LEGISLATIVE HISTORY
OF THE
SAFE DRINKING WATER ACT AMENDMENTS
OF
1986
Volume 1:
Contains a general section which Includes general statements
regarding the SDWA Amendments as a whole and statements pertaining
to sections of the various bills that did not become law.
Also includes the legislative history of Title I of the SDWA
Amendments, the provisions related to public water systems.
-------
LItGISLATI%’g hISTORY
P L 93—52 3
These conc 5rfls arc not merely speciilati’.e potentialities in the Corn-
mittee’s vice The hearing records on safe drinking water legislation
are replete a itli exoniples of these problems having actually occurred
Moreover, it is nl>iii hiiu itJy lear tii t nililifiopial Federal aSSistance,
research, and suppOrt is ma essiir; in nider to enable State miii local
efforts to pros ide safe eater to ix successful ijndei these cireuluil-
Stflfleps, the Couuiuiiittee linus I lilt (lie F’eder ’ui go; eruiiiieuit iiiuist lxiii a
Shared respoiisihulity ; ; itli St iitp nuiul iou ’ s I go; en uiuu ’iits to ensure pro-
tection of flue uiiiiiic’s li iiltli and the cnf ty of di iiukuiig ‘;atei supplies
It is ti lie that sonic esisting Federal programs do relate to drinking
water suipply 5%sfcunS Federal agencies with a significant, insolve-
nient in drinking eater Supply are the Farmers blue Admiiiistra
tion. the Department, of Ilolisirig and Ilrluan Deselopment , and the
Economic De ;elnpmeuit Ageni’s The Indian lfealtli Service in the
J)epaitiuiu .r t of I health, Ediieatioui, and Welfare operates a cl ect coui—
striictioo program to pros ide Sanitation facilities to Indiaii arid
Ahaskon nittites however, iii the Crinimittee s view these grant pro-
grams to eonsti lu-f drinking ssuiter supply s ct iiis are lint iiecu’s,sarils’
adequate to assure thatsafe (Irlilking eater a ill be asailable,e ;en from
those s sfu’iiis a hi-h are coiistriicted with such aid
Cusi Esii;i sir
In aci’ordn,uee a itli ccctioii 2 2(n) of the Legislatise lleorganu,a-
t,ion Aetof (970 (l’uhlie Laa Ol—5l 0),3our Committee eStimates that
the folIo;; lng costs a ill he inciirreil in carrs log (utit (lie fiunict ioiis as-
signed to the Environnieiifal Pu otect ion Agency b 11 11 13002 as
amende(j be’ the Committee
5 YEAR COST PQOJECT109S...44 ii 13007 SAFE DRINKING WATER ACT
iDoUl ’ , In n iIon (
(974
iRiS
i976
i917
1979
Slindardi (i2i2 1721 I)
Moniln,,n 1 ond .nln ’ (nn,e,i
1224 1237)
Eo .ng. , y TOWl O (17313
Rsn,d, 4.morni,r, o,
•
(i2i3 1,211
I 215 1223
ii 7
16
6
32 I
9 4
I 2
02 1
120
i 2
02 5
iS 0
I 2
019
iS 3
I 2
(2232 1234 3)
‘ 0V . ’ O 4 ..n h (1233)
TOTS - -
n fl . , , .
,_
- --
.
(53
6
357
ii 7
430
246
190
440
21 0
Ri 4
78 3
246
ii 3
346
100 3
SF(rIui3y-$i ii( , ’c Aini Y ”iS OI ‘3111 JtFi’Ou (Tt.i) Bii.r
Section 1 Shore LotTe
The first section of Hit 13002, as reported by the committee, pro-
vides that thIs legislation ina be cited as the “Safe Drinking Water
Act”,
Sectwn Public waler systems
This section amends the Public lIPSItIl Sers ice Act by inserting a
ness title XIV
SAFE DRINKIN( WATER ACT
PL 93—t23
PART A—DErtNrriONs
SECTiON 1401 DEFINITiONS
“Prlnwrg drinking water regulations”
Section 1401 of the new title defines “primary drinking water regu-
mt ion” as a national regulation which is intended to protect health to
the masimlirfl estent feasible This definition which applies to both
inteT m l 110(1 ias isecl primary regulations under section 1412, estab-
lishes the cnicilil framework for regulation under the Act
The definition provides that primary regulations apply to “public
aster systems”, WlilCll is also a defined term 1’rimar , ie uihatioflS must
pecif contalillnhtiltS eshlieli in the judgnieiit of tile Aduuiilist,iiutor fluky
liii; e 5 :5 acts erse effect on tile Ilei lltli of persons a hen found in drinking
water ‘l’tle eel (Is ulsell h the Conlinittee acre cai chIlly chosen Be-
cnu w of the es.sentiail3 presentive phi pose of tile legi l.it non, the ‘.‘liSt
iliiilih0’i of cold 11101 ilililtS Is llil ’ll iii I V ilN ’ll Ii> be iegiuliitcul. iniul the liiii—
it eli ii lllOii of or k-ni 1W ll’u Ige p1 u -seiitl a sail a huh’ 00 the ilea It hi c tfu’et s of
sulri,uiis OntflllliiluliltS ill di lilkillg saId, the (‘oiiumittee (lid not intend
to requlli e COii(lLlSiC e pi oof that ails’ coiitanimnalit 17( 11 cause R(lt CISC
hienhtla effm ts as a ConditIon for reguilatioii of a siisixct contaunuiiallt
Jlathei all that. is reqhiiie(I is that tile 1,clininistratoi make a i eflsouie (I
iiiiul plausilule Judgnleilt that a COntaillinililt lflhT!/ has C suich an effect
slcurco ; ci, the, (01151113 inulilt. ill’ed not, hate the ads else effect dim ectiy
iii or l ’’i for the , i d nil nisti at or to reguiliute it 115 a hurl TilT I C contii in i ISI S nit
If it is a pu’reuursor to i cqiutamoin iiit which iflily lint e such effeet 01
if it 1 )1St comitribuite to SuCh effect, tile coiitmirnii )nhit 511011 1(1 be coil—
rolled uinde I p Il iflil ry i egui I at ions
Suiu’hi a 1 uiulgu nent, ma hue hunsed ni pon epideni ioiog ical toxicologicihi,
ph’,siologlcal, biochicniical, 01 statistical research or studies or estrap-
olat ions tilerefroiii (Thus, for example, such a 1 iidgment may be based
cii evidence of either oniiiial or hiiiiinn tosicity or disease ) Suich a
iiulgiiient inS)’ nhtcrnatisclv be based on knowledge concernulig be-
has lOTS of gloups of (ontauiilnnnfs or behlaviors of analogous con-
tluiliiilau its or behaviors of the salile contnniinants in other media
It uiuist be noted that oiuui e than 12,000 chemical coin iouuids are now
hueiiig used coiiiiuieru ,inhh , not counting additional eaiiants and frac-
(10115 About 500 iice cileinical compounds are added each year. Many
of these will find theii way into the nat ion’s tlriiiking a mud supplies
It is, of eouirse, impossible for EPA to regulate each of these containi-
ilailts s;hichs ma’ 7 be 1351 illfull to health Oil a contnminant_by.eontflmin-
mt basis 1 her efui e, the Couiiuuiittee anticipates that tIle AuiunlnmstrntOr
sill establish primary di oiLing water reguiat ions for some groups of
cont nmlnuuiits, such as organlcs and asbestos Tile est,iili li shuiiiciit of such
grouup-e idle reguihuit ions should help to assure that tue puibhic henithi
still be protected from currently undiscosered, unidentified or under-
ieseaiched subgroups or specific contnnunuints within the group
]Iowever, the Committee behaves that effective and adequate pro-
tection of the public health can only be assured by a comprehensive
aluproachu to standard setting In the Committee’s view, such an ap-
h)i uuach muist coiiiluunc 511(11 grouip-ivide rettuli’utlofls with regulations
for certain sub-groups 1113(1 specific contaminants within the group of
6462
6463
-------
LEGISLATIVE HISTORY
P L 93—523
substances being regulated These regulations are needed both for
licse sub—groups ml cusitanii ,canls witu Ic ore most pies ilecit in drink-
ing write, sriI)piic-s acid also for thuse which arc very liaza rdons at
101% t ’OSi( ent i at ions (cai . i nogens, fo i e ;i i irpie)
Titus, for exiciuple, the Committee anticipates that revised national
iii at diii ki rig w at ci regii I at otis would i itt 1 tide regulation ot
(Ii gait it’s its a grnii i stitch stiligi nips sucdc as liulnet mis. p 01 1 thic aio—
iiial ic li ci local Icons, intl iiiti osanhines
iii pics i rIcing whit ii groups. sirtigioups. arid s cc iI c cocctainiiiants
is ill be subject to res mccl i ego hit ohs, the Ad iiciiiistt sit or is es pet—ted to
ciii I iic I c ii iOSC cii bst hut es coritcit flC(I in i %r 0 1 Id I lea It Ic Orgriii i sat ion,
- t Iaxcnlum, i ’erni,ciq,bie Conrv’n/r,iicons of flar,c,fuc/ Subsiance in i/ce
li’S/er of lI”crcol ,rw -g i.jsrd ftcr ii 1/q?e,c (r cz,t l l)oniesicc i’uiposea
1970) , Vor hI lIe ’iltlt Or gsiuii,at ion, Euro pean $/o,c(/arqis for I)rin/.-
inq li’a/rr, 2d Ed , Ifec ( es1es a (11)70) , National I ,istitiite of Occu—
pal i Onal ‘ ,afeIs anti I lealtii ariniccil list of to,ui siiiistacices, and toxic
stiI (Stliflc e ’, Iistt’il citric; sect nit I07 of lice F’edcr,ti \Valt —i l 1 ollution
(‘out to! Act If titu’ . ilrniiiisti:itor ilett-r iitiisi’s ito) to iii little icily of
these scibstrinces iii the i evrst—ii pi inca i regiil-ct ions, lice Committee
aiiticc 1 c ites I list lie ci oiiiii 1 )icidiishi iidi ticte; iiiiicat ion tiong cs it h tho
ic’:c ocis foi finding sin ii ic’giiiat nit to it. iticici. t s—ct ’ liucits ci. 1103
(‘ttiiiiciittt’i— ilicec nut iiitciid tins , .Iriciiirsticctoi Iii juiii,Iisli si sepaicte
ihetci iiiiicsi(cii ;i cool stcilu’icit’iit cii’ ii—u’oi,—, foi ccciii cclu —itliti ,—cI suhistcsiicu
ci Itoh is tiot iii , little.! uii tin— it’s iced iegiilsctc .iccc l ,ithiii the Coiiiinittee
i’siceet s lice fici ies—t I ’ sibic (Slti.tiiict ion ott i gi tticp Oi chi s b_isis of
hit I ice ott—itt itu’ii ‘—tilts) ii in es hi is e been oiciit ted
‘lhie Cnii .ciiittee of course. aiitiecpcitcs that nil couctunsin i ts cur—
tent I ’, siiicjec t to iiitei’st:cte can iei drinking water ie iii:tti .,iis oi to
i t’coiicittc—iiclcil ctsiicciarcis ci ocilci liP i(uist toiled under Ixil ii iiitci ciii anti
it’s mid iegiiisitcoits ritilese the Auiriujiiistcatoi finds that no Iceccitti
threat inn ice poci il its airs siwii i’oiit qiiiisiaiit Iii riddit on sill ot her
t’notnuiiici:iiits ci liii ii I hit’ Adiiiiitisti:itor juitlge iciac hinse an a.lvcns
i’ttect on tIn- ho—a it Ii of icrstciis eltoitid Ice egicistt ..ch its stain sic lcOSSii,ii
Ito cc ccc ?, in rotc taut , ,c.-,ccf i t -c . ‘i ccc I ,c,,/,n S ic /Ci’/d ic ique i
on. p tin— , iliiiicii. ,t iatoi t°’ lii’s coictsiniiiantq icc.’iiidui.g giocilts
: 1 iii siii iii tiiilds I hi—i cot scili ect tei iinit roust i pi iiriai tin iiiisiicg ci clot
ieirccisttioii s, iii’ isiii—t i e t i lii’ fit 1 vsiclt i’oiitciiiiicsiict a icisc inucniti conc—
t:citiici.iict etc—i lit.— oici ciii icnistsiiuc— cii diii it a nirisiictiiiii c ii sitiitcinc—
.i nI it—c c i is icot to Ice Iiiesci dcccl foi ntis iit;itsciiiiiiciiit is if lii— tools thtsit
it i’— itot Ic—c lciicch .cgnc alit iti cc tuiioin iicaiis feasiltic— for itcost piihl ic ci it ‘i
ssslt’intc to itcoicititi itt tic ct ,‘cicitscctciiiiiiit Ii thic’ c tiisiiicrsti,ctici — ,ci fiiccl ,,
icc’ siiinct lutes’ i lii’ ic’gcii.it ioics ssitn , Ii (I) ic’—t nil kicoss it tic’rttccic ’iit
tcrhc ;nnt 1 cic’s tot turd e (tittsciciiiiiiit tt ii Ii inset tue idviciiic—icct’ict of sic’—
I mu 141 d duct di ic trig cisc ’ S (idt(ii(t ft— scaii cit. ci ole, tiois oft itt’ 1)dii)i it ii oaltli,
inimil ( ) it5 iiit tue IiSCc)f it 1( 5 ( 5 1 ccii.’ of those listed
I”cdi t hi— tcii Itoses of iiiai, tug I it liiithiiig I ego tic ire lice fi’:csiicii its of
icioicctcii cti i foi any gistic cositsitiiiic:itit. Iii .— Adniiitistr ‘tm nicust
lost deIct niiiicp. is itht respect to gts c-mi ontactciiisint siccit c’ffcc tiso
iinoicitoi clip It ’chitcitii ;es, if ntis .siti- teciiiiohogcc’:iiis’ as iciisibit- %eit the
Aclicitiinst r itor inciist cletm’nittniie at whict ft i’i 1 incsiccres erich, tc’ehniqcies
siiociiti Ice c’inj’hosetl to assniie dcti-i ticiti itt nov s tohUion tncoi to the,
I tin’ cmii nol,itioii ci iii ii tiiciiiv ,iiist’ or ciiit i built tci iris scgiccfi—
SAFE DRINKING WATER ACT
P L 93—523
cantly increased health hazard Then the Admincstrator must deter-
Inline is icether such monitor ing at such frequency is economically
feasible
One example of a group of contaminants for which monitoring
might be 1 icdged to be infeasible would be viruses, svhich arc currently
prolcihitisely expensive to isolate and mea.scirc on a routine basis
