EPA-910/9-73-006
                              IDAHO
                              WATER
                              SUPPLY
                                                             98IOI

-------
  IDAHO WATER SUPPLY PROGRAM

          EVALUATION
      EPA - 910/9-73-006

       Water Supply Unit
       Municipal Section
 Air & Water Programs Division
Environmental  Protection Agency
           Region X

         October 1973
     I:

-------
                            PREFACE

     This report  presents  the  Environmental  Protection  Agency's
findings, conclusions  and  recommendations, with  supporting  data
and explanatory text,  resulting  from  an  evaluation  of the  Idaho
public  drinking water  supply program.
     Field  surveys  to  determine  the adequacy of  water system
facilities, water quality,  State  laboratory  facilities  and  opera-
tions,  and  overall  water supply  surveillance were conducted in
late 1971 and early 1972.   Additional  information concerning
legislation affecting  the water  supply program,  recent  organiza-
tional  changes establishing the  Department of Environmental and
Community Services,  and current manpower and funding expenditures
for public water supply surveillance  has been included.
     Information contained  in  this report has been  condensed and
is further discussed in a companion report,  Idaho Water Supply
Program Evaluation  - Summary.   The Summary highlights important
findings and principal  needs of the State program for those who
have an interest in  Idaho's drinking water program  but do not
wish to study the details of the complete report.

-------
                      TABLE OF CONTENTS
                                                            Page
SUMMARY	      1
RECOMMENDATIONS	     17
INTRODUCTION	     23
PLAN OF STUDY
     WATER SUPPLIES IN IDAHO	     27
     WATER SUPPLIES STUDIED	     27
EVALUATION CRITERIA
     WATER QUALITY	     37
     FACILITIES	     38
     WATER SUPPLY PROGRAM	     42
STUDY FINDINGS
     WATER SUPPLY STATUS
          Bacteriological Quality	     47
          Chemical Quality	     49
          Facilities	     52
          Operator Competence	     53
          Fluoridation	     54
     WATER SUPPLY PROGRAM
          Legal Authority and Responsibilities	     56
          Regulations and Standards	     60

-------
                      TABLE OF CONTENTS

                                                            Page

          Organization	    61

          Activities	    66

     PUBLIC HEALTH RISK	    73

PROGRAM NEEDS

     AUTHORITY	    81

     REGULATIONS	    84

     POLICY	    88

     ACTIVITIES

          Engineering Services	    89

          Laboratory Support - Bacteriological	    94

          Laboratory Support - Chemical	    95

          District Health Departments	    97

REFERENCES	   101

PARTICIPANTS	   105

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS	   Ill

APPENDICES

     APPENDIX A - SUMMARY TABLES: WATER SUPPLIES STUDIED..   115

     APPENDIX B - ADEQUACY OF THE WATER FLUORIDATION
                    CONTROL PROGRAM IN IDAHO	   125

     APPENDIX C - BACTERIOLOGICAL LABORATORY SURVEY	   151

     APPENDIX D - CHEMICAL LABORATORY SURVEY	   185

     APPENDIX E - MANPOWER NEEDS AND COST ESTIMATES FOR
                    WATER SUPPLY ACTIVITIES	   199

                            ii

-------
                 LIST OF FIGURES AND TABLES

Figure                                                      Page
  1        Water Quality & System Condition Summary	    3
  2       Population Ranges Served by Public Water
            Suppl ies	   29
  3       Public Water Supply Systems Surveyed	   33
  4       Fluoridated Water Supply Systems in Idaho	   34
  5       Idaho Department of Environmental and
            Community Services	   65

Table                                                       Page
  1        Summary - Public Water Supplies in Idaho	   28
  2       Selection of Public Water Supplies	   31
  3       Water Supply Field Survey Sampling Schedule	   39
  4       Chemical  Analyses Conducted on Survey Samples...   40
  5       Bacteriological  Quality of Distributed Water
            Related to Chlorination Practice	   48
  6       Comparison of Water Quality By Population Group.   50
  7       Comparison of System Surveillance By Population
            Range	   51
  8       Water Supply Activities Resource Allocations	   64

-------
                           SUMMARY

     Approximately 482,000 people in Idaho, or 68 percent of the
State's population, are served by 274 public water supplies.  The
health of this segment of the population is directly affected by
the quality of their drinking water, and under State law the
Department of Environmental and Community Services is responsible
for establishing requirements and providing surveillance of these
supplies to assure safe drinking water.  The State water supply
program, therefore, has a significant impact on the health of a
major portion of the State population.
     Recognizing this, James L. Agee, Region X, Administrator,
Environmental Protection Agency, when requested by the Honorable
Cecil D. Andrus, Governor of Idaho, to assist in supporting Idaho's
environmental program recommended as part of a total environmental
program assessment package an evaluation of the State water supply
program.  Subsequent discussion in the fall of 1971 with State
water supply program personnel resulted in establishment of an
agreement for evaluation of the program.  The effectiveness of the
program was to be judged primarily on the basis of the adequacy of
State statues, rules and regulations; examination of drinking
water quality and condition of water treatment and distribution
facilities in a representative 10 percent of the State's 274 public

-------
water systems; comparison of bacteriological and chemical water



quality with the criteria of the 1962 Public Health Service Drink-



ing Water Standards (1); and an overall evaluation of the water



supply surveillance program.



     Principal findings and conclusions of the study follow.





                     WATER SUPPLY STATUS



     The drinking water quality and the condition of the water



supply treatment and distribution system facilities were determined



from an evaluation of 10 percent of the total number of public



water supplies in the State.  The supplies surveyed were selected



to provide a cross-section of the State's supplies from the stand-



point of geographical  distribution, type of source and type of



treatment.  These supplies provide drinking water to over 21 per-



cent of the population served by public water supplies and the



findings are judged to be representative of the overall conditions



in the State.   Water quality and system conditions data as deter-



mined from the supplies surveyed are described below and are



summarized graphically in Figure 1.





Water Quality - Bacteriological



     Seventy-five (75) percent of the public water supply systems



evaluated either did not meet the bacteriological quality standards



2 or more months during the 12 month period prior to the survey, or

-------
 PARAMETER   <  28 PUBLIC SUPPLIES SURVEYED )
                                                               PERCENT OF SYSTEMS NOT MEETING REQUIREMENTS
                                                              (l)
WATER QUALITY
            BACTERIOLOGICAL QUALITY AND/OR SAMPLING FREQUENCY

            BACTERIOLOGICAL QUALITY (1)

            CHEMICAL  QUALITY -  MANDATORY (2)

            CHEMICAL  QUALITY -  RECOMMENDED  (2)
 FACILITIES
            SOURCE  PROTECTION

            TREATMENT OR ADDITIONAL SOURCE PROTECTION

            DISTRIBUTION SYSTEMS
 FLUORIDATION (3)
            ADEQUATE FACILITIES  (2)

            FEED RATES TO ASSURE  OPTIMUM  HEALTH BENEFITS (2)

            MONTHLY  CHECK SAMPLES (I)
CROSS - CONNECTION CONTROL

 BACTERIOLOGICAL SURVEILLANCE   (1)

 CHEMICAL SURVEILLANCE  (4)

 SANITARY  SURVEYS  (5)

 OPERATOR  TRAINING
(I)  DATA  FROM  PERIOD 12  MONTHS PRIOR TO SURVEY
W  DATA  FROM  SAMPLES COLLECTED  DURING  SURVEY
(3)  EIGHT  FLUORIDATED SUPPLIES  OPERATIONAL
(•»)  REQUIREMENT - CHEMICAL SAMPLE WITHIN  3  YEARS PRIOR TO SURVEY
(5)  REQUIREMENT - SANITARY SURVEY WITHiN  I  YEAR  PRIOR TO SURVEY
FIGURE  1  WATER  QUALITY  & SYSTEMS  CONDITION  SUMMARY

-------
failed to collect sufficient samples during this same period to
determine the bacteriological quality.  Considering only those
water samples collected during the survey, 18 percent of the
supplies failed to meet bacteriological quality standards.

Water Quality - Chemical
     While only four (4) percent of the public water systems
examined did not meet mandatory chemical drinking water standards,
twenty-five (25) percent did not meet one or more of the recom-
mended chemical drinking water standards.  The latter group of
systems serve over 80,000 people.

Facilities
     Fifty (50) percent of the supplies surveyed need improvements
at the source and 36 percent need either additional treatment
facilities or additional protection of the source of supply.
Thirty-nine (39) percent of the supplies had either inadequate dis-
tribution system facilities or need improved operation of the
existing facilities.  Without these additions and changes, contin-
uous production of safe drinking water may not be maintained.
     An example of the impact of inadequate water distribution
facilities on the health of community residents is a situation
which existed in the south central  Idaho community of Rockland in
the late 60's and early 70's.  Periodic outbreaks of summer dysen-
tery were quite common during this period culminating with a

-------
widespread outbreak of gastroenteritis in June of 1970.  An epide-



miological investigation disclosed pathogenic organisms, including



salmonella bacteria, in the drinking water.  The apparent route of



contamination of the water was from septic tanks discharging



into a high ground water table which in turn found egress into the



poorly maintained water distribution system in areas of low pres-



sure.  New sewage collection and water distribution systems were



installed in addition to elimination of one badly deteriorated



well and installation of chlorination equipment.  With the advent



of these changes summer "pip" outbreaks are now a rarity in



Rockland.





Operator Competence



     Twenty-nine (29) percent of the systems employ operators



who have participated in water supply operators short course



training.  Many operators, although aware of their lack of



knowledge in critical public health aspects of water supply



operations, felt they could not be away from the job for even



short course training.





Fluoridation



     Fourteen (14) public water supply systems were reportedly



fluoridating in 1971.  None were found fully acceptable.  Of the



14, only 8 fluoridation installations were in operation, the



remainder having been discontinued for various reasons.  Of the

-------
8 facilities operating at the time of the survey, only two  (25



percent) were fluoridating at a level high enough to assure



dental health benefits.  In addition, two supplies (25 percent)



were fluoridating at a level above that recommended for optimum



health benefits.





Cross-Connectien Control
     Only one supply surveyed had an adecuate cross-connection



control program to eliminate potential hazards from the distri-



bution system.  Fifty  (50) percent of the supplies indicated



having ordinances to require elimination of cross-connections but



nad implemented no program.





                    WATER SUPPLY PROGRAM



Legal Authority, Regulations and Standards



     Basic health regulatory authority over public water  supplies



is provided in  Idaho Code, Title 37, Chapter 21,  Sections  37-2102



and 37-2103.  Section  2102 provides that the owner or  operator  of



a system providing v;ater for domestic purposes shall keep  it  free



from impurities, and that the State Board of Health, shall  promul-



gate standards  for protection of the system from  impurities  and



for water quality.  Section 2103 specifies that failure  to comply



with the provisions of Chapter  21  is a misdemeanor.



     The Environmental  Protection  and Health /^ct  of 1972,

-------
creating the Department of Environmental Protection and Health,
transferred the authority of the Board of Health and the Depart-
ment of Health to the new agency.  Provisions of the Act are
included in Idaho Code, Title 38, Chapter 1.  Sections 39-101
to 39-114 establish statutory definition of a public water
supply, provide for adoption of rules and regulations, empower
the department to enforce standards, and provide for civil
penalties.  The 1973 Idaho legislature retitled the department
the Department of Environmental and Community Services, revised
the definition of a public water supply and added Section 39-118
requiring submission and approval of plans and specifications
for construction or modifications of public water supply systems.
     Title 39, Chapter 4, Section 39-414 of the Idaho Code
provides that the District Boards of Health may administer and
enforce all state health laws, regulations and standards, and
all duties expressly delegated to them by the State Board of
Health.  In June 1971 the State Board of Health delegated to
the seven Health Districts authority to enforce several state
public health laws.  Public water supply was not included in the
delegation of authority.
     The Idaho Code provides comprehensive administrative machin-
ery for the aquisition of water rights to both surface and ground
waters.  In addition, Title 42, Chapter 2, Section 42-238

-------
requires the adoption of minimum well  construction standards to
protect groundwater from contamination and the licensing of well
drillers.   Regulations adopted by the Department of Water Reclama-
tion in 1968 require that public water supply wells shall also
meet all State health agency requirements.
     General regulations governing protection of public water
supply were issued in November 1964.  These regulations adopt the
1962 U.S.  Public Health Service Drinking Vlater Standards and
provide that water systems be maintained in accordance with these
water quality standards.  Additional standards cover design and
construction of facilities for collection, treatment, storage and
distribution of water for public use.
     The enabling legislation and the 1964 rules and regulations
are generally adequate to permit operation of an acceptable public
water supply program.  Elements necessary to improve the water
supply program's operational and legal base are:
     1.   Updating the water supply regulations to reflect
organizational changes, to require new and modified water quality
and monitoring criteria, and to reflect improved water treatment
and distribution practices,
     2.   Adopting legislation establishing a mandatory operator
certification program, and
     3.   Adopting legislation establishing a program to assure
coordinated development of public water supply systems.

-------
Resources and Activities
     Funds expended for public drinking water protection in Idaho
have been inadequate to support a comprehensive program.  The
water supply effort in FY 1971 and FY 1972, including field work,
administration and laboratory support, operated on a budget of
approximately $91,000.  This expenditure amounted to $330 per
system or approximately 13 cents per capita.  Total water supply
funding increased to $124,000 in FY 1973, resulting in an annual
expenditure of $450 per system or 17 cents per capita.  Nationwide
studies by the Environmental Protection Agency indicate that an
adequate State drinking water program would require an annual
expenditure of approximately $1000 per system or 22 cents per
capita.
     Total staffing for water supply activities during FY 1971
and FY 1972 was one man-year.  The effort increased to 2.7 man-
years in FY 1973 and improved the State's water supply surveil-
lance activities.  These staffing levels remain inadequate,
however, and have contributed to the inability of the water
supply program to fulfill its responsibilities.
     Evaluation of the program activities in FY 1971-72 showed
that many important activities were not being performed or were
being performed superficially, thus reducing the effectiveness

-------
of the program.  Evidence of this fact is illustrated in the
survey results which show that 78 percent of the systems had not
been subject to a sanitary survey within the previous 12 months
and that the average period since the last sanitary survey was
over 7 years.  In addition, very few detailed survey reports have
been prepared in recent years.  Many of those which have been
completed were sent to the purveyor a number of months after the
survey.  Even more important, follow-up contact with the operator
of the supply to determine compliance with recommendations of
surveys has also been inadequate.
     Although operating records are required by State standards,
few have been submitted and little effort has been made to encour-
age more complete reporting.  Submitted reports receive only
cursory review by the engineers.  Little effort has been made to
ensure that all water suppliers submit the required number of bac-
teriological samples each month.  Of the 28 suppliers surveyed
68 percent failed to collect the required number of bacteriolog-
ical samples during 2 or more months of the previous 12 month
reporting period.  Review of bacteriological  records revealed
that little resampling or investigation was done following
samples showing contamination.
     Seventy one (71) percent of the water suppliers surveyed
had not received a chemical analysis within the previous 3 years,
                           10

-------
the average  period  being  9 years.   In  addition,  those  analyses
which were completed  did  not  include  important  health  parameters
such as  arsenic,  cadmium, chromium, cyanide,  lead,  and silver.
     No  routine  surveillance  program  has  been carried  out  for
communities  v.'hich adjust  the  fluoride  level  in  their water supply.
Inspection visits of  fluoridated water systems  by water supply
program  engineers averaged one  visit  every  five  years.   Only 13
percent  of the water  suppliers  adjusting  fluoride levels were
submitting the required monthly check  samples to the State
laboratory.
     Few forual  inspections and follow-up surveys of water system
facilities and limited review of water quality  and  operating
records  result in little  enforcement of established standards.
Enforcement  is hampered not only by lack of manpower to  carry out
field surveys and laboratory  analyses,  but also  by  the  continued
use of a time consuming, manually operated data  recording  and
retrieval system.
     One responsibility which has been  carried out with  some
degree of regularity  by the water supply program is the  review
of plans and specifications for new construction and modifications
to existing water system facilities.  This effort, along with
providing technical  assistance on special problems and emergen-
cies,  accounts for the majority of the professional  manpower
                           11

-------
resource allocation to water supply activities.
     The Environmental Protection Division conducts an annual
three day water supply-wastewater operators short school.  Although
the results of the effort have been beneficial, many of the water
supply operators who need training the most are not attending.
This is particularly true for the operators of small water
systems.  These individuals are usually part-time operators with
other job responsibilities and are either unable or unwilling to
travel long distances or be away from their job responsibilities.
They do not attend training programs of the type necessary for
adequate knowledge of public health considerations or as prereq-
uisites for certification under the State's voluntary certifica-
tion program.  This lack of training contributed significantly
to many of the operational deficiencies noted during the survey.
     Laboratory support for the water supply program is provided
by the Department's Laboratory Section.  Facilities and procedures
were evaluated at the chemical laboratory and at three of the
six bacteriological laboratories.  Both bacteriological and
chemical laboratory procedures and operations were found in
general compliance with provisions of Standard Methods for the
Examination of Water and Wastewater (2).  Additional emphasis
will be required to provide the laboratory capability to routinely
analyze for toxic chemicals in drinking water.
                           12

-------
Related Findings
     Bottled water sales have not been considered a significant
aspect of the Idaho drinking water surveillance program.  Current
evaluation procedures are to judge bottling practices against
State regulations for food preparation establishments and bottled
water quality against drinking water quality criteria.  Little
surveillance of either bottling operations or bottled water quality
has been provided, however.
     The State Board of Health did not include responsibility for
enforcement of the State public water supply regulations in its
June 1971 delegation of authority to the local Health Districts.
The State and Districts have had informal working agreements,
however.  Certain Districts have been involved in the removal of
sanitary restrictions related to platting of new subdivisions,
approval of plans for small public water systems, follow-up on
unsatisfactory bacteriological samples, and consultation on
problems relating to private water supplies.  The ultimate
potential for fully utilizing the Health Districts in selected
areas of surveillance and enforcement of water supply regulations
has yet to be developed.
     Waterborne disease outbreaks have occurred in Idaho.  Subse-
quent surveys have shown that in essentially all cases deficiencies
existed in the water supply systems during the period when disease
                           13

-------
was transmitted.  Investigations also show that these deficiencies
were either unrecognized because of inadequate surveillance for
public health hazards, or were recognized but not remedied due to
ineffective persuasion or enforcement by health officials.
Deficiencies similar to those responsible for waterborne outbreaks
are present in water supplies in Idaho and were found during this
study.  The requisites for repetition of the waterborne outbreaks
of the past, namely the presence of diseased individuals in the
State and the inadequate surveillance of public water supplies
and inadequate enforcement of public health standards, exist in
Idaho.  Greater vigilance by Idaho's health officials and imple-
mentation of the recommendations of this report are needed to
assure the State's residents and visitors an adequate and safe
supply of drinking water.
                           14

-------
                        RECOMMENDATIONS

     The  public water  supply  program  of  the  Idaho  Department  of
 Environmental  and  Community Services  is  not  providing  the  sur-
 veillance and  consultative services necessary  to  fulfill  its
 responsibilities to  protect the  health of  the  citizens  of  Idaho.
 To  properly  provide  such  services,  it is recommended that:
     1.   The water supply program be  upgraded  to  a  stature  commen-
 surate with  its importance to  the health of  Idaho  residents and
 visitors  with  a minimum annual budget of $239,000  allocated as
 follows:
           a.   Engineering surveillance and
                 activities                            $128,000
           b.   Laboratory services                      71,000
           c.   Management and  overhead                  40,000
                                                       $239,000
     2.   The water supply program manpower resources be increased
to a minimum of 6 man-years of professional  staff and  2 man-years
of secretarial  support  to provide essential  surveillance, training
and program direction activities.
     3.  The bacteriological  surveillance program be redirected to:
          a.   Encourage water supply purveyors to develop their
own bacteriological monitoring program,
          b.   Charge a reasonable fee to cover the cost of

-------
routine bacteriological  analyses, and
          c.   Conduct a check sampling program, at State expense,
to assure validity of routine sampling by purveyors.
     4.   The chemical surveillance pronrar, be expanded and
modified to:
          a.   Conduct as least one complete chemical analysis
on each surface water supply annually and on each ground water
supply triennally, and
          b.   Discontinue the practice of performing chemical
analyses for operational control  which are considered the respon-
sibility of the water supply purveyor.
     5.   Enabling legislation be adopted requiring:
          a.   Mandatory certification of all public water supply
facility operators,
          b.   Coordinated planning and development of new public
water supply systems and the consolidation of the large number
of small suppliers in certain regions of the State, and
          c.   Fluoridation of community water supplies not
containing dentally significant concentrations of natural fluo-
rides.  Enactment of this requirement should be delayed until
qualified operators are available and the Department's surveil-
lance and monitoring program improves.
     6.   The 1964 Idaho Drinking Water Standards (3) be revised
to:
          a.   Recognize recent organizational changes,
          b.   Update water quality and monitoring criteria,
          c.   Incorporate special design, operation and monitor-
ing requirements for small public water supplies and bottled
water facilities,
          d.   Establish chlorination as the minimum treatment

                           18

-------
for all public water supplies and filtration for all surface water
sources with individual cases being exempted at the discretion of
the Administrator if the purveyor can demonstrate adherence to
the standards with disinfection alone, and

          e.   Reflect improved water treatment and distribution
practices.

     7.   A program be established to document present and

future policy decisions for distribution in a water supply

program policy manual.

     8.   Surveillance of all public water supplies be increased

to provide at least the minimum levels set forth in the Drinking

Water Standards and the Manual for Evaluation of Public Hater

Supplies  (4), including but not necessarily limited to:

          a.   Development and continued updating of a compre-
hensive inventory of public water supplies,

          b.   Thorough annual sanitary surveys of each system
with follow-up as required,

          c.   Increased effort to assure minimum bacteriological
sampling  along with the required check samples from all supplies,

          d.   Establishment of a routine complete chemical
sampling  program for each supply,

          e.   Establishment of a program to encourage adoption of
local cross-connection control ordinances and institution of viable
surveillance programs for elimination of backflow conditions,

          f.   Increased emphasis on surveillance of fluoridated
supplies  to assure adequacy of these operations, and

          g.   Initiation of a surveillance program to assure
that bottled water quality and bottling practices comply with
established standards for food packaging and water quality.
                           19

-------
     9.   Operator training be improved by:

          a.    The Department working more closely with the State
universities  and community colleges on operator entry level and
upgrade training programs, and,

          b.    Increased program flexibility to meet the needs
and schedules of both full and part-time operators.

    10.   Computer services be utilized for storage and retrieval

of water quality data, engineering report information, monthly

operating report records and inventory data.

    11.   A memorandum of agreement be developed with each Health

District for surveillance of and technical assistance to the

State's small public and recreational water supply systems.
                            20

-------
                       INTRODUCTION

     The great strides made in water treatment in past years have
reduced the threat of the once feared major water-borne epidemics.
With this technological advancement has come a sense of assurance
that our drinking water supplies are failsafe and free from
potential health hazards.  This false sense of security is
reflected not only by the average citizen but has spread to por-
tions of the water supply industry itself.  Many supplies have
become victims of their own success.  They have maintained a
status quo without concern for improving the reliability of their
system or for meeting the challenge of newer and more stringent
quality standards.
     The Community Hater Supply Study (5) indicated that com-
placency is not restricted solely to the citizenry and utilities,
but has spread also to the regulatory agencies.  In general, state
agencies are much less active in drinking water supply surveil-
lance today than in past years.  Program emphasis and resources
have been reallocated to meet the demands of new pollution control
mandates.  Although extensive water pollution control efforts can
provide improved raw water quality, these programs alone do not
assure safety or reliability of drinking water.  Such assurance
is attainable only through renewed awareness of the public health
significance of drinking water and the establishment of active

-------
water supply programs at the state and local levels.
     Recognizing this, James L. Agee, Region X Administrator,
Environmental Protection Agency, when requested by the Honorable
Cecil D. Andrus, Governor of the State of Idaho, to assist in
supporting environmental programs in Idaho, recommended as part
of a total environmental program assessment package an evaluation
of the State's water supply activities.  Subsequent correspond-
ence and discussion with State water supply program personnel
established that the purposes of the evaluation would be:
     1.  To ascertain the condition of Idaho's water supplies
through field surveys of water supply systems, laboratory analyses
of drinking water samples for bacteriological, chemical, and
radiochemical constituents, and examination of pertinent data
recorded in the State files,
     2.  To determine the adequacy of legal statutes, regula-
tions and policies, budget and manpower resources, laboratory
support, surveillance activities, and operator training,
     3.  To evaluate the effectiveness of the Idaho water supply
program as determined by the condition of a representative number
of the State's water supplies, and
     4.  To recommend improvements and additions which may be
needed to assure an adequate supply of safe drinking water for
residents of Idaho.
                            24

-------
                        PLAN OF STUDY



                   WATER SUPPLIES IN IDAHO





     Resident population in Idaho, according to the 1970 census,



is 713,008.   Approximately 482,000 of these people, or 68 percent



of the population, are served by 274 public water supplies.  Table



1  presents a summary of information concerning these supplies.



Many of the State's remaining 231,000 people live in rural areas



and obtain their drinking water from individual water systems.



In addition to the public supplies, there is an unknown number



of systems, generally designated semi-public supplies, which



serve State residents and the traveling public at restaurants,



service stations, recreation facilities, trailer courts and



similar establishments.  Presently these supplies are neither



listed nor under surveillance by the State.



     Figure 2 illustrates the percentage of supplies serving



various population ranges.  Over 75 percent of the public water



supplies in Idaho serve a population of less than 1000.  This is



significant as the Community Mater Supply Study (5) showed that



these smaller systems have the most difficulty in continuously



providing safe drinking water to their customers.





