EVALUATION OF
THE COLORADO WATER
SUPPLY PROGRAM
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY REGION VIII DENVER. COLORADO
-------
EVALUATION
OF THE
COLORADO WATER SUPPLY PROGRAM
WATER SUPPLY SECTION
CONTROL TECHNOLOGY BRANCH
WATER DIVISION
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
REGION VIII
NOVEMBER, 1974
-------
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Page
SUMMARY 1
RECOMMENDATIONS 12
INTRODUCTION 19
PLAN OF STUDY 21
Purposes of Evaluation 21
Definitions 21
Evaluation Criteria 22
STUDY FINDINGS 25
Water Supplies in Colorado 25
Community Water Supplies 25
Bacteriological Quality 27
Chemical Quality 29
Facilities Appraisal 29
Fluoridation 31
Small Public Water Supplies 34
Individual Water Supplies 35
Water Supply Program 35
Legal Authority 36
Regulations 38
Organization 39
Responsibilities 41
Policy 43
Budget and Staffing 44
Engineering and Surveillance of Public Water
Supplies 48
Training 52
Local Health Departments 53
Laboratory Support - Bacteriological 56
Laboratory Support - Chemical 57
Other Agencies 58
Data Management . -. . 61
Public Health Risk 61
PROGRAM NEEDS 66
Legal Authority 66
Regulations 68
Policy 71
Surveillance of Public Water Supplies 71
Staffing Requirements for Engineering Surveillance ... 74
Budget Requirements for Engineering Surveillance .... 78
Organization 79
Laboratory Support-Bacteriological 80
Laboratory Support-Chemical 83
-------
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Page
Data Management 84
Summary of Water Supply Program Costs 84
REFERENCES CITED 87
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS 88
APPENDICIES
Appendix A - 1962 U.S.P.H.S. Drinking Water
Standards 89
Appendix B - Summary - Community Water Supplies
in Colorado 93
Appendix C - Community Water Supplies Failing
Bacteriological Standards in 1972. . 96
Appendix D - Colorado Water Supply Legislation. . 97
Appendix E - Colorado Water Supply Regulations. . 108
Appendix F - Colorado Water Supply Policy .... 112
Appendix G - Budget and Manpower Comparisons. . . 122
Appendix H - Bacteriological Laboratory Survey. . 123
Appendix I - Incidence of Waterborne Diseases . . 142
Appendix J - Estimated Resources - Chemical
Laboratory Support 143
-------
LIST OF FIGURES
Figure Page
1 Colorado Department of Health 40
2 Districts of the Public Health Engineers 42
3 Budget Comparisons of Environmental Programs 46
4 Staffing Comparisons Between Environmental Programs . 47
5 Counties Served by Organized Local Health Departments. 54
-------
LIST OF TABLES
Table Page
1 Water Supplies in Colorado 26
2 Community Water Supplies Failing Bacteriological
Standards in 1972 28
3 Community Water Supplies Not Meeting Drinking Water
Standards for Chemical Quality 30
4 Facilities Appraisal of Community Water Supplies. . . 32
5 Colorado Department of Health Guidelines for the
Surveillance of Public Water Supplies 45
6 Bacteriological Testing Requirements 81
7 Water Supply Program Budgets 86
-------
SUMMARY
-------
SUMMARY
Ninety percent of Colorado's 2.4 million citizens are served by
an estimated 704 community water supplies. The remainder obtain their
drinking water from small public or individual systems. The small
public systems at restaurants, motels, recreational areas and trailer
parks also serve many of the 8.4 million people who travel in Colorado
each year.
In view of the importance of safe and adequate quantities of
drinking water, Mr. William N. Gahr, Director of the Engineering and
Sanitation Division of the Colorado Department of Health, requested
the Environmental Protection Agency to evaluate and determine the
effectiveness of Colorado's water supply program.
An extensive review of the records pertaining to public water
supplies maintained by the Colorado Department of Health was conducted.
Since only 394 of the community water supplies (all those serving over
100 people) were under routine surveillance as of January 1973, the
information presented primarily concerns these systems. Bacteriological
and chemical qualities of the supplies were judged on the basis of the
1962 U.S. Public Health Service Drinking Water Standards. In addition,
the adequacy of the water supply program was evaluated in regard to
its legislative authority, regulations, policies, surveillance activities,
laboratory support, manpower and budget.
-------
Evaluation of Community Water Supplies
Bacteriological Water Quality
Bacteriological testing is essential to determine if drinking water
is safe. Since the isolation of pathogenic (disease-producing) organisms
is complex and time-consuming, coliform bacteria are used as indicators
of the sanitary quality of water. These bacteria are normal inhabitants
of the intestines in warm-blooded animals; therefore are present in
their fecal discharges. The Drinking Water Standards recognizes the
coliform group as a reliable indicator of the bacteriological quality
of drinking water. The presence of coliform organisms in drinking water
suggests either inadequate treatment or contamination of the water
after treatment. Failure to meet the bacteriological quality standards
indicates that drinking water is a potential carrier of infectious
disease. This is a serious health hazard and calls for immediate
corrective action.
Of the 394 community water supplies:
1. 102 (26%) failed to meet bacteriological quality standards
for one or more months during 1972. These systems were serving
about 12 percent of the State's population with potentially
contaminated water.
2. 249 (63%) did not submit the required number of samples for two
or more months during 1972.
Chemical Water Quality
Drinking water should not contain substances which are toxic or
cause adverse health effects in man. Ma.ny harmful elements do occur
-------
naturally in the earth; therefore can be present in any water supply.
The Drinking Water Standards has established mandatory chemical standards
for such substances. If the mandatory limits are not met, additional
treatment should be provided or the supply should be rejected.
1. 33 (8%) of the 394 community water supplies failed to
meet at least one of the mandatory limits. These systems
serve about 25,000 people with water that could cause adverse
health effects.
Good quality drinking water should not contain substances which
adversely affect its appearance, odor, taste or cause undue discomfort
to man. The Drinking Water Standards has set recommended chemical
limits to assure that drinking water contains no substance in concen-
trations which would make it undesirable. When the recommended
standards can't be met, consideration should be given to selecting
a more suitable source of water supply.
1. 78 (20%) of the 394 community water supplies failed to meet
at least one of the recommended limits. These systems serve
approximately 143,000 people with aesthetically inferior water.
Facilities
Water supplies include everything needed for the collection, treat-
ment, storage, and distribution of drinking water from the source to the
consumer's tap. Whether the facilities include an elaborate treatment
plant or just a chlorinator, they must be able to produce adequate
quantities of safe drinking water and prevent contamination from
entering the system at any point. Any condition, device, or practice
-------
in the water supply system and its operation, which allows water of
questionable quality to be delivered to the consumer, constitutes a
health hazard.
Of the 394 community water supplies at the end of 1972:
1. 105 (27%}, serving over 187,000 people, had inadequate
treatment. The majority of these systems were not even
providing disinfection of their water, resulting in no
margin of safety against disease transmission by water.
2. 62 (16%), serving about 285,000 people, had sanitary
defects within their systems. The ability of these
supplies to produce safe water at all times is questionable.
3. The systems serving less than 1,000 people have the most
deficiencies. For example, of the 105 supplies having
inadequate treatment, 84 percent served 100-1,000 people.
Fluoridation
Many years of medical and dental research have shown fluoridation
to be a safe and beneficial practice. Approximately 80 percent of
Colorado's population is served water containing a dentally signi-
ficant amount of fluoride. Thirty-five water supplies adjust the
fluoride content of the water to obtain the recommended opitmum level.
In order for the maximum benefits to be realized, the fluoridation
equipment must be well operated and maintained.
Surveillance of these systems is the responsibility of the Colorado
Department of Health. Nevertheless, inadequate attention is being
given to the surveillance program as indicated by the following:
-------
1. Not enough emphasis is placed on proper operation and mainten-
ance of the fluoridation equipment during the engineering
inspections. As a result many communities are not maintaining
the fluoride concentration at the level at which it is most
beneficial. Therefore, in many cases the communities are
not receiving the benefits that properly managed fluoridation
can achieve.
2. Check samples to determine the fluoride concentration in the
water are required only every three months.
3. The operators are not required to maintain or submit operating
records on the amount of chemical used or the fluoride
concentrations.
4. The fluoridation records at the Colorado Department of Health
are inadequate and not carefully maintained.
Small Public Water Supplies
The Colorado Department of Health estimates that there are 900
water supplies located at small residential areas, trailer courts,
campgrounds, motels, and recreational areas which serve a major
portion of the 8.4 million people who travel in the state each year.
Many of these supplies receive little or no surveillance. During
1972, four waterborne outbreaks were associated with supplies serving
the traveling public in Colorado which illustrates that such systems
can pose significant health problems.
-------
Although no field studies were conducted during this evaluation,
studies completed in other states by the Environmental Protection Agency
revealed that the small public systems are, in most cases, in worse
condition than the community supplies and have the most difficulty
meeting the quality standards.
Evaluation of the Water Supply Program
Drinking water quality and the conditions of water supply facilities
are related directly to the adequacy of the water supply program at
the State level. To determine if Colorado's water supply program was
capable of fulfilling its legal responsibilities and meeting the
problems, an evaluation was conducted of the program.
Legal Authority, Regulations and Policy
The Colorado Statutes place various legal responsibilities regarding
public water supplies within the Colorado Department of Health (hereafter
the Department). These statutes give the Department authority to adopt
and enforce drinking water standards, regulations including mandatory
disinfection, as well as a uniform plumbing code. In addition, the
statutes require water and wastewater plants to be under the supervision
of a certified operator. Water well drillers and pump installers must
also be certified. Based on this authority, the Department has adopted
a thorough set of regulations and a policy statement to assure the
uniform application of the regulations. Nevertheless, the water supply
program lacks authority in two major areas.
-------
First, the water supply program does not have the authority to
require public water supplies to obtain approval before construction
of new or modification of existing facilities. Construction of water
supply facilities represents a major expenditure on the part of
municipalities. If inadequate attention is given to the source water
or to the type of treatment, costly errors can result which also can
cause public health problems. For example, all four waterborne outbreaks
which occurred in Colorado during 1972 were due to inadequate treatment
of surface sources. Many poorly designed small water supply systems
are operating in Colorado as pointed out by the study findings. A
good review and approval program can prevent many of these problems
from occurring.
Secondly, the water supply program does not have the authority to
administer a construction grant program for community water supplies.
The largest percentage of the communities with deficiencies in their
water supply systems have less than 1,000 people. Many need additional
treatment facilities or new water sources so they can serve safe
drinking water. Unfortunately, most of these small communities have
serious financial problems and can't afford major capital improvements.
Presently, there are practically no reliable sources of funding for
such cases. Although Colorado has a construction grant program for
sewage disposal facilities, there is not a similar program for community
water supplies. Such a program would help make it possible for small
communities to have safe drinking water.
-------
8
Organization
The water supply program is administered by the Engineering
Section under the Department's Engineering and Sanitation Division.
The Section is also responsible for the solid wastes, plumbing
inspection,swimming area regulation and individual sewage disposal
systems regulation programs.
The Section's staff consists of ten public health engineers and
three secretaries. Staff-time is divided between the various programs
reducing the effort in any one area. During 1972 only 40 percent of
the total staff time was devoted to water supply activities. The
engineers operate from Denver and have extensive districts to cover.
Budget and Staffing
The funds and manpower available for drinking water protection in
Colorado are inadequate to support an effective program. A total
of only $59,800 was allocated for the water supply activities of the
Engineering Section during fiscal year 1974. This represents only
about 2.5 cents per capita for the engineering surveillance of public
water supplies which is less than one-half the national average. In
fact, the budget and the man-years available for water supply activities
are at the same level as they were in 1967 even though the number of
water supplies requiring surveillance has tripled,
These limitations have prevented the water supply program from
fulfilling Us responsibilities. As a result, important water supply
activities can't be performed or are being performed only in a cursory
manner reducing the program's effectiveness.
-------
Surveillance of Public Water Supplies
The surveillance of water systems is one of the most important
duties of state and local health officials. It demands constant
vigilance over water quality, water system facilities and operational
practices. The bacteriological and chemical quality of drinking water
must be routinely monitored to detect possible contamination. To
prevent serious health hazards from developing in a water supply, the
physical facilities and operational procedures must be reviewed regularly
by personnel trained in proper water supply practice.
Although Departmental regulations and policy provide for a strong
surveillance program, the budget and staffing limitations have never
allowed it to be fully implemented. Very few of the small community
supplies (serving 40-100 people) and the other small public supplies
(mainly supplies at motels, campgrounds, trailer parks and recreational
areas) are under routine surveillance. Written reports on community
water supplies are completed only every five years. Follow-up work to
check compliance with previous recommendations or unsafe bacteriological
and chemical results is inadequate. Stronger enforcement of the regu-
lations is needed since as of January 1973, 27 percent of 394 community
water supplies still had inadequate treatment. The limitation of
resources has also affected the water supply program's ability to
perform other important activities such as operator training and
technical assistance.
The bacteriological and chemical laboratory support functions
also need upgrading. The bacteriological laboratories of the local
-------
10
health departments seem to be particularly overburdened. The
Department's chemical laboratory is understaffed and operating in
very cramped quarters reducing its total capability. As the number
of water supplies under surveillance increases, these conditions will
continue to worsen.
A false sense of security might well exist concerning the safety
of water supplies in Colorado. Colorado's water supply program is not
meeting its responsibility of protecting the quality of water served
to the State's residents and visitors. This situation is a direct result
of the lack of resources allocated to water supply activities. The time
has come to reverse this trend. Waterborne disease outbreaks have
occurred in Colorado and in all the cases, it was shown that deficiencies
existed in the water supply systems during the time 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 complacent water supply personnel
and ineffective enforcement by health officials. Deficiencies similar
to those responsible for the outbreaks are present in the water supplies
of Colorado as indicated by this study. The requisites for repetition
of the tragic waterborne outbreaks of the past, namely inadequate
surveillance of water supplies serving the public, and the presence of
diseased individuals, definitely exist in Colorado. An increase in the
occurrence of waterborne disease obviously would cause needless human
suffering and might result in a sharp reduction in the $600 million which
tourism brings into the State each year. In other words, Colorado no
longer can afford to overlook the importance of the water supply program
-------
11
and shirk its responsibilities to protect the public health of its
citizens. The recommendations of this report need to be implemented
if Colorado is to assure each resident and visitor an adequate and
safe supply of drinking water.
-------
RECOMMENDATIONS
-------
12
RECOMMENDATIONS
A primary purpose of the evaluation was to propose recommendations
needed for Colorado to have an effective and responsive water supply
program.
1. The water supply program must increase and improve its
surveillance of public water supplies. It is recommended
that the following critical activities be given a high
priority:
a. On-site inspections (with written reports)of community
water supplies at least annually.
b. Follow-up inspections to check compliance with
recommendations,
c. Frequent comprehensive reviews of bacteriological and
chemical sampling records with prompt follow-up on those
failing to meet sampling and quality standards.
d. Maintenance of an up-to-date inventory of public water
supplies.
e. Detailed plan review of proposed water system construction
and modification.
2. The fluoridation surveillance effort must be improved if the
potential benefits of this program are to be realized. Therefore,
it is recommended that:
a. Information should be gathered on the fluoridation equip-
ment and chemical compound used at each water supply.
This would be helpful in follow-up of reported problems.
-------
13
b. The number of check samples sent to the State Laboratory
should be increased to at least one per month for every
water system adjusting fluoride content.
c. The check sample records should be kept by the Engineering
Section rather than the Dental Health Section.
d. More frequent review of fluoride check sample results
and better communication between the State Dental Director's
office and the Engineering Section is needed to ensure
more efficient field follow-up in problem areas.
e. The Engineering Section should develop for the water operators
standard forms for recording:
1. Daily fluoride sample results.
2. Amount of fluoride compound used, total water
produced and other operational information.
3. Cooperative compliance with the regulations should continue to
be emphasized. However, if this fails to achieve prompt
compliance, strong enforcement measures should be taken to
protect drinking water and public health.
4. Legislation is needed to give the Department of Health the
authority to:
a. Require that a permit be obtained (from the water supply
program) by a public water supply before construction of
new or modification of existing water supply facilities
could begin.
-------
14
b. Issue regulations concerning the requirements which
must be met in order to obtain a permit, including prior
approval of proposed sources and treatment.
c. Issue criteria for the design, construction and operation
of water supply facilities.
d. Administer a construction grant (or combination grant
and low-interest loan) program for those community water
supplies not able to finance the improvements necessary
to bring their systems into compliance with the State's
requirements.
5. To implement the recommended expanded authority described above
the following regulations should be developed. In the absence
of legislation these could still be issued as guidelines.
a. Requirements for obtaining a permit to construct or
modify water supply facilities. These should require:
1. Submission of preliminary engineering reports,
plans and specifications for review and approval.
These should be prepared by a professional
engineer registered in Colorado.
2. Approval of proposed water sources
3. Compliance with the program's criteria for
minimum acceptable treatment.
4. Compliance with the program's criteria for
design and construction of water supply facilities,
5. Regional planning to discourage the proliferation
of small, inefficient water systems. Proposed
systems should be stimulated to explore the
-------
15
possibilities of consolidating with other systems
before approval is given.
b. Definition of minimum acceptable treatment for source
waters. Filtration of surface sources should be required.
c. Minimum requirements for water treatment and distribution
systems should be developed. These should be flexible
enough to allow the design engineers to make full use of
available water treatment technology; but should insure
continued production of a safe water supply.
d. The engineering consultant should be required to provide
inspection during construction to assure that all work is
done in accordance with the State approved plans and
specifications. Engineers from the water supply program
should have access to the project at all times during
construction.
e. All public water supplies should be required to have a
satisfactory bacteriological test and engineering inspec-
tion before being placed into service after construction
or modification.
f. Basic criteria concerning the operation and maintenance
of water supply systems are needed. These would outline
such items as the type and number of quality control tests
which should be conducted for various classes of systems
and the periodic submission of standard operating reports
to the water supply program. The operating reports can
provide valuable information such as indicating when
-------
16
systems are experiencing difficulties. In this regard,
water supplies which fluoridate should be required to
submit monthly check samples and monthly operational reports
g. Criteria for the grant program.
6. The current "Rules and Regulations for Water Well and Pump
Installation Contractors" need strengthening in order to achieve
their stated purpose of protecting public health. The water
supply program should recommend changes to the Board of Examiners
of Water Well and Pump Installation Contractors as they see fit.
Specifically, the following changes are recommended:
a. A definition of what constitutes an adequate grout
mixture is needed.
b. A minimum grout thickness should be stipulated.
c. The present 10-foot minimum grout depth will not provide
the intended protection where deep frost penetration
occurs. To be effective, the grout seal must be in
contact with undisturbed earth. Therefore, the regulations
should require the grout to extend at least ten feet below
the frost line.
d. Regulations concerning non-ferrous well casing should be
developed. In particular, plastic well casing used in
wells intended for domestic purposes should have National
Sanitation Foundation (NSF) approval.
e. Regulations regarding the proper installation of pitless
well adaptors and units are needed.
-------
17
7. Serious consideration should be given to using automatic
data processing for storage and retrieval of water quality
data, engineering report information, inventory data, etc.
8. Steps should be taken to achieve closer coordination between
the water supply program and other governmental functions
concerned with water supplies including the Department of
Natural Resources and the local health departments. Regulations
of the other State agencies should reflect that the principal
authority for regulation of water supplies rests with the water
supply program.
In order to fully implement the above, it is recommended that:
9. The annual budget for the water supply program be increased by
the end of FY 1977 to:
Engineering Surveillance $421,200
Laborabory Support $267.000
TOTAL $688,200
10. A Water Supply Section be formed within the Engineering and
Sanitation Division to be responsible for engineering surveillance
activities for all public water supplies.
11. The engineering surveillance staff of the proposed Water Supply
Section be increased to at least 17 professionals and 6 secretaries
by the end of FY 1977. Annual budgetary support for this activity
should be increased to approximately $421,200 during this period.
-------
18
12. Consideration be given to decentralizing the proposed Water Supply
Section by establishing two offices in western Colorado and two
in eastern Colorado.
13. The bacteriological quality testing program be modified by:
a. Allowing the community water supplies serving over 10,000
people (category A) to conduct their own testing and
submit monthly summaries to the water supply program.
b. Having the Department's Laboratory Division certify all
laboratories doing bacteriological tests for public water
supplies at least every three years.
H. An evaluation of the local health departments' bacteriological
laboratories is needed to determine their requirements for an
adequate testing program for public and individual water supplies.
15. Adequate staff, space and equipment must be provided for the
chemical laboratory in order to conduct routine drinking water
analysis. A total of eight man-years at an approximate cost
of $172,800 annually would be required for an acceptable program.
16. Serious consideration should be given to decentralizing the labora-
tory services. A laboratory in western Colorado could provide
a much better surveillance program.
-------
-------
19
EVALUATION
OF THE
COLORADO WATER SUPPLY PROGRAM
INTRODUCTION
The American people take drinking water for granted. They
naturally expect adequate and safe quantities of this essential
resource to be delivered continually to their homes. The dreaded
water-borne epidemics, which still threaten some parts of the
world, no longer are a major concern in the United States due to
the diligence of the water utilities and public health officials.
Unfortunately, this success has led to a certain complacency con-
cerning drinking water. In addition, public and legislative emphasis
is being placed on other environmental concerns, such as water and
air pollution. In order to meet the burgeoning requirements of
pollution control legislation, the states are having to commit more
and more of their resources to these programs. Therefore, less time
and money is being devoted to the drinking water activities, signi-
ficantly reducing the surveillance and regulation of public water
supplies. Although effective water pollution control is important
to minimize contamination of drinking water sources, it alone cannot
assure the public will receive safe and reliable drinking water. Such
assurance can be gained only from a renewed awareness of the public
health importance of drinking water and the establishment of active
water supply programs at the state level. The need for this awareness
was highlighted by the Community Water Supply Study] which found that
-------
20
41 percent of the 969 water systems surveyed were delivering waters of
inferior quality to 2.5 million people, and 56 percent of the systems
had physical deficiencies in their facilities. The increasing rates
of waterborne diseases is a further indication of the need to re-establish
a strong emphasis on the provision of safe drinking water for all
Americans.
Recognizing these considerations, Mr. William N. Gahr, Director
of the Engineering and Sanitation Division for the Colorado Department
of Health, requested the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) to
evaluate and determine the effectiveness of Colorado's water supply program.
-------
PLAN OF STUDY
-------
21
PLAN OF STUDY
Purposes of Evaluation
1. Determine the general condition of Colorado's public water supplies.
2. Determine if the water supply program, as presently authorized and
administered, is adequate to fulfill its responsibilities.
3. Propose any recommendations necessary for Colorado to maintain an
effective water supply program; thus assuring its citizens and
visitors safe drinking water.
After discussions with Mr. William N. Gahr, it was decided that
these purposes could be achieved by reviewing the records pertaining
to the public water supplies maintained by the Colorado Department of
Health.
Definitions
For the purposes of this evaluation, drinking water systems were
defined as follows:
1. Public water supply system - any system which provides water
for public consumption, excluding water sold in bottles or
other closed containers.
a, Community water supply system - a public system that
provides water to ten or more premises not owned or
controlled by the supplier of water or to forty or more
resident individuals.
-------
22
b. Small public water supply system - a public water supply
system that: (a) provides water to less than ten premises
not controlled by the supplier of water or less than 40
resident individuals; (b) provides water to any number of
people on premise owned or controlled by the supplier of
water; or (c) provides water to the traveling public.
2. Individual water supply system - a water supply system that
serves a single dwelling unit occupied by one family.
Evaluation Criteria
Bacteriological Water Quality
The bacteriological records for the community water supplies
which routinely submit water samples to laboratories approved by
the Colorado Department of Health were examined. A supply was given
an unsatisfactory rating if it did not meet, for one or more months,
the bacteriological quality requirements of the 1962 United States
Public Health Service Drinking Water Standards^, hereafter referred
to as the Drinking Water Standards. These limits are summarized in
Appendix A.
Chemical Water Quality
The available chemical records for the community water supplies
were reviewed. The analysis for each supply was compared with the
Drinking Water Standards (Appendix A) and rated as either:
1. Meeting the standards for all limits.
2. Failing to meet one or more of the "recommended" limits but
meeting all the "mandatory" limits;
3. Failing to meet one or more "mandatory" limits.
-------
23
Hater Supply Facilities
The annual inspection reports for the community water systems
were reviewed. The supplies were rated according to the adequacy of
treatment provided and existence of sanitary defects.
Water Supply Program
The water supply program was evaluated on each of the following:
1. Surveillance of Community Water Supplies
The records and procedures relating to bacteriological monitoring,
chemical monitoring and inspections of water supply facilities were
reviewed. These activities were considered adequate if:
a. The number of bacteriological samples examined for each
supply during 1972 met the number specified by the
Drinking Water Standards for 11 of the 12 months.
b. A chemical analysis, including all the constituents listed
in the Drinking Water Standards, had been performed within
the previous three years.
c. The results of the bacteriological and chemical tests were
reviewed and any necessary follow-up performed routinely.
d. Each supply received an annual inspection, including a
prepared report, by an engineer from the Colorado Department
of Health.
e. Follow-up surveys of those water supplies with facility and
operational deficiencies were performed routinely.
-------
24
2- Legislative Authority
The existing legislative authority of the water supply program
was reviewed to determine if it has sufficient policy and regulation-
setting power to conduct its activities properly and protect the
public health.
