United States
Environmental Protection Office of Water EPA 810/R-94-002
Agency 4601 February 1994
NATIONAL DRINKING WATER
ADVISORY COUNCIL
MINUTES OF MEETING
DECEMBER 2 AND 3, 1993
RKyctod/Ftecydabte
Prtntod wtth Soy/Canala Ink an p*w ttw
oo«ab« « IM« 50% racpMd Kwr
-------
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
National Drinking Water Advisory Council
December 2-3,1993
The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency sponsored a meeting of the National Drinking
Water Advisory Council (NDWAC) at the St. James Hotel on December 2 and 3, 1993.
The following members were present on December 2, 1993:
John Gaston L. D. McMullen
Maurice Are! Eric Olson
Becky Cain Joan Rose
Paul Foran Susan Seacrest
Marilyn Hotch Wilma Warren
Carolyn Hardy-Olsen J.C. Watts
Frederick Marrocco
The following members were absent on December 2, 1993:
Carmen Leal
Rhonda Swaney
The following members were present on December 3, 1993:
\
John Gaston L. D. McMullen
Becky Cain Eric Olson
Paul Foran Joan Rose
Marilyn Hotch Susan Seacrest
Carolyn Hardy-Olsen Wilma Warren
Frederick Marrocco
The following members were absent on December 3, 1993:
Maurice Arel
Carmen Leal
Rhonda Swaney
J.C. Watts
-------
Also present during all or part of the meeting were:
Charlene E. Shaw, Designated Federal Official, NDWAC
James Elder, Director, Office of Ground Water and Drinking Water
Tudor Davies, Director, Office of Science and Technology
Robert Perciasepe, Assistant Administrator for Water
Peter Cook, Deputy Director, Office of Ground Water and Drinking Water
Robert Blanco, Office of Ground Water and Drinking Water
Carl Reeverts, Deputy, Enforcement and Program Implementation Division
Peter Shanaghan, Office of Ground Water and Drinking Water
Ed Bender, Science Advisory Board
Terry Harvey, Office of Research and Development
Verne A. Ray, Science Advisory Board Liaison
Registered at the meeting were:
See Attachment A
Thursday. December 2. 1993
I. Opening Remarks and Welcome
Chairperson John Gaston welcomed new members Ms. Cain, Mr. McMullen, and Mr.
Arel to the Council and he noted that Ms. Leal, Mr.. Watts, Ms. Olsen, and Mr. Foran will be
retiring from the Council.
JJ. Update. Office of Ground Water and Drinking Water
James Elder, Director of the Office of Ground Water and Drinking Water ^OGWDW),
explained that the Agency is still in transition; seven out of ten Regional Administrators are not
yet in place.
Since the last meeting, EPA delivered the Chafee-Lautenberg report to Congress. The
report presents a great deal of historical information and current statistics that describe the
drinking water program. Ten different legislative proposals accompanied the report.
At the end of May, the Administration sent its outline for the State Revolving Fund
(SRF) to Congress. In July, at Senator Max Baucus' request, EPA translated those principles
into legislative language.
The regulatory negotiation process (reg-neg) on disinfectants and disinfection by-products
(D/DBP) concluded in June. During the negotiations, the need to provide additional public
-------
health protection from microbial contamination became apparent. Negotiators recognized that
more research is necessary before the rule packages are completed. The Agency wants to
coordinate with other federal agencies to finish the research.
Primacy continues to be a concern. Maine retained primacy by passing legislation
establishing a gubernatorial commission and a fee program. In response to a fee boycott by
public water systems (PWSs), the Governor of Idaho threatened to give back primacy if the state
did not generate a percentage of fees by a fixed date. Region 7 recently sent a letter to the State
of Iowa outlining the deficiencies of the state program. Keeping primacy in Iowa will require
significant effort.
The Agency is working with the Bull Run Coalition of Oregon to establish alternative
dates for proposing and finalizing rules currently under court-ordered deadlines.
Since May, EPA has focused on implementing two rules. For the Lead and Copper rule,
the Agency communicated to the public the results of the medium systems sampling. Under the
Surface Water Treatment Rule (SWTR), EPA continues efforts to ensure that systems required
to install filtration do so.
The Agency began its reorganization to strengthen enforcement. Headquarters OGWDW
will shift 14 people and the regional offices will shift 95 to enforcement.
The Administration plans to streamline the federal government. As a result, EPA must
achieve a supervisor-to-employee ratio of 1:11; the current ratio for the Office of Water is 1:3.5.
The Office of Water will realize budget cuts in FY94 of about 7 percent, however funds
to upgrade the data system were protected from the cut.
EPA continues efforts to combine the comprehensive state ground water protection
program idea and the local well head protection program idea into both a surface water and a
ground water concept.
III. Status Report on Small Water Systems
Small Systems Coordinator Peter Shanaghan reported that approximately 66 percent of
the 58,000 community water systems (CWS) that EPA regulates, are small or very small
systems. The key issue to solving the problems of small systems is determining system viability.
State viability programs have three components: screening new systems, evaluating existing
systems to determine viability, and restructuring nonviable, noncomplying systems.
-------
More coordination is necessary between state drinking water programs and public utility
commissions (PUCs). Investor-owned small systems need a simple way to approach PUCs for
rate increases. The Small Companies Committee of the National Association of Water
Companies recently drafted a proposal outlining an expedited rate-making process.
Mr. Shanaghan reported that, within the wide spectrum of restructuring options,
approximately half of small CWSs may be eligible for some type of restructuring.