                   WATER SUPPLIES STUDIED





     Discussions were held in August 1971 with Mr. Vaughn Anderson,

-------
                                                   TABLE  I

                                             ri.oLic VAT:?. SIT-LIES u; IDAHO
Source of    liumber     Percent  of    Population    Percent  Pop.    Nurber       Percent    Nun^er      Percent
 Supply                  Total         Served        Served  by     Filtered     Filtered  Disinfected  Disinfected
                                                    PUS  I/
 Surface
38
3.9
51,000
10.6
17
44.7
30
78.9
 Ground        228         83.2        395,000
                                     81.9
                                                    0.9
                                                     47
                                                   20.7
 Dual i/         8          2.9         36,000
                                      7.5
                                                   25.0
                                                                 100.0
 Total        274
         100.0       482,000
                         100.0
                             21
                          7.7
                        85
                         31.0
I/  PWS - Public Water  Supplies

2/  Both surface and  cround  sources

-------
0
c
a
                              POPULATION RANGE
o
i
c
r
>
H
0
z
a
>
z
0
tt
M
a

M
o

D
<
r

0

I
            c
            Z
            fcn
            O
            O
                        Ui
                        O
                        O
                        O
                        o
                        o
o
o
o
UI

o
o
o
en

O
O
O
to
y
o
o
o
o
<
en

O
O
O
      DO

      CO
      m

      O


      O

      z
       T3

       C
       oo
       >
       H
       m
       7>
      C
      TJ
c
1

r
m
*
                                                                     to
                                                                     o
                                                                             TO
                                                                             n
                                                                             m
                                                                             Z
                                                                             c
                                                                             D>
                                                                             I—

                                                                             n
                                                                              CO

                                                                              C
                                                                      00
                                                                      o
                                                                      O
                                                                      o

-------
Director of Categorical Programs, formerly the Environmental
Improvement Division, to review the scope and procedures to be
used in conducting the study.  Agreement was reached to follow in
general the procedures used in the national Community Water Supply
Study.   The principal objective was to evaluate the total Idaho
water supply program and recommend improvements in the program
that would assure an adequate supply of safe drinking water for
the residents of Idaho.  It was agreed also that investigation of
a representative number of water supplies would be sufficient to
evaluate the effectiveness of the State program.  No individual,
or semi-public water supplies were to be selected for study.
     Two factors were considered in selecting the water supplies
to be studied.  First was a need to select supplies representative
of the sizes of systems, types of sources, methods of treatment
and geographical distribution throughout the state.  Second was
a need to select a sufficient number of supplies to enable com-
parison of the findings of the Idaho study to those of the
national Community Water Supply Study.  To accomplish these
objectives it was determined that at least 10 percent of Idaho's
274 public water supplies would be surveyed.  These 28 supplies
would be selected at random from the respective percentage of
supplies within predetermined population groupings.  Table 2
illustrates the population groupings and the determination of the
number of systems to be selected within each group.

                           30

-------
                                          TABLE 2



                             SELECTION OF PUBLIC WATER SUPPLIES
POPULATION
GROUP
Over
5,000 -
1,000 -
500 -
Under
25,000
25,000
5,000
1,000
500
POPULATION
SERVED
152,500
150,081
120,597
28,170
30,551
NUMBER OF
SYSTEMS
3
12
53
42
164
% SYSTEMS
1.1
4.4
19.3
15.3
59.9
(% SYSTEMS) (28)
0.3
1.2
5.4
4.3
16.8
NUMBER
SELECTED
1
1
5
4
17
TOTAL
481,899
274
100.0
28.0
28

-------
     The 28 supplies selected are listed in Appendix A, Table 1
along with their respective populations served, sources of supply
and treatment provided.  Following the random selection, a check
was made to determine the representation from the standpoint of
geography, type of source, and type of treatment.  All three
factors were found acceptable.  Location of the supplies is shown
in Figure 3.
     These 28 supplies serve over 106,000 people or about 15 per-
cent of the total state population and approximately 22 percent of
those served by public water supplies in Idaho.
     According to State dental health records, fourteen (14) of the
274 public water supply systems in Idaho adjust the fluoride
content of their water for dental health protection.  In view of
the small number of systems reportedly fluoridating, a special
fluoride study was conducted of all  fourteen supplies.  Figure 4
shows the location of the fluoridated systems surveyed.
                            32

-------
       boundary

       lL9j
       bonner
     kootenai
      120
         .26
          22
  5  benewah ;shoshone*

       latah "1	
        O   I
      I  '   ' clearwater
   nez percej^    ^-^
   2--V Pr
    lewisb
   ^    idaho
         3
i
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
12
14
BOISE
LEWISTON
GRANGEVILLE
ST. ANTHONY
ST. MARIES
ABERDEEN
ARCO
COUNCIL
POTLATCH
RIRIE
HORSESHOE BEND
HAGERMAN
FRANKLIN
LAPWAI
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
                                                       HAZELTON
                                                       FIRTH
                                                       ARIMO
                                                       ROCKLAND
                                                       MOYIE SPRINGS
                                                       ATHOL
                                                       MIDVALE
                                                       EAST HOPE
                                                       CASTLEFORD
                                                       STANLEY  POND  W.A.
                                                       MURPHY
                                                       HOPE
                                                        HOLLISTER
                                                        EUGENE  OUTLOOK W.A.
            \
   1
24
28
                    	/ lemhi
      adams'l valley      '

       l*{         /X>\
  i 4.1  ^  1       ('          ^'^^'  \I—V*^	r1  A
Washington^     jL   custer      '*>  Jf dark  f   4
  ^—Vf-fbTB'e    \               VT r— rfrem°nt
 payette/ |        ^             ,;   L-("    I K   .^,
         "El  11   X"  1   -/~-\,      1  '    nefferson    ! tet  n
          \    /    ; ^"7    \js^ ^-^utte  '  _ _I^^--1
     \   'ada'Y'^    f*   Sblaine  -^       pt'l bonneville  ~"~
                    i    i        '	1
  canyon
                                     r-J"lbonneville
  \  jaud ;       i     ^       -»,	    p"  •—-^_
""""'..•|5*   |elmore lea mas L_        '--y'bingham   U"
  FIGURE  3

  PUBLIC  WATER SUPPLY SYSTEMS  SURVEYED

-------
                                        BOWERS FERRY
                                        COUNCIL
                                        JEROME
                                        LAPWAI
                                        LEWISTON
                                           :ALL
                                 9
                                iO
                                n
                                12
     bejewah jshoshone
                                                             "IONTPELIER
                                                             MOUNTAIN HOME
                                                            ORIFINO
                                                            PRESTON
                                                            "ALMQN
                                                       ;3   SANDPOINT
                                                       i4   SHOSHONE
nez perc
canyon   i   \
    *\  '  ''TV'      I4'   I6'1'"*
      X  f   7 i         I     j
        ^Lada (elmore  .camas L_
           's.  I  •/»    I     TT:
            T~^   V  gooding!

       owyhee
                                            i        r~" fremont
                                        ^  L._{—'I  K
                                        \      'Jefferson    I teton
                                      '>,!!«•   I
                    'bingham
                                                        ,
                                               ingam      i

                                            '   i --- • -- ^C~
                                          l
                                          •.P°werV ban nock
| twin   j
! falls   '  cassia
                                             -

                                             I on
                                             .r'
                                            oneida
                                                        '.bear
                                       lake
                                                     i~    i
                                                     r franklin
                                                    .1 ft-
                                                        11

  FIOURK  4

  FLUOMIDATBD  WATKR SUPPLY  SYSTKMS IN  IDAHO

-------
                     EVALUATION CRITERIA

     The effectiveness of the Idaho water supply program in
protecting public health was judged on the basis of drinking
water quality, reliability of system physical facilities and
adequacy of sanitary surveillance.  Criteria used in each aspect
of the evaluation follows.
                        WATER QUALITY

     Adequacy of drinking water quality was  based on the follow-
ing bacteriological and chemical criteria
     1.  Bacteriological quality - Comparisons were made of the
bacteriological sampling record of each supply for 12 months
prior to the survey against the bacteriological sampling frequency
and quality criteria of the 1962 United States Public Health
Service Drinking Hater Standards  (1), hereafter referred to as the
Drinking Hater Standards.  A supply was considered unsatisfactory
if the bacteriological quality failed to meet the Drinking
Water Standards two or more of the prior 12  months, or  if  insuf-
ficient samples were collected during two or more of the prior
12 months in order to determine bacteriological quality.   Since
many of the smaller supplies routinely do not meet the  sampling
frequency, bacteriological samples were collected from  the dis-
tribution system of each supply at a rate of 10 percent of the

-------
number required per month by the Drinking Hater Standards.



These samples were analyzed by EPA and health district laborator-



ies and the results used to provide additional background on



water quality.  Any sample having a total coliform density



greater than 4 per 100 ml was considered to have failed the



bacteriological standard.  In addition, a supply was



considered unsatisfactory if the arithmetic mean coliform



density of the samples collected during the survey exceeded



one per 100 nl.



     2.  Chenical quality - Samples for chemical analyses were



collected from each supply in accordance with the schedule shown



in Table 3.  These samples were analyzed by Environmental Pro-



tection Agency Laboratories for the parameters listed in Table 4.



Each sample was compared to the chemical quality criteria of the



Drinking Hater Standards and rated as either:



     1.  Meeting the Standards for all parameters,



     2.  Failing to meet one or more of the "recommended" limits,



but meeting all of the mandatory limits, or



     3.  Failing to meet one or more "mandatory" limits.





                         FACILITIES





     Adequacy of water supply system facilities was judged on the



basis of the Manual for Evaluating Public Drinking Water Supplies



(4) and the  Drinking Water Standards.  System elements considered




                           38

-------
TABLE 3 - WATER SUPPLY FIELD SURVEY SAMPLING  SCHEDULE
Population
Group
Over 25,000
5,000-25,000
1,000-5,000




500-1 ,000



Under 500
















System
Boise
Lewis ton
Source
36 Wells
Treatment
Chlo
River & 3 Wells Filt/Chlc/Fluo
St. Anthony 4 Wells Ohio
St. Maries
Grangeville
Aberdeen
Arco
Horseshoe Bend
Council
Ririe
Potlatch
Hagerman
• Arimo
Firth
Castleford
Eugene Outlook
Moyie Springs
Athol
Hope
Hoi lister
Murphy
Lapwai
Rock! and
Stanley-Pond
Hazel ton
East Hope
Franklin
Midvale
Rochat Creek Chlo
2 Wells Chlo
3 Wells
4 Wells
None
Chlo
4 Wells None
3 Springs/2 Wells Chlo/Fluo
2 Wells
5 Wells
Spring
None
None
Chlo
Springs & Well Chlo
2 Wells None
Well Chlo
Well None
Skin Creek
Well
Spring
2 Wells
2 Wells
2 Wells
Well
Well
2 Wells
Creek
6 Springs
2 Wells
Filt/Chlo
None
None
None
None
Fluo
Chlo
None
Chlo
Filt/Chlo
None
None
Source
Raw
Bact.
36
4
4
1
2
3
4
4
5
2
5
1
3
2
1
1
1
1
1
2
2
2
1
1
2
1
6
2
Source
Finished
Distribution
System
Wet Trace Rad. Other Bact. Trace
5
36
2 4
1 4
1 1
1 2
1 ' 3
1 4
1
2
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
4
5
2
5
1
3
2
1
1
1
1
1
2
2
2
1
1
2
1
6
2
5
2
1
1
1
1
4
1
2
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1

Special
_
Special
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
Special
-
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
Special

-
10
4
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
10
4
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2

-------
                                TABLE 4
             CHEMICAL ANALYSES CONDUCTED ON SURVEY SAMPLES
Routine For All  Supplies

     Arsenic  (As)
     Barium  (Ba)
     Cadmium  (Cd)
     Chloride  (Cl)
     Chromium  (Mexavalent - Cr+6)
     Cobalt  (Co)
     Color
     Copper  (Cu)
     Fluoride  (F)
     Iron  (Fe)
     Lead  (Pb)

     Manganese  (Mn)
     Mercury  (Mg)
     f'ethylene-Blue Active Substances
          (MBAS)
     Nickel   (Ni)
     Nitrate  (NOo)
     pH
     Radiochemical
          Gross  alpha
          Gross  beta
     Selenium  (Se)
     Silver   (Ag)
     Specific Conductance
     Sulfate  (504)
     Total  Dissolved Solids   (TDS)
     Turbidity
     Zinc  (Zn)
Special  For Selected Supplies

     Cyanide (Cn)
     Carbon Chloroform Extract  (CCE)
     Carbon Alcohol Extract  (CAE)

     Insecticides
       Aldrin
       Lindane
       Chlordane
       ODD, DDE, DDT
       Dieldrin, Endrin
       Heptachlor, Heptachlor-
         epoxide
       Methoxychlor, Toxapiiene

     Herbicides
       2,  4-D
       2,  4, 5-T
       Si 1 vex

-------
were:



     1.  Source - Each source was judged by compliance of its



chemical quality with the Drinking Water Standards, protection



against contamination, and adequacy of quantity as determined by



past experience and current water demands.



     2.  Treatment - Facilities were judged on the basis of the



degree of treatment provided, maintenance and operation of equip-



ment, and overall reliability of operation including standby



equipment.



     3.  Distribution - Finished water storage facilities and



system pressure were included in evaluating the distribution



system.  Storage was considered adequate fron the standpoint of



quality protection if reservoirs were covered and well maintained.



Storage volume was judged adequate if sufficient quantities of



water were available during periods required for repair of treat-



ment and/or punping equipment.  Pressure in various parts of



the system was used as a measure of the adequacy of pipe sizing



and looping.  A pressure of at least 20 psi in all parts of the



system was considered adequate.



     4.  Quality control  - A supply was judged adequate if proper



records of system operation were being maintained; appropriate



bacteriological and chemical  testing was being performed; and a



cross-connection surveillance, elimination, and device testing



program was  being implemented.





                           41

-------
     Each supply was rated on the above four system elements as
shown in Appendix A, Table III.   A public health risk factor,
ranging from 0 to 10, was then assigned for each supply.  A risk
factor of zero indicates least or little risk, while a rating of
10 indicates most or high risk.

                    WATER SUPPLY PROGRAM

     Adequacy of the State surveillance program was evaluated on
the following
     1.  Legislative authority - Reviews were made of the State
statutes pertaining to protection of the State's water resource
for drinking purposes and to provisions for safe water supplies.
     2.  Regulations and policy - Rules and regulations promulgated
by the Department of Environmental and Community Services and
the program policies adopted by the Environmental Protection
Division were reviewed to determine their adequacy with respect to
current water supply practice.
     3.  Surveillance of water supplies - Reviews were made of
bacteriological monitoring, chemical monitoring and field surveil-
lance.  These program elements were considered adequate if:
          a.  The number of bacteriological samples examined for
each supply met the minimum number specified in the Drinking
Water Standards 11 of the 12 months immediately prior to the
survey,
                           42

-------
          b.   Chemical analyses, including all  parameters listed
in the Drinking Water Standards, had been performed within the
previous three years,
          c.   The results of bacteriological  and chemical samples
not meeting the Drinking Hater Standards were reviewed and the
necessary follow-up performed routinely,
          d.   A field survey of the supply had been conducted
within 12 months prior to the survey, and
          e.   Follow-up surveys to previously identified system
facility and operational deficiencies were performed routinely.
     4.   Laboratory support - Surveys were made of the State
bacteriological and chemical laboratories in Boise as well as the
Department's bacteriological laboratories in Lewiston and Idaho
Falls.  Each laboratory was evaluated to determine its capabil-
ity to provide adequate support for the program and the compliance
of its procedures with Standard Methods for the Examination of
Hater and Wastewater (2).
     5.   Budget and staffing - Present staffing and program
funding levels were evaluated and compared with the adequacy of
program elements described above.
     6.   Other program activities such as operator training and
certification, cross-connection control, fluoridation, and
technical assistance were also evaluated.
                           43

-------
                       STUDY FINDINGS
                     WATER SUPPLY STATUS

Bacteriological Quality
     Review of the bacteriological  sampling  records  indicated
that  21(75%) of the 28 supplies evaluated either  failed to meet
the bacteriological quality limits  of the Drinking Water Standards
(1) two or more of the 12 months prior  to the  survey  or failed
to collect sufficient samples during the period to adequately
determine bacteriological quality.  These systems  serve over
13,750 people or approximately 13%  of the population  served by
public water supplies surveyed.
     Further breakdown of data, as  shown in  Appendix  A, Table II,
indicated that nine (35%) of the 26 supplies submitting bacter-
iological samples failed to meet the bacteriological  quality
standards at least one month during the period.  Tv/o  supplies had
submitted no samples.  Of these two, one failed to meet the bac-
teriological  standards for the samples collected during the
survey.
     The ten supplies failing to meet the bacteriological standards
either during the 12 month period prior to the survey or as a
result of samples collected during the field investigations were
evaluated in an attempt to relate bacteriological   quality to
disinfection practices.   As shown in Table 5, there is no

-------
                               TABLE 5

             BACTERIOLOGICAL QUALITY OF DISTRIBUTED  WATER
                    RELATED TO CHLORINATION PRACTICE
Type of Source Chlorinaticn
Practiced
Surface Water
Source
Mixed Ground
and Surface
Water Source
Spring Source
i/.'sll Source
[iixed Spring
and Well Source
All Types
llO
Yes
No
Yes
No
Yes 2J
No
Yes
tlo
Yes
No
Yes
Number of
Systems
0
2
0
1
2
2
15
3
1
2
18
10
Percent Systems
Exceeding
Col iform Limit I/
0
0
100
100
33
33
0
50
39
40
Number of
Systems v.'ith
Inadequate
Chlorination
0
0
2
1
1
4
]_/  Bacteriological data from State record for 12 months prior  to  survey.
    Where no samples submitted during this period, survey data  was  used.

2J  Some springs chlorinated.

-------
apparent  correlation between bacteriological quality and
either  type of source or disinfection.  Of  importance, however,
is  the  relationship between the adequacy of chlorination, as
determined by field survey observation, and bacteriological
quality.  In addition to the statistical significance noted,
examination of individual system data confirms that the supplies
with  inadequate chlorination exceeded the bacteriological
standards.
      Comparisons of bacteriological quality with system size
were  also made.  Table 6 shows the relationship of bacteriological
quality to population served.  These results indicate that
smaller water systems in Idaho distribute poorer quality water.

Chemical Quality
      As shown in Table 7, the average period since the last state
chemical analysis for the 28 supplies surveyed was 9 years.  The
chemical constituents routinely reported from these analyses
were  those for which recommended standards have been established.
Constituents such as arsenic, barium, cadmium, chromium,  copper,
cyanide, lead, mercury,  MBAS, organics (CCE, CAE), phenols,
silver and selenium were not routinely monitored.   Adequacy of
chemical quality for the 28 supplies surveyed was  determined,
therefore, from samples  collected during the field surveys.
Details of particular constituents  exceeded in these samples are
found in Appendix A, Table  II.
                             49

-------
                    TABLE 6



COMPARISON OF WATER DUALITY BY POPULATION GROUP
BACTERIOLOGICAL STANDARDS NOT MET
Samples Collected

POPULATION
GROUP

Over 25,000
5,000-25,000
1 ,000-5,000
500-1 ,000
Under 500
Combined
Survey

NUMBER OF
SYSTEMS
SURVEYED
1
1
5
4
17

28
During
Number
of
Systems
0
0
0
1
4

5
Survey
Percent
of
Systems
0%
0%
0%
25%
24%

18%
Samples Submitted
Prior 12
Number
of
Systems
0
0
0
3
6

9
Months
Percent
of
Systems
0%
0%
0%
75%
35%

32%
CHEMICAL STANDARDS NOT MET
RECOMMENDED
NOT MET
Number
of
Systems
1
0
2
0
3

6
Percent
of
Systems
100%
0%
40%
0%
18%

21%
MANDATORY
NOT
Number
of
Systems
0
0
0
0
1

2
MET
Percent
of
Systems
0%
0%
0%
0%
6%

7%

-------
                                                       TABLE 7
                              COMPARISON OF SYSTEM SURVEILLANCE BY POPULATION SERVED

RANGE OF POPULATION



Over 25,000
5,000-25,000
1,000-5,000
500-1,000
Under 500
Combined
Survey
NUMBER
OF
SYSTEMS
SURVEYED

1
1
5
4
17

28
AVERAGE
NUMBER
OF YEARS SINCE
LAST
Chemical
Analysis
1
2
5
8
11

9
STATE
Sanitary
Survey
1
1
5
6
9

7
SYSTEMS
NOT MEET
ING
SURVEILLANCE REQUIREMENTS

Chem.l/
Anal .
n°/
U/o
0%
80%
75%
76%

71%

San.2/
Survey
0%
0%
80%
100%
82%

78%

Bact.3/
Anal .
0%
0%
40%
100%
47%

54%
OPERATOR
TRAINING

Short
School
100%
100%
60%
25%
12%

36%
Total Population Served by Systems Surveyed:  106,035
Total State Population - 1970 Census:  713,008
Percent Population Surveyed:  15%
]_/  Sampling Frequency:  Within 3 years
2/  Survey Frequency:  Annual
3/  Bacteriological Sampling As Required to Meet USPHS Drinking Water  Standards

-------
     Results of the analyses indicated only one supply  (4%) not
meeting the mandatory chemical standards.  Drinking water failing
to meet the mandatory chemical standards poses a threat of toxic
material hazardous to human health.  Supplies or individual
sources from which samples have been confirmed as failing to
meet these standards should be rejected.
     Seven (25%) of the systems surveyed failed to meet one or
more of the recommended chemical limits.  Concentrations of chem-
ical constituents exceeding these limits may impart objectionable
taste, odor and/or undesirable physiological  effects.  Since
these render drinking water less than desirable or aesthetically
inferior, supplies or individual sources failing to meet these
standards should be evaluated for treatment or used as standby
for alternate higher quality sources.
     These results illustrate the importance of routinely pro-
viding complete chemical analyses to detect potential health
problems.

Facilities
     Information obtained during sanitary surveys was used to
rate systems Adequate (A) or Inadequate (I) in each of four
system elements: source, treatment, distribution and quality
control.  A risk factor was then assigned on the basis of the
relationship of noted facility deficiencies to potential water
quality deterioration and public health risk.   Ratings for
individual system elements and the assigned risk factors are
                            52

-------
presented in Appendix A, Table III.
     The risk factor is an overall judgment of the system by the
surveying engineer rather than a summation of deficiencies in
individual system elements.  The factors, ranging from 1 to 8
with an average of 3.9, indicate that significant facility prob-
lems exist.  As shown in Appendix A, Table III, 14 (50%) of the
supplies were considered to have inadequate protection of the
source against contamination.  Even more significant is the fact
that 9 (64%) of these 14 supplies were also found to have either
inadequate treatment or none at all.
     Thirty nine (39) percent of the system were judged to have
inadequate distribution system facilities and 96 percent were
providing inadequate quality control to assure protection of the
water supplied.  A number of the larger supplies were providing
appropriate bacteriological sampling, chemical testing and oper-
ating records.  Only one supply, however, was judged to be carry-
ing out an adequate cross-connection control  program.  Most of
the smaller supplies were deficient in one or all of these areas.

Operator Competence
     Proper system operation and maintenance is essential  in
providing an adequate supply of safe drinking water.   A good
operator knows more than how to start a pump or open a valve.
He also should be knowledgeable about the importance and prac-
tice of treatment required for his supply, as well  as elementary
                           53

-------
water chemistry and microbiology.
     Evaluation of the operators and their qualifications for the
28 water supplies surveyed revealed that only 3 (11%) employed
full-time water system operators.  Five supplies (18%) utilized
full-time employees but divided their responsibilities between many
areas of the public works department.
     Most of the operators interviewed were conscientious and
concerned about doing a good job.  None, however, had received
any college level training in water supply operations and only
8 (29%) had participated in any operator short school training.
Many of the operators, although aware of their lack of knowledge
in critical public health aspects of water supply operations,
felt they could not afford the time away from the job for even
short course training.  Several stated that the city would not
reimburse them for expenses incurred for such training or permit
them to leave the local area.

Fluoridation
     Fluoridation is a proven public health practice which pro-
vides an optimum level of fluoride ion for the prevention of
tooth decay.  Proper operation and maintenance of fluoridation
equipment, as well as concern on the part of the operator, are
essential  if maximum health benefits are to be realized.
                           54

-------
     At the time of the survey 14 suppliers were reported by the
Department of Environmental  and Community Services to be fluori-
dating.  Field surveys of all  14 revealed, however, only 8 instal-
lations in operation.  Six had discontinued feeding fluoride for
various reasons, including equipment breakdown and disfavor of
fluoridation by the operator.
     The actual level of fluoride in the distribution system is
the single most important factor in evaluating the adequacy of a
water fluoridation program and the benefits which will be received.
Of the eight installations in operation only two (25% were found
to be providing a fluoride ion content in the distribution system
within the 0.8-1.3 mg/1 range recommended by the State.  Five
(63%) were underfeeding, thereby significantly reducing the health
benefits of fluoridation, and two (25%) were overfeeding.  Samples
collected from one system were both above and below the recommended
fluoride ion range.
     Operators at two of the eight installations were not con-
ducting fluoride ion analyses and in fact had no test equipment
or facilities for such analyses.  Of the six performing fluoride
ion analyses only three were conducting analyses daily and none
were analyzing raw water for natural fluoride content on a regular
basis.  Only one operator was routinely sending the required
monthly check sample to the State Laboratory.
     Fluoride feed equipment and facilities were found adequate

                           55

-------
at 4  (50%) of the installations operating!.  Maintenance was judged
satisfactory at only 4  (50%) of the facilities even though plant
operators had been advised of the survey.  Storage arrangements
for chemical conpounds were unsatisfactory at 4 of the 8 installa-
tions, and 6 of the operators interviewed either did not. have
available or were not using safety eauipr.ent in their operation.
     A trained operator with a genuine interest in feeding
fluoride is essential to the satisfactory operation of a fluori-
dation installation.  Two of the eight facilities were operated
by personnel not completely familiar with the chemical feed
equipment at their plants, and three cf the six operators per-
forming fluoride analysis were not adequately trained in use of
the test equipment.   In addition, 3 of the 8 operators interviewed
did not favor fluoridation of public water supplies.

