MONTHLY HOTLINE REPORT
Safe Drinking Water Hotline
AUGUST 1993
CONTENTS
Index To Hot Topic Questions and Answers ............................. 2
Hotline Activities ................................................. 6
Federal Register Notices .......................................... 10
Hot Topics [[[ 13
Specific Water Systems/Enforcement ................................. 30
Regulations Update ...................................... Attachment A
-------
INDEX TO HOT TOPICS QUESTIONS AND ANSWERS
TITLE QUESTION Page No.
ADDITIVES
Fluoride: What are the requirements for adding
fluoride to drinking water? 13
Registration: Where can I register my new chemical
product with EPA? 14
BOTTLED WATER
Flooding: I'm in a flood area. Should I buy bottled
water? 14
DEFINITIONS
Human Consumption: What is the meaning of "human consumption"? .... 15
E.COLJ
Private Wells: We had our wells tested and it came back
positive for E. coli. What should we do
now? 16
HEALTH ADVISORY TABLE
MCLGs: How do I interpret the health advisory
tables? 16
LABAT-ANDERSON Incorporated
-------
HOME WATER
TREATMENT UNITS
Registration: How can I register my filtration units
with EPA? 17
LABORATORY CERTIFICATION
National
Program: Does EPA have a national program
for certifying laboratories for
drinking water testing? 18
LEAD AND COPPen
Monitoring: What is the method to calculate the 90th percentile
for 11 sample sites for small systems? 18
Monitoring: Are we required to conduct monitoring since
we are a consecutive water system? 19
Reporting
Requirements: Am I required to report the results
of all the tap water samples to the State
or just the 90th percentile? 20
Pri»«ie Property: Are we required to notify our employees
that we exceeded the lead action level? 20
Water Quality
Parameters: What are the water quality parameter (WQP)
requirements for medium systems after
installation of corrosion control? 21
PHASE II & V
Analytical
Methods: What are the test methods for cyanide? 22
LABAT-ANDERSON Incorporated
-------
Chrysene & Benz[a]
anthracene:
Monitoring:
SOC Sampling:
What are the Maximum Contaminant
Levels (MCLs) for Chrysene and
Benz[a]anthracene (BaA)?
I need to know if the Maximum Contaminant
Level (MCL; ia an annual average based
on some sampling frequency?
Where are the regulations which delineate
sampling requirements for Synthetic
Organic Chemicals (SOCs)?
23
23
24
Waiver Criteria:
I heard that if my well is deep enough,
: dont have to monitor for organic
chemicals; is that true?
24
RADON
Testing:
Our radon level for air was 1.7 pCi/l;
should we test our water for radon?
25
RADIONUCLIDES
Polonium-210:
Is Polonium-210 regulated under the
Safe Drinking Water Act?
26
SECONDARY DRINKING
WATER REGULATIONS
Iron Bacteria:
What are iron bacteria? 26
LABAT-ANDERSON Incorporated
-------
STATE
CERTIFICATION
Monitoring: Where in the Code of Federal
Regulations (CFR) does it state
that the analysis of a compound
has to be conducted by a State
certified laboratory? 27
TESTING
Pesticides: How do I get my water tested? 28
TOTAL TRIHALOMETHANES (TTHMs)
Applicability: What is the current TTHM standard
for non-transient, non-community
water systems? 28
WELLS
Testing: What should I test my household
well for? 29
LABAT-ANDERSON Incorporated
-------
Hotline Activities
SAFE DRINKING WATER HOTLINE
MONTHLY REPORT -- AUGUST 1993
I. ACTIVITIES
• The Hotline answered approximately 3,611 calls during August. This is an
average of 164 calls per day.
• There were 1,627 document requests during August.
• The largest number of questions concerned lead. The majority of referrals
went to State agencies.
• The average waiting time in the queue was less than 40 seconds. The total
number of incoming calls to the Hotline during August was 5,026. The
cifference between this number and the number of calls answered by the
Hotline, approximately 1,415 calls, represents calls made outside of the
Hotline's hours of operation, i.e., before 9 a.m., after 5:30 p.m., and on
weekends and Federal holidays. Approximately 480 callers hung up, most
in 40 seconds or less.
• The Hotline is preparing a series of primers using a question and answer
format. The Hotline delivered a proposed set of questions for the laboratory
certification primer to Beth Hall, Project Officer, and Pat Minami, Task
Manager, on August 6, 1993. On August 26, 1993, the Hotline learned that
a third primer will address Treatment Technologies. The Hotline organized
reference materials and developed an outline of questions and answers for
this primer. Bill Rusin, Hotline Manager, and Mary Beth Weaver, Senior
Information Specialist, met with Steve Clark, DWSD, to discuss the content
LABAT-ANDERSON Incorporated
-------
of the treatment technologies primer. The Hotline received comments on
the standard setting and laboratory certification primers during the week
beginning August 30, 1993.
• Mike Cross, Senior Information Specialist, is developing an automated
document order data entry screen using FoxPro which will be used by the
Hotline Information Specialists to take document requests. This system will
enable callers to receive documents more quickly through the Office of
Water Resource Center and the National Center for Environmental
Publications and Information. The Hotline plans to begin using the new
system by October 1,1993.
• The Hotline prepared a compendium of significant questions and answers
addressed in Hotline Monthly Reports from January through June 1993. A
draft compendium was delivered to Beth Hall, Project Officer, on August 13,
1993.
• The hotline developed an outline describing the proposed contents and
method (s) of presentation for the Annual Statistical Report of Hotline
Activities that will include a summary of statistical and other information
summarizing Hotline activity for Fiscal Year 1993.
• The Hotline developed a FoxPro database indexing questions and answers
from Hotline Weekly Reports from Fiscal Year 1993. The database allows
each Information Specialist to search questions and answers using general
keyword (e.g., lead and copper, BAT, MCL, etc.).
• A FoxPro database of holdings in the Hotline library is being developed.
The database will allow a user to search for holdings under general
categories similar to those described above for the Weekly Report question-
and-answer database.
• Forrest Meader, Information Specialist, is preparing an index to questions
and answers presented in Hotline Monthly Reports from Fiscal Year 1993.
The Index will be completed by September 24,1993.
• To prepare for a potential CBS Morning News broadcast, Beth Hall, Project
Officer, instructed the Hotline to contact each State laboratory certification
office to request a list of laboratories certified to test lead in drinking water
samples. It was learned that CBS Morning News was planning to air a
piece on lead in drinking water during which they would advertise the EPA's
Saf Drinking Water Hotline as a contact for obtaining a list of laboratories
for each State. The broadcast was scheduled for August 19 or 20, 1993.
Based on our previous experiences with nationwide broadcasts, the Hotline
LABAT-ANDERSON Incorporated 7
-------
anticipated a heavy call load in response to the planned broadcast by CBS.
Rather than referring Hotline callers to States for the lists, we planned to
make arrangements with EPA's Office of Water Resource Center to send
the lists to callers. Calls to all 50 States were made on August 20, 1993.
Although CBS did not broadcast the piece, the Hotline has a complete and
current set of State lists.
On August 5, 1993, Judy Lebowich, EPID, briefed the Hotline on the public
notification requirements of EPA's drinking water program.
On August 5, 12, 17, and 26, 1993, staff from OGWDW and LABAT-
ANDERSON, Inc., met for the scheduled weekly meetings.
On August 17, 1993, Information Specialist, Greg Bindner, attended a
meeting of the Science Advisory Board's Drinking Water Committee. The
Committee • eviewed the status of the Disinfectants/Disinfection By-Products
Rule, the Information Collection Rule and the Enhanced Surface Water
Treatment Rule which are expected to be proposed as Phase Via in
December 1993. The results of the National Research Council's study on
fluoride were also announced at the meeting.
On August 26,1993, Jan Auerbach and Heather Shank-Givens, DWSD, met
with Bill Rusin, Hotline Manger, and provided an update on regulatory
developments in DWSD.
On August 26,1993, Tim Gill, DWSD, briefed the Hotline on the status of the
upcoming final rule regulating radionuclides in drinking water.
CORRECTIONS/DISCREPANCIES
[The information that is presented in the Hotline monthly reports is carefully reviewed for accuracy
and completeness. When an error, ambiguity, or other concern is subsequently identified, an
appropriate correction or explanation will be provided below. Revised information will be highlighted
in bold type.]
There are no corrections or discrepancies to report this month.