3. Regulations and Policy
The water supply program's existing regulations and policy
were reviewed to determine if they were adequate and reflected
sound public health principles.
4, Laboratory Support
A survey of the bacteriological and chemical laboratories was
conducted to determine the capability of each laboratory to
provide adequate support to the water supply program.
5. Program Activities
Factors such as the level and adequacy of operator training
and certification, emphasis placed on fluoridation and cross-
connection control programs, as well as coordination with and
technical assistance given to other agencies concerned with public
water supplies were also evaluated.
6. Budget and Staffing
Based on the findings in the above categories, budget and
manpower requirements for an effective water supply program were
calculated and compared with those of the current program.
-------
STUDY FINDINGS
-------
25
STUDY FINDINGS
Water Supplies In Colorado
Ninety percent of Colorado's 2.4 million citizens are served by
an estimated 704 community water supplies. Information concerning
these systems is summarized in Appendix B. Significantly, 80 percent
of the community supplies serve less than 1,000 people each. As shown.
by the Community Water Supply Study1 it is these small community systems
which have the most difficulty in consistently providing safe drinking
water to their consumers.
As shown by Table 1, there are an estimated 900 small public water
supplies located at residential areas, trailer courts, campgrounds,
motels, and recreational areas. These are of special concern since
they serve many of the 8.4 million people who travel in Colorado each
year.
Not all Coloradans are served by public water supplies. Approxi-
mately 240,000 are either supplied by individual home water systems
(obtaining water from wells, springs, and surface sources) or do not
have any source of drinking water conveniently available.
Community Mater Supplies
The information presented in this section was compiled by reviewing
the records maintained by the Colorado Department of Health. Since only
394 of the community water supplies (all those serving over 100 people)
-------
Type
Community Water Supplies
Serving over 100 people
Serving 40-100 people
Samll Public Water Supplies
Serving a Residential Population
(less than 40 people)
Serving the Traveling Public
Individual Supplies
TABLE 1
Water Supplies in Colorado
Number
394
310*
100*
800*
60,000*
Population Served
2,083,000
25,000*
3,000*
Many of the 8.4 million
visitors annually*
240,000*
re
en
*Estimates
-------
27
were under routine surveillance-as of January 1973, the information
primarily concerns these supplies. Records for the remaining 310
supplies (serving 40-100 people) were not adequate during the time
the study was conducted. Based on studies completed in other states;
however, the conditions of these supplies would, in most cases, be the
same or worse than that reported below for the 394 supplies.4»5,6
Bacteriological Quality
A review of the records maintained by the Colorado Department of
Health revealed that 102 (26%) of the 394 community water supplies
failed to meet the bacteriological limits of the Drinking Water Standards
for one or more months during 1972. These systems were serving approxi-
mately 12 percent of Colorado's population with water potentially
containing disease producing organisms. Significantly, 26 of these
supplies, as shown by Table 2, were not providing any form of disinfection,
Appendix C presents further information on the supplies which failed
the bacteriological standards.
The problem is made worse since many supplies are not submitting
the proper number of bacteriological samples each month for testing.
For example, during 1972, over 60 percent of the 394 community water
supplies did not submit the required number of samples for two or
more months. Twenty-six percent submitted less than one-half the
required number.
-------
TABLE 2
Conmunity Water Supplies Failing Bacteriological Standards in 1972
(By Number of Months Supplies Failed to Meet Standards)
Number of Months
Standards Failed
One
Two
Three
Four
Five
Number of CWS*
Failing
64
20
8
8
2
Percent of CWS*
Failing
16%
5%
2%
2%
1%
Population
Served
237,800
23,400
5,600
13,600
600
Number of Those Failing
Having No Disinfection
11
6
3
4
2
TOTAL 102 26% 281,000 26
*CWS - Conmunity Water Supplies - Includes only the 394 supplies unacr toutine surveillance ^ of
January 1973.
IV
-------
29
Chemical Quality
A review of the chemical quality data for the 394 community water
supplies indicated that each supply had a chemical analysis within
the previous three years (1970 through 1972). With the exceptions of
silver and carbon chloroform extract, the analyses included all the
constituents listed in the Drinking Water Standards. Table 3 summarizes
the information obtained from this data.
Thirty-three (8%) failed to meet at least one of the mandatory
limits of the Drinking Water Standards. These supplies serve about
24,600 people with water that could cause adverse health effects. In
addition, 78 supplies (20%), by not meeting one or more of the recommended
limits, are serving 142,600 people with aesthetically inferior water.
These results point out the importance of doing complete chemical
analyses of drinking water routinely to detect potential health problems.
Facilities Appraisal
During 1972, 88 percent of the 394 community water supplies were
inspected by engineers from the Colorado Department of Health. The
: i
remaining 12 percent had been inspected during the previous three
years. Written reports were prepared only in a few cases since a
check sheet (shown in Appendix F) is used. A review of the latest
Inspection data for the 394 community water supplies (summarized by
Table 4) revealed the following:
-------
Community Mater Supplies Not Meeting
Number of
Chemical DWS,1 CW$2 Wot
Constituent mg/1 Meeting Standards
RECOMMENDED LIMITS
Total Dissolved
Sol Ids 500. 67
Sul fates 250. 58
Iron 0.3 38
Manganese 0.05 22
Nitrate 45. 6
Z1nc 5. 1
TOTAL* 78
KAHDATORY LIMITS
Fluoride3 2.4 14
Selenium 0.01 9
Radium 226 3 plcocurles per liter 7
Chromium
(Hexavalent) 0.05 1
Arsenic n,ns 1
Cadmium 0.01 1
Lead 0.05 1
TOTAL4 33
30
TABLE 3
Drinking Water Standards For Chemical Quality
Population
Served
97,800
92.000
72,800
21 ,500
3,300
500
142,600
8.500
11,800
2,500
1,300
300
250
150
24,600
^WS - Drinking Water Standards - Limits are expressed 1n milligrams p
Possible Effects
When these limits are not met. more suitable
sources of water supply should be considered
Taste and laxative effects-
Taste and laxative effects-
Imparts stains to laundered goods and
plumbing fixtures.
Sane as Iron-
Can cause serious poisoning (methemogloblneipla)
in infants-
Bitter Taste.
Vlhen these limits are not met, the water supply
should be rejected.
Can produce objectionable staining of the teeth-
(Fluorosls)
Can cause disturbances in human physiologic
functions .
Accumulates 1n the bones and is a carcinogen.
Toxic to man and Induces skin sensltizations.
Toxic to man and can accumulate in the body.
Highly toxic to man.
Toxic tc man ind can accumulate In the body.
er liter except for Radium 226 which 1s in
plcocuries per liter.
2CWS - Community Water Supplies - Includes only the 394 supplies under routine surveillance as of January 1973.
3A11 of the excessive fluoride concentrations were due to naturally occurring fluoride compounds.
4The totals are not direct additions from the table since some communities failed to meet one or more standards.
-------
31
1. 105 (27%), serving over 187,000 people, had inadequate
treatment. As shown by Table 4, the majority of this problem
was due to the 78 systems not having disinfection; however,
there were also 27 supplies not providing adequate treatment
(such as coagulation and filtration) for surface sources.
2. 62 (16%) serving about 258,000 people, had sanitary defects
within their systems, which included such problems as Improper
source protection, cross-connections and uncovered finished water
storage.
3. The systems serving less than 1,000 people had the most
deficiencies. For example, of the 105 supplies having
inadequate treatment, 84 percent served 100-1,000 people.
This situation was also identified on a national basis by the
Community Mater Supply Study J
These conditions indicate the need for routine engineering
surveillance to identify deficiencies within public water supplies.
In addition, good follow-up procedures are essential to assist the
communities in eliminating the deficiencies. These aspects of the
Colorado water supply program are discussed in more detail later in
this report.
Fluoridation
Many years of medical and dental research have shown fluoridation
to be a safe and beneficial practice. The proper addition of fluorides
to a water supply can reduce the incidence of tooth decay in children
by as much as 65 percent.
-------
TABLE 4
Facilities Appraisal of Community Water Supplies
Deficiency
Inadequate Treatment
Number of CWS1
Population Served
Not Having Disinfection2
Number of CWS1
Population Served
Having Sanitary Defects
Number of CMS1
Population Served
Population Range Served
1,000 - 100 -
Over 10.000 Under 10,000 Under 1,000 Total
1
100,600
0
0
4
224,000
16
54,500
13
39,200
9
16,400
88
32,700
65
23,100
49
17.400
105
187,700
78
62,300
62
257,800
- Community Water Supplies - Includes only the 394 supplies under routine surveillance as of
January 1973.
2Supplies "Not Having Disinfection" also included under "Inadequate Treatment."
co
ro
-------
33
Approximately 1.9 million persons in Colorado are served by water
supplies which contain a dentally significant amount of fluoride. This
covers about 92 percent of the population served by community water
supplies. Thirty-five of these supplies, serving approximately 1.2
million persons, adjust the fluoride content of the water to the optimum
level by adding a chemical compound containing fluoride. For the maximum
beneifts to be realized, the fluoridation equipment must be well operated
and maintained.
Responsibility for surveillance of fluoridation rests with the
Colorado Department of Health. Engineers from the Department (Engineering
Section) are supposed to check on the operation and maintenance of the
fluoridation equipment during their annual inspections of the water
supplies. However, field checks made by engineers of the EPA have
revealed that deficiencies are not being noted and corrected. For
example, a few communities have been using the wrong fluoride chemical
compound. Although this does not constitute a health hazard, it does
make fluoridation more expensive and creates operational difficulties.
This indicates that inadequate attention is being given to fluoridation
during the inspections. In addition, there is no place on the
inspection forms for information regarding fluoridation to be recorded;
therefore, the Department has very little file Information on the types
of equipment and chemicals being used.
The actual level of fluoride in the distribution system is the single
most important factor in evaluating the adequacy of a community water-
fluoridation effort as well as the benefits which will be received.
However, communities which fluoridate are required to submit only one
check sample every three months to the Department's laboratory. Water
-------
34
operators are not required by the Department to keep records on the
amount of fluoride compound used and daily test results. Consequently,
there is little recorded information on how adequate the adjustment of
fluoride content is at these water supplies. Spot checks have revealed
that it is not adequate at many supplies. In all cases not enough
fluoride was being added to achieve the optimum concentration. The
results of the check samples are monitored by the State Dental Director's
office. In the past, many of these sample results have been misfiled
and information on needed field follow-up has not been transmitted to
the Engineering Section.
In summary, the surveillance of fluoridation in Colorado is
inadequate. Many communities are not receiving the benefits for which
they are paying and which properly managed fluoridation can achieve.
Small Public Water Supplies
The Colorado Department of Health estimates that there are 900
water supplies located at small residential areas, trailer courts,
campgrounds, motels, and recreational areas which serve a major portion
of the 8.4 million people who travel in the state each year. Many of
these supplies receive little or no surveillance. Although no field
surveys were conducted during this evaluation, studies completed in
other states by the EPA showed that an average of 30 percent of these
supplies failed to meet the bacteriological quality limits of the
Drinking Water Standards.4»5,6
During 1972, four waterborne outbreaks were associated with
supplies serving the traveling public in Colorado which illustrates
that such systems can pose significant health problems.
-------
35
Individual Water Supplies
Approximately 240,000 Coloradans depend on individual home
systems (wells, springs or surface sources) for drinking water.
The Colorado Department of Health has no authority regarding these
suppliesi but, can provide technical assistance if requested. Little
is known about the condition of the individual water supplies or the
quality of water they produce. A field study being conducted in
Jefferson County by the U.S. Geological Survey has shown that 20 percent
of the 800 individual water wells tested failed to meet bacteriological
quality standards.7 These results are similar to those obtained by the
EPA in other states.4'5'6 Practically all of the supplies surveyed by
the EPA lacked proper sanitary construction.
A definite need exists for more activity 1n the area of Individual
water supplies since the general public knows little of proper source
protection and sanitation. During the last ten years, 73 percent of
recorded waterborne outbreaks were due to contaminated individual water
supplies.2
Water Supply Program
The preceding sections have presented the study findings related
to the general condition of public water supplies in Colorado. To
determine if the State's water supply program,,as presently administered,
was capable of fulfilling its legal responsibilities and meeting the
problems, an evaluation was conducted of the program.
-------
36
Legal Authority
The 1963 Colorado Revised Statutes place various legal responsibilities
regarding public water supplies within the Colorado Department of Health
(hereafter called the Department). These statutes are compiled in
Appendix D and summarized below:
Section 66-1-7(6) - Authorized Department to "establish and
enforce minimum general sanitary standards as to the quality
of water supplied to the public, including the authority
to require disinfection of such water, and to advise with
municipalities, utilities, institutions, organizations, and
individuals, concerning the methods of processes believed
best suited to provide the protection or purification of
water to meet such minimum general sanitary standards..."
Section 66-1-7(9) - Authorizes Department to establish and approve
laboratories to conduct examinations necessary for protection
of the public health.
Section 66-1-7(10) - Authorizes Department to establish standards
for laboratory tests to which the laboratories must conform.
Section 66-1-7(19) - Adopts the U.S. Public Health Service Drinking
Water Standards as the "minimum general sanitary standards
as to the quality of water supplied to the public."
Section 66-l-7(20)(g) - Authorizes Department to examine plans for
the proposed construction of community water facilities if
submitted for review.
-------
37
Section 66-1-8(5)(a) - Empowers the Department, through the Board
of Health, to adopt rules, regulations, and standards
necessary to administer the State's public health laws.
Section 66-1-14(1)(a)&(b) - Makes it unlawful for any "person,
association, or corporation" to violate the public health
laws, rules, regulations, and standards.
Section 66-1-14(1)(a)&(1) - Makes it unlawful to permit cross-
connections between a public water supply and a supply
which does not meet the Drinking Water Standards.
Section 66-1-14(4) - Establishes penalties for the violation of
public health laws.
Section 66-38 - Requires each water and wastewater treatment plant
to be under the supervision of a certified operator. Establishes
classes of operators and defines qualifications for them.
Provides penalties for violations.
Section 106-2-37(1)(a)&(h) - Requires Departmental review of water
quality for proposed subdivisions when submitted by county
commissioners.
Section 142-1 - Authorizes Department to adopt and enforce a
plumbing code that is uniform throughout the state.
-------
38
Section 148-20 - Requires that well drillers and pump installers
be certified. The certification board, which includes a
representative from the Department, is within the State
Engineer's office. This board sets certification criteria
and minimum standards for water well construction and pump
installation.
In addition, under the provisions of Section 139-32-1(35), cities
and towns have the authority to protect their water sources within five
miles of their water supply intakes.
Regulations
In accordance with the authority granted by the statutes, the
Department adopted a set of regulations entitled "Standards for the
Quality of Water Supplied to the Public." These regulations, included
in Appendix E, cover the following main topics:
1. Definition of Terms - Defines certifying authority, coliform
group, standard sample and other terms used in the regulations.
2. Source and Protection - Requires that a public water supply be
protected by adequate treatment. Health hazards are to be
sought out and eliminated through routine surveillance.
3. Drinking Water Quality - Establishes sampling frequency and
standards for the bacteriological, physical, chemical, and
radiological quality of drinking water. These are essentially
the same as found in the Drinking Water Standards.
-------
39
4. Recommended Analytical Methods - Prescribes the testing
procedures to be followed to determine compliance with the
standards.
5. Hazardous Cross Connection - Provides that "a public water supply
shall have no cross-connection to a pipe, fixture, or supply
any of which contain water of lesser quality."
6. Disinfection of Drinking Water - Requires that all public water
supplies be disinfected.
Organization
Figure 1, an organization chart of the Department, shows that the
water supply program is administered by the Engineering Section under the
Engineering and Sanitation Division. Additional responsibilities of
the Section include the solid wastes, plumbing inspection, swimming area
regulation, and incifidual sewage disposal systems regulation programs.
The chemical and bacteriological testing is done by the Laboratory Division.
The Engineering Section's current staff consists of ten public
health engineers (one of which serves as Section Chief) and three
secretaries. The entire staff operates from the central office in Denver.
None of the public health engineers are assigned to a specific program;
therefore, staff-time is divided between the various programs reducing
the effort in any one area. During 1972, for example, only 40 percent
of the engineers' time was devoted to activities relating to public
water supplies (i.e., 4 man-years).
-------
Figure I Colorado Department of Health
Governor
I
|Colorado Department of Health { 1 State Board of Health |
I
I Executive Director |
i
1 Assistant Director |
i
1 1
~Adminis- W
trative Laboratory p
Services Division c
Division D
—Business Microbi-
Manage- ology
ment Section
Section
LChemistry
—Personnel Section
Section
—Records &
Statistics
Section
l|_ _ T 4- U
— Hea I th
Education
Section
—Data Pro-
cessing
Section
—Legal
Services
ann i ng
Section
I
| Assistant Director j
1 1
ater Engineering
Dilution and Sanita-
ontrol tion
ivision Division
. J
Air HOI lu-
tion Control
Division
1
Occupational
& Radiologi-
cal Health
Division
-Milk, Food -Radiological
& Drug Health
Section Section
-Engineering ^Occupational
Section Health
Section
-Water Supply Program
-Solid Wastes Program
-Plumbing Inspection
"Swimming Area Regulation
-Individual Sewage Disposal
Systems Regulation
1
j Assistant Director f
I
Special
Health
Services
Division
-Public
Health
Nursing
Section
-Social Work
Section
-Dental
Health
Section
-Migrant
Health
Section
^P
1
um id
Health
Services
Division
Preventive
Medical
Services
Division
Alcoholism
& Drug
Dependence
Division
Hospital &
Nursing
Home
Division
Community
Health
Services
Division
o
-------
41
Each of the engineers is responsible for a district within the
State. As shown by Figure 2, most of these districts are extensive.
This not only requires a large amount of travel, but makes it difficult
for the engineers to provide adequate coverage,especially of the
counties in western Colorado.
The staff is dedicated and well qualified. There has been little
turnover, so most of the engineers have many years of experience.
Nationally, Colorado ranks about 22nd in average salary paid to staff
engineers ($15,000 for Public Health Engineer I). This salary range
is slightly higher than other states in the region, which helps
maintain the low turnover rate.
Responsibilities
The activities and responsibilities of the Engineering Section
concerning public water supplies, as outlined in the regulations are:
1. Engineering inspection of public water supply facilities and
their operation.
2. Proposing rules, regulations and criteria to secure protection
of public water supplies.
3. Enforcement of sanitary standards to protect quality of water
served to the public.
4. Surveillance of the quality of the water being served to the
public.
5. Review of plans and specifications for new construction and
modifications of existing public water systems.
6. Advise municipalities, utilities, institutions and individuals on
the methods best suited to provide protection or treatment of the
water to meet the standards.
-------
Figure 2
Districts of the Public Health Enaineers
COLORADO
fiOTE: Each number represents an engineer's district
-------
43
In addition, other services are performed, including:
1. Training of water utility personnel.
2, Providing technical assistance to local health departments,
state agencies, and individuals.
3. Promotion of good water supply practices.
Policy
The Engineering Section has adopted a policy statement entitled
"Guidelines for Applying Drinking Water Standards to Regulations -
Quality of Water Supplied to the Public" (included in Appendix F)
which is used to assure, as much as possible, the uniform application
and interpretation of the regulations regarding public water supplies.
The enforcement procedures to be taken when supplies fall to meet the
Drinking Water Standards also are covered.
The guidelines define a public water supply as any water supply
available to the public and establish the following categories:
A Serving over 10,000 persons
B Serving 1,000 - Under 10,000 persons
C Serving 100 - Under 1,000 persons and
having at least 25 service connections.
D Community water supplies serving 10
or more dwelling units not under control
of the owner or 40 - Under TOO resident
persons.
E Other public water supplies not meeting
conditions for above categories.
Therefore, the A, B, C, and D supplies would be considered community
water'supplies as defined on page 3.
-------
44
Before January 1973, when the guidelines were revised, only the
A, B, C, and D categories were listed. The surveillance schedule called
for each A, B, and C supply to receive an annual inspection by an
engineer from the Department. At least one chemical analysis per year
also was required for these supplies.
The revised schedule is shown by Table 5. With the exception of
bacteriological testing, the new schedule doubles the activities of
the previous one. The local health departments are responsible for
the surveillance of the category E supplies as well as for the
bacteriological and chemical sampling program for all supplies within
the counties they serve.
Budget and^ j taff i ng
Figures 3 and 4 present budget and staffing patterns of the water
supply program as compared to two other major environmental activities
administered by the Department. The basic dilemma confronting the
water supply program is shown quite dramatically. Whereas the water
pollution and air pollution control programs have realized significant
increases in their resources for the past several years, the water supply
program has remained practically static. This has occurred although
the number of water supplies requiring surveillance have more than
tripled in the last seven years.
The fiscal year 1974 (FY 1974) allocation for the water supply
program is $59,800. This represents only about $85.00 for the engineering
surveillance of each of Colorado's 704 community water supplies, or about
2.5 cents per capita (based on the 1972 estimated population of 2,375,000).8
These levels are well below the national averages of $287.00 per water
supply and 5.3 cents per capita, respectively. As a comparison, Colorado
-------
TABLE 5
Colorado Department of Health Guidelines for the
Surveillance of Public Water Supplies ]_/
Category of
Public Water
Supplies
A, B, C, & D
E
Frequency of Inspections
Engineering-.
Inspections—'
2 per year
1 per year
Sanitary.
Surveys—
1 every 5 years
At discretion of
inspecting
authority
Frequency of Analyses
Chemical-/
2 per year
At discretion
of insoectinq
authority
Bacteriological
According to
Drinking Water
Standards
1 per month
en
V Based on January, 1973 revisions to "Guidelines for Apnlying Drinking Water Standards to
Regulations - Quality of Water Supplied to the Public."
2/ An inspection to check compliance with regulations. Report is submitted on form included in
~ Appendix F.
3/ Detailed survey including a comprehensive written report on all aspects of the water supoly.
4/ Includes all constituents listed in the Drinking Water Standards.
-------
46
Figure 3
Budget Comparisons of Environmental Programs
(From Appendix G)
1/1
to
o
a
*»-
o
in
o
Q>
•O
CO
r—
2
C
<
1.8
1.7
1.6
1.5
1.4
1.3
1.2
1.1
1.0
0.9
0.8
0.7
0.6
0.5
0.4
0.3
0.2
0.1
0.0
Water Pollution
Control Progranf
Air Pollution
Control Program
Water Supply Program
I
I
1968 1969
1970 1971 1972 1973 1974
Fiscal Year
-------
47
Figure 4
Staffing Comparisons Between Environmental Programs
(From Appendix G)
60
50
40
Air Pollution
Control Program-
t.
o
uu
v
o
ea
-------
48
expends about 75 cents per capita for water pollution control and
53 cents per capita for air pollution control activities. Certainly,
these environmental proqrams are important, but an effective drinking
water program is just as essential and should receive a comparable
level of funding and manpower.
Why hasn't the water supply program kept pace with the growth
experienced by the other environmental activities? The answer is
simply that public and legislative emphasis have been concentrated on
other environmental concerns. The Federal Government has enacted
strong legislation regardinn water and air pollution control which
nlaced many legal requirements upon the states. Federal funds are
provided to enable the states to strengthen their programs and
i mo lenient the legislation. For example, federal funds will account
for one-third of the FY 1974 water and air pollution control budgets
shown by Figure 3. The remaining two-thirds are state funds which
Colorado had to commit in order to qualify for the federal grants
and comply with the legislative requirements. Since Colorado does not
have unlimited resources, priorities must be established. Unfortunately,
more often than not, the low priority activities are those, such as
the water supply program, which don't receive federal funding.
Engineering Surveillance of Public Uater Supplies
The routine surveillance of public water supplies is one of the
most important duties of health officials. To prevent serious health
hazards from developing, the physical facilities and operational
procedures of a water supply must be reviewed regularly by qualified
personnel.
-------
49
As shown by Table 5, the Engineering Section has a DO!icy (as of
January 1973) of inspectinn each community water supply (categories
A, B, C, & D) twice each year. Unfortunately, present staff and budget
limitations probably will never allow this schedule to be fully implemented.
In fact, the staff could never complete the annual insnections of the
suoplfes under the previous surveillance schedule. For example, in
1972, 12 percent of the A, B, C supolies were not inspected. As
indicated earlier, surveillance of those sunplies which are fluoridating
has been particularly inadequate. Very few of the D supplies were
surveyed. Records for previous years revealed that 20 percent
of the A, B, and C supplies were being inspected every two or three vears
rather than annually.
Well-written reports, outlining the findings and recommendations of
the inspections, are essential to obtain desired improvements. Presently,
a complete written report is prepared only every five years. For the
intervening years an annual inspection form (included in Appendix F)
is used. This check-sheet is a general measure of compliance with
regulations. The form does provide a convenient reporting method for
the inspections which is important in view of current staff limitations.
Nevertheless, the forms do pose the danger of making the inspections too
routine. The engineer might well fill out the entire form without
doing a thorough inspection to detect problems which would negate the
purpose of the surveillance effort. A review of completed inspection
forms revealed that this problem is occurring, indicating the need for
a more detailed reporting system.
-------
50
After the initial inspections, follow-up surveys are important in
order to determine if the communities have properly implemented the
recommendations. The lack of available staff time has prevented adequate
follow-up consultations and investigations. Emphasizing this point is
that, as of January 1973, 27 percent of the 394 A, B, and C supplies
still had inadequate treatment.