Therefore, the Committee expects that thce Administrator would pro-
scribe all known treatment techniques for controihin viruses rather
than establishing a maximum contaniiicaiit level for viruses A second
esarcipie aught be as follows where several specific contaminants
occur svithin a general group, the ctinuilative expense of monitoring
for eiccii individual contaminant might similarly lead to a 1 irdgment
that such corttaniincirits are ones for which treatme,nt technique regii-
ml ions should be preset ibed Ti eatment techniques is hich the Admiri-
isti ictor is niithiorireul to prescribe shoiiic ’I include appropriate provision
for storage and distribution teehnit 1 ues
If in the Administrator’s jiidgnirsnt, however, it is economically
011(1 technologically feasible to moicitor for any contrincinrint (or group
or stibgroup), he is directed to prc-sci ihe a ma imunm contaminiuiit
kciei for that contaminant Of course, in this case, the Administrator
would i .e expected to require pichlic wator ssstemc to rise at least one
of tins iiioiiitoriiig techiciiqiies wht h lie lcsmc 1 iidged to I.e feasible
‘l’he choice as to who-it of the peimrcsihle treatment techniques
shtould lie used by any public svatei system would l)e left essontiallv to
that cs’stem (and to State and local policy) Morcoser, iiriuler sectcon
1415 if a system (or ans other pt’reohi including a seicdor) t’ncihd
tlemoiisti ate that any other Ii eat meitt technique tiot I csted by tIm Ad—
ntunictrictor was at least as etl’ectise as tiiosc listed by him, theii that
tcchctiiqtce could be irsed under a ‘,ntriance whit-hi thte Administrator
ci otcid be cuitltonizt’d to issue If. on tice other linnil, thii’ Admiiiistrntor
Iiiids iicoiuntoniitg for any contantunant is not feasrble (ecoiconiicahly or
technolooically), hue must preset ibe the frill r.ingc of available treat-
meiit tec iuiqties whrrhi he letei niitnes ito-et the iequcienuents of section
1412
4seumeul ,nIa e irS /er qua/it c,
lii post-i clciiit ci:ttcmiii’ii i ’ iittcii 5 tli iitisiicg sstitc’i I . giiiititiics tite
Adcitiictst i.itcti nitist utc:ihu’ stutttc nissltitnittitcitS tiltcctt tl,c’ u 1 iitlit of liii’
iitt,tke issiter’s stimuli ill ‘ iuutct es.itl its tue tii ,ttiiic’itt lit hiutiqittS
ci ituclt lie iias foiuucd to he genet it his ns’ritlnil,le ‘I’itc ( ‘oiumntittec rerog—
us izes t itat intake water quality is likely Pm vary throughout the Nation
If the Administrator were to a sume that cntake ssaters ssould in gen-
eral he ext reniely contaminated, then many areas ci loch are relatively
clean eouhd meet the unasimuirn contaminant levels which the Admun’
iqtristor ssoichd prescribe svithocit. the use of the most effective treatment
ittot itcitis ‘l’hns ; c’suilt ssoicld lie ineoicsictt’nt ci ithi I lie ( ‘oinmnttteu’ so’,ei —
i ruicntg itmtettt to iica’ciiuitze hdioted’tioii of tlte ptiicltc Ict—schlli ‘I lie (‘oni—
tuittee clues not nicteni(l that primary regulations be set at levels svhtchi
would peutnit systems svith relatively clean intake water sources to
provide water which is more contaminated than the recommended
tui ,i cccmctiit u uictntctctuscitt ics ,’i (ic, tlmt ’ hioiiitii goal svhiieli is to I’ estald—
ltsItPdi Its hit’ tiitttcctst i.ituui ii ftei u o,i —sitlei’iitiotc cf titc teldutit tif Iitt’
N ’cmt cititti c ’iicic’tit cii’ us rc’it( t 1 idit’Siiiii( to cut ttttn Ill j(ic) (I) of tict’
lii II), ci riless t hncse st stenis ltnt p I,tc’n recim r ci ed to umt ii it’ t lie most e ffc’c—
Ii vu’ gemii’ral Is its nil able t rest tmce itt inst Itods
6465
6464
-------
LEGISLATIVE hISTORy
I ’ L ‘ I 3 — sr
}‘Iie fore it is the intent of (lip (‘Oinhiiittpe t hu the tdiiiiiiistrator,
10 Prescribing iiational pi imary drinking atei rcguilat ions, assume
that intake wate will be s ufficiently iiiieontsnhinate(l SO that with ap-
plication of the unos effecti,. e treatineiit uiiethioel(c) a liiiblic water s s-
tern would be able to protect the public health (iiicliuding attaiiiment
of the recomnieiicle(l uuiaxumuim contanuinsuit Ic’. els)
This policy may ir some iiislaiices wsiilt iii those public water sss
tems with extremely contaminated iiitake water sources being unable
to comply with natio nal piiinarv drinking watei regiulati 0 5 In light
of this liolic’. . the (‘Oiiuuiiittpe has uiiitlio, i n tl ii i Oiiietw fro public
wuit(’i 53 Sterns ii lii i Ii (anluot i oiiqd’. “it h i (lii i(’n(ilat iO( ( (l(iu tip l(ooi
Source wiitei qoalit ’ . ‘I lie (‘OiOiuuuttee ahiticulu,it(.S that fill iiiil(liui((.iit,i_
tinii of th e I(’ileial \ uitp-u Polliitioii ( uuiti ‘it ‘il-t iou of ‘ihtp’i iii-
tue iuitaki. aiitpr Souiutç nod (1(1)19 lig,il ou to liiuulo u il uie iS i, 1 5
will eiiahilc iiiiicf SSSti’iiis iii u i liii-,. p the ieqiii itt iutiilo. i(.iten qialit y
wittiiii a period of tliiee to ‘,i (‘iu i the liiti t
Oil ier reqnzrcflien,e
In addition, uiidpr sect Ion 1 ‘10 1 “p i ma iy il i iii hi ug nat en i egiila
tioiis” must contain enforceable iequiirem 5 for quality coritipil test-
i ng (mid iidi rig mom tni ing, * if fciisi I tie) in opei ((lie i at oil a 1 1(1 iuia iii-
tenance Siting for new facilities and intake water ipiahuti iii0iinim
neutiiuieuuieiits foi ouIl watei s Sttius It rstlu. hu’lui.f 1 f ihu- ( °Oiiiiuttee
that flies0 safegiianis may be essenit i:iI to assure that, tuohilip n .iiei S 5-
tems dependii hi so pp I y sa fe di ink nog wit er S i n i re m i Ia tioiis :u i e not
intended to stifle di i ereity, innovation or responsiu ciurse to local coiiuli-
tions Nor are such remilations inteiiule(I to per iuiut Federal dnctato,i iif
the ideal waten 5 ’.ste,i( ‘I hey are iiitc,iilerl hiouci ci, to asciini that all
systems will nieet the essential niinirnal criterut riecessiry to safeguard
the public’s health
Intake water qual ity requrrem g
Tl ii s for esanipte in the Committee’s ‘. iew regotatuon of tl 0 quality
of raw- water 5oiirres is riot an end in itself, iior is it necessary for all
all contaminants Tha Committee inte nds that intake water quality
standar ds should be prescribed by EPA only for those contaminaots
for which the Administrator deter-mines that existing treatmneiit tech-
riiquies may be inadequate to aseiire achievement of recommended maxi-
mum contaminant levels (i e, health goals). If available techniquies
are adequate to achieve these levels regardle of the qumalit’.- of (lie
intake water to w-hich the techniqui arc applied, then no iiutuike water
quality regulation should be prescribed
In making this jridgment, the Administrator should not undertake
a water systein-hyw system analysis Rather, he should examine
(on a contaminarithycentami t basis) the most contanuinated raw
wataw source which is likely to be used by a public water system If use
of the roost efficient treatment techniques will permit the achievement
of the health goal with respect to a given coiitamiiisiit ci cii from (hue
most contaminated raw water source, then no intake water reu luiii uiiuent
or limitation should be estalilislierl by EPA wit Ii respect to such
coiitaniinaiit
By pro’.idirig for a carefully circiimscrihed exercise of suthiority by
EPA, the Comnuittec seeks to achieve the primary purpose of protee-
since drinking waler rrgoiniionn are iniended (o be m.( ar ibr ronnawer a (op ibe
commoner aniieui ni ,o (hat monuioriog woohi r i oie (op ‘napiung
6466
SAFE DRINKING WATER ACT
P L 91—523
non of the public health while leaving to State and local governments
and the puililic water systems maximum flexibility in determining
whether to achieve this purpose by reliance on clean source water,
trva( iiuent techiiology, or other effective means
Operati ng rcqttircfl(tflt8
Likewise operating iequrroments which are authorized to be pre-
scribed by EPA under thus section should he as limited as possible while
still permitt ig assuiiiince that safe drinking water will be provided
K ept a ithi i espect to t hose cnntaiiuiiiaiits foi which a treatment
ti -i built i o iiun cnieiit us est ahuhislieil i iut hiei thiaiu a iiiatuinuiiuu conitaiuui —
uuuuut he’ eh, State, li La I. suud huuiWic w atci sy steiuu discietion should be
touisti.uuiied ouuht to uiucet uiuiuiuiunuiui ci (onus, suuchu as those preventing
the si teiuu fu oiuu hcuuug left uuuistteuided by couuupeteuut peisonuucl or ue—
upiiu iuig ui-guuhui teuuiiiuig Ofeiliiuliuueiut aiuih f_ui ihities l’hie terliuuital the—
u.uuhs of iii’.’ (ii i su tie ‘iii etTicueiit Iuuut)huc ‘.vatei system should iuot be
phi t atiuh huy ieguuhnt uouus iuiuuhei this uuuthuriu ity, except tii the extent
ieueuu u i hIs uiutepsuu u y to uusso n e that t reato ueint tech iuiquie m-equi ii enien ts
juuuuiuiuulgiitid a— I ai t (If the iiuttuoinal pruiuuiuiy di inking water reguha—
u inuis iii c e th i-ct it clv uiuu tuleuiisiit ed
.Sitiag requneinents
Tile Committee hikew use intends that EPA’s reguihstuon of siting for
new facilities fon lulihlic water systems he stuuctuuied so as to effect ii-
ate (lie puii pose of (hums hegislat ion ‘I’buis uies mis t lint uegolutiouis shioiulul
estahil ishu sit mug ui itei a null) to (lie extent ri o essa to pios ale rohe-
i 1 uisie u’siuu a iii c t hi it public a it er steiuis a u It he ihile to 1° in uuhc a i oii—
tunimuoui; .uMuhs of hie plthifol lu oukung wateu Siuihu p nuteiua shioiiltl ou—
huurhe u uuiu,i 1 p-u,itioii, melitumug hunotcerioiu fiouju thpio’ls. eaithiqnuakes,
hues uiiuh otliu-n iii imuiii_u,lu— intl riahural ilus;ustt-m—s which iotuluI cause
hreakuhowmu of thu puutula watt-u sssieiii ppm a huoitioul thuereuif
The Committee uhocs not intend to convey to EPA the authority to
impose a siting permit system or to desuguate water system facility
sites Responsibility for such action rests with the public water sys-
tems and with State and local governments EPA us expected merely
to establish general siting criteria w-hichi must be considered in siting
decisions and to estah lush the most limited or narrow system of pro-
neduirnl review iieeessaiy to assure omphu:umuce Wheue a State lues
estahilmshueul adeouiate siting eruterma amid review prrx-eI(mres tlue Com-
mittee intends EP A’s review to be limited only to assurmno that the
State’s criteria amid mevncw process aic beuuig inupiemuentea in gooil
fait In
Moreoser, the (‘ommnuttee suit ucupates that siting r-egumlations estah-
lislied by EPA will be measonable If. for example, all areas in which
a new facility might be located are subject to some risk of earthquiake
damage, the regulations should not flatly prohibit the location of the
facility Rather, they should encourage location in the por”nn of the
area where such risk is minimized and shiould take into a mt con-
structmoa techniques which may be available to minimize earthquake
damage
F’uiuthcruuioie, the Eh’A situmig regulations should be designed to as-
suinc aulequiatiu p-onsiilijnntioni of disaster u isks and of other consndeua-
iOiis iiceeasiuu to assuu m umug healthful di miukirig water reliably how—
etem, these p-oiisithp-u at uimi Ire iuot initemithe t l to be the exclusu’. e factors
(I ictutu nug su t u u ug le isionus — ‘ si met y of social, tec liruologmca I, cmiv mm on—
6467
-------
LEGISLATIVI. iliSTOlty
PL 9 — 23
iiieiii.ii, lii. .il .1,11 1 el OIloillI._ ( 01151(101 it bus IIIU iegl1lili.lt 0 I Outer lilt))
SI Ii ng (le( I loll s ilV l 111)111 (late I S St (HIS 11101 Stai e 11114 local go em—
Iiwilta, El & ci ii g i vgii lit Io ns sliou hi be designed so as to 11111 ooze
tile likeilhoo4 lISt 51 aler illeet iiig natIonal ill lillary (Ii inkiilg a ater