8 LABAT-ANDERSON Incorporated
-------
1 — •
— -g-j
• »
i — -
New Publications
II. PUBLICATIONS - August 1993
A Drinking Water State Revolving Fund: Ensuring Safe Drinking Water for America,
is being distributed by the Office of Water Resource Center and is available by
contacting the Safe Drinking Water Hotline at 1-800-426-4791.
This is a brief look at how State revolving funds can assist in complying with the
Safe Drinking Water Act.
Private Wells - Guidance for What to do after the Flood, is being distributed by the
Office of Water Resource Center and is available by contacting the Safe Drinking
Water Hotline at 1-800-426-4791.
1 ,IL, rour-page document is intended to supplement flood precautions issued by
State and local health departments and environmental departments.
LABAT-ANDERSON Incorporated
-------
Federal Registers
III. FEDERAL REGISTER NOTICES
August 3, 1993
(Final Rule;
Analytical techniques;
Trihalomethanes)
58 FR 41344
August 4, 199?
(Notice of Primacy
Program approval
for Washington)
58 FR 41471
Finaf rule approving two additional methods in 40 CFR
141.30 for monitoring total trihalomethanes. These are
methods 502.2 and 524.2 already approved for
monitoring of VOCs. This rule is considered issued at
1 p.m. Eastern Time on August 14, 1993. It is effective
and the methods may be used on September 2, 1993.
Notice that the State of Washington has revised its
approved State Public Water Supply Supervision
(PWSS) Primacy Program by adopting drinking water
regulations for total coliforms and the treatment of
surface water.
10
LABAT-ANDERSON Incorporated
-------
Augusts, 1993
(Notice of Primacy
Program approval
for Oregon)
58 FR 42320
August 10, 1993
(Notice of Primacy
Program approval
for New Jersey)
58 FR 42543
August 10, 1993
(Notice of proposed
rule, injection
wells in Michigan)
58 FR 42543
August 23, 1993
(Lodging of Consent
Decree Pursuant to
thfi SDWA)
58 Fn 44527
Notice that the State of Oregon has revised its State
PWSS Primacy Program by adopting drinking water
regulations for lead and copper.
Notice that the State of New Jersey is revising its
approved PWSS Primacy Program by adopting drinking
water regulations for the Surface Water Treatment Rule.
EPA is proposing pressure gradients for calculating the
maximum allowable liquid injection pressure for rule-
authorized Class II enhanced recovery injection wells
in six Michigan fields.
Notice that a proposed consent decree in United States
v. Residual Technologies, Inc., was lodged on August
4, 1993 with the United States District Court for the
Northern District of Oklahoma. The consent decree
settles alleged violations of the Underground Injection
Control regulations promulgated under the SDWA
resulting from injection into a hazardous waste disposal
well in Tulsa, Oklahoma.
LABAT-ANDERSON Incorporated
11
-------
August 30, 1993
(Notice of Primacy
Program approval
for Nevada)
58 FR 45491 Notice that the State of Nevada has revised its
approvrH State PWSS Program by adopting drinking
water regulations for total coliforms.
August 30, 1993
(Notice of Primacy
Program approval
for Hawaii)
58 FR 45491 Notice that the State of Hawaii has revised its approved
State PWSS Program by adopting drinking water
regulations for filtration and disinfection of surface
water.
August 31, 1993
(Notice of Primacy
Program approval
for North Carolina)
58 FR 45888 Notice that the State of North Carolina has revised its
approved State PWSS Primacy Program by adopting
drinking water regulations for Phase V.
12 LABAT-ANDERSON Incorporated
-------
Hot Tonics/Special Issues
IV. HOT TOPICS AND SPECIFIC WATER SYSTEMS/ENFORCEMENT ISSUES
Each week the Hotline submits a weekly status report to the EPA Office of Ground Water and
Drinking Water, Enforcement and Program Implementation Division These weekly reports present
Hot Topics and Specific Water System/Enforcement Issues identified from calls taken during daily
Hotline operations. Highlights from August 1993 weekly reports are as follows
ADDITIVES
Fluoride:
What are the requirements for adding fluoride to drinking
water?
• There are no requirements under the Safe Drinking
Water Act for adding fluoride to drinking water. The
drinking water additives program is handled by the
National Sanitation Foundation which may be
contacted at 313-769-8010.
• According to 40 CFR 143.5, fluoride in children's
drinking water at levels of approximately 1 mg/l
reduces the number of dental cavities. However,
addition of fluoride is not a regulatory requirement
applicable to Public Water Systems.
• The regulations do specify a Secondary Maximum
Contaminant Level (SMCL) of 2.0 mg/l and a Maximum
Contaminant Level (MCL) of 4.0 mg/l.
LABAT-ANDERSON Incorporated
13
-------
Registration:
• States may have requirements that apply to fluoride
that are stricter than the Federal requirements. The
caller was provided the name and telephone number of
the appropriate State Public Water Supply Supervision
contact to learn about State requirements that apply to
fluoride in dnnking water.
Where can I register my new chemical product with EPA?
A caller from Colorado inquired about EPA certification
information for new chemical products. The product,
consisting primarily of sulfuric acid and copper, is to be used
for purification of water and possibly to inhibit bacterial
growth.
• EPA does not have an additives program any more.
The National Sanitation Foundation may b* contacted
at (313)769-8010 if this chemical is to be used as a
drinking water additive.
• The Toxic Substance Control Act Hotline (202-554-
1404) may be contacted for additional information
about registering chemical products.
BOTTLED WATER
Flooding:
I'm in a flood area. Should I buy bottled water?
A caller from Kansas, reported problems with her drinking
water that she believed were caused by flooding. Flooding
had occurred in her area and water had come up near the
water treatment plant; however, she had not been put on a
boil notice and there has been no other public notification
about water problems. Her family, however, experienced
stomach and intestinal distress and were contemplating
switching to bottled water for drinking.
• The caller was referred to her local public water system
to report her family's problems and see if there are any
reports on contamination. She could also contact her
local public health department for information and to
report her situation.
14
LABAT-ANDERSON Incorporated
-------
The caller's name and telephone number were taken
and a memorandum reporting the call was written and
copies were given to Beth Hall, Project Officer, and
Sandy Germann of the Office of Water in keeping with
Hotline procedures for handling telephone calls related
to the Midwest flood.
The Information Specialist offered to take an order for
the caller to receive a copy of Protecting Our Drinking
Water from Microbes (EPA 570/9-89-008), Bottled
Water (EPA 570/9-90-GGG), and afactsheet on bottled
water prepared by EPA. The caller was referred to the
Food and Drug Administration (301-443-4166) for
answers to questions related to bottled water.
DEFINITIONS
Human Consumption: What is the meaning of "human consumption"?
A caller from New York wanted information on EPA's definition
of "human consumption" as it applies to the Safe Drinking
Water Act. He had researched this same question a few
years ago and knew there was a court decision where human
consumption included water used for showering because of
the inhalation of water vapors.
• The L/.S. EPA National Safe Drinking Water Hotline:
Compendium of Responses to Policy Inquiries, in
section III-5, discusses U.S. v. Midway Heights settled
in U.S. District Court on February 26, 1988 by claiming
"human consumption includes drinking, bathing,
showering, cooking, dishwashing, and maintaining oral
hygiene". The response continues, "If an individual
uses the water provided for bathing ... [he] would be
exposed to contaminants in the water through
inhalation."
• The proper citation for U.S. v. Midway Heights is 695
F. SUPP. 1072, Eastern District of California, 1988.
LABAT-ANDERSON Incorporated 15
-------
E. COL/
Private Wells: We had our wells tested and it came back positive for E.
co//. What should we do now?
A private citizen from Illinois called because E. co//' were
detected in a sample of water taken from his private well. He
wanted to know if it was safe to use the water for cleaning the
dishes.
• It would be safe to wash the dishes in the water (even
if it had not been boiled) so long as the plates were
dried completely immediately after washing. This is
because E. co// bacteria and bacterial pathogens prefer
warm moist surfaces.
• Boiling the water for about one minute (except perhaps
at very high altitudes) will kill the pathogens that may
be associated with fecal contamination, as indicated by
the presence of E. co//' bacteria.
• The health effects of E. co// found at 40 CFR
141.32(e)(12).
• The local health department may provide additional
information on well disinfection.