The surveillance of the quality of water being served by public
water supplies also requires additional follow-up work. The community
water supplies are supposed to have at least one complete chemical
analysis each year. They are required to submit samples for bacterio-
logical analysis each month. Each engineer receives the results for
his district. The engineers are responsible for following-up on the unsafe
results, requesting resamples, and for seeing that the systems are
submitting the proper number of samples. During 1972, however, 60
percent of the 394 A, B, and C supplies did not submit the required
number of samples for two or more months, and very little
resampling was done. Obviously, more-thorough follow-up and more
attention to the enforcement steps outlined in the "Guidelines for
Applying Drinking Water Standards to Regulations - Quality of Water
Supplied to the Public" by .the Engineering Section is needed.
The community water supplies are not required to submit periodical
operating reports. In fact, many supplies do not maintain adequate
records for their own use. Good records are essential to the operation
of any water system. Operating logs submitted to the Engineering
Section, on a periodic basis, would provide valuable information as
-------
51
well as indicating problems with which the supply needs assistance.
This would also encourage the operators to maintain good records.
The community water supplies are not required to submit plans and
specifications for the construction of new water supply systems or the
modifications of existing systems. In addition, there is no requirement
that the plans and specifications must be prepared by an engineer
licensed to practice in Colorado. All plans that are submitted are
reviewed by the Engineering Section. Approximately 140 plans
representing $16 million are reviewed annually. A concentrated effort
is made to carry out this activity often at the expense of other
important functions.
Generally, the Recommended Standards for Water Works9 adopted by
the Great Lakes - Upper Mississippi River Board of State Sanitary
Engineers (the so-called Ten-State Standards) are used by the Engineering
Section when reviewing plans. The Section has developed and published
its own criteria regarding distribution systems, disinfection systems
and finished water storage tanks.
The Engineering Section provides technical assistance to the local
health departments, other state agencies and individuals upon request.
Unfortunately, lack of available staff and the distances involved (from
Denver to Durango for example) limit the extent and amount of technical
assistance which can be offered.
In summary, a definite need exists for more surveillance and technical
assistance in order to help the communities improve the condition, opera-
tion and maintenance of their water supplies. More follow-up work on
-------
52
inspection, chemical and bacteriological reports is needed to isolate
and correct deficiencies. The present water supply program simply does
not have the resources to perform these functions adequately.
Training
Operation of water supply systems must be by qualified persons.
Skilled operation not only protects a community's investment in its
drinking water facilities but safeguards the public health as well.
In view of these considerations Colorado enacted a mandatory certifi-
cation law (included in Appendix D) for water and wastewater system
operators. The law requires that each water and wastewater system in
Colorado have a certified operator meeting specific qualifications.
This has increased the demand for operator training considerably.
At present, the only training offered is the Rocky Mountain Water and
Wastewater Plant Operators School held in Denver each year. The week-
long school is conducted by the University of Colorado, Colorado
Department of Health, and Wyoming Department of Environmental Quality.
Between 75-100 operators attend the water treatment segment of the
school each year. Even with the law; however, many communities
(especially the small ones) either cannot afford or simply do not care
to send their operators to the school. Many of the small-town operators
also perform other duties (such as garbage collection and street repair)
and cannot be spared for an entire week. In addition, many operators
criticize the school for presenting too much material in too short a
time. Since the school does not appear to be meeting the operators'
needs, the sponsors should seriously consider modifications to the school's
approach.
-------
53
In an attempt to alleviate some of these problems two of the
district engineers presented one-day short courses in two locations
in southwest Colorado. The courses covered Departmental regulations
regarding public water supplies, the why and how of bacteriological
testing as well as other fundamentals. Both courses were extremely
successful. The operators were relaxed and felt much freer to ask
questions. They commented that they gained much more from the short
courses than from the operators school. It appears that the short course
approach presented around the State could reap valuable benefits in
improved operation and maintenance. Again, lack of staff-time and
funds are the major obstacles.
Another important form of training which has been seriously
neglected by the Department is an on-going training program for the
district engineers. Although they have engineering backgrounds,
they still need some form of periodic training to keep up with technical
advances and for professional development. The water supply program
has no specific allotment for training; therefore, any funds for this
purpose must be "borrowed" from other activities. This approach has
meant that few of the district engineers have attended training courses
other than those sponsored by the Department.
Local Health Departments
The Colorado Revised Statutes authorize the formation of local
health departments at the county or municipal level. Presently, there
are 13 organized local health departments serving 24 of Colorado's 63
counties (Figure 5). These departments use a combination of local,
-------
Figure 5
Counties Served by Organized Local Health Departments
COLORADO
GRAND I BOULDER
NOTE-. Each number represents an organized local health department
-------
55
state, and, in some cases, federal funds. If the county (or counties)
provide at least $1.50 per capita to support a local health department,
the State will provide an additional $0.85 per capita.
According to Departmental policy (Appendix F)» the local health
departments have the following responsibilities regarding public and
individual water supplies:
1. Implementation of the bacteriological sampling requirements
for all public water supplies in their respective areas
including submission of a monthly summary report of tests
conducted on category A, B, C, and D supplies to the Department.
2. Inspection and surveillance of the category E and individual
water supplies.
3. Investigation of complaints regarding public water supplies.
4- Reporting to the Department any findings from investigations
of complaints, abnormal conditions and any suspected waterborne
disease outbreaks.
Ten of the local departments provide laboratory services which
Include bacteriological testing of water supplies. The local departments
provide some beneficial decentralization of the water supply program.
The reaction to problems, such as unsafe bacteriological results, can
be much quicker and more effective. Unfortunately, the local departments
do not have the resources to fulfill the responsibilities. This has
resulted in inadequate sampling and few follow-up investigations of
public water supplies.
-------
56
The Drinking Water Standards specify a definite procedure to be
followed when unsafe bacteriological results are obtained. Departmental
records indicate that the local departments are not following this
procedure. Many times the Engineering Section or the water utility
have not been promptly notified of unsafe results. The Engineering
Section often does not receive monthly summaries of results from the
local departments. Obviously, these problems will have to be corrected
before the potential benefits of local health departments can be
realized by the water supply program.
Laboratory Support - Bacteriological
Bacteriological testing of water supplies is conducted by the
Department, local health departments and, in some cases, by the
municipalities. Most of this work is done by the Department's
Laboratory Division (Figure 1). Approximately 9,800 water samples
from public supplies and 5,200 from individual supplies are tested
annually by the Division. A staff of four conducts the tests; however,
they are also responsible for a large volume of work relating to the
water pollution control and milk sanitation programs. The Division
estimates that it costs $2.00 to test each water sample. No charges
are made to water utilities or individuals for this service. The
results are sent to the Engineering Section for further action. The
Laboratory's procedures and facilities were evaluated in 1971 by the
Environmental Protection Agency. The report, included in Appendix H,
concluded that the laboratory generally met the provisions of the
Standard Methods for the Examination of Water and WastewaterJ0
-------
57
Ten of the local health departments also do bacteriological testing
of water supplies. Their laboratories conduct about 8,000 tests on
public water supplies each year. There are indications that some of
these labs are under-staffed. For example, there have been cases when
samples were not tested during periods when the microbiologist or lab
technician was on vacation. The monthly summaries often have not been
submitted to the Engineering Section on a timely basis. Obviously,
these problems hamper the surveillance program. All of these labs are
visited at least once a year by someone from the Laboratory Division
(usually the Division Director) to evaluate procedures and provide
technical assistance. Five of the laboratories must be formally
evaluated and certified every three years since they test samples from
water supplies which serve interstate carriers (airplanes, trains or
buses). The Division estimates that each of these formal evaluations
costs $500 based on the man-hours and travel required.
Some of the water utilities conduct their own bacteriological
testing. These include Aurora, Colorado Springs and Denver, whose
results are accepted as official since they are subject to the formal
certifications by the Laboratory Division. These laboratories submit
summaries of their results to the Engineering Section.
Laboratory Support - Chemical
The Laboratory Division conducts the chemical analyses on water
samples from the public supplies collected by the Engineering Section
as part of the surveillance program. Analyses on about 440 of the 704
community water supplies are conducted each year indicating that each
-------
58
community supply has a chemical analysis every 20 months. Each analysis
includes all the constituents in the Drinking Water Standards except
silver and carbon chloroform extract. Pesticides analyses are conducted
upon request. The Division estimates that each complete analysis
(excluding pesticides) costs $150.
The present staff of four chemists and a technician are respon-
sible for conducting not only the water supply analyses but also a
large volume of water pollution control tests. In fact, about 70% of
their time is devoted to the water pollution work. This in conjunction
with the extremely cramped conditions in the chemistry laboratory
results in long turn-around times for water samples. At times the
laboratory has had a four month backlog of samples for analysis. These
delays affect the overall surveillance effort.
Other Agencies
Water Pollution Control Division - The Water Pollution Control
Division, within the Department, is responsible for administering
Colorado's water quality control program. This involves a wide variety
of activities including surveillance of domestic and industrial waste
treatment facilities, monitoring the water quality of streams and
effluents, comprehensive water quality planning, as well as setting
and enforcing water quality standards. In conjunction with the EPA,
the Division processes applications for construction grants for sewage
facilities and for waste discharge permits. Furthermore, the Division
has strong regulations concerning disposal of wastes by injection wells
or other subsurface means. These are very important regulations in view
-------
59
of the increased interest in Colorado's underground resources. By
helping to protect and improve the quality of water sources, the
Division's activities benefit the overall water supply program. There
must be continual coordination between the water pollution control and
water supply programs if these benefits are to be realized.
Department of Natural Resources - The Division of Water Resources
(State Engineer's office) has the responsibility of carrying out the
provisions of the Water Well and Pump Installation Contractors Law
(Colorado Revised Statutes - Section 118-20) which went into effect
July 1, 1967,
The law established the Board of Examiners of Water Well and Pump
Installation Contractors under the Division of Water Resources. The
Department of Health is represented on the Board. The Board has
adopted regulations to implement the act.
Another major provision requires that well and pump installation
contractors must be certified by the Board in order to construct and
install pumps in water wells within Colorado. A permit must be obtained
from the State Engineer's office before construction or modification of
a water well.
Well completion and pump installation reports (including a well log)
must be filed with the office within 60 days after construction (or
modification) is completed. The Board has a staff consisting of a
registered professional engineer and three engineering technicians
(well inspectors) to enforce the regulations. Since about 16,000 well
-------
60
permits are issued each year it is impossible for the inspectors to
look at all the installations.
Unfortunately, the regulations are weak concerning proper grouting,
non-ferrous well casing and water quality testing after construction.
These vague regulations do not allow the true intent of the legislation,
to protect the public health through proper well construction, to be
implemented.
Environmental Protection Agency - Under the Federal Interstate
Quarantine Regulations, the EPA must survey and classify those water
supplies providing water to interstate carriers (trains, planes, and buses)
This program consists of a joint EPA - State survey every three years
and a State survey during the intervening years. A supply is classified
as either "Approved", "Provisionally Approved" or "Prohibited" based
on the adequacy of the supply to provide water meeting the Drinking
Water Standards. Presently, there are 12 supplies serving over 1.25
million people in Colorado which come under this program. All but
three of these supplies have the "Approved" classification.
Other Federal Agencies - The Forest Service and the National Park
Service have water supplies which do not fall under state jurisdiction.
These agencies are responsible for conducting their own-surveillance
programs. The Farmers Home Administration (FmHA) provides loans to
rural communities and water districts (serving less than 10,000 people)
to construct water supply facilities. The FmHA requires that the plans
for proposed projects be approved by the Engineering Section before the
loans are granted.
-------
61
Data Management
The Engineering Section must collect, evaluate and file an immense
quantity of data in managing the water supply program. Information such
as an inventory of supplies, engineering inspections, bacteriological
results and chemical analyses is essential. In addition, information
in connection with review of plans as well as surveillance of small
public and individual water systems is necessary. These items, which
can run into the millions, must be retained and be continuously avail-
able for reference or analysis.
Automatic data processing (ADP) could provide an effective means
for storage and retrieval of these data. Presently, the only information
for which the Engineering Section uses ADP is that relating to the
activity reports (which lists how many hours spent on what activities)
kept by the engineers and a quarterly summary of the inspection reports.
None of the bacteriological or chemical surveillance data are included.
These data require time consuming bookkeeping, filing and retrieval
procedures. The present system is cumbersome, especially when informa-
tion on a large number of water supplies is needed.
Public Health Risk
Since the middle of the nineteenth century, when Dr. John Snow did
his classical study on the transmission of cholera through a water
supply, it has been recognized generally that disease epidemics can,
and do, result from consumption of water containing pathogenic micro-
organisms. Diseases most commonly associated with drinking water are
-------
62
cholera, typhoid fever, dysentery, and infectious hepatitis. Spread
of these diseases occurs most often when body wastes from the 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 of people, remains and demands constant
vigilance.
Human body wastes from infected persons, when present in inadequately
treated drinking water, have caused waterborne disease outbreaks in
Colorado. From 1963 - 1972 a total of eight outbreaks, resulting in
411 cases of waterborne disease, have been attributed to public water
supplies. Fortunately, none of these outbreaks resulted in a fatality.
All of the outbreaks were the result of contamination entering an
inadequately treated water supply. Either no disinfection was being
provided or the disinfection equipment (chlorinators) was inoperative
due to poor operation and maintenance. Four outbreaks involved surface
water sources with disinfection (inoperative much of. the time) as the
only form of treatment. Six of the outbreaks (274 cases) occurred at
recreational areas such as ski resorts and summer camps. These systems
have great potential for spreading waterborne disease because:
1. They are generally poorly constructed, operated and maintained.
2. They receive little or no surveillance.
3. Large numbers of people use them in a relatively short period
of time. Those people that contract a disease can, in turn,
infect others as they continue their travels.
-------
63
Since there are over eight million people who travel in Colorado
each year, a public health risk does exist. These outbreaks illustrate
the importance of routine surveillance of public water supplies.
Appendix I presents a tabulation of significant diseases, which
could be waterborne, and a comparison of the number of cases in Colorado
versus the number occurring nationwide for the past ten years. While
Colorado has approximately 1.1 percent of the nation's population, it
had for the period 1963-1972:
1. 0.3 percent of the total number of reported cases of amebiasis.
2. 1.4 percent of the total number of reported cases of viral
hepatitis.
3. 1.6 percent of the total number of reported cases of salmo-
nellosis.
4. 2.2 percent of the total number of reported cases of shlgellosis.
5. 1.1 percent of the total number of reported cases of typhoid
fever.
This data is not intended to imply that all reported cases were
waterborne. It is intended, however, to point out that a portion of
these cases, plus an unknown number of unreported cases, may have been
waterborne. In addition, body wastes from these diseased persons
pose the constant threat of contaminating public drinking water with
pathogenic microorganisms.
While epidemiological records generally do not show widespread
incidence of waterborne disease, this actually may reflect incomplete
reporting, inaccurate diagnosis and the fact that much enteric illness
-------
64
is not treated by physicians. This had led some authorities to suggest
that cases of such diseases as gastroenteritis and infectious hepatitis
actually may be as many as 100 times the number reported.
In recent years, concern also has been directed to the possible
chronic diseases which may result from use of water containing certain
elements and chemicals. These potentially dangerous substances include
heavy metals, pesticides and toxic industrial products. Although few
clinical cases are recorded, health agency statistics are limited usually
to communicable diseases and affected individuals may have unrecognized
symptoms. The heavy metals, such as selenium, cadmium, lead, zinc,
and arsenic, occur naturally in the earth therefore, they can be present
in water sources. As shown by Table 3, several public water supplies in
Colorado have concentrations of some of these elements exceeding the
Drinking Water Standards. Therefore, it is important that every water
supply serving the public should have an adequate chemical analysis
performed routinely.
In essentially all documented cases of waterborne illness, it has
been shown that definite deficiencies existed in the water supply systems
during the time when disease was transmitted. Furthermore, these
deficiencies either were unrecognized because of inadequate surveillance
for pqblic health hazards, or were recognized but not remedied due to
complacent water supply personnel and ineffective enforcement by health
officials. Deficiencies similar to those responsible for epidemics
definitely are present in the water supplies of Colorado. The requisites
for repetition of the waterborne outbreaks of the past, namely inadequate
surveillance of water supplies serving the public and the presence of
-------
PROGRAM
-------
66
PROGRAM NEEDS
The previous sections presented the study findings and their
relation to the current status of the water supply orogram in Colorado.
There is a definite need for a much stronger program especially in
terms of surveillance. This section will discuss what is required to
give Colorado an adequate water, supply program.
Legal Authority
The Colorado statutes provide the Department of Health with
regulatory powers to establish and enforce standards to protect the
quality of water served to the public. Unfortunately, the scope of
this authority is limited to drinking water quality standards and
mandatory disinfection.
The water supply orogram does not have the authority to require
Public water suoplies to obtain aporoval before construction of new or
modification of existing water supply facilities, Construction of water
suoDly facilities represents a major expenditure on the part of
municipalities. If inadequate attention is given to the source water or
to the type of treatment, costly errors can result which also can cause
Public health problems. For example, all four waterborne outbreaks which
occurred in Colorado during 1972 were due to inadequate treatment of
surface sources. Many poorly designed small water supply systems are
operating in Colorado. A good review program can prevent many of these
P^blems from occurring. Therefore, legislation is needed to give the
water supply program the authority to:
-------
67
1. Require that a permit be obtained (from the water supply program)
by a public water supply before construction of new or modification
of existing water supply facilities could begin.
2. Issue regulations concerning the requirements which must be met
in order to obtain a permit, including prior approval of proposed
sources and treatment.
3. Issue criteria for the design, construction and operation of water
supply facilities.
Table 4 illustrates another problem of major concern which could be
alleviated with proper legislation, The largest percentage of the
communities with deficiencies 1n their water supply systems have less than
1,000 people. Many need additional treatment facilities or new water
sources so they can serve safe drinking water, Unfortunately, most of these
small communities have serious financial problems and can't afford major
capital Improvements. Presently, there are practically no reliable sources
of funding for such cases, The Farmers Home Administration (U.S. Department
of Agriculture) can provide loans (and grants 1n some cases) to small
communities and districts (serving less than 10,000 people) for water
supply facilities but these funds are limited. Although Colorado has a
construction grant program for sewage disposal facilities, there is not a
similar program for community water supplies.
Many states have similar situations. Eight states, in an effort to
help those communities with fiscal hardships, have Implemented grant or low-
interest loan programs for construction of water supply facilities.
Although using a variety of approaches, all of these programs have the common
purpose of helping make it possible for small communities to have safe
drinking water.
-------
68
In view of the numerous small communities 1n Colorado with deficient
water supplies, it is recommended that legislation be enacted authorizing
a construction grant (or combination grant and low-interest loan) program
for community water supplies to be administered by the Department of
Health. The program would be intended for those communities unable to
finance the improvements necessary for their water systems to meet the
State's quality or treatment requirements. This program could result in
definite public health and economic benefits to Colorado.
Regulations
The present regulations are adequate in terms of the water supply
program's existing statutory authority. However, to implement the
recommended expanded authority the following regulations would be
needed. In absence of legislation these could still be developed
and issued as guidelines:
1. Requirements for obtaining a permit to construct or modify
water supply facilities. These should require:
a. Submission of preliminary engineering reports, plans
and specifications for review arid approval. These shall
be prepared by a professional engineer registered in Colorado.
b. Approval of proposed water sources.
c. Compliance with the program's criteria for minimum
acceptable treatment.
d. Compliance with the program's criteria for design and
construction of water supply facilities.
-------
69
e. Regional planning to discourage the proliferation of small,
inefficient water systems. Proposed systems should be
stimulated to explore the possibilities of consolidating
with other systems before approval is given.
2. Definition of minimum acceptable treatment for source waters.
Filtration of surface sources should be required.
3. Minimum requirements for water treatment and distribution systems
should be developed. These should be flexible enough to allow
the design engineers to make full use of available water treat-
ment technology; but should insure continued production of a safe
water supply.
4. The engineering consultant should be required to provide inspec-
tion during construction to assure that all work is done in accor-
dance with the State approved plans and specifications. Engineers
from the water supply program should have access to the project
at all times during construction.
5. All public water supplies should be required to have a satisfactory
bacteriological test and engineering inspection before being
placed into service after construction or modification.
6. Basic criteria concerning the operation and maintenance of water
supply systems are needed. These would outline such items as
the type and number of quality control tests which should be
conducted for various classes of systems and the periodic sub-
mission of standard operating reports to the water supply program.
The operating reports can provide valuable information such as
indicating when systems are experiencing difficulties.
-------
70
In this regard water supplies which fluoridate should be required
to submit monthly check samples and monthly operational reports.
7. Criteria for the grant program.
The current "Rules and Regulations for Water Well and Pump
Installation Contractors" need strengthening in order to achieve their
stated purpose of protecting public health. The water supply program
should recommend changes to the Board of Examiners of Water Well and Pump
Installation Contractors as they see fit. Specifically, the following
changes are recommended:
1. A definition of what constitutes an adequate grout mixture
is needed.
2. A minimum grout thickness should be stipulated.
3. The present in-foot minimum grout depth will not provide the
intended protection where deep frost penetration occurs. To
be effective, the grout seal must be in contact with undisturbed
earth. Therefore, the regulations should require the grout to
extend at least ten feet below the frost line.
4. Regulations concerning non-ferrous well casing should be
developed, In particular, plastic well casing used in wells
Intended for domestic purposes should have National Sanitation
Foundation (NSF) approval.
-------
71
5. Regulations regarding the proper installation of pitless well
adaptors and units are needed.
The recommended regulations would be important additions to the
present water supply program. Their purpose would be to help foster
more careful planning and design of water supplies, effective operation
and maintenance of facilities as well as increased attention to quality
control. All of these are essential to continued production of safe
drinking water.
Policy
The "Guidelines for Applying Drinking Water Standards to Regulations
Quality of Water Supplied to the Public" outlines the respective
responsibilities of the State and local health departments very well.
The guidelines should be followed to eliminate confusion regarding
surveillance of public water supplies.
The policy statement (or guidelines) should remain flexible so
changes can be made easily.
Surveillance of Public Water Supplies
The importance of routine surveillance of public water supply
systems cannot be overstated. Only through an effective surveillance
and enforcement program can potential problems be detected and eliminated.
This is the area in which Colorado's water supply program needs the most
strengthening.
As indicated earlier, the present staff is not adequate to visit
each community water supply at least once .each year. This is especially
-------
72
true of the category C and D supplies which have most of the problems.
The need for more effective follow-up inspections and enforcement is
evident,si nee there are over 100 supplies in Colorado which do not have
adequate treatment. In fact, there are many supplies which still do not
disinfect, although this has been State law since 1967. The use of
penalties is distasteful in public health work and the Engineering
Section must be commended for the progress achieved in improving water
supplies without the use of force. Unfortunately, there are those who
refuse to implement the recommendations. Such cases call for much
stronger action by the Engineering Section and, if necessary, the
Department.
The present policy of using a check sheet (Form ES-ENG-1 in
Appendix F) for annual inspections is convenient but is poses the danger
of making the evaluations too routine. If the inspections become just
"visits to the water plant" the whole purpose of routine surveillance is
negated. The check sheets can serve as useful guides, but a written
report with recommendations should be submitted to each community water
supply at least once each year. This provides a better basis for future
follow-up and enforcement action.
More emphasis on bacteriological monitoring is needed. The present
situation where over half of the community supplies are not submitting
the proper number of samples must not be allowed to continue. Even
more serious is the fact that some of these supplies fail to meet the
bacteriological quality standards for two to five months. This indicates
a lack of follow-up and enforcement action. There are definite enforcement
-------
73
steps outlined in the policy statement. These should be followed more
closely.
Presently, each community water supply has a chemical analysis about
every 20 months. To improve the monitoring, the Engineering Section has
adopted the policy of requiring chemical analyses twice a year (Table 5).
Although this would be an excellent monitoring program, it would probably
be impossible to implement due to overburdened laboratory facilities.
Instead, the following schedule might prove to be more feasible and
still provide adequate monitoring:
Community Water Supplies
Surface Water Sources - Every Year
Ground Water Sources - Every 3 Years
Small Public Water
Supplies - Every 5 Years
More frequent analyses may be necessary to establish historic records
for sources or if sources have constituents approaching the limits of
the Drinking Water Standards.
The fluoridation surveillance effort must be improved if the
potential benefits of this program are to be realized. Therefore, it
is recommended that;
1. Information should be gathered on the fluoridation equipment
and chemical compound used at each water supply. This would
be helpful in follow-up of reported problems.
2. The number of check samples sent to the State Laboratory should
be increased to at least one per month for every water system
adjusting fluoride content.
-------
74
3. The check sample records should be kept by the Engineering
Section rather than the Dental Health Section.
4. More frequent review of fluoride check sample results and
better communication between the Dental Health Section and
the Engineering Section is needed to ensure more efficient
field follow-up in problem areas.
5. The Engineering Section should develop standard forms for
recording:
a. Daily fluoride sample results
b. Amount of fluoride compound used, total water produced,
and other operational information.
In summary, the water supply program must be upgraded so that
it can meet its responsibilities to the citizens of Colorado.
Staffing Requirements for Engineering Surveillance
As indicated throughout this report, the primary need of the water
supply program is sufficient personnel to implement an effective
surveillance effort.