regil Iitt 1)10 , iiii,I iei oilliilell.;e(I lllli 5lrnlllil eoiltanhiiiailt levei a ill be
( 14 .10,pi P It I lIlli,i till Ililslilllem 5 If legit Illate (OIlSldei itt lOilS otliei- 1111111
I lose COil it 110, 1 iii El ‘A i ego .tt ions ii tilt S SIt log (lOCisioiiS a Ii idl II-
i .i ti 1 1 u us k of ii 5,4 St ( ‘I (11111 age (01 other pi OI)leiiis which con 1(1
Ilil (i0uliliiup :lsslllaill e Ill a lienitilful uliol eiiabk di iikiiig aatei supply
S%S(eIIi ) mii i if ii tnte ,iiiil lopal glllpriIrne7l and pub’ic Isater s s_
tl ’llIS 11111 I fill Il t.il 1 eii III 411111 (If Sill II I I Sh ill tll(’lI sltiIlg (101 iSiolis,
E PA cIting i4 ’ lii.lt 1(1115 SilIllIlli ieSi(Oct tile 1.lt( find in iii (101 lSi(lilS
I Oiler 110 (ill ulllst lines. ho ever. may any siting dCcisio esenipt
a public a itter SSsteili Ii urn the duty to compI with flhil Iiflhii COIltafli—
in.iiit los ci, tre.ltiiieiit IVCiiIlO 1 iIe, or illtake a ater qua iut 1 regulations
(1 ai,!?, e4) n/ ref and (estinq reql,iremenJs
lit esta hi I’ll ii lg q Hilt 1 0(41111 ol and test I rIg roc dii res for tue sniui CC,
treat iileilt ailli Ii 1st iT hut Oil 5’. SteillS of puililic 11 lIter S)StCflis, EPA
siiiiiii,l e .l ,liIl(sil i illlilllililil) lnI 1 dlilg fiofileill v fill each l ’OIit ’lil )uilfluit
liii It III ii .1 I II I S Illili lIl i llIltiiI (i lii llrlt P5 11 11,15 lIecul c Ot t Ioue fleqlient
100111101 Iil 51100111 he illililicll iI’ ( ucglliatuoil foi lasses of ststeiliS uitc—
III (II ii Ilililit (Ills 111111 II pi0,tuf ’ . sin-li lilcie,lsell iiioIiltQi lg ill pre-
SI I Ibliig I l ’irI:l.l l lulls I (1(1111 lug 111(110 frcIiIIeult ifluiiitllu log (Ii Sfluili)iI1i
(ha 11 till Illlllliiulullll Ii )lilluili5tI 1101 lcl ’5 1 (0 1 . ( 1 .4 to t.ui.e lilti) (i( ( ’l)l(nI
iilll(Ilig utlier II I tIll’,, tile 111111111 ailli tS p0 oft!ip 0,ltei Soul 1 I ’, illStOi cli
( I T ( I IlililI IPI l/lil liii’ 11(1101 111011111. 111tH I )uit0,l SHilIltions iii ‘ .S,ilI.l
lJil (lill S I iilI (II4ilIiit% (If till’ SOilil ’Q III TIP, !ll(Ilt4i (Ii IiI’ili(I’ilIt ( ’ 0 oultrlufl
ulituoll tiu 1 IlIoplil 1111111 It luck tile I ’ . 1)1’ (II I i e ,lIilll.ll( 11011 dell nod tile
ie ei of tile 4 (Iiltilill )Ilsll ( 11111)11 iS geileu.tii (01(11(1 as it relates to tile
( ‘Stll)ilsl (l lI 11111(1
lli)ilitIII lug “IlIliii )i ulISlule II) 1110 I’ t0flt tcasii 1 ie tin- (letci (mu of ii
I mint loll 11(1110 sui ,l 1 I olflti o iu , I (111.05 iir (Ohitrli)lltcS to lily nihersu’
11(11111 (‘tii’o I 1114’ (‘uilllil (lt(.0 e iI0 ( Is Iii It till’ Ailiuiuiiust ififfli 110111(1
9’ ” til:iI (1 1 11 w 11111111 III’t0, tIll 11 O IU 5OSJi t ted iol (1tlI)ul. Illollitlll log
f I n-in ’’. 11(1111(1 Is’ iiii I I’l 1S((l
Limo la / w a oiz 8/a ndard se // zn 9 author iy
The A(hnmiillstrntor uuiidcr this section croutld be I)rohll)ited from re-
qimirirlg the addit o of any substance ot,iier than for tile purpose of
reatiiug contn,ninanLs ‘ihuls, EPA could not require the acldit,on of
fihiorilleS 01 other substances to a publIc water system for medicInal
purposes Nor could EPA prevent the addition of fluorides or other
Substances up to th 0 maximum aniount allowable llnder a inI1 imrlm
Contaminant level Vhule EPA could not require the arlditloii of a sub-
stance for medicinal pllrposea, the Agency would have full authority
to limit the addition of such ii Substance if necessary to prevent exo
dYe levels fioni Occuiirluig Or to prevent such substanre from interfer-
ing with the effecti;cness of any required treatment techniques
“Secondary drinking water regulation,,”
11(111 1101 also (li’lliieq ‘‘cccllil ,lai ‘ . (Iruilkoug ‘ ).III’i ilgIli 111011
This is a regulation which establishes fllflxiunum allowable Comitanii.
flaiit le t -i’Is to protect tile J)III)iiC wolf 51 e S u n h i i egiiiat louis are uultende4
I ) ) 05 1.ii)ilsll I I)Iltlilllli , Iult li ’seis to pr ( ’l ’ l ’rlt 0(lou III .iIIi )l ’iliaul (I . of ii , iii,-
6468
SAFE DRINKING WATER ACT
PL 93—523
111(1 scater a i uch 1)18’.,’ cause a siihstllTltinl muuuihei of peisons served by
lie 1 ulmbluc srnt ci s , ’ . stem providing such aater to discontinue its use.
‘these levels sic intended as guiideliiues to I lie States On the other
Ilililli. if a suibstuiiicc may cause or conti iblite to an interaction with
pipes a liich may endnitger 1 )uihlic health, the Committee a oulid an—
Iii ipate that tilat substance a ould be regulated as a prinm ry drink-
ing water contaminant Both primary and secondary drinking water
regulations may be established for the same contaminant, if the statu-
tory criteria are met
“Public water system”
Section 1401 defines certain other ternlS, including “public water
s stem” A “public water system” is a system which has 15 or inoue
sd vice conuuectioius or regularly serves 2 ’ or more persons, regardless
of IShcIIICi the S3 stem is publicly or pro ately owned or operated Thus
definition, thus, encompasses nearly all pibluc accommodations, such
as iestaiiiants, motels, and trailer parks which serve the public
“Contaminant”
Section 1401 defines “contaniiiuant” to mean ‘any ph SlCll1, chensi-
o ni liuologica I. ci I aihioliugucal sllbstllncc ou mutter n a atel ‘ Tills, of
(l)uirsl ’ 5’ .Ouil(l uIl( Iuuile any i flIIIOhl( tic e materials V lletl1er 0! not they
Ilriguuinte(I Ii oni nuu SOIiICO iiiidei the juii isilict iOil of the Atunis En—
ci g ’ . (‘1(01111 iSSiOfl
“Municipality”
Sect ion 1401 (10) defluucs “municipality” to mean “a cut>, town, or
I(uiiPi 11141110 1(1)11’, I ICiIteIh I)’.’ or piIlc luaiit to State lass. oi iou luldiall
111)81 01 gIl muss 11011 a ut 11011 zed l)y iuics ’ ‘ lii tile (‘olin-ni ttee s iew’, Ili is
uiefiiiit ion Is ouild iimi liude counties, boi oulgl ls. and parushes since these
elitIlleS ale created by or i)ursunilt to State constituitioiial Oi statutory
law
P ,SRT B—POlItic We-i-sn Sas-itMs
SECTiON 1411 COVERAGE
Section 1411 provides that except insofar as variances may be
granted under section 1415 or exemptions granted under section 141(1,
illitional primary drimlking water regulations apply to each puibluc
water system in each State The section also exempts any entity which
csoiild otherwise qiualify as a “public water system” within the mean-
Ing of tIle 11111, if it only dustribuites and stores water butt does not collect,
treat, or sell it and if it relies entirely on a public water system to
11101 ide the crater which the entity ultimately makes available to the
public
Each of these three condItions specified in section 1411 must be met
in order for a public water system to be exempt from the duty to
comply with national primary drinking water regulations Thus, for
example, a municipal system which imposes water and sewage taxw
or diarges would not be exempt, because it sells water within the
unealling of tile section Any distributor of water for human consump-
tion, whether r)uublic or private, would be subject to the primary
reguilatio 1 us uIiiless lie can show that he receives his water supplies
6469
-------
LEGISLATIVF HISTORY
PL 51—523
from a system which is subject to the regulations and he does not
charge consumers for the water that he provides The piii ;ose of this
provision is to exempt from Federal regulation those facilities such
as hotels, ahich merely by virtue of having a storage tank and acting
as a conduit from public water system to consumer would otherwise
be subject to Fedei uI regulation as a public %iater systeni
By this provision the Committee intends that primary regulations
would apply to housing developments, motels, restaurant.s, trailer
parks, and other businesses serving the public if the business in ques-
tion maiiitains its own well or water Supply The Committee intends
to e cinpt businesses which merely store and distribute water pro-
vided b 3 others unless that business sells watcr as a separate iteiii or
bills separately for water it provides
SEcTiON 141 2 NATIONAL DRLNKINO WATER R lVLArIoNs
Inlerini requ/qI ,on.,
Section 1412 requires the Administrator of EPA to establish both
i uteri m a iid revised pi iiniu ry drinking a at or regu hit Ions The Coin—
iniltre intends that, the interim regulations bc established quickly and,
therefore, anticipates hit these i eiziilatioiis would be hiised largely on
a review anul ullahat ing of the l5 l’l IS di inking %oiterstiiuiulni(ls Such
a rev ievv has alread, leon couiipletoil EPA Advisoiy Committee on the
Ilevivion aiid Appluriitio:i of the !)rinking Water Stan,laiuls, as recom-
meiiilerl to the Adniiruistrntor, Drinking lVater&andards, September
20, litT’l the U(iuiiuiuuttu ’ .iiitii 1 ) 114 ’S tInt the A.lv isoi v (‘oiuuiiuilt, ’o
recom iiwiidnt ions a nu l I sei e I ui goly as the bins fii I lie i iitci un I -u —
iiin ry u u ’guiluut ions
On the other hand, I lie Corn in itt cc in tends tint revised i u ’gii hit ions
contain a coiiuiireliuouisive proguiiuui of oiituol of iii oil.uuig auutor ion—
tarn iniit inn Tb us. lie Conini itt ce has uo i in utte, I a so tnt iii Ii iii ly longer
period for do’. clopment. of the u c v ised primary i u ’guilatio,is
National interim primary drinking water regulations inc to be pro-
mulgated within 180 clays after date of enactment, of the bill Prornuul-
gation is to be preceded by proposal and opportunity to comment in
accordance with 5 U-S C § 553, and consultation with the Secretary
of hEW and the National Drinking Water Advisory Council National
interim primary regulations take effect not later than one year after
promulgation These interim regulations niust protect health to the
maximum extent feasible using treatment methods which are generally
available on the (late of enactment In determnuiiing what methods are
generally available, the Administrator is directed to take costs into
account.
Reasonable CO8
it is evident that what is a reasonable co for a large metropolitan
(or regional) public water sy tern may not be reasonable for a ‘mniall
system which serves atively few users The Counnuittas believes, how-
ever, that the quality of the Nation’s drinking sater can only lie’ up-
graded if the s stenis which l)rovide eatci to tim public arc orgauiized
so as to be roost cost-effective In general, this means larger systi’ms
are to be encouraged and smaller systems discouraged For thi8 reason,
the Committee intends that the Admiriistrat,or’g determination of what
methods are generally available (taking cost into account) is to be
SAFE DltlNl{ING VATER ACT
P L 93—523
based on what may reasonably be afforded by large metropolitan or
regional public water systems
This, of course, means that some small water systems which cannot
afford the methods determined by the Administrator to be “generally
available” will be unable promptly to comply with all primary regli-
lations. For this reason, authority to grant exemption from the effective
data of the primary regulations and thus to delay the date for com-
pliance by public water systems has been provided in section 1416
however, this period should be used to develop a regional water
system which can afford to purchase and use such methods, to seek
additional sources of funding such as State aid., or to develop a plan
for otiuci a iso cci voic t lie .i tl ’tcti’d pupiil.utioii afteu any i—xistuig iiiale—
quate system is closed
It is not the Committee’s intent to cause any area to be deprived of
existing drinking v,ater supply services Thus, the Committee anici-
pates that during the next three years the States and localities and the
Environmental Protection Agency will review this matter and will
determine whether any additional legislative authonUee are needed.