• An order was taken for the caller to receive a copy of
Citizen Monitoring: Recommendations to Household
Well Users (EPA 570/9-90-006), Drinking Water from
Household Wells (EPA 570/9-90-013^ ",'otecting Our
Drinking Water From Microbes (EPA 570/9-89-008),
and Home Water Treatment Units (EPA 570/9-90-HHH).
HEALTH ADVISORY TABLE
MCLGs: How do I interpret the health advisory tables?
A caller from Texas A & M University wanted help in
understanding the health advisory tables contained in Drinking
Water Regulations and Health Advisories. He wanted to know
how the Maximum Contaminant Level Goal (MCLG) relates to
the amount of water that one consumes.
16 LABAT-ANDERSON Incorporated
-------
In developing MCLGs, EPA calculations assume that
an individual consumes two liters of water per day.
The Federal Register at 56 FR 3532 states: "From the
RfD, a drinking water equivalc.it level (DWEL) is
calculated by multiplying the RfD by the assumed adult
body v. -'ght (generally 70 kr) 3nd then dividing by an
average daily water consumption or 2 L per day."
HOME WATER
TREATMENT UNITS
Registration: How can I register my filtration units with EPA?
A caller from Georgia asked how to register his home water
treatment units.
• EPA neither regulates nor endorses specific brands of
home water treatment units; however, EPA regulates
certain chemicals used in these units. For example, if
a manufacturer impregnates a filter with silver which is
intended to inhibit the growth of bacteria that
accumulate within the filter, then the silver is
considered a pesticide under the Federal Insecticide
Fungicide and Rodenticide Act (FIFRA).
• EPA's pesticide registration office may be contacted at
(703)305-7700 for additional information on the
registration requirements.
• The caller was sent a copy of Home Water Treatment
Units: Filtering Fact From Fiction (EPA 570/9-90-HHH).
• Additional information on home water treatment units
is available by contacting the National Sanitation
Foundation (NSF) at (313)769-8010.
LABAT-ANDERSON Incorporated 17
-------
LABORATORY CERTIFICATION
National
Program: Does EPA have a national program for certifying
laboratories for drinking water testing?
• Yes; EPA's Office of Ground Water and Drinking Water
is responsible for developing and implementing the
national certification program for laboratories that
analyze drinking water samples.
• The ten EPA Regions oversee progress of the
certification programs in the States.
• The regulations at 40 CFR 142.10(b)(4) require a State
that has primary enforcement responsibility, i.e.,
primacy, to have laboratory facilities avai'?ble which
have been certified by EPA.
• An order was taken for the caller to receive a copy of
Manual for the Certification of Laboratories Analyzing
Drinking Water (EPA 570/9-90-008) and the changes
to this manual (EPA 570/9-90-008A and EPA 812/K-92-
001).
LEAD AND COPPER
Monitoring: A representative of a small Public Water System (PWS) in
Connecticut wanted to know the method to calculate the
90th percentile for 11 sample sites?
• Title 40 CFR 141.86(c) states that the minimum number
of sampling sites for a PWS that serves less than 100
individuals is 5 samples, the minimum number of
sampling sites for a PWS serving 101 to 500 individuals
is 10 samples, and the minimum number of sampling
sites for a PWS serving 501 to 3,300 individuals is 20
samples. It was unclear why this PWS had taken 11
samples; however, since it took 11 samples, the results
from all 11 samples needed to be reported and used
to calculate the 90th percentile to determine whether
the action level had been exceeded.
18 LABAT-ANDERSON Incorporated
-------
Title 40 CFR 141.86(e) states: "The results of any
monitoring conducted in addition to the minimum
requirements of this section shall be considered by the
system and the State in making any determinations
(i.e., calculating the 90th percentile lead or copper
level) under this subpart."
The State Public Water Supply Supervision contact in
Connecticut may provide additional guidance in
determining the 90th percentile.
Monitoring: Are we required to conduct monitoring since we are a
consecutive water system?
A representative from a non-transient non-community water
system in Arizona wanted to know if they would be required
to monitor for lead. The caller mentioned that they are a
consecutive system which receives its source water from
another public water system.
• Title 40 CFR 141.29 states that "When a public water
system supplies water to one or more other public
systems, the State may modify the monitoring
requirements imposed by this part to the extent that
the interconnection of the systems justifies treating
them as a single system for monitoring purposes. Any
modified monitoring shall be conducted pursuant to a
schedule specified by the State and concurred in by
the Administrator of the U.S. Environmental Protection
Agency."
• The caller was referred to the Arizona Public Water
Supply Supervision contact for additional information
on the monitoring requirements for consecutive
systems.
• In addition, because Arizona does not have primacy for
enforcement of the Lead and Copper Rule (56 FR
26460 dated June 7, 1991), it was suggested that the
caller contact the Public Water Supply Section in EPA
Region IX at (415)744-1851 for additional guidance.
LABAT-ANDERSON Incorporated 19
-------
Reporting
Requirements: Am I required to report the results of all the tap water
samples to the State or just the 90th percentile?
• Public Water Systems must report the results of all tap
water "aiples, including the 90th percentile sample
result, to the State within 10 days following the
completion of the monitoring period (Lead and Copper
Rule Guidance Manual Volume I: Monitoring,
September 1991).
• Title 40 CFR 141.90(a)(1)(i) states water systems must
report The results of all tap samples for lead and
copper including the location of each site and the
criteria under §141.86 (a)(3), (4), (5), (6), and/or (7)
under whicn the site was selected for the system's
sampling pool;"...
• Title 40 CFR 141.90 (a) (1) (iv) states that water systems
must report "The 90th percentile lead and copper
concentrations measured from among all lead and
copper tap water samples collected during each
monitoring period (calculated in accordance with
§141.80(c)(3))."... This means that in addition to
reporting all lead monitoring results, Public Water
Systems must designate the 90th percentile result.
Private Property: Are we required to notify our employees that we
exceeded the lead action level?
A consultant wanted to know if his client (the . .»ner of a small
business) is responsible for informing his employees that the
business exceeds the action level for lead. The business
does not supply or treat its own water.
• The business does not appear to meet EPA's definition
of public water system, and therefore does not appear
to be subject to the Federal drinking water regulations.
It was suggested that the consultant call or write his
State Public Water Supply Supervision contact since it
is ultimately the State's responsibility to make decisions
regarding public water systems.
20 LABAT-ANDERSON Incorporated
-------
Since the business does not appear subject to the
Federal drinking water regulations, it would not be
subject to the public education requirements of 40 CFR
141.85 which are triggered when the lead action level
is exceeded. The business would not be required to
notify it* employees that it e'"^eded the action level.
Elevated lead levels in the human body can cause
serious damage to the brain, kidneys, nervous system,
and red blood cells. The greatest risks of short-term
exposure are to young child and pregnant women.
Actions that may be taken to reduce lead in drinking
water include flushing pipes before drinking, using cold
water for consumption, installing point-of-entry or point-
of-use devices, and drinking bottled water.
The caller was sent Lead In Your inking Water
(EPA/810-F-93-001 dated June 1993).
Water Quality
Parameters: What are the water quality parameter (WQP) requirements
for medium systems after installation of corrosion
control?
A consultant in Ohio wanted to know what the WQP
requirements were for medium systems after installation of
corrosion control.
• A medium system must compi; with 40 CFR
141.86(dH2)(ii) which states that "Any small or medium-
size system which installs optimal corrosion control
treatment pursuant to §141.81(c)(5) shall monitor
during two consecutive six-month periods by the date
specified in §141.81(e)(6)." Title 40 CFR 141.87(c)
states that "Any small or medium-size system which
installs optimal corrosion control treatment shall
conduct such monitoring during each six-month
monitoring period specified in §141.86(d)(2)(ii) in which
the system exceeds the action level for lead and
copper." Title 40 CFR 141.87(c) states that the system
must take two samples at taps ever; six months and
one sample at every entry point to the distribution
system every two weeks.
LABAT-ANDERSON Incorporated 21
-------
The characteristics for the WQPs are listed in 40 CFR
141.87(c)(1) and (2), and include pH, alkalinity,
calcium, conductivity, orthophosphate, silica, and water
temperature.
State specified WQPs are to be monitored according to
40 CFR 141.87(d). The State Public Water Supply
Supervision should be contacted for information
regarding those requirements.
PHASE II & V
Analytical
Methods: What are the test methods for cyanide?
A caller from Alabama called to get information regarding the
proper test method for cyanide?
• A table at 57 FR 31839 in the Phase V Final Rule
contained in the July 17, 1992 Federal Register, lists
the analytical methods for cyanide.