                    WATER SUPPLY PROGRAM
Legal  Authority and Responsibilities
     Regulatory authority over health aspects of public water
supplies in Idaho is provided in Idaho Code, Title 37, Chapter 21,
Section 37-2102:   Domestic water to be protected.   Section 37-2102
provides:
          1.   That any person, corporation, or officers of a
municipality owning or operating a systen for the purposes of
providing  water for domestic purposes shall  protect the system
and keep it free from impurities, whether bacterial or chemical,
                            56

-------
          2.    That the State Board of Health shall annually
promulgate standards for protection from impurities and standards
for bacterial and chemical purity which must be consistent with
the drinking water standards of the U.S. Public Health Service,
and
          3.    The State Board of Health authority to issue
reports and post signs indicating compliance with the standards.
     Section 37-2103 specifies that any person, corporation or
officers of a municipality failing to comply with the provisions
of Chapter 21 shall be guilty of a misdemeanor.
     Title 39, Chapter 4, Section 39-414 of the Idaho Code pro-
vides that the District Boards of Health shall have and may
exercise the powers and duties to administer and enforce all State
health laws, regulations and standards, and to do all duties
expressly delegated to them by the State Board of Health.  On
June 16, 1971 the State Board of Health delegated to the seven
District Boards of Health authority to enforce State public
health laws and Board of Health rules and regulations in the
areas of food service establishments, meat and meat products,
milk, solid waste, septic tanks, swimming pools and vital statis-
tics.  Public water supply was not included in the delegation of
authority and thus primary responsibility for enforcement of the
public water supply regulations renains with the State health
agency.
                            57

-------
     The Environmental  Protection and Health Act of 1972, creating
the Department of Environmental  Protection and Health, transferred
the authority of the Board of Health and the functions of the
Department of Health to the new agency.   Provisions of the act
are included in Idaho Code, Title 39, Chapter 1.
     Sections 39-101 to 39-114 establish statutory definition of a
public water supply; empower the administrator of the department
to enforce standards, rules and regulations relating to public
water supplies, enable the Board of Environmental Protection and
Health to adopt, amend, or repeal rules, reoulations, codes and
standards, and provide for civil penalties of up to $1,000.00
per day for non-compliance with provisions of the act or any
rule or regulation promulgated thereunder.
     The 1973 Idaho Legislature enacted three measures impacting
the water supply program as follows:
          1.   Section 39-103, Idaho Code, relating to definition
of terms is amended to define a public water system as all facil-
ities actually used or intended for use in serving water for
drinking or domestic use to ten or more separate premises or
households, or any other supply which serves water to the public
and which the Department of Environmental  Protection and Health
declares to have potential health significance.
          2.   Section 39-118 is added to Chapter 1, Title 39,
Idaho Code providing for the submission of plans and specifica-
                             58

-------
tions  for  the  new  construction  of  or  modification  to  all  public
water  supply systems  or  public  water  treatment  systems  and  for
the approval of  the plans  and specifications  by the  Department
of Environmental Protection  and Health  prior  to initiating  con-
struction.  The  requirement  may be waived  by  the Department if
the facility v/ill  produce  no impact on  the environment  or public
health.
           3.   The Department of Environmental  Protection and
Health  is  merged with the  Department  of Social  and Rehabilitation
Services,  and  the  State  Youth Training  Center and  is  designated
the Department of  Environmental  and Community Services.   All codes,
rules,  regulations, standards,  plans, licenses,  permits.,  and
certificates of  the former departments  remain in effect and the
Board of Environmental Protection  and Health  is  retitled  the
Board of Environmental and Community  Services.   The Governor is
also authorized  to establish substate administrative  regions to
improve the delivery  of  environmental,  health and  social  services.
     The Idaho Code provides comprehensive  administrative mach-
inery for  the acquisition of water  rights  to  both  surface and
ground waters.    In addition, Title  42,  Chapter  2,  Section
42-238 of  the Code vests in  the  Department  of Water Administration
the power  and duties  relating to minimum well construction  stand-
ards  for protection of ground water resources and  to  the  licensing
of well drillers.
                            59

-------
Regulations and Standards
     The standards currently in use by the Division of Environ-
mental Protection for public water supplies were adopted in
November 1964.  These standards reference the appropriate sections
of the Idaho Code, provide definitions of key terms, and specify
the type of source, treatment, operational and water quality
standards upon which the adequacy of the supply is judged.
     Water supply is to be obtained from the most desirable source
with effort being made to prevent or control source pollution.  If
adequate source protection is not provided, treatment is required.
Frequent surveys are to be made by the purveyor to identify health
hazards.   Correction of health deficiencies is to be made in
accordance with a program approved by the regulatory agency.  The
agency or individual responsible for the condition of the system
is also defined.
     Approval  of water supplies is dependent in part upon enforce-
ment of rules  and regulations, adequate protection of water
quality throughout the system, proper system operation under
qualified personnel  acceptable to the regulatory agency, adequate
system capacity, satisfactory record of laboratory examinations
showing compliance with water quality standards, and submission
and approval  of engineering plans and specifications for construc-
tion or expansion of the system.
                            60

-------
     Water quality must meet criteria adopted from the 1962 U. S.



Public Health Service Drinking Water Standards.  These criteria



include standards for sampling, bacteriological quality, physical



characteristics, chemical quality, and radioactivity.  Recom-



mended analytical methods for determining compliance with the



standards are also included.



     Construction and design standards are also included.  Part  I



outlines the format and material to be included in submitting



plans and specifications.  Parts II and III describe requirements



for utilization of surface and ground water sources.  Parts IV



through XII include recommendations and requirements for pre-



treatment, high rate treatment units, softening, filtration,



disinfection, iron and manganese removal, taste and odor control,



and fluoridation.  Part XIII outlines standards for the location



of pump stations, construction of buildings, and the construction



and installation of pump units.  Part XIV lists requirements for



the design, location, material, interior protective coating, and



disinfection of storage reservoirs and pressure tanks.   Part XV



prescribes acceptable distribution system materials, pipe sizes,



locations and pressures as well as specifying disinfection



requirement for water mains and prohibiting cross-connections.





Organization



     Considerable reorganization of health and social service
                            61

-------
agencies has occurred recently in Idaho.   At the time of the
field survey in 1971-1972, the Idaho water supply program was
organizationally located within the Idaho Department of Health.
The water supply activity was not an identifiable unit within
the organization and had no specific manpower or budget alloca-
tions.  General direction for program activities was provided
by the Chief of the Engineering Division.  Field work was
accomplished by individuals in the three Health Department
Regional Offices.  Total manpower allocation for public water
supply activities in FY  '71, including clerical support, was
estimated by the Department to be 1.0 man-year.  Estimated
water supply program expenditures, excluding laboratory support,
were $22,000.  Laboratory support for this same period was cal-
culated at $69,000.  The total expenditure of $91,000 for FY  '71
amounts to approximately $330 for surveillance of each of the
274 public water supplies in Idaho, or about 13 cents per capita.
     Creation of the Department of Environmental Protection and
Health by legislative mandate in 1972 resulted in certain organ-
izational changes and the establishment of the Division of
Environmental Protection.  Water supply activities remained
located in two of the three organizational units under the
Division.  General  program direction was provided by the Director
of Categorical Programs with field work being carried by the
                            62

-------
regional office staff under direction of the Director of Regional
Operations.  Manpower and budget for FY '72 water supply activi-
ties remained the same as that in FY '71.
     Estimated manpower and budget figures for FY '73 water supply
surveillance activities show an increase in manpower expenditures
to 2.7 man-years and a budget increase to $44,000.  These figures
include program direction, plan review and field surveillance.
Laboratory support increased to $80,000 for the period.  Total
estimated expenditures for FY '73 are $124,000, which amounts to
approximately $450 per supply or 17 cents per capita.  Table 8
illustrates the status of water supply budget allocations for
the period FY 1971 to FY 1973.
     Creation of the Idaho Department of Environmental and
Community Services by the 1973 Idaho Legislature has had little
influence on the basic organization structure of the State's
environmental programs.  An organization chart for the Department's
Environmental Protection Division is shown in Figure 5.  Signifi-
cant for improving the posture of water supply activities in the
State,  however, is the inclusion of a public health engineer
position under the Director of Categorical Programs specifically
for water supplies and swimming pools.  This individual will be
primarily responsible for standards revision, policy development,
training coordination, and overall water supply program direc-
tion.   As in the past, field surveillance for all environmental

                            63

-------
                                             TABLE  8
                            WATER  SUPPLY  ACTIVITY  RESOURCE  ALLOCATIONS
FISCAL
YEAR
1971
1972
1973
MANPOWER
FOR
ENGINEERING
(MAN- YEARS)!/
1.0
1.0
2.7
DOLLAR EXPENDITURES

ENGINEERING
ACTIVITIES
22,000
22,000
44,000

LABORATORY SUPPORT
(BACT. + CMEM.)
56,500+12,500
55,700+13,300
58,000+22,000

TOTAL
91,000
91 ,000
124,000

PER SYSTEM
330
330
450

PER CAPITA!/
,13
.13
.17
_]_/  Includes clerical  support
2/  Calculation based  on  total  State  population,  1970  census

-------
FIGURE 5



ORGANIZATIONAL CHART-IDAHO DEPARTMENT OF  ENVIRONMENTAL AND  COMMUNITY SERVICES





DEPAR1
OFFICE OF PROGRAM
SUPPORT

LABORATORY SECTION



GOVERNOR
1

ADMINISTRATOR
FMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL & COMMUNITY SERVICES ~

1
BOARD OF ENVIRONMENTAL
PROTECTION & HEALTH


ASSISTANT ADMINISTRATOR
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION DIVISION

1
DIRECTOR
AIR & WATER PROGRAMS

Planner

Engineer Permits

Env. Quality
Specialist






Engineer
Air Pollution
Sup. Env. Quality
Specialist
Env. Quality
Specialist






Specia
DIRECTOR
CATEGORICAL PROGRAMS

Solid Waste


list

Engineer | —
Equip. Oper. | — '

Public
Water
Swimm
Visual Pollution
Control

Noise Pollution
Control

Health Engineer
ing Pools

	 Vector




Control
Reg
P
T . . .
Hygiene

Quality

Control

Milk Prog. Cord.
Food & Drue Cord.
Radiati
Control
on


DIRECTOR
REGIONAL OPERATIONS




1
. Env. Dir. Reg. Env. Dir. Reg. Env. Dir.
ocatello Boise Couer d'Alene

Env: Quality
Specialist
Env. Quality
Specialist
Hr • 1
Engineer |
— 1 Aquatic Biologist
Health Physicist




Env. Quality
Specialist
Env. Duality
Specialist

— Engineer
— Env. Quality
Specialist


_ Aquatic Bi-
ologist
Env. Quality
Specialist

— Env. Quality
Specialist

— Engineer


-------
program activities will  be carried out by the staff of the
three Regional  Offices.
     The Regional  Environmental  Directors are registered profes-
sional engineers and have water supply experience.  At least one
other member of each Regional  Office staff is also an engineer.
However, additional time will  be required for these individuals
to obtain water supply experience.
     Laboratory support for water supply activities is provided
by the Laboratory Section under the Department's Office of
Program support.  The Laboratory Section operates a central
laboratory in Boise which provides chemical  analyses capability
for all Department programs.  Bacteriological analyses are pro-
vided by the central laboratory and five branch laboratories
located in Coeur d'Alene, Lewiston, Twin Falls, Pocatello and
Idaho Falls.  These laboratories provide bacteriological capa-
bility for all  State and Health District program activities.

Activities
     Engineering activities and responsibilities concerning public
water supplies, as outlined in the previously stated regulations,
are:
     1.  Development of rules and regulations to assure protection
of domestic water supplies,
     2.  Review of plans and specifications for new construction
                            66

-------
and modification to existing systems,
     3.   Inspection of facilities and operation of all public
water  supplies,
     4.   Review and evaluation of operating reports and water
quality data fron public water supplies, and
     5.   Enforcement of sanitary standards to protect the quality
of water  served to the public.
     In addition, other services performed include:
     1.   Training of water plant operators,
     2.   Technical consultation with consulting engineers and
water  supply purveyors on special problems and during emergency
conditions, and
     3.   Assistance to Federal and other State agencies.
     Past manpower and budget limitations have prevented the
water  supply program from meeting these responsibilities.  Rules
and regulations for protecting public water supplies in Idaho
were last adopted by the State Board of Health in 1964.  Although
these  rules and regulations contain standards for both water
quality and facility design and construction, they are in need of
revision to incorporate new quality criteria and to reflect cur-
rent construction,  operation and maintenance practices.
     Necessary routine field inspections of public water supplies
and complete and timely reviews of operating report and water
                           67

-------
quality data have not been accomplished because of restricted man-
power.  The cross section of public water supplies surveyed
during this evaluation showed that 78 percent of the systems had
not been surveyed within the previous 12 months and that the
average period since the last survey was over 7 years.
     Well-written reports, outlining the findings and recommenda-
tions of water supply inspections, are essential to obtain desired
improvements.  However, very few detailed reports have been pre-
pared in recent years.  Many of those which have been completed
were sent to the communities a number of months after the survey.
To be effective, a report should be submitted to the community
within a month of the survey while the findings and recommenda-
tions are still fresh in the minds of the engineer and the
system operator.  Follow-up contact with the operator by phone,
letter or field survey is important to determine compliance with
the recommendations of the survey report.  Here again, insuffi-
cient manpower has prevented adequate follow-up.
     Surveillance of water quality includes review of bacter-
iological  and chemical data as well as routinely submitted oper-
ating reports.  Very little has been done recently in this area
by the water supply program.  Although operating records are
required by the Idaho Drinking Hater Standards  (3),  few are
submitted and little effort is made to encourage more complete
reporting.  Those reports submitted receive only cursory review
                            68

-------
 by  the  engineers.  The  bacteriological  sampling  program  has  also
 suffered  from  lack of staff.   Little  effort  has  been  made  to
 ensure  that  all water supplies  are  submitting  the  required number
 of  samples per month.   Of  the  28 water  supplies  surveyed during
 the evaluation, 68 percent  had  failed to  collect the  required
 number  of bacteriological  samples during  2 or  more months  of the
 previous  12  month reporting period.
     A  copy  of each  bacteriological analysis is  provided to  the
 appropriate  regional engineer.  The engineer is  responsible  for
 following up on unsafe  samples  and  ensuring  that resamples are
 submitted.   A  review of the bacteriological  records revealed that
 little  resampling or investigation  was  done  after  a sample showed
 contamination.
     The  chemical sampling program  has  been  inadequate also.  Of
 the 28  supplies surveyed 71 percent had not  received  a chemical
 analysis  within the previous three years.  Credability of  a
 chemical  sampling program depends not only on  the  frequency  of
 sampling  but also on the completeness of  the analyses with respect
 to the  health  parameters contained  in the standards.  Review of
 the chemical  sampling program revealed that, in  general, the anal-
yses did not include health parameters such as arsenic, cadmium,
 chromium, cyanide, lead, silver, etc.   Analyses  of these parameters
 is basic in determining the acceptability of the supply for  human
consumption.

                           69

-------
     Routine surveillance of communities which adjust the fluoride
level in their water supply is important in providing health pro-
tection for those served.  Regular inspections of the fluoridation
installations and frequent check samples of fluoride levels in
the system must be conducted to assure proper operation.  Review
of the water supplies adjusting fluoride levels showed only 13
percent submitting monthly check samples to the State.  Results
of these check samples are provided to the Dental Health Section.
The water supply program was not provided with this information.
Inspection visits to the fluoridated water systems by water supply
program engineers averaged one visit in five years.  The complete
report of fluoridation practice in Idaho is included in Appendix B.
     Since there are few formal inspections and follow-up surveys
of water system facilities and limited review of water quality
and operating reports, little enforcement is accomplished.  Hhere
changes are implemented, the regional  engineer may not return to
the system for a year or more to verify that proper action was
taken.   Enforcement of the Idaho Drinking Water Standards is
hampered by the lack of manpower to carryout both field surveys
and laboratory analyses as well as by a time consuming, manually
operated data recording system.
     One responsibility which has been carried out with some
degree of regularity by the water supply program is the review
                           70

-------
of plans and specifications for new construction and modifica-
tions to existing water system facilities.  This effort, along
with providing technical assistance on special problems and
emergencies, accounts for the majority of the resource alloca-
tion to water supply activities.
     The Environmental Protection Division and its predecessor
departments conduct an annual three day water supply-wastewater
operators short school.  The State currently maintains voluntary
operators certification programs for both water supply and
wastewater operators.  As of July 1973, 178 operators representing
38 communities (13%) have been certified under this program.
Although the results cf these efforts have been beneficial, many
of the operators who need the training the most are not attending.
This is particularly true for the operators of small systems.
These individuals are usually part-time operators or have other
responsibilities in the municipality and thus are unable or
unwilling to travel long distances or to be away from their job
responsibilities to attend training programs of the type necessary
as prerequisites for certification.
     As noted previously, bacteriological and chemical laboratory
support for the water supply program is provided by the Depart-
ment's Laboratory Section.   Facilities and procedures were eval-
uated at the central bacteriological  and chemical  laboratories
                           71

-------
and at two of the five branch bacteriological laboratories.  Com-
plete reports for the bacteriological laboratories are included
in Appendix C.  These reports conclude that the three bacteriolog-
ical laboratories generally met the provisions of Standard Methods.
A number of facility and operational recommendations were made.
Primary among these was the need to provide new quarters or
increased facilities in Idaho Falls.  The report notes the limited
facilities could influence the quality of work and reliability
of data.   On July 1, 1973, the Idaho Falls laboratory moved into
new quarters providing twice the space of the previous facility.
Additional equipment has also been purchased.
     A complete report for the chemical  laboratory is included in
Appendix D.   The report notes that in 1971 the laboratory anal-
yzed samples from only approximately 1/3 of the number of water
supplies  considered necessary for a minimal operation.  Adding to
the inadequacy of the chemical surveillance program was the fact
that the  laboratory routinely analyzed only 11 of the 25 sub-
stances included in the Drinking Water Standards.  The report
concludes that although the equipment is available for carrying
out analyses on all  but two of the parameters specified in the
Drinking  Water Standards,  more personnel are needed to carry out
the analyses of additional chemical parameters and the desired
increase  in  sampling.
                            72

-------
                     PUBLIC HEALTH RISK

     Since the middle of the nineteenth century, when Dr. John
Snow conducted ins classical study on the transmission of
cholera through a water supply, it has been generally recognized
that disease epidemics can, and do, result from consumption of
water containing pathogenic microorganisms.  Diseases most com-
monly associated with drinking water are cholera, typhoid fever,
dysentery, and infectious hepatitis.  Spread of these diseases
occurs most commonly when body wastes from an infected persons
are ingested.  While person-to-person contact is recognized as
the common method of transmission for low incidence levels
currently found in this country, the potential for catastrophic
epidemics transmitted by drinking water supplies which serve
thousands cf people remains.
     Human body wastes from an infected person, when present in
inadequately treated drinking water, have caused waterborne dis-
ease outbreaks in Idaho.  Three outbreaks involving public water
supplies have been reported during the past 15 years.  Fortu-
nately, none of the outbreaks resulted in a fatality.  The most
well documented case occurred in Wilder during April 1958.  In
this incidence approximately 200-250 persons became ill reportedly
suffering from vomiting, headache, fever, and diarrhea.  Surveys

-------
of the water system showed deficiencies which could have con-
tributed to contamination of the system.  Results of bacteriolog-
ical analyses confirmed the presence of Shigella organisms in the
system.  The suspected cause of the contamination was a jail  cell
above an underground water storage reservoir.  The jail cell  had
no toilet facilities and shigella organisms v.'ere isolated from
floor areas in the cell.
     An outbreak of infectious hepatitus occurred in Kamiah during
September 1958.  At least 50 cases were reported.  Sanitary sur-
veys of the system led health officials to list the probable cause
as contamination of the spring water supply by septic tank seepage
from areas above the spring.
     Numerous complaints of summer diarrhea were reported in
Rock!and during the late 1960's.  In June 1970, there were wide-
spread cases of diarrhea in Rockland and, following an epidernolo-
gical investigation, the cause was attributed to various viruses
and bacteria, including salmonella, in the water system.  Con-
tamination of the system was the combined result of deteriorated
distribution system piping, a high water table, seepage from
septic tanks, and low pressure in the system during the period
of constructing a new distribution system.
     Other illnesses occurring at Strike Dam and at Mack's Inn
are suspected to have been caused by drinking water supplies con-
taminated with sewage.  A study of gastroenteritis in the Mack's
Inn area in 1946 concluded that the source of infection developed
                            74

-------
primarily from contaminated water which acted as a reservoir
of the infection.  Although the native population was not affect-
ed, visitors to the area who used the water showed a high rate
of illness.
     While epidemological records generally do not show widespread
incidence of waterborne disease, this may reflect incomplete
reporting, inaccurate diagnosis and the fact that much enteric
illness is not treated by physicians, rather than an absence of
waterborne disease.  These circumstances have led some health
authorities to suggest that the actual incidence of diseases such
as gastroenteritis and infectious hepatitus may be as high as 100
times the number reported.
     After reviewing waterborne disease data over the last three
decades, Craun and McCabe (6) report that outbreaks are no longer
on the decline in the United States.  The consistent and dramatic
decrease in the number of waterborne outbreaks noted during the
period 1938-1955 has reversed and since the period 1951-55 a
slight increase has occurred.  It is not known if this represents
a real increase or is due to improved diagnosis and reporting.
The significance, however, is that there appears to be no decline.
The authors note that, if similar conditions continue to exist in
the future, the current average of one waterborne disease out-
break per month can be expected to continue.
                            75

-------
     In recent years, concern also has been directed to the
possible chronic diseases which may result from use of water con-
taining certain chemicals.  These potentially dangerous substances
include heavy metals, pesticides and toxic industrial products.
Few clinical cases of illness caused by the presence of toxic
chemicals in drinking water are recorded.  Lack of documentation
is not surprising as affected individuals may have unrecognized
symptoms and health agency statistics are limited usually to com-
municable diseases.  Heavy metals such as selenium, cadmium, lead,
zinc and arsenic occur naturally in the earth and can be present
in water sources.  Agricultural and industrial discharges contain
pesticides and chemicals which may be hazardous to human health.
Certainly, it is evident that every water supply serving the
public should have a complete chemical analysis performed
routinely.
     In essentially all  documented cases of waterborne illness,
definite deficiencies have existed in the water supply systems
during the period when the disease was transmitted.  Furthermore,
these deficiencies either were unrecognized because of inadequate
surveillance for public health hazards, or were recognized but
not remedied due to ineffective persuasion or enforcement by
health officials.  Deficiencies similar to those responsible for
epidemics definitely are present in the water supplies of Idaho
and were found during this study.  The requisites for repetition
                           76

-------
of the waterborne outbreaks of the past, namely the presence of
diseased individuals in the State and the inadequate surveillance
of public water supplies and inadequate enforcement of public
health standards,  exist in Idaho.  Greater vigilance by Idaho's
health officials and the water supply industry will be required
to minimize public health risk from drinking water.
                            77

-------
                        PROGRAM NEEDS

     Previous sections of this report present the findings of
water quality and water system facilities and their relation to
the current status of the public water supply program in  Idaho.
These findings clearly demonstrate that the water supply  program
is inadequate in the health evaluation and engineering services
necessary to provide the level of surveillance required to
assure low risk to the citizens of Idaho.
     There is a definite need to immediately strengthen all
aspects of the State's water supply program.  As Idaho's  perma-
nent population grows and as more recreational developments are
planned, the need for additional resources to insure safe and
wholesome drinking water for Idaho's citizens and visitors will
become more critical.  This section of the report presents nec-
essary improvements to provide  Idaho an adequate water supply
program.
                          AUTHORITY
     Idaho statutes require protection of all domestic water
supplies and provide the Department of Environmental and  Community
Services with broad regulatory powers to establish and enforce
standards, rules and regulations relating to public water supplies.
Section 39-103, Idaho Code as amended by the 1973 Idaho legislature

-------
now provides an adequate definition of water supplies to be pro-
tected under rules and regulations.  Particularly significant is
the expansion of the definition to include "...any other supply
which serves water to the public and which the Department of
Environmental Protection and Health declares to have potential
health significance."  This provides legislative authority for
protection of small recreation area water supplies and supplies
serving facilities at rest stops, service stations and restuarants
along Idaho's highways.  Including these installations in the
definition of supplies to be protected is the first step toward
providing adequate health protection to this class of previously
exempted supplies.  Other actions necessary for preventing public
health problems will be the establishment of a Department policy
outlining the specific type of supplies to be covered under the
option and the development of standards for design, operation and
surveillance of these special classes of supplies.  Specific
recommendations for development of standards and policy will  be
discussed later in the report.
      Idaho's voluntary water supply operator certification program
is inadequate and  should be phased into a mandatory program by
means of proper legislation.  This action will assist in assuring
that  public water  supplies are operated by qualified personnel.
To provide for orderly implementation and to prevent the imposition
of hardship on smaller communities, an implementation schedule
                            82

-------
 should be developed  based on water  system  complexity.  As  an
 example, water  systems designated Class  I,  or most  complex, should
 be  required to  employ on each  shift  at least one  certified opera-
 tor within 6 months  of passage of the legislation.   Similarly,
 Class II, III and  IV supplies  should be  required  to  employ at
 least one certified  operator within  12,  18  and 24 months respec-
 tively.  Regulations should be established  to require  by some
 later date minimum numbers of  certified  operators for  the  more
 complex systems.
     In view of the  considerable benefits of fluoridation, it is
 recommended that the Department of Environmental  and Community
 Services more actively promote and support  fluoridation of com-
 munity water supplies. Where the fluoridation of  an entire
 community water supply is not  feasible,  school water supply
 fluoridation should  be considered.  Proper  fluoridation tech-
 niques could be incorporated easily into the State operator cer-
 tification program.  As qualified operators are available  and as
 the Department's surveillance and monitoring activities improve,
 the program should culminate in enactment of legislation requiring
 fluoridation of community water supplies not containing dentally
 significant concentrations of natural fluorides.
     No provision is made in the Idaho Code to promote the coordi-
nated planning and development of new public water supply  systems
and the consolidation of the large number of small supplies
                           83

-------
existing in certain regions of the State.  This lack of authority
to promote proper planning has resulted in the proliferation of
small public water supply systems which tend to provide poorer
quality, less efficient and more costly service to customers.  It
is recommended, therefore, that legislation be enacted to assure
efficient and coordinated development of public water supply
systems.  Fewer systems also will assist in the orderly and effi-
cient administration of State surveillance programs for public
water systems.