Five demonstration projects are in progress across the country. They include the
installation of an ion exchange unit to control radium in a small mobile home park in Spicewood,
TX; a compact version of a conventional type of treatment technology which was donated to a
system in Freestone, CA; and point-of-use fluoride-removal devices which were installed in a
small system in Suffolk, VA. Two new demonstration projects recently began, one in Amsbry,
PA and one in Perrysville, IN.
EPA continues developing alternative approaches to state design review. EPA also
worked to establish relationships with the Rural Development Office and the Community
Development Block Grant staff to support reauthorization efforts.
IV. Report of the Resource Protection Subcommittee
Chairperson Carolyn Olsen reviewed the subcommittee's recommendations in the areas
of source water, watershed, and wellhead protection.
In the area of source water protection EPA should: make SRF funds available for source
water protection implementation activities and land acquisition (if the funds are matcned by the
community); endorse the two-tiered approach for the source water program and implement a
similar approach for the watershed program; explore partnerships between EPA and health
agencies to reinforce the connection between source water protection and public health; consider
communities' current wellhead protection efforts in the development of the new source water
protection program; and extend public education efforts to establish source water protection at
the local level if source water protection legislation does not pass.
The subcommittee recommended that EPA do the following in the area of watershed
protection: require that states involve all appropriate environmental programs, including public
health, when implementing watershed protection programs; require that states have legislative
authority t" organize, fund, and regulate political subdivisions organized around watersheds; and
-------
include a mandatory watershed planning process in any concurrent watershed legislation
(assuming that the source water protection program passes as part of the Safe Drinking Water
Act [SDWA] reauthorization).
For wellhead protection, the subcommittee recommended that EPA: recognize wellhead
protection as the treatment technology of choice for ground water; reinstate funding for wellhead
protection demonstration projects in the 1995 budget; and present a briefing on microbial
contamination at the next Council meeting.
The subcommittee's specific recommendations are listed in Attachment B.
V. State Program Subcommittee
Eric Olson reported that the subcommittee recommends that EPA:
provide the Council with the background materials and a report of the outcome
of the meeting with ASDWA on monitoring reductions;
work closely with state and federal agencies to ensure that funding for water
supply projects is not spent on encouraging or developing nonviable water
systems;
encourage state and local governments to consider appropriate pricing,
acquisition, and management policies to encourage consolidation and
restructuring;
require that states adopt viability programs tailored to local needs and resources
to prevent the creation of new nonviable systems and to help states resolve
existing nonviable systems; and
take a position in favor of repealing the current tax on contributions to aid
construction of PWSs.
The subcommittee's specific recommendations are listed in Attachment C.
VI. EPA Strategic Issue Plans
Office of Research and Development (ORD) Issue Planner, Terry Harvey, explained that
EPA's research strategy will focus on broad assurance, ecology, and pollution prevention. The
disinfection research module, using a holistic approach, also will be a significant effort for ORD
in the next five years.
-------
EPA should continue plans to develop research alliances with other federal agencies and
should investigate the benefits of public/private partnerships, he said.
Mr. Harvey would like to see a drinking water consortium and a council on disinfection
research established.
Regarding the Disinfection Rule, Mr. Harvey suggested that EPA: balance microbial and
chemical risks taking into account health effects, treatment, analytical methods and risk
assessment; develop a human database, where feasible; and evaluate comparative risks for
disinfection. The Disinfection Rule exemplifies the usefulness and effectiveness of a
collaborative approach.
There is a growing concern about microbial risks. Cryptosporidiosis was brought back
into the spotlight by the outbreak in Milwaukee. ORD wants to perform a quantitative microbial
risk assessment to determine the point at which microbial contamination causes problems and
the point at which it causes disease.
Mr. Harvey reported that EPA's North Carolina Laboratory is researching haloacidic
acids and trihalomethanes. The laboratory will concentrate on precursor reduction in the
watershed, ozone by-products, chloramines, chlorine dioxide, and small system support.
ORD's budget was lower in 1993 than in previous years. The offices' current budget is
25 - 35 percent below what it needs.
VII. American Water Works Research Foundation
Rick Karlin, Deputy Director of the American Water Works Research Foundation, said
that the Foundation sponsors approximately 20 research projects a year. Approximately 260
projects were completed in the past 10 years. The Foundation allocated 40 percent of its budget
to D/DBP for the coming years.
The Foundation recently conducted a public attitude survey for public utility managers
to use in determining what consumers think about their water. The survey found that customers
want quality, health and safety from their water utility; about two-thirds of all Americans believe
they receive very little or no information about the quality of their drinking water and that they
have very little to say about the quality of their drinking water and would like more public
involvement; and most water utility customers would be willing to pay more for quality drinking
water.
-------
VOL Update on Activities of the Office of Science and Technology COST)
Tudor Davies, Director, Office of Science and Technology, reported that, since the
November meeting, OST: published a national sewage/sludge rule; finalized a national toxics
rule; proposed a Great Lakes Initiative; published effluent guidelines for pulp and paper plants;
and provided support to the drinking water program in setting maximum contaminant level goals
(MCLGs). In addition, OST has done much work with D/DBP, the surface water treatment rule
(SWTR), and radionuclides.
In the coming year, OST plans to shift from the alpha-numeric classification of
carcinogens to a more descriptive classification; research non-cancer risk estimation; explore the
relative source contributions of toxicants to humans; develop methodologies and criteria for
beach closure; and issue a notice requesting comment on the three-category approach for setting
MCLGs.
IX. Health. Science, and Standards Subcommittee Report
Joan Rose, Chairperson, summarized the subcommittee's recommendations to EPA.