• The Phase V Final Rule preamble (57 FR 31800) states:
"EPA concurred with commenters that it was
appropriate to include methods that determined
cyanide amenable to chlorination, or "free" cyanide.
For this reason NOA [the November 29, 1991 notice of
availability] proposed to add a methodology for
amenable cyanide to the list of approved methods.
The "total" cyanide methods are listed as well because
they are adequate to screen samples for cyanide. If
the total cyanide levels are greater than the MCL, then
analysis for "free" cyanide should be performed to
determine whether there is an MCL exceedance."
22 LABAT-ANDERSON Incorporated
-------
Chrysene & Benz[a]
anthracene:
What are the Maximum Contaminant Levels (MCLs) for
Chrysene and Benz[a]anthracene (BaA)?
A caller from Pennsylvania wanted to know the MCLs for
Chrysene and BaA?
• EPA has not established MCLs for Chrysene and BaA;
however, EPA proposed MCLs of 0.0002 mg/l and
0.0001 mg/l in the July 25,1990 Federal Register at 55
FR 30409.
• The preamble of the Phase V Final Rule (57 FR 31788
dated July 17, 1992) states "In the July 1990 notice
[the Phase V Proposed Rule dated July 25,1990], EPA
discussed the available information on the health
effects, occurrence and human exposure for 15
Polynuclear Aromatic Hydrocarbons (PAHs) [55 FR
30396]. Of the 15 PAHs, seven were presented in
greater detail because of their carcinogenic potential
(all classified as Group B2, probable human
carcinogen), and were proposed for regulatory
consideration." Chrysene and Benz[a]anthracene
(BaA) were included on this list but were never
finalized.
• In the future, EPA may regulate Chrysene and BaA
using a comparative cancer potency approach; the
individual potencies would be compared to that of
benzo[a]pyrene. Such regulation may be proposed at
a future date when EPA has establisned a policy for
how such a comparative approach would be
conducted (57 FR 31788).
Monitoring:
I need to know if the Maximum Contaminant Level (MCL)
is an annual average based on some sampling
frequency?
A caller from the U.S. Department of Agriculture in Kansas
wanted to know if systems can calculate and report an
average MCL for samples taken at each sampling point under
the monitoring requirements presented in the Phase II Final
Rule (56 FR 3526 dated January 30, 1991).
LABAT-ANDERSON Incorporated
23
-------
Title 40 CFR 141.24(f)(15)(i) states: "For systems which
are conducting monitoring at a frequency greater than
annual, compliance is determined by a running annual
average of all samples taken at each sampling point.
If the annual average of any sampling point is greater
than th« MCL then the system is out of compliance.
If the initial sample or a subsequent sample would
cause the annual average to be exceeded, then the
system is out of compliance immediately. Any samples
below the detection limit shall be calculated as zero for
purposes of determining the annual average."
SOC Sampling:
Where are the regulations which delineate sampling
requirements for Synthetic Organic Chemicals (SOCs)?
An owner of a small public water system wanted to know
where in the regulations he could find the regulations for SOC
sampling. He also wanted to obtain general information about
the regulations.
• Title 40 CFR 141.24 explains monitoring and analytical
requirements for SOCs.
• These requirements are explained in the Phase II
Federal Register dated January 30,1991 (56 FR 3526),
the Phase V Federal Register dated July 17, 1992 (57
FR 31776), and the Standard Monitoring Framework
(570-9-91-045, dated February 1991).
• The American Water Works Ass nation's Small
Systems Hotline at 1-800-366-0107 may be contacted
for additional assistance.
Waiver Criteria:
I heard that if my well is deep enough, I don't have to
monitor for organic chemicals; is that true?
An operator of a Community Water System in Georgia with a
ground water source said that he had heard he could be
exempt from monitoring for organic chemicals since he had
a deep well. He was calling to confirm this.
24
LABAT-ANDERSON Incorporated
-------
If previous use of an organic contaminant is unknown
or if a contaminant has been used previously,
evaluating well depth is a criterion the State uses to
assess the Public Water System's application for a
waiver.
Well depth is considered by the State when granting a
waiver under 40 CFR 141.24(f)(8)(ii)(E) which states
that a State must consider "How well the water source
is protected against contamination, such as whether it
is a surface or groundwater system. Groundwater
systems must consider factors such as depth of the
well, the type of soil, and wellhead protection."
Public Water Systems must apply to the State for a
waiver from monitoring and must m«et all the criteria
under 40 CFR 141.24 (f)(8) to the s'i.sfaction of the
State in its application.
The State Public Water Supply Supervision office
should be contacted for details concerning how to
apply for a waiver.
RADON
Testing: Our radon level for air was 1.7 pCi/l; should we test our
water for radon?
A caller from Connecticut wanted to know if she should test
her water for radon since the air in her home was tested and
radon was detected. The caller's drinking water is supplied
by a private ground water well.
• EPA's Radionuclides in Drinking Water Factsheet dated
June 1991 presents an action guideline for radon in the
air as 4 pCi/l. It states that "After testing the air for
radon and finding levels above EPA's current action
guideline of 4 pCi/l, homeowners with private wells
should consult with their State drinking water office to
obtain information on laboratories to test for radon in
water, and test the water. After testing, homeowners
should select the mitigation strategy that is most cost-
LABAT-ANDERSON Incorporated 25
-------
effective for reducing radon exposure for the individual
home."
The State Laboratory Certification Office in Connecticut
may be contacted to obtain a list of laboratories
certified to test radon in drinking water samples.
Additional information regarding radon in air is available
from the EPA Radon Information Hotline at 1-800-SOS-
RADON or a State radon office.
RADIONUCLIDES
Polonium-210: Is Polonium-210 regulated under the Safe Drinking Water
Act?
An environmental consultant from Colorado wanted to know
the drinking water regulations and health effects for Polonium-
210?
• Polonium-210 is neither regulated under the Safe
Drinking Water Act nor is proposed to be regulated.
• The Radionuclides Proposed Rule contained in the July
18, 1991, Federal Register (56 FR 33079) states:
"Polonium-210 is in the uranium-238 decay series, and
is the daughter of lead-210, the first long-lived daughter
of radon 222.... Effects in exposed humans including
hematologic changes, impairment of the liver, kidney
and reproductive organs, were reported ...". It also
states that" The model [the RADRISK model used in
assessing polonium risk] estimates that Polonium at 14
pCi/l in water (assuming 2 liters daily intake) would
pose an approximate lifetime cancer risk of 1 x 10"4
[EPA, 1991 a]."
SECONDARY DRINKING
WATER REGULATIONS
Iron Bacteria: What are iron bacteria?
A caller from New Hampshire wanted to know what iron
bacteria are and how they can be removed.
26 LABAT-ANDERSON Incorporated
-------
• Iron bacteria are bacteria that get energy from the
oxidation of iron when dissolved iron and oxygen are
present in the water.
• EPA's Manual of Individual and Non-Public Water
Supply Systems (EPA 570/9-91-004), states: "Under
certain conditions, the removal of iron compounds from
a water supply may be more difficult due to the
presence of iron bacteria. When dissolved iron and
oxygen are present in the water, these bacteria get
energy from the oxidation of the iron. These bacteria
may give an unpleasant taste and odor to the water,
discolor and spot fabrics and plumbing fixtures, and
clog pumps. Iron-removal filters or water softeners can
remove iron-bacteria: however they often become
clogged by the slime."
• Information on home water treatment units is available
by contacting the National Sanitation Foundation (313-
769-8010) and the Water Quality Association (708-505-
0160).
STATE
CERTIFICATION
Monitoring: Where in the Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) does it
state that the analysis of a compound has to be
conducted by a State certified laboratory?
A consultant from Georgia asked where in the CFR does it
state that analysis must be conducted by a State certified
laboratory.
• Title 40 CFR 141.28 states that, "For the purpose of
determining compliance with 141.21 through 141.27,
141.41, and 141.42 samples may be considered only
if they have been analyzed by a laboratory approved
by the State except that measurements for turbidity,
free chlorine residual, temperature, and pH may be
performed by any person acceptable to the State".
LABAT-ANDERSON Incorporated 27
-------
TESTING
Pesticides: How do I get my water tested?
A citizen from Florida called with a concern about pesticides
in his drinkn iy water. He had his home treated for termites
and the pest control company drilled into a water pipe and
injected pesticide into his water system. The caller is on a
public water system. The caller had health concerns and also
wanted information on correcting the situation.