                         REGULATIONS

     The most recent revision of the Idaho Drinking Water
Standards (3) was adopted in November 1964.  These regulations
need updating and strengthening to recognize the Department's
organizational changes, to require new and modified water quality
and monitoring criteria, and to reflect improved water treatment
and distribution practices.  The following specific recommenda-
tions are made for improvement of the regulations.
     1.   The introduction of the Idaho Drinking Hater Standards,
which provides quotations of the Idaho statutes upon which the
regulations are developed, should be expanded to include recent
legislative action impacting the water supply program.
     2.   References to the powers and duties of the Department,
as well  as instruction for implementing the regulations, should

                           84

-------
be updated to reflect recent organizational changes.
     3.  The regulations should define the types of waterworks
facilities which are considered public water supplies.  This
definition would go beyond that specified by the legislature
to define or categorize the supplies determined by the Department
to have potential health significance.  Included should be supp-
lies serving facilities such as campgrounds, motels, restaurants,
service stations, highway rest stops, etc.
     4.  Certain portions of the Idaho drinking water quality
standards and recommended analytical procedures need revision.
For example, the outlined procedures for bacteriological analyses
prescribe incubation temperatures and media which are no longer
valid.  In addition, the definition of a standard bacteriological
sample limits the procedure to use of the multiple - tube fermen-
tation test.  These portions of the regulations should be revised
to incorporate new analytical techniques and to permit increased
latitude in bacteriological analyses.  Idaho's drinking water
quality criteria should be updated to reflect new concerns for
the toxicity of chemical contaminants.  New standards should be
adopted for pesticides, mercury and organics.  Others may be
altered or deleted.  The U.S. Public Health Service Drinking Mater
Standards (1), upon which the existing Idaho water quality stand-
ards are based, are currently under revision.  It is recommended
that the Department revise the Idaho standards to provide

                            85

-------
regulations at least as stringent as the updated Federal  standards.
     5.   Special design and surveillance regulations should be
developed for small  public water supplies such as those serving
recreation facilities, motels and restaurants.
     6.   Special water quality criteria and surveillance regula-
tions should be developed for bottled water and water bottling
facilities.
     7.   The guidance provided by the current regulations for
determining the type of treatment required for a particular source
is vague.  It is recommended that standards be developed  specifying
the treatment required for various types of water sources, water-
shed characteristics and raw water quality.  As a minimum, all
public water supplies, regardless of source, should receive treat-
ment by disinfection.  All supplies utilizing surface water sources
should provide filtration in addition to disinfection unless field
survey and sampling data substantiate that all source protection
and water quality criteria can be met continuously.
     8.  Bacteriological and chemical sampling frequencies should
be updated to reflect expanding system sizes and increased public
health concern for chemical contaminants.  Specifically,  the table
or graph of bacteriological sampling requirements should  be
expanded to illustrate the minimum number of finished water samples
required from cities with larger populations.  Requirements should
also be established for minimum monthly raw water sampling from
                            86

-------
surface water supplies.  More detail should be  incorporated  into
the requirements describing the frequency and extent of  physical,
chemical and radiochemical sampling.  Consideration should be
given to specific requirements or policy based  on  source and
treatment.
     9.  The current  Idaho Drinking Water Standards state that
approval of a water supply is based in part upon enforcement of
rules and regulations, protection of water quality throughout the
entire system, proper operation by qualified operators,  adequate
capacity and pressure, satisfactory record of laboratory examina-
tions, submission of  treatment records, and submittal of plans
and specifications for approval prior to construction and exten-
sion of water supply  systems.  The intent of these requirements
is commendable.   Enforcement authority is lacking, however, as
there is no requirement that a public water supply must  be approv-
ed.  It is recommended, therefore, the regulations be revised to
eliminate this inadequacy and to strengthen each of the  essential
program requirements.  For example, each purveyor should be
required to keep records of operations and analyses as establish-
ed by the Department.  The more complex systems, as defined by
the classification system recommended in Item 3, should  be re-
quired to submit to the Department copies of the reports monthly.
 The systems also should be required to submit to the Department
annual  reports summarizing the system's operations, facility
                           87

-------
changes, etc. for the preceding year.  Regulations for submission
of plans and specifications should be strengthened to require
their submittal to and written approval from the Department prior
to the start of construction.
    10.   The current regulations covering cross-connection
control should be expanded.  It is recommended that regulations
be developed defining backflow; describing the types of backflow
devices acceptable to the Department; defining typical backflow
situations and proper protection for each; outlining required
minimum testing programs for devices: and defining the responsi-
bility of the purveyor, customer, health officer, and plumbing
authority in implementing the regulations.
     11.  Requirements should be incorporated in the drinking
water regulations to assure that provisions are made for proper
disposal of water treatment plant wastes such as sanitary, labor-
atory, clarification, softening, filter backwash and brines.
Reference may be made to waste treatment regulations for detailed
design and effluent requirements.

                           POLICY

     As the number of individuals in the central and regional
offices involved in water supply activities increases, it will
become essential  to institute a procedure whereby policy is
established and documented for reference.  The program will be
                           88

-------
beneficial  not only to the Department staff but also to consult-
ing engineers and others preparing plans for construction or
modification of v.'ater supply systems.  It is recommended, there-
fore, that a program be established to document present and future
water supply policy decisions and to prepare and distribute such
statements for inclusion in a water supply program policy manual.
Program policy statements should be made available to all water-
works industry groups routinely and to individuals upon request.

                         ACTIVITIES

Engineering Services
     Commitments in other environmental programs have caused the
water supply surveillance effort to deteriorate steadily until
in fiscal years 1971 and 1972 only one man-year was expended for
surveillance of the State's 274 public v/ater supplies.  Although
the resource allocation for water supply activities increased to
2.7 man-years by the end of FY 1973, the effort remains inadequate.
     Surveillance activities should be upgraded.  There is
obvious need for an inventory of all public water supplies in
Idaho.  Such an inventory has been initiated in conjunction with
the national water supply inventory being developed by the U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency.  There is evidence indicating
that the completed Idaho inventory will show a significant in-
crease in the number of known public water supplies for which
                            89

-------
the Department is responsible.  This inventory should be inte-
grated into the water supply program to permit continuous
updating.
     A comprehensive engineering inspection should be conducted
for each water supply at least once per year.   A written report
should be returned to each supply within a month of the survey
while the survey and findings are fresh in the minds of both the
regional engineer and the purveyor.  Supplies  which fluoridate or
have serious deficiencies should be surveyed more frequently.
     In addition to field inspections, a surveillance program
must include bacteriological and chemical  monitoring to assure
compliance of water quality with established standards.  Data
collected in the monitoring program are also beneficial in ascer-
taining trends in water quality and thus help  assess the adequacy
of present and future treatment needs.  Findings of this study
show Idaho's water supply monitoring program to be inadequate.
Both the bacteriological and chemical  sampling programs must be
improved.  Additional emphasis should be placed on assuring that
at least the minimum number of bacteriological samples is col-
lected monthly from each public water supply,  that bacteriological
laboratory results are systematically reviewed and recorded, and
that a resampling program for unsatisfactory samples is carried
out in accordance with the drinking water standards.  This
                           90

-------
program will  require improved coordination with the Laboratory
Section.
     The chemical sampling program for drinking water supplies
should be expanded to assure not only compliance with the minimum
sampling frequency but also inclusion of all constituents listed
in the drinking water standards.  It is recommended that chemical
samples be collected and analyzed from each system according to
the following schedule unless more frequent analyses are indicated
by the presence of excessive levels of harmful constituents:
     1.  Surface (river or lake) - at least once per year, and
     2.  Ground  (well or spring) - at least triennially.
New sources should be sampled more frequently than the above
schedule until a satisfactory data base is established.  If no
problems are evident sampling should then revert to the routine
schedule.  In addition, all public water supplies should be
analyzed triennially for radiochemical constituents contained in
the drinking water standards.
     Programs to prevent contamination of drinking water systems
from actual or potential backflow conditions have not been
actively pursued in Idaho.  It is recommended that a program be
established to encourage adoption of local cross-connection con-
trol ordinances and institution of viable surveillance programs
for elimination of backflow conditions.  The water supply program
should establish guidelines for local programs, maintain lists of
                            91

-------
acceptable backflow prevention devices, establish testing proce-
dures and frequencies for backflow devices, and develop spe-
cialized training programs for cross-connection surveillance and
for certification of backflow prevention device testers.
     A specialized fluoridation surveillance program should be
initiated.  The program should include routine surveillance and
technical assistance to supplies adjusting the fluoride content
of their water and closer surveillance of water supplies  with
naturally occurring high fluoride content.  Responsibility for
monitoring the fluoride check sampling activity should be
relocated from the dental health to the engineering surveillance
program.
     Bottled water sales have not been considered a significant
aspect of the Idaho drinking water surveillance program.   There
are no specific State standards regulating bottling practices or
the quality of bottled water.  Current evaluation procedures are
to judge bottling practices against State regulations for food
preparation establishments and bottled water quality against
drinking water standards criteria.  Little surveillance of either
bottlers or finished water quality has been provided.  It is
recommended that increased coordination be maintained between the
State water supply and food service programs to assure that
bottled water complies with the same health related constituent
limits and monitoring requirements which are applicable to drink-
ing water.
                           92

-------
     Operator  training  and  certification  activities  should  be
 expanded.   The State's  current  operator training  program  is  not
 reaching  the operators  who  most need  the  training.   Findings of
 the evaluation show  only  29%  of the operators  interviewed had
 received  training  through the short school  program.   Those  not
 receiving  short school  training were  found  to  operate the smaller
 size,  poorer quality systems.   It  is  recommended,  therefore, that
 a more flexible program be  established to meet the needs  and
 commuting  schedules  of  both full and  part-time operators.   It is
 also recommended that the Department  work closely with  the  State
 universities and community  colleges to establish  entry  level and
 upgrade operator training programs.
     Approximately 180  operators have been  certified  under  the
 current voluntary water supply  certification program.   These 180
 operators  represent  38  utilities or 14 percent of the total number
 of municipal water supplies in  the State.   It  is  recommended that
 the Department  continue the present voluntary  certification pro-
 gram at an  increased level of activity and work actively  for
 passage of  a mandatory  certification  program by the legislature.
     Successful  administration  of a water supply surveillance
 program requires the accumulation, processing, analyses and
 retrieval  of large quantities of information.  Data storage and
 retrieval  are currently accomplished manually.  The growing quan-
tity  of water quality data, engineering inspection report

                            93

-------
information, inventory data, and monthly operating report records
expected as the water supply program effort increases will require
reorganization of this activity under a computerized system and
the services of a system analyst.  It is recommended that the
water supply program utilize the existing State's computer capa-
bility on a time sharing plan with other State programs.
     The primary need of the engineering services portion of the
water supply program is sufficient numbers of thoroughly trained,
strategically located personnel to fulfill its responsibilities.
Staffing needs will  require personnel to carry out standards revi-
sion, planning, surveillance, training, and technical assistance
activities of the program plus secretarial support.  Environmental
Protection Agency experience in working with State water supply
programs has been used to develop estimated personnel needs and
program costs for an effective water supply program in Idaho.
Assumptions used and calculations made are included in Appendix E.
In summary, it is recommended that the total manpower allocations
for engineering services be 6 man-years of professional staff and
2 man-years of secretarial  support.  Direct program cost for these
services is estimated at $128,000 annually.  Management and over-
head costs for engineering add approximately $26,000 to the
overall surveillance program operations cost.

Laboratory Support-Bacteriological
     A strong bacteriological surveillance effort is an essential
                            94

-------
part of a State water supply program.  Bacteriological monitoring
is considered to be an operational procedure to be performed at
the expense of the water supply purveyor.  The State is respon-
sible for performing a minimum number of analyses to assure that
the analyses performed by the purveyor are properly performed.
It is recommended that the State of  Idaho establish a self-sup-
porting bacteriological surveillance program.  Water supply
purveyors should be encouraged to develop their own bacteriolog-
ical monitoring capability or should be charged to cover the cost
of analyses at State laboratories.  The State should establish a
program to examine monthly from each system either five percent
of the minimum number of distribution system samples required by
drinking water standards or two samples, whichever is greater.
Cost of this check sampling program  should be borne by the State.
     The State should also perform periodic surveys of all
laboratories utilized by purveyors of public drinking water.
This surveillance should be provided at least triennially.
     It is estimated that the cost of both the check sampling
program and the laboratory surveillance activity would be $36,000
per year.  Management and overhead will add approximately 20
percent to the overall program cost.  Assumptions and calculations
upon which the above figures are based are presented in Appendix E.

Laboratory Support-Chemical
     The performance of chemical analyses for operational control
                           95

-------
and special analyses for contaminants known to be present at
levels approaching established drinking water standards are
considered to be the responsibility of the water supply purveyor.
The State should be responsible for sufficient sampling and
analyses to ensure that water of satisfactory chemical quality
is delivered to consumers served by public water supply systems.
     It is recommended that the State chemical laboratory anal-
yze all drinking water standards constituents in accordance with
the sampling frequency previously recommended for ground and
surface water supplies.  This will  require considerable increase
in the number of constituents routinely analyzed, additional
professional and technician personnel, and additional space and
equipment.
     The State should also perform periodic surveys of all lab-
oratories utilized by purveyors of public drinking water.  It is
estimated that there will be few laboratories in the State
equipped or staffed to analyze all  drinking water standards con-
stituents.  Therefore, the cost for the chemical quality control
program will not be great.  The smaller water utility laboratories
equipped for physical and chemical  analyses for operational con-
trol  should be evaluated by State agency personnel during the
routine annual sanitary survey of the utility.
     It is estimated that the cost of both the laboratory surveil-
lance and chemical sampling programs would be $35,000 per year.

                            96

-------
Management and overhead will add an additional 20 percent to the
overall program cost.  Assumptions and calculations upon which
the above figures are based are presented in Appendix E.

District Health Departments
     Experience has  shown that strong local health agencies can be
instrumental in improving private, small public, and recreational
water  supply systems within their area of jurisdiction.  Since
they have a smaller  area to cover, the local staff can  provide
surveillance and technical  assistance more  readily than the State.
There  are seven such Health Districts in Idaho.  It is  recommended
that the State develop a memorandum of agreement with each of the
Health Districts for surveillance of and technical assistance to
these  type water supplies in  Idaho.  The agreements should be
tailored to the manpower and  water supply experience capabilities
of each individual Health District.  They should identify the size
and class of systems for which the Health District will be respon-
sible  and specify that Health District regulations and  policy be
at least as stringent as those adopted by the  State.
     In addition to  their responsibilities  for surveillance of
the smaller water supplies, the Health Districts could  improve
the overall water supply program  by:
     1.   Assisting  in developing and maintaining  an up-to-date
inventory of all public water suppies,
                            97

-------
     2.   Assisting with bacteriological and chemical sampling
programs,
     3.   Assisting with enforcement of well construction
standards,
     4.   Assisting in special studies, and
     5.   Providing immediate follow-up assistance on water
supply problems.
     It is recognized that a certain amount of technical assistance
will be required from the State's water supply program staff to
support the Health Districts.  In fact, the Health District's may
desire to turn responsibility for surveillance of some of the more
complex small  water supply systems back to the State.  Overall,
however, proper utilization of the Health Districts will greatly
broaden the public health protection provided for water supplies
in Idaho.
                           98

-------
                              REFERENCES
1.    Public Health Service Drinking Water Standards, 1962 ed.
     USPHS Pub.  No.  956, U.S.  Government Printing Office,
     Washington, D.C.,  1969.

2.    Standard Methods  for the Examination of Water and Wastewater, 31th ed.
     American Public Health Association, New York, New York, 1971.

3.    Idaho Drinking  Water Standards.   State of Idaho, Boise, 1964.

4.    Manual for Evaluating Public Drinking Water Supplies.
     U.S.  Environmental  Protection Agency, U.S.  Government  Printing Office,
     Washington, D.C.,  1971.

5.    Community Water Supply Study - Analyses of National  Survey Findings.
     U.S.  Public Health  Service, Bureau of Water Hygiene, July, 1970.

6.    Craun, G.F. and McCabe,  L.J. - Review of the Causes  of Waterborne-
     Disease Outbreaks.  Journal  AWWA 65:1:74 (Jan. 1973).
                                101

-------
                             PARTICIPANTS


     The following persons and/or agencies made major contribution to
the successful  completion of this study.

Study Director

     William A. Mullen, Chief, Water Supply Unit
          Air & Water Programs Division, EPA, Region X, Seattle

Study Advisor

     Francis L. Nelson, Chief, Technical Support Branch
          Surveillance and Analysis Division, EPA, Region X, Seattle

Field Evaluation

     Howard L.  Burkherdt, Regional Environmental Engineer,
          Idaho Department of Environmental Protection & Health, Pocatello —'

     Thomas N.  Hushower, Chief, Special Studies Section
          Water Supply Division, EPA, Washington, D.C.

     Earl F. McFarren, Supervisory Chemist, Standards Attainment Branch
          Water Supply Research Laboratory, NERC, EPA, Cincinnati

     William A. Mullen, Chief, Water Supply Unit
          Air & Water Programs Division, EPA, Region X, Seattle

     Harry D. Nash, Microbiologist, Standards Attainment Branch
          Water Supply Research Laboratory, NERC, EPA, Cincinnati

     Francis L. Nelson, Chief, Technical Support Branch
          Surveillance and Analyses Division, EPA, Region X, Seattle

     Jeffrey T. Pearlman, Dental Technician, Dental  Health Section
          Idaho Department of Environmental Protection & Health, Boise I/

     James E. Warren, Staff Engineer, Surveillance and Technical Assistance
          Section
          Water Supply Division, EPA, Washington, D.C.

     Arthur W.  Van't Hul, Regional Environmental Engineer
          Idaho Department of Environmental Protection & Health, Lewiston I/

     Jerry L. Yoder, Regional Environmental Engineer
          Idaho Department of Environmental Protection & Health, Boise —'

                                105

-------
Laboratory Support
     Fluoride Laboratory,  Uater Supply Division,  EPA,  Washington, D.C.
     Cincinnati  Water Hygiene Laboratory,  EPA,  Cincinnati,  Ohio —'
     Gulf Coast  Water Hygiene Laboratory,  EPA,  Mobile, Alabama I/
     Northeast Water Hygiene Laboratory,  EPA,  Narragansett, Rhode Island
     Northwest Water Hygiene Laboratory,  EPA,  Giq Harbor, Washington 3/
     Southwest Radiological  Health Laboratory,  EPA,  Las Vegas, Nevada I/
     Idaho Department of Environmental Protection &  Health  Laboratory,
       Boise I/
     Idaho Health District Laboratory, Coeur d'Alene
     Idaho Health District Laboratory, Idaho Falls
     Idaho Health District Laboratory, Lewiston
     Idaho Health District Laboratory, Pocatello
     Idaho Health District Laboratory, Twin Falls
Data Processing  -Water Supply Division, Data Processing Unit, Cincinnati
     Grace D. Bardo, Statistical  Clerk
     Arthur F. Hammonds, Computer Systems  Analyst
     George C. Kent, Chief,  Water Quality  Register Branch
     Richard L.  Manning, Computer Systems  Analyst
                                106

-------
Report Preparation

     Karen M. Ihrig, Principal Typist

     William A.  Mullen, Chief, Water Supply Unit

     Francis L.  Nelson, Chief, Technical Support Branch
]_/  Agency subsequently renamed Idaho Department of Environmental  and
      Community Services.

2J  Laboratory subsequently renamed Water Supply Research Laboratory,
      National Environmental Research Center-Cincinnati.

3/  Laboratory subsequently consolidated with Water Supply  Research
      Laboratory, NERC-Cincinnati.

4/  Laboratory subsequently renamed National Environmental  Research
      Center-Las Vegas.
                                 107

-------
                      ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

     The assistance and cooperation of Mr. Vaughn Anderson,
Director of Categorical Programs, Environmental Protection
Division, Idaho Department of Environmental and Community
Services, is greatly appreciated.  Mr. Anderson and his office
staff gave freely of their time and contributed valuable back-
ground information during the formative stages of the study.
The effort expended by the Regional Engineers in scheduling
the field surveys and accompanying the survey officers is
greatfully acknowledged.  Dr. Darrell Brock, Director,
Laboratory Section, Office of Program Support, Idaho
Department of Environmental and Community Services, and the
staff members of the State laboratories providing bacter-
iological and chemical  analyses made significant contribu-
tions.  A special  thank you is also given to all the residents,
waterworks personnel and utility officials who provided
information and generously cooperated in the study.
                          Ill

-------
      APPENDIX A






    SUMMARY TABLES






WATER SUPPLIES STUDIED

-------
         APPENDIX A
           TABLE I
PUBLIC WATER SYSTEMS STUDIED
CTl
SYSTEM
NUMBER
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
NAME OF
SYSTEM
Boise Water Corporation
Lewiston
Grangeville
St. Anthony
St. Maries
Aberdeen
Arco
Council
Potlatch
Ri ri e
Horseshoe Bend
Hagerman
Franklin
Lapwai
POPULATION
SERVED
75,000
12,600
3,636
2,877
2,571
1,542
1,244
899
871
575
511
436
400
400
AVERAGE DAILY
DEMAND (MGD)
16.00
3.80
0.55
0.80
Unknown
Unknown
Unknown
Unknown
0.07
Unknown
Unknown
Unknown
Unknown
Unknown
SOURCE
38-Wells
Clearwater R.
3- We 11s
4-Wells
2 Springs
4-Wel 1 s
(1 Standby)
Rochat Creek
St. Joseph River
3-Wells
4-Wells
3-Sprinqs
2- Wells"
4-Wells
(2 Standby)
2-Wells
4-Wells
Spring
6-Springs
2-Wells
TREATMENT!/
PD
CSFDLAF1
D
None
D
(Standby)
None
None
DF1
None
None
None
D
None
hi

-------
                                         TABLE I (Cont'd)
NO.
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
NAME OF
SYSTEM
Hazel ton
Firth
Arimo
Rock! and
Moyie Springs
Athol
Midvale
East Hope
Castleford
Stanley Pond Water Assn.
Murphy
Hope
Hollister
Eugene Outlook
POPULATION
SERVED
396
362
252
209
203
190
176
175
174
100
75
63
57
40
AVERAGE DAILY
DEMAND (MGD)
Unknown
Unknown
Unknown
0.046
0.04
Unknown
Unknown
0.02
Unknown
Unknown
Unknown
Unknown
Unknown
Unknown
SOURCE
2-Wells
2-Wells
Springs & Well
2-Wells
Springs
Well
(1 Standby)
2-Wells
Creek
Well
Well
2-Wells
Spri ng
2-Wells
Well
TREATMENT I/
D
None
None
D
Some D
None
None
FD
D
None
None
None
None
None
Water Association

]_/  A - Aeration
    C - Coagulation
    S - Sedimentation
    F - Filtration
    D - Disinfection
L - Lime
LA~ Soda Ash
Fl- Fluoridation
P - Phosphates

-------
             APPENDIX A
              TABLE II
WATER QUALITY - PUBLIC WATER SYSTEMS
SYSTEM
NUMBER
BACT
ERIOLOGICAL STANDARDS
NOT MET
DURING SURVEY I/

1






2
3
4
5
6

7
8
9
10
11
12
Number
Samples
12






4
3
2
2
3

2
2
2
1
2
3
Density
>4/ 100ml
0






0
0
0
0
0

0
0
0
0
0
0
DURING YEAR 2/
Average
Density
0.0






0.0
0.7
0.0
0.0
0.0

0.0
0.0
1.1
0.0
0.0
0.0
Months
0-12






0-12
0-12
0-10
0-8
0-5

0-10
2-8
1-7
1-6
0-5
2-5
CHEMICAL STANDARDS NOT MET 3/
RECOMMENDED
Plant
Fe (0.77 & 0.55
& 1.80)
Mn (0.054 & 0.79
& 0.053 & 0.13 &
0.36 & 0.055 &
0.098 & 0.13)
Color (30)
0
Fe (1.40 & 0.65)
0
0
Fe (2.2 & 4.1)
Mn (0.07)
0
0
0
0
0
0
Dist. Sys.
0






0
0
0
0
0

0
0
0
0
0
0
MANDATORY
Plant
0






0
0
0
0
0

0
0
0
0
0
0
Dist. Sys.
0






0
0
0
0
0

0
0
0
0
0
0

-------
APPENDIX A - TABLE II (COM'T)
SYSTEM
NUMBER
BACTERIOLOGICAL STANDARDS
NOT MET
DURING SURVEY I/

13
14
15

16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23

24
25
26
27
28
Number
Samples
2
2
2

1
2
2
2
2
2
2
2

1
2
2
3
1
Density
>4/ 100ml
1
0
2

0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0

0
0
2
1
0
DURING
Average
Density
4.6
0.0
12.6

0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0

0.0
0.0
14.0
3.0
0.0
YEAR 2/
Months
No Samples
0-8
2-11

0-11
0-3
0-7
1-10
0-12
0.4
0-12
0-11

0-12
No Samples
6-6
1-4
0-12
CHEMICAL STANDARDS NOT MET 3_/
RECOMMENDED
Plant
0
0
As (.012)47
Mn (.063)
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
As (.02)47
TDS (662.0)47
0
0
0
0
0
Dist. Sys.
0
0
0

0
Zn (18.3)
0
0
0
0
0
0

0
0
0
F (2.2)57
0
MANDATORY
Plant
0
0
Se (.017)47

0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0

0
0
0
0
0
Dist. Sys.
0
0
0

0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0

0
0
0
0
0

-------
                                                                                                             ro
                                                                                                             o
                                                  Footnotes
iy  Distribution Samples Only
2J  State Health Dept. Monthly Summary Data - may contain treated water from  source as well  as distribution
    samples.
ZJ  Only chemical constituents failing to meet the Drinking Water Standards are shown.
    Color expressed in standard units, all others in mg/1.
4/  Constituent not measured in distribution system.
5/  Constituent not measured at source.