Regarding the identification, prioritization, and ranking of contaminants, the subcommittee
recommended that EPA: complete development of the guidance document addressing
appropriate data reporting; rank chemicals by weighing transport and fate as they are produced
and released; collect toxicity data on chemicals in drinking water through Federal Insecticide,
Fungicide and Rodenticide Act registrants for registered pesticides; develop the capability to
interface with geographic information systems; and support waivers to reduce sampling
frequency.
In the area of microbial risk ranking and characterization, the subcommittee
recommended that the Agency develop a microbial assessment program run in parallel to the
chemical occurrence assessment program.
Additionally, the subcommittee recommended that the Agency assess its resource needs
to undertake risk assessments for the Information Collection Rule (ICR), D/DBP, and the
ESWTR; use Best Available Technologies (BATs) when systems cannot be restructured,
consolidated, or reorganized; recommend national accreditation of systems addressing point-of-
entry or point-of-use reliability and technical issues; sponsor research to promote rule making
under die direction of the Office of Water; assess resource needs for promulgating rules in a
-------
timely manner; request that the Science Advisory Board (SAB) review arsenic risk
characterization; include the Centers for Disease Control and state health agencies in the ICR;
and consider implementing the ICR in a pilot program.
The subcommittee's specific recommendations are listed in Attachment D.
X. Briefing on the Science Advisory Board Environmental Futures Project
The environmental futures project, described by Ed Bender, is an attempt to consider the
current factors in society that will affect the environment of the future, the changes that may
occur, and the potential effect of those changes on the Agency.
The Environmental Futures Committee tasked its subcommittees to conduct
environmental futures research for six months. The results will be compiled into a report and
submitted to the Administrator.
EPA will use futures research in the development of assessment scenarios to identify
trends. Researchers will consider the implications of these trends to assist EPA in planning.
XI. Report on the Science Advisory Board (SAB>
Since the last meeting, Verne Ray reported, the SAB found that the D/DBP program in
Cincinnati is proceeding very well.
The executive committee recommended that EPA: research by-products associated with
alternate disinfectants used with ozone; characterize major by-products systematically and link
the characterizations to any potential etiologic agent for non-cancer disease; perform additional:
research in granulated organic carbon and membranes for removal of by-products; undertake a
thorough survey to formulate a ground water disinfection rule; develop a better understanding
of the relationship between arsenic exposure and cancer risk before finalizing a quantitative risk
assessment; evaluate the differences in Taiwanese and U.S. populations before using the findings
of the Taiwanese study; and perform an in-house quantitative risk assessment for non-skin
cancers from drinking water. The executive committee agrees with EPA's view that arsenic has
not been proved conclusively to be an essential element.
The Executive Committee wants 'to ensure, if additional microbiology research is
conducted, that the funds are directed towards the problems that will likely produce the most
results.
-------
Xn. Report of the Legislation/Public Outreach Subcommittee
Marilyn Hotch reported that the subcommittee focused on discussing SDWA
reauthorization and made recommendations where the subcommittee had concerns about EPA's
position.
Regarding SRF grant eligibility, subcommittee members recommended that EPA: allow
the SRF be used to acquire land for source water protection projects; substitute "restructuring"
for "consolidation" in the proposal to merge nonviable systems with viable systems; support the
Baucus bill provision that SRFs should focus on SDWA compliance in disadvantaged
communities; and allocate up to 20 percent of the SRF for grants in disadvantaged communities.
In the area of user fees, the subcommittee recommended that EPA (1) authorize states
to create funds into which PWSs must contribute user fees and (2) modify the provision that the
federal government will collect user fees from states whose primacy is withdrawn by EPA. The
provision should include a guarantee that funds from the user fee will be dedicated to
implementing the drinking water program in the state from which the fees were collected.
For contaminant selection, the subcommittee recommended that EPA support and seek
funding, in addition to federal funding, to establish a national occurrence database; use the
national occurrence database to select new contaminants for regulation; and seek authority to
drop contaminants from the regulatory list.
Regarding standard setting and BATs, the subcommittee recommended that EPA: support
establishment of MCLs based on BATs, taking risk reduction cost and benefits into
consideration; and designate BATs for systems to meet newly promulgated MCLs.
The subcommittee further recommended that: the Council form an ad hoc committee to
facilitate the conduct of Council business; EPA brief the Council on the definition of PWS
ownership and control, and the minimum requirements of laboratory certification; and that EPA
support an enforcement moratorium for systems involved in restructuring.
The subcommittee's specific recommendations are listed in Attachment E.
Xin. Public Participants
Sanjay Saxena, Program Coordinator for the National Drinking Water Clearinghouse
explained that the clearinghouse is funded by a grant from Rural Development Association to
assist small communities by providing information on drinking water issues.
Association of Metropolitan Water Agencies representative Diane Vande Hei reported
-------
that the most controversial issue for the association is the mandate for EPA to regulate 25 new
contaminants every three years. The association would like EPA to develop an occurrence
monitoring database to determine which contaminants to regulate and to receive authorization
to remove chemicals from the regulatory list.
Ms. Vande Hei recommended that EPA consider risk reduction in the standards setting
process and educate the public on the benefits of the drinking water regulations.
Regarding the user fee issue, the association does not agree that a designated trust fund
is the answer for user fees collected from states in which EPA has withdrawn primacy.
Robert J. Fensterheim, a consultant to the Association of California Water Agencies
/Alliance for Radon Reduction, commented on arsenic and radon. He explained that arsenic is
a good example of how public health benefits can be incorporated into the standard setting
process. When reviewing a standard, he said the benefits of raising the standard versus the risks
of lowering the standard should be weighed.