• The following should be contacted: (1) the local public
health department and public water system to inform
them of the incident and for information on how long to
flush pipes to make the water safe for drinking, (2) the
National Pesticide Telecommunications rNetwork (800-
858-PEST) for health effects information, and (3) his
State Laboratory Certification Office for a list of certified
laboratories that could analyze water samples for the
specific pesticide used.
TOTAL TRIHALOMETHANES (TTHMs)
Applicability: What is the current TTHM standard for non-transient, non-
community water systems?
The Hotline received the above call from a consultant.
• The TTHM standard, or Maximum Contaminant Level
(MCL), cf 0.1 mg/l does not applv *c non-transient,
non-community water systems.
• Title 40 CFR 141.12 states "The maximum contaminant
level for total trihalomethanes ... applies only to
community water systems which serve a population of
10,000 or more individuals and which add a
disinfectant (oxidant) to the water in any part of the
drinking water treatment process."
• The TTHM standard is based upon the sum of the
concentrations of bromodichloromethane,
dibromochloromethane, tribromomethane, and
trichloromethane. The MCL for TTHMs is 0.10 mg/l
(40 CFR 141.12).
28 LABAT-ANDERSON Incorporated
-------
USE OF HOTLINE NUMBER
Publication: An engineer with the United States Bureau of
Reclamation requested permission to publish the Safe
Drinking Water Hotline telephone number in the
revised edition of The Ground Water Manual. The
revised manual should be r Wished sometime in the
next six months. He wanted to Know if the Hotline
could pro/ide information on MCLs and monitoring
requirements.
The caller was informed that it would be appropriate to
publish the Hotline number and that the Hotline could
provide information on drinking water MCLs and
monitoring requirements.
• Background information was sent including: The
Maximum Contaminant Level L& dPA 570/9-91-
012FS), The Phase VFact Steer (EPA 811/F-92-001),
The Safe Drinking Water Hotline Fact Sheet (EPA
812/FP-93-001) and selected ground water documents.
WELLS
Testing: What should I test my household well for?
A household well owner from North Carolina asked the above
question.
EPA's publication Citizen Monitoring:
Recommendations to Household Well Users (EPA
570/9-90-006) recommends testing the well annually
for nitrate and total coliform levels. The document also
recommends that the homeowner test for two
additional contaminants, radon and lead, at least once.
It was suggested that the caller contact her local health
department since it may test a household well for
nitrates and total coliforms.
A telephone number for the North Carolina Department
of Environment, Health, and Natural Resources was
provided to call for a list of State certified laboratories.
30 LABAT-ANDERSON Incorporated
-------
SPECIFIC WATER SYSTEMS/ENFORCEMENT ISSUES
Disinfection: Why does my water system not disinfect on a regular
basis?
A citizen from Louisiana complained about her local water
supplier. She stated that the water system will not disinfect
the water supply during particular times because the
disinfectant (chlorine) would be detrimental to the chickens
being raised. She stated that certain managers of the water
supplier also are involved in the chicken industry. She implied
that they were more concerned with the chickens' health
rather than the health of the citizens. She had been
monitoring chlorine levels in her tap water for two weeks
using a kit supplied by her local health department, and she
claimed that no chlorine had been added to the v.ater supply.
The caller then went on to say that the water has a greasy
feel to it and smells like sewage.
• Public water systems using surface water and ground
water under the influence of surface water (that is
determined to need disinfection) must maintain a
disinfectant residual of .2 mg/l at the distribution
system. The caller was unaware if her water source
was surface water, ground water under the influence of
surface water, or ground water not under the influence
of surface water. While she had monitored her water
for chlorine levels, there had been no notice of the
MCL for total coliform as having been violated.
• The caller's concerns were relayed to Mr. T. Jay Ray
of the Office of Public Health, Louisiana Department of
Health and Hospitals, and Mr. Craig Lutz, the EPA
Region 6 contact. Both said they were going to look
into the allegations made by the caller.
An order was taken for the caller to receive the
following documents: Is Your Drinking Water Safe?
(EPA 570/9-91 -005) and Protecting Our Drinking Water
from Microbes (EPA 570/9-89-008).
LABAT-ANDERSON Incorporated 31
-------
MISCELLANEOUS
[The Hotline routinely responds to calls on topics that are not within the scope of the
project. Examples of these types of calls are provided below to illustrate the variety of
contacts handled by the Hotline.]
Cars
Can you remove my car from my neighbor's farm? He
won't give it back!
A caller from Texas asked if we could get his car back from
his neighbor, who was keeping it on his farm.
• The Information Specialist told the caller that his
request was outside the jurisdiction of the Safe
Drinking Water Hotline.
• However, it was suggested that he might receive
assistance from the local police department.
Copper Roofs:
Will rainwater fill my eggplants with copper?
An architect from California called to find out if there were
regulations with respect to the use of copper roofing. This is
a style of roof that she uses quite often in her designs and a
client had raised the question of rainwater running off the roof
and carrying copper that would show up in vegetables in an
adjacent garden.
• The Information Specialist explained the scope of
services provided by the Safe Drinking Water Hotline
and suggested she call her local agricultural agent for
information on plant uptake of copper.
Dust mites:
There are dust mites crawling all over my body. How do
I get rid of them?
LABAT-ANDERSON Incorporated
31
-------
The caller was informed that this Hotline does not
answer questions on dust mites, but rather, on drinking
water regulations related to the Safe Drinking Water
Act.
The CG...V,. was referred to the Indoor Air Hotline at
(800)438-4318 because the Information Specialist knew
that the Indoor Air Hotline provides information on dust
mites.
The caller was also referred to the National Pesticide
Telecommunication Network (800-858-PEST) for
information on pesticides that could be used to
exterminate dust mites, and the caller was referred to
her local health department.
Local Water
Quality: Can you tell me which city has the best water in the
United States?
A citizen from South Carolina wanted information on the
location of the best tasting water in the U.S. so he could
move there. He said that even the food prepared using his
local area water tasted bad. He also commented that particle
radiation from satellites was making the water radioactive
resulting in hair loss.
• The caller was informed that the Safe Drinking Water
Hotline provides information relate^ to the Safe
Drinking Water Act and its regulations. The Hotline
does not have information on local water quality.
• The Information Specialist suggested that a granular
activated carbon filter might improve the taste of his
water. No comment was made by the Information
Specialist about how to treat water contaminated by
radioactive particle beams from satellites.
• The caller was referred to his local library with the idea
that there could be environmental guidebooks listing
the best places to live in the U.S. from an
environmental standpoint.
32 LABAT-ANDERSON Incorporated
-------
The caller was offered a copy of Home Water
Treatment Units: Filtering Fact from Fiction (EPA 570/9-
90-HHH) and referred to the National Sanitation
Foundation at (313)769-8010 Lo receive additional
information on home water treatment units.
Rats: A rat fell into my well; I was able to fish half of him out.
Do you know how long it will take the other half to
decompose?
A caller from South Carolina wanted to know how long it was
going to take for the rat to decompose in his well.
• The Information Specialist responded that the question
was out of the jurisdiction of the Safe Drinking Water
Hotline.
• It was recommended that the caller contact his local
health department.
• A copy of Protecting our Drinking Water from Microbes
(EPA 570/9-89-008) was sent to the caller.
Transmission
Fluid: Is it illegal to paint a wood house with transmission fluid?
A citizen from Alabama said her neighbor was going to paint
his house with transmission fluid to elirn..iate any potential
insect problems he might have. She wanted to report him.
• The caller was informed that she had reached the Safe
Drinking Water Hotline which answers questions on
regulations and other issues related to the Safe
Drinking Water Act and that her concern was outside
the scope of services provided by the Hotline.
• The caller was referred to her State environmental
organization to find out about the legality of this action.
LABAT-ANDERSON Incorporated 33
-------
Water Quality
in France: How safe is the drinking water in Paris?
A caller inquired about the safety of the water in France. Her
granddaughter was leaving to study in Paris for the fall
semester. She was concerned that her granddaughter might
become ill after consuming the water.
• The Information Specialist responded that the
information she wanted was out of the jurisdiction of
the Hotline.
• The Information Specialist provided the caller the
number for INFOTERRA (202-260-7466). INFOTERRA
ia an international environmental referral and research
service coordinated by the United Nations Environment
Program. The Information Specialist suggested calling
them for information on the drinking water quality in
Paris.