The Community Water Supply Study1indicated that an average of
1.2 man-days, per community water supply, are needed to make a
comprehensive field survey of facilities and operation. However, this
single-visit-time-requirement does not allow for:
1. Making arrangements for field work.
2. Preparing the survey reports.
-------
75
3. Review of plans and specifications for new facilities.
4. Follow-up work to see that deficiencies are being corrected.
5. Activities related to training of water treatment plant
operators.
These are essential if the program is to be successful in securing
proper water treatment practices throughout the State. Therefore, it
has been estimated that at least four man-days per year are required for
each community water supply (the A, B, C, and D systems in Colorado).
In addition, one man-day per year is required for the supplies serving
the traveling public and the small public water supplies (category E
systems).
Based on these estimates the personnel requirements are:
1. Community Systems (categories A, B, C, and D)
704 systems x 4 man-days = 2,816 man-days
system
2. Small Public Systems (category E)
900 systems x 1 man-day = 900 man-days
system
Total requirement = 3,716 man-days or 17 man-years (assuming
220 man-days per man-year).
Therefore, an adequate water supply program in Colorado would require a
total of 17 professional man-years - 4% times the current level.
Secretarial support would be essential to the effective operation
of the expanded water supply program. It is recommended that one
secretary be added for every three professionals. Therefore, a secretarial
staff of six would be required.
-------
76
Since the local health departments participate in the surveillance
of the small public water supplies and the supplies serving the traveling
public, some of the positions could be assigned to these departments.
Such a distribution was not considered as part of this study because:
1. The needs of each local health department were not evaluated.
2. 77 percent of the counties are not covered by local health
departments, therefore, surveillance responsibility rests with
the Engineering Section.
However, to assure a coordinated effort, the local health departments'
surveillance activities relating to public water supplies should be
evaluated and considered to overall staffing patterns.
The recommended annual personnel requirements represent more than
a four-fold increase over the current level. This would enable
accomplishment of the activities related to a fully satisfactory program.
Nevertheless, it is not considered advisable to add personnel at a
rate greater than they can be properly recruited, trained and assimilated
into the program. In view of this, a phased increase is recommended.
This means that priorities must be established in order to meet
the pressing responsibilities of the water supply program. Among
these critical activities are:
1. On-site inspections (with written report) of community water
supplies at least annually.
2. Follow-up inspections to check compliance with recommendations.
3. Frequent comprehensive reviews of bacteriological and chemical
sampling records with prompt follow-up on those failing to meet
sampling and quality standards.
-------
77
4. Detailed plan review with on-site inspection of construction.
5. Review of operating reports with follow-up on those indicating
problems.
The first priority should be to accomplish the above tasks for the
704 community water supplies (categories A, B, C and D). The following
proposed staffing pattern would make this possible by the end of FY 1976.
Full services for the small public supplies could not be provided until
the final staff increments were made during FY 1977.
Technical Staff
Staff at
Fiscal Year Start of FY During FY End of FY
74 4 0 4
75 459
76 9 4 13
77 13 4 17
Existing Staff
Start of FY
4
4
9
13
Clerical
1
1
3
5
To be
During
0
5
4
4
Staff
0
2
2
1
added
FY
74 101
75 123
76 325
77 5 1 6
-------
78
Budget Requirements for Engineering Surveillance
To estimate the annual costs that this increased level of effort
would entail, the following breakdowns were used:
a. Average cost per professional per year:
Salary $12,000
Fringe Benefits 2,500
Travel 2,000
Training 500*
Misc. (office supplies
office space,etc.) 1,000
$18,000
Administration Costs (2Q%) 3,600
TOTAL $217600
*Training costs based on the premise that each professional should
receive at least five days of training per year to keep abreast of
new developments.
b. Average cost per clerical employee per year:
Salary $6,000
Fringe Benefits 1,500
$7,500
Administration Costs (20%) 1.500
$9,000
The recommended staff and budget for the water supply program are
summarized below.
-------
Professional
4
9
13
17
Clerical
1
3
5
6
Total
5
12
18
23
79
Staffing - Engineering Surveillance
FY Staff at End of FY
74
75
76
77
Budget - Engineering Surveillance
Additional Costs Program Costs
£1 Added During FY at End of FY
74 - $59,800 (estimate)
75 $161,600 $221,400
76 $104,400 $325,800
77 $95,400 $421,200
A fully effective engineering surveillance program to insure that
Colorado's citizens and visitors are served safe drinking water would
require an annual expenditure of $421,200. This represents $600 per
community water system or about 18 cents per capita - over seven times
the amount allocated to the present program.
Organization
The Engineering Section Chief is responsible for directing and
coordinating the water supply program as well as the other activities
of the Section. In terms of the water supply program's present level
of staff and activity this has been a satisfactory approach. Nevertheless,
-------
80
as the water supply program expands, as recommended by this evaluation,
a larger and larger administrative burden will be placed on the Section
Chief. This could result in decreased coordination and a less efficient
organization. It is recommended, therefore, that a Water Supply Section
be formed within the Engineering and Sanitation Division to be responsible
for all activities concerning public water supplies.
To make the water supply activities more responsive to the needs
of the communities and people, it is further recommended that the
proposed Water Supply Section be decentralized. As a minimum, district
offices should be established in two locations in western Colorado
such as Durango and Glenwood Springs. Offices in the Pueblo and Greeley
areas could also be beneficial. This would allow the engineers to provide
better coverage of their districts resulting in an overall improvement
of surveillance as well as an increased ability to respond to emergencies.
Better coordination with the local health departments could be achieved.
Hopefully these organizational changes would also serve to increase
the visibility of the water supply program and re-establish its importance.
Laboratory Support - Bacteriological
The State and local health departments' laboratories conduct
approximately 24,000 bacteriological tests each year for water supplies,
This costs about $48,000 using the State's estimate of $2.00 per sample.
In addition, Denver, Colorado Springs, and Aurora are doing much of
their own testing for official purposes.
As shown by Table 6 the expanded water supply program would be
testing about 20,000 more samples each year. This would result in
-------
TABLE 6
Bacteriological Testing Requirements
Water Supply
Category
A
B
C
D
E (Small Residential) """ "" " "" °°
E (Supplies Serving
Traveling Public)
Individual
43,380
*Assumes that these supplies operate on a seasonal basis.
Number of
Supplies
26
113
255
310
100
800
60,000
for Aurora,
Samples Req'd
Per Month
1,200
400
510
620
200
1,600
Colorado Springs and Denver
Samples Req'd
Per Year
14,400
4,800
6,120
7,440
2,400
6,400*
8,000
49,560
-6,180
-------
82
an additional annual expenditure of at least $40,000. Obviously,
additional staff at both the State and local laboratories would be
necessary.
This impact could be alleviated to some degree by allowing the
category A supplies to do their own bacteriological testing. The
Department's responsibility, in this case, would be to assure that the
analyses are performed properly, which could be accomplished through
the laboratory certification program. Further monitoring could be
achieved by conducting at least five percent of the monthly requirements
at the State and local health department laboratories. A decrease of
about 8,000 samples (and $16,000} would result, but 23 more laboratories
would have to be evaluated every three years. At $500 per evaluation this
would cost approximately $4,000 each year but would still represent a
net savings as compared to testing the samples. This approach also
would allow closer surveillance of the smaller supplies where most of
the quality problems occur. A cost summary of the proposed program is
shown below:
Bacteriological Analyses:
36,000 samples/yr. x $2.00/sample = $72,000/yr.
72,000 + 20% x $7'2-,000 (Administration) = $86,400/yr.
Laboratory Evaluation (on a triennial basis):
39 laboratories (local health departments and A supplies)
x $500/evaluation = $19,500 = $6,500/yr.
3
$6,500 + 2Q% x $6,500 (Administration) = $7,800/yr.
TOTAL = $94,200/yr.
-------
83
Laboratory Support - Chemical
The present chemical laboratory is hard-pressed to analyze the
nearly 450 water samples from public water supplies each year in
addition to their many other duties. If the current sampling schedule
is adhered to, the expanded water supply program would place an impossible
burden upon the laboratory facilities which are already overcrowded
and understaffed. To lessen this problem, the following sampling
schedule is recommended;
Community Water Supplies (categories A, B. C. and D)
Surface Water Sources - Every Year
Ground Water Sources - Every 3 Years
Small Public Water Supplies (category E) - Every 5 years
This means that approximately 520 samples would be analyzed
annually in Colorado (see Appendix J). Additional analyses may be
necessary if sources have constituents approaching or exceeding the
Drinking Water Standards. Appendix J also indicates what this type of
monitoring program would require in terms of staff and budget. A total
of eight man-years at an approximate annual cost of $172,800 would be
required to implement an adequate chemical quality surveillance program.
This program could be phased in over a three to four year period.
The annual cost of the program could be reduced by conducting
only partial analyses once a data base has been established for the
supplies. For example, perhaps only the trace elements would be
conducted on a routine basis. This eould save about $470 on each
-------
84
surface water sample and $180 on each ground water sample. This would
also allow more frequent analyses of water from problem areas.
The present laboratory facilities are extremely crowded which
reduces efficiency and total capability. Consideration should be given
to expanding the existing facilities. Decentralization of all laboratory
services could also prove beneficial. This in concert with decentrali-
zation of the engineering services could greatly improve surveillance
of public water supplies.
Data Management
Due to the immense quantity of data the expanded water supply
program will have to collect, review and file it is recommend that
serious consideration be given to the use of ADP. A number of state
water supply programs are now using some form of ADP, so information
on how to set-up a system could be obtained. This would certainly
reduce much of the time-consuming bookkeeping procedures now being
used for bacteriological, chemical and fluoride surveillance data.
The engineers would have quick access to a wide range of information
and allow them to keep better track of problem areas.
Summary of Water Supply Program Costs
Table 7 summarizes the estimated budget requirements for the
proposed Water Supply Branch and compares them with the present level
of funding. The proposed budget would triple the current expendi-
tures which is a true indication of the inadequacy at the
-------
85
present program. Colorado can no longer affort to overlook the
importance of the water supply program and continue to shirk its respon-
sibilities to protect the public health of its citizens.
-------
86
TABLE 7
Water Supply Program Budgets
Estimated Budget of Proposed Water Supply Program
Water Supply Branch
Engineering Surveillance
Laboratory Support
Bacteriological Surveillance
Bacteriological Laboratory
Certification
Chemical Surveillance
Program Administration (20% of
above costs)
TOTAL
or
$351,000
$72,000
$6,500
$144,000
$114,700
$688,200
$978/conmunity water supply
$0.29/capita
Estimated Costs of Present Water Supply Program
Engineering Section
Engineering Surveillance
Laboratory Support
Bacteriological Surveillance
Bacteriological Laboratory
Certification
Chemical Surveillance
Program Administration (20% of
above costs)
TOTAL
or
$59,800
$55,200
$1,800
$79,200
$39.200
$235,200
$330/community water supply
$0.10/capita
-------
REFERENCES (XTE
-------
87
REFERENCES CITED
1. Bureau of Water Hygiene, U.S. Public Health Service.
Community Water Supply Study - Analysis of National Survey
Findings. Washington, D.C., Government Printing Office
1970. Ill p.
2. Craun, 6.F. and L.J. McCabe. Review of the Causes of Water-
borne Disease Outbreaks. American Water Works Association
Journal 65:74-78.
3. U.S. Public Health Service. Drinking Water Standards.
Uashington, D.C., Government Printing Office, 1962. 118 p.
4. Bureau of Water Hygiene, Environmental Protection Agency,
Region IV. Evaluation of the Tennessee Water Supply
Program. Atlanta, Government Printing Office, 1971. 208 p.
5. Bureau of Water Hygiene, Environmental Protection Agency,
Region IV. Evaluation of the Kentucky Water Supply
Program. Atlanta, Government Printing Office, 1972. 228 p.
6. Water Supply Branch, Environmental Protection Agency,
Region VIII. Evaluation of the Wyoming Water Supply
Program. Denver, Government Printing Office, 1972. 236 p.
7. Jeffco Water Wells Contaminated. Rocky Mountain News
(Denver, Colorado), February 2, 1974.
8. Monarch!, David. County Population Methods and Estimates -
1971 and 1972. Colorado Population Trends 2:1-7. Winter,
1973.
9. Great Lakes - Upper Mississippi River Board of State Sanitary
Engineers. Recommended Standards for Water Works. New York,
Health Education Service, 1968. 87 p.
10. American Public Health Association, Standard Methods for the
Examination of Water and Wastewater. 13th ed. New York, 1971.
874 p.
-------
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
-------
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
The assistance and cooperation of the following people are
gratefully acknowledged:
Mr. William Gahr, Director, Engineering and Sanitation
Division, Colorado Department of Health
Mr. George Prince, Chief, Engineering Section, Engineering
and Sanitation Division, Colorado Department of Health
Mr. Ralph Leidholdt, Water Supply Specialist, Engineering
Section, Engineering and Sanitation Division, Colorado
Department of Health
Mr. Paul Haswell, Assistant Chief, Ground Water Section,
Division of Water Resources, Colorado Department of
Natural Resources
Mr. Roger Lee, Chief, Surveillance and Technical Assistance
Section, Water Supply Division, Office of Water Programs,
Environmental Protection Agency, Washington, D.C.
Mr. Albert V. Soukup, Chief, Water Supply Section, Control
Technology Branch, Water Division, Environmental Protection
Agency, Region VIII
Mr. Dean R. Chaussee, Water Supply Engineer, Water Supply
Section, Control Technology Branch, Water Division,
Environmental Protection Agency, Region VIII
Mrs. Caryl Phillips, Secretary, Control Technology Branch,
Water Division, Environmental Protection Agency, Region VIII
A special thanks is expressed to all the public health engineers
of the Engineering Section, Colorado Department of Health who provided
much information and cooperated generously in the evaluation.
-------
APPENDICES
-------
A P. P.IH 2 I X. A
11 £ 1 H- i- P.. H.. S. p. R L N_ K 1 N. G
WATER STANDARDS
-------
Tuesday, March tf, 1962
89
APPENDIX A
1962 U.S.P.H.S. Drinking Water Standards
2152
Title 42— PUBLIC HEALTH
Chapter I— Public Health Service,
Department of Health, Education,
and Welfare
PAiF 72— JNTERSTATE QUARANTINE
Drinking Water Standards
On July 27, 1961. notice of proposed
nue making relating to the revision of
the regulations In this Subpart J—
p-nkinsr Water Standards, and a re-
lated section was published in the FBD-
«ML RCCISTIR (28 r.B. GY37J. After
consideration of all relevant matter pre-
sented regarding the proposed revision,
the regulations as so published are
adopted, to become effective 30 days after
the publication ol this no'-lce in the
FEDIRAL REGISTER, subject to the changes
set out below.
1. Section 12,203: The words "Figure
I" are added Immediately below the
graph in this section.
3. Section 7a.805(b)a>: The word
'fluoride" Is substituted for the word
'flourtde* appearing In the table tn
Paragraph I.
3. Section 72.206 (b) (2) : The concen-
tration in mg/1 for chromium (Hexa-
valenti shown in the table Is amended to
read "0.05".
4. Paragraph (b) ot 5 12.206 Is
amended.
Dated: February 21, 1962.
[WAI] Ltmoa L. TBIUJY,
Svrffeon General.
Approved: February 28, 1962,
ABRAHAM Roiconr.
Secretary.
§ 72,1 lAntendmenl]
l. Secttdn 73.1(11 is amended to readt
<1> Potable water. Water which
meets the standards prescribed in the
Public Health Service Drinking Water
Btandwrda (see Bubpart J ol this part).
2 Subpart J Is amended to read as
follows:
Subpart J— Drinking Water Standard*
See.
"SOI Definition of terms.
I»-30a Soutc* and protection.
Bacteriological quality.
phyrieal cfcaracterlBtlcs.
CbtmlcU
Ra«o*ctlTlty,
Recommended. Uklytlccl method*.
AOTHOMTT: || 79.301 to Tfl.307 Iciued
wwto »«c. an, 68 Sttrt. 600, M mn«> "Certifying Authority" means the
Surgeon General cf the United States
Public Health Service or his duly au-
thorized representatives. Reference to
the certifying authority is applicable
only for those water supplies to be cer-
tified for use on carriers subject to this
part.
(d) "The ooliform group" includes all
organisms considered in the conform
group as set forth in Standard Methods
fov the Examination of Water and
Wastewater, current edition, prepared
and published jointly by the American
Public Health Association, American
Water Works Association, and Water
Pollution Control Federation,
"Health hasatds" mean any con-
ditions, devices, or practices in the water
supply system and its operation which
create, or may create, a danger to the
health and well-being of the water con-
sumer. An example of a health hazard
la a structural defect in the water sup-
ply system, whether of location, design,
or construction, which may regularly or
occasionally prevent satisfactory purifi-
cation of the water supply or cause it to
be polluted from extraneous sources.
_.«> ^Buttonw. as used in these
Standards, means the presence of any
foreign substance (organic. Inorganic
radiological, or biological) in water
which tends to degrade its quality so as
to constitute a hazard or impair the use-
fullness of the water.
(g) "Reporting agencies" means the
respective official State health agencies .
°r their designated representatives.
(h) '-The standard sample" for the
bacteriological test shall consist of-
(!) For the bacteriological
* <
Ten milUlitm uo ml>
Cii) One hundred miliuiters "Water supply system" includes
the works and auxiliaries for collection
treatment, storage, and distribution of
the water from the sources of waply to
the free-flowing outlet of the ultimate
consumer.
§72.202 Source and protection.
(a) The water supply should be ob-
tained from the most desirable source
which is feasible, and effort should be
made to prevent or control pollution of
the source. If the source is not ade-
quately protected by natural means, the
supply shall be adequately protected by
treatment.
(b} Frequent sanitary surveys shall
be made of the water supply system to
locate and identify health hazards which
might exist in the system. The manner
and frequency of making these surveys.
and the rate at which discovered health
hazards are to be removed shall he In
accordance with a program approv. Approval of water supplies shell
be dependent in part upon;
(1) Enforcement of rules and regu-
lations to prevent development of health
hazards;
-------
Tuesd<
-------
2154
In any month shall show the presence
or the coliform group. The presence of
the colifonn croup In all five of the
100 ml portions of a standard sample
shall not be allowable a this occurs:
(1) In two consecutive samples;
(11) In more than one sample per
month when less than flve are examined
per month; or
(ill) In more than 20 percent of the
samples when five or more are examined
Per month.
When organisms of the coliform group
occur in all flve of the 100 ml portions
01 a single standard sample, daily sam-
ples from the same sampling point shall
pe collected promptly and examined un-
til the results obtained from at least two
consecutive samples show the water to
be of satisfactory quality.
(3) When the membrane filter tech-
nique Is used, the arithmetic mean eoll-
rorm density of all standard samples ex-
amined per month shall not exceed one
Per 100 ml. Coliform colonies per
standard sample shall not exceed 3/50
ml. 4/100 ml. 7/200 ml, or 13/500 ml In:
(i> Two consecutive samples;
(11) More than one standard sample
wnen less than 20 are examined per
month; or
(111) More than flve percent of the
standard samples when 20 or more are
examined per month.
When coliform colonies In a single stand-
ard sample exceed the above values, dally
"*mP1« *rom the same sampling point
, «) be.coll«ted promptly and examined
antil the results obtained from at least
two consecutive samples show the water
to be of satisfactory quality.
S 72.204 Physical eharaclerhties.
(a) Sampling. The frequency and
manner of sampling shall be determined
oy -the reporting agency and the certi-
fying authority. Under normal circum-
stance* samples should be collected one
or more times per week from represent-
«SI* polnt8 m tbe distribution system
and examined for turbidity, color,
"^snold odor, and taste.
«.«i. • m'**- Drinklng water should
contain no impurity which would cause
r?^!86 w the sense of sight, taste, or
smell. Under general use, the following
Umits should not be exceeded:
TurbWlty-SunlU.
Color—15 unite.
Threshold odor number—3.
§ 72.205 Chemical charocteristics.
Sampling, a) The frequency
*nj! manner of sampling shall be deter-
™med,by the reporting agency and the
M™ * ^ ftuth°r%- Under normal cir-
anc«. analyses for substances
,below "«ed.be made only semi-
lly. if, however, there is some
presumption of unfltness because of the
Presence of undesirable elements, corn-
Pounds, or materials, periodic deter-
minations for the suspected toxicant or
material should be made mere frequent-
y and an exhaustive sanitary survey
^ould be made to determine the source
w ine pollution. Where the concentra-
"on of a substance is not expected to
"wrease in processing and distribution.
91
RULES AND REGULATIONS
available and acceptable source water
analyses performed In accordance with
standard methods may be used as evi-
dence of compliance with these Stand-
ards.
(2) Where experience, examination,
and available evidence Indicate that
particular substances are consistently
absent from a water supply or below
levels of concern, semi-annual examina-
tions for those substances may be
omitted when approved by the report-
ing agency and the certifying authority.
(3) The burden of analysis may be
reduced in many cases by using data
from acceptable sources. Judgment
concerning the quality of water supply
and the need for performing specific
local analyses may depend in part on
Information produced by such agencies
as <1) the U.S. Geological Survey, which
determines chemical quality of surface
and ground waters of the United States
and publishes these data In "Water Sup-
ply Papers" and other reports, and (11)
the U.S. Public Health Service which
determines water quality related to pol-
lution (or the absence of pollution) in
the principal rivers of the Nation and
publishes these data annually In "Na-
tional Water Quality Network." Data
on pollution of waters as measured by
carbon chloroform extracts (CCE) may
be found in the latter publication.
The presence of the following
substances in excess of the concentra-
tions listed shall constitute grounds for
rejection of the supply:
Concentration
Substance. in mall
Arsenic (As) ------------------- * o
-------
Tuesday, March 6, 1962
recommended by the Federal Radiation
Council and approved by the President.
Water supplies shall be approved with-
out further consideration of other
sources of radioactivity intake of Ra-
dium-226 and Strontium-90 when the
water contains these substances in
amounts not exceeding 3 and 10 ^pc/liter.
respectively. When these concentrations
are exceeded, a water supply shall be
approved by the certifying authority if
surveillance of total intakes of radio-
activity from all sources indicates that
such intakes are within the limits rec-
ommended by' the Federal Radiation
Council for control action.
(2) In the known absence* of Stron-
tium-90 and alpha emitters, the water
supply Is acceptable when the gross beta
concentrations do not exceed 1,000 upc/
liter. Gross beta concentrations in ex-
cess of 1.000 p/tc/llter shall be grounds for
rejection of supply except when more
complete analyses Indicate that concen-
trations of nuclldes are not likely to
cause exposures greater than the Radia-
tion Protection Guides as approved by
average exposures of suitable samples of an
exposed population group will not exceed the
upper value of Range n (30 **c/day of Ha-
dlum-226 and 200 /me/day of 8trontlum-80)."
• Absence U taken here to mean a negligi-
bly small fraction of the above specific limits,
where the limit for unidentified alpha emit-
ters U taken as the listed limit for Radium-
226.
92
FEDERAL REGISTER
the President on recommendation of the
Federal Radiation Council.
§ 72.207 Recommended analytical
methods.
(a) Analytical methods to determine
compliance with the requirements of
these Standards shall be those specified
in Standard Methods for the Examina-
tion of Water and Wastewater. Am. Pub.
Health Assoc.. current edition and those
specified as follows:
(1) Barium: Methods for the Collec-
tion and Analyses of Water Samples.
Water Supply Paper No. 1454. Rain-
water, F. H. & Thatcher. L. L., UJ3.
Geological Survey, Washington, D.C.
(2) Carbon Chloroform Extract
(CCE): Manual for Recovery and Iden-
tification of Organic Chemicals in
Water, Middleton, F. M.. Rosen, A. A.,
and Burttscbell, R. H.. Robert A. Taft
Sanitary Engineering Center, PHS, Cin-
cinnati, Ohio.
(3) Radioactivity: Laboratory Man-
ual of Methodology, Radlonucllde
Analyses of Environmental Samples,
Technical Report RB9-6. Robert A.
Taft Sanitary Engineering Center. PHS,
Cincinnati, Ohio, and Methods of Radio-
chemical Analysis, Technical Report No.
173, Report of the Joint WHO-PAO
Committee, 1959, World Health Organi-
zation.
(4) Selenium: Suggested Modified
Method for Colorimetric Determination
2155
of Selenium in Natural Water, Magln,
G. B.. Thatcher, L. L., Rettig, 8., and
Levine. H., J. Am. Water Works Assoc.
59,1199 (I960).
(b) Organisms of the coUform group.
All of the details of techniques in the
determination of bacteria of this group.
Including the selection and preparation
of apparatus and media, the collection
and handling of samples and the inter-
vals and conditions of storage allowable
between collection and examination of
the water sample, shall be in accordance
with Standard Methods for the Exami-
nation of Water and Wastewater, cur-
rent edition, and the procedures shall be
those specified therein for:
(1) The Membrane Filter Technique.
Standard Test, or
(2) The Completed Test, or
(3) The Confirmed Test, procedure
with brilliant green lactose bile broth,'
or
(4) The Confirmed Test, procedure
with Endo or eosln methylene blue agar
plates.1
(Fit. Doc. 02-3191; Filed, liar. B. 1882;
8:49 ajn.)
•The Confirmed Test Is allowed, provided
the value of this test to determine the sani-
tary quality of the specific water supply
being examined 1* established beyond rea-
sonable doubt by comparisons with Com-
pleted Test* performed on the same water
•upply.
