic into the environment. Although about 90 percent of the arsenic used by
industry in the United States is used for wood preservative purposes, arsenic is also used in paints,
drugs, dyes, soaps, metals and semi-conductors. Burning fossil fuels and wastes, paper
production, glass manufacturing, cement manufacturing, mining and smelting can also release
arsenic. While arsenic can no longer be used in making pesticides, weed killers and embalming
fluids, the Agency is aware that prior to this ban these substances have contributed to drinking
-------
water contamination.
7. How many people and how many systems will be affected by this rule?
Higher levels of arsenic tend to be found more in ground water sources than in surface water
sources (i.e., lakes and rivers). Compared to the rest of the United States, the Western states
have more systems with arsenic levels greater than 10 Aig/L. Parts of the Midwest and New
England have systems with 2-10 //g/L of arsenic. While many systems may not have any detected
arsenic in their drinking water, there may be "hot spots" with systems higher than the predicted
occurrence for an area. About 12 percent of the nation's 54,000 CWSs will need to take
measures to lower arsenic in their drinking water. Of the affected systems, 94 percent serve less
than 10,000 people. Tables 1 and 2 below show the estimated number of CWSs and NTNCWSs
that would be affected by this rule and the estimated population served by these public water
systems.
Table 1. Estimates
-------
8.
How much will this rule cost?
Over 98% of the cost of the arsenic rule comes from adding treatment equipment, chemicals, and
oversight of the new treatment. Table 3 below shows the total annualized costs of treatment,
monitoring, reporting, recordkeeping, and administration for this rule at three and seven percent
discount rates.
Table 3. Total National Annualized CostsV the Arsenic Rule
(Includes cost of treatment, monitoring, reporting, recordkeeping, and administration)
Regulatory Action
Proposal of 5 ^g/L
Option of 3 fig/L
Option of 10 ftgfL
Option of 20 jUg/L
Three Percent Discount Rate
~ $ 379 million
~ $ 645 million
~ $ 166 million
~$ 65 million
Seven Percent Discount Rate
~ $ 445 million
~ $ 756 million
~ $ 195 million
~$ 77 million
For systems that need to take corrective action to comply with the new rule, the annual
costs per system will range from $7,000 per year for the smallest community water
systems to over $100,000 for systems serving 3,300 to 10,000, and over $0.5 million for
larger systems.
For households served by systems that need to take corrective action with the new rule,
average annual household costs are estimated to increase by $28 for Americans served by
large systems (serving over 10,000 people) and $85 for those served by small systems
(systems serving less than 10,000 people). Costs will vary depending on the system size.
What are the benefits of this rule?
Reducing arsenic from 50 //g/L to 5 /j.g/L - protects an additional 22.5 million Americans
and will prevent about 20 cases of bladder cancer per year and approximately 5 bladder
cancer deaths per year.
At a regulatory option of 3 Aig/L, reducing arsenic from 50 ywg/L to 3 fj,gfL - protects an
additional 35.7 million Americans and will prevent about 25 cases of bladder cancer and
approximately 7 bladder cancer deaths per year.
At a regulatory option of 10 //g/L, reducing arsenic from 50 //g/L to 10 //g/L - protects
an additional 10.7 million Americans and will prevent about 13 cases of bladder and
approximately 3 bladder cancer deaths per year.
-------
Under a regulatory option of 20 //g/L, reducing arsenic from 50 //g/L to 20 //g/L -
protects an additional 4.4 million Americans and will prevent about 7 cases of bladder
cancer and approximately 2 bladder cancer deaths per year
EPA expects that arsenic-related lung cancers (that could number as many as two to five
times the number of bladder cancers) and cardiovascular diseases will be reduced with a
lower standard as well.
The estimated values of the benefits of this rule range from as high as $90 million for
bladder cancer to $384 million for lung cancer.
10. Is there funding associated with this rule?
Since 1996, the Drinking Water State Revolving Loan Fund has made over $3.6. billion available
for loans to help water systems improve their infrastructure. This program has now made over
1000 loans. EPA also provides funding to States that have primary enforcement responsibility for
their drinking water programs through the Public Water Systems Supervision (PWSS) grants
program. Other federal funds are available through Housing knd Urban Development's
Community Development Block Grant Program, and the Rural Utilities Service of the U.S.
Department of Agriculture.
11. How did EPA consult with stakeholders?
From 1996-1999, EPA conducted a number of Agency v/orkgroup meetings on arsenic and
advertised five stakeholder meetings in the Federal Register. Five States also provided written
comments on implementation issues during the workgroup process. Representatives of eight
Federal agencies, 19 state offices, 16 associations, 13 corporations, 14 consulting engineering
companies, two environmental organizations, three members of the press, 37 public utilities and
cities, four universities, and one Indian tribe attended the stakeholder meetings on arsenic. The
Office of Water staff presented an overview of the arsenic rulemaking to over 900 Tribal
attendees in 1998 and provided more detailed information in 1999 to 25 Tribal council members
and water utility operators from 12 Indian tribes. In addition,;EPA provided updates on our
rulemaking activities at national and regional meetings of various groups and trade associations.
Furthermore, we participated in AWWA's technical workgroup meetings. As part of the Small
Business Regulatory and Enforcement Flexibility Act (SBREFA), EPA also received valuable
input from discussions with small entity representatives during SBREFA consultations for the
arsenic rule. EPA obtained recommendations from the National Drinking Water Advisory
Council (NDWAC) on the rule as a whole as well as on benefits analysis and small systems
affordability. We also posted discussion papers produced for our stakeholder interactions on the
Office of Ground Water and Drinking Water (OGWDW) Internet site and sent them directly to
participants at stakeholder meetings and others who expressed interest.
-------
12. Where can the public get more information about this proposed rule?
For general information on arsenic in drinking water, contact the Safe Drinking Water Hotline, at
(800) 426-4791, or visit the EPA Safewater website at http://www.epa.gov/safewater or the
arsenic website at http://www.epa.gQv/safewater/arsenic.htmi.
In addition to this technical fact sheet, the following documents and fact sheets will be available to
the public at EPA's web site on arsenic in drinking water:
1. Federal Register notice of the proposed arsenic regulation
2. More detailed discussion documents on Arsenic in Drinking Water
3, Consumer Fact Sheet on Arsenic in Drinking Water
A copy of the Federal Register notice of the proposed regulation or any of the technical and
consumer facts sheets can be obtained by contacting the Safe Drinking Water Hotline at (800)
426-4791. The Safe Drinking Water Hotline is open Monday through Friday, excluding Federal
holidays, from 9:00 a.m. to 5:30 p.m. Eastern Time.
-------
-------
-o o
CD 5:
g> Q!
•^7 03
^c —
-* CO
3 §
5 5'
3- (0
1 8
CD
C
CD
CO
O
O
^'S. ni
CO
------- |