• To avoid acute health concerns related to
microbiological contaminants, her granddaughter could
follow emergency disinfection techniques involving
boiling the water for one minute or using chemicals
such as chlorine bleach or iodine (Manual of Small
Public Water Supply Systems, Appendix E, EPA 570/9-
91-003, May 1991).
34 LABAT-ANDERSON Incorporated
-------
ATTACHMENT A
REGULATIONS UPDATE
LABAT-ANDERSON Incorporated 35
-------
REGULATIONS UPDATE
The Regulations Update is current as of September 20, 1993.
Arsenic
In 1986 Congress amended the Safe Drinking Water Act which, among other
requirements, mandated that EPA revise the NPDWR for arsenic. EPA did not promulgate
the rule in the 3 years as required by the statute. As a result, the Bull Run coalition filed
a suit requiring the Agency to promulgate a standard. The Agency signed a consent
order which laid out the process that the Agency would follow to resolve arsenic risk
assessment issues and issue regulations. The dates in the original consent order have
been extended by mutual agreement of the parties. EPA is now under a court-ordered
deadline to propose a rule by September 1994 and promulgate a rule by September
1996.
EPA received a study by Mr. Allan Smiih, University of California at Berkttoy, stating a
causal link between arsenic and internal cancer. The Science Advisory Board (SAB) was
briefed on the health study on February 9, 1993. At the April 1993 meeting of the SAB,
the Health Criteria Document for Arsenic was discussed. At an SAB meeting on August
16, the arsenic health effects research was discussed. SAB recommendations from the
August 16 meeting are still expected.
EPA has initiated meetings with the public to obtain data related to arsenic's health
effects, occurrence, and exposure. The public is represented by industry, environmental
groups, and the general public. The first meeting was held June 1,1993, and a second
meeting is scheduled for no earlier than December 30,1993. The American Water
Works Association (AWWA) met with EPA on September 16, 1993 to present
occurrence data. EPA has committed to a public sharing of information when its
analys.. ..» complete.
Colilert/Total Coliform Rule
The Final Total Coliform Rule (June 29, 1989, 54 FR 27544) included Colilert as an
approved test method for the analysis of total conforms under the new coliform
requirements, effective December 31, 1990. On January 8, 1991, EPA published in the
Federal Register two approved test methods for the analysis of E. coli. Colilert was not
approved at that time and further tests for this method were conducted during the
summer of 1991. The Notice of Availability (NOA) of data from these tests was published
on September 27, 1991 (56 FR 49153). A decision to partially approve Colilert for
detection of E. coli appeared in the Wednesday, January 15, 1992 Federal Register (57
FR 1850). As of January 15, 1992, laboratories are allowed to transfer a total coliform-
positive, MUG-negative culture by the MMO-MUG test to EC-MUG. On June 10, 1992,
LABAT-ANDERSON Incorporated
-------
EPA released in the Federal Register (57 FR 24744) a decision to approve Colilert for
detection of E. coli, with an effective date of June 10,1992.
Disinfectants and Disinfection By-Products Rule
The Disinfectants and Disinfection By-Pr~Hucts (D/DBPs) Ru'~ was to be proposed in
June 1993 in order for EPA to meet its court ordered deadline. A conceptual framework
for regulating DBPs and Disinfectants was published by OGWDW on December 21,1990.
EPA released the "Status Report on Development of Regulations for Disinfectants and
Disinfection By-Products" for comment on June 20, 1991. A model to estimate risks
between pathogens and disinfectant/disinfection by-products was presented to the
Science Advisory Board (SAB) on February 11, 1992. The Agency responded to the
SAB's comments on the model at its meeting on April 13, 1992. On April 30, 1992, the
EPA Assistant Administrator approved the Agency's exploration of a negotiated
rulemaking process for this regulation. On September 15, 1992, EPA published in the
Federal Register u notice announcing its intention to proceed with a negotiated
rulemaking process. Based on a public meeting held on Septembei °C-30, 1992, the
Agency proceeded with negotiated rulemaking (also called "Reg Neg"). A total of eight
regulatory negotiation sessions were held, the last one ending June 23,1993.
The parties to the negotiated rulemaking reached agreement on all three rules (D/DBP,
ICR, and ESWTR). Regulatory language for all three rules is complete and the parties are
in agreement. The EPA is to propose the ICR in December 1993, and to promulgate
the ICR in June 1994. EPA plans to propose the D/DBP Rule and the ESWTR in
March 1994.
Ground Water Disinfection Rule
In June 1989, EPA promulgated disinfection requirements for surface water and ground
water unde- the direct influence of surface water. EPA must r.jw propose and
promulgate disinfection requirements for ground water not under the direct influence of
surface water. This will fulfill the statutory requirements set by the 1986 SDWA
amendments.
EPA released for comment "Possible Requirements of the Ground Water Disinfection
Rule," dated June 20,1991. All comments received by October 15,1991 were considered
in the development of the Draft Rule. The Draft Rule was distributed during the week of
July 20, 1992 and a notice of availability appeared in the Federal Register on July 31,
1992 (57 FR 33960). Comments on the Draft Rule received by September 30, 1992 will
be considered in the development of the Proposed Rule. EPA has entered into a Consent
Decree which requires that a rule be proposed by August 1994 and promulgated by
August 1996.
LABAT-ANDERSON Incorporated
-------
Lead and Copper Rule
The Final Rule was published in the Federal Register on June 7,1991 (56 FR 26460) and
a correction notice concerning effective dates appeared in the Federal Register on July
15, 1991 (56 FR 32112). The effective date of this rule is December 7, 1932. On June
29,1992, EPA released a notice in the Federal Register (57 FR 28785) correcting errors
in the text of the Final Rule.
This Final Rule established MCLGs of zero and 1.3 mg/l for lead and copper respectively.
The rule also promulgates treatment technique requirements that include corrosion control
treatment, source water treatment, lead service line replacement, and pubic education if
lead and copper action levels are exceeded. Community water suppliers and non-
transient, non-community water suppliers are required to take samples at the consumers'
tap. The number of samples is based on the size of the system. If 10 percent of the
required samples exceed the action level for lead (0.015 mg/l) or copper (1.3 mg/l), the
system will have to take the corrective actions.
The results of the first round of monitoring for the large systems were released on
October 20,1992. The second round of monitoring for these systems and the first round
of monitoring for medium systems was completed on January 1, 1993. These results
were released on May 11,1993. Small systems were required to start monitoring on July
1,1993. Guidance manuals for monitoring and corrosion control treatment are available
through the National Technical Information Service, the Educational Resources
Information Center, and the American Water Works Association. EPA intends to propose
changes to this rule to clarify monitoring requirements in the spring of 1994.
National Pesticide Survey
A report on a national survey of drinking water wells was released on November 13,1990.
Phase I of the survey tested 546 community and 783 rural domestic drinking water wells
for nitrates anc 126 pesticides and pesticide degradates. Phase II of the survey was
released on January 9,1992 and is a comprehensive analysis of factors associated with
the contamination of drinking water wells by pesticides and nitrates. In June 1992, the
Quality Assurance Project Plans (QAPPs) were released. The QAPPs outline the standard
operating procedures followed to insure that the results of the National Pesticide Survey
are of known quality. These are available through the National Technical Information
Service.
Phase I Rule
The Phase I Rule established MCLGs and National Primary Drinking Water Regulations
for 8 volatile organic compounds (VOCs) Also included in the Phase I Rule are
monitoring requirements for 51 unregulated contaminants. On July 8, 1987, the EPA
published the Final Phase I Rule (52 FR 25690). A correction notice for the Final Rule
LABAT-ANDERSON Incorporated
-------
was published on July 1, 1988 (53 FR 25108). On July 1, 1991, EPA released the Final
Phase II-B Rule (56 FR 25690). This rule revised the monitoring requirements for the 8
VOCs in the Phase I Rule to the Standardized Monitoring Framework. Beginning January
1, 1993, the current monitoring requirements were synchronized with the Standardized
Monitoring Framework. The framework is comprised of a 9-year compliance cycle and
is made up of three, 3-year compliance periods. The first 3-year compliance period
extends from 1993 through 1995.