NAS tvdy
The Committee was concerned that adequate data on the health ef-
fects of contaminants in drinking water is not now available Section
1412(e), therefore, mandates the Administrator to make arrangements
with the National Academy of Sciences to conduct a study of the
ninxiuinim contaminant levels which should be allosed in drinking
water These levels should assure that the health of persons will be
protected against known or anticipated adverse effects, allowing an
adequate margin of safety.
In addition, the NAS is diiected to develop a list of contaminants,
the levels of liich in drinking sater cannot be determined but which
may have an adverse effect on the health of persons The NAS list is
to be considered by the Administrator in deciding whether to include
such contaminaiits on his own lust and thus whether to prescribe treat.-
iiient tccliiuique requirements for such coiitamunant in a national pri-
mary drinkiiig watet regulation
The results of the NAS study, including proposals for recommended
maxunuin contaminant levels (i e. health goals) are to be reported to
Congress no later than two years after data of enactment.
In conducting its study and making its report, the NAS is directed
to consider only what is required for protection of the public health,
not what is tec )inologicallY or economically feasible or reasonable. In
the Committee’s view, the question of what is necewuary for adequate
protection of the public health is and ought to be considered sep-
arately from the question of what degree of contaminant control is
technologically or economically feasible
The Committee wishes to ensure that the NAS report is based
solely on considerations of public health and is not influen ( R I by
political, budgetary or other considerations’ For these reasons, the
prior release of any draft or the final repoi t to any Federal agency
(other than EPA) is prohibited.
The NAS is further directed to develop its proposals for recoin-
meuided ma’cumiini contaminant levels so as to protect susceptible
groups in the popiihuution, so as to take account of long-term exposures,
exposures to contammn flt5 in other media, and synergistic effects
of unuiltiple contuvuiuinuint 5, so as to prevent both changes which are
4 US 10 , ,, Ad,,, li,o 11. R 6471
6470
-------
LECISLATIVE hISTORy
PL 93—’23
reasonably suspect of increasing the risk or severity of illness, and so
as to incorporate tin adequate margin of safeta
Tn rnci-)nhinen (ling nn uleqiiate uiiu u izuui of sri f r i the \ iitiouial eud-
elny of & (Pines iS directed to u ’ouiqiclei iuriioure oIlier fnlois_ tlic unto
guts (if safety n luirlu nip iii ieuul Ii iu nal in t iul:utuin , fo<,ul, auid uli Ira.
pesticides, rndnutmoii nil iiuil “ruler lulluituiiui 0 uuupahi.uuiul esfureuui•s
to cnntamuuinnts, enul ot lieu relei ii nI i pyuiliitiir S t stpin I Ioueveu is
in the rest of the St uuds’_ ru olioiuii( 01 I erlunologu, iii f e e s u hi lit is riot to
be aciglied iii deciding hoe iiiiicli nuurgin of safet’, is licu-essar’, to
give reasonable assiti ito-c tlinl health of persons it ill lie luiotec leil
Eeoiion-uii— anti tus lunolngiu id fensuhiilut ’. sic to l, ’ onsiiluueil l,v EPA
(and tinder section 141 (1 by the tiutes) ,iuuul then ,inl’, lot the P ilo e
of du’teriii iiuiii line soon it is l ’uis.5ulili to lea, Ii I (‘Coflhujipncleil nuts_i—
moot cont :uiiii(iiiui le ’ ,els atid lion iutii,ju prolirujioji u i I Iii.’ piililit lierilt Ii
is feasible until I lien
The NAS study should also examine slid identify future rese.ircli
needs in the alea of health effects of drinking ‘titer contnhilination
In this portion of its study. the NAS should consider not. only a hit
research is necessary on thc effects of (iiutainhiuiuiits ahiichi line al-
ready been uneltided in the IJSPI IS drinking aiter standai us t
should also coiisidei the iesesireli needs lot thiosi otln’i ontaiiuuiuints
aliich the Academy concludes have the gie.itost potential for adierse
effect on human health Finally, tIn’ study should establish priorities
for research needs and estiinuite the costs necessary to iinluleiuient the
recommended research progiain In deciding which contaliiinants to
include in the list for revised priniary ueguilatioius. it is aiiticipated
that the Administrator will carefully consider the reiouiimendatuons
of the Academy
Recommended mc.xz ,nnvn comvtamznaag levels
One hundred days after the NAS report is submitted to Congress,
the Administrator must publish regulations, promulgated in accord-
ance with US C 5i5 , establishing recommended rnaxinium con-
taminant levels and listing the comitaimnante the level of whidi he
finds cannot be determined in drinking water but which he determines
may have an adverse effect on public health The recommended niaxi-
mum contamuiant levels are goals which are to be set at levels suflicicuit
to prevent the occurrence of any known or anticipated adverse health
effects with an adequate margin of safety They au-c to be based on the
NAS report, but may differ from the NAS’ proposals if the Adminis-
trator finds (lint adequate justification for such differences exists and
if shUt finding is iibhislied and explained by the Administrator
The incorporation of an adequate margin of safety is not to be
con fused a ith the anticipation of ad eree health effects Recommen(led
msximuun contaminant levels are to be established by a three-step
process First ,thie knott n aulverse health effects of contaminants are to
be compiled Secciuiul. the Administrator must decide whether any ad-
verse effects can be rensonal)hy anticipated, even though not proved to
exist It is at this point that the Adiniiiistrator must consider the
possible impact of synergistic effects, long-term and niiilti-media cx-
posliics, and the existence of more susceptible groups in the popula-
tion Finally, the recommended maximum level must be set, to hlreveiit
the occurrence of any known or anticipated adverse effect It must in-
clude an nclc(luate margin of safety, uiiless there is no safe threshold
SAFE l)IIINKING WATER ACT
P L 93—523
lot a eoiitriininriiit in such a ca.se, thin recoiuuiuiended maxlnrum con-
i:urninant level should be set at the zero lcvel
Ret uscd rcquilatioris
‘rho revised national drinking waler regiilatiniis must be proposed at
the I iiuie of pruimuilg:ution of the reconimne ,nded maximum l v ls The re-
vised regulations niuist be promulgated within 180 days after the pro-
posal is published Pu omulgation muSt be 1 )reccded by oppol tunit y to
coinmeuut in accor lance ‘,‘,uthi 5 US C § 5 ’ and by consultation with
the Secretary of hEW and the National Drinking \Vater Advisory
Council The revised primary regulations must specify the containi-
iiant let el (or ti eel inent methods, if nioiuitormiig is in feasible) whicli
prot ides maximum feasible protection for human health, using gen-
ci ally arnilable met boils of tieatmenl, or coiitu ol
These revised regulations lake effect not later than one year after
proiiuuilgutt .ion, e Uel)t as 1 ro ’ ided iii sect ions illS and 1410 In setting
the res iseil ieguilatiuuiuS, the Aduuiinustuator shall consider all tech—
iiologv that can lie miiass pu oehiiceil mmcl iuit into operatioul in tune for
i iiipleniciitatiumn of sit h regulations
hum’ 1 ui i dgito ’0 of mu —i un-il ,egiil ,il nuns lot _iiit I ontainiriiuiit will
uioi ,iuiliiiii:il ii dlv met ,,ke until (iii ui’giil itiuuns .iluplii ruble to I bit ni h—
l,muiiuriiiiil Omuls if the • iluuuiuum ”ti.itoi’ , ui-i vii i im ’guulritiouis espuessly
lm 1mu uk I Ii it the uiilei iii u cguil_iticmui s rue siu ue n i ilmil titmultl sui li iii—
mmliii umg uul.uiiuio s ‘un tim Is’ i Ou ’ tutu’ Iii lii olung clii liii iii uo-uI to
sui um ii mile iimlm’i miii i m’gul.ut uomis I lii- mhuuii ii u_mt mo luumuihul u iimisimlei I lie
Ii iii tiuuum’ ‘ , iluum Ii th m ’ Iiii i’ limo iii t 1 e , t tIme ,iuuimiuiiil m l iummirie’m’
Iii ( miiuuimls it utlu ‘iii Ii im gut ii limos Ilim’ mmuuiji_mtulmilutv rml I (unuluhi—
m— sI mit mgi’s ,u id is luiiumiiuu’s liii uoi’et mug i lit u-i no ri uiml ii’’, used i ego—
l,tiouus. .inI ut lum’r rikihuin ii iiuie lii t,mis iii iu,hhut ion to tIle Iuulh1C Iit ’iilth
uiiililim it nuns of hustt iiug I ie uuulu ’i iii um-giuhuti OilS iii rlhm’ct If intel miii ieg —
uil.mm uu) rrS i u ’iiu,Liii un ellis I, tvlu ’iu ict used i urgiuluttiomus iii e mrouuuuilgat(d,
u’ ucli puhuhuc writuri s’, ’—ti’uum nuuuilul lii— i m— m 1 iiuiu ’d lii ouuup V a tilt liuuthi
iiiluo iii a uI i ci used ieguilut moius iii rim m—ord,iiice it it Ii the timetables and
uuuudcr I hue coiidml bus set. foi thu iii i hi bill
.S’ecrnuluiry , r 1 mil tioim
Finally, section 1412 requires the Administrator to propose national
secondary drinking water regulations within 270 days after enactment
and to promulgate such regulations within 90 days thereafter.
BEOFTON 34 i 3 STATS PJUMART ENFORCEMEWI RESSUTS
It is the Committee’s intent Ihat States nuii public water sislenis
take (lie pi mmmii v mespotusihuilily fou a_ssimriiig the safety of the Na-
tion’s drinkiutg waler suujiphues While Federal stnuidnrd sell iuu ’ iuiid
back-up en lou ceuiuumuut, is aiithioi ized I he Coiuumuuut tee us hopeful’ i lint
State nii(l Fcdeial eooperiutioii still but the i uile aiiul thiuut the SInus will
lake the lead iii adopting s laiiulnrds, uci um’aiuug comnpliaium c sti_ilegumis,
audi a here ion essar ‘ hi iii ’iiim piifcuu m u’iuim’uit ut uumuis
Sectuomi 1413 defluies the sui stanti ’me conditions under which the Ad-
uninustrator may determine that a State has pruniary eriforceflient re-
sponsibility for assuring compliance. by public water systems a ithiin
that Sl,tto st itb national pm iniarv drunkiiig a ater regulntiOiiS I hiese
conulitions miiclude (1) the adoption of State reguihationS a loch (lie
St.ite ciii dcnuoiistiate arc at, leavt emhiialhy as stu ingent as national
pr iniary reguilat inns - (2) I lie aulopt mon anul impleinrnlati ofl of ade—
6472
6473
-------
LEGISLATIVg hISTORy
P L 93—523
quate su r, ci lan e a nil en mi cii lent olcil U rec , antI (3) if the St ate
penn its % a i in nc cc n iI e eriipt ions, (lie ii (lopt ion a iid iii ipleinen tation
of measures to nseiire that. siuJi ‘.ai lances arid e(ernptions i ie per-
mitted under conditions arid in a riiahiiicr w bob is at. least equally
stririgeiit, as ti , , iPliUII ,iiic , ,t uf c. tioii, I I IS 1 1 1( 1 1411;
Section 1413 also prot ides that the procediires by which the Ad-
ministrator will make tim determinations as to whether a State his
primary enforceineiit responsil)i lity for public Wflter systems are to be
prescribed h rule of the Adriiinistrator in accordance with 5 US C
§ 553 Proposal of iicli regulations is required within 180 days after
enactnient of this bill and promulgation is required within 90 days
thereafter.
This section also requires the Administrator to take final action
within 90 days after date of submission of an application for a de-
termination of State pnimiiary enforcement responsibility If the Ad-
ministrator s decision is negative, lie must notify the State in a riting
of the reasons forsiichi (lecision.