-------
                                                                        121
                              APPENDIX A

                              TABLE III

                   WATER SUPPLY FACILITIES APPRAISAL
SYSTEM
NUMBER
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
SOURCE
A
I
I
A
I
A
I
I
A
A
I
A
I
A
I
I
A
A
I
A
I
I
A
A
I
I
A
TREATMENT
A
A
A
N/A
A
N/A
N/A
I
N/A
N/A
N/A
A
N/A
N/A
I
N/A
I
A
I
N/A
A
A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
DISTRIBUTION
A
I
I
I
I
A
A
I
I
I
A
A
A
A
I
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
I
I
I
I
QUALITY
CONTROL
I
A
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
RISK
FACTOR
3
2
4
3
5
2
5
8
3
4
5
2
7
2
6
3
4
2
6
2
3
4
1
3
8
7
3
Percent    50%
Inadequate
33%
39%
96%  Avg. = 3.9
Key:  A - Adequate
      I - Inadequate
    N/A - Not Applicable
]_/  Weighted numerical rating assigned by survey engineer.
    1 equals least public health risk and 10 equals high p
    risk.
                                     A rating of
                                  public health

-------
          APPENDIX A
           TABLE IV
PUBLIC WATER SUPPLY SURVEILLANCE
ro
IX)
SYSTEM
NUMBER
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
BACTERIOLOGICAL LABS
TYPE

SHD I/
SHD
SHD
SHD
SHD
SHD
SHD
SHD
SHD
SHD
SHD
SHD
SHD
SHD
SHD
SHD
CERTIFIED

SHD-EPA !/
SHD
SHD
SHD
SHD
SHD
SHD
SHD-EPA
SHD
SHD
SHD-EPA
SHD-EPA
SHD
SHD
SHD
SHD
BACTERIOLOGICAL SAMPLES
REQUIRED
Per Month
I/
90
18
4
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
NUMBER
Avg.2_/
100
25
2
2
1
1
2
1
1
1
1
1
0
1
2
2
EXAMINED
Range/Month
80-150
18-28
2
0-2
0-2
0-2
0-4
0-4
0-2
0-2
0-4
0-2
0
0-2
0-2
0-4
MONTHS
WITHOUT
SAMPLES
0
0
0
2
4
7
2
4
5
6
7
7
12
4
1
1
YEARS
SHD SURVEY

1
1
4
7
4
1
8
11
2
5
6
16
12
1
2
5
SINCE LAST
CHEMICAL ANAL.

1
2
4
7
4
1
10
14
3
7
none
10
16
1
1
25

-------
                                               APPENDIX A - TABLE IV
                                     PUBLIC WATER SUPPLY SURVEILLANCE (CON'T.)
SYSTEM
NUMBER
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28

I/ Minimum
BACTERIOLOGICAL LABS
TYPE

SHD
SHD
SHD
SHD
SHD
SHD
SHD
SHD
SHD
SHD
SHD
SHD

number of
CERTIFIED

SHD
SHD
SHD
SHD
SHD-EPA
SHD
SHD
SHD-EPA
SHD-EPA
SHD
SHD
SHD-EPA

samples requi
BACTERIOLOGICAL SAMPLES
REQUIRED
Per Month
I/
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2

red to meet
NUMBER
Avg.2/
1
1
2
2
1
2
2
2
0
2
1
2
No
Drinking
EXAMINED
Range/Month
0-2
0-6
0-4
2
0-2
2
0-4
2
0
0-4
0-2
2
. Deficient 5/
MONTHS
WITHOUT
SAMPLES

9
5
2
0
8
0
1
0
12
6
8
0
= 19
YEARS
SHD SURVEY

17
7
14
11
1
2
10
8
17
14
13
1
No.>l = 22
SINCE LAST
CHEMICAL ANAL

19
11
14
11
1

17
4
17
14
13
1
No.>3 = 20
Water Standards.
2/  Average number examined/month during the 12 month period proceeding the study rounded to the nearest whole  number.
3/  SHD - State Health Department
4/  EPA - Environmental Protection Agency
5/  Number failing to collect sufficient bacteriological samples two or more months during  12 month  period.

-------
            APPENDIX B






ADEQUACY OF THE WATER FLUORIDATION



  '    CONTROL PROGRAM IN IDAHO

-------
  Adequacy of the Water Fluoridation
       Control Program in Idaho
An Evaluation of the Water Fluoridation
  Installations in the State of Idaho
                          Thomas N. Hushower, P.E.
                          Chief, Special Studies Section
                          Office of Water Programs Operations
                          Environmental Protection Agency

-------
                                                                         129




                IDAHO WATER SUPPLY PROGRAM EVALUATION




    ADEQUACY OF THE WATER FLUORIDATION CONTROL PROGRAM IN IDAHO









Introduction




The Idaho State Board of Health by a  Resolution on Fluoridation, approved




August 6, 1966, "recommends and encourages the adoption of controlled




fluoridation in communities with public water supplies" as an important




public health measure for the prevention of tooth decay.  Section 37-2102




of the Idaho Code requires that the standards for chemical (including




fluorides) and bacterial purity of the public water supplies in Idaho




shall be consistent with the Drinking Water Standards of the U.S. Public




Health Service.  Construction and design standards for fluoridation




installations in the State and operating and control procedures for the




facilities are outlined in Part XII - Fluoridation of Public Water Supplies,




of the Idaho Drinking Water Standards.  Responsibility for the approval




and surveillance of the fluoridation installations rests with the Environ-




mental Improvement Division of the Department of Health.  There is no




State law requiring the fluoridation of public water supplies, however,




legislation  (HR #515) has recently been introduced to amend the State




Code to provide for the fluoridation of all water supply systems serving




more than one hundred (100) residences.









On October 1, 1971, fourteen public water supply systems were reported by




the Department of Health to be fluoridating out of a total of 280 public




water supplies in the State. _!/  Field visits to the fourteen supplies,









I/  Water supply systems serving populations of twenty-five or more.

-------
130




       however, revealed only eight fluoridation installations were in




       operation.  The fluoridation practices at six water supply systems




       at the time of the survey had been discontinued for various reasons.




       Figure 1, Fluoridation Water Supply Systems in Idaho, locates the




       fourteen reported fluoridated water supplies in the State and




       Table I summarizes pertinent information on each supply.  Thirty-




       four communities were using one or more water sources containing




       natural fluorides of 0.7 mg/1 or higher; and, seven communities




       (Buhl, Bruneau, Filer, Grand View, Hollister, Newdale and Teton) were




       using one or more water sources containing natural fluorides of greater




       than 2.0 mg/1 fluoride.  2J









       Evaluation Procedures




       To evaluate the adequacy of the Idaho water fluoridation control program,




       the eight fluoridated public water supply systems in the State operating




       under the approval of the Department of Health were examined with respect




       to: fluoride content in the distribution system;  analytical control of




       the fluoride level;  fluoride feed equipment and facilities; fluoride




       compound-storage and handling;  operator training  and interest;  and,




       surveillance.   A field inspection visit was conducted at each of the




       eight fluoridated water systems in operation, survey forms were completed _3/




       and water samples for fluoride  ion analysis were  collected.   Officials




       in charge of the installations  were given advance notice of the visit.









       2J  1968 Compilation of Chemical Analysis of Public Water Supplies in the




           State of Idaho,  Idaho State Department of Health.




       _3/  A copy  of  the questionnaire used in the Idaho Fluoridation  Survey is




           appended.

-------
  IDAHO WATER SUPPLY PROGRAM EVALUATION
                Figure 1
FLUORIDATED WATER SUPPLY SYSTEMS IN IDAHO
  1-Bonners Ferry
  2-Council
  3-Jerome
  4-Lapwai
  5-Lewiston
  6-McCall
  7-Meridian
 8-Montpelier
 9-Mountain Home
10-Orifino
11-Preston
12-Salmon
13-Sandpoint
14-Shoshone

-------
                                          Idaho Water Supply Program Evaluation
                                                         TABLE I
                                        FLUORIDATED WATER SUPPLY SYSTEMS IN IDAHO
Water Supply
System
Bonners Ferry

Council
Jerome

Lapwai
Lewistonr./

McCall
Meridian
Well //2
Well //3
Well #5
Well #6
Montpelier

Mountain Home
Orif ino
Preston
Salmon

Sandpoint

Shoshone
Fluoride Compound
Location
(County)
Boundary

Adams
Jerome

Nez Perce
Nez Perce

Valley
da




Bear Lake

Elmore
Clearwater
Franklin
Lemhi

Bonner

Lincoln
Date of
Fldn.
8/52

1/54
7/58

6/71
6/47

1/52
12/54




7/53

11/57
4/54
1/52
9/52

4/52

7/55
Population
Served
2

1
4


12

2
2




2

7
3
3
2

4

1
,500

,000
,200

400
,000

,000
,500




,640

,000
,800
,500
,940

,500

,300
: Analysis Method:
VS - Sodium Silicof luoride
VT - Sodium Fluoride
S —
SS -
SPADNS

Scott-Sanchis
Source of Av
Supply
Myrtle Creek &
Kootenai R.
2 -Wells & 3 Sprs.
2 -Wells

2 Wells
Clearwater R. &
1 Well
Payette Lake
4-Wells




13- Springs &
3-Wells
8-Wells
Clearwater R.
Berquist Spr .
Jesse Creek &
Pollard Creek
Sand Creek
Pend Oreille Lake
2-Wells
g. Flow Fluoride
(MGD)l/ Compound
0.50
2.00
0.52
0.40
1.20
0.33
4.20

1.08
1.17




1.73

2.50
0.53
1.20
4.75

1.70
3.60
0.50
Type of
V-l Volumetric
V-2 Volumetric
- W&T
- W&T
W
S

W
s
4_/








A/




A/

w
s

Feeder
A-378
A-635
VS

VT
VS

VT
VS

VS
VT




VS

VS
VS
VS
VS

VS

VS

Roll
Screw
Type of
Feeder
V-l

P-l
VE-1

PS-1
V-l

V-2

P-2
P-2
P-2
P-2
VE-1

5/
V-4
VE-1
V-l

V-3

VE-1

Type
Type
Analysis
Method
SS

3/
SS

S
SS

3/
SS




S

SS
SS
3/
S

S

I/



Test
Equip.
T-l

I/
T-l

T-3
T-2

3/
T-l




T-3

T-l
T-2
3/
T-3

T-3

I/



Test Equipment:
T-l Color Comparator  - Hellige Aqua Tester
T-2 Nessler Tubes,  100 ml
T-3 Photometer - Hach DR-A
I/  W - Winter;   S -  Summer
"2Y Two Water Systems  - Lewis ton Orchards' System is not Fluoridated
3Y No Fluoride Analysis Conducted by Operator
4/ Plant Capacity - No Flow Records Kept by Operator
~5J Fluoridation Discontinued April 1971 - Equipment Dismantled
 V-3 Volumetric - W&T A-690 Screw Type
 V-4 Volumetric - BIF 50-A Rotating Disk
VE-1 Volumetric -  W&T A-378 Roll Type; Eductor
 P-l Piston Pump - W&T M-902
 P-2 DiEpluam Pump - W&T A-747 Metering Pump
PS-1 Diaphram Pump - W&T A-745 Metering Pump; W&T Saturator

-------
                                                                          133
The actual level of fluoride ion in the distribution system is the single




most important factor in evaluating the adequacy of a community water




fluoridation effort and hence in evaluation of the state program responsible




for approval and surveillance of the installation.  However, as distribution




system samples collected on one particular day may not give a true picture




of day-to-day operating conditions at the facilities, the installations




were further evaluated with respect to the following:




     I.  Analytical Control of the Fluoride Level




         A.  Were the fluoride ion analyses conducted at the water




             plant accurate within +0.1 mg/1 of the value determined




             by the EPA Water Supply Programs Division?




         B.  Were finished water samples analyzed daily or more




             frequently for fluoride ion content?




         C.  Were raw water samples analyzed regularly for fluoride




             ion content?




         D.  Were laboratory equipment and facilities at the water




             plant adequate to conduct fluoride ion analysis according




             to one of three standard methods?




         E.  Was laboratory equipment clean and given responsible care?




         F.  Were complete records kept of the fluoridation operation?




    II.  Fluoride Feed Equipment and Facilities




         A.  Were the fluoride feed equipment and facilities adequate




             to control the fluoride ion level in the finished water?

-------
134
                B.  Was positive protection provided against overfeeding?




                    Was equipment location and point of fluoride chemical




                    application at the best practical site?  Was backflow




                    protection provided?  Was the feed equipment site




                    uncluttered?




                C.  Was the fluoride chemical feed installation operated




                    continously for the past twelve months without an




                    interruption of more than one day?




                D.  Were the fluoride chemical feed equipment and facilities




                    maintained satisfactorily?




          III.  Fluoride Compound - Storage and Handling




                A.  Was the fluoride chemical compound stored in a safe,




                    protected and orderly manner?




                B.  Was safety equipment available and were safe procedures




                    followed in handling the fluoride chemical compound?




                C.  Were fluoride chemical shipping containers disposed of




                    satisfactorily or re-used only for fluoride chemical storage?




           IV.  Operator Training and Interest




                A.  Was the treatment plant operator well-trained to operate




                    the fluoride chemical feed equipment and facilities?




                B.  Was the individual conducting the fluoride ion analyses




                    knowledgeable of his test equipment and standard procedures




                    for analysis?




                C.  Was the water plant official interviewed in favor of




                    fluoridation and was he interested in adding fluorides




                    to public water supply systems?

-------
                                                                           135
      V.   Surveillance




          A.   Were check samples for fluoride ion analysis submitted to




              the State as required?




          B.   Had the water fluoridation installation surveyed been




              inspected in the past  twelve months by a representative




              of  the  State water supply program surveillance agency?









 Summary  of  Findings




 Data  collected on the water supply  systems fluoridating in the State of




 Idaho indicated  only two (25 percent)  of the eight  installations fluoridat-




 ing at the  time  of the survey evidenced a fluoride  ion content in the




 distribution  system  within a range  of  0.8 - 1.3 mg/1.  4/   Five (63 percent)




 of the eight  installations were underfeeding,  i.e., the fluoride ion levels




 in the samples collected from the distribution systems were less than 0.8




 mg/1,  and two installations (25 percent) were  overfeeding.   Water samples




 collected from one system (Preston)  were both  above and below the recommended




 fluoride  ion  level.   Table II,  Analysis Of Samples  From Fluoridated Water




 Supply Systems,  tabulates the fluoride ion analysis results of the water




 samples  collected at each facility  surveyed,5_/









 The operating conditions observed at the eight fluoridation installations




 inspected during  the time of  the survey are summarized as   follows:









 kj 1962 Drinking  Water  Standards for an annual average maximum daily air




   temperature of  63.1°F (Boise, Idaho  30-yr.  Avg.  1931-60).




_5_/ Water samples  were  analyzed  for  fluoride ion  content by  the Water Supply




   Division,  Environmental Protection  Agency,  Washington, D.  C.  using the




   Electrode  Method.

-------
                                 Idaho Water Supply Program  Evaluation

                                              TABLE  II
                      ANALYSIS  OF  SAMPLES FROM FLUORIDATED  WATER  SUPPLY  SYSTEMS
CO
en
Water Supply System
Bonners Ferry
Council
Jerome -./
Well #1
Well #2
Lapwai _£./
Lewiston
McCall A/
Meridian
Well #2
Well #3
Well #5
Well #6
Montpelier
Mountain Home —
Or if ino
Preston
Salmon I/
Sandpoint
Shoshone — '
Date of
Sample
12/1
11/29
10/20



11/30
11/29
10/19




10/21

11/30
10/21
10/22
12/2
10/20
Raw
Water
0.05
0.23

0.46
0.47

0.15
0.06

0.17
0.16
0.14
0.30
0.15

0.13
0.04
0.05
0.04
0.20
Check Samples
(Operator) (EPA)
1.1
I/




1.1
I/

1.2
0.8
1.0
1.6
0.62

0.3
I/

1.23
!/
1.25





0.95


1.00
0.79
1.13
0.39
0.13

0.15
0.76

1.17

(Fluoride, mg/1)
Distribution System
1.35
0.28




1.00
0.04
0.87




1.25

0.16
0.17

1.17

1.35
0.45




1.10
0.04
0.60




0.69

0.66
1.70

1.17

_!/  No fluoride analysis conducted by operator.
_2/  Fluoridation discontinued Oct. 16, 1971 - Chlorinator repairs required
3/  Fluoridation discontinued approx. June 25, 1971,  (2 wks after start up) - Well pump failure  &  indifference.
4/  Fluoridation discontinued approx. Nov. 15, 1971 - Equipment repairs required.
_5/  Fluoridation discontinued April 1971 - Equipment dismantled
_6/  Fluoridation discontinued April 14, 1971 - Equipment repairs required and indifference
]_/  Fluoridation discontinued Sept. 11, 1971 - Chlorinator repairs required.

-------
                                                                     137
I.   Analytical Control of the Fluoride Level




    Practices to analytically test and control the fluoride




    ion level in the water distribution systems varied con-




    siderably.  Only three (50 percent) of the plant operators




    conducting fluoride ion analysis were within jf 0.1 mg/1 of the




    sample results analyzed by the EPA, Water Supply




    Division.  The operators at two of the eight installations




    surveyed (Council and Preston) were not conducting fluoride




    ion analysis and had no test equipment or facilities to




    analyze water samples for fluoride ion content.   The




    operators of the two facilities reported sending one sample




    per month to the State Lab for analysis; however, State




    Health Department records for 1970 showed only three samples




    from one system and eleven from the other were received




    during the year for fluoride ion analysis.









    Standard Methods or modified versions of the three Standard




    Methods were used by each operator conducting fluoride ion




    analysis; however, daily finished water fluoride ion analysis




    was conducted at only three (38 percent) of the  eight installa-




    tions and no operator was analyzing raw water for fluoride




    ion content on a regular basis.  Adequate analytical equipment




    and facilities were available at four (50 percent) of the




    installations visited and care for laboratory equipment was




    judged satisfactory at only three (50 percent) of the plants

-------
138
               where fluoride ion analysis was conducted.  Records of the




               fluoridation operation were acceptable at three  (38 percent)




               of the facilities surveyed.









          II.  Fluoride Feed Equipment and Facilities




               Fluoride chemical feed equipment and facilities were found




               deficient at four (50 percent) of the eight installations




               surveyed and only five (63 percent) of the feeding arrange-




               ments were acceptable, i.e. protected against overfeeding,




               preferred point of chemical application, protected against




               backflow, and good housekeeping in the feeder area.  One




                (13 percent)  of the operators reported one or more interrup-




               tions in fluoridation of one or more days duration in the




               past twelve months.  Maintenance was judged satisfactory at




               only four  (50 percent) of the facilities surveyed even




               though the plant operators had been alerted to the inspection




               visit.









          III.  Fluoride Compound - Storage and Handling




               Storage arrangements for the fluoride chemical compound fed




               were unsatisfactory at four  (50 percent) of the  eight installa-




               tions surveyed.  Six (75 percent) of the operators interviewed




               did not have available or were not using safety  equipment  in




               handling the fluoride chemical compounds.  All the operators




               reported satisfactory disposal practices for  the empty fluoride

-------
                                                                      139
    chemical shipping containers.   Only sodium fluoride and sodium




    silicofluoride were being used as a source of fluoride ion at




    the installations surveyed.









IV.   Operator Training and Interest




    A trained operator with a geniune interest in feeding fluorides




    is essential to the satisfactory operation of a fluoridation




    installation.  Two (25 percent) of the facilities surveyed




    were operated by personnel not completely familar with the




    fluoride chemical feed equipment at their plants.  The operators




    at three (50 percent) of the facilities conducting fluoride ion




    analysis were not adequately trained in the use of the fluoride




    ion test equipment provided and the procedures to follow in




    conducting a fluoride ion analysis.  Three (38 percent) of




    the eight operators questioned did not favor feeding fluorides




    to public water supply systems.









 V.   Surveillance




    Frequent check samples of fluoride ion levels in the distribution




    system and regular inspection  visits to the water fluoridation




    installation by state water  supply program personnel must be




    conducted to assure the facility is operating satisfactorily.




    The Health Department's policy is for one water sample per month




    to be submitted from each fluoridated water supply to the State




    Health Department Laboratory for fluoride ion analysis.  The




    sample is a 4-oz daily composite collected in one container,

-------
140
                 mixed and a 4-oz. sample drawn and mailed for check analysis.




                 A review of state records, and discussions with the operators




                 at the eight fluoridated water supply systems revealed just




                 one (13 percent) of the operators was submitting the recommended




                 monthly check sample to the state laboratory for fluoride ion




                 analysis.  Only one (13 percent) of the fluoridation installations




                 had been visited in the past twelve months by a representative




                 of the state water supply program surveillance agency.  Inspection




                 visits to the eight fluoridated water supply systems in Idaho




                 averaged one visit in five years.









                 Figure 2, Operating Conditions At Fluoridated Water Supply Systems




                 In Idaho, summarizes the operating conditions observed at the




                 installations inspected during the time of the survey.  Table III,




                 Adequacy Of The Fluoridation Installations In Idaho, summarizes




                 the adequacy of the operating conditions at each facility rated.









       Conclusions and Recommendations




       1.   Eight public water supply systems in Idaho of a reported 280 public




           water supply systems in the State were fluoridating October 1, 1971.




           Thirty-four (34) supplies were known to use one or more sources




           containing natural fluorides of 0.7 mg/1 or higher.  Therefore




           only three percent of the 246 public water supply systems in




           Idaho not using one or more water sources containing natural




           fluorides of 0.7 mg/1 or higher were attempting to supply water




           having a fluoride ion content within recommended limits.

-------
                                        Idaho Water Supply Program Evaluation
                                                       FIGURE 2
                          OPERATING CONDITIONS AT FLUORIDATED WATER SUPPLY SYSTEMS IN IDAHO
                                                        % OF  FLUORIDATED  WATER SUPPLY SYSTEMS
   PARAMETER EVALUATED

Fluoride Content in the Distribution System !_/
  Fluoride Level  0.8 - 1.3 mg/1  2/
  Fluoride Level  0.8 mg/1  _3/
  Fluoride Level  1.3 mg/1  _3/
Analytical Control of the Fluoride Level
  Operator Analysis +0.1 mg/1 EPA Value  47
  Daily Finished Water Fluoride Analysis
  Regular Raw Water Fluoride Analysis
  Adequate Analytical Equip. & Facilities
  Adequate Care for Laboratory Equipment
  Adequate Records
Fluoride Feed Equipment and Facilities
  Adequate Feeding Equip. & Facilities
  Adequate Feeding Arrangements
  Feed Interrupted  1-Day in Past 12-Mos.
  Adequate Maintenance
Fluoride Compound - Storage and Handling
  Adequate Storage Arrangements
  Acceptable Safe Handling Provisions
  Satisfactory Disposal of Shipping Containers
Operator Training and Interest
  Adequately Trained to Operate Feed Equipment
  Knowledgeable of Test Equip. & Procedures  47
  Accepts and Interested in Fluoridation
Surveillance
  Monthly Check Samples to State
  Installation Inspected by State in Past 12-Mos.
   20
40
60
 80
—r~
 100
—I
        25
                               63
        25
                       50
               38
                      •50
                      -50
               •38
                       50
                               63
                       50

                       50
        25
                                                    •88
                                      75
                       50
                               63
 13
•13
17 Eight Installations Rated.  Fluorides not being fed at Six Installations when  Surveyed.
27 Per 1962 Drinking Water  Standards for an Annual Avg. Max. Daily Air Temp, of 63.1°F  (Boise,  Idaho  30-Yr.  Avg.  1931-60)
_3/ Distribution Samples from Preston were   0.8 and  1.3 mg/1.
47 Six Installations Rated.  Two Operators at Eight Installations Fluoridating did not  Conduct  Fluoride  Ion  Analysis.

-------
                                      Idaho Water Supply Program Evaluation
                                                   Table  III
                               ADEQUACY OF THE FLUORIDATION INSTALLATIONS IN  IDAHO
                 Parameter Evaluated
                                                                                                             n|  u
                                                                                            G.  AJ   -H   U
  Fluoride  Content in the Distribution System
    Fluoride Level  0.8 - 1.3 mg/1  Tj
    Fluoride Level < 0.8 mg/1
    Fluoride Level >1.3 mg/1

  Analytical Control of The Fluoride Level
    Operator Analysis ±0.1 mg/1 EPA Value
    Daily Finished Water Fluoride Analysis
    Regular Raw Water Fluoride Analysis
    Adequate Analytical Equip. & Facilities
    Adequate Care For Laboratory Equipment
    Adequate Records

  Fluoride  Feed Equipment and Facilities
    Adequate Feeding Equipment & Facilities
    Adequate Feeding Arrangements
    Feed Interrupted < 1-Day in Past 12-mos.
    Adequate Maintenance

  Fluoride  Compound - Storage and Handling
    Adequate Storage Arrangements
    Acceptable Safe Handling Provisions
    Satisfactory Disposal of Shipping  Containers

  Operator  Training and Interest
    Adequately Trained to Operate Feed Equip.
    Knowledgeable of Test Equip. &  Procedures
    Accepts and Interested in Fluoridation

  Surveillance
    Monthly Check Samples  to  State £/
    Installation Inspected by State in past  12-mos.  9/
8/
N/A
                                x   8/
                                x   N/A
N/A
x   x
x   N/A
X - Satisfactory or applicable for community surveyed
II - Fluoridation discontinued  Oct 16, 1971 - Chlorinator repairs required
~2J - Fluoridation discontinued approx. June 25, 1971, (2 wks.  after start-up)-Well pump failure and indifference
3V - Fluoridation discontinued approx. Nov. 15, 1971 - Equipment repairs required
4/ - Fluoridation discontinuedApril, 1971 - Equipment dismantled
3/ - Fluoridation discontinued April 14, 1971 - Equipment repairs required and indifference
bj - Fluoridation discontinued Sept. 11, 1971 - Chlorinator repairs required
TJ - Per 1962 Drinking Water Standards for an annual avg. max. daily air temp, of 63.1°F (Boise, Idaho; 30-yr.  Avg. 1931-60)
jj/ - No Fluoride Analysis conducted by operator
~jj - Per 1970 State Health Dept. records
Tj/A - Not Applicable

-------
                                                                          143
Recommendation:




The Idaho Department of Health should more actively promote and support




fluoridation in Idaho.  A concentrated effort should be made to provide




the benefits of fluoridated water to the population served by the more




than 235 small public water supplies in the State not fluoridated or




containing dentally significant concentrations of natural fluorides.




Where the fluoridation of a community water supply system is not feasible,




school water supply fluoridation in that community should be considered.









2.  Seven public water supply systems in Idaho were reported using one or




    more water sources containing  natural fluorides greater than 2.0 mg/1.









Recommendation:




When the natural fluoride ion level exceeds two times the optimum, the




following should be considered so the  finished water will have a fluoride




ion level within the  limits recommended by the State: blending of water




containing high levels of fluoride ion with a low natural fluoride water,




development of an alternate source of water, or defluoridation of the




water source.









3.  Only two  (25 percent) of the eight fluoridated water supply systems




    in  Idaho evidenced a fluoride ion content in the distribution system




    within a range of 0.8 - 1.3 mg/1.  Five  (63 percent) were underfeeding




    and two  (25 percent) were overfeeding.  Water samples collected  from




    one system were both above and below the recommended range.  Three

-------
144
           (50 percent) of the operators at the six fluoridated supplies conducting




           fluoride ion analyses were within +0.1 mg/1 of the sample results




           analyzed by the EPA Water Supply Programs Division.  Two operators




           did not conduct fluoride ion analysis and had no test equipment.