-------
A P. P.E.N.J) i X. £
ML^NJ.TY, WATE.R.
IN COLORADO
-------
93
APPENDIX B
TABLE 1
Summary - Community Water Supplies In Colorado
Population
Range
Served
Over 10,000
1,000 - Under
10,000
100 - Under
1,000
40 - Under 100
TOTAL
Number
CWS I/
26
113
255
31 Ol/
704
Percent
of
Total
4%
16%
36%
44%
100%
Population
Served
1,622,000
363,000
98,000
25.0002/
2,108,000
Percent of
Pop. Served
by CWS
77%
17%
5%
1%
100%
]_/ CWS - Community Water Supply
2/ Estimate
-------
APPENDIX B
TABLE 2
Summary of the 394 Community Water Supplies Under
Routine Surveillance as of January, 1973
(By Population Range Served)
Population
Range
Served
Over 10,000
1,000 - Under
10,000
100 - Under
1,000
TOTAL
Number
of
CWS
26
113
255
394
Percent
of
Total
7%
28%
65%
100%
Population
Served
1,622,000
363,000
98,000
2,083,000
Percent of
Pop. Served
by CWS
78%
17%
5%
100%
Number of
CWS
Disinfected
26
100
190
316
Percent of
CWS
Disinfected
100%
88%
75%
80%
Percent of Population
Using CWS Served
Disinfected Water
100%
89%
76%
97%
vo
-------
APPENDIX B
TABLE 3
Summary of the 394 Community Water Supplies Under
Routine Surveillance as of January, 1973
(By Source of Supply)
Source
of
Supply
Surface
Ground
Combined!/
TOTAL
Number
of
CWS
145
242
7
394
Percent
of
Total
37%
61%
2%
100%
Population
Served
1,614,000
346,000
123,000
2,083,000
Percent of
Pop. Served
By CWS
78%
16%
6%
100%
Number of
CWS
Disinfected
139
170
*
316
Percent of
CWS
Disinfected
96%
70%
100%
80%
Percent of Population
Using CWS Served
Disinfected Water
99%
83%
100%
97%
vo
01
!_/ Using Both surface and ground sources
-------
£2 M Ml IX WAT££ iH.
£ A ! LI N. i iA£Iiilo.k0.iICAL.
IN 1972
-------
APPENDIX C
Community Water Supplies Failing Bacteriological Standards in 1972
1. By Population Range Served
Population
Range Served
Over 10,000
1,000 - Under
10,000
100 - Under
1,000
TOTAL
Source
of Supply
Surface
Ground
Combined
TOTAL
Number of
CWS*
26
113
255
394
Number of
CWS*
145
242
7
394
Number
Failing
4
84
64
102
2. By
Number
Failing
50
52
0
102
Percent
Failing
15%
30*
25%
26%
Source of Supply
Percent
Failing
34%
22%
0
26%
Population
Served
149,000
104,000
28,000
281 ,000
Population
Served
213,000
68,000
__
281 ,000
Number of These Failing
Having no Disinfection
0
4
22
26
Number of Those Failing
Having No Disinfection
8
18
— •»
25
to
*CWS - Community Water Supplies - Includes only the 394 supplies under routine surveillance as of January 1973.
-------
APPENDIX D
COLORADO W • A T £ R !S U P P L Y LEGISLATION
-------
97
APPENDIX D
Colorado Water Supply Legislation
CHAPTER 66
ARTICLE 1
DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC HEALTH
66-1-7. POWERS AND DUTIES OF THE STATE DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC HEALTH--
(1) The state department 01 public health shall have and exercise,.in addition
to all other powers and duties imposed upon it by law, the following powers
and duties:
(6) To establish and enforce minimum general sanitary standards as
to the quality of water supplied to the public, including the authority to
require disinfection of such water, and to advise with municipalities,
utilities, institutions, organizations, and individuals, concerning the methods
or processes believed best suited to provide the protection or purification of
water to meet such minimum general sanitary standards; and also to establish
and enforce minimum general sanitary standards as to the quality of wastes
discharged upon land and as to the quality of fertilizer derived from excreta
of human beings or from the sludge of sewage disposal plants;
(9) To establish, maintain and approve chemical, bacteriological and
biological laboratories, and to conduct such laboratory investigations and
examinations as it may deem necessary or proper for the protection of the
public health;
(10) To make, approve and establish standards for diagnostic tests
by chemical, bacteriological and' biological laboratories, and to require such
laboratories to conform thereto; and to prepare, distribute and require the
completion of forms or certificates with respect thereto;
(19) The phrase "minimum general sanitary standards" as used in
this section shall mean the minimum standards reasonably consistent with
protection of the public health, and in the case of minimum general sanitary
standards as to the quality of water supplied to the public, the same shall
in no event be less than the drinking water standards of the United States
Public Health Service. The word "standards" as used in this section shall
mean standards reasonably designed to promote and protect the public health;
-------
98
(20) (a) To examine plans, specifications, and other related data
pertaining to the proposed construction of any and all publicly or privately
ownel community water facilities submitted for review of sanitary engineering
features prior to construction of such facilities.
66-1-8. POWERS AND DUTIES OF THE STATE BOARD OF HEALTH. - - (1) In
addition to all other powers and duties conferred and imposed upon the state
board of health by the provisions of this article, the board shall have and
exorcise the following specific powers and duties:
(5) (a) To issue from time to ime such orders, to adopt such
rules and regulations, and to establi«u such standards as the board may deem
necessary or proper to carry out the provisions and purposes of this article and
to administer and enforce the public health laws of this state.
66-1-14. UNLAWFUL ACTS --PENALTIES. --(1) (a) It shall be unlawful
for any person, association, or corporation, and the officers thereof:
(b) To willfully violate, disobey or disregard the provisions of the
public health laws or the terms of .any lawful notice, order, standard, rule or
regulation issued pursuant thereto; or
(i) To make, install, maintain, or permit any cross-connection
between any water system supplying drinking water to the public and any pipe,
plumbing fixture, or water system which contains water of a quality below the mlnimuffi
general sanitary standards as to the quality of drinking water supplied to the
public; or to fail to remove such connection within ten days after being ordered
in writing by the department to remove the same. For the purposes of this
paragraph (1) (i), the term "cross-connection" shall mean any connection which
would allow water to flow from any pipe, plumbin'g fixture, or water system into
a water system supplying drinking water to the public. (Source: Chapter 56,
Pg. 478, Colo. Session Laws, 1964).
(4) Any person, association, or corporation, or the officers thereof, wh.P
shall violate any provision of this section, upon conviction, shall be fined not
to exceed one thousand dollars or be imprisoned 'for not to exceed one year, or
he both fined and imprisoned, and in addition to such fine and imprisonment shall
be liable for any expense incurred by health authorities in removing any nuisance,
source of filth, or cause of sickness. Conviction under the penalty provisions
of this article or any other public health law shall not relieve any person from
any civil action in damages that may exist for an injury resulting from any
violation of the public health laws.
-------
99
(Reproduced by the Colorado Department of Health)
CHAPTER 66
ARTICLE 38
PROVIDING FOR THE CERTIFICATION OF WATER AND
WASTEWATER TREATMENT PLANT OPERATORS
66-38-1. Legislative declaration. 66-38-6. Wastewater treatment
66-38-2. Definitions. plant operator.
66-38-3. Plant operators certification 66-38-7. Certification procedure.
board - composition. 66-38-8. Fees.
66-38-4. Duties of the board. 66-38-9. Use of title.
66-38-5. Water treatment plant operator. 66-38-10. Violations - penalty.
66-38-1. LEGISLATIVE DECLARATION ~ To assure adequate operation of water
and wastewater treatment facilities, and to preserve the public peace, health,
and safety, the provisions of this article and regulations authorized pursuant
thereto are enacted to provide for the examination, classification, and certi-
fication of water and wastewater treatment plant operators and to establish
minimum standards therefor based upon their knowledge and experience, to provide
procedures for certification, to encourage vocational education for such op-
erators, to provide a penalty for the wrongful use of the title "certified
operator", to require each water and wastewater treatment plant to be under the
supervision of a certified operator, to provide for the classification of all
water and wastewater treatment plants in the state, and to provide a penalty for
the operation of a water or wastewater treatment plant without supervision of
a certified operator.
66-38-2. DEFINITIONS.--(1) As used in this article, unless the context
otherwise requires:
(2) "Board"means the plant operators certification board.
(3) "Certificate" means the certificate of competency issued by the board
stating that the operator named thereon has met the requirements for the speci-
fied operator classification of the certification program.
(4) "Certified operator" means the person who has direct responsibility
for the operation of any treatment facility covered under this article and is
certified in accordance with the provisions of this article.
(5) "Department" means the Colorado department of health.
(6) "Wastewater treatment plant" means the facility or group of units
used for the treatment of wastewater from sewer systems and for the reduction
and handling of solids and gases removed from such wastes.
-------
100
Providing for the Certification of Water
and Uastewater Treatment Plant Operators
Chapter 66, Article 38
Page 2
(7) "Water supply system" means the system of pipes, structures, and
facilities through which a water supply is obtained, treated, and sold or dis-
tributed for human consumption or household use.
(8) "Water treatment plant" means the facility or facilities within the
water supply system which can alter the physical, chemical, or bacteriological
quality of the water.
66-38-3. 1'IANT OPERATORS CERTIFICATION BOARD - COMPOSITION.--(1) (a) There
is hereby created the plant operators certificntion board which shall constitute
a section of the division of administration of the department and shall consist
of nine members, five of whom shall be as follows:
(b) A certified Class A water treatment plant operator;
(c) A certified Class A wastewater treatment plant operator;
(d) A representative from the Colorado municipal league;
(e) A representative recommended by the Colorado board of health;
(f) A representative recommended by the Colorado water pollution control
commission.
(2) All members of the board shall be appointed by the governor.
(3) Appointments to the initial board shall be as follows:
Three of the members shall be appointed for a three-year term, three for a two-
year term, and three for a one-year term. Thereafter all board members shall serve
for a term of three years. No member shall serve continuously on the board for
more than nine years.
66-38-4, DUTIES OF THE BOARD.—(1) The board shall elect a chairman and -
secretary each year, establish" rules and regulations setting forth the requirements
governing application, admission to the examinations, and recording and issuing of
certificates for the class of operator for which the applicant is found to be qual-
ified. The board shall furnish the examination material and collect fees as set
forth in section 66-38-8. The board shall set the times, dates, and places for
holding examinations, one of which shall'be given at least annually, grade exami-
nation papers, and evaluate work experience of applicants. The board shall maintain
an office provided by the department for contact with operators and employers to
receive applications and fees, conduct such examinations as may be directed by the
board, record the results thereof, notify applicants of results, issue certificates.
and prepare and distribute an annual report.
. (2) The board shall promote and assist in regular training schools and pro-
grams designed to aid applicants and other interested persons to acquire the nec-
essary knowledge to meet the certification requirements of this article.
(3) The board shall establish not less than four classes of certified water
treatment plant operators and not less than four classes of wastewater treatment
plant operators, which classes shall differentiate the various levels of complex-
ity to be encountered in water and wastewater treatment plant operation.
-------
101
Providing for the Certification of Water
and Wastewater Treatment Plant Operators
Chapter 66, Article 38
Page 3
(4) The board shall, after due consideration,establish for each water and
wastewater treatment plant a minimum class of certified operators required for
its direct supervision. Compliance for all such treatment plants shall be
mandatory by January 1, 1976.
(5) The board shall establish a procedure whereby any decision of the
board can be subject to appeal.
(6) The board shall exercise such other powers and duties as are deemed
necessary within the scope of this article.
(7) Members of the board shall serve without compensation, but shall be
reimbursed for their necessary expenses.
(8) The board shall exercise its powers and perform its duties and
functions as if it were transferred to the department by a type 1 transfer under
the "Administrative Organization Act of 1968", being article 28 of chapter 3.
C.R.S. 1963.
66-38-5. WATER TREATMENT PLANT OPERATOR.—(1) (a) Persons who by exami-
nation and experience are found to be qualified for certification as water
treatment plant operators shall be certified as having the minimum qualifications
required for each of the respective classes, as follows:
(b) Class D. An applicant must indicate by written examination his
knowledge of basic water treatment principles, chlorination procedures, bacter-
iological testing techniques and standards.department water quality standards,
pumping and storage principles, and good housekeeping and safety practices.
(c) Class C. In addition to the knowledge required for a Class D. appli-
cant, the Class C applicant must indicate by written examination his knowledge
of control procedures, including but not limited to the purpose, use, and
procedures used for the basic chemical, physical, and biological tests. The
applicant must also have two years' experience working in a water treatment
facility.
(d) Class B. In addition to the knowledge required for a Class C appli-
cant, the Class B applicant must indicate by written examination his knowledge
of the operation and maintenance of filter units, the principles of coagulation
and sedimentation, the maintenance and safety of auxiliary equipment, and the
principles of taste and odor control. The applicant must also have three years'
experience working in a water treatment facility.
(e) Class A. In addition to the knowledge required for a Class B appli-
cant, the Class A applicant must indicate by written examination his knowledge
of the interpretation of results of chemical, physical, and biological control
analyses; maintenance and operational procedures; housekeeping; customer rela-
tions; corrosion control; cross-connection control; and supervisory control
techniques. The applicant must also have four years' experience working in a
water treatment facility.
-------
102
Providing for the Certification of Water
and Wastewater Treatment Plant Operators
Chapter 66, Article 38
Page 4
66-38-6. WASTEWATER TREATMENT PLANT OPERATOR.—(1) (a) Persons who by
examination and experience are found to be qualified for certification as waste-
water treatment plant operators shall be certified as having the minimum quali-
fications required for each of the respective classes, as follows:
(b) Class D. A Class D applicant must indicate by written examination
his knowledge of basic principles concerning pumping, grit, grease, sludge,
sedimentation, hydraulics, chlorination, pumps, motors, state water pollution
control commission stream standards, and good housekeeping and safety practices.
(c) Class C. In addition to the knowledge required for a Class D appli-
cant, the Class C applicant must indicate by written exandnation his knowledge
of wastewater treatment principles, settling characteristics of solids and grit,
separate sludge digestion, sludge processing, sampling, and basic chemical,
physical, and biological tests. The applicant must also have two years'
experience working in a wastewater treatment facility.
(d) Class B. In addition to the knowledge required for a Class C applicant,
the Class B applicant must indicate by written examination his knowledge of the
maintenance and operation of biological units, sedimentation units, and aux-
iliary equipment, and his experience in performing basic chemical, physical, and
biological tests. The applicant must also have three years' experience working
in a wastewater treatment faciliiy.
(e) Class A. In addition t_ the knowledge required for a Class B applicant]
the Class A applicant must indicate by written examination his knowledge in
the interpretation of the results of chemical, physical, and biological control
analyses; maintenance and operational procedures; and record-keeping, customer
relations, corrosion control, cross-connection control, and supervisory control
techniques. The applicant must also have four years' experience working in a
wastewater treatment facility.
66-38-7. CERTIFICATION PROCEDURE.—(1) Any individual possessing the "
required experience may apply to the board on such forms as required and
furnished by the board. The application shall be accompanied by such fee as
required by section 66-38-8. The board shall admit for examination those appli-
cants who meet the minimum qualifications as established by regulations of the
board for certification.
(2) When an individual desires certification in a field other than that
in which he has experience, his experience shall be evaluated by the board.
The certificate issued is to be based upon the knowledge demonstrated by the
applicant through examination and his verified record of work experience in
water and wastewater treatment plant operation.
(3) Certificates shall be awarded by the board for a period of five
years only to those applicants successfully meeting all of the requirements.
(A) Certificates shall be renewed upon payment of the required renewal
by the applicant or at any transfer in class accomplished by the applicant's
successful completion of a board examination.
•*
(5) The board, upon application therefor, may issue a certificate,
without examination, in a comparable classification to any person who holds a
certificate in any state, territory, or possession of the United States or any
country, providing the requirements for certification of operators under which
-------
103
Providing for the Certification of Water
and Wastewater Treatment Plant Operators
Chapter 66, Article 38
Page 5
the person's certificate was issued do not conflict with the provisions of this
article and are of a standard not lower than that specified by regulations
adopted under this article and providing further that reciprocal privileges
are granted to certified operators of this state.
(6) Certificates of proper classification shall be issued without exam-
ination, upon appropriate application, to applicants who have been the operators
of any facilities covered under this artlclo on or before July 1, 1973. A cert-
ificate so issued shall be valid only for that particular treatment plant or
system and for the classification determined by the board on the basis of exper-
ience and education of the operator, and shall remain in effect unless revoked
by the board pursuant to the provisions of article 16 of chapter 3, C.R.S. 1963.
(7) Certification in an appropriate classification shall be Issued to
operators who on or before July, 1973, hold certificates of competency
attained by examination under the voluntary certification program within the.
state of Colorado during the time immediately preceding July 1, 1973.
66-38-8. FKES.—Each application for certification shall be accompanied
by a fee in the amount of fifteen dollars which is not refundable and which
will include the expenses for the first examination taken by the applicant.
Examination fees in the amount of ten dollars shall be paid for each additional
examination taken in any class. Re-examination fees in the amount of ten
dollars will be paid for second and succeeding examinations in any class.
Renewal fees in the amount of five dollars shall be paid prior to the issuance
of a renewal certificate by the board. All moneys received by the board shall
be deposited with the department of the treasury pursuant to the provisions of
section 3-6-3, C.R.S. 1963.
66-38-9. USE OF TITLE.—Only a person who has been qualified by the board
as a certified water treatment plant operator or certified wastewater treat-
ment plant operator and who possesses a valid certificate attesting to this
certification in this state shall have the right and privilege of using the
title "certified water treatment plant operator, Class " or "Certified
wastewater treatment plant operator, Class _, ".
66-38-10. VIOLATIONS - PENALTY.—(1) It is unlawful for any person to
represent himself as a certified water treatment plant operator of any class,
or a certified wastewater treatment plant operator of any class without first
being so certified by the board and without being the holder of a current valid
certificate issued by the board. Any person violating the provisions of this
portion of this article is guilty of a misdemeanor and, upon conviction thereof,
shall be punished by a fine of not more than three hundred dollars.
(2) It is unlawful for any owner of a water treatment plant or a waste-
water treatment plant in the state of Colorado to allow the plant to be operated
without the supervision of a certified operator of the classification required
by the board for the specific plant. Any owner violating the provisions of
this portion of this article is guilty of a misdemeanor and, upon conviction
thereof, shall be punished by a fine of not more than three hundred dollars for
each violation. Each day of violation constitutes a separate offense.
-------
104
WATER WELL AND PUMP INSTALLATION
CONTRACTORS LAW
(As amended through 1972)
148-20-1. Declaration of policy.— It has
been, established by scientific evidence that improp-
erly constructed water wells and improperty instal-
led pumps and pumping equipment can adversely
affect the public health. Consistent with its duty
to safeguard the public health of this state, the
general assembly therefore declares that the proper
location, construction, repair, ami abandonment of
water wells, and the proper installation and repair
of pumps and pumping equipment, as well as the
licensing and regulation of persons engaging in the
business of contracting cither for the construction of
water wells or for the installation of pumps or
pumping equipment, is essential for the protection
of the public health.
148-20-2. Definitions.— (I) As used in
this article, unless the context otherwise requires:
(2) "License" means the granting of a license
by the state board of examiners of water well and
pump installation contractors, to qualified persons
making application therefor, authorizing such per-
sons to engage in I lit: business (if water well drilling
or the business of pump installing, or both.
(3j "Construction of water wells" means all
acts necessary to obtaining ground water by any
method for human consumption or other use, in-
cluding, without limitation, the location of and the
excavation for the well, but not including prospect-
in};, surveying, or other acts preparatory thereto,
nor the installation of pumps and pumping equip-
ment,
ficial recharge, or acquisition of ground water, but
such term docs not include an excavation made for
the purpose of obtaining or for prospecting for oil,
natural gas, minerals, or products of mining or
qunrr> ing, or for inserting media to rcpressure oil
or natural gas-bearing formation or for storing pet-
roleum, natural gas, or othey products,
(11) "Water well contractor" means any in-
dividual, corporation, partnership, association, poli-
tical subdivision, or public agency in immediate
supervision of and responsible lor the construction,
test pumping or equipping, or development of an
individual well or wells, either by contract or for
hire or for any consideration whatsoever.
(12) "Private driller" means any individual,
corporation, partnership, association, political sub-
division, or public agency which shall construct a
well or wells entirely for his or their own use on
property owned or controlled, with equipment
•owned and operated, by him or them.
(13) "Irrigation, industrial, or commercial
well" means any well construction for the purpose
of obtaining water to be used beneficially but not
for human consumption.
(14) "Artesian well" meanj a well obtaining
water from an aquifer under hydrostatic pressure.
(15) "Drainage well" means a well construc-
tion for the purpose of lowering the water table.
'(16) "Aquifer" means a geological formation
that contains or transmits ground water.
(17) "Domestic well" means a well used for
ordinary household purposes, the watering of farm
livestock, poultry, and domestic animals, and the
irri«nlion f the following persons:
The state engineer or a representative designated
by him; a representative of tho dcp.irtment of
health di'signaU'd by the executive director of the
department; and three members appointed by the
governor, two ol whom shall be water well con-
tractors, each with a minimum of ten years exper-
ience in the water well contracting business pre-
ceding his appointment; and one nl whum shall be
an engineer or geologist with a minimum of ten
years experience in water supply and water well
construction preceding his appointment.
(2) The governor shall make I;is first throe ap-
pointments within thirty days after July 1, 1907, to
serve the following leans; One lor a lean expiring
June 30, 1909, one for a term expiring June 30,
1970, and otic for a trrm expiring June 30. 1971.
Thcit-afler all members shall be appointed for four-
year terms, but no member shall be rcappoinlcci to
serve more than twu consecutive loin-year terms.
Kiicll member shall hold olficc until the expiration
of his term or until a successor is appointed. Any
-------
105
vacancy occurring In the board membership of the
governor's appointees, other tliun by expiration,
shall be filled by the governor 1>\; appointment for
tbc niicxpircd lain. Members shall serve without
compensation but shall be reimbursed for actual ex-
penses necessarily incurred in their official business.
(3) The board shall meet within sixty days af-
ter July 1. 1957 and not less than once every three
mouths thereafter, and at such other times as it
deems neces,«arv or advisable. Special meetings of
the- board may be called at any time on order of the
chairman or Yitc'-chairman or any three members
of the bonrd. The time and place of all meetings
shall be determined by the board, but one meeting
\villiin tlirc-e ineinths after the first appointment of
the board shall be held in'Denver, at which time a
chairman, vice-chairman, and a secretary shall be
selected. Three; members of the board shall con-
stitute a (murum, and the affirmative vote of three
members shall bu required to pass any action or mo-
tion of the board. The board may adopt bylaws
to govern its own procedure.
148-20-4. Duties of the board,—
(1) (a) The board shall:
(b) Be responsible for the administration ol
this article, and with respect to such administration
shall enforce the provisions of this article and any
rules adopted pursuant thereto, and shall take such
other actions as may be reasonably necessaiy to
carry out the provisions of this article;
(c) Have general supervision and authority
over the construction nnd abandonment of water
wells nnd the installation of pumps and pumping
equipment, as provided by sections 148-20-0 and
148-20-10;
pumping equipment, shall obtain a license from the
board, ami in the case of any water well contractor,
shall stt-urc a registration from the board for-each
well drilling rig to be operated by him.
(2) (a) The board shall issue a license to
each applicant who shall file an application upon a
form and in such manner us the board prescribes,
accompanied by «uch fees and bond as required by
section 1-18-20-7; and who furnishes evidence sat-
isfactory to tbc board that he:
(b) Is at least twenty-one years of age;
(c) Is a citizen of the United States or has
declared his intention to become a citizen;
(d) Is of good moral character;
(c) Has had not less than two yean experience
in the work for which he is applying for a license;
and
(f) Demonstrates professional competence bv
passing a written and oral examination prescribed
by the board.
(3) Upon investigation of the application and
other evidence suhmittcd, tin: board shall, not less
than thirty days prior to the examination, notify
each applicant that the application and evidence
submitted lor licensing is satisfactory and accepted,
or unsatisfactory and rejected; if rejected, said no-
tice shall state the reasons for such rejection.
(4) The place of examination shall be desig-
nated in advance by the biurd, and shall be given
annually, and at such other times as, in the opinion
of the hoard, the number of applicants warrants.
Tliu board rnay, if the applicant meets all other re-
(d) Adopt, and from time to time revise, such
rules not inconsistent with law, as may bo necessary
to effectuate the provisions of this article, all such
rules to be adopted in accordance with article 16
of chapter 3, C.R.S. 1903;
(o) Employ, within funds available, personnel
necessary for the proper performance of its work
under this article;
(f) Examine for, deny, approve,, revoke, sus-
pend, and renew the licenses of applicants and lic-
ensees as provided in this article;
(g) Conduct hearings upon complaints with
respect to any licensee under this article, and with
respect to the denial, revocation, or suspension of
a license, all such hearings to be conducted in con-
formity with article 16 of chapter 3, C.H.S. l'963;
(h) Prepare and transmit annually, in the form
and manner prcsribcd bv the controller pursuant to
the provisions of section 3-3-17, C.H.S. 1963, a re-
port accounting to the governor and the general
assembly for the efficient discharge of all responsi-
bilities assigned by law or directive to the board.