The significance of this determination cannot be overestimated
Authorit) for States to grant variances and exemptions under sections
1415 and 14 1( ,, to recei’,e nolu-c prior to thia coiiimencementof Federal
emiforcemeiit actions under section 1414, and to receive grants under
section l 1t (es, ept uS riiiiv ls Piol i,leul iluimiiig (lie lust teai ) is ul. —
pendenit upon this deterniinatio,i Therefore, the Committee intends
EPA. to exercise utmiioat care in passing upon such applications and
to deiiy any such application only upon a clear fniluic by the State
to meet the requirements of this section
Sect ion 14 I I mi l o l tin_ (AO liii n corel it ions w Ii n —I i Iii ict be met
before an EPA ,heteriii I nat iou to i et i ,hi’ a SI nte s 1)1 I lila I cii (one-
meiit respoiusuliility iului% hue effecti ’.e Fir-st the Auhiiuiiuistr.itoi ruitust
submit to the State iii n i 1mg a siatciii nit of tIm Sliecitic uelLuuiicnl(.r ,ts
which lie hi rids tIe State is i 0 loiugc r ii met i iig and I lie basis foi t Ii is
finding Second. (he Adniniiist aloi niiist piot ide nii opportuiiiits for
publn_ hearing ‘I’Le Adniuiiistralor’s hiiinl detem iiiuiliitioni lii net o Le or
leave in effect the States primary euiforcenient iespouisibihit ) is riot
required to be niade on the recoid of this hearing, however
For the phrpose of this section the phrase “adequate procedures for
the cii forcement. of such Statc regulations” includes suithicuently expedi-
tioiis administrative and judicial annthorit ins and prot-eduires to a ure
(hat, if properly exercised, these proce(luires and authorities will obvi-
ate the neCc itv for h’etler ul ciifor-,-ernent unIter spi tmori 1414 This
means that a State must he able to take eflective action within 60 days
lifter receipt of a riot ice of Iioflconnpliance from EPA to lii unig a system
i ruto coin p1 in rice at t lie ear lost (nuci hIt- ti miii
SFCflON i 4i4 FArLURE flY ar .STE ‘ro Assusx ENFC)RC sirr Or
DRuNKiNO WATPR aEOULArroNa
C ‘ndrI’ons for Fe era] enf orcem-ent
This section sets forth thc conditions tinder which Federal eiifort- ’-
rnent of primary drinking water regulations may occur If the Adniin-
istrator finds a violation is occnirning in a State sthich has primary
enforcement responsibility, he must give notice of the alleged viola-
tion to the State
If the Administrator finds that (lie noncompliance extends beyond
tIle t hun n-tb cia), lie is I e,l,iire,l to muiiti fy the public of this finding He
6474
SAFE DI1INEINC WATER ACT
P L 93—521
is olco reqiiireil to request the State to report within 15 days as to the
steps it us taking to bring the system into compliance
‘1 he Committee uiit iidc that such reply be as specific mis poesihie
It ciuu ,iul ,l specify a tmunetrible by which compliance will he ucliieved
and In, 1 iule i nt iri i m ateps I hat will he t a ken Tt should also include a
stmiteinent of t lie legal niitliorrt whit ii the Stnte nnt nds to rely iilS)fl
a oh mv r einaiiuuiig legal steps that a ill be taken by the State to
nssiul - t lint the tiniiettulule is followed Mere (leclarmit ions of intent
to conunienice legal i ,ruieeedin or other sinilan vacua declarations
of int,-uit would not be qiifficienu to conStitute the required reply under
thus sect un It is further expected thuut the State would amend itS
reply if. after th 0 iiiit.inl suibniussuoui of such reply to EPA, such State
lied ice soii to bel ii’s e t lie ciminpl i aim e timetable, inch uid i ng interim
steps would not. be iiii’t_ ‘l’he Coiuiinitteu’ ( ‘tl)ects that the _&dminiis-
truutor will piomulguite reqmiirenients for regular followiip reports
from the Stats on pr-ogress being made toward bringing about com-
pliance liuirsuiant . to the Administi atom’s authority tinder section 1413
to issue reguulat ions concerning State programs
If a system rematns in noncompliance sixty days after the initial
notice by EPA and if the State has failed to submit the report re-
quested a ithin tin’ I ‘i clay per mod or the Admiuiust rntor deterTninics
lint Ii failing to iuiiplenieult umdequiate procedures by the sixtieth day
to bring the system into compliaiiee by the earliest feasible date the
State has abused its discretion in cii rying out its primarY en forcement
responsibility, then the Administrator niftY commence an enforcement
art ion iniider smibsei-tjoii (hi)
In using the phrase “abuised its discretion in carrying out itfi pri-
mary enforcement responsibility”, the Committee intends that any
failuire by a State to implement by the sixtieth day adequate prece-
duurea to bring a system into compliance by the ear’iest feasible timA
be considered a per ee abu c of discretion by the State Such a failure
is both a necessary an(l sufficient condition for enforcement action by
the Administrator Such a failiuie sonld conustitiute an abuse of dis-
cud mu whiethu’r it results from negligence, inattention, lack of ad-
equate tn--hinicuil niiil culforceuluent personnel, or from any other cause
‘J’huis, in the (‘ornnuiittee’s VH ’SV ill) defeumse to au enforcement action
by EPA. would lie on the ground thuat, thomigh the State huud failed to
iuuupleuuieuut such adequate prou_eduir es by tim sixtieth day, the State did
nut abuse its discretion
Iii net ewing the date determined by tim State to be the earliest
ía u il,le time Oii amiy sstenn to come into cOmnIllian ice. the Adminiis—
tu atou should consider, among other matters, till techniological alterna-
lit es a mud inuu.unicial u esou ices a hi uchu may iie available to the public water
5) steuii on to thi ent it) which opei .utes it If a St ite lia.s not uiiitiated
ui ocudui m es svhu n Ii would bri rig t lie 5)-St ciii i ito coin p1 mance at the earliest
fe.usmble tuumie, this a mild ciinstutuute au abuse of thuscretionu a ithumn tIme
iuue,u mum hg o so t I on 14 14, sin-lu t hu.mt Ft-u len a ] en forceunent efforts a ouu Id
hue u 11(1 Ui I zed lii a, 1,1 it iou u, .L ,t ut c a iii lii ha deeuiied to ha cc abused
its uic-ci et uu,ui if ut mv tunie prior to n-hIll I5ii Q being achieved, such
St_ut ii fiti Is to (Iii)’ • •iit ii (iliCi 1 allY follow —uuIl oi cii ( rceiuieuit proce—
•luiue—, uie(essan s to ii luiuts e ,_ouuul;luuliui e auth in the I iulue conutenipliuted
I I cisc pm need tunes
i lue ,hiIi iii st is ton us also a uut licuri u- i l to coiumn ieuuco enforcement
a tluiu ml l’-° uu’lIu lust of thue (lot u-rmuoi (or ol her clume f e set-ut it-c officer)
6475
-------
i ,EGTSJATIvE 1IiSTOJ3Y
P L 93—521
of a state (ii upon request of (lie ag i.% of the St.ite lesponsible for
n sni ingi oinpliince wit ii di iiikiiig a flier regliiat,ioiis
Coiit muons violet ions of priliiar%’ drinking anter regulations woiilul
of course, be biasis for Federal eiifoiceinei actions tinder tIne condi-
tions stated above The Committuw also intends (lint sporadic bitt in-
pouted viohiitioiis of tire iegiilnt,ioes hue siibtect to Fpderal eynforcemeiit
uin, her conditiotis de,si’i lied a boy e It shoii Id 1)1’ tinfoil in his regard
tim t a V u,l t ion OeCii is iv lienet em a ii ia m l I In I COil tflnii imnint Tot ci is cx—
ceemlemi 01 a I rent nwnt te4’hnique is not followed hiOweser hriefl’ 1 While
the (joiiimnnt tee does inn?. intenil to rethiilre enforcement ae ,tmoiis to be
comiwierit oil a itli i espu’ct. to cinch iSolated iolation, it is intentJ l (lint
tI 0 public receite notice of eath vnoiatioii which is found to occur
In the event the Administrater finds that a violation is occurring in
a State which does not have priltiary enforcemetit iespoiisibility, be
is hot. reuju I red to give the Stimi t’ iiot no prior to Coiiinnencing a Suit to
coin pci coin 1 din iicc a ith the national pit inn ri regmi hat ions.
Iwiwial eiiforceme
Section 1414 also provides that courts entertaining suits tinder this
section may enter each judgment as the public health nifty require,
taking into account, the time necessary to comply and the availability
of alternative water supplies Therefore, the Committec intends that
courts which are considering remedies in enforcement actions under
this section are not to apply traditional balancing principles used by
eqiiitycomir Rathei, they are directed to give utmost weight to the
Committee’s paramount objective of providing maximum feasible pro-
tection of the public health atthe times specilled in the bill
Although requiring prompt complianre by some small outdated
systems may in effect. force the closing thereof, such a court order
would be both permissible and warranted if an expansion of existing
regional water service or other State or local assistance could be pro-
vided to assure the asailability of adequate and safe drinking aster
supplies to those presently serviced
Notice to wiees
Section 1414(e) requires public water systems to give notice to the
misers of time si Stein (inn to (lie pimhilic iiiimler live Separnte circuiiiistances
(1) alien the systei fails to eoiii 1 ifv a itli ii iiiaxllniiin contnmniiiiaiit
letel reqmiireiiicir i , of a mit inmirel pi irriar v iii miikiiig wnter iegnmhi(it,in
(2) alien (lie eisti nIi f iihs tin use nut of (lie ii’uhiiiipil tre:rtiii,iit tre ii —
iiiuhmim.’ m)f a iii mmii Pt iiii:ni t di iiikimi a:itei rcguilatioii ( I ahipii (lie
si sum fails to pet fumi iii tesi ing or iiiuiiitoi ing as required by such a
im ’gmil mtimm ni hi Sum timmum II IL (4) wlieii a St teiui has iem m’is’eml in tIlt i—
ain’t’ iiiimlmi imt miii (Ii ‘(.i) (I) ( ‘ ) oi Ill m(:m) (2) (tom au mn,ml>ilmti to
inmeet a iii,i\iilili’ii m’ouiiunriiuieiit Intel ieutiii lm’iIiI.iit ) oi liii,. it, citeil iii
(‘euui mt mmmii iiiinim.i set into I I hi oi ( ) tt hiiui ,m stst’iii hems f.iileml (it
lilt it iii .ini si liemlruli’ iii i nit intl iil( ’,ismnim ’ iio’ i thu-st piii ’Iiimit tn t
ii tHCi’ (Ii I S lunipt (iii
The piii pose of t his not ice reqn ircinent is to educate (lii’ public as to
the estemit to a liicli l)mil)lir: it it ii Si Sti’imis St’i sing (h umi Ion >n fium utile”
iiianlpn 1 in ’itel,, iii light f tlu objet t es and fl 5 hnuiieuuiu’iits of this hill
Such 1)11(11 it’ ciii i a 1 morn is deern il e Seun tin I IJ the Coiimimi it c c in mulct’ to
deselop 1 niinl , nit aum’iin•ss of (lie Iim1tlt’umi fit ifl (. h)iilihie itt’ sisti’ii ’-,
to cmii i)miiiig it a ihliiigiri’ss tim Smippoi t gie.i(ei i ’Shmeii(hituiit . it .ihh ln ’si’ls
SAFE l)IIINhING WATER ACT
P L 91—521
of gotl’i uiuiieiit tim assist iii mIt ruin uhmm’sm’ hiomluhm’iilS, niol tO it_It Sm’ thin
Imuihulic uif hmoteiit iii oi am tuiiil hie ,iltl hi:ii,iiils
lii hnnm’ping truth this purpose, the Coiniiiittee Tins specified certain
met hiods and frequencies for giving notice to tine public and has con-
fei ieul niiithiom tv liii tire Adiniimiust m intmrr to iire -riire the form and taco-
tier of this notice ‘J’he regulations of the Anhimiinistrator must, of
course, lie rensoiiabic and related to the purpose expressed above
Notice should inform tine public, iiot minduly alarm it Thus, the Corn-
mitice expects thma, tire Adiiminns(rator’s regulations womikh permit pub-
Tic water systenus to give fair exphanatioii of tire significance or sermomis-
ness for thic pmihil ic lienuhthi itt any vioiiitioni, failmiic. exenmpt iou or vari-
ance ‘These regulations shim.rnild also permit fair explanation of steps
takein by the systeirm to cot rect unity pi elrlein
On tine other hand, tine Adiiinuiistm-nitor’s regulations should assure
that unduly technical language, small print., or other methods which
would lininder l)tibhic nnvumreness arc not. iisemi Moreover, it may be
neees.sniy to require bi-hiiigual notice in certain communities to assuire
iid t ’i 1 ntate tint no is gi n’eui it, all segiiii ’iits of (lie inib 1ic ‘J’lin diinuin—
is? i ,ttuun s m ‘grilutioins shimminhul also i i’iIIi lie that. (lie thiee—miiomit ,h not ice
iiim’huimie all uohat nip, not inn t imimushy 101)01 ted, es en though they iiat’e
lain tot tin terl iii the tunic of iimutiticntion
‘Flie (‘rnimuiiiittec icr cgini u’s t lint. iim snmne iiistaiices ap nai emit iolot iOi i5
uuu,ni im’suihi fnmuiim inuoiiitumi lug ci tot ( )iih’. if thin’ 1 ,milihit tsuitm’i sssteiii
munihul ntis nub’ 1m ’ ,ismtm’ mimiof dint im’hi lliiigs in m’MeSS of rcguhintioius
situ’ t mum’ to sum hi ci mi itiurihil thim’ ss”,tn’iii hue ‘‘i misemi fioiii tIre inmutit a
im’qiiii oiuii ’iit uiiimhm’u slut mu 1-h hi lii “nit_hi .i riism’ tint’ ( ‘ummnniumittee, aiitii I—
pates thiiit, (lii’ sisteimu is iii iio(ifv ii ipiopn into 1 nribhic iuutlioi itmcs of
Suit_li iiiuuuiitOi ilig oi saiiiph mug I’m nuts
The Administrator’s regulations would be expected to differentiate
bet tveen the type of notice which might he ordered in case of urti-
tmiimuent anti srmiuetantnal endaiigernient under section 1431 and that
which is required in ie.sssei uomis nees tinder this sectuon
Section 14 14(c) also contains provision making punishable by a
fine of tip to $5,000 a is ihlfmil fauluirc to g e (he i CihUil ed unotice
S’econdaruj di ni l isq nt_a/cr ,eqrdal,ons
N’,ttio,iiih su’i oimthiui y di imih.miig st,itei mn’grihlu(iorus ate mmmii femhei,ihhi’
eiifoi cciulmie If tIne Athiiiiiiisti ittom fui h’, t lint t Imese tegmilations ant’ tiot
hmei ii .,r ciuiiiini med a itin utah (lint the ,m rite is f,n ilmuig to take reasomualule
.ini iou to as,smit e coiiiimhiaimn n , lie uiimmst team f 3 t lie State.