Phase II Rule
The 38 Phase II contaminants include 27 newly regulated contaminants and 11 previously
regulated contaminants that have been revised. The Final Rule for 33 of 38 chemicals
was published in the Federal Register on January 30, 1991 (56 FR 3526). On the same
day, EPA reproposed fivfi of the previously proposed contaminants. The five reproposed
chemicals (three forms of aldicarb, barium, and pentachlorophenol) were finalized (Phase
II-B Rule) and appeared in the Federal Register on July 1, 1991 (56 FR 30266). This
notice also contained corrections to the January 30,1991 Final Rule and revisions to the
monitoring requirements of eight VOCs promulgated on July 8,1987 (52 FR 25690). On
June 29, 1992, EPA released a notice in the Federal Register (57 FR 28785) correcting
errors in the text of the Final Phase II Rule.
Public water systems were required to begin initial monitoring January 1, 1993. The 33
contaminants promulgated on January 30, 1991 were effective on July 30, 1992. The
NPDWRs for barium and pentachlorophenol promulgated on July 1, 1991 were effective
on January 1, 1993.
Affected parties filed a petition to the EPA protesting the MCLs for ethylene dibromide,
dibromochloropropane, perchloroethylene, and polychlorinated biphenyls. On August 21,
1SC2 this petition was denied by the court.
Affected parties have filed a petition to the EPA protesting the MCLs for aldicarb, aldicarb
sulfoxide, and aldicarb sulfone. They are questioning the scientific basis for these
standards. EPA published a stay of the Phase II Rule for these contaminants on May 27,
1992 (57 FR 22178), postponing the effective date. While the stay is in effect, EPA has
been conducting a revised risk assessment for these contaminants that may change the
MCL and MCLG. The risk assessment was presented to the SAB on November 5-6,
1992. The draft final risk assessment was received from OST on December 1, 1992. A
Start Action Notice was initiated November 24, 1992 and signed on December 8, 1992
by Jim Elder, OGWDW. The Agency is considering what regulatory action is appropriate.
EPA has completed a revised risk assessment for these contaminants, and is planning
to repropose the drinking water standards for aldicarb, aldicarb sulfoxide, and aldicarb
sulfone by December 1993. It is not likely that EPA will meet this deadline.
LABAT-ANDERSON Incorporated
-------
Phase V Rule
The Final Phase V Rule was published in the Federal Register on July 17, 1992 (57 FR
31776). The requirements for the 23 IOC and SOC contaminants in the Final Phase V
Rule will be effective by January 17, 1994-18 months after publication of the Final Rule
in the Federal Register. The regulatic includes MCLs, MCLGs, requirements for
monitoring, reporting, public notification, and Best Available Technologies (BATs) for water
treatment.
The Phase V Rule, following the Standardized Monitoring Framework, uses the 1993-1995
initial monitoring period for all contaminants for water systems with 150 or more service
connections. Smaller systems are required to monitor during the 1996-1998 monitoring
period. Petitions for the withdrawal of nickel and beryllium are under review. EPA and
the petitioner have failed to reach agreement on nickel. The petitioner will either take
additional legal action or ornreed in some other manner.
Phase VI-B Rule
EPA is considering contaminants for proposal. Additional information on the
contaminants being considered is not public information. The health effects Preamble for
the Proposed Rule was received on March 2, 1993. EPA is anticipating the receipt of
national occurrence data and cost estimates. EPA is negotiating a schedule. The date
for this proposed rule has not yet been determined.
Primacy
On December 20,1989, EPA revised the Primacy Rule (54 FR 52126). In February 1990,
the National Wildlife Federation brought suit against EPA on two counts dealing with the
Primacy Rule. The first count concerned the legality under the Safe Drinking Water Act
(SDWA> Amendments of 1986 of a 2-year extension that EPA may g;~/it to States to
adopt primary enforcement responsibility for a rulemaking. The second count in the
lawsuit concerned EPA's discretion on when to withdraw Primacy from a State that has
a deficient Primacy Program and if EPA provided adequate public notice when changing
the Primacy withdrawal language. The National Wildlife Federation argued that EPA must
withdraw Primacy from deficient States, and not have the discretion to choose to withdraw
Primacy. On November 28, 1990 (55 FR 49398), EPA gave notice that it was
reconsidering the language in 40 CFR §142.17(a)(2) concerning the procedures that could
lead to withdrawal of State Primacy. The Final Primacy Rule appeared in the Federal
Register on June 3,1992 (56 FR 25046). On February 15,1991, the court found in EPA's
favor that the 2-year extension is legal under the SDWA. The issue concerning EPA's
discretion in determining when to initiate Primacy withdrawal was decided by the U.S.
Court of Appeals on December 11, 1992. The court upheld EPA's position that it has
broad discretion in determining whether a State meets Primacy conditions and if it is
failing to make adequate progress towards resolving its deficiencies. The court did
LABAT-ANDERSON Incorporated
-------
however rule that once EPA makes this determination, it must initiate Primacy withdrawal.
The court remanded the rule to EPA. EPA will be making modifications to its Primacy
regulations to conform with the court decision. An Agency work group reviewed an
options paper in August 1993. A proposal package will be developed by the end
of 1993.
Radionuclides
The Proposed Rule was signed on June 18,1991 and appeared in the Federal Register
on July 18, 1991 (56 FR 33050). This notice proposes MCLGs and MCLs for four
radionuclides: radon, radium-226, radium-222, uranium and two radiological categories--
alpha emitters, and beta particle and photon emitters.
The extended public comment period for this Proposed Rule was signed on October 15
and closed on November 15, 1991. A notice regarding the extension appeared in the
October 18, 1991 Federal Register on page 52241. Public hearts were held on
September 6, 1991 in Washington, D.C. and on September 12, l"»i in Chicago.
Transcripts from these hearings are available through the Office of Water Docket. The
Agency has received approximately 600 comments. OGWDW received the Science
Advisory Board's comments on the Proposed Rule on January 9 and 29, 1992. EPA's
response to these comments is still pending. The original court-ordered deadline for
promulgation of the Radionuclides Rule was April 1993. EPA's Appropriations Bill, passed
in October 1992, permitted EPA to seek a court extension of the April 1993 date to
October 1,1993. On April 20,1993, the court extended the deadline to October 1,1993.
It will be difficult for EPA to meet this deadline.
The Appropriations Bill requires the Administrator of EPA to conduct a risk assessment
of radon that considers: 1) the risk of adverse human health effects; 2) the costs of
controlling exposure to radon; and 3) the costs of radon control for small communities
and househ'iiHs. The reports to the Science Advisory Board (SAB; committees were
scheduled tor February 1993. Multimedia cost assessment information was presented to
the SAB on February 8, 1993, and risk assessment information was presented on
February 17,1993. Comments from the SAB were received during March 1993.
The SAB reviewed the Agency's study and submitted recommendations to the
Administrator by April or May, 1993. The Administrator will report the Administrator's
findings and the recommendation of the SAB to the Senate Committee on the
Environment and Public Works and the House Committee on Energy and Commerce.
The Office of Management and Budget is reviewing the Report to Congress. A Draft
Report to the United States Congress on Radionuclides in drinking water was
issued on July 15, 1993. A Final Report to Congress has yet to be sent to
Congress.
LABAT-ANDERSON Incorporated
-------
Sulfate
Sulfate was one of the 24 contaminants proposed for regulation under the Phase V Rule
published on July 25, 1990 (55 FR 30370). EPA decided to defer the rulemaking for
sulfate based on the public comments received on the Proposed Rule. As part of the
deferral, EPA is considering an implementation program that will target the populations
most affected by sulfate. EPA is under a consent order to propose the rule by October
1993 and to promulgate the rule by December 1994.
Surface Water Treatment Rule
The Final Rule was published on June 29,1989 (54 FR 27485). The effective date of this
Rule was December 31, 1990. This Rule established maximum contaminant level goals
(MCLGs) for Giardia lamblia, viruses, heterotrophic plate count bacteria, Legionella, and
turbidity. It promulgated National Primary Drinking Water Regulations (NPDWRs) for
public water systems using surface water, and requirements for disinfection and
compliance, including filtration.
Public water systems that use a surface water source (or ground water sources under the
direct influence of surface water) were required to meet the criteria for avoiding filtration
specified in 40 CFR §141.71 by December 29, 1991, unless the State determined that
filtration is required.