Publications of the board intended for circulation
in quantity outside the board shall bo issued in
accordance with fiscal ruins promulgated by the
controller pursuant to the provisions of section
3-3-17, C.R.S. 1963;
(i) Cause the prosecution and enjoinder of all
persons violating this article and incur necessary
expenses therefor.
148-20-5. Licensing—registration of rigs.
—(1) Ever}' person, before engaging in the busi-
ness of contracting cither for the construction of
water wells or for the installation of pumps cr
quirempnts issue a temporary license, not to ex-
ceed 90 days, until the next examination by the
board.
(5) The examination shall consist of an oral
and written examination, and shall fairly test the
applicant's knowledge and application thereof in
the following subjects: llasics of drilling methods
and_ basics of construction; state laws'and local
ordinances concerning the construction of water
wells or installation of pumps and pumping equip-
ment, or both, and rules promulgated in connection
therewith.
(0) In the event nn applicant fails to receive a
passing grade on the examination, he may reapply
for examination within ninety clays.
148-20-6. Persons previously licensed—
exemptions.—(1) Any person possessing the
qualifications prescribed in subsections (2) (a)
through (2) (e) of section 148-20-3 and who has
been licensed in the business of a water well con-
tractor immediately prior to July 1. 1907, shall upon
application mado within onu year of said date, ac-
companied by satisfactory proof to the board that
ho was so licensed, and accompanied by pavment
of the required fee and the furnishing of the- re-
quired bond, be gran'cd a license as a water well
contractor without fulfilling the requirements that
he pass the examination prescribed by subsection
(2) (f) of section 148-20-5.
(2) A license shall not be required of any per-
son who performs labor or services at the direction
and under the personal supervision ol" a licensed
water well contractor or pump installation contrac-
tor,
(3) A private driller shall be exempt from all
license requirements under this article, except that
-------
106
he shall lie a resident of the .state of Colorado, and
shall comply with minimum construction standards
as required by suction 1-1S-20-10.
148-20-7. Fees and bonds.— (1) All fees
from applicants sacking n license tinder this article,
and all renewal fees, shall he credited to the gener-
al fund of Ihi: state. No feos shall be refunded.
A license shall be nontransfcrahlc and unassignable.
(2) The board shall charge an application fee
of ten dollars to accompany each application from a
resident of the state of Colorado, and a further fee
of twenty-five dollars upon successful completion of
examination before issuance of a license. In ad-
dition each successful resident applicant shall file
with the board a performance and compliance bond
in the amount of five thousand dollars with a cor-
porate surety authorized to do business in the state
of Colorado, conditioned that such licensee will
comply with the laws of the state of Colorado in
engaging in the business for which he receives a
license, and the rules of the board promulgated in
the regulation of such business.
(3) The board shall charge an application fee
of twenty-five dollars to accompany each applica-
tion from a nonresident of the state of Colorado,
and a further nonresident fee of two hundred dol-
lars upon successful completion of examination be-
fore issuance of a license. In addition each suc-
cessful nonresident applicant shall file with the
board a performance and compliance bond in the
amount of ten thousand dollars with a corporate
surety authorized to do business in the state of
Colorado, conditioned that such licensee will com-
ply with the laws of the state in engaging in the
business for which he receives a license, and the
rules of the board promulgated in compliance there-
with.
148-20-10 and the rules of the board promulgated
with respect thereto.
(2) No license shall be withheld, denied, re-
voked, or suspended except in conformity with
article 16 of chapter 3, C.11.S. 1963.
148-20-9. Further scope of article.—
In addition to the licensing of water'well and pump
installation contractors as required by this article,
no water well shall be located, constructed, re-
paired, or abandoned and no pump or pumping
equipment shall be installed or repaired, contrary
to the provisions of this article and applicable rules
of the board promulgated to effectuate the pur-
poses of this article. The provisions of this article
shall apply to any water well, pump, or pumping
equipment not otherwise subject to regulation un-
der the laws of tins state, and to any distribution
of water therefrom; but this article shall not apply
to any distribution of water beyond the point of
discharge from the pressure lank, or beyond the
point oi discharge from the pump if no pressure
tank or an overhead pressure tank is employed.
148-20-10. Basic principles and minimum
Standards.— (1) (a) The following basic prin-
ciples, general in scope and fundamental in char-
utter, shall govern the cunst'niction, repair, or aban-
donment of any water well, and the installation or
repair of rtiiy pump or pumping equipment:
(b) £i) Water wells shall be:
(ii) Located, in such manner that the well
dud its surroundings can be kept in a sanitary con-
dition;
(iii) Adequate in size to permit the installation
of a pump to pump the volume of water sought to
be obtained;
(4) Ever)' water well contractor or pump in-
stallation contractor in this italo shall annually pay
to the board during the month of January of each
year, beginning in the year immediately subsequent
to his initial licensing, a fee of twenty-five dollars,
and shall annually file a new performance and com-
pliance bond in the amount required upon initial
licensins, and the secretary shall thereupon issue a
renewal license for one year. The license of anv
water well or pump installation contractor who shall
fail to have his license renewed during the month
of January in each and every ycslr shall lapse.
Any lapsed license may be renewed within a period
of two years after such lapse, upon payment of all
fees in arrears, or thereafter, upon payment of a
renewal fee of twenty-five dollars.
(5) The board shall charge an annual regis-
tration fee of five dollars for each well drilling rig
to be operated by a water well contractor.
148-20-8. Denial—revocation or suspen-
sion of license.— (1) (a) The board, by an
affirmative vote of three of its five members, may
withhold, deny, revoke, or suspend any license
issued or applied for in accordance with the provi-
sions of this article, upon proof that the licensee
or'applicant:
(b) Has used fraud or deception in applying
for a license or in taking an examination provided
for in tins article;
(c) Has willfully or negligently violated any
of the provisions of tins article or of the "Colorado
Ground Water Management Act";
(d) Has failed, in engaging in the business of
water well or pump installation contractor, to com-
ply with minimum standards prescribed by section
(iv) Constructed in such a manner as to main-
tain natural protection against pollution of water-
bearing formations and to exclude known sources
of contamination.
(c) (i) The pumping equipment shall be:
(ii) Located iiv such a manner that the pump
and its surroundings can be kept in a sanitary con-
dition;
(iii) Selected, constructed, and installed: To
meet the water yield and drawdown characteristic
of the well; to be durable and reliable in character; ,
of such material that no toxic or otherwise objec-
tionable condition will be created in the water; in
such a manner that continued operation without
priming is assured at the time of installation; to
provide adequate protection against pollution of
any character from any surface or subsurface
source.
(2) The board shall adopt, and may from time
to time amend, rules reasonably necessary to effect-
uate the basic principles and minimum standards
prescribed by subsection (1) of this section. The
board shall have authority to require such informa-
tion relating to any such construction or installation
as it may deem necessary.
148-20-11. Violation and penalties.—
(1) (a) It shall be a misdemeanor after six
months from July 1, 1007:
(b) For any person to represent himself as a
water well contractor or a pump installation con-
tractor who is not licensed under this article, or to
so represent himself after his license has been sus-
pended, revoked, or lapsed; or
(c) For any person not licensed under this
article to advertise or issue any sign, card, or other
-------
107
.vice winch would indicate that he is a licensed
alcr well contractor or a pump installation con-
.•aclor; or
(<1) For any person to otherwise violate any
of the provisions of this article.
(2) Such misdemeanor shall be punishable
upon conviction \>y a fine of not more than three
hundred dollars, in liy imprisonment in tlic county
jail fur not more than ninety days, or by both such
fine and imprisonment.
148-20-12. Injunctive proceedings.—
(1) The board may. through the attorney general
of the state of Colorado, apply for an injunction in
any court of competent jurisdiction to enjoin any
person from committing any act declared to be a
misdemeanor by this article.
(2) Such injunctivc proceedings shall be in
addition to and not in lieu of any other penalty or
remedy in this article provided.
148-20-13. Effective date.— This article
shall take effect July 1, 1907,
CHAPTER 142
PLUMBERS
142-1-1. RULES GOVERNING PLUMBING.--The department of public health,
in pursuance of its general power of supervision over the interest of the
health and life of the citizens of this state, and of the sanitary conditions
under which they live, is hereby authorized and empowered to make, prescribe,
enforce, amend and repeal rules and regulations governing the plumbing, drain-
age, sewerage, and plumbing ventilation of all buildings in this state, and
thereby to establish and maintain minimum standards, which shall be unifona
throughout the state, which rules and regulations shall have the force and
effect of law, when not in conflict with the statutes of the states of Colo-
rado. This article shall not be conotrusd to deny any municipal ii:y the right
to adopt and enforce such rules and regulations in the premises, as are not
inconsistent with the laws of the state.
-------
A P P E N D I X E
COLORADO WATER SUPPLY R E G U t A T-KO K S
-------
APPENDIX E
Colorado Water Supply Regulations
COLORADO DEPARTMENT Or HEALTH
STANDARDS FOR THE QUALI TY OF WATER
SUPPLIED TO THE PUBLIC
EOULATIONS: QUALITY OF WATER SUPPLIED THE PUBLIC
JTHORITY: Sec. 66-1-7 (6) 4 (19), COLO. Rev.
STATUTES 1963, A3 AMENDED, (1967
PERM. CUM. SUPP.)
X3PTED: COLO. STATE BOARD or HEALTH FEB. 12,
1963-SEc. 9, AMENDED OCT. 17, 1967.
1, Definitions of terms.
As used In this subpart, the following tens
shall have the meanings set out belo*:
(a) "Adequate protection by natural means"
involves one or more of the following processes
of nature that produces water consistently meet-
ing the requirements of these Standards: dilu-
tion, storage, sedimentation, sunlipht, aeration.
and the associated physical and biological proc-
esses which tend to accomplish natural purifica-
tion in surface waters and, in the case of
ground waters, the natural purification of water
by infiltration through soil and percolation
through underlying naterlal and storage belo*
the ground water table.
(b) "Adequate protection by treatment"
leans any one or any combination of the con-
trolled processes of coagulation, sedimentation,
absorption, filtration, disinfection, or other
processes which produce a water consistently
meeting the requlrenents of these Standards.
This protection also Includes processes which
are appropriate to the source of supply; works
which are of adequate capacity to Beet naxUua
demands without creating health hazards, and
which are located, designed, and constructed to
eliminate or prevent pollution: and conscien-
tious operation by well-trained and competent
personnel whose qualifications are connensurate
with the responsibilities of the position and
acceptable to the reporting apency and the cer-
tifying authority.
(c) "CERTIFYING AUTHORITY" MEANS THE
COLORADO DEPARTMENT or HEALTH
(d) "The conform group" includes all
organisms considered in the coll Torn croup as
i>et forth in Standard Methods for the Examina-
tion of Hater and Wastewater, current edition,
prepared and published jointly by the American
Public Health Association, American Water Morns
Association, and tuter Pollution Control Federa-
tion.
(e) "health hazards" mean any conditions.
devices, or practices in the water supply system
and its operation which create, or nay create, a
dancer to the health and well-beinn of the water
consumer ta example of a health hazard Is a
structural defect In the water supply systes.
whether of location, design, or construction.
which nay regularly or occasionally prevent sat-
isfactory purification of the water supply or
cause it to be polluted from extraneous sources.
(n "Pollution1, as used in these Stand
arjs, means the presence of any foreign sub-
stance (organic, inorganic, radiological, or
bioloflcal) in water which tends to degrade its
quality so as to constitute a hazard or iapair
the usefulness of the water
(r) "Heportine agencies" leans the respec-
tive official state health agencies or their
designated representatives.
(h) "'the standard sample" for the bacte-
riological test shall consist of
(I) Kor the bacteriological fernentation
tube test, five (f) standard portions of either:
108
(1) Ten BillUlters (10 al)
(il) one hundred milliter* (lOOal)
(2) For the membrane filter technique,
not less than fifty milliners (SO •!).
(1) "Water supply systea" includes the
works and auxiliaries for collection, treatment,
storage, and distribution of the water from the
•sources of supply to the free-flowing outlet of
the ulttiate consumer.
2. Source and Protection
(a) The water supply should be obtained
froi the lost desirable source which is fea-
sible, and effort should be Bade to prevent or
control pollution of the source. If the source
it not adequately protected by natural leans,
the supply shall be adequately protected by
treatment,
(b) Frequent sanitary surveys shall be
nade of tne water supply systei to locate and
Identify health hazards which tight exist in the
system, 'ihe manner and frequency of Baking
these surveys, and the rate at which discovered
health hazards are to be removed shall be in
accordance with a program approved by tne
reporting agency and the certifying authority.
(c) Approval of water supplies shall be
dependent In part upon.
(1) Enforceaent of rules and regulations
to prevent development of health hazards;
(2) Adequate protection of the water
quality throughout all parts of the systei.as
demonstrated by frequent surveys;
(3) Proper operation of the water supply
system under the responsible charge of personnel
whose qualifications are acceptable to the
reporting agency and the certifying authority;
(4) Adequate capacity to ieet peak
deiands without development of low pressures or
other health hazards, and
(5) Record of laboratory examinations
showing consistent coipllance with the water
quality requirements of these Standards.
(d) Kor the purpose of application of
these Standards, responsibility for the condi-
tions in the water supply system shall be con-
sidered to be held by:
(\) The water purveyor fro» the source
of supply'to the connection to the Customer's
service piping; and
(2) The owner of the property served and
the municipal, county, or other authority having
legal jurisdiction iron the point of connection
to the custoner's service piping to the free-
flowing outlet of the uluiate consuaer.
3. bacteriological quality
(a) SAMPLING.
(1) Conpllance with the bacteriological
requirements of these Standards shall be based
on examinations of samples collected at rep-
resentative points throughout the distribution
systei. The frequency of sampling and the loca-
tion of sampling points shall be established
jointly by the reporting agency and the certify-
ing authority after investigation by either
agency, or both, of the source, tethod of treat-
aent. and protection of the water concerned.
(2) 'Ihe mlnimuci nunber of samples to be
collected from the water supply and exaalned
each tenth should be as follows: For supplies
serving less than 2,000 persons - 2 per lonth;
for supplies serving froi 2,000 to 100.ooo per-
sons - l per month per 1.000 persons served; for
supplies serving over 100.000 persons - as taken
fron the graph in the u. s. Public Health Serv-
ice Drinking Water Standards.
(3) In determining the number of samples
examined monthly, the following sanpies nay be
included, provided all results are assembled and
available for inspection and the laboratory
l
-2-
-------
109
methods and technical competence of the lab-
oratory personnel are approved by the reporting
agency and the certifying authority:
(1) Saipleg examined by the reporting
agency.
(11) Samples exaHned by local govern-
ment laboratories.
(Ill) Saiples examined by the water
works authority.
(Iv) Samples exanlned by commercial
laboratories.
(4) The laboratories In which these
examinations are nade and the tethods used In
making them shall be subject to inspection at
any time by the designated representatives of
the certifying authority and the reporting
agency. Conpllance with the specified proce-
dures and the results obtained shall be used as
a basis for certification of the supply.
(5) Dally samples collected following a
bacterlologlcally unsatisfactory sample as pro-
vided In paragraph (b) (1), (2), and (3) of this
section shall be considered as special samples
and shall not be Included in the total number of
samples examined. Neither shall such special
saiples be used as a basis for prohibiting the
supply: Provided. That (1) when waters'of un-
known quality are being examined, simultaneous
tests are made on multiple portions of a geomet-
ric series to determine a definitive conform
content, (11) Immediate and active efforts are
nade to locate the cause of pollution, (111)
Immediate action Is taken to eliminate the
cause, and (Iv) sanples taken following such
remedial action are satisfactory.
(t>1 Llnlts. The presence of organisms of
the conform group as indicated by samples exam-
ined shall not exceed the following limits:
(1) When 10 mi standard portions are
examined, not more than 10 percent In any month
shall sho* the presence of the coll fora group.
The presence of the conform group In three or
more 10 ml portions of a standard sample shall
not be allowable If this occurs:
(1) In two consecutive sanples;
(11) In more than one sample per month
when less than 20 are examined per month; or
(111) In more than five percent of the
sanples when 20 or store are examined per month.
»hen organises of the conform group occur In
three or more of the 10 01 portions of a single
standard sample, dally samples from the same
sampling point shall be collected promptly and
examined until the results obtained from at
least two consecutive samples show the water to
be of satisfactory quality.
(2) Wien loo ml standard portions are
examined, not more than 60 percent In any month
shall show the presence of the coll form group.
The presence of the conform group In all five
of the 100 ml portions of a standard saiple
shall not be allowable if this occurs:
(1) In two consecutive sanples;
(11) In more than one sample per month
when less than five are exailned per month; or
(ill) In more than 20 percent of the
samples when five or more are examined per
month,
When organisms of the coll form group occur In
all five of the IOC ail portions of a single
standard sample dally sanples from the same sam-
pling point shall Le collected promptly and
examined until the results obtained from at
least two consecutive samples show the water to
be of satisfactory quality.
(3) When th.e membrane filter technique
Is used, the arithmetic mean conform density of
all standard samples exanlned per month shall
not exceed one per 100 ml. Collfora colonies
per standard sample shall not exceed 3/50 ml,
4/100 ml. 7/200 al. or 13/MO il in:
(1) Two consecutive samples;
(11) More than one standard sample
when less than 20 are examined per month; or
(111) More than five percent of the
standard samples when 20 or more are examined
per month.
then conform colonies in a single standard sam-
ple exceed the above values, dally samples from
the same sampling point shall be collected
promptly and examined until the results obtained
from at least two consecutive samples show the
water to be of satisfactory quality.
4. Physical characteristics.
(a) Sampling. The frequency and manner of
sampling shall be determined by the reporting
agency and the certifying authority. Under nor-
mal circumstances samples should be collected
one or more times per week froi representative
points In the distribution system and examined
for turbidity, color, threshold odor, and taste.
(b) Limits. Drinking water should contain
no impurity which would cause offense to the
sense of sight, taste, or smell. Under general
use. the following limits should not be ex-
ceeded :
Turbidity - 5 units
Color - is units
Threshold odor number - 3
5. Chemical characteristics.
(a) Sampling.
(l) The frequency and manner of sampling
shall be determined by the reporting agency and
the certifying authority. Under normal circum-
stances, analyses for substances listed below
need be made only semi-annually. If. however.
there is some presumption of unfltness because
of the presence of undesirable elements, com-
pounds, or materials, periodic determinations
for the suspected toxicant or material should be
made more frequently and an exhaustive sanitary
survey should be made to determine the source of
the pollution. Where the concentration of a
substance is not expected to increase in proc-
essing and distribution, available and accept-
able source, water analyses performed in accord-
ance with standard methods may be used as ev-
idence of compliance with these Standards.
(2) Where experience, examination, and
available evidence Indicate that particular- sub-
stances are consistently absent from a water
supply or below levels of concern, semi-annual
examinations for those substance* may be omitted ,
when approved by the reporting agency and the
certifying authority.
(3) The burden of analyses may be re-
duced in many cases by using data fron accept-
able sources. Judgment concerning the quality
of water supply and the need for performing
specific local analyses may depend in part on
information produced by such agencies as (1) the
u. s. Geological Survey, wnlch determines chem-
ical quality of surface and ground waters of the
united Statea and publishes these data in "Water
Supply Papers" and other reporti, and (11) the
u. s. Public Health Service which dtternlnei
water quality related to pollution (or the ab-
sence of pollution) in the principal rivin of
the Nation and publishes these data annually In
"National Water Quality Network". Data on pol-
lution of waters as measured by carbon chloro-
form extracts (CCE) may be found in the latter
publication.
(b) Units. Drinking water shall not con-
tain Impurities In concentrations which may be
hazardous to the health of the considers. It
should not be excessively corrosive to the water
supply system. Substances used in Its treatment
shall not renaln In the water In concentrations
greater than required oy good practice. Sub-
stances which may have deleterious physiological
-3-
-4-
-------
no
effect, or for which physiological effects are
not known, shall not be introduced into the sys-
te« in a manner which would pernlt then to reach
the consumer.
(i) The following chealcal substances
should not be present In a water supply in ex-
cess of the listed concentrations where, in the
Judgment of the reporting agency and the cer-
tifying authority, other more suitable supplies
are or can be Bade available.
Concentration
Substance in ag/1
Alkyl Benzene Sulfonate (ABS) 0.5
Arsenic (As) 0.01
Chloride (Cl) 250
Copper (Cu) 1.0
Carbon CM or of or n Extract (CCE)- - - - 0.2
Cyanide (CN) 0.01
Fluoride (F) (•)
Iron (Fe) 0.3
Magnesium 125
Manganese (Mn) 0.05
Nitrate J(NO,) 45
Phenols- - - 0.001
Sulphate (S04) 250
Tbtal Dissolved Solids 500
Zinc 'Z«) 5
* See 5 (b) (3)
1 In areas In which the nitrate content of
•ater Is known to be In excess of the listed
concentration, the public should be warned of
the potential dangers of using the water for
infant feeding.
(2) The presence of the following sub-
stances in excess of the concentrations listed
shall constitute grounds for rejection of the
supply;
Concentration
Substance in ng/1
Arsenic (As) 0.05
Bariua (Ba) 1.0
CadBlua (Cd) • - -« °-01
ChroaluB (Hexavalent) (Cr +• °) - - • • 0.05
Cyanide (OO 0.2
fluoride (F) (•)
Lead (Pb) 0.05
Selenium (Se) 0.01
Silver (Ag) 0.05
*See 5 (b> (3)
(3) (1) When fluoride is naturally pres-
ent in drinking water it is recommended that the
concentration should not average itore than the
Appropriate upper Holt In Table I. Presence of
fluoride in average concentrations greater than
two tines the optimum'values in Table I shall
constitute grounds for rejection of the supply.
(11) Where fluorldatlon (supplementa-
tion of fluoride in drinking water) is prac-
ticed, the average fluoride concentration shall
»e kept within the upper and lower control Un-
its in Table I.
Table I
Annual average of
•MliuB daily,air
le«peratures a
Recommended Control
Limits (Fluoride
concentrations In mg/lJ
L ovier Optlaum Upper
1.2 1.7
1.1 1.5
1.0 1.3
0.9 1.2
0.8 1.0
0.7 0.8
Based on temperature data obtained for a Bin-
inun> of five years.
(ill) In addition to the sampling
required by paragraph (a) of this section, flu-
oridated and defluorldated supplies shall be
samples with sufficient frequency to deternlne
tnat the desired fluoride concentration Is main-
tained,
53,8-58 3
58.4-83 8........
63 9- 7ft A........
70 7.79 9 ----
79.3.90 5--
*
0.9
00
Op
On
Of-
6. Radioactivity.
(a) Sampling.
(1) The frequency of sanpllng and anal-
ysis for radioactivity shall be determined by
the reporting agency and the certifying author-
after con-' -' " " ' "
ity
consideration of the likelihood of
significant amountJL-belng present. Where con-
centrations of Ra •**" or Sr80 may vary consider-
ably. quarterly samples composited over a period
of three Bontns are reconmended. Samples for
deteruinatlon of gross activity should be taken
and analyzed more frequently.
(2) As Indicated In (a), data from ac-
ceptable sources may be used to indicate compli-
ance with these requirements.
(b) Limits
(1) The effects of human radiation expo-
sure are viewed as harmful and any unnecessary
exposure to ionizing radiation should be avoided
The concentrations of radioactivity specified
below for drinking water are Intended to limit
Intake of these substances by this route so that
total radiation exposure of population groups
does not exceed appropriate Radiation Protection
Guides recommended by the Federal Radiation
Council, Concentrations which exceed, on the
average, the values presented below for a period
of one year shall constitute grounds for rejec-
tion of the supply. Where the total Intake of
Ra226 and Sr90 froa all sources has been deter-
alned, these limits may be adjusted by the
reporting agency and the certifying authority so
that the total intake of Ka226 ^a Sr?0 will not
exceed 7.3 uuc per day and 73 iiuc per day
respectively.
Radlonuclldes Concentrations In uuc/llter
RadlUB226 ................. 3
StrontluB90 ................ 10
Grow Beta Activity {Strontini*0 and
alpha eim«» absent1) ..... 1000
Absent is taken here to. Bean a negligibly
small fraction of the above specific limits.
where the limit for unidentified aloha emitters
Is taken as the listed limit far Ra"6
(2) When mixtures of RadlumZZB, stron-
tium90, and other radlonucl Ides are present, the
above Hitting values shall be modified to as-
sure that the combined intake is not likely to
result In radiation exposure in excess of the
Radiation Protection Guides reconmended by the
Federal Radiation Council,
7. Hecommended analytical methods
(a) Analytical methods to deternlne com-
pliance with the requirements of these Standards
shall be those specified in Standard Methods for
the Examination of Water and Wastewater, Am
Pub. Health Assoc. , current edition and those
specified as follows:
(1) Barium: Methods for the Collection
and Analyses of Water Samples, Water Supply
Paper No. 1454, Rainwater, F.H. A Thatcher, L.L.,
LI. E. Geological Survey V'ashington, D.C.
(2) Carbon Chloroform Extract (CCF,):
Manual for Recovery and Identification of Or-
ganic Chemicals In Water, Middleton. F. M. .
Rosen, A. A., and Hurttschell. R. H. . Robert A.
Taft Sanitary Engineering Center, PHS, Cin-
cinnati, Ohio.