The Alliance for Radon Reduction opposes the 300 picocuries per liter standard because
there are more cost effective ways to reduce the public's exposure to radon. The alliance
believes that a radon standard commensurate with the public's exposure to radon in outdoor air
is appropriate and that residents in high radon areas should receive education on radon.
American Water Works Association (AWWA) Deputy Director John H. Sullivan
presented AWWA's position on several issues. Regarding the D/DBP rule, AWWA is
concerned that EPA agreed to, but has not provided, funding for research and data collection.
Development of an information management system also is critical. The schedule agreed to by
the reg-neg committee is nearing an end, and AWWA needs to discuss these issues with EPA.
Whether EPA has the authority to define control beyond ownership is before the courts
and will likely be decided in the upcoming year.
AWWA dedicated many resources for public education for arsenic focusing on skin
cancer and exposure.
Barker Hamill, of the New Jersey Bureau of Safe Drinking Water, presented New
Jersey's positions on reauthorization issues. The Baucus bill, although well thought out,
contains many unfunded mandates.
10
-------
Regarding system viability, Hamill commented that states need a mechanism to reduce
oversight of very small systems by changing the definition of a PWS, by reducing monitoring
requirements, or by providing a voting mechanism for system users to decide if they want to be
regulated by outside agencies.
Hamill noted that revenue collected by the user fee proposed in the Baucus Bill would
be extremely high; $18 million in New Jersey alone.
Richard Moser, of the American Water Works Service Company, described an alternate
testing technique for atrazine that costs considerably less than the current approved technique.
EPA approval of the alternate technique would allow more frequent testing, which in turn would
provide better data on occurrence and human exposure to atrazine.
11
-------
Friday. December 3. 1993
XTV. Report of the Agenda Subcommittee
Marilyn Hotch reviewed the subcommittee's recommendation to hold the spring meeting
in Cincinnati, OH on May 2-6, 1994 and the fall meeting in Washington, D.C. on November
15 - 18, 1994.
XV. Council Discussion of Subcommittee Reports and Formulation of
Recommendations
The Council considered each subcommittee's recommendations in turn, voting whether
to adopt the recommendations. The Council adopted the recommendations of the following
subcommittees unanimously: the State Programs Committee; the Health, Science, and Standards
Subcommittee; and the Resource Protection Subcommittee.
The council voted 10 affirmative and 1 negative on all recommendations by the
Legislation/Public Outreach Committee except the standard setting recommendation which
resulted in 6 affirmative and 5 negative votes.
XVI. Office of Water Update
EPA's Assistant Administrator for the Office of Water, Robert Perciasepe, outlined the
office's position on many of the subcommittees' recommendations. The answer to many of the
current problems with the program lie in reforming and improving the SDWA. There is)
considerable controversy with the SDWA mandate to regulate 25 new contaminants every three
years. The debate over SDWA problems has been two sided. No one has attempted to develop
a third, holistic approach, to solving the problems of the SDWA.
Getting the legislation through Congress is a priority. To ensure the long-term security
of the country's water supply, the SDWA and the Clean Water Act should be linked in the
reauthorization, and reauthorization of the two Acts also should give EPA the flexibility to
e which contaminant's to repulate.
12
-------
The public has shown interest and concern about water issues. In Maryland, an optional
special license plate raised $5 million for the Chesapeake Bay Project. Mr. Perciasepe
concluded by saying that if people work hard and work together, there are always ways to solve
problems.
With no other business before the Council, Mr. Gaston adjourned the meeting.
13
-------
I certify to the best of my knowledge that the foregoing minutes are complete and accurate.
John M.
Gaston, Chair
Charlene E. Shaw, DFO
FEB 22 1994
14
-------
ATTACHMENT A
-------
Attachment A: Registered
Daniel Barbato
Arthur Dungan
James Groff
Claire Harrison
Lance Mabry
Robert Peterson
David Reynolds
Colleen Selia
Ralph Sullivan
Tyrone Wilson
BiUEby
Barker Hamill
David Martin
Mark Planning
Sanjay Saxena
Kathleen Stanley
Mary Terry
Robert Fensterheim
Hugh Hanson
Vanessa Leiby
Bridget O'Grady
Mike Redman
Tom Schaeffer
Brenda Styer
Amy Wilmot
John Davidson
Dale Long
at Meeting
Philadelphia Water Department
Chlorine Institute
National Assoc. of Water Companies
Eastern Municipal Water District
JDEM/Drinking Water Branch
MBD, Inc.
ACWA
Environmental Policy Alert
Consultant
Int'l Bottled Water Association
Water Week
Bureau of Drinking Water/New Jersey
Plumbing Manufacturers Institute
Nat'l Association of Water Companies
Drinking Water Clearinghouse
Rural Community Assistance Programs
Virginia Water Project
RegNet/ACWA/ARR
Rasslo, Inc.
Association of State Drinking Water Admin.
Assoc. of State Drinking Water Administrators
National Soft Drink Association
Assoc. of Metropolitan Water Agencies
U.S. Forest Service
RegNet
U.S. EPA '
U.S. EPA
-------
ATTACHMENT B
-------
^eosr^
c*
\ 5 \
NATIONAL DRINKING WATER ADVISORY COUNCIL * NDWAC 3
401 M Street, S.W.
Washington, D.C. 20460
Designated
Federal Official Chairman
Advisor to The Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Drinking Water (WH-550)
REPORT OF THE
RESOURCE PROTECTION SUBCOMMITTEE
November 30 and December 1, 1993
Washington, D.C.