           Daily finished water fluoride ion analysis was conducted by the




           operators at only three (38 percent) of the installations and no




           regular raw water fluoride ion analysis was conducted at any of




           eight facilities.









       Recommendation:




       The State of Idaho should provide the necessary training and technical




       assistance to the water plant operators at the fluoridation installations




       to control the fluoride ion level in the distribution system within the




       recommended range, and to conduct fluoride ion analysis according to




       Standard Methods to within +0.1 mg/1 of the value reported on the State




       check sample.  Daily finished water fluoride ion analysis, regular raw




       water fluoride ion analysis, adequate laboratory equipment and care of




       equipment, and complete records on the fluoridation operation should be




       required at all fluoridation installations.









       4.  Fluoride chemical feed equipment and facilities to control the




           distribution system fluoride ion level to within the recommended




           range were satisfactory at four (50 percent) of the installations




           surveyed and feeding arrangements were judged adequate at five




           (63 percent) of the plants visited.  One  (13 percent) of the

-------
                                                                          145
    operators reported one or more interruptions in fluoridation of




    one or more days duration in the past twelve months and maintenance




    conditions were less than satisfactory at four (50 percent) of the




    facilities visited.









Recommendation:




The State of Idaho should provide design assistance to all communities




proposing to install fluoridation facilities, thoroughly review all




proposed installations before the operation is approved, and assist




the operator as needed during the "start-up" period.  All interruptions




in the fluoridation operations should be required to be reported to




the state water supply program surveillance agency.  A preventative




maintenance program should be established for each facility and closely




followed for the installation to receive continued approval for operation.









5.  Fluoride chemical storage arrangements and safety precautions




    for handling the compounds were judged inadequate at four  (50




    percent) of the installations surveyed.  Six (75 percent) of the




    operators did not have available or were not using safety equipment




    in handling the fluoride chemical compounds.









Recommendation:




The State of Idaho should instruct all water plant operators feeding




fluorides on safe handling and storage practices for fluoride chemical




compounds.   Safety regulations for the handling and storage of fluoride




chemicals should be adopted and included in Part XII - Fluoridation




of Public Water Supplies, of the State Drinking Water Standards.

-------
146
      6.  A trained operator with a genuine interest in feeding fluorides




          is essential to the satisfactory operation of a fluoridation




          installation.  Training deficiencies were noted in the operators'




          knowledge of his fluoride feed equipment and his acquaintance




          with the test equipment and procedures used in conducting fluoride




          ion analysis.  The plant operators at two facilities were not




          trained to conduct fluoride ion analysis and three (38 percent) of




          the operators questioned did not favor feeding fluorides to public




          water supply systems.









      Recommendation:




      The State of Idaho should provide training in fluoride feed equipment




      operation and fluoride determinations in water for the operators of all




      fluoridated water supply systems.  The benefits of water fluoridation




      and the importance of maintaining the fluoride ion level within the




      recommended range should be stressed.  Satisfactory completion of the




      course should be a mandatory requirement of the plant operator for approval




      of his installation to feed fluorides.  The operators at all fluoridation




      facilities should conduct daily fluoride ion analysis.









      7.  Surveillance of each water fluoridation installation must be on




          a regular, continual basis to assure the facility is operating




          satisfactory.  Only one (13 percent) of the operators interviewed




          was submitting the recommended monthly check sample to the state




          laboratory for fluoride ion analysis.  Inspection visits to the

-------
                                                                          147
    fluoridated water supply systems in Idaho by a representative of




    the state water supply program surveillance agency averaged one




    visit in five years.









Recommendation:




The State of Idaho should require at least monthly check samples be




submitted by the operators of all fluoridated water supply systems to




the State Laboratory for fluoride ion analysis.  These should be grab




samples in preference to composite samples.  The state water supply




program surveillance agency should conduct a minimum of two field




inspection visits per year to each water fluoridation installation in




the state and visit immediately all plants employing new operating




personnel placed in charge of the fluoridation operation.  All




interruptions in the fluoridation operations should be investigated.




A full time engineer with the necessary travel funds and laboratory




support is estimated to be needed for an adequate fluoridation




surveillance program in Idaho.

-------
148
                                                              I)\TK
                             IDAHO FLUORIDATION SURVEY
     \iater System:

     Population Served:

     Date  Fluoridntion Started:

     Source of S


     Tre it
      F I v or i d e \ nn I y s i s
           TV aw 'nalcr:
      I'M uoridat ion Kriui Tii.ic

         Manufacturer:

         Type:

         Model:

         Location:


         '•oint of atvli cat ion:
         Cou'litiou of
Avoraire Flow:
Finished  0,'ater:
         Oncrational problems:
         Ovcrfeedin"1: safeguards;
         Planned Ir;;nrovcr,ient5:
         J?eiiiar!cs:

-------
                                                                          149

Fl uor i do  ('oi-iMound  -

   Chcmi r,.-, 1 :                              Cost,:

   Sour-c •?:


   '•^r i  > " sh j nincnt

   '^tora^e facilities;



   Quantity u -cd :

   Safety provisions:


   Remarks:
         i f  ii;n>- j (Lit i on -
              of s.i'U'jlim1.;:
        R.'itt  v,-;.tcr:                      Fini.shed water;

   Sfimpl in 
-------
150




      Operator ''iiali Pi c"'tions  -




         lOxnerience :                        C las si f i cat ion:
         Training:
          Intore -.t:
          Remarks:
      Survci1 Iancc -




          Check STi.spies:




          Last  vi.- it by SI ,-te :




          Avai l.iblli ty of tcclmical  assistance:









          Remarks:
      Co ""rents

-------
           APPENDIX C






BACTERIOLOGICAL LABORATORY SURVEY

-------
                          Report of a Survey of the
                         Idaho Department of Health
                         Central Water Laboratory
                         2150 Warm  Springs Avenue
                             Boise, Idaho  83701
                          on November 29-30, 1971

                                      by
                           Harry D. Nash,  Ph. D.
                               Microbiologist
                      Environmental Protection Agency
                           4676 Columbia Parkway
                           Cincinnati,  Ohio 45268
The equipment and procedures employed in the bacteriological analyses of
water by this laboratory conformed with the provisions of Standard Methods
for the Examination of Water and Wastewater (13th edition - 1971) and with
the provisions of the Interstate Quarantine Drinking Water Standards,  except
for items marked with a cross "X" on the accompanying form EPA -  103
(Rev 3-71).  Items marked with a "U" could not be determined at the time  of
the survey.  Items marked "O" do not apply to the procedures programmed
in the laboratory.  Specific deviations are described with  appropriate remedial
action for compliance in the  following recommendations:

                              Recommendations

Item 3    Sample bottles

Samples taken in narrow-mouth bottles are more subject to accidental contam-
ination, especially if the person collecting the sample is inexperienced.  There-
fore,  it is recommended that wide-mouth bottles be phased into  service as part
of the normal replacement of broken and lost bottles.

Items 2, 4   Collection procedures and transportation and storage

When two or more  samples are shipped in the same container, each sample
must be marked to correspond with the appropriate sample sheet.  Each
sample  sheet should contain  complete information relating to the sample,
including the date of collection and the exact location sampled.  It is also
suggested that a space be provided to enter residual  chlorine values.

It is recommended that the instructions on the back of the  State of Idaho Dept.
of Health form  DH 61271,  figure 1,  relating to the volume of sample to be
collected, be changed.  Presently the sample collector is  instructed to fill

-------
154
  the sample bottle two-thirds (2/3) full.  Since the capacity of the sample
  bottle is  120 ml,  the volume received for analysis would only be 80 ml and
  the minimum recommended sample volume is 100 ml.  The present sample
  bottle could be marked to assure that a. minimum of 100 ml is collected with
  ample space remaining for adequate shaking.  Then samplers could be in-
  structed  to fill the bottle to this mark.   It is also recommended that the last
  sentence in item 4 on the back of the State of Idaho Department of Health form
  DH 61058,  figure 1,   "if samples must be held for some time they should be
  refrigerated, "  be deleted.  All samples should reach the laboratory within 30
  to 48 hours after collection.   Therefore, it is suggested that sample collectors
  be instructed to  coordinate sample collection and shipment with existing mailing
  and shipping schedules in their area.

  Item 5     Record of Laboratory Examinations

  The procedure for reporting results of bacteriological analyses depends upon
  the type system  examined.  Results of samples from municipal supplies are
  reported directly to the purveyor with copies of the report sent to the  Environ-
  mental Improvement Division (EID).  It  is the responsibility of EID to initiate
  a program for remedial action when unsatisfactory samples are reported.
  However, results relating to private and semi-public supplies are reported
  differently. These results are sent to the purveyor or owner and a copy sent
  to the District Health Department.  If the sample is unsatisfactory,  a  form
  letter similar to Exhibit A,  is sent along with the report.   The EID is not  con-
  tacted.

  A semi-public supply is defined as:  (1)  new subdivisions not yet included in
  municipal supplies,  (2)  schools,  and  (3)  industries.

  Basically there is no  resampling program for remedial action when unsatis-
  factory samples are  obtained, table 1.   Regulations do recommend that unsatis-
  factory samples should be reported and  a program be initiated  which provides
  for daily samples to be collected from the same  sampling point and examined
  until the  results obtained from at least two  consecutive samples indicate that
  contamination is no longer present.  Such regulations are outlined in the Public
  Health Service Drinking Water Standards,  1962,  and the Surgeon General's
  memorandum to all State Health Officers,  dated  February 15,  1963.

  Items 7,  9    Incubators

  A daily record of incubator temperatures is required in the absence of a
  recording thermometer.  This record should include the date,  temperature
  and initials of the person who records the data.  Any deviation greater than
  the variance permitted should be corrected by proper thermostat adjustment.
  Maintaining such a record will also alert laboratory personnel to any gradual
  changes  which may reflect possible metal fatigue  in the bi-metallic strip of the
  thermostat.

-------
                                                                               155

         INSTRUCTIONS FOR COLLECTING SAMPLES
1.  This bottle has been sterilized. Do not remove cap from bottle
   until just before collecting sample. Hold cap and bottle so that
   neither the inside of the cap nor the lip of the bottle are touched
   by the fingers or other objects.

2.  If from faucet or pump allow the water to run three to five
   minutes before collecting. FILL THE BOTTLE ABOUT TWO-
   THIRDS (2/3)  FULL and return to laboratory promptly.

3.  Please fill out the  reverse side of this form as  completely  as
   possible.
Form DH  61271
          INSTRUCTIONS  FOR COLLECTING  SAMPLES
 1. Select a clean faucet and sterilize by thorough flaming before opening.


 2. Allow water to run three to five minutes before taking sample.


 3. Do not remove the cap from the bottle until just before filling. While
   filling hold cap and bottle so that neither the inside  of the cap or the
   lip of the bottle are touched by the fingers or other objects.


 4. Samples should reach the laboratory  as soon as  possible after they
   have been collected.  If samples must be held for some time they should
   be refrigerated.


 5. Please fill out the reverse side of this form as completely as possible.
  *lf the water sample is collected at the source prior to chlorination, it
   is considered a "well" sample.  Samples collected  at various points
   throughout  the  distribution  system  should  be checked as  "system"
   samples regardless of whether or not the water  is chlorinated.
        DO NOT FILL BOTTLE MORE THAN TWO-THIRDS (2/3) FULL

 Form  DH 61058              Figure  1
 Instructions  for  collecting  samples  from municipal  (DH 61058)
 and private  and semi-public  (DH  61271)  water supplies

-------
                                    EXHIBIT  A
156

                             CITY  COUNTY  HEALTH DEPT.
                                1455 North Orchard
                                BOISE,  IDAHO 837OA

          Boise,  Idaho       CITY-COUNTY HEALTH DEPARTMENT      Telephone 375-5211

                             CONTAMINATED DRINKING  WATER

               Laboratory examination of  your water sample  indicates  that  the water
          is contaminated with intestinal type of bacteria.   This  indicates  that
          the water is  polluted by organisms normally  found  in sewage and  continued
          use may result  in  disease.

               Corrective measures can  be divided into two  categories.   The  first
          is aimed at preventing surface  water or other contaminating material
          from gaining  access to the well, and the  second is aimed at disinfecting
          the well.

          OLD WELLS:  These  wells  may be  contaminated  because of poor construction
                     or  because the source  of water itself  is contaminated.   If
                     the latter is the case,  (usually shallow wells)  little  can
                     be  done to improve  the situation except  to  have a well
                     driller seal (case) off this  shallow  contaminated water and
                     seek safe water at  a greater  depth.   Dug wells  commonly show
                     contamination because  it is almost impossible to keep  out
                     surface or seepage  waters.

          NEW WELLS:  It  has been  our experience that  new wells or recently
                     repaired old wells  and water  systems  commonly show contami-
                     nation.   This is  because the  materials used  are ordinarily
                     contaminated.   Disinfection,  as  outlined below,  will usually
                     correct this trouble.

                               DISINFECTING  WELLS

               Wells may  be  disinfected by adding chlorine  solutions,  (Clorox,
          White Magic,  Purex,  etc.)  or  chlorine powders (H.T.,  B.K.,  Chloride of
          Lime, etc.) directly to  the water  in the  well.  About a  quart of solu-
          tion or 1/4 Ib.  of powder should be added to a 4-inch well  but pro-
          portionately  more  is required for  larger  wells.  Larger  quantities  may
          be required where  unusual conditions are  encountered.  Add  this  material
          directly to the well itself in  the evening and operate the  pump  until
          chlorine can  be detected at all taps,  then allow  to set  all night.   Pump
          out the well  thoroughly  the following morning until no smell or  taste  of
          chlorine is left and sample again  (for laboratory  examination) on  the
          following day.   Sample bottles  supplied by the Department of Health,
          Laboratory Services, should be  used for this purpose.  Periodic  sampling
          should  be done  to  be reasonably certain that the  difficulty has  been
          corrected.
                                          ADA COUNTY  HEALTH OFFICER

-------
                                                                      157

                          EXHIBIT A
     When it is suspected that the water is contaminated because of'
poor design or construction there are a number of conditions to check.

     1.  Is the well deep enough to get satisfactory water?  Water
         from shallow wells and pitcher pumps is always subject to
         contamination.

     2.  Is the well tightly cased?  Make certain the casing is not
         perforated or cracked and that the joints are tight in the
         contaminated area or upper strata.

     3.  Is the well or casing tightly sealed at the top?  This is
         important to keep out surface contamination and rodents.

     4.  Is the top of the well in a pit?  This is a poor situation
         unless special protection is offered.

     5.  Is the surface drainage toward the well and are irrigation
         waters close?  If so, these conditions should be remedied.

     6.  Are outdoor toilets, septic tanks, cesspools or sewer lines
         close to the well?  If so, this is a definite hazard.

     7.  Is your well in lava formation where crevices may carry
         contamination great distances?

     8.  Are there other conditions which could contribute to the
         contamination of the water?

     If you are still in doubt concerning the safety of your well or the
quality of your water, write or call the City-County Health Department.
We shall be glad to advise you or perhaps a sanitarian can call on
you.  After all, remember that a safe water supply is one of the founda-
tions of good family and community health.

-------
158
                                    Table 1
               Resampling Intervals on Reported Positive Samples
              	January - October  1971	
  Name of Municipal
  Water Supply
                            Date               Approx. time interval
              Collected Reported* Resampled       for resample
Bliss
Boise (Boise Water Corp)
Boise (Eugene Outlook)
Boise (Lucky Lane)
Boise (Malad Hilton)
C aid well
Emmett (Municipal)
Haggerman
Idaho City
Marsing
Mt. Home
5/10
1/27
5/5
6/9
9/27
8/27
2/11
5/29
8/11
1/25
5/11
4/8
8/26
9/2
4/5
8/2
10/18
5/13
1/30
5/8
6/12
9/30
8/30
2/14
6/1
8/14
1/28
5/14
4/11
8/29
9/5
4/8
8/5
10/21
6/9
2/3 -
5/12
6/16
10/4
9/28
2/19
6/9 -
9/22
4/12
5/24

2/12
- 6/1
- 6/23
- 10/6

- 3/18
7/12


10/18
9/11
9/15
5/25
none
none

- 7/20

27
4
4
4
4
29
5
8
39
74
10
158
13
10
47
not resampled
not resampled
  *The time interval between sample collection and reporting averaged three days.
  Item 12
Thermometers
  The accuracy of all thermometers should be verified at selected temperatures
  within the minimum and maximum range of intended use by comparison with a
  thermometer certified by the National Bureau of Standards or one of equivalent
  accuracy.  One certified thermometer would be sufficient if it were available
  to all regional laboratories.

  Item 32     Buffered Dilution Water

  A fresh  stock buffer solution should be prepared if the turbidity indicates bio-
  logical growth in the stock solution.   Microorganisms are  capable of survival

-------
                                                                           159
 and growth in buffered dilution water which could adversely influence the
 effectiveness of the buffer solution.  Rather than storing the entire supply of
 stock buffer in one container,  it is suggested that 25-30 ml portions  be dis-
 pensed in screw-cap test tubes, autoclaved for 15 minutes at 121°C and
 stored at 5 - 10° C.  Having several smaller volumes available will  eliminate
 accidental contamination of the entire supply.

 Item 33    pH Measurements

 A record of the pH, medium lot number, and date of preparation should be
 maintained on each batch of culture medium prepared.  The minimal require-
 ment is to maintain such a record for each new bottle of medium used.  By
 monitoring final medium pH,  a check can be made on possible errors in
 weighing,  excessive  heating or sterilization which could cause lactose
 hydrolysis,  chemical contamination, or deterioration of ingredients  that
 might occur during storage of the dehydrated medium.

 Item 34    Sterilization of media

 It is suggested that liquid media containing carbohydrates be sterilized at
 121° C for  12 minutes.  This will reduce the chance of lactose hydrolysis
 resulting from excessive exposure of lactose to heat.  Such hydrolysis
 produces glucose and galactose which can be fermented by non-coliform
 organisms resulting  in false-positive reactions.

 Item 48    Completed test

 The confirmed test can yield positive reactions in the absence of the  coliform
 group (false-positive test).  Therefore, it is necessary to establish the
 validity of the confirmed test by comparison with the completed test.  The
 number of comparative procedures depends on the individual location and
 waters being examined.  Approximately 20 comparative procedures each
 three months should be sufficient when there is good agreement.  The number
 should be increased if results  from the confirmed and completed tests differ.
 The completed test is the reference standard.

 Item 50    MF Procedure

 The present practice of applying continuous vacuum during the entire mem-
brane filter procedure is not recommended.  In order to avoid uneven dis-
tribution of organisms over the membrane  and accidental breaking of the
filter,  vacuum should be applied only during the actual filtration process.

Air bubbles between the membrane and agar can easily be recognized on
m-Endo (MF) agar medium as colorless (white) spots in the membrane.  A
membrane properly placed is uniformly pink.  To eliminate bubbles,  lift

-------
160

 the membrane with sterile forceps and re-roll it onto the agar surface.   Desic-
 cation and death of coliform organisms may occur where air bubbles are formed
 which could result in a lower count than is actually present in the volume of
 sample filtered.

                        Laboratory Evaluation Program

 Mr. Owen Carpenter, Assistant Director of Laboratories, is designated as the
 State Water Laboratory Survey Officer.  He is knowledgeable in the field of
 water bacteriology,  familiar with coliform detection methods,  laboratory
 apparatus, media requirements and analysis of laboratory records for com-
 pliance of sampling to meet  requirements in water quality standards.

 Idaho has seven public health districts,  Exhibit B, with the central laboratory
 in Boise serving two districts  and five regional laboratories serving the re-
 maining five,  table 2.  These laboratories are the only ones examining potable
 water supplies in  the state.

                                    Table 2

           Regional Laboratories Certified to Examine  Drinking Water
Laboratory and
Location
Coeur d'Alene
Lewiston 1C*
Twin Falls
Pocatello
Idaho Falls 1C
District
Served
1
2
5
6
7
Date
Certified
8/29/69
8/28/69
12/10/69
11/19/69
10/12/69
Surveying Officer
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
Carpenter
Carpenter
Carpenter
Carpenter
Carpenter
 ^Laboratories examing water supplies serving Interstate Carriers.

                                    Remarks

 At present the Boise Laboratory is  using both Gelman (Metricel) and Millipore
 membrane filters.  Both have currently been evaluated and are rated as being
 of comparable quality.   However, it is recommended that a surveillance  of
 the quality of both be conducted during routine use.  Such a surveillance should
 include:
       1.   Increase or decrease  of filtration time
       2.   Increase of filtration through individual portions  of the membrane
       3.   Toxicity of the ink used to print grid markings
       4.   Diffusion of ink when membranes are incubated,  especially when
           used in the membrane filter fecal coliform procedure.

-------
             EXHIBIT B
             PUBLIC HEALTH DISTRICTS
                  Effective July 1, 1971
                             efferson [—^_.
                                     [Mad i son'.Te to
V. South Central District
                            VI. Southeastern District

-------
162
 Specific deviations observed at the Idaho Falls and Lewiston Regional Labor-
 atories can not be corrected at the regional level and the major responsibility
 for corrective action must be initiated at the State level.  This is recommended
 since all purchasing authority is at the State level and the Regional Labora-
 tories are entirely dependent upon the State Health Department for their needs
 and procedural guidelines.

 Table  3 lists the item number and short description of each deviation.   Refer-
 ence should be made to the individual survey report on each regional laboratory
 for specific information relating to the deviation and corrective recommenda-
 tion.

                                    Table  3

               Deviations at Regional Level Requiring State Action
Regional
Laboratory
Idaho Falls






Lewiston




Item
Number
2 and 4
3
5
9
12
60
61
2 and 4
3
5
12
13
Brief description of deviation
Laboratory forms accompanying
Sample bottles

sample

Reporting results and remedial action
Water bath incubator
Thermometers
Physical facilities
Laboratory safety, autoclave
Laboratory forms accompanying
Sample bottles




samples

Reporting results and remedial action
Thermometers
pH meter


                              Personnel Approved

 Mrs. Connie Roberts, Microbiologist, is approved for the application of the
 multiple tube fermentation and membrane filter procedures for the bacteriological
 examination of drinking water for total coliform and the application of the multiple
 tube fermentation procedure used in stream quality measurements for total and
 fecal coliform.

-------
                                                                           163
                                Conclusions

The procedures and equipment in use at the time of the survey complied in
general with the provisions of Standard Methods for the Examination of Water
and Wastewater (13th edition - 1971) and the Interstate Quarantine Drinking
Water St andards, and with correction of deviations listed, it  is recommended
that the results be accepted for the bacterial examination of waters under
interstate regulations.

-------
                                                                          165
                           Report of a Survey of the
                         Idaho Department of Health
                       Idaho Falls Regional Laboratory
                              520 Legion Drive
                                P.O.  Box 661
                           Idaho Falls, Idaho 83401
                              December 1,  1971

                                      by
                           Harry D.  Nash, Ph. D.
                               Microbiologist
                      Environmental Protection Agency
                           4676 Columbia Parkway
                           Cincinnati,  Ohio 45268
The equipment and procedures employed in the bacteriological analyses of
water by this laboratory conformed in general with the provisions of Standard
Methods for the Examination of Water and Wastewater (13th edition - 1971)
and with the provisions of the Interstate Quarantine Drinking Water Standards,
except for items marked with a cross "X" on the accompanying Form EPA -
103 (Rev 3-71). Items marked with a "U" could not be determined at the time
of the survey.  Items marked "O" do not apply to the procedures  programmed
in the laboratory.   Specific deviations are described with appropriate remedial
action for compliance  in the following recommendations:

                              Recommendations

Item 3      Sample bottles

Samples taken  in narrow-mouth bottles are more subject to accidental con-
tamination, especially if the person collecting the  sample is inexperienced.
Therefore, it is recommended that wide-mouth bottles be phased into service
as part  of the normal replacement of broken and lost bottles.

Item 2, 4    Collection procedures and transportation and storage

When two or more samples are shipped  in the same container, each sample
must be marked to correspond with the appropriate sample sheet. Each
sample  sheet should contain complete information  relating to the  sample,
including the date  of collection and the exact location sampled. It is also
suggested that  a space be provided to enter residual chlorine values.

Instructions to  sample collectors

It is recommended that the  instructions  on the back of the State of Idaho
Department of  Health form  DH 61271,  figure  1, relating to the volume of

-------
166
  sample to be collected, be changed.  Presently the sample collector is in-
  structed to fill the sample bottle two-thirds (2/3) full.  Since the capacity of
  the sample bottle is 120 ml, the volume received for analysis would only be
  80 ml and the minimum recommended sample volume is 100 ml.  The present
  sample bottle could be marked to assure that a minimum of 100 ml  is collec-
  ted with ample space remaining for adequate shaking.  Then samplers could
  be instructed to fill the bottle to this mark.  It is also recommended that the
  last sentence in item 4 on the back of the State of Idaho Department of Health
  form DH 61058, figure 1,  "if sample must be  held for some time they should
  be refrigerated, " be  deleted.  All samples should reach the laboratory within
  30 to 48 hours  after collection.  Therefore, it is suggested that sample
  collector be  instructed to coordinate sample collection and shipment with
  existing mailing and shipping schedules in their area.

  Item 5    Record of laboratory examination

  The procedure for reporting results of bacteriological analyses depends upon
  the type  supply examined.  All results are reported by mail unless  a special
  request is made for telephonic notification.  All results concerning municipal
  supplies are reported to the municipality and to the  State Regional Engineer.
  A  report is  not sent directly to the Environmental Improvement Division in
  Boise.  Results concerning private  and semi-public supplies are sent to the
  purveyor or owner and to the County Environmentalist.  The State Regional
  Engineer is not notified by the laboratory.   If samples from private or semi-
  public supplies are unsatisfactory,  a form letter, similar to Exhibit A,
  accompanies the report.

  A  semi-public supply is defined as one serving:  (1)  new subdivisions not yet
  included in municipal supplies, (2) schools, and (3)  industries.