(3) Hadloactivity: Laboratory Manual of
Methodology, Radlonucl Ide Analyses of Envi-
ronmental Samples. Technical Report R59-6.
Robert A. Taft Sanitary Engineering Center, l'na,
Cincinnati. Ohio, and Methods of Radio-cneisical
Analysis, Technical Report No. 173, Report of
the Joint WHO-FAO Committee 1959, World Health
Organization
(4) Selenium: Suggested Modified Method
for Colorimetric Determination of Selenium In
Natural Water, Magin, C. b. , Thatcher, L, L.,
-5-
-6-
-------
Ill
RCTTIQ, S. AND LEV INC, H.J., AMERICAN WATER
WORKS ASSOCIATION, 52, 1199, (I960).
(a) ORGANISMS or THE COL I FORM GROUP.
ALL or THE DETAILS or TECHNIQUES IN THE DETER-
MINATION Or BACTERIA Or THIS OfiOUP, INCLUDING
THE SELECTION AND PREPARATION Or APPARATUS AND
MEDIA, THE' COLLECTION AND HANDLING Or SAMPLES
AND THE INTERVALS AND CONDITIONS or STORAGE
ALLOWABLE BETWEEN COLLECTION AND EXAMINATION
Or THE WATER SAMPLE , SHALL BE I N ACCORDANCE
WITH STANDARD METHODS FOR THE EXAMINATION or
WATER AND WASTEWATER, CURRENT EDITION, AND THE
PROCEDURES SHALL BE THOSE SPECIFIED THEREIN
FOR:
0) THE MEMBRANE FILTER
TECHNIQUE, STANDARD TEST, OR
(z) THE COMPLETED TEST, OR
(3) THE CONFIRMED TEST, PROCEDURE
WITH BRILLIANT GREEN LACTOSE
BILE BROTH' , OR
(4) THE CONFIRMED TEST, PROCEDURE
WITH ENDO OR EOS IN MCTHYLENE
BLUE AQAR PLATES. 1
CONFIRMED TEST is ALLOWED,
PROVIDED THE VALUE Or THIS TEST TO DETERMINE THE
SANITARY QUALITY OF THE SPECIFIC WATER SUPPLY
BEING EXAMINED IS ESTABLISHED BEYOND REASON-
ABLE DOUBT BY COMPARISONS WITH COMPLETED TESTS
PERFORMED ON THE SAME WATER SUPPLY.
8. HAZARDOUS CROSS-CONNECTION
A PUBLIC WATER SUPPLY SHALL HAVE NO CROSS-
CONNECTION TO A PIPE, FIXTURE OR SUPPLY ANY
OF WHICH CONTAIN WATER OF LESSER QUALITY.
9. DISINFECTION or DRINKING WATER.
ALL DRINKING WATER SUPPLIED TO THE PUBLIC
SHALL BE DISINFECTED BY CHLORINATION OR
OTHER MEANS OR METHODS OF EQUAL EFFICACY
IN THE KILLING OR REMOVAL Or ORGANISMS CAP-
ABLE Or CAUSING INrtCTION. WHEN CHLORINA-
TION IS EMPLOYED, A SUFFICIENT AMOUNT OF
CHLORINE SHALL BE ADDED TO THE WATER TO
MAINTAIN A MEASURABLE CHLORINE RESIDUAL AT
ALL POINTS IN THE DISTRIBUTION SYSTEM FROM
WHICH WATER HAY BE WITHDRAWN.
(A) THE COLORADO DEPARTMENT or
HEALTH MAY UPON WRITTEN APPLICATION TO THE
DIVISION Or ADMINISTRATION AND THE SUB-
MISSION Or COMPETENT EVIDENCE TO ESTABLISH
THAT THE WATER BEING SUPPLIED TO THE PUBLIC
BY THE APPLICANT'S r ACUITIES is REASONABLY
SArE AND FREE rROM CONTAMINATION, WAIVE THE
REQUIREMENT FOR DISINFECTION AS HEREIN
PROVIDED. THE APPLICANT SHOULD SUBMIT
DATA OR OTHER EVIDENCE PERTINENT TO THE
WATER SOURCE, DISTRIBUTION SYSTEM AND
WATER QUALITY BASED UPON ITS PHYSICAL,
CHEMICAL, BACTERIOLOGICAL AND RADIOAC-
TIVITY CHARACTERISTICS. Ir THE EVIDENCE
ESTABLISHES THAT THE WATER BE I NO FURNISH-
ED MEETS THE STANDARDS SET FORTH IN SEC-
TIONS 2 THROUGH 8 OP THESE REGULATIONS,
DISINFECTION MAY NOT BE REQUIRED. IN CASE
THE REQUEST FOR WAIVER IS DENIED, THE
APPLICANT MAY REQUEST A HEARING PURSUANT
TO SECTION 66-1-9, COLORADO REVISED
STATUTES 1963.
(B) SAMPLES TROW WATER SUPPLY SYSTEMS FOR WHIO
WAIVERS HAVE BEEN GRANTED SHALL BE SUBMITTED FOR
ANALYSES AS REQUESTED BY THE DEPARTMENT. Ir AT ANY
TIME IT APPEARS THAT THE WATER BEING FURNISHED IS
NOT REASONABLY SAFE TO DRINK AND IN COMPLIANCE WITH
THE STANDARDS, THE WAIVER MAY BE SUMMARILY WITH-
DRAWN BY THE DEPARTMENT AND NOTICE GIVEN THAT DIS-
INFECTION IS REQUIRED.
10.
CLAUSE.
Ir ANY PROVISION OF THESE REGULATIONS OR THE APPLICA-
TION THEREOr TO ANY PERSON OR CIRCUMSTANCE IS HELD
INVALID, SUCH INVALIDITY SHALL NOT AFFECT OTHER
PROVISIONS OR APPLICATIONS OF THE REFLATIONS ARE
DECLARED TO BE SEVERABLE.
REFERENCE:
t.
2.
CHAPTER 66-17(6) (19) CRS '63 -
AUTHORITY ro« WRITING REGULATIONS.
DEPARTMENT OF DEW, PHS - INTERSTATE QUARANTINE
DRINKING WATER STANDARDS, AS APPROVED BY
THE SECRETARY, JULY 20, 1961.
3. STAFF REPORT OF THE FEDERAL RADIATION COUNCIL,
SEPTEMBER 1961. REPORT No. 2 "BACKGROUND
MATERIAL FOR THE DEVELOPMENT OF RADIATION
PROTECTION STANDARDS11.
4. COLORADO STATE BOARD OF HEALTH REGULATIONS
PERTAINING TO ICE, ADOPTED AUGUST 14, 1950.
5' o™?*1*0.?™™..80*1"5 or HEALTH REGULATIONS
VENDORS, ADOPTED
6. COLORADO STATE BOARD OF HEALTH REGULATIONS
PERTAINING TO PLUMB,NQ (TECHNICAL PLUMB. NG
21 Ofil *MENDCO N°«MBER 13. 1961, AUOUST
21, 1968, AND JULY 16, 1969.
APPENDIX
REFERENCE 4
COLORADO STATE BOAAO or HEALTH REGULATIONS PERTAINING
TO ICE ADOPTED AUGUST 14,1950.
OR FOR COOLING FOOD
SHALL BE MADE FROM WATER
WMER ^PLY STANDARDS.
MAINTAIN IN ALL PARTS OF THE
REFERENCE 5.
STANDARDS or THE QUALITY or WATER TO BE SUPPLIED TO
"* VENDORS« °"«NSING TANKS, WATER
BOTTL"» *NO CONTAINERS OTHER THAN
U "U8LIC W*TER SUM>«-Y THROUGH DIS-
PJPE3, ADOPTED BY THE COLORADO STATE
BOARD OF HEALTH OCTOBER 18. 1954. TATE
E
OF HEAL
CULINARY AND ABLUTIONARY
OR GIVEN TO THE PUBLIC
TANKS* WATER HAULER TANKS>
OTH£R ™fo T^ PUBL'C WAT£R
DISTRIBUTION PIPES SHALL
**"«• SANITARY STANDARDS
, ^^lED TO WE PUBLIC AS
TIME BY ™E STATE BOAR°
-7-
-8-
UPDATED: SEPTEMBER 15, 1959
-------
APPEND IX F
CO L 0 R A DO W A T E R SUPPLY P 0 L I C Y
-------
1T2
January 31, 1973
APPENDIX F
Colorado Water Supply Policy
COLORADO DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH
Division of Engineering it Sanitation
GUIDELINES FOR APPLYING DRINKING WATER STANDARDS TO
REGULATIONS - QUALITY OF WATER SUPPLIED TO THE PUBLIC
March, 1966
Revised March, 1969
Revised January, 1973 .
These guidelines are established as Departmental Policy to aid State Health
Department Personnel and Local Health Department Personnel in applying the
Drinking Water Standards to categories of water supply coining under State
Board of Health Regulations Jl Quality of Water Supplied to the Public!',
effective November 15, 1967, and to interpret and supplement current
Drinking Water Standards as established by the State Boe.rd of Health. The
guidelines are also designed to help personnel.in making as uniform as possible
their approach and ultimate solution of problems involving drinking water supplies.
These standards will also serve as a more exact way of fixing responsibilities
in efforts to secure safe and adequate supplies of water.
A. DEFINITIONS:
1. A Public Water ftupply is any water supply which is available to
the public. All public water supplies and those used in the
preparation of food or for drinking pin _>oses when offered in any
establishment to the public shall coroe within the purview of
thp.se guidelines. The following examples are given by way of
explanation and not by way of limitation:
a. A water supply serving a municipality, water district,
community or a rural domestic water supply system;
b. A water supply serving more than one dwelling unit or
residence, an apartment house, condominium, ntotel, hotel
or lodging house;
c. A supply serving any establishment licensed by the state of
Colorado or any of its subdivisions, or a restaurant, dairy,
dairy farm, hospital, nursing home, public institution or jail;
d. A supply used in preparation of food1, drink, or drugs, or
used by the persons working in such establishments -
-------
113
e. A supply serving a service station, roadside atop, campsite,
school,- business establishment, public building, trailer parks,
mobile home parks, industrial.'plants, work station, mercantile
establishment, park, beach area, picnic ground, public swimming
pool, country club, or place,of public assembly.
2. The categories of Public Water Supplies are as follows:
A Serving over 10,000 persons
B Serving 1,000 to 10,000 persons
C. Serving 100 to 1,000 parsons and having
at least 25 service' connections
D • Community water supplies serving 10 or more'
dwelling wiits not under control of the
owner or 40 or more resident persons.
E Other public water supplies not meeting
conditions for above categories.
3. The Annual Inspection is to be made twice each year and reported on
Drinking Water Supply System - Annug1 Inspection form E? ENG 1; it
consists of an examination of such system features as involve source
and protection, sanitary defects an'd health hazards, bacteriological
quality, chemical quality, physical quality, radiological quality,
and disinfectant residual and overall compliance with the state
law and "Regulations - Quality of Water Supplied to the Public."
4. Sanitary Survey is a comprehensice examination and written report
made of the entire water supply system once each five years. It
will include all the details of the annual inspection but in more
detail. Information about the coiroiunity, such as ordinances, future
plans-for w. ter improvement, enlargement, financing, and overall
compliance with state law and regulations is to be written in a
narrative fora incluJin;; schematic drawings. Procedure for written
form is outlined in Operations Memorandum Narrative Reports,
October 20, 1965.
5. Department means the health department having jurisdiction.
6. Local Health Department is defined to be a department organized
and operated in accord with Chapter 66, Article 2, CRS 63, as amended.
7. A Purveyor is an individual or organization responsible for providing
'facilities through which water may be processed and transported from
a water source to a connection with the consumer's service piping.
-------
114
8. Inspecting Authority - The inspecting authority is the Colorado
Department of Health for all public water supplies serving 40 or
more resident persons or 10 or more dwelling units regardless of
location. For other public water supplies, the local health
departments are the inspecting authority in their jurisdiction,
and the Colorado Department of Health is the inspecting authority
In areas not served by local health departments.
Note: Additional information may be found in "Definition of Terms" in the
Regulations - quality £f Water Supplied tjo the Public.
B. RESPONSIBILITIES
1. The water purveyor is responsible that the water which he serves
the public meets the Regulations'- "Quality of Water Supplied to
the Public."
2. The Colorado Department of Health and local health departments
(organized under 66-2, 1963 CRS) are responsible for enforcing
compliance with current regulations adopted by the State Board
-of Health and for implementing other provisions of public health
laws pertaining thereto. The current regulations as of this date
are entitled "Regulations - Quality of Water Supplied to the Public."
It is understood that state Department 'of Health personnel and
local health department personnel'will work together to achieve
confortnance with those requirements.
3. In order to avoid duplication of effort, the following general
division of duties will apply:
a. The Colorado Department of Health will have the following
responsibilities:
(1} Revicv of plnrs and specifications for new water works or
modifications to existing facilities.
(2) Make serai annual inspections and written reports on public
water supply systems serving over 40 resident persons or
over 10 dwelling units. Make a periodic complete sanitary
survey of these water supplies. Provide follow up and
enforcement on these water supplies.
(3) Provide local health departments with copies of all inspection
reports., correspondence and official actions concerning water
supplies in areas served by local health departments. Discuss
problems with local department personnel.
(4) Surveillance on all public water supplies in areas not served
by local health departments.
-------
115
(5) Provide consultation and assistance as requested by local
health departments.
b. The Local Health Departments will be responsible for:
(1) Implementing the sampling requirements for all public water
supplies in their area. Reporting to the State Department
of Health, monthly, a summary of all tests run on public water
systems directly inspected by the state. (The District Enginee*
will supply to'the local department a current list -of such
systems to be sampled).
(2) Direct inspection and surveillance of private water supplies
and public supplies not under direct surveillance of the state-
(3) Interpreting to the public, state recommendations concerning
public water supplies. Investigating complaints and conditions
coming to their attention.
(4) Reporting to the state, findings from investigation of
complaints and remedial action taken concerning those supplies
directly inspected by the state. Requesting the state for
assistance as needed. Reporting- immediately any abnormal
conditipns coming to their attention either from emergency
or breakdov/n, or unusual bacteriological findings. Reporting
any disease outbreak where a water supply may be suspect.
C. PERIODS OF INSPECTION
All public water supply systems In Categories A, B, C and D are to be
given an inspection twice annually and a report made by a public health engineer
of the'Colorado Department of Health ( Only those serving 10 or more dwelling
units or 40 or nsore resident persons) .
Where these supplies are located within a local health department juri-sdictit i,
the engineer will coordinate the Inspection trip with the director- of the
appropriate ,dc'.p.n-;;ir.ent. Upon conviction of the inspection, the findings and
recommendations vill be discussed with tha most responsible purveyor representative
available and a report left with him. If the findings are significantly adverse
or if the recommendations are of a major nature, the findings and re'co^nmepdr.tions
shall be confirmed by a letter from the state Department of Health and follow up
instituted by the assigned engineer.
The annual inspection shall set forth the status of compliance with the
Drinking Water Standards for water quality, adequacy of treatment and freedom
from hazards. The Sanitary Survey will include a complete evaluation of the
water source,- treatment facility, operating procedure, control programs and other
matters of sanitary significance'as well as general information pertaining to
the community'
-------
116
Public water supplies which are listed under Category E (Sampling Schedule
applying to Drinking Water Supplied the Public) in local health department
jurisdictions and which arc not regularly inspected by the state shall be
inspected and samples taken as the situation requires in the judgment of
the responsible inspecting authority. However, inspections with written
report to owner of system at least once annually are suggested.
Category E (Public Water Supply) located within a local health department
jurisdiction is to be sampled according to "Sampling Schedule applying to
Drinking Water Supplied to the Public" which follows.
-------
117
D. SAMPLING SCHEDULE APPLYING TO DRINKING WATER'SUPPLIED THE PUBLIC:
Characteristic
Category A, B, C, D All supplies serving
over 10 dwelling units or 40 resident persons
Category
BACTERIOLOGICAL
&
CHLORINE RESIDUAL
Follow requirements established in current
State Board of Health Regulations to the
Public.
Numbers of samples collected per month
shall be based upon population served.
Note: Enter chlorine residual on Bact.
results report.
Discretion of
inspecting
authority.
One per month
recommended.
PHYSICAL -
TURBIDITY
PHYSICAL -
COLOR
PHYSICAL -
THRESHOLD
ODOR
CHEMICAL
RADIOACTIVITY
A minimum of four -samples per year for
surface waters and two samples per year
for grouixd water.
A minimum of two samples per year.
A minimum of two samples per year.
A minimum of two samples per year.
A minimum of two samples per year.
Discretion
t>f
inspecting
Authority.
Every six months from any water supply known to
contain radioactive substances; collect one sample
min imum.
E- Regularly inspected by local health department, if
available.
D - Regularly inspected by state
-------
120
RESPONSIBILITIES IN LOCAL HEALTH DEPARTMENT AREAS
Inspections,
Reports and
Follow-up
Correspondence
Enforcement
COLORADO DEPARTMENT
OF HEALTH
All supplies serving 10 or
more dwelling units not under
control of owner, or serving
40 or more resident persons.
LOCAL HEALTH
DEPARTMENTS
All supplies serving less
than 40 resident persons.
Establishment supplies.
Private supplies.
Sampling
Coordination
All public water supplies,
Minimum of 2 samples for
bacteriological tests per
month or 1 per month per
1,000 population, whichever
is greater, on those inspects
by the state; others, as
required.
Sample
Reports,
Bacteriological,
Physical,
Chemical,
Radioactivity
Analyze reports,
Notify purveyors of
non-compliance
Monthly summary of bacterio-
logical analyses to state by
•5th of following month on
system!; inspected by the
state. Forward individual
sample reports directly to
water purveyor as soon as
possible. Notify state as
soon as possible of all
unsafe sample results from
supplies inspected by state.
-------
121
COLORADO DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH
DIVISION OF ENGINEERING & SANITATION
DRINKING WATER SUPPLY SYSTEM
ANNUAL INSPECTION
A B C D
CATEGORY f~7 I 7 / 7 / 7
File No.
Facility Name:
Street or P.O. Box_
Ci ty;_..
Date:
Population Served:
_County_
jColo., Zip_
ITEM
AS FOUND
1. COMPLIES WITH MINIMUM LEGAL REQUIREMENTS
2. MEETS QUALITY STANDARDS
3. DISINFECTION PROVIDED
4. ADEQUACY OF TREATMENT
Disinfection-all supplies unless waivered .
Coagulation, -settling-turbid surface sources
5. FREE OF SANITARY DEFECTS
6. SOURCE
No upstream contamination controllable by entity
Yes No
LJLJ
rjrj
.
LULU
rjrj
LJLJ
O£7
Source:
Mayor or Manager:
Treatment:
Person Interviewed:
Cap. M.G.D.:_
Number Taps:
Inspecting Engineer:
Local Health Dept. Rep; .
"X" in "NO" column indicates unsatisfactory
condition Letter to:
Letter to Follow: Yes f~J No /~~7
ES ENG 1 (Rev,3-69-20)
-------
A N M X
BU.2GE.T. AN.D MAN[£
COMPARISONS
-------
122
APPENDIX G
Budget and Manpower Comparisons - Environmental Programs
Fiscal
Year
1968
Budget
Man-Years
1969
Budget
Man-Years
1970
Budget
Man-Years
1971
Budget
Man-Years
1972
Budget
Man-Years
1973
Budget
Man-Years
1974
Budget
Man-Years
Water Pollution
Control
$167,900
14
$212,800
18
$238,000
21
$415,900
23
$616,200
25
$417,200
29
$1,774,600
44
Air Pollution
Control
$227,500
14
$219,400
16
$213,200
18
$310,200
21
$585,400
36
$682,400
44
$1,265,500
52
Water
Supply
$59,100
2
$59 ,900
2
$68,500
2
$52 ,900
4
$52,200
4
$55 ,400
6
$59,800
4
NOTE: Budget figures rounded off to nearest $100, Man-years rounded off
to nearest man-year.
Source: Colorado Department of Health Budget Reports
-------
APPENDIX H
BACTERIOLOGICAL LABORATORY SURVE.Y
-------
123
APPENDIX H
Bacteriological Laboratory .Survey
Report of a Survey of the
Colorado Department of Public Health
Water Laboratory
4210 East llth Avenue
Denver, Colorado 80220
October 19, 1971
by
Harry D, Nash, Ph. D.
Microbiologist
Water Supply Programs Division
Office of Water Programs
Environmental Protection Agency
5555 Ridge. Avenue
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 Public Health Service Drinking Water Standards,
except for the 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 this laboratory. Specific deviations are described with
appropriate remedial action for compliance in the following recommendations:
Recommendations
Item 4 Transportation and storage
The sample sheet accompanying each sample should plainly state the source
of the supply, the exact location sampled and the chlorine residual found at
the time of sampling. Information on these sheets may be an important aid
in the interpretation of results.
A records examination of approximately 300 municipal samples received in
August, 1971, revealed that 25% of the samples were received after 48 hours
and 10% after 78 hours. This review indicated that the delay could be
attributed to shipping of samples to the laboratory toward the end of the
week and holding samples over the week-end before examination. Samples
should be examined within 48 hours after collection or discarded. The
practice of accepting samples older than 48 hours can result in data ranging
from misleading to totally false. Bacterial flora can undergo marked
-------
124
unpredictable changes in the presence of toxic or nutritive substances,
especially at temperatures above 15°C. The greatest concern is that unsafe
potable supplies will be reported as safe due to coliform die-off during
transit. Such die-off may result from metal ions, adverse pH, toxic meta-
bolites and competition from non-coliforms present in the water.
It is recommended that individuals be instructed to check mail schedules
so that sample collection and shipment can be coordinated, reducing the
overall time delay before examination of samples. The importance of
collecting and shipping samples at the beginning of the week and not prior
to holidays should be stressed in the instructions for taking samples,
Item 5 Record of Laboratory examination
Laboratory records
It is suggested that the laboratory itself maintain records indicating the
number of tests conducted yearly. These records should show the number
•of samples received from municipal and private supplies, the total number
of samples examined, the number of positive and negative tests, and the
number of completed tests conducted.
Prompt resampling for unsafe samples
A review of the Colorado State Public Health Engineering Section records
indicated that there is no remedial action initiated for resampling when an
unsafe sample is reported by the laboratory. However, a letter is sent to
municipalities at the end of each month if bacteriological tests indicate that
their water supply did not meet minimum requirements for water purity
for that month, figure 1. Records further indicate that three of nine
samples collected from a water supply which serves interstate carriers,
examined by the San Juan Basin Health Unit Laboratory located in Durango,
were reported as too numerous to count to the Colorado State Public Health
Engineering Section without any remedial action being initiated. In addition,
data relating to samples from the La Junta water supply system which
serves interstate carriers, examined by the Pueblo City-County Health
Department Laboratory, have not been submitted to the Colorado State
Public Health Engineering Section since January, 1971. Again apparently
no action has been taken to correct non-compliance with existing regulations.
It is recommended that regulations outlined in the Public Health Drinking
Water Standards, 1962 and the Surgeon General's memorandum dated
February 15, 1963, be followed especially regarding water supplies serving
interstate carriers.
Item 6 Laboratory evaluation program
Dr. C. D. McGuire, Director of Laboratories, is designated as the State
Water Laboratory Survey Officer. According to information obtained at the
-------
125
- 3-
8TATE 0:: COLORADO DEPARTMENT O" PUBLIC HEALTH
4210 EAST 11TH AVENUE • DENVER, COLORADO 80220 • PHONE 388-6111
R. L. CLBERB, M.D., M.P.H., DIRECTOR
Dear Sir:
The results of bacteriological tests made on. samples of water
collected from your water supply show that your water did not
meet the minimum requirements for water purity for the month
of"" •
This indicates the need for'improved treatment facilities
or improved operation of the facilities that you do have,
or both.
Should you have any questions concerning this do not hesitate
to let us know.
Yours very truly,
FOR DIRECTOR, ENGINEERING & SANITATION DIVISION
George A. Prince, P.E., Chief
public Health Engineering Section
rb
Figure 1. Letter sent to municipalities
-------
126
- 4 -
time of this survey, nine laboratories, Table 1, conduct water bacteriological
analyses. The first seven have not been evaluated since the State evaluation
program was reviewed in October, 1968. The Larimer County Health Depart-
ment laboratory located in Fort Collins has never been surveyed.
The basic concept of the laboratory evaluation program is to extend technical
consultation to personnel in any laboratory conducting water bacteriological
analyses with regard to procedures, techniques and equipment and to assure
that these conform with provisions set forth in "Standard Methods for the
Examination of Water and Wastewater" and the Public Health Service Drinking
Water Standards. Such a consultant type program benefits the overall service
of the laboratory and insures the reliability of data. Laboratory evaluations
should be conducted under the State program on all laboratories at a frequency
which will assure compliance with recommended procedures for water bacter-
iological analyses. The ultimate goal in this program is to up-grade techniques
and procedures used in all types of laboratory which examine water so that the
data is acceptable for official use in monitoring public water supplies and also
known to be of reliable status when used as legal evidence.
Table 1.