MEMBERS ATTENDING
Carolyn Olsen, Chair
Susan Seacrest, Vice Chair
Marilyn Hotch
J.C. Watts
Becky Cain
Joan Rose
OTHERS ATTENDING
Ramona Trovato
Janette Hanson
Chuck Job
Bob Barles
Roy Simons
Geoff Grubbs
Issue; Source Water Protection
RECOMMENDATIONS
1. The Subcommittee recommends that SRF funds be available to the
Source Water Protection Program for SDWA compliance implementation
activities, including land acquisition, in lieu of conventional
treatment, provided that in such purchase the community provide
matching funds from non-SRF funds and land acquisition is the most
cost effective alternative.
2. The Subcommittee strongly endorses the two-tiered approach
taken by the proposed SWP program within the SDWA and recommends a
similar approach be taken with watershed implementation program.
The Subcommittee is extremely pleased that the pollution prevention
philosophy endorsed at the El Paso meeting has been included in the
current SWP program proposal.
-------
3. In the development of the new SWP Program, the Subcommittee
recommends that EPA carefully consider current WHP efforts so that
communities currently implementing WHP be allowed to utilize these
activities to the maximum extent possible (For example, WHP allowed
as a way to meet vulnerability assessment in the proposed ground
water disinfection rule).
4. With or without legislation, the Subcommittee recommends that
EPA explore partnerships with well known public health agencies
such as the CDC in order to re-enforce in the public's mind the
links between SWP and public health benefits.
5. If SWP legislation does not happen, the Subcommittee
recommends that EPA expand its public education effort and help
develop grassroots initiatives on the local level.
Issue; Watershed Protection
RECOMMENDATIONS
1. The Subcommittee recommends that when implementing the
Watershed Protection Program on the state level be required to
involve all appropriate environmental programs including public
health that the state oversees.
2. The Subcommittee recommends that in order to implement the
Watershed Program, states need legislative authorities to organize,
fund, and regulate political subdivisions organized around
watersheds, and a framework for multi-faceted watershed planning.
3. Assuming that the SWP program passes as part of SDWA
reauthorization, the Subcommittee recommends that any concurrent
watershed legislation, such as the Clean Water Act, contain a
mandatory watershed planning process.
Issue; Wellhead Protection
RECOMMENDATIONS;
1. The Subcommittee recommends that Wellhead Protection Programs
be recognized by EPA as a "treatment technology of choice for
ground water."
2. Given that small communities derive great benefit from the
wellhead demonstration grant program, the Subcommittee recommends
that funding be re-instated for WHP demonstration projects in the
1995 budget.
-------
3. The Subcommittee strongly recommends a briefing at the next
meeting about the effectiveness of WHP as a process for natural
disinfection to meet drinking water standards. The Subcommittee
also recommends that EPA address the need for viral survey data and
viral transport through soils before the next meeting.
NOTE: The Subcommittee wants to be assured that microbial
contamination including virus occurrence from septic tanks be
equally considered with chemical contamination as a contamination
source in the WHP inventory process.
-------
Approved:
Carolyn Olsen, Chair
Maralyn Hrftch
Susan Seacrest, Vice Chair
. Watts
an Hose
Becky Ca
in
Carmen Leal
Rhonda Swaney, Absent
-------
ATTACHMENT C
-------
t ° \
? NATIONAL DRINKING WATER ADVISORY COUNCIL jNDWACj
401 M Street, S.W.
Washington, D.C. 20460
Designated
Federal Official Chairman
Advisor to The Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Drinking Water (WH-550)
REPORT OF THE
STATE PROGRAM SUBCOMMITTEE
November 30 and December 1, 1993
Washington, D.C.
MEMBERS ATTENDING
Erik Olson, Vice Chair
Paul Foran
L.D. McMullen
Maurice Arel
OTHERS ATTENDING
Carl Reeverts
Jamie Bourne
Lonnie Finkel
Peter Shanaghan
Issue: Monitoring
RECOMMENDATIONS
1. The Subcommittee understands that several EPA employees and state representatives
have discussed at length in Denver possible means of improving the system for drinking
water monitoring. The Subcommittee asks that it be provided, as soon as possible, full
written summaries of the proposals that have been developed in those discussions, and EPA's
evaluation of the pros and cons of those recommendations, in order for the Council to
evaluate and prepare recommendations regarding these proposals at the May, 1994 meeting.
The Subcommittee agrees with the concept that the scheme for monitoring of drinking
water ideally should be integrated with programs that encourage full consideration of the
vulnerability of systems to contamination, and looks forward to reviewing the results of the
"Denver" meetings in preparing more detailed recommendations on this issue.
-------
Issue: Coordinating Federal Funds for Small Systems
RECOMMENDATION
2. The Subcommittee strongly recommends that EPA work more closely with state
PWSS programs and with the Rural Development Administration and the Department of
Housing and Urban Development and other relevant federal and state agencies to assure that
federal funding for water supply projects is spent on appropriate projects that are consistent
with drinking water program health-based priorities, and not spent on encouraging the
development or continued existence of non-viable water systems that cannot assure long-term
supplies of safe drinking water.