j?etent,on of ,S’tatc and Focal authority
r’et mon 1414 m eta m ins iii I lie. St ates in mid political subdivisions the
I uglut to nndunpt amid cmi frum i e a iii di mink umig ti ater regulations or laws
it. c’hiooses However, no persotu may be relieved of tine ditty to comply
with requirements tinder thus bill by any State or local regulations or
laws (except umisofar as varmauices, exeniptions, or tetnpornry permits
thaw be issued by States pursuant to authorities expressly conferred by
thins bill)
J ’e/il,r /im’arnngn to encouzrags compliance
P’inalhy, section h4 14 (f) iuttlinni ices the Administrator, mupon receipt
a it-i mtuon by a wtuutc it it hi pm ituinrv em forectmneunt. i es 1 nmnsubmhity or by
1 ,r1d ‘inter s ’stcmn or ity unimy 1 uersmimi art ‘ii by a system which the
Atlmunuuuistrator tunis is mint, tui n’ouuuihnuimit e it ithu any uiat tonal primary
6477
6476
-------
LEGISLATIVE hISTORY
P L 9J—523
(Irurikirig water iegiilntion or w lii .ini oIlier ieqiiirerflc,it under section
1415 or 1416. to ornhiict, until i( heai I igs nith respect, to such non-
cornpiiinnce The purpose of I lice- hear Ing , is to gal tier information on
the way in winch lie ystciii em he lii ought into compliance at the
earliest feasil,ie time 1 lie purpose is also to explore irreans for the
mn inuiun feasible pmt u-t ion of the lOilulir health (luring any period
of noncompliance ‘l’hiree hearings shrill he the bacis for recomrnan(la.
turns by (lie Administrator l’ln -se recomuiie,iulat ions are to he sub-
mitted to (he State. lIme piululic iiater c%stem. nun to the communica-
tions media arid are tui Is’ rna(le an nilumble to tIre public
Nothing iii cii used ion (1) is mt eiolei I by the Corn mit tee to limit, the
Administrator’s nuithom it to act Rva i7rnnte to liokl hearings or to make
reconlunendations to effect lisle flue piiipocec of this bill Nor is the so-
thoi ity in subsection (f) iuiten(led in any may to be construed as a con-
dition precedent to Federal enforcement
SFCFIo ( 1415 V ifliANi ,Eg
State variance auth ority
Section 1415 aiithuori7eg vnm-u:inu’eq from primary drinking water
regulations to be granted on two separate hia,scs
First, a State which has primary enforcement responsibility for
public water systems may grant one or more variances to aiiy system
which cannot meet maxunmluim contaminant lcvcl renulurements despite
application of the most effective treatment meLhod This variance is
intended to d ciii with the Situation in which the system cannot comply
with primary regulation intake requirements (and thus cannot comply
with maximum contaminant level output limits) despite all reasonable
technological, economic, and legal efforts to do so The Conunrttce an-
ticipates that in exercising this authority States will peruodicnll 3 re-
view variances to assure that they are still necessary and that all rea-
sonable efforts to obtain access to a satisfactory raw water source are
being made by the system
Second, States with primary enforcement responsibility may grant
a variance from a primary driuikung water regulation which requires
the miss of treatment technique(s) if a satisfactory showing is made
by a publicwnter system that such treatment is unnecessary to pro-
tect the public health This variance is designed to apply to situations
in which the systern’nn raw water source is substantially cleaner than
the mIziimurn intake water requirements
The Committee anticipates that ans’ such variance would, uuiclei the
Administrator’s regulations, be conditin-irienl upon monitoring and peri-
odic review to assure that it continuation is warranted Furtherniore,
section 1415 requires notice and opportunity for a public hearing be-
fore any such ‘-arinncc niav take effect Separate notice and hearing is
not. re(liiireil of cccli armance. however
EPA review of State action
The Cornniittee coatennplntce that EPA will carefiill’, review thc
variances which are granted by States to assure that the state has iiot
abused its discretion in grantuug ariaiices and hag not failed to unpose
reasonable control measures
If the Administrator finds that,, in a cnilustaritial niinuiber of cases,
the State has guanted variances which were clearly unwarranted or
SAFE DRINKING WATER A T
PL 93—523
has failed to impose reasonable control measures during tIre period of
the variances, he must notify (lie St ite of thn fin(lung The iiotiee
must include, among other things, proposed retocations of specific
variances or revised control measure requirements or both
Reasonable notice and public hearing on the notice must be pro-
vided by the Administrator before any final action may lie tnikeri
After such hearing the Administrator must either resc;nd his fluidiiig
or must take action to promulgate lie ‘.nriarice revocations and re-
vised control measure requirements mihicli he proposed Tn ordeu to
afford States an adequate oppoituiniti to take correctime action in re-
sponse to the Administrator’s notice, section 1415 precludes nov action
by the Administrator from taking effect for 90 days after the Ad-
ministrator has sent notice of the proposed rem ocatioiis and revised
control measures Moreomer, if such timely corrective State rictiori is
forthcoming, the Administrator is required to rescind flue application
of his finding to the variance or contiol measure or other requlirenient
which has been corrected.
This system of EPA oversight us intended by the Committee to con-
fer masimuim responsibility on States which make appropriate efforts
to effectuate the purposes of the Act While some EPA rem mew of State
granted variances from national regulations was deemed nceessar 3 by
the Committee to assure the effectuation of the national policy, it is
not intended that EPA engage in a case-by-case review or substitute
ita judgment for the well-exercised judgment of a State EPA notice to
a State is mvarrTuntu—d uuiihy when a significant nnmmls’r of cases can lie
shown of State nctuoii inconsistent with flue intent, of this I)ihl
In determining what conslutuites a significant nuimhi-r of cases the
number cuf consumers affected by such variuu rices should be consrdeied
EPA variance authority
Section 1415 also provides that public water systems in States which
do not have primary enforcement responsibility may obtain variances
froiii EPA mu the same n)aniier arid under the saunC conditions as they
could fiomnu the State, if It hind pi imuniy r -iifornvmi.nt iespomisibihity
In addition to the tMo types of variances which States iiiay giant,
section IllS ntuthiorizes the Admituistiator to giant a different type of
man irimuci
Under thus fiuiah variance authority, the Administrator may grant
a variance. upon application of a public water System or other inter-
ested person, if tire applicant muiakes a showing to the Administrator’s
satisfaction that another Li eat-merit technique is of at least equal effec-
II’. (neSs to anc ti eatuncnt, techiniquie requii rreh by the Admnuiu tm-ator
mmmlii .1 1° iuueunm nh inking minter regrulrufuorm A mci ir’n (e under (lure ion—
micron iuunmct Is’ condi(iimiasl on the Ice of the alternative teehrruu 1 ue which
is f iii hurucus of t hue viii armee
Sen tion 1415 also provides that the condrtmonal requirements of van-
8d0 (‘S mm lid tier gi ariteul by EPA mi by t lie States are eui foreah,le by
El’ ins if tlm wire part. of a national primary drinking water
regulation
SF(jrm(uN i4iiu 1ixEar1 i-rows
SNtu,uii 1416 mutliorrze.s any St,uute wInch hiss primary enforcement
reciuummisihumhit 3 to rixenipt a purblic water system from any maximum
coiitaiuuiiuaunt level rechiiir ciiieilt or from any treatment technique re-
(Iii ii nuimiuit Ii poi I a Ii nd i rig tliunt, th 53 temn is u mnalule ti, conul p13 d uie to
6479
6478
-------
LEGISLATIVE HISTORY
PL 91—52 i
compelling factors These factors nus inclitile economic factors, such
as the high cost of piirrhnciiig and c( iIlctI iii fAng neces,aiy eqiiipnient
or facilities arid the los per cillifla incoltie iiiid small number of rest-
dents in i conirnunity served by the system.
The aiithorit to grant siaJi e .emptiuns is limited to public systems
in opi ’Intioli ott (lie eIFCLti%c daft ’ (if (he 1)1 olin v reguliif Ion ew c s—
(snis which ate plauci ift(o npeiitt ion after (lint dale ale expecleil to
comply with (he riqui I enieii(s Sc itlioiit, lilly 4’ceiiil ltii)n Mon itvt ’i iii
ciinciilei tug w!iethiii ecoItiiiiilc fitctois are siillicueiit Iv coiiipel hug Li)
art a ,ìt :iut exempt lO l l utti let tl is section. it is aittici paled that the
St ttes will weigh any pl.iniied expait..ltin of existing facilities of I lie
system In the Committees Vies’., if a Systeiit has stiflicient fiunils to
permit substantial expansion of canacitv and service, these funds
should first be used to assure the sale quality of the drinking aater
presently being supplied In such cases, States should be extremely
reluctant to grant exemptions on economic grounds
If a State does grant an exemption to any public water system under
section 14 16, it roust within one sear tlierct.fter liresenbe a aehieditle
for bringing the system into compliance (including inciements of pro-
gress) and for interim control measures during the pendency of the
exemption. These schedules may be p cribed by the State only after
notice and opportunity for a public hearmg on the proposed schedule
The conilihiance schiehitle most provitle for conijihiaitie by the ‘;ys—
tein v. ithi (lii ’ leihmillilneitiS of the pm iiiii(r , regiiliittiiiis a c 1 ii ’dmtioiislv
as pm act teali he lii at 13’ 05 emit. I lose ii , the iiin ph a lice nate rn iist be
titi hiiiei than . 1 aii itiiy I. P)Sl. iii (lie (uS C tif liii exeilihiti(iii (mom liii
ilium illi it ’giil .it hut. tutu iiii hillel thuimu SeS(’ii yetii .tfiui (lie i’lri’i tiiit
ihiite iii .t ii’. i ’cil ii.glil.iiiohu iii the i .i e of an i\iiiihitmoli fio such
regl I lit (ions (eat Cl it t hunt iii cit her ase two adu lit intuit I cit is may li
giuiiitu.ul if the s’.s(iiul ic cuter ilii tutu a regional csat(l svcterii)
This cli (toll alsit (liii’. ales (ut a sc stein of El ’A re’. toss of State—
gm:iiited cxdntlittiiiic o, rei 1 uiiriih to ciuiiiluleti. ciii hi it re’. less ithuiii
lu iuiuuutthus iftit (lie elfis tus u. (late of (lie tiut,i un ni.giilul units ‘I lie pio—
uu’illtui.c aniul ii its’i ii i for l I ’ ie ’ . ies ’ . of State gunufi 1 ( ciiipltinIts tine
aim 111.1 (0 thtuu ’,i’ cc tilt e,juu ’ui lut s an i.tiuue ’,
‘e( I aiii 1 11(1 tl o liii’. tile’, ( Ii it hutillil ‘.i.iti.i ‘ ‘ . stunnis iii St.iti•s is liii I i
rhti iuuil liii’. t’ ii thOu’. ( ‘ii (iii i i ’luii’hit Ii ‘ ,luuuti ’ ,ihil lit’. liii’. uhf tin i’’,uuiuti—
((OtiS fi,iuii I ’l’ . in liii’ uiiui. iiitiiinii ,iiiil uiuiuhiu (lii’ , mu umiuilit iii’,
tic (lii ’ . u untIl fliiiui t lii ’ Stile, if ii laid iii iiuu.um s iniloi, i’iiuiiit ie,juoiini—
bilit
Pairr C ’—I’rri.r i;iiii’ iii’ U ticiwiiuiu’,mi Siii,iii r ’. ui l)iii—.i i’.i \ , ‘ .i -i
i.,i.(Imiu i. 12i itEt,Li ,,Siiii ’ 5S touR Si /sir i ’itii(.li / sMS
Guuiu(el,iues for ,S ’lafe proqra;n
Si ’utioii I P21 is iiuteiniltil In estalthishu a I”eilei:iI Stifu’ s’ustci li of
uiiii iii i ’, ’.niii’ hill ili iuul.uiig u. iii ‘—iiiin c— lu tiu.ul ,uiunl huh mih,il
iiie nut r,ntli.ni’il hull for ciii Ii use Iiy utuidi’iguuiuuitil iuiji’i taut ot inn—
tahiuinaiits ‘l’lue glutiluIlnu’s fom the States’ ii’guihistouv ilogiiinis are to
lie pmoi’uiilgnitu ’ul Lv (lie Adiiiiiiustu ulor silt liiii 3(0 ihi ’ .i affci euiai t—
niettt utili ilt)titIilgttttiuli is (in lie iiu.u ‘uled Ii’. Iiiopuu ’ .tl huh iulihuiimtiu_
iiut ’ . fin luiihihii lii’ltl mug i ’. ‘ .‘.i’ll tic ilnhiuuttuuhttt ’ . to ciuiihtiu•ii( lii ii ’’iiitil—
anti e a thu ‘ I S I’ Sit. Ii jiioiiintlg.ttiuitm us ,mlso i,i Ii’ iti.u eileil Ii ’ ,
SAFE DRINKING WATER ACT
P L 93—523
u iiii ’.i’li.it hut a ithi (lie Si’u’li’limi iiiiii I lii’ (‘iuiuuh ii .iiiil othnt’i itlil)iO—
lii liii’ I’ ‘deiuil ittiul . .tiu(i’ i ii( itit’s
lii \iliiiiuiisl tutu s guiuulehiutc’c (ii , Stile uuutuii’ugimuuiitil iiijeu lieu iou—
iuul 1 uiuglaluiS mntast, a’. a iniiiuiiuuiiim, ri’iliiirc States to (I) piohiliit
Ititaull ltortzeul nuialei grouttid inject nit cffci (ice three years after enact—
riti’rul of (Ii us Intl . (2) req uuii e applicants for nude i grouunu] injection
lWi nuts to hear the bit ruien of prosing to (lie State t hat its injection
sill uuuul endinger d rin ki lug water soiu rees, (3) i oft ai n froni adopting
regiulnt molts a iiieh either on their face or mis applied would authorize
iiitdt’rgiottnd iuijia (ion sslii,’hi ettilangers drinking water sources;
(4) adopt inspection, monitoring. recordkeeping, and reporting
reii iii ‘hiit’nts for t lie iuui rpose of (hits l’am t . and ( ‘I) appls (Item r m mijctt—
I mt i omit m oh piogi iimuis to tundem ground iliject lens Ii’. I’ edt , at agencies
amid It’. ut’. oilier pcmsomi schielhier or not occurring omi l”cderall) -owned
01 ie,tsed lit Ohtertv
l”iimthti’iiiioue the Cammni(tee seeks to base su’ceral major policies
ini 1 ulentented First, potential as well as presently-used dnimukurig water
sources are to be protecled Second, (lie protection ma to apply to any
injected substance (or derivative thereof) whether or not that sub-
stutmice is is conlamimiant slib)ect to national primary drinking water
regulations Thus the injection is to be subject to regulation or pro-
hibition if the injected sutbstanee may cause or contribute to non-
complIance with a national pnirnar tiruriking waler regutlalmon or
if it niav 01 het cc cu ’ adversely affect the linuhmhuc liealtIt. mnu-Iuudlng
caumsimig or conli mbiittrig to the sister’s unfitness for human comisttmp-
Lion
Numerous public and private agencies which have eon idered the
matter ha’. o become concerneil ahioutt (Inc sntbstnintiah hazards amid dan-