Public water systems that use a surface water source and do not provide filtration
treatment were required to begin disinfection treatment by December 29,1991, unless the
State had determined in writing that filtration was required. Additionally, public water
systems that use a ground water source under the direct influence of surface water and
do not provide filtration were required to provide disinfection treatment by December 29,
1991. A public water system that uses a surface water source that provides filtration
treatment must provide the disinfection treatment specified in 40 CFR §141.72(b) by June
29, 1993. Finally, public water systems that use a surface water source or a ground
water source under the direct influence of surface water, and do not meet all of the
criteria for avoiding filtration, must provide disinfection treatment and filtration by June 29,
1993.
An Enhanced Surface Water Treatment Rule is expected to be proposed in March 1994
as a result of the Disinfection/Disinfection By-products regulatory negotiation process.
URTH
On October 2, 1990 a Notice of Availability (NOA) for the draft guidance document was
published in the Federal Register. On January 23, 1991, a workshop was held.
Currently, the Office of Science and Technology is incorporating comments from an
internal review of the draft final guidance, conducted in December 1991. A Notice of
LABAT-ANDERSON Incorporated
-------
Availability for the final guidance document is anticipated to appear in the Federal
Register. The draft guidance document has been revised and is awaiting clearance.
LABAT-ANDERSON Incorporated
-------
Summary of Monthly Hotline
Statistics
ATTACHMENT B
LABAT-ANDERSON Incorporated
-------
SAFE DRINKING WATER HOTLINE CALLS
MONTHLY SUMMARY - AUGUST 1993
CALL LOAD NUMBER
Total Incoming Calls (a) 5,026
Calls Received and Answered (b) 3,611
Hang-ups 480
Night Calls (c) 738
Busy Signals (d) N/A
Ratio of Calls Received and
Answered to Busy Signals (d) N/A
Ratio of Incoming Calls to Hangups 10.5
Mean Queue Time <40 seconds
Average Calls per Day 164
a/ Total incoming calls includes calls received and answered by
the Hotline, abandoned calls (i.e., hang-ups), and calls made
to the Hotline outside of the Hotline hours of operation.
b/ Calls logged by the Information Specialists.
c/ Night calls are those received outside of the Hotline's operating
hours, including weekends.
d/ Busy signal data from AT&T were not available (N/A) at this writing.
LABAT-ANDERSON Incorporated
-------
SAFE DRINKING WATER HOTLINE CALLS
MONTHLY SUMMARY - AUGUST 1993
CALL TYPE: Numbers for the following sections are based on statistics
gathered by the Information Specialists during August 1993.
Total Number of Callers 3611
Subject Inquiries 3896
Referrals 2085
Document Requests 1627
[HIGHEST NUMBER OF CALLS
A. Type of Caller - Citizen 2039
B. Geographic Region V 607
C. Subject
Question: Lead 716
Documents: Background/Overview 529
D. Referrals: State Agencies 715
[A. TYPE OF CALLER |
Analytical Lab 40 1.1%
Citizen 2039 56.5%
Consultants 836 23.2%
Environmental Groups 41 1.1%
EPA HQ & Regions 42 1.2%
Federal Government 45 1.2%
Industry/Trade 46 1.3%
Law Firms 17 0.5%
Manufacturers 37 1.0%
Media 22 0.6%
Schools/Universities 84 2.3%
State/Local Government 79 2.2%
Water Suppliers
Community 167 4.6%
Non-Community 12 0.3%
NTNC 28 0.8%
Other 76 2.1%
I TOTAL 3611 100*0%
GEOGRAPHICAL AREA _ J
EPA Region I 253 7.0%
EPA" Region II 447 12.4%
EPA Region III 594 16.5%
EPA Region IV 556 15.4%
EPA Region V 607 16.8%
EPA Region VI 282 7.8%
EPA Region VII 161 4.5%
EPA Region VIII 155 4.3%
EPA Region IX 393 10.9%
EPA Region X 160 4.4%
International 1 0.0%
[TOTAL 1 360$ 100.0*
LABAT-ANDERSON Incorporated
-------
SAFE DRINKING WATER HOTLINE CALLS
MONTHLY SUMMARY - AUGUST 1993
|c. SUBJECT OF INQUIRY
1. NPDWRs
a. Microbiological
Total Coliforms
SWTR
Phase Vl-a GW
Disinfection
Turbidity
Subtotal
b. OB"
THM
Phase VI-a-DBP
Subtotal
c. IOC/SOC
Phase I
Phase II
Phase IV
Phase Vl-b
Arsenic
Flouride
Sulfate
Subtotal
d. Lead/Copper
e. Radionuclides
Sub-total NPDWRS
QUESTIONS
ANSWERED
75
37
14
I
127
12
1°
42
33
213
140
20
23
13
2
449
716
102
1436
1.9%
0.9%
0.4%
0.0%
3.3%
0.3%
0.8%
1.1%
0.8%
5.5%
3.6%
0.5%
0.6%
0.3%
0.2%
11.5%
18.4%
2.6%
36.9%
DOCUMENTS
REQUESTED
15
13
10
0
38
0
2
2
11
88
111
1
0
0
.0
211
289
40
580
0.9%
0.8%
0.6%
0.0%
2.3%
0.0%
0.1%
0.1%
0.7%
5.4%
6.8%
0.1%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
13.0%
17.8%
2.5%
35.6%
2. Secondary Drinking
Water Reflations
54
1.4%
29
1.8%
LABAT-ANDERSON Incorporated
-------
SAFE DRINKING WATER HOTLINE CALLS
MONTHLY SUMMARY - AUGUST 1993
3. Other Drinking Water Regulations
Background/Overview
Definitions/Applicability/Coverage
DW Priority List
Sodium Monitoring
State Primacy & Indian Lands
Unregulated Contaminant Monitoring
Variances and Exemptions
Subtotal
4. Other Drinking Water Topics
Additives Program
Affordability/Cost Implementation
Analytical Methods (General)
Bottled Water
Compliance/Enforcement
Special Issues
Statistics
Health Advisories
Health Effects (Unregulated Contamin
Home Water Treatment Units (tOU/POE)
Household Wells
LCCA/Lead Bans
Local DW Quality
Mobilization
•'itional Pesticide Survey
State Labaratory Certification
Tap Water Testing
Treatment Technologies (General)
URTH
Wellhead Protection
Other
Subtotal
QUESTIONS
ANSWERED
370
52
8
5
5
27
2
469
9
4
43
79
10
4
109
14
166
235
51
168
5
13
19
382
14
3
87
522
L937
9.5%
1.3%
0.2%
0.1%
0.1%
0.7%
0.1%
12.0%
0.2%
0.1%
1.1%
2.0%
0.3%
0.1%
2.8%
0.4%
4.3%
6.0%
1.3%
4.3%
0.1%
0.3%
0.5%
9.8%
0.4%
0.1%
2.2%
13.4%
49.7%
DOCUMENTS
REQUESTED
529
7
2
0
0
0
1
539
0
3
1
23
0
0
142
1
78
45
37
2
4
O
12
8
2
5
43
15
479
32.5%
0.4%
0.1%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
0.1%
33.1%
0.0%
0.2%
0.1%
1.4%
0.0%
0.0%
8.7%
0.1%
4.8%
2.8%
2.3%
0.1%
0.2%
0.5%
0.7%
0.5%
0.1%
0.3%
2.6%
4.0%
29.4%
TOTAL
3-09*0%
LABAT- ANDERSON Incorporated
-------
SAFE DRINKING WATER HOTLINE CALLS
MONTHLY SUMMARY - AUGUST 1993
|D. REFERRALS
1. Drinking Hater Referrals
a. EPA HQ OGWDW ( PWS )
Docket
b. EPA HQ OGWDW (non-FWS]
EPA HQ OGWPW (GWPD)
c. EPA ORD
d. EPA Regional
6
14
13
21
43
0.3%
0.7%
0.6%
1.0%
2.1%
Region I
Region II
Region III
Region IV
Region V
Region VI
Region VII
Region VIII
Region IX
Region X
Subtotal
e. State Agencies
Total
3
8
8
6
4
4
1
1
18
54
715
866
2.6%
34.3%
41.5%
f. External Referrals
American Water Works Association
Association of State Drinking Water Administrators
Water Quality Association
FDA/International Bottled Water Association
Local Public Health
Local Water Systems
National Sanitation Foundation
NTIS/GPO/PIC
Trade
Other
Total External
6
15
132
64
158
103
146
52
2
541
1219
0.3%
0.7%
6.3%
3.1%
7.6%
4.9%
7.0%
2.5%
0.1%
25.9%
58.5%
TOTAL REFERRALS
3085 100.0%
LABAT-ANDERSON Incorporated
------- |