Issue: Incentives for Restructuring Nonviable Systems
RECOMMENDATION
3. At the May, 1993 meeting in El Paso, Texas, the Council recommended that the
SDWA should provide incentives for consolidation, regionalization or acquisition of non
viable systems by financially and technologically viable governmental or investor owned
systems. In order to achieve the public health benefits of the SDWA for all water
consumers, this Subcommittee reiterates and expands this recommendation to include
encouragement of relevant state and local governmental bodies to consider appropriate
pricing, acquisition, and management policies, such as single tariff pricing, acquisition
adjustments or alternative management arrangements that would further encourage
consolidation, regionalization, and development of economies of scale.
\
Issue: Programs to Assure System Viability
RECOMMENDATION
4. The Subcommittee commends EPA for its recognition that nonviable small system
compliance problems are one of the most significant impediments to assuring a supply of safe
drinking water to all Americans. However, EPA should develop a better-funded and more
fully implemented program to educate the public and key federal and state officials about this
problem, to identify and encourage the creation of incentives, and to eliminate disincentives,
to redressing small nonviable system problems. For example, consistent with that previous
Reconimendatiori, EPA should develop a menu of options and model laws that states could
adopt to prevent the creation of new, non-viable systems and to resolve problems with
existing nonviable systems. In addition, the Subcommittee recommends that states be
required to adopt a program, whose structure would be tailored to local needs and resources,
-------
that will assure that new, nonviable systems are not created, and that the state will resolve
problems with existing non-viable systems to bring them into compliance in the shortest time
possible. EPA should seek additional resources and make every effort to assure that state
grant funding and the SKF set-aside for state program administration when matched with
state and local resources would be sufficient for the states to meet this new mandate.
Issue: Repeal of the Tax on Contributions in Aid of Construction for Public Water Systems
RECOMMFNPATTQI^
5. The Subcommittee recommends that EPA and the Administration take a clear position
in favor of the repeal of the current tax on contributions in aid of construction of public
water supplies, which has served as an unnecessary economic disincentive for viable public
water systems to acquire existing nonviable water systems.
-------
Approved:
L.D. McMuUen
Paul Foran
Rhonda Swaney, Absent
-------
ATTACHMENT D
-------
r
USB
? NATIONAL DRINKING WATER ADVISORY COUNCIL « NDWAC 5
401 M Street, S.W. >.
Washington, D.C. 20460
Designated
Federal Official Chairman
Advisor to The Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Drinking Water (WH-550)
REPORT OF THE
HEALTH, SCIENCE AND STANDARDS
SUBCOMMITTEE
NOVEMBER 30 and DECEMBER 1, 1993
WASHINGTON, D.C.
Members Attending; Staff;
Joan B. Rose, Chair Ben Smith
Carolyn Hardy Olsen A.W. Marks
Paul G. Foran Marc Parrotta
Erik Olson James M. Conlon
L.D. McMullen Evelyn Washington
Maurice Arel Peter Shanaghan
Steve Clarke
Jennifer Orme
Others;
Verne A. Ray
Tom Schaeffer
The subcommittee was briefed by Mr. Ben Smith on the
Occurrence Assessment Program, Mr. Marc Parrotta on Small Systems
BAT, Mr. Stig Regli on the Information Collection Rule (ICR) and
research priorities, Verne A. Ray on the Science Advisory Board's
review of arsenic risks and research needs associated with the ICR
and Jennifer Orme on risk characterization, standard setting and
arsenic risks. The discussions by the subcommittee focused on six
areas, which resulted in recommendations. These included:
1. Identification, prioritization and ranking of
contaminants for regulation.
2. Inclusion of Microbial Contaminants into the risk
ranking and characterization process.
3. The risk characterization and the standard setting
process.
4. BAT for small systems.
-------
5. Research needs.
6. Rules on arsenic, ICR and groundwater disinfection.
A. ISSUE: Identification* prioritization and ranking of
contaminants for regulation.
The subcommittee recognizes the increased costs associated
with routine monitoring and the increasing constraints upon
resources which give a greater importance to a well designed
prioritization scheme for addressing unregulated contaminants. The
subcommittee supports the prioritization approach presented in more
detail at this meeting based on occurrence and health effects; and
generally supports the options for further monitoring, fulfilling
research needs, immediate development of an MCL or no regulation
development at this time. The subcommittee supports the study of
a specified number of targeted contaminants (i.e. 15) of
prioritizing according to the greatest risk every 3 years
accompanied by a mechanism to assure that sufficient research will
be conducted on occurrence and health effects of unregulated
contaminants.
RECOMMENDATIONS
1. The subcommittee recommends that the guidance document on the
appropriate format for chemical occurrence data reporting be issued
as soon as possible to ensure better consistency and quality of the
information being compiled and assessed. The members would like to
receive this guidance document.
2. The subcommittee accepts the need for weighting the
production/release data with a fate and transport element in the
process, however it recommends that the scientific data on
transport models be scrutinized carefully and that less weight be
given to degradation in the absence of sound science, and that full
consideration be given to the toxicity of degradation products or
metabolites of the compounds.
3. The subcommittee recommends that the toxicity data on chemicals
of concern in drinking water, and specifically data on
disinfectants and disinfection by-products, be pursued through the
Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, Rodenticide Act, from the
registrants for the relevant registered pesticides.
4. The subcommittee recommends that the agency develop the
capabilities to interface with Geographical Information System.
-------
5o The subcommittee supports the waiver for reduced monitoring but
not through a complete moratorium on analysis but recommends
reduced frequency associated with the vulnerability assessment and
change in the use of a specific chemical in an area. In regard to
a waiver for the single sample, the subcommittee recommends that
the sample be collected at the most susceptible time period and
that other criteria of vulnerability be included in the decision.
B. ISSUE: Inclusion of Microbial Contaminants into the risk
ranking and characterization process.