  Basically there is no resampling program for remedial action when unsatisfactory
  samples are reported,  Table 1.  Regulations  do recommend that unsatisfactory
  samples be  reported and a program be initiated which provides for daily
  samples to be  collected from the same sampling point and examined until the
  results obtained from at least two consecutive samples indicate that contami-
  nation is no  longer present.  Such regulations are outlined in the Public Health
  Drinking Water Standards,  1962, and the  Surgeon General's memorandum to
  all State Health Officers, dated February 15,  1963.

  Item 9    Water bath incubator

  The model water bath which is used for fecal  coliform incubation is not adequate.
  The design  is such that a uniform temperature of 44. 5_f 0. 2°C cannot be
  maintained.  In addition, the same water bath is used for certain clinical
  diagnostic examinations which require changing the temperature controls from

-------
                                                                                167

         INSTRUCTIONS FOR  COLLECTING SAMPLES
1. This bottle has been sterilized. Do not remove cap from bottle
   until just before collecting sample. Hold cap and bottle so that
   neither the inside of the cap nor the lip of the bottle are touched
   by the fingers or other objects.

2. If  from faucet or pump allow the water to run three  to five
   minutes  before collecting. FILL THE BOTTLE ABOUT TWO-
   THIRDS (2/3) FULL and return to laboratory promptly.

3. Please fill  out the reverse side of this form as completely as
   possible.
Form DH  61271

          INSTRUCTIONS FOR  COLLECTING  SAMPLES
 1. Select a clean faucet and sterilize by thorough flaming before opening.


 2. Allow water to run three to five minutes before taking sample.
 3. Do not remove the cap from  the bottle until  just  before filling. While
   filling hold cap and bottle so that neither the inside of the cap or the
   lip of the bottle are touched by the fingers or  other objects.
4. Samples should reach  the laboratory as soon as possible after they
   have been collected. If samples must be held for some time they should
   be refrigerated.
5.  Please fill out the reverse side of this form as completely as possible.


  *lf the water sample is collected at  the source prior to chlorination, it
   is considered a  "well"  sample. Samples collected  at various  points
   throughout the distribution system  should  be  checked as "system"
   samples regardless of whether or not the water is chlorinated.
       DO NOT FILL BOTTLE MORE THAN TWO-THIRDS (2/3} FULL

Form DH  61058               Figure  1
Instructions for collecting samples  from  municipal  (DH 61058)
and  private and semi-public (DH  61271) water supplies

-------
                                  EXHIBIT A
168

                           CITY COUNTY HEALTH DEPT.
                              1455 North Orchard
                              BOISE, IDAHO 83704

        Boise, Idaho      CITY-COUNTY HEALTH DEPARTMENT     Telephone 375-5211

                           CONTAMINATED DRINKING WATER

             Laboratory examination of your water sample indicates that the water
        is contaminated with intestinal type of bacteria.  This indicates that
        the water is polluted by organisms normally found in sewage and continued
        use may result in disease.

             Corrective measures can be divided into two categories.  The first
        is aimed at preventing surface water or other contaminating material
        from gaining access to the well, and the second is aimed at disinfecting
        the well.

        OLD WELLS:  These wells may be contaminated because of poor construction
                    or because the source of water itself is contaminated.  If
                    the latter is the case, (usually shallow wells) little can
                    be done to improve the situation except  to have a well
                    driller seal  (case) off this shallow contaminated water and
                    seek safe water at a greater depth.  Dug wells commonly show
                    contamination because it is almost impossible to keep out
                    surface or seepage waters.

        NEW WELLS:  It has been our experience that new wells or recently
                    repaired old wells and water systems commonly show contami-
                    nation.  This is because the materials used are ordinarily
                    contaminated.  Disinfection, as outlined below, will usually
                    correct this trouble.

                             DISINFECTING WELLS

             Wells may be disinfected by adding chlorine solutions, (Clorox,
        White Magic, Purex, etc.) or chlorine powders  (H.T., B.K., Chloride of
        Lime, etc.) directly to the water in the well.  About a quart of solu-
        tion or 1/4 Ib. of powder should be added to a 4-inch well but pro-
        portionately more is required for larger wells.  Larger quantities may
        be required where unusual conditions are encountered.  Add this material
        directly to the well itself in the evening and operate the pump until
        chlorine can be detected at all taps, then allow to set all night.  Pump
        out the well thoroughly the following morning until no smell or taste of
        chlorine is left and sample again  (for laboratory examination) on the
        following day.  Sample bottles supplied by the Department of Health,
        Laboratory Services, should be used for this purpose.  Periodic sampling
        should be done to be reasonably certain that the difficulty has been
        corrected.
                                        ADA COUNTY HEALTH OFFICER

-------
                          EXHIBIT A
                                                                      169
     When it is suspected that the water is contaminated because of
poor design or construction there are a number of conditions to check.

     1.  Is the well deep enough to get satisfactory water?  Water
         from shallow wells and pitcher pumps is always subject to
         contamination.

     2.  Is the well tightly cased?  Make certain the casing is not
         perforated or cracked and that the joints are tight in the
         contaminated area or upper strata.

     3.  Is the well or casing tightly sealed at the top?  This is
         important to keep out surface contamination and rodents.

     4.  Is the top of the well in a pit?  This is a poor situation
         unless special protection is offered.

     5.  Is the surface drainage toward the well and are irrigation
         waters close?  If so, these conditions should be remedied.

     6.  Are outdoor toilets, septic tanks, cesspools or sewer lines
         close to the well?  If so, this is a definite hazard.

     7.  Is your well in lava formation where crevices may carry
         contamination great distances?

     8.  Are there other conditions which could contribute to the
         contamination of the water?

     If you are still in doubt concerning the safety of your well or the
quality of your water,  write or call the City-County Health Department.
We shall be glad to advise you or perhaps a sanitarian can call on
you.  After all, remember that a safe water supply is one of the founda-
tions of good family and community health.

-------
170
                                     Table 1

                Resampling intervals on reported positive samples
                             January - October 1971
Name of municipal
water supply
Ashton
lona
Newdale
Ucon
Collected
2/17/71
5/26/71
10/1/71
4/12/71
5/17/71
7/12/71
7/12/71
7/16/71
Date
Reported
2/20/71
5/30/71
10/8/71
4/17/71
5/22/71
7/15/71
7/15/71
7/19/71
Re sampled
3/2/71
none
none
8/20/71
7/20/71
7/20/71
7/16/71
7/20/71
Time Interval
for Resampling
10 days

over 4 months
approx. 2 mos.
5 days
1 day
1 day
 one setting to another depending on the test.  Such constant changing of the
 controls is not desirable because of the uncertainty of temperature stabilization.
 It is recommended that a water bath equipped with a gabled cover to reduce
 water and heat loss be purchased for incubating fecalcoliform cultures.  A
 daily record should be maintained to assure proper incubation temperature
 is achieved.
 Item 10    Hot air sterilization oven

 The commercial type oven used to sterilize dry glassware should be checked
 in order to verify that sterilization temperature is reached and maintained
 (170° - 180° C for two hours).  This can be done by placing a thermometer in
 a can filled with fine sand and placed in the oven so that the thermometer can
 be read immediately after the oven door is opened. The sand will prevent an
 immediate thermometer fluctuation and permit adequate verification of the
 maximum temperature obtained.
 Item 12
Thermometers
 The accuracy of all thermometers should be verified at temperatures within
 the minimum and maximum range of intended use by comparison with one
 certified by the National Bureau of Standards or one of equivalent accuracy.
 It is suggested that this service  or such a thermometer be requested from the
 central laboratory in Boise.

 Item 31    Laboratory water quality

 Distilled water used for bacteriological tests should be free of inorganic and
 organic  substances either toxic or nutritive which may influence the survival

-------
                                                EXHIBIT  B

                                                PUBLIC HEALTH DISTRICTS
                                                    Effective July 1, 1971
                                                             nsida    J	'    |
                                                                      j Frank I i n»
IV. Central
   District
                                  V. South Central District
                                                               VI. Southeastern District

-------
172

or growth of microorganisms.  Several factors can influence the quality:
(1) design of the distillation equipment,   (2) source of water,   (3) storage
chamber for reserve supply,  (4) temperature of stored supply,  (5) duration
of storage before use.  These factors may contribute  varying degrees of
contaminants such as metal ions, ammonium hydroxide,  hydrochloric acid,
chlorine from the source water, and carbon dioxide from the air. In order to
assure the quality, it is recommended that  a distilled water suitability test be
conducted at least  once a year.  This procedure for monitoring distilled water
quality can also be done by the Central Lab as a service  to the  regional laboratory
 system.
Item  32   Buffered dilution water

A fresh stock buffer solution should be prepared if the turbidity indicates bio-
logical growth in the stock solution.  Microorganisms are capable of survival
and growth in buffered dilution water which could adversely influence its
effectiveness.  Rather than storing the entire supply of stock buffer in one
container, it is suggested that 25-30 ml protions be dispensed  in screw-cap
test tubes, autoclaved for 15 minutes at 121° C and stored at 5  - 10° C.   Having
 several smaller volumes available  will eliminate accidental contamination of
the entire supply.

Item  33   pH measurements

A record of the pH, medium lot number,  and date of preparation should be
maintained on each batch of culture medium prepared.  The minimal requirement
 is to maintain such a record for each new bottle of medium  used.  By monitoring
 final medium pH, a check can be made on possible errors in weighing, excessive
 heating or sterilization which could cause lactose hydrolysis,  chemical  contami-
nation,  or deterioration of ingredients that might occur during storage of the
 dehydrated medium.

 Item 34   Sterilization of media

 It is  suggested that liquid media containing carbohydrates be sterilized at 121°C
 for 12 minutes.  This will reduce the chance of lactose hydrolysis resulting from
 excessive exposure of lactose to heat.  Such hydrolysis produces glucose and
 galactose which can be fermented by non-coliform organisms resulting in false-
 positive reactions.

 Item 50   MF procedure

 It is  recommended that sterile buffered water be used to rinse the funnel after
 filtering the sample.  The pH of sterile  distilled water may have an adverse
 effect, especially  on attenuated organisms,  if the pH of the distilled water
 indicates  it to be too acid or basic.

-------
                                                                             173

Item 52    Counting - verification of coliform colonies

Verification of coliform or suspected coliform colonies should be conducted by
picking colonies and inoculating either lactose  or lauryl tryptose broth and then
transferring positive cultures to brilliant green lactose bile (BGB) broth.  The
present practice of picking colonies and inoculating directly into BGB broth
should be discontinued.  Atypical colonies may be developing from attenuated
coliform organisms and as a result the typical sheen will not be observed.
Therefore,  an enrichment procedure,  inoculation into either lactose or lauryl
tryptose broth,  is required.

Item 60    Physical facilities

Mr. Dennis Paananen should be commended for his ability to conduct the number
and variety of examinations in a laboratory having such limited space.  It would
be beneficial for the overall mission of this laboratory to provide new quarters
or increase the facilities at the present location.  Mr. Owen Carpenter also
indicated the need for additional space in  his laboratory evaluation report dated
October 7,  1969.  This laboratory conducts clinical diagnostic and water bacteri-
ological examinations.  The amount of space available for bench work,  storage
of both sterile and non-sterile media and  equipment,  and office facilities is
insufficient.  Such limited facilities could influence the quality of work and reliability
of date unless corrected in the near future.

Item 61    Laboratory safety

It is recommended that periodic inspection and maintenance be  conducted on  the
present autoclave.  It appears that the drain becomes clogged periodically and
at present there is no screen in the drain to retain material which causes block-
age.  Although this autoclave appears to function adequately, it is relatively  old
and replacement parts may be difficult to obtain.  It is suggested that a new auto-
clave be purchased in the event that the present one can not  be properly serviced
and maintained.

                                    Remarks

It is suggested that the Boise Central Water Laboratory assume the major respon-
sibility for correction of deviations listed in items 2,  3, 4,  5, 9,  12, 60, and 61
because all  purchasing authority is at the  State level  and the Regional Laboratories'
are entirely dependent upon the State Health Department for their needs  and pro-
cedural guidelines.

                               Personnel Approved

Mr. Dennis Paananen, Microbiologist, is approved for the  application of the
multiple tube fermentation and membrane filter procedures  for the bacteriological

-------
174

 examination of drinking water for total coliform and the application of the
 multiple tube fermentation procedure used in stream quality measurements for
 total and fecal coliforms.  Although Mr.  Paananen is approved for the application
 of the multiple tube fermentation procedure used to detect fecal coliform,  the
 data obtained using the present water bath incubator may be considered question-
 able if needed as official data.

                                   Conclusions

 The procedures and equipment in use at the time of the survey complied in
 general with the provisions of Standard Methods for the Examination of Water
 and Wastewater (13th edition - 1971) and the Interstate Quarantine Drinking
 Water Standards, and with correction of deviations listed, it is recommended
 that the results be accepted for the bacterial examination of waters under  inter-
 state  regulations.

-------
                          REPORT OF A SURVEY OF THE                         175
                          IDAHO DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH
                         LEWISTON REGIONAL  LABORATORY
                               122) F STREET
                           LEWISTON,  IDAHO 83501
                            on December 2, 1971

                                    by

                    Harry D. Nash, PhD., Microbiologist
                      Water Supply Programs Division
                     Environmental  Protection Agency
                           U676 Columbia Parkway
                          Cincinnati, Ohio ^5268
     The equipment and procedures employed  in the bacteriological analyses
of water by this  laboratory conformed  in general with the provisions of
Standard Methods  for the Examination of Water and Wastewater  (13 edition -
1971) and with the provisions of the Interstate Quarantine Drinking Water
Standards, except for  items marked with a cross "X" on the accompanying
form EPA 103  (Rev 3-71).   I terns marked with a "U" could not be determined
at the time of the survey.  I terns marked "0" do not apply to  the procedures
programmed in the  laboratory.  Specific deviations are described with
appropriate remedial action for compliance  ii the following recommendations:

                              RECOMMENDATIONS

Item 3  Sample Bottle

     SampleStaken in narrow-mouth bottles are more subject to accidental
contamination, especially  if the person collecting the sample is inexperi-
enced.  Therefore, it  is recommended that wide-mouth bottles  be phased  into
service as part of the normal  replacement of broken and lost  bottles.

Item 2 and k  Collection Procedures and Transportation and Storage

     Each sample  sheet should contain complete  information relating to  the
sample including  date of collection and the exact location sampled.  It is
also suggested that a space be provided to enter residual chlorine values.

Instructions to sample collectors

     It is recommended that the instructions on the back of the State of
Idaho Department of Health form DH 61271, figure 1,  relating  to the volume
of sample to be collected, be changed.  Presently the sample  collector  is
instructed to fill the sample bottle two-thirds (2/3) full.   Since the
capacity of the sample bottle is 120 ml, the volume received  for analysis
would only be 80 ml and the minimum recommended sample volume is 100 ml.
The present sample bottle could be marked to assure that a minimum of
100 ml is collected with ample space remaining  for adequate shaking.  Then
samplers could be instructed to fill the bottle to this mark.  It is also

-------
176
     recommended that the last sentence in item k on the back of the State of
     Idaho Department of Health form DH 61058, figure 1, "If sample must be
     held for some time they should be refrigerated", be deleted.  AH samples
     should reach the laboratory within 30 to 48 hours after collection.  There-
     fore it is suggested that sample collectors be  instructed to coordinate
     sample collection and shipment with existing mailing and shipping schedules
     in their area.

     I tern 5  Record of Laboratory Examination

          The procedure for reporting results of bacteriological analyses
     depends upon the type supply examined.  All results are reported by mail
     unless a special request is made for telephonic notification.  AH results
     concerning municipal supplies are reported to the municipality and to the
     State Regional Engineer.  A report is not sent directly to the Environmental
     Improvement Division in Boise.  Results concerning private and semi-public
     supplies are sent to the purveyor or owner and  to the County Environmentalist,
     The State Regional Engineer is not notified by  the laboratory.  If samples
     from private or semi-public supplies are unsatisfactory, a form letter,
     similar to Exhibit A,  accompanies the report.

          A semi-public supply is defined as one serving:  (1) new subdivisions
     not yet included in municipal supplies,   (2) schools,  and (3) industries.

          Basically there is no resampling program for remedial  action when
     unsatisfactory samples are reported,  Table 1.  Regulations do recommend
     that unsatisfactory samples be reported and a program be initiated which
     provides for daily samples to be collected from the same sampling point
     and examined until the results obtained from at least two consecutive
     samples indicate that contamination is no longer present.  Such regu-
     lations are outlined in the Public Health Drinking Water Standards, 1962,
     and the Surgeon General's memorandum to all State Health Officers, dated
     February 15, 1963.

-------
                                                                              177

         INSTRUCTIONS FOR COLLECTING SAMPLES
1. This bottle has been sterilized. Do not remove cap from bottle
   until just before collecting sample. Hold cap and bottle so that
   neither the inside of the cap nor the lip of the bottle are touched
   by the fingers or other objects.

2. If from faucet or pump allow the water to run three  to five
   minutes  before collecting. FILL  THE BOTTLE ABOUT TWO-
   THIRDS (2/3) FULL and return to laboratory promptly.

3. Please fill out the reverse side of this form as  completely as
   possible.
Form DH  61271

          INSTRUCTIONS FOR  COLLECTING  SAMPLES
 1. Select a clean faucet and sterilize by thorough flaming before opening.


 2. Allow water to run three to five minutes before taking sample.
3. Do not remove the cap from  the bottle until  just  before filling. While
   filling hold cap and bottle so that neither the inside of the cap or the
   lip of the bottle are touched by the fingers or  other objects.
4. Samples should reach  the laboratory as soon as possible after  they
   have been collected. If samples must be held for some time they should
   be refrigerated.
5.  Please fill out the reverse side of this form as completely as possible.


  *lf the water sample is collected at  the source prior to chlorination, it
   is considered a  "well"  sample. Samples collected  at various  points
   throughout the distribution system  should  be  checked  as "system"
   samples regardless of whether or not the water is chlorinated.
       DO NOT FILL BOTTLE MORE THAN TWO-THIRDS (2/3) FULL

Form DH 61058               Figure  1
Instructions for collecting samples  from  municipal  (DH 61058)
and  private and semi-public (DH  61271) water supplies

-------
178
                                     EXHIBIT A
                              CITY COUNTY HEALTH DEPT.
                                 1455  North Orchard
                                 BOISE,  IDAHO 83704

           Boise,  Idaho      CITY-COUNTY HEALTH DEPARTMENT     Telephone 375-5211

                              CONTAMINATED DRINKING WATER

                Laboratory examination of your water sample  indicates  that the water
           is contaminated with intestinal type of  bacteria.   This  indicates  that
           the water is polluted by organisms normally  found  in sewage and continued
           use may result in disease.

                Corrective measures can  be divided  into two  categories.   The  first
           is aimed at  preventing surface water or  other contaminating material
           from gaining access to the  well,  and the second is aimed at disinfecting
           the well.

           OLD WELLS:   These wells may be contaminated  because of poor construction
                       or because the  source of water itself  is contaminated.   If
                       the latter is the case,  (usually shallow wells)  little  can
                       be done to improve the situation except  to  have a well
                       driller seal (case) off this shallow  contaminated water and
                       seek safe water at a greater depth.  Dug wells  commonly show
                       contamination because it is  almost impossible to keep  out
                       surface or seepage waters.

           NEW WELLS:   It has been our experience that  new wells or recently
                       repaired old wells and water systems commonly show contami-
                       nation.   This is  because the materials used  are ordinarily
                       contaminated.   Disinfection,  as  outlined below,  will usually
                       correct this trouble.

                                DISINFECTING WELLS

                Wells may be disinfected by  adding  chlorine solutions,  (Clorox,
           White Magic,  Purex,  etc.) or  chlorine powders (H.T.,  B.K.,  Chloride of
           Lime, etc.)  directly to the water in the well.  About a  quart of solu-
           tion or 1/4  Ib.  of powder should  be  added to a 4-inch well  but pro-
           portionately more is required for larger wells.  Larger  quantities  may
           be required  where unusual conditions are encountered.  Add  this material
           directly to  the well itself in the evening and operate the  pump until
           chlorine can be detected at all taps, then allow to set  all night.   Pump
           out the well thoroughly the following morning until no smell or taste  of
           chlorine is  left and sample again (for laboratory  examination)  on  the
           following day.   Sample bottles supplied  by the Department of Health,
           Laboratory Services, should be used  for  this purpose.  Periodic sampling
           should  be done to be reasonably certain  that the difficulty has been
           corrected.
                                          ADA COUNTY HEALTH OFFICER

-------
                                                                      179
                          EXHIBIT A
     When it is suspected that the water is contaminated because of
poor design or construction there are a number of conditions to check.

     1.  Is the well deep enough to get satisfactory water?  Water
         from shallow wells and pitcher pumps is always subject to
         contamination.

     2.  Is the well tightly cased?  Make certain the casing is not
         perforated or cracked and that the joints are tight in the
         contaminated area or upper strata.

     3.  Is the well or casing tightly sealed at the top?  This is
         important to keep out surface contamination and rodents.

     4.  Is the top of the well in a pit?  This is a poor situation
         unless special protection is offered.

     5.  Is the surface drainage toward the well and are irrigation
         waters close?  If so, these conditions should be remedied.

     6.  Are outdoor toilets, septic tanks, cesspools or sewer lines
         close to the well?  If so, this is a definite hazard.

     7.  Is your well in lava formation where crevices may carry
         contamination great distances?

     8.  Are there other conditions which could contribute to the
         contamination of the water?

     If you are still in doubt concerning the safety of your well  or the
quality of your water, write or call the City-County Health Department.
We shall be glad to advise you or perhaps a sanitarian can call on
you.  After all, remember that a safe water supply is one of the founda-
tions of good family and community health.

-------
180
                                      Table I

                 Resampling  intervals on reported positive samples
                              January - October 1971
Name of municipal
water supply sampled
Bovi 1 1
(three sampl ing
po i n t s )
Crai gmont
(two sampl ing
points)
Ferdinand
(three sampl i ng
points)
Mi 1 1 view Water Co.
(two sampl i ng
po i n t s )
Sti tes
(ei ght sampl ing
po i n t s )





Date
col lected
2/8
2/8
3/10
7/23
9/7

7/2 b
7/26
9/20
8/2
9/27

1/18
1/18
5/17
7/19
7/19
8/16
8/16
11/1
Date
reported
2/11
2/11
3/15
7/28
9/13

7/30
7/30
9/24
8/5
10/1

1/21
1/21
5/20
7/2?
7/22
8/19
8/19
11/5
Date
resampled
3/10
none
5/12
8/2
none

9/20
none
11/7
none
1 1/2

2/18
none
6/21
none
8/16
9/20
none
none
Time interva
for resampl i
27 days

1
ng


approx 2 months
5 days


52 days

44 days

52 days

28 days

32 days

25 days
32 days




















-------
              EXHIBIT B

              PUBLIC HEALTH DISTRICTS
                  Effective July 1, 1971
V. South Central District
                           VI. Southeastern District

-------
182
     Item 12  Thermometers

          The accuracy of all thermometers should be verified at temperatures
     within the minimum and maximum range of intended use by comparison with
     one certified by the National Bureau of Standards or one of equivalent
     accuracy.  It is suggested that this service or such a thermometer be
     requested from the central laboratory in Boise.

     I tern 13  pH Meter

          The pH meter was sent to the central  laboratory in Boise approximately
     one [month ago for repairs.  During this time, media has not been checked
     for proper pH.  It is recommended that the central laboratory provide a
     replacement when pH meters or similar instrument? are being repaired.
     The pH of media is cr;tical and must be monitored.

     I tern 31  Laboratory Water Quality

          Distilled water used for bacteriological tests should be free of
     inorganic and organic substances either toxic or nutritive which may
     influence the survival or growth of microorganisms.  In order to assure
     the quality,   it is recommended that a distilled water suitability test
     be conducted at least once a year.  This test can also be used to evaluate
     newly  installed distillation apparatus,  recently repaired or cleaned
     distillation equipment,  and as a periodic  check for loss of tin plating
     over a copper base of existing stills.  This procedure for monitoring
     distilled water qutility could also be done by the Central State Laboratory
     as a service to its regional  laboratories.

     I tern 33  pH Measurements

          A record of the pH, medium lot number,  and date of preparation should
     be maintained on each batch of culture medium prepared.  The minimal
     requirement is to maintain such a record for each new bottle of medium used.
     By monitoring final medium pH,  a check can be made on possible errors in
     weighing, excessive heating or bteri1ization which could cause lactose
     hydrolysis,  chemical  contamination, or deterioration of ingredients that
     might occur during storage of the dehydrated medium.

     Item 3^  Sterilization of Mfdia

          It  is suggested that liquid media containing carbohydrates be sterilized
     at 121°C for  12 minutes.  This will reduce the chance of lactose hydrolysis
     resulting from excessive exposure of lactose to heat.  Such hydrolysis
     produces glucose and galactose which can be fermented by non-coliform
     organisms causing false-positive reactions.

     Item ^8  Completed Test

          The confirmed test can yield positive reactions in the absence of the
     coliform group  (false-positive test).  Therefore, it is necessary to establish

-------
                                                                            183
 the  validity of  the  confirmed  test  by  comparison with  the  completed  test.
 The  number  of  comparative  procedures depends on the  individual  location
 and  waters  being  examined.  Approximately 20 comparative procedures  each
 three months should  be  sufficient when there  is good agreement.  The number
 should  be  increased  if  results  from the confirmed and  completed  tests differ,
 The  completed  test  is the  reference standard.

 I tern 50 MF Procedure

     The filtration  unit,  funnel and receptacle, should be sterile at the
 start of each  filtration series.  Sterilization may be done by boiling,
 autoclaving, or ultraviolet radiation.

     It is  recommended  that sterile buffered water be  used to rinse  the
 funnel  after filtering  the sample.  The pH of  sterile  distilled water may
 have an adverse effect, especially  on  attenuated organisms, if the pH
 indicates that the distilled water  is  too acidic or basic.

 I tern 52  Counting -  Verification of Coliform Colonies

     Verification of coliform or suspected coliform colonies should  be
 conducted by picking colonies and inoculating  either lactose or  lauryl
 tryptose broth and then transferring positive  cultures to  brilliant  green
 lactose bile (BGB) broth.  The  present practice of picking colonies  and
 inoculating directly into BGB broth should be  discontinued because of the
 inherent lower recovery in more selective medium.   Atypical colonies may
 be developing  from attenuated coliform organisms and as a  result the
 typical sheen will not be observed.  Therefore, an enrichment procedure,
 inoculation into either lactose or  lauryl tryptose broth,   is required.