Laboratories Conducting Water Bacteriological Analyses
Name of Lab
Boulder County Health
Department Lab
Colorado Springs Health
Department Lab
Weld County Public Health
Department Lab
Northeast Colorado
Health Dept. Lab
Mesa County Health
Dept. Lab 1C*
Pueblo City-County
Health Dept. Lab 1C
San Juan Basin
Health Unit Lab 1C
Larimer County Health
Dept. Lab
Denver Board of Water
Commissioners Lab 1C
Location Survey Officer
Boulder McGuire
Colorado Springs "
Greely "
ti
Grand Junction "
Pueblo "
Durango "
Fort Collins "
Denver "
Date of
Last Survey
1966
1966
1966
1967
1968
1968
1968
«
1970
*IC Laboratories examining samples from supplies serving interstate carriers
-------
127
- 5 -
Item 33 pH Measurements
The pH of all batches of culture media should be checked after sterilization
and the pH of each batch recorded with the date and medium lot number. As
an absolute minimal requirement, the pH of at least one batch of sterilized
medium from each new bottle of commercial medium must be determined to
assure its quality. By monitoring final medium pH, a check can be made on
possible errors in weighing, excessive heating and sterilization resulting
in lactose hydrolysis, chemical contamination or deterioration of ingredients
that might occur during storage after stock packages are opened.
Item 34 Sterilization of media
It is recommended that liquid media containing carbohydrates be sterilized
at 121°C for 12 minutes. This will reduce the possible chance of lactose
hydrolysis resulting from excessive exposure of lactose to heat. Such
hydrolysis produces glucose and galatose 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 for establishing the confirmed test for
use in water quality examination by comparison with the completed test
depends on the individual location. Approximately 20 tests each three months
should be sufficient when good agreement is secured. The number should be
increased if results from the confirmed and completed tests differ. The
completed test is the reference standard.
Item 59 Reference material
Since it is required that all equipment and procedures employed in the bacter-
iological analyses of water conform with the provisions of Standard Methods
for the Examination of Water and Wastewater, it is essential that the labora-
tory be supplied with a copy of the current edition (13th edition - 1971) for
reference.
Personnel Approved
Mr. Paul Maifarth, Senior Microbiologist, and Mrs. Lori Green, Laboratory
Assistant, are approved for the application of the total coliform multiple-tube
-------
128
- 6 -
fermentation procedure to the bacteriological examination of drinking water
and for the application of the fecal coliform test as used in stream quality
measurements.
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 Public Health Service
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.
-------
129
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
Water Quality Office
Water Hygiene Division
Bacteriological Survey for
Water Laboratories .
Indicating conformity with the 13th
edition of Standard Methods for the
Examination of Water and Waste-
water (1971).
Survey By
ftoriy £>. Wash
X = Deviation U = Undetermined
O = Not Used
Laboratory Crit
_ • *
Location
"««»«•. A •> . «-
i*tu»»vw>»
Date
ia/13/tt
Sampling and Monitoring Response
1. Location and Frequency
Representative points on system
Frequency of sampling adequate
2. Collection Procedure
Faucets with aerators should not be used
Flush tap 1 min. prior to sampling
Pump well 1 min. to waste prior to sampling
River, stream, lake, or reservoir sampled at least
6 inches below surface and toward current
Minimum sample not less than 100 ml
Ample air space in bottle for mixing
Promptly identify sample legibly and indelibly
3. Sample Bottles
Wide mouth, glass or plastic bottles of capacity
Sample bottles capable of sterilization and rinse
Closure:
a. Glass stoppered bottles protected with metal foil,
rubberized cloth or kraft type paper .
b. Metal or plastic screw cap with leakproof liner
Sodium thiosulfate added for dechlorination
Concentration 100 mg/1 added before sterilization
Chelation agent for stream samples (optional)
Concentration 372 mg/1 added before sterilization
4. Transportation and Storage
Complete and accurate data accompanies sample
Transit time for potable water samples should not exceed
48 hrs, preferably within 30 hrs
Transit time for source waters, reservoirs, and natural
bathing waters should not exceed 6 hrs
All samples examined within 2 hours of arrival
EPA-103 (Cin)
(Rev. 3-71)
-------
130
Laboratory C:tevt.*z Dt&. df P-ftl«C H^fl^ocation 4210 E. J.lMiAW.
Water Iji)). Denver, Ccto. 0023 0
Date
10/19/71
4. Transportation a ad Storage (Continued)
Sample refrigeration mandatory on stream samples,
optional on potable water samples
5. Record of Laboratory Examination
Results assembled and available for inspection
Number of Tests per year
MPN Test - Type of sample Muatcipal & Private (July 1070 to July 1971)
Confirmed (+) (-) (Total) 1S.Q31
Completed (+) (-) (Total)
MF Test - Type of sample O
Direct Count (+) (-)_ (Total) O
Verified Count (+) (-} (Total) Q
Data processed rapidly through laboratory and engineering sections .
Unsatisfactory sample defined as J5 or more positive tubes per
MPN test
High priority placed on alerting operator to unsatisfactory(unBafe)
potable water results
Prompt resampling for unsatisfactory samples . , X
6. Laboratory Evaluation Service
State program to evaluate all laboratories which examine
potable water supplies.
Frequency of surveys on a 1 year basis X
State survey officer (Name)pr. C. David McGulra . . . . "
Status of laboratory evaluation service.
Total 9 labs known to examine water
S approved laboratories
provisional laboratories
Laboratory Apparatus
7. Incubator
Manufacturer Precision Scientific Model 00«B
Sufficient size for daily work load
Maintain uniform temperature in all parts (± 0.5° C)
Accurate thermometer with bulb immersed in liquid on
top and bottom shelves
Daily record of temperature or use of recording thermometer
sensitive to 0.5° C change
Incubator not subject to excessive room temperature variations
beyond a range of 50 - 80° F . . . .
EPA-103 (Cin)
(Rev. 3-71)
-------
131
Laboratory C rfawif* £>
-------
132
Laboratory Colorado Dcpw of Pi'Mic I Location 4210;:'. UthAve.
Health YSfotor I^o. Denver, Colo. &0220
Date
10/19/71
13. pH Meter
Manufacture r Photovolt Model Digicord
Electronic pH meter accurate to 0.1 pH units
14. Balance
Balance with 2 g sensitivity at 150 g load used for general
media preparations, Type_
Analytical balance with 1 mg sensitivity at 10 g load used
for weighing, quantities less than 2 g , Type
Appropriate weights of good quality for each balance
15. Microscope and Lamp
Preferably binocular wide field, 10 to 15 diameters magnifi-
cation for MF colony counts, Type O
Fluorescent light source for sheen discernment
16. Colony Count
Quebec colony counter, dark-field model preferred for
standard plate counts O
17. Inoculating Equipment
Wire loop of 22 or 24 gauge chromel, nichrome, or platinum
iridium, sterilized by flame . .
Single-service transfer loops of aluminum or stainless steel, pre-
sterilized by dry heat or steam
Disposable single service hardwood applicators, pre-
sterilized by dry heat only
18. Membrane Filtration Units
Manufacturer _Type
Leak proof during filtration O
Metal plating not worn to expose base metal
19. .Membrane filters
Manufacturer Type
Full bacterial retention, satisfactory filtration speed O
Stable in use, glycerin free. .
Grid marked with non-toxic ink _
Presterilized or autoclaved 121° C for 10 min
20. Absorbent Pads
Manufacturer Type
Filter paper free from growth Inhibitory substances O
Thickness uniform to permit 1.8 - 2.2 ml medium absorption ....
Presterilized or autoclaved with membrane filters
EPA-103 (Gin)
(Rev. 3-71)
-------
133
Laboratory Ce!oro<2o
ui*.
of i
Location *31
Colo*
HthAve, | Date
cosao |io/ie/n
21. Forceps
Preferably round tip without corrugations
Forceps are alcohol flamed for use in MF procedure
Glassware, Metal Utensils and Plastic Items
22. Media Preparation Utensils
BW8raisat#ljB*f . . • •
Stainless steel
Utensils clean and free from foreign residues or
dried medium
23. Pipets
Br^nd *»"» Type ^13* tip
Calibration error not exceeding 2.5%. . . . . . . . .. . . .
Tips unbroken, graduation distinctly marked
Deliver accurately and quickly.
Mouth end plugged with cotton (optional)
24. Pipet Containers
Box, aJutirtfiunf or stainless steel
Paper wrapping of good quality sulfite paper (optional) »
25. Petri Dishes
Brand Type
Use 100 mm x 15 mm dishes for pour plates
Use 60 mm x 15 mm dishes for- MF cultures
Clear, flat bottom, free from bubbles and scratches
. Plastic dishes may be reused if sterilized in 70% ethanol for
30 min. or by ultraviolet radiation
26. Petripish Containers
Alumihumor stainless steel cans with covers, coarsely woven
wire baskets, char-resistant paper sacks or wrappings
27. Culture Tubes
Size sufficient for total volume of medium and sample portions
Borosilicate glass or other corrosive resistant glass
28. Dilution Bottles or Tubes
Borosilicate or other corrosive resistant glass .
Screw cap with leak-proof liner free from toxic substances
on sterilization
Graduation level indelibly marked on side of bottle or tube
EPA-103 (Cin)
(Rev. 3-71)
-------
134
Laboratory Colorado Eter« of Public
Health Water Lab.
Location 42*,, E. llth A ve.
Denver* Colo. 80220
Date
10/19/71
29.
Materials and Media Preparation
Cleaning Glassware
Dishwasher Manufacturer Hetnlcfce
Model
Thoroughly washed in detergent at 160°F, cycle time 7 mjn.
Rinse in clean water at 180° F( Cycie time 7 mint. '. . .'
Final rinse in distilled water, cycle time 2.5mln. ~. • •
Detergent brand Helnicho B-3 ^
Washing procedure leaves no toxic residue
Glassware free from acidity or alkalinity
30. Sterilization of Materials^
Dry heat sterilization (1 hr at 170°C)
Glassware not in metal containers
Dry heat sterilization (2 hrs at 170°C)
Glassware in metal containers
Glass sample bottles
Autoclaving at 121° C for 15 min
Plastic sample bottles
Dilution water blanks
31. Laboratory Water Quality
Still manufacturer Construction Material
_ ' , .. . " Cuoliitonuu —————
Demineralizer with once a month recharge frequency
Protected storage tank
Supply adequate for all laboratory needs .
Free from traces of dissolved metals or chlorine . . .
Free from bactericidal compounds as measured
by bacteriological suitability test
Bacteriological quality of water measured once each year
by suitability test or sooner if necessary
32. Buffered Dilution Water
Stock phosphate buffer solution pH 7.2
Prepare fresh stock buffer when turbidity appears .
Stock buffer autoclaved and stored at 5 - 10° C
1. 25 ml stock buffer per 1 liter distilled water
Dispense to give 99 ± 2 ml of 9 ± 0.2 ml after autoclaving
33. pH Measurements
Calibrate pH meter against appropriate standard buffer prior to use
Standard buffer brand pH 7.0
Check the pH of each sterile medium batch or at least one batch
from each new medium lot number
EPA-103 (Cin)
(Rev. 3-71)
-------
135
Laboratory C
Wstor
i ,'t> fop** of
Location «J3 K« Hth Aw.
Denvvr* Colo. 80229
Date
1D/J9/T*
33. pH Measurements (Continued)
Maintain a pH record of each sterile medium batch,
the date and lot number.
34. Sterilization of Media
Carbohydrate medium sterilized 121° C for 12 min
All other media autoclaved 121°C for 15 min
Tubes packed loosely in baskets for uniform heating and cooling.
Timing starts when autoclave reaches 121°C
Total exposure of carbohydrate media to heat not over 45 min
Media removed and cooled as soon as possible after sterilization
35. Storage
Dehydrated media bottles kept tightly closed and stored
at less than 30°C
Dehydrated media not used if discolored or caked
Sterile culture media stored in clean area free from
contamination and excessive evaporation
Sterile batches used in less than 1 week
All media protected from sunlight
If media is stored at low temperatures, it must be incubated
overnight and any tubes with air bubbles discarded
Culture Media - Specifications
36i Lactose Broth
Manufacturer Lot No.
• Single strength composition 13 g per liter distilled water
Sinrle strrrseth pH 6. 9 ± 0.1, double strength pH 6. 7 ± 0.1
Not less than 10 ml medium per tube
Composition of medium after 10 ml sample is added must
contain 0.013 g per ml dry ingredients
37. Lauryl Tryptose Broth
Manufacturer ' Plfe<» Lot No. 8g443S
Single strength composition 35. 6 g per liter distilled water
Single strength pH 6. 8 ± 0.1, double strength pH 6. 7 ± 0.1
Not less than 10 ml medium per tube
Composition of medium after 10 ml sample is added must
contain 0. 0356 g per ml of dry ingredients
38. Brilliant Green Lactose Bile Broth
Manufacturer **h™ Lot No. 63S783
EPA-103 (Gin)
(Rev. 3-71)
-------
136
Laboratory Colorado Dcpt. of Public
Health Water Lab.
Location 4210 £. llth Avo.
Denver, Colo. 80220
Date
10/10/71
38. Brilliant Green Lactose Bile Broth (Continued)
Correct composition, sterility and pH 7. 2
Not less than 10 ml medium per tube
39. Eosin Methylene Blue Agar
Manufacturer pjfco
-------
137
Laboratory C^lorfcda J>ep|, of PotllO I ''Location 4SIOE. I Uh Avtl, I Date
m Water Lab, | tcnvor, Cola SOZaft £3/19/71
45. _ _ Agar (Continued)
Correct composition and pH
Multiple Tube Coliform Test
46. Presumptive Procedure
lauryl tryptose broth_
Shake sample vigorously
Potable water: 5 standard portions, either 10
Stream monitoring: multiple dilutions
Incubate tubes at 35° ± 0. 5°C for 24 ± 2 hr
Examine for gas any gas bubble positive. . .
Return negative tubes to incubator
Examine for gas at 48 ± 3 hr from original incubation
47. Confirmed Test
Promptly submit all presumptive tubes showing gas production
before or at 24 hr and 48 hr periods to Confirmed Test . .
a. Brilliant green lactose broth
Gently shake presumptive tube or mix by rotating
Transfer one loopful of positive broth or one dip of applicator
from presumptive tube to brilliant green lactose broth. . .
'Incubate at 35° ± 0. 5°C and check at 24 hrs for gas production.
Reincubate negative tubes for additional 24 hrs
and check for gas production
Calculate MPN or report positive tube results
b. TJffncrW eosin methylene blue agar plates adequate streaking
to obtain discrete colonies separated by 0.5 cm
Incubate at 35° ± 0.5° C for 24 ±2 hr
Typical nucleated colonies with or without sheen are conforms
If atypical unnucleated pink colonies develop, result is
doubtful and completed test must be applied
If no colonies or only colorless colonies appear, the
confirmed test is negative. ......... ......
48, Completed Test
Applied to all potable water samples or a proportion each three
months to establish the validity of the confirmed test in
determining their sanitary quality. . . , . .
Applied to positive confirmed tubes or to doubtful colonies
on differential medium ..... ..... •
Streak positive confirmed tubes on Endo or EMB plates for
colony isolation. .......... .
EPA-103 (Gin)
(Rev. 3-71)
-------
138
Laboratory Colorado Dept. of Public
Health Water Lab.
Location 4210 E. HthAve.
Denver, Colo, 80220
Date
10/19/71
48. Completed Test (Continued)
.Choice of selected isolated colony for verification should be one
typical or two atypical to lactose or lauryl tryptose broth and
to agar slant for Gram stain
Incubate at 35° C ± 0. 5°C for 24 hrs or 48 hrs ,
Gram negative rods without spores and gas in lactose tube
with 48 hrs in positive Completed Test ,
Membrane Filter Coliform Test
49. . Application as Standard Test
Use as a standard test for determining potability of water after
• • demonstration by parallel testing that it yields information
' " equal to that from the multiple-tube fermentation procedure . . . Q
50. MF Procedure
Filter funnel and receptacle sterile at start of series. . . . . . . . . _O_
—:— Rapid funnel resterilization by UV, flowing steam or boiling water
acceptable , O
.Membrane filter cultures and technician eyes should not be
subject to UV radiation leaks . . . . ... ..» ... ... . . . Q
Filtration volume not less than 50 ml for potable water; multiple
dilutions for stream pollution . . . Q
~ """• Rinse funnel by flushing several 20 - 30 ml portions of sterile buffered
_ water through MF . ... ...... . Q
"' Remove filter with sterile forceps O
Roll filter over M-ENDO medium pad or agar so air bubbles
will not form Q
51. Incubation • •
In high humidity or in tight fitting culture dishes Q
At 35°C ± 0. 5° C for 22 - 24 hrs
"52." "Counting
_ -All colonies with a metallic yellowish green surface sheen
If coliforms are found in potable samples, verify by transfers
to lactose broth, then to BGB broth for evidence of gas
production at 35°C within 48 hr limit...... . . . . . . . . .
Calculate direct count in cdliform density per'100 ml.
53"."" Standard MF test with Enrichment
Incubate MF after filtration on pad saturated with lauryl tryptose
broth for 1 1/2 - 2 hr at 35°C ±0. 5°C . ............. Q
EPA-103 (Ciu)
(Rev. 3-71)
10
-------
139
Laboratory CotofaOfli f*?S»t
Wattr
Location 4210.., IUHAV9.
Denver. Colo. £0339
Date
10/10/71
53. Standard MF test with Enrichment (Continued)
Transfer MF culture to M-Endo medium for a final
20 - 22 hr incubation at 35°C ± 0.5° C
Count sheen colonies, verify if necessary, and calculate
direct count in coliform density per 100 ml
Supplementary Bacteriological Methods
54. Standard Plate Count
Plate not more than 1 or less than 0.1 ml (sample or dilution) Q
Add 10 ml or more liquefied agar medium at a temperature ~"
between 43 - 45°C • . .
Melted medium stored for no more than 3 hr at 43 - 45° C
Liquid agar and sample portion thoroughly mixed by gently
rotating to spread mixture evenly
Count only plates with between 30 and 300 colonies, exception
being 1 ml sample with less than 30 colonies
Record only two significant figures and calculate as "standard
plate count at 35C C per 1 ml of sample".
55. Fecal Coliform Test
a. Multiple Tube Procedure
Applied as an EC broth confirmation of all positive
presumptive tubes • . . 7
Place EC tubes in water bath within 30 min of transfers 1
Incubate at 44. 5°C ±0.2° C for 24 hrs ] ] '
Gas production is positive test for fecal coliforms ] ]
Calculate MPN based on combination of positive EC tubes ! . ! ! !
b. Membrane Filter Procedure
Following filtration place MF over pad saturated with
M-FC broth.
Place MF cultures in water-proof plastic bag and submerge
in water bath within 30 min
Incubate at 44. 5*C ±0.2° C for 24 hrs ......:....'.'. '.
All blue colonies are fecal coliforms
Calculate direct count in density per 100 ml . . . '. ' . ,
56. Delayed-Incubation Coliform Test
After filtration, place MF over pad of M-Endo containing 3. 2 ml
of a 12% sodium benzoate solution per 100 ml of medium ..... .
Addition of 50 mg cycloheximide per 100 ml of preservative
medium for fungus suppression is optional
Transport culture by mail service to laboratory within 72 hours . . . .
EPA-103 (Gin)
(Rev. 3-71) 11
-------
140
Laboratory Colorado Dfc^*. of Public I Location 42h» E. llth Ave. I Date
Health Water Lab. j Denver, Colo. 80220 [10/.9/71
56. Delayed-Incubation Coliform Test (Continued)
Transfer MF cultures to standard M-Endo medium
at laboratory
Incubate at 35°C ± 0. 5°C for 20 - 22 hr .
If at time of transfer, growth is visible, hold in refrigerator
till end of work day then incubate at 35° overnight
(16 - 18 hr period)
Count sheen colonies, verify if necessary, and calculate
direct count in coliform density per 100 ml
57. Additional Test Capabilities
Fecal streptococci Method
Pseudomonas aeruginosa ___ Method _________________
Staphylococcus _______ Method '
Salmonellae Method '
Biochemical tests Purpose •
Serological tests Purpose
Other Purpose
Laboratory Staff and Facilities
58. Personnel
Adequately trained or supervised for bacteriological
examination of water
Laboratory staff 3 (Total) Prep room staff (Total)"
59. Reference Material
Copy of the current edition of Standard Methods available
in the laboratory
State or federal manuals on bacteriological procedures for
water available for staff use
60. Physical Facilities
Bench-top area adequate for periods of peak work in
processing samples
Sufficient cabinet space for media and chemical storage. .
Office space and equipment available for processing water
examination reports and mailing sample bottles . . . .
Facilities clean, with adequate lighting, ventilation and
reasonably free from, dust and drafts
61. Laboratory Safety
Proper receptacles for contaminated glassware and pipettes,
EPA-103 (Cin)
(Rev. 3-71) 12
-------
141
Laboratory Colorado
Health Water Lab.
of Pulilto
Location 42*,. E. llth Aw. Date
Denver, Colo. 80220 10/19/71
61. Laboratory Safety (Continued)
Adequately functioning autoclaves with periodic inspection
and maintenance
Accessible facilities for hand washing
Proper maintenance of electrical equipment to prevent fire
and electrical shock
Convenient gas and electric outlets.
First aid supplies available and not out-dated ,
62. Remarks
EPA-103 (Gin)
(Rev. 3-71)
13
-------
APPENDIX I
INCIDENCE OF WATER BORNE DISEASES
-------
142
APPENDIX I
Incidence of Potential Water-borne Diseases in Colorado
Ameblasis Hepatitis Saltnonellosls Shlgellosls Typhoid
1963
Colo, cases
U.S. cases
% in Colo.
1964
Colo, cases
U.S. cases
% in Colo.
1965
Colo, cases
U.S. cases
% in Colo.
1966
CoTo". cases
U.S. cases
% in Colo.
1967
Colo, cases
U.S. cases
% in Colo.
1968
Col o . cases
U.S. cases
% in Colo.
1969
Colo, cases
U.S. cases
% in Colo.
1970
Colo, cases
U.S. cases
% in Colo.
1971
Colo, cases
U.S. cases
% 1n Colo.
1972
Colo, cases
U.S. cases
% 1n Colo.
TOTAL
Colo, cases
U.S. cases
% 1n Colo.
5
?886
0.2%
10
3304
0.3%
11
2768
0.43!
6
2921
0.2*
6
3157
0.2%
6
3005
0.2%
6
2915
0.2%
5
2888
0.2%
16
2752
0.6%
10
2199
0.5%
81
28,795
0.3%
573
42,974
1.3%
622
37,740
1.6%
403
33,856
1.2%
318
32,859
1.0%
328
38,909
0.8%
773
45,893
1.7%
724
48,416
1.5%
1,017
56,797
1.8%
842
59,606
1.4%
754
54,074
1.4%
6,354
451 ,124
1 ;4%
357
15,390
2.3%
330
17,144
1.9%
218
17,161
1.3%
376
16,841
2.2%
296
18,120
1.6%
197
16,514
1,2%
225
18,419
1.2%
305
22,096
1.4%
291
21 ,928
1.3%
281
22,151
1.3%
2,876
185,764
1.6%
300
13,009
2.3%
476
12,984
3.7%
259
11,027
2.4%
354
11,888
3.0%
408
13,474
3.0%
415
12,180
3.4 %
175
11,946
1.5%
100
13,845
0.7%
156
16,143
1.0%
300
20,207
1.5%
2,943
136,703
2.2%
7
566
1.2%
4
501
0.8%
1
454
0.2%
3
378
0.8%
13
396
3.3%
7
395
1.8%
3
364
0.8%
3
346
0.9%
3
407
0.7%
2
398
0.5%
46
4,205
1.1%
-------
A P.P.E.N.D I X. i
£iHHAT£D RE.IOURC; E.S
CHEMICAL L A B 0 R A T 0 R Y S U P P 0 R T
-------
143
APPENDIX J
Estimated Resources
Chemical Laboratory Support
I. Frequency of Analysis
Frequency of
Supply Number Analysis Number/Year
Community (A, B, C, & D)
Surface water sources 152 Every year 152
Ground water sources 552 Every 3 years 184
Small public and those
serving traveling
public (E) 900 Every 5 years 180
TOTAL 516
II. Manpower to Analyze for Constituents in Drinking Water Standards.
(Based on EPA Experience)
Chemical Man Days/Sample
Analysis Surface Water Source Ground Water Source
Wet Chemistry 0.65 0.65
Trace Elements 0.65 0.65
Carbon Chloroform Extract
(Organics) 1.00
Radiochemical 1.20 1.20
Pesticides (chlorinated
hydrocarbons and herbicides) 2.00
TOTAL 5.50 2.50
-------
144
III. Annual Manpower Required and Costs
Community Water Supplies
Surface Water Sources - 152 samples x 5.50 man-days = 836 man-days
year sample
Ground Water Sources - 184 samples x 2.50 man-days = 460 man-days
year sample
Small Public Water Supplies and Supplies Serving the Traveling Public
180 samples x 2.50 man-days* = 450 man-days
year sample
TOTAL = 1,746 man-days/year
1,746 man-days/year = 7.9 or approximately 8 man-years
220 man-days/man-year
8 man-years x $21,600/man-year = $172,800 annual costs (including 20%
administrative costs)
*Assumes that these are all ground water supplies
IV. Approximate Costs Per Sample
Surface Water Sources
(5.50 man-days) x ($21,600/man-year) = $540/sample
220 man-days/man-year
Ground Water Sources
(2.50 man-davs) x ($21,600/man-year) = $245/sample
220 man-days/man-year
Trace Elements Only
(0.65 man-davs) x ($21,600/man-year) • $64/sample
220 man-days/man-year
------- |