The subcommittee recommended during the May session that the
methodology for the ranking of contaminants include microbial. The
agency responded by agreeing with this recommendation. Despite
this apparent agreement the "Occurrence Assessment Program"
document that was sent to the subcommittee in the second paragraph
states "We are not addressing microbial....11 . The justification
for this was based on the use of surrogates (coliforms) and
treatment technique requirements for their control. The
subcommittee supports this approach for CONTROL of these
contaminants, however without proper risk characterization,
identification, occurrence information, relative risk rankings,
with a process which is analogous to the level of effort made in
assessing the chemical contamination then the agency will continue
to suffer from a lack of credibility for its effort in addressing
contaminants like Cryptosporidium. It makes no sense to exclude an
important class of contaminants in the process of identification,
and risk characterization. By taking this approach, resources will
never be delegated to addressing potentially the most serious
risks. Research gaps will not be addressed in a timely fashion.
This will happen regardless of what approach is taken for control;
Microbes cause known diseases and health impacts, significant
evidence links these agents to diabetes, reactive arthritides, and
heart disease. The Center for Disease Control estimates that
between 5 and 60% of enteric cases of disease are linked to water.
The National Hospital Discharge Survey reports 752,797 hospitalized
cases per year associated with these types of agents and based on
1990 national average costs for hospital time this amounts to over
3 billion dollars per year.
The questions are what known microbial contaminants pose the
most serious risks? and are the current rules and proposed rules
adequate in controlling these risks? Finally, there needs to be a
system to address as yet unrecognized, newly emerging microbial
risks.
RECOMMENDATION
1. The subcommittee recommends that the agency develop a
microbial assessment program which is run in a parallel fashion and
is analogous to the chemical occurrence assessment program. The
-------
financial constraints are understood and the subcommittee applauds
the efforts already made on collaborations between OST, ORO and
OGWDW. However, the agency in acknowledging that microbial
contaminants are a priority, need to back this up with resources
and creative approaches are needed to address this resource need.
C. ISSUE: The risk characterization and the standard setting
process.
The subcommittee was encouraged by the reevaluation of the
risk characterization process and the setting of the MCLGs. The
subcommittee was also pleased that microbial contaminants were
being brought into the risk characterization process.
RECOMMENDATION
1. The subcommittee recommends that resource needs be assessed in
particular to address the ICR, DBF and ESWTR specifically for
undertaking the risk characterizations.
D. ISSUE: BAT for small systems.
1. The subcommittee recognizes the need for small system BAT
approaches, but believes that this should only be considered as an
option when the system can not be restructured, consolidated or
reorganized. Of the three options (simple treatment, special
BATs and POE), the subcommittee favors the special BATs.
RECOMMENDATIONS
1. The subcommittee recommends that the special BAT approach bet
developed in more detail and a presentation made at the spring
meeting in 1994.
2. Although the POE approach may be useful in some situations the
subcommittee has reservations regarding maintenance and reliability
and recommends some national accreditation of these systems which
will address reliability and technical issues.
E. Research needs.
The subcommittee was concerned that the questions posed to the
agency on the process for prioritization of research funds agency
and office wide, at the May, 1993 meeting were not audic&seci. Ths
subcommittee re-directs these questions to the agency. The SAB as
well as the results of the negotiation-regulation process point to
the significant need for adequate science to develop an appropriate
rule. The subcommittee strongly supports this view. It is
anticipated that Mr. Terry Harvey will be able to address some of
the issues.
-------
RECOMMENDATION
The subcommittee recommends that essential research dollars to
promote rulemaking come under the direction of the office of Water.
7. Rules on arsenic, ICR and groundvater disinfection.
The development of the rule for arsenic appears to be moving
towards the proposal stage. However, it is apparent that resources
are not available within the drinking water program to promulgate
rules in a timely fashion. The groundwater rule has been put on
hold because all resources are being placed into the ICR. The ICR
is a tremendous effort and is precedent setting as well as will
provide information for pollution prevent approaches, yet no new
resources are being provided. This will certainly delay the
promulgation of this rule and others. The subcommittee believes
that public health protection provided by these rules warrants
strong consideration for prioritization of resources within the
agency.
RECOMMENDATION
1. The subcommittee recommends that resource needs be assessed for
the promulgation of rules in a timely fashion, as mandated by
court orders and in particular so that progress can be made on the
ground water disinfection rule. We would request a briefing on
this at the spring 1994 meeting.
2. The subcommittee requests the SAB review of the arsenic risk
characterization, EPA's response to that review, and would like to
have the Smith et al. publication and others reviewed for strength
of evidence on the association of internal cancers and low risks.
3. The Subcommittee recommends that CDC, and State Health
Agencies be brought into the ICR considering the potential for the
detection of low levels of pathogens for better assessment and
communication of health effects and that health advisories are
developed for the State for contaminants monitored for under the
ICR.
4. The Subcommittee recommends that consideration be given to
early implementation of the ICR in a pilot fashion in several key
geographical locations.
-------
Approved-
oan \Rose , Chan
Erik Olson
L.D. McMullen
Paul t-oran
Maurice Are!
C
Carolyn Olsen
Frederick Marroopo
-------
ATTACHMENT E
-------
3 « NDWAC
< NATIONAL DRINKING WATER ADVISORY COUNCIL z.
401 M Street, S.W. 1
Washington, D.C. 20460
Designated
Federal Official Chairman
Advisor to The Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Drinking Water (WH-550)
REPORT OF THE
LEGISLATION/PUBLIC OUTREACH
SUBCOMMITTEE
November 30 and December 1, 1993
Washington, D.C.