                                  RE-MARKS

     It is  suggested that the Boise Central Water Laboratory assume  the
 major responsibility for correction of deviations listed in items 2,  3,
 4, 5, 12, and  13 because all purchasing authority is at the state level
 and  the regional  laboratories are entirely dependent upon  the State  Health
 Department  for their needs and  procedural guidelines.

                             PERSONNEL APPROVED

     Mr. Jack Bennett,  Microbiologist  and Mrs. Sally Nick,  Assistant
Microbiologist are approved for the application of the multiple tube
 fermentation and membrane filter procedures for the bacteriological
examination of drinking water for total coliform and the application of
 the multiple tube fermentation procedure used  in stream quality measure-
ments for total and  fecal  coliform.

-------
184
                                     CONCLUSIONS

          The procedures and equipment in use at the time of the survey complied
     in general with the provisions of Standard Methods for the Examination of
     Water and Wastewater (13th edition - 1970 and tne Interstate Quarantine
     Drinking Water Standards, and with correction of deviations listed, it is
     recommended that the results be accepted for the bacterial examination of
     waters under interstate regulations.

-------
        APPENDIX D






CHEMICAL LABORATORY SURVEY

-------
                                                                            187
                    Survey of Water Chemistry Laboratory
                             Laboratory Division
                       Idaho State Department of Health
                                 Boise, Idaho

                                 Conducted by
                              Earl F. McFarren
                          Analytical Quality Control
                       Water Supply Programs Division
     The offices of the Environmental Improvement Division in downtown
 Boise and the Public Health Laboratory on Warm Springs Road were visited
 on January 26 and 27,  1972.  I was accompanied on this visit and introduced
 to the various personnel by Mr. William Mullen, Water Supply Consultant,
 Region X.  Mr.  Mullen,  however, was able to stay only for the first day of
 the survey.

 Substances Determined

     The water laboratory routinely determines turbidity, chlorides, fluorides,
 nitiates,  sulfates, total dissolved solids, copper, iron, lead, manganese and
 zinc as specified by the drinking water standards.  In addition,  they also
 routinely determine total solids, alkalinity, hardness, calcium,  sodium,
 phosphate,  silica and ammonia on potable waters even though these are not
 required.  They generally never do color,  odor, cyanide,  carbon chloroform
 extract, surfactants,  arsenic,  barium,  cadmium, chromium, selenium,
 silver, mercury, gross beta,  radium 226, or strontium 90.  Thus, in summary,
 although they routinely do twenty-three determinations,  only  eleven of these
 are required by the drinking water standards and fifteen substances specified
 in the drinking water standards are seldom, if ever,  done.  In addition, although,
 not at present specified by the drinking water standards, they have the capacity
 through the services of the EPA, Pesticides Community Study Laboratory
 located in the same building to do at least some water pesticide analysis,  but
 none were done last year.

 Laboratory Apparatus

    Although they have the equipment for the determination of color  (see item
 6a of survey form) they do not routinely do this determination.  Likewise,  they
 have the equipment to do cadmium, chromium,  and silver  (item 8a); mercury
 (item 8c); barium (item 8b); arsenic (item 16); cyanide (item  17); and fluoride
 with distillation  (item 18), but they do not do these determinations.   Fluoride,
 however,  is  done by the direct colorimetric SPA DNS  procedure and is  probably
generally satisfactory.

-------
188
      However, since the electrode procedure is more accurate and free from
  interferences, it was  recommended that they purchase an electrode.   They
  do not have equipment for the determination of the carbon chloroform extract
  (item 19) or the determination of radium 226 (item 29a).  Since carbon
  chloroform extraction equipment is not presently available, it was recom-
  mended that they wait until the new mini-sampler procedure and equipment
  becomes  available.

  Samples

      While the sample identification form is generally satisfactory, the sample
  collectors are generally very careless in filling-in the required information
  and as  a result many  samples are poorly identified.  In addition,  there is no
  place to indicate whether the sample is a raw or finished water or whether a
  grab or composite sample (item 33b).

  Records

      A compilation dated January 1968,  and listing the results of analysis of
  public water supplies  was obtained from Mr. Vaughn Anderson's  office,
  Director  of the Environmental Improvement Division, but the  latest results
  were dated 1966,  and  most were the results of even  earlier analyses. However,
  Mr. Anderson did have  in his files results  of more recent analyses on many of
  the supplies.   These have been key punched,  but no recent print-out was avail-
  able.  Results of all municipal water supplies analyzed last year  were available
  at the laboratory and a review of these files indicated that a total of 209 samples
  were analyzed last year.  However, 50 of these were for fluoride only, and
  seven for iron and manganese only.   Of the remaining 31 were analyzed for 20
  substances and 121  for 23 substances.   However, these 209 samples  represented
  only about 46 different supplies,  since 128  were wells (many of which were
  different  wells in the same system).   Nineteen of the samples were distribution
  samples and only 12 were from water supplies using surface water as a source.

      According to Mr.  Anderson there are about 300  municipal water supplies
  in the state, and about 20 of these have surface sources.  However, from the
  above search of the records it appears that only about 35 or 40 ground water
  supplies and 10 or 12  surface water supplies were analyzed last year.  Thus,
  in conclusion if,  as a  minimum,  the surface water supplies are analyzed twice
  a year they should have done (20 x 2) 40, whereas they only did 10 or 12,  and
  they should have analyzed at least one third of the 280 ground  water supplies
  (once every three years) or about 95,  whereas, they only did  35 or 40 (see
  item 36a).  In addition,  about 17 supplies are supposedly fluoridated,  but a
  review  of the records  indicate that several were overfluoridated and most of
  the others were underfluoridated to the extent that it was useless.  Since there
  is no other check on the fluoridated supplies these supplies should be analyzed

-------
                                                                           189
at least once a week, which would mean about 884 (12 x 52) a year, whereas
only about 200 were done.  There is another problem,  however, in that many
of the supplies are wells scattered throughout the system and each well is
separately fluoridated, so actually the total number should be much higher.
In such cases, however,  I wonder if it really is practical to attempt fluori-
dation.  The City of Boise, for example, has 37 wells which would need to be
separately fluoridated and checked during peak consumption periods in the
summer time.

     Other problem areas, as indicated from  a review of the records,  which
may require more or less continuous  surveillance, are a few wells which
produce waters with total dissolved solids over 500,  or nitrates over 40,
and others with high iron and manganese values which causes difficulties
in the operation of water heaters and boilers.

Laboratory

     The water chemistry laboratory which is  responsible for analysis of
both polluted and potable waters,  consists of  one  2 module (about 20 by 20)
and a one 1 module laboratory (about 10 by 20) which also serves as an
office for the chief chemist.  Although these laboratories are perhaps
adequate for the three people which at present occupy them, they do not allow
for an expansion of either the number of persons  or an increase in activity.
Even now there is inadequate storage  space for chemicals and glassware,
and no separate space for storage and handling of sample bottles.

Quality Control

     The laboratory does routinely check the quality of their distilled and
deionized water, but otherwise,  has no routine program for checking the
quality of their analyses (item 42).

     If the laboratory desires to be certified for analysis of those chemistries
which they are now running routinely, it will be necessary for them to
establish their proficiency by analyzing a reference sample which we can
supply.

Staff

     The water chemistry staff consists of a chief chemist (Merle Maxwell)
who has a masters degree in chemistry,  an assistant with a bachelor's
degree in biology  (with some training and experience in chemistry), and a
technician.  In general,  the salaries of all appear to be  low, and the number
is inadequate to carry out the desired chemistries with the desired frequencies.
In addition,  another person is needed on Mr.  Anderson's staff to be in charge
and responsible for carrying out an  effective water supply program.

-------
190

  Conclusions

      The water chemistry laboratory routinely analyzes for 23 substances,
  however, only 11 of these are required by the drinking water standards,
  and 14 substances that are  in the standards are seldom  if ever run.

      The laboratory analyzed about 35 or 40 ground water supplies and 10 or
  12 surface  water supplies last year, whereas, even as a minimal operation
  they should have analyzed at least 95 ground water supplies and 40  surface
  water supply samples.

      About  17 water supplies are supposedly fluoridated and hence,  as a
  minimal operation the laboratory should have analyzed about 884 samples for
  fluoride, whereas,  they did only about 200.  The results of analyses  indicate
  the need, since a review of the records revealed that a  few were overfluoridated
  and most of the others were underfluoridated to the extent that it was useless.
  In order to increase the accuracy of the analysis, it is recommended that the
  laboratory purchase a fluoride electrode, since they are at present using the
  SPADNS procedure without distillation.

      The equipment is available so that all of the chemistries specified by the
  drinking water standards, except the carbon chloroform extraction and radium
  226, could be carried out,  however, more personnel would be needed to carry
  out these additional chemistries and the desired increase in sampling.  At
  least two additional persons (one chemist and a  technician) are needed in the
  laboratory and an additional person to be responsible for carrying  out an
  effective water supply program is needed in the Environmental Improvement
  Division.

      There already is inadequate storage space for chemicals and glassware
  in the laboratory, and no place is provided for receiving and shipping or
  storage of  samples and sample bottles.  If additional personnel are hired,
  more laboratory space also will be required.

      Salaries of all laboratory personnel appear to be low.
                                             Earl F. McFarren

-------
               SURVEY OF WATER CHEMISTRY LABORATORIES
                                                                            191
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
        Office of Water Programs
          Water Hygiene Division
                                           Indicating conformity with the 13th
                                           edition of Standard Methods for the
                                           Examination of Water and Waste -
                                           water (1971).
Survey by   Earl F. McFarren

Date     1-26-72
                                      X =  Deviation     U =  Undetermined

                                                 O =  Not Used
Laboratory Public Health Laboratory

Street Warm Springs Road 	
City    Boise
                                     Director  pr. Darrell W. Brock

                                     Chief Chemist Merle Maxwell
                   State  Idaho
Water Supply Chief Vaughn Anderson
1.
3.
                             Substances Determined
Physical determinations
   a.  color
   b.  odor
   c.  turbidity	
         Method
                                                 nephelometric
2.   Miscellaneous anions, organics and solids
a.
b.
c.
d.
e.
f.
g.
h.
i.
Metals
a.
b.
c.
d.
e.
f.
g-
h.
i.
3-
k.
1.
m.
chlorides
cyanide
carbon chloroform extract
fluorides
nitrates
sulfates
surfactants
total dissolved solids
other
arsenic
barium
cadmium
chromium
copper
iron
lead
manganese
selenium
silver
mercury
zinc
other
mercuric nitrate titration

•
SPADNS without distillation
ultraviolet spectrophotometr|c
turbidimetric

gravimetric at 103°





atomic absorption
atomic absorption
atomic absorption
atomic absorption



atomic absorption

                                                                           X
                                                                           X
                                                                           X
                                                                           X
                                                                           X
                                                                           X
                                                                           X
                                                                           X
                                                                           X
                                                                           X
                                                                           X

-------
4.  Radioactivity
       a.  gross beta_
       b.  radium 226"
9.
       c.  strontium 90
       d.  other
5.  Pesticides
       a.  aldrin	
       b.  chlordane
       c.  dieldrin	
       d.  DDT
           endrin
           heptachlor
    e.
    f.
    g.   heptachlor epoxide
    h.   methoxychlor
    i.   lindane
       j.   toxaphene
       k.   total organic phosphates plus carbamates
       1.   chlorinated phenoxy alkyl pesticides
       m.  other
                             Laboratory Apparatus

                                   Make
                                                      Model
6.  Color comparators

       a.  visual
                                          Taylor disc comparator
       b.  filter photometer

    Spe ctrophotomete r 	
       a.  visible  	
       b.  flame  	
       c.  other
                          Beckman
Model B
                          Beckman
Model R
                 Beckman UV and Visible

Atomic absorption spectrophotometer
    a.   air-acetylene burner  	
        nitrous-oxide burner  	
        cold
-------
 Laboratory                                Location                    Date
                                           Warm Springs Road               193
    Public Health Laboratory	Boise. Idaho	1/26/72
                                    Make                 Model
 10.  Other chromatographic equipment
        a.  thin-layer                      Yes
        b.  Kuderna-Danish evaporator	Yes
        c.  other
 11.  Turbidimeter                         Hack            2100
20.  Drying oven	Precision
21.  Steam bath         Precision
22.  Hot water bath                  Yes
23.  Muffle furnace                  Yes
 12.  Amperemeter                                                            Q
 13.  Titrimeter	                            Q

 14.  pH meter   Radiometer.  Beckman expanded scale. Corning	    	
 15.  Fluoride electrode                                                       O
 16.  Arsine generator	have	                            X
 17.  Cyanide still    	have	                            X
18.  Fluoride still	have	                            X
19.  Carbon-chloroform extraction equipment
       a.  high or low flow columns                                           X
       b.  carbon drying oven                                                 X
       c.  extraction apparatus                                                X
       d.  manifold for solvent evaporation                                    v
24.  Distilled water still   Two 10 gallons per hr.        Barnstead
               •f            "-	 «... i . I,   fc		    — •  • • —
25.  Water deionizer   mixed bed,  large cartridge    	
26.  Conductivity meter   Wheatstone bridge, and YST	
27.  Balance, sensitive to 0. 1 mg.   Three Mettler balances
28.  Automatic analyzer for
       a. nitrates plus nitrites
       b. nitrites

-------
 194          .                      Make                 Model
28.  Automatic analyzer for (Continued)
       c.   chloride
       d.   sulfate
       e.   cyanide
       f.   fluoride
       g.  other
29.  Radiation Counting Equipment
       a.   internal proportional counter   Beckman, Wide-beta II
       b.   alpha-scintillation counter
       c.  other   gamma scan                    Radiation Instruments
30.  Other Instruments or Equipment
       a.      '	K jeldahl	  	
       b-  .	 BOD
       c-  	con
       d.
                                      Samples

31.  Containers
       a.  Non-reusable plastic containers preferred for the
           collection of samples for general inorganic analysis.  .  .
       b.  Glass bottles with teflon lines caps preferred for
           collection of pesticide samples	
       c.  Other kind	nalgene% reuse able .

32.  Preservatives
       a.  Samples for metal analysis preserved by the addition
           of nitric acid to a pH of about 2.0	
       b.  Nitrates and methylene blue active substances preserved
           by addition  of mercuric chloride	
       c.  Cyanide preserved by the addition of sodium
           hydroxide to a pH of 11	
       d.  No known or required preservative for turbidity, color,
           pH,  chloride,  sulfate,.  fluoride,  specific conductance
           and total dissolved solids	
       e.  If no preservative is used,  in general samples are
           analyzed within 72 hrs,. if. not .samples are frgz§n.

-------
 Laboratory                                 Location                    Date
  „ , ..   TT  ,., T  ,    .                      Warm Springs Road            1/126/72
  Public Health Laboratory                         r   &                    /   /
	Boise. Idaho	
 33.  Identification
        a.  Every bottle should be identified by attaching an
           appropriately inscribed tag, a label or a number
           corresponding to a sample identification sheet		
        b.  The minimum  information required on the tag or
           correspondingly numbered sheet includes; name
           of the  water supply sampled, location of sampling
           site,  exact date and time  of collection, type of
           sample (raw, finished,  grab or  composite) by
           whom  collected, and kind of preservative if added	
 34.  Collection
        a.  Samples from wells collected after pumping for
           a sufficient time to assure that the sample is
           representative of the ground water which feeds
           the well	    fj
        b.  Finished  (treated) water sampled at the plant by
           use of a pipeline drip device or the collecting
           and compositing of hourly (or other interval) samples	    U
        c.  Distribution samples obtained at several different
           points in  the sj^stem; usually grab samples  obtained
           without first flushing the line, although both kinds of
           samples may at times be desirable	    U

                                     Records
 35.  Availability
        a.  Assay results assembled and available for inspection		
        b.  Notation made of those water supplies which did not
           comply with one  or more standards, and some sort
           of follow-up program instigated	
 36.  Number analyzed annually
        a.  private supplies  	
        b.  semi-public
        c.  municipal  	46 supplies analyzed last year
             (1) sources     128 wells (35 or 40 supplies)	
             (2) finished	12'from rivers, lakes or springs
             (3) distribution	19	

-------
37.  Frequency
       a. Physical characteristics measured at least once a week
          and preferably every day at the treatment plant .........   X
       b. Chemical characteristics determined at least once every
          three years on ground water supplies and semi-annually
          on surface water supplies unless previous data has indicated
          a potential problem which needs to be monitored more frequently    y
                                  Laboratory

38.  Physical facilities
       a. Bench top area adequate ...................    X
       b. Sufficient cabinet space for chemicals and glassware ......    X
       c. Adequate hood space .....................  _
       d. Office space available for record keeping and
          processing reports .....................    X
       e. Space for storage and handling of bottles	    X

39.  Glassware
       a. Thoroughly washed with suitable detergent and warm water  .  .  .
       b. Rinsed immediately in clean tap water to  remove detergent  .  .  .
       c. Final rinse with distilled water	
       d. Bichromate  cleaning solution used for difficult to
          clean glassware		
       e. Glassware used for pesticide analysis should receive a
          final rinse with A.  R. grade acetone or ethyl acetate		
40.  Organization
       a. Total number of laboratories examining water
       b. Water laboratory is a separate unit, and not part of a
          food, drug,  or toxicological laboratory	
       c. Each of the other regional laboratories have the same
          capabilities	
       d. Radiation chemistry is a part of the water laboratory .

                                Quality Control

41.  Laboratory water quality
       a. Conductivity of water checked at regular intervals  . .
       b. Use of deionized water for metal analysis	

-------
Laboratory                                Location                    Date
  Public Health Laboratory                 Warm SPrin§S  Road         1/26/72
	      	Boise. Idaho	      .
42.  Control Samples
       a. A control sample of known composition (in addition to
          any necessary standards) is analyzed every time one or
          more unknown samples are analyzed	      -^-
       b. A control sample is available and used for each
          substance specified in the drinking water standards	      X
       c. A control chart has been constructed  for each substance,
          and the precision of each determination has been
          calculated	      X
43.  Reference Samples
       a. Accuracy and ability of laboratory to perform each
          analysis  checked by requiring them to  analyze an
          unknown  reference  sample(s) supplied  by the surveying
          office or laboratory at least once a year	      X

                                     Staff

44.  Personnel
       a. Total number of staff    3		      X
       b. Number with degrees in chemistry  i     	      X
       c. Does state operate under a merit system	
       d. Are job descriptions written	   	
       e. Does state encourage attendance at professional
          meetings, short courses,  etc	
45.  Salaries
       a. Chief chemist $nj 972 _ .............  ...      X
       b. Assistant chemist  $g_ 975 _ ..............      X
       c. Aids $5620            ...................      X

-------
           APPENDIX E






MANPOWER NEEDS AND COST ESTIMATES



   FOR WATER SUPPLY ACTIVITIES

-------
                                                                   201
MANPOWER NEEDS AND COST ESTIMATES FOR WATER SUPPLY ACTIVITIES

                  Engineering Surveillance

     Environmental Protection Agency experience indicates that on
the average, at least four man-days per year are required to pro-
vide review of plans and specifications, meetings with governing
bodies, field surveys, report writing, review of operational and
water quality reports, and informal on-the-job training.  Cross-
connection control activities are excluded from this estimate as
this activity is the responsibility of the purveyor.  However,
it is estimated that surveillance for cross-connection control
in the smaller Idaho communities may be accomplished by the
regional engineer within the four day allocation.  Average annual
estimated personnel cost for the above activities is $20,000l/.
This figure includes salary, fringe benefits, travel, office
supplies and space, and the cost of 1/3 secretary.
     Assuming a man-year is equal to 225 man-days, one individual
can provide surveillance over (225 man-days per year/4 man-days
per system) = 56 systems/year.  The average cost per system for
engineering surveillance is ($20,000/56) = $335 per year.
     The known number of public water supplies in Idaho is
currently 274.  Early indications from the water supply inventory
in progress is that this number will increase significantly.
]_/ All cost estimates and calculations are rounded to nearest
   $1,000.

-------
202
             However,  for the purposes  of these calculations  a  figure of 274
             public water supplies  was  used.   On this  basis,  the  following
             annual  personnel  requirements and cost  estimates for engineering
             surveillance are:
                                                                      i
                  A.   Personnel:
                       1.   Professional:
                            (274  systems) X (4 man days/system) =1100 man-days
                            (1100 man days) /  (225 man days/man year) =4.9
                            man-years
                       2.   Clerical:
                            (4.9  man-years professional)  X  (1/3 clerical/pro-
                            fessional)  =  1.6 man-years
                  B.   Cost:
                       ($355/system)  X  (274 systems) = $97,000

                                            Training
                  Two  types  of training,  State staff and  waterworks  operators,
             are considered  with  the  following assumptions.   Each professional
             should receive  5 days  training per year at an estimated cost of
             $100 per  day to cover  tuition, travel and per diem.   On the basis
             of each professional providing surveillance  over 56  systems, the
             cost of training State staff is  ($500)/(56)  = $9 per system.
                  Assume  also that  utilities or operators are responsible for
             entry level  training,  that the State will adsorb the cost of short-
             term training to update  operator  skills and  knowledge of new
             regulations,  and that  one  operator per  system receives  on the
             average one  day of training  per year.   The cost  to the  State is

-------
                                                                    203
estimated  to  be  $60  per  system  per year with  0.5  man-year  profes-
sional  staff  allocated to  coordination of  the training  program.
     The annual  personnel  requirements and  cost estimates  per
system  for training  are:
     A.  Personnel:  0.5 man-year professional staff
                     0.2 man-year support  staff
     B.  Cost:
           ($9/system) +  ($60/system)  = $69/system
           ($69/system) X  (274 systems) - $19,000

                     Standards  Revision &  Planning
     Revision of existing  standards and regulations, development of
new standards and policy,  establishment of  program  plans,  and coor-
dination of activities are essential  to a well administered  program.
Resource expenditures for  these water supply  activities are  esti-
mated at 0.6 man-year professional staff, 0.2 man-year  support
staff,  and  $12,000 annually.

                     Bacteriological  Surveillance
     Bacteriological analyses are considered  an operational  expense
of the  utility.  The State is responsible for performing a minimum
number  of  check sample analyses and for conducting  periodic  surveys
of laboratories.  Assume the State will  examine from each  system
5% of the  distribution system samples required by the drinking
water standards, or two samples, whichever  is  greater.  On the

-------
204
              basis of population served by the 274 public water supplies and
              the minimum number of bacteriological samples required for each
              supply, the estimated number of bacteriological  samples to be
              analyzed by the State laboratories in Idaho is 7000 per year.
              Assuming a cost of $5 per bacteriological  sample,  including
              postage, the estimated cost to the State for bacteriological
              sampling is $35,000 per year.
                   An additional aspect of the program is laboratory surveillance.
              It will be necessary to certify triennually all  laboratories  used
              by the utilities for bacteriological  analyses.  Assume the need for
              surveillance of five state laboratories  and five utility or private
              laboratories.   Many of the medium size communities may elect  to
              reimburse the State for analyzing their  samples  in State labora-
              tories.  Environmental  Protection Agency experience indicates the
              cost of triennial  surveillance of State  bacteriological labora-
              tories to be $130  per laboratory per  year.   Small  laboratory  costs
              are estimated at $85 per year.  The estimated cost for laboratory
              certification is approximately $1000  per year.
                   Total State cost for bacteriological  surveillance is estimated
              to be $36,000 per  year.

                                       Chemical  Surveillance
                   Chemical  analyses for proper operational control  as well as
              special analyses for contaminants known  to  be present  at levels

-------
                                                                    205
approaching established drinking water  limits  should  be  performed
routinely by the utility.  The State  is responsible for  sufficient
sampling to insure that water of satisfactory  chemical quality  is
delivered to customers of public water  supply  systems.   Environ-
mental Protection Agency experience indicates  the following lab--
oratory personnel requirements (man-days per sample)  for various
analyses: wet chemistry parameters, 1.8; trace metals, 0.4;
pesticides, 0.8;  organics, 0.6; radiochemical, 0.6.  Estimated
personnel costs including salary, equipment, supplies and secre-
tarial support are $20,000 per man-year.
     Of the 274 known public water supplies in Idaho, approximately
45 utilize surface or a combination of ground and surface water.
Assuming that each supply utilizing solely ground water requires
a wet chemistry, trace metals, and radiochemically analysis tri-
ennial ly and each supply utilizing surface water or combination
ground and surface water requires a complete chemical  analysis
annually and radiochemical  analysis triennally, the resource
requirements for an adequate chemical  sampling program are:
     A.   Personnel:
          1.   Surface Supplies:
               (45 surface  supply samples)  X (1.8+0.4+0.8+0.6+(0.6/3)
               man-days  per samples)  = 171  man-days
          2.   Ground  Supplies:
               (229  ground  supply samples)  X 1/3(1.8+0.4+0.6  man-days
               per samples)  =  214 man-days

-------
206
                        3.   Total Estimated man-years for chemical  analyses:
                             (171 man-days + 214 man-days)/(225 man-days per
                             year) =1.7 man-years
                   B.   Cost:
                        (1.7 man-years X ($20,000/man-year) = $34,000
                   It is anticipated in Idaho that in the foreseeable future
              only the State laboratory will have the staff and equipment to
              analyze wet chemistry, trace metals, pesticide, organic and
              radiochemical samples.  Occasionally a contract laboratory may be
              called upon by a public water supply for chemical analyses.  There
              may be no more than 6 or 7 laboratories in the State and, there-
              fore, the annual  cost of chemical  laboratory surveillance in Idaho
              will be low.  Based on Environmental Protection Agency experience,
              the cost of certification of chemical  laboratories is  approximately
              $390 every 3 years or $130 annually.  The estimated cost of the
              chemical laboratory evaluation and certification program will be
              less than $1000 per year.
                   State cost for chemical surveillance is estimated to be
              $35,000 per year.

                                 Management and Overhead
                   Personnel costs and supervisor salaries are estimated to be
              20% of the surveillance, training and program development costs.
              This does not include costs for centralized services such as
              accounting, purchasing, etc.  The estimated annual management

-------
                                                                   207
and overhead costs for Idaho's water supply program are:

                    20% (Engineering Surveillance + Training +
                    Standards Revision and Planning + Bacteriological
                    Surveillance + Chemical Surveillance)

                    20% ($97,000 + $19,000 + $36,000 + $35,000)

                    .20 ($199,000) - $40,000 per year

-------