gers associated ‘.511 1 1 deep well injection of couitamunutnts Vow Chem-
ical (‘itt poi at ion whuelt had piomicered deep i’.chh inject inn as a method
of mnuhuist m ittl V. aste uhisposal. hmas deciiled to stop thrilling new wells
amid to pltase oumt es.istnmig scells, hueauise of these hiaznn’ds New Yom k
State has declared that it. will regard (heels well tnject ton as a “last
resort” affer esalitatnon of all nilter uimcthoils ?sum le other Slates dir-
rently reject or uliscouirage al)l)hicattouis for injetuori s3stemtns The
US Geological Sunsey and the ltuinuinui of Mines have c’cpu-essed ill-
creasing worr’, about the indicci trttinatc “sweepumig of mir sastes
mindergrouuuid “ Sormie commentators have esen ternued utijection sell
actions as “ult ntihiazmurdous activity”
5oujethmeles . uimtuhem grontmiul umijet t nun of eouutiintuit,ituts us eleam ly an
irudleasimug pm oh,leitu Miuruictpahit it’s ate umiu m e.usmmugl elugugumug lit liii—
tlt’lguuuthnnil tutji’u I mutt ui st’’.n.ugi’, slumilgi’ iuhuih uillue , scacles hihulit’ul lit’s
tire tlljts tnmtg u hui’tiiui’mihc, it’. lii mliii Is. it mid w usli’s Euwi g ’ . pi iudilct huh
I 0ttt )iittte’, iu me ut’.i tg i iijucttiuui ti’illtulqniu’ ’. tin tutu re,msi’ i)ililit ott ititil
to lms umise if nuiti’.unii(t’il hum imtcs Iuuttitghil to thu. Slim I:ii I’ (lull IlIg litmtlmu —
tIoti i ’ uemt goi t’i lhn’tt’ltt iigt’ii( Ii’s, umuu’huihmuig (lit muimlmtumm V. ame gt’I(uuig
rtu1 of ulilluu ill In itiilltflge s astt’ Iuiolthitus It’. uitmulu’ugiuttmuitl uluciult’,.il
riuetlutals Pamt (_ ts ill ’ttded tut thaI a tilt till of the fuumegotutg si(niimtuolnS
iiisofuim as t llt ’ mlii’.’ u’iidangu’m itmuchem pm ummtmid tlt mitt imig cc ittt’I SOhiiu t’s
Jut requuriitg EI’A to prornuilguite mlmitmulm requirements for effec-
the State programs to prevent umidergrnund injection which en-
tlemtireus it uttktiig snitch suiluri i’ s tine (‘iuuthluultteC mmutt’nudsto ratmi’. l P. ’s
j ol Ic’. Oil deep scell uuuject uomi (See ‘19 l”eil Rep 12)22_3, Ala il 9. Ii) u4)
I us humilhu I Sit’, litsl it(iutl)teul ii’. thte I’u’tlt’inl Vt aten Qulality Adititmins—
6481
6480
-------
CO
Dec. 16 SAFE DRINKING WATER A T P.L. 93-523
SAFE DRINKING WATER ACT
For Legislolive Hislory of Aci, see p. 6454
PUBLIC LAW 93-523; 88 STAT. 1660
(S 433]
An Act to amend the Public Health Service Act to assure that the public
a provided with safe drinking water, and for other purpose,.
Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United
States of Amerjca in Congress assembled, That
SHORT TITLE
Section 1 This Act may be cited as the ‘Safe Drinking Water
Act”.
PUBLIC WATER SYSTEMS
Sec. 2. (a) The Public Health Service Act is amended by in-
serting after title XIII the following new title:
“TITLE XIV—SAFETY OF PUBLIC WATER SYSTEMS
“Part A—Definitions
DEFINITIONS
“Sec 1401 For purposes of this title:
“(1) The term ‘primary drinking water regulation’ means a
regulation which—
“(A) applies to public water systems;
“(B) specifies contaminants which, in the judgment of
the Administrator, may have any adverse effect on the
health of persons,
“(C) specifies for each such contaminant either—
“(i) a maximum contaminant level, if, in the judg-
ment of the Administrator, it is economically and tech-
nologically feasible to ascertain the level of such con.
taminant in water in public water systems, or
“(ii) if, in the judgment of the Administrator, it is
not economically or technologically feasible to so ascer-
tain the level of such contaminant, each treatment tech-
nique known to the Administrator which leads to a
reduction in the level of such contaminant sufficient
to satisfy the requirements of section 1412, and
“(D) contains criteria and procedures to assure a supply
of drinking water which dependably complies with such
maximum contaminant levels; including quality control and
testing procedures to insure compliance with such levels
and to insure proper operation and maintenance of the sys-
tem, and requirements as to (i) the minimum quality of
water which may be taken into the system and (ii) siting
for new facilities for public water systems
36. 42 U S C A 201 et seq
1909
-------
P.L. 93—523 LAWS OF 93rd CONG.—2nd SESS. Dec. 16
“(2) The term ‘secondary drinking water regulation’ means a
regulation which applies to public water systems and which
specifies the maximum contaminant levels which, in the judg-
ment of the Administrator, are requisite to protect the public
welfare. Such regulations may apply to any contaminant in
drinking water (A) which may adversely affect the odor or ap-
pearance of such water and consequently may cause a substan-
tial number of the persons served by the public water system
providing such water to discontinue its use, or (B) which may
otherwise adversely affect the public welfare. Such regulations
may vary according to geographic and other circumstances.
“(3) The term ‘maximum contaminant level’ means the maxi-
mum permissible level of a contaminant in water which is de-
livered to any user of a public water system.
“(4) The term ‘public water system’ means a system for the
provision to the public of piped water for human consumption,
if such system has at least fifteen service connections or regu-
larly serves at least twenty-five individuals. Such term includes
(A) any collection, treatment, storage, and distribution facilities
under control of the operator of such system and used primarily
in connection with such system, and (B) any collection or pre-
treatment storage facilities not under such control which are
used primarily in connection with such system.
“(5) The term ‘supplier of water’ means any person who owns
or operates a public water system.
“(6) The term ‘contaminant’ means any physical, chemical,
biological, or radiological substance or matter in water
“(7) The term ‘Administrator’ means the Administrator of
the Environmental Protection Agency.
“(8) The term ‘Agency’ means the Environmental Protection
Agency
“(9) The term ‘Council’ means the National Drinking Water
Advisory Council established under section 1446.
“(10) The term ‘municipality’ means a city, town, or other
public body created by or pursuant to State law, or an Indian
tribal organization authorized by law.
“(11) The term ‘Federal agency’ means any department,
agency, or instrumentality of the United States
“(12) The term ‘person’ means an individual, corporation,
company, association, partnership, State, or municipality.
“Part B—Public Water Systems
COVERAGE
“Sec. 1411. Subject to sections 1415 and 1416, national primary
drinking water regulations under this part shall apply to each pub-
lic water system in each State, except that such regulations shall
not apply to a public water system—
“(1) which consists only of distribution and storage facilities
(and does not have any collection and treatment facilities)
1910
-------
Dec. 16 SAFE DRINKING WATER ACT P.L. 93-523
“(2) which obtains all of its water from, but is not owned or
operated by, a public water system to which such regulations
apply,
“(3) which does not sell water to any person; and
“(4) which is not a carrier which conveys passengers in in-
terstate commerce.
“NATIONAL DRINKING WATER REGTJLATIONS
“Sec. 1412. (a)(1) The Administrator shall publish proposed na-
tional interim primary drinking water regulations within 90 days
after the date of enactment of this title. Within 180 days after such
date of enactment, he shall promulgate such regulations with such
modifications as he deems appropriate Regulations under this para-
graph may be amended from time to time.
“(2) National interim primary drinking water regulations promul-
gated under paragraph (1) shall protect health to the extent feasible,
using technology, treatment techniques, and other means, which the
Administrator determines are generally available (taking costs into
consideration) on the date of enactment of this title.
“(3) The interim primary regulations first promulgated under
paragraph (1) shall take effect eighteen months after the date of
their promulgation
“(b)(1)(A) Within 10 days of the date the report on the study
conducted pursuant to subsection (e) is submitted to Congress, the
Administrator shall publish in the Federal Register, and provide
opportunity for comment on, the—
“(i) proposals in the report for recommended maximum con-
taminant levels for national primary drinking water regulations,
and
“(ii) list in the report of contaminants the levels of which in
drinking water cannot be determined but which may have an
adverse effect on the health of persons
“(B) Within 90 days after the date the Administrator makes the
publication required by subparagraph (A), he shall by rule establish
recommended maximum contaminant levels for each contaminant
which, in his judgment based on the report on the study conducted
pursuant to subsection (e), may have any adverse effect on the
health of persons Each such recommended maximum contaminant
level shall be set at a le el at which, in the Administrator’s judg-
ment based on such report, no known or anticipated atherse effects
on the health of persons occur and which allows an adequate mar-
gin of safety In addition, he shall, on the basis of the report on the
study conducted pursuant to subsection (e), list in the rules under
this subparagraph any contaminant the level of which cannot be
accurately enough measured in drinking water to establish a recom-
mended maximum contaminant level and which may have any ad-
verse effect on the health of persons Based on information avail-
able to him, the Administrator may by rule change recommended
levels established under this subparagraph or change such list.
1911
-------
P.L. 93—523 LAWS OF 93rd CONG.—2nd SESS. Dec. 16
“(2) On the date the Administrator establishes pursuant to para-
graph (1)(B) recommended maximum contaminant levels he shall
publish in the Federal Register proposed revised national primary
drinking water regulations (meeting the requirements of paragraph
(3)) Within 180 days after the date of such proposed regulations,
he shall promulgate such revised drinking water regulations with
such modifications as he deems appropriate.
“(3) Revised national primary drinking water regulations promul-
gated under paragraph (2) of this subsection shall be primary drink-
ing water regulations which specify a maximum contaminant level
or require the use of treatment techniques for each contaminant for
which a recommended maximum contaminant level is established or
which is listed in a rule under paragraph (1)(B). The maximum
contaminant level specified in a revised national primary drinking
water regulation for a contaminant shall be as close to the recom-
mended maximum contaminant level established under paragraph
(1)(B) for such contaminant as is feasible A required treatment
technique for a contaminant for which a recommended maximum
contaminant level has been established under paragraph (1)(B)
shall reduce such contaminant to a level which is as close to the
recommended maximum contaminant level for such contaminant as
is feasible A required treatment technique for a contaminant
which is listed under paragaph (1)(B) shall require treatment nec-
essary in the Administrator’s judgment to prevent known or antici-
pated adverse effects on the health of persons to the extent feasible.
For purposes of this paragraph, the term feasible’ means feasible
with the use of the best technology, treatment techniques, and other
means, which the Administrator finds are generally available (tak-
ing cost into consideration).
“(4) Revised national primary drinking water regulations shall
be amended whenever changes in technology, treatment techniques,
and other means permit greater protection of the health of persons,
but in any event such regulations shall be reviewed at least once
every 3 years
“(5) Revised national primary drinking water regulations promul-
gated under this subsection (and amendments thereto) shall take
effect eighteen months after the date of their promulgation Regu-
lations under subsection (a) shall be superseded by regulations un-
der this subsection to the extent provided by the regulations under
this subsection.
“(6) No national primary drinking water regulation may require
the addition of any substance for preventive health care purposes
unrelated to contamination tf di-inking ater.
“(c) The Administrator shall publish proposed national secondary
drinking water regulations within 270 days after the date of enact-
ment of this title Within 90 days after publication of any such
regulation, he shall promulgate such regulation with such modifica-
tions as he deems appropriate Regulations under this subsection
may be amended from time to time
1912
-------
fl374
Dec. 16 SAFE DRINKING WATER ACT P.L. 93-523
“(d) Regulations under this section shall be prescribed in accord-
ance with section 553 of title 5. United States Code (relating to rule-
making), except that the Administrator shall provide opportunity
for public hearing prior to promulgation of such regulations. In
proposing and promulgating regulations under this section, the Ad-
ministrator shall consult with the Secretary and the National Drink.
ing Water Advisory Council
“(e)(1) The Administrator shall enter into appropriate arrange-
ments with the National Academy of Sciences (or with another in-
dependent scientific organization if appropriate arrangements can-
not be made with such Academy) to conduct a study to determine
(A) the maximum contaminant levels which should be recommended
under subsection (b)(2) in order to protect the health of persons
from any known or anticipated adverse effects, and (B) the exist-
ence of any contaminants the levels of which in drinking water
cannot be determined but which may have an adverse effect on the
health of persons.