MEMBERS ATTENDING
Carmen Leal, Chair
J.C. Watts
Becky Cain
Susan seacrest
Marilyn Hotch
OTHERS ATTENDING
Tom Wall
Margie Pitts
Cherie Fields
John Reeder
LEGISLATION
The Subcommittee was briefed on the status of reauthorization
activities in the Senate and House of Representatives. The
Subcommittee reviewed with EPA staff and discussed issues contained
in proposed legislation, comparing the Administration's position,
S.1547 (Baucus) and H.R. 3392 (Slattery).
The Subcommittee was generally favorable toward the EPA
proposals and commends EPA for the thoughtfulness and thoroughness
of its approach. It particularly appreciates EPA's responsiveness
to issues of source water protection and pollution prevention
raised at the Council's El Paso meeting. The Subcommittee did have
some areas where it would recommend modification or addition to the
Administration/EPA position. Those recommendations follow:
State Revolving Fund '
Issue; Eligibility Requirements
-------
RECOMMENDATIONS
1. The Subcommittee recommends that the phrase "restructuring"
should be substituted for the word "consolidation" by EPA in its
proposal on SRF eligibility regarding the merging viable with non-
viable systems.
2. The Subcommittee recommends that EPA should support the
provisions in S.1547 (Baucus) that State SRF use plans should focus
on SDWA compliance in disadvantaged communities and that up to 20%
of the SRF may be used for grants to disadvantaged communities.
Issue; Definition Changes in the SDWA
RECQMMENDATION
1. The Subcommittee recommends that EPA provide the Council with
a briefing on the definitions of ownership and control by public
water suppliers under the SDWA and how those definitions are
applied.
Issue: User Fees
RECOMMENDATIONS
1. The Subcommittee recommends support for EPA's proposal that
States be given authorization to create a fund into which PWSs must
contribute user fees. The Subcommittee further recommends that EPA
support a requirement that, if states establish a user fee
structure, such fees be deposited in a designated fund to be used
exclusively for compliance with the SDWA or state law designed to
protect or improve the quality of drinking water.
2. The Subcommittee recommends that EPA modify its proposal that
the Federal government assess user fees within a state from which
it withdraws primacy to include the provision that the fees must go
into a dedicated fund that is guaranteed to be utilized by EPA for
the drinking water program within that state. If no such
guaranteed dedication can be achieved, then the Subcommittee
recommends that EPA delete frcsi the proposal that the Federal
government assess such a fee.
Issue; Source Water Protection
RECOMMENDATIONS
1. The Subcommittee recommends that the Council commend and
express strong support for EPA's source water protection proposals,
particularly the two-tier baseline/enhanced state and local
programs which allow flexibility with proper ccntrols.
-------
Issue: Lab Certification
RECOMMENDATIONS
1. The Subcommittee recommends that EPA prepare and present at
the next Council meeting a briefing on the status of lab adequacy
throughout the country to accommodate SDWA requirements and needs.
Issue; Extension of Compliance Timeframes
RECOMMENDATION
1. The Subcommittee recommends the Council support the proposal
that EPA have authority to extend on a case by case or categorical
basis up to 60 months for compliance with NPDWRS if construction is
needed. In granting such extensions, EPA should consider the
ability of such systems to comply.
Issue: Contaminant Selection
RECOMMENDATIONS
1. The Subcommittee recommends that EPA use every available
effort, legislative or otherwise, to establish a national
occurrence database. Such a database is critical to the
implementation of various regulatory programs related to drinking
water, including current and proposed source water prevention
programs. The Subcommittee further recommends that EPA seek
sources of funding in addition to Federal funds to create and
implement such a data bank.
2. The Subcommittee recommends that EPA propose and support the
database for the preliminary selection of new contaminants to be
regulated, followed by any further health study needed to decide
either to regulate a contaminant or issue a health advisory.
3. The Subcommittee further recommends that EPA propose and
support that it determine, based upon sufficient occurrence data
and study, that a contaminant may be dropped from the regulatory
list but only if, in such case, occurrence monitoring be conducted
for that contaminant. The Subcommittee recommends that EPA brief
the Council on how it would define and determine the sufficiency of
the data.
Issue: Standard Setting
RECOMMENDATIONS
1. The Subcommittee recommends that EPA propose and support that
it establish MCLs based on best technology taking risk reduction
benefits and cost into consideration.
-------
Issue; Best Available Technology (BAT)
RECOMMENDATION
1. The Subcommittee recommends that EPA propose and support that
it designate BAT for systems to meet a newly promulgated MCL,
taking into account system size in that determination. If a BAT
cannot be found for a particular size system to comply, then EPA
must require innovation alternatives such as restructuring,
prevention or other mechanisms to achieve public health protection.
This is not intended to imply that standards will be set based on
what small systems can achieve.
Issue: Role and Operation of the NDWAC
RECOMMENDATION
1. The Subcommittee recommends that an Ad Hoc Committee be formed
to discuss and propose to the Council procedures and mechanisms to
facilitate the Council in the conduct of its business. The options
should include ways for the Council to interact with EPA which
permit timely response on issues of concern by each to the other.
The Subcommittee recommends that the members of the Ad Hoc
committee be: Susan Seacrest, Wilma Warren, L.D. McMullen, Erik
Olson, and Marilyn Hotch.
-------
Approved:
Carmen Leal, cnair
otch
if r.^
J/C.
Watts
Becky Cain
'Susan seacrest
Rhonda Swaney (Absent)
------- |