“(2) The result of the study shall be reported to Congress no later
than 2 years after the date of enactment of this title. The report
shall contain (A) a summary and evaluation of relevant publications
and unpublished studies; (B) a statement of methodologies and as-
sumptions for estimating the levels at which adverse health effects
may occur; (C) a statement of methodologies and assumptions for
estimating the margin of safety which should be incorporated in the
national primary drinking water regulations, (D) proposals for
recommended maximum contaminant levels for national primary
drinking water regulations, based on the methodologies, assump-
tions, and studies referred to in clauses (A), (B), and (C) and in
paragraph (4) , (E) a list of contaminants the level of which in
drinking water cannot be determined but which may have an ad-
verse effect on the health of persons; and (F) recommended studies
and test protocols for future research on the health effects of drink-
ing water contaminants, including a list of the major research pri-
orities and estimated costs necessary to conduct such priority re-
search.
“(3) In developing its proposals for recommended maximum con-
taminant levels under paragraph (2)(D) the National Academy of
Sciences (or other organization preparing the report) shall evaluate
and explain (separately and in composite) the impact of the follow-
ing considerations
‘(A) The existence of groups or individuals in the popula-
tion which are more susceptible to adverse effects than the nor-
mal healthy adult
“(B) The exposure to contaminants in other media than drink-
ing water (including exposures in food, in the ambient air, and
in occupational settings) and the resulting body burden of con-
taminants
“(C) Synergistic effects resulting from exposure to or inter-
action by two or more contaminants.
1913
-------
P.L. 93-523 LAWS OF 93rd CONG.—2nd SESS. Dec. 16
“(D) The contaminant exposure and body burden levels which
alter physiological function or structure in a manner reason-
ably suspected of increasing the risk of illness
“(4) In making the study under this subsection, the National
Academy of Sciences (or other organization) shall collect and cor-
relate (A) morbidity and mortality data and (B) monitored data on
the quality of drinking water. Any conclusions based on such cor-
relation shall be included in the report of the study
“(5) Neither the report of the study under this subsection nor
any draft of such report shall be submitted to the Office of Manage-
ment and Budget or to any other Federal agency (other than the En-
vironmental Protection Agency) prior to its submission to Congress.
“(6) Of the funds authorized to be appropriated to the Adminis-
trator by this title, such amounts as may be required shall be avail-
able to carry out the study and to make the report directed by para-
graph (2) of this subsection
STATE PRIMARY ENFORCEM ENT RESPONSIBILITY
“Sec. 1413. (a) For purposes of this title, a State has primary
enforcement responsibility for public water systems during any pe-
riod for which the Administrator determines (pursuant to regula-
tions prescribed under subsection (b)) that such State—
“(1) has adopted drinking water regulations which (A) in
the case of the period beginning on the date the national interim
primary drinking ater regulations are promulgated under sec-
tion 1412 and ending on the date such regulations take effect
are no less stringent than such regulations, and (B) in the case
of the period after such effective date are no less stringent than
the interim and revised national primary drinking water regu-
lations in effect under such section;
“(2) has adopted and is implementing adequate procedures
for the enforcement of such State regulations, including con-
ducting such monitoring and making such inspections as the
Administrator may require by regulation,
“(3) will keep such records and make such reports with re-
spect to its activities under paragraphs (1) and (2) as the Ad-
ministrator may require by regulation,
“(4) if it permits variances or exemptions, or both, from the
requirements of its drinking water regulations which meet the
requirements of paragraph (1), permits such variances and ex-
emptions under conditions and in a manner s hich is not less
stringent than the conditions under, and the manner in, which
variances and exemptions may be granted under sections 1415
and 1416, and
“(5) has adopted and can implement an adequate plan for
the provision of safe drinking ater under emergency circum-
stances
“(b) (1) The Administrator shall, by regulation (proposed within
180 days of the date of the enactment of this title), prescribe the
manner in which a State may apply to the Administrator for a de-
1914
-------
Dec. 16 SAFE DRINKING WATER ACT P.L. 93-523
termination that the requirements of paragraphs (1), (2), (3), and
(4) of subsection (a) are satisfied with respect to the State, the
manner in which the determination is made, the period for which
the determination will be effective, and the manner in which the
Administrator may determine that such requirements are no longer
met. Such regulations shall require that before a determination of
the Administrator that such requirements are met or are no longer
met with respect to a State may become effective, the Administrator
shall notify such State of the determination and the reasons there-
for and shall provide an opportunity for public hearing on the de-
termination. Such regulations shall be promulgated (with such
modifications as the Administrator deems appropriate) within 90
days of the publication of the proposed regulations in the Federal
Register. The Administrator shall promptly notify in writing the
chief executive officer of each State of the promulgation of regula-
tions under this paragraph. Such notice shall contain a copy of
the regulations and shall specify a State’s authority under this title
when it is determined to have primary enforcement responsibility
for public water systems
“(2) When an application is submitted in accordance with the
Administrator’s regulations under paragraph (1), the Administrator
shall within 90 days of the date on which such application is sub-
mitted (A) make the determination applied for, or (B) deny the ap-
plication and notify the applicant in writing of the reasons for his
denial
“FAILURE BY STATE TO ASSURE ENFORCEMENT OF
DRI KI’ G WATER REGULATIONS
“Sec. 1414 (a)(1)(A) Whenever the Administrator finds during
a period during which a State has primary enforcement responsibil-
ity for public water systems (within the meaning of section 1413(a))
that any public water system—
“(i) for which a variance under section 1415 or an exemp-
tion under section 1416 is not in effect, does not comply with
any national primary drinking water regulation in effect under
section 1412, or
“(ii) for which a ariance under section 1415 or an exemp-
tion under section 1416 is in effect, does not comply with any
schedule or other requirement imposed pursuant thereto,
he shall so notify the State and provide such advice and technical
assistance to such State and public water system as may be appro-
priate to bring the system into compliance with such regulation or
requirement by the earliest feasible time
“(B) If the Administrator finds such failure to comply extends
beyond the thirtieth day after the date of the notice given pursuant
to subparagraph (A), he shall give public notice of such finding and
request the State to report within fifteen days from the date of such
public notice as to the steps being taken to bring the system into
compliance (including reasons for anticipated steps to be taken to
1915
-------
P.L. 93-523 LAWS OF 93rd CONG.—2nd SESS.
Dec. 16
bring the system into compliance and for any failure to take steps
to bring the system into compliance) If—
“(i) such failure to comply extends beyond the sixtieth day
after the date of the notice given pursuant to subparagraph (A);
and
“(ii)(a) the State fails to submit the report requested by the
Administrator within the time period prescribed by the preced-
ing sentence, or
“(a) the State submits such report within such period but the
Administrator, after considering the report, determines that the
State abused its discretion in carrying out primary enforcement
responsibility for public water systems by both—
“(I) failing to implement by such sixtieth day adequate
procedures to bring the system into compliance by the
earliest feasible time, and
“(II) failing to assure by such day the provision through
alternative means of safe drinking water by the earliest
feasible time,
the Administrator may commence a civil action under subsection
(b).
“(2) Whenever, on the basis of information available to him, the
Administrator finds during a period during which a State does not
have primary enforcement responsibility for public water systems
that a public water system in such State—
“(A) for which a variance under section 1415(a)(2) or an
exemption under section 1416(f) is not in effect, does not com-
ply with any national primary drinking water regulation in ef-
fect under section 1412, or
“(B) for which a ‘ariance under section 1415(a)(2) or an
exemption under section 1416(f) is in effect, does not comply
with any schedule or other requirement imposed pursuant there-
to,
he may commence a civil action under subsection (b)
“(b) The Administratoi may bring a civil action in the appropri-
ate United States district court to require compliance with a na-
tional primary drinking water regulation or with any schedule or other
requirement imposed pursuant to a variance or exemption granted
under section 1415 or 1416 if—
“(1) authorized under paragraph (1) or (2) of subsection
(a), or
“(2) if iequested by (A) the chief executive officer of the
State in which is located the public water system which is not
in compliance with such regulation or requirement, or (B) the
agency of such State which has jurisdiction over compliance by
public water systems in the State with national primary drink-
ing water regulations or State drinking water regulations.
The court may enter, in an action brought under this subsection,
such judgment as protection of public health may require, taking
into consideration the time necessary to comply and the availability
of alternative water supplies, and, if the court determines that
1916
-------
LUDE
1974
Dec. 16 SAFE DRINKING WATER ACT P.L. 93-523
there has been a willful violation of the regulation or schedule or
other requirement with respect to which the action was brought,
the court may, taking into account the seriousness of the violation,
the population at risk, and other appropriate factors, impose on the
violator a civil penalty of not to exceed $5,000 for each day in which
such violation occurs
“(c) Each owner or operator of a public water system shall give
notice t the persons served by it
“(1) of any failure on the part of the public water system
to-
“(A) comply with an applicable maximum contaminant
level or treatment technique requirement of, or a testing
procedure prescribed by, a national primary drinking water
regulation, or
“(B) perform monitoring required by section 1445(a), and
“(2) if the public water system is subject to a variance grant-
ed under section 1415(a)(1)(A) or 1415(a)(2) for an inability
to meet a maximum contaminant level requirement or is subject
to an exemption granted under section 1416, of—
“(A) the existence of such variance or exemption, and
“(B) any failure to comply with the requirements of any
schedule prescribed pursuant to the variance or exemption
The Administrator shall by regulation prescribe the form and man-
ner for giving such notice Such notice shall be given not less than
once every 3 months, shall be given by publication in a newspaper
of general circulation serving the area served by each such water
system (as determined by the Administrator), shall be furnished to
the other communications media serving such area, and shall be
furnished to the communications media as soon as practicable after
the discovery of the violation with respect to which the notice is
required If the water bills of a public water system are issued
more often than once every 3 months, such notice shall be included
in at least one water bill of the system every 3 months, and if a
public water system issues its water bills less often than once every
3 months, such notice shall be included in each of the water bills
issued by the system Any person who willfully violates this sub-
section or regulations thereunder shall be fined not more than $5,000
“(d) Whenever, on the basis of information available to him, the
Administrator finds that within a reasonable time after national
secondary drinking water regulations have b ’en promulgated, one
or more public water systems in a State do not comply with such
secondary regulations. and that such noncompliance appears to re-
sult from a failure of such State to take reasonable action to assure
that public water systems throughout such State meet such secon-
dary regulations, he shall so notify the State
“(e) Nothing in this title shall diminish any authority of a State
or political subdivision to adopt or enforce any law or regulation
respecting drinking water regulations or public water systems, but
no such law or regulation shall relieve any person of any require-
ment otherwise applicable under this title
1 USCong. &AdmNews 7 —129 1917
-------
P.L. 93-523 LAWS OF 93rd CONG.—Znd SESS. Dec. 16
“(f) If the Administrator makes a finding of noncompliance (de-
scribed in subparagraph (A) or (B) of subsection (a)(1)) with re-
spect to a public water system in a State which has primary en-
forcement responsibility, the Administrator may, for the purpose of
assisting that State in carrying out such responsibility and upon the
petition of such State or public water system or persons served by
such system, hold, after appropriate notice, public hearings for the
purpose of gathering information from technical or other experts,
Federal, State, or other public officials, representatives of such pub-
lic water system, persons served by such system, and other interest-
ed persons on—
“(1) the ways in which such system can within the earliest
feasible time be brought into compliance with the regulation or
requirement with respect to which such finding was made, and
“(2) the means for the maximum feasible protection of the
public health during any period in which such system is not in
compliance with a national primary drinking water regulation
or requirement applicable to a variance or exemption.
On the basis of such hearings the Administrator shall issue recom-
mendations which shall be sent to such State and public water sys-
tem and shall be made available to the public and communications
media.
‘VARIANCES
“Sec. 1415. (a) Notwithstanding any other provision of this part,
variances from national primary drinking water regulations may be
granted as follows
“(1)(A) A State which has primary enforcement responsibil-
ity for public ater systems may grant one or more variances
from an applicable national primary drinking water regulation
to one or more public water systems within its 3 urisdiction
which, because of characteristics of the raw water sources which
are reasonably available to the systems, cannot meet the re-
quirements respecting the maximum contaminant levels of such
drinking water regulation despite application of the best tech-
nology, treatment techniques, or other means, which the Ad-
ministrator finds are generally available (taking costs into con-
sideration) Before a State may grant a variance under this
subparagraph. the State must find that the variance will not
result in an unreasonable risk to health If a State grants a
public water system a variance under this subparagraph, the
State shall prescribe within one year of the date of the variance
is granted, a schedule fQr—
“Ci) compliance (including increments of progress) by
the public water system with each contaminant level re-
quirement with respect to which the variance was granted,
and
“(ii) implementation by the public ater system of such
control measures as the State may require for each con-
taminant, sub)ect to such contaminant level requirement.
1918
-------
1974
Dec. 16 SAFE DRINKING WATER ACT P.L. 93-523
during the period ending on the date compliance with such
requirement is required
Before a schedule prescribed by a State pursuant to this sub-
paragraph may take effect, the State shall provide notice and
opportunity for a public hearing on the schedule A notice
given pursuant to the preceding sentence may cover the pre-
scribing of more than one such schedule and a hearing held
pursuant to such notice shall include each of the schedules cov-
ered by the notice. A schedule prescribed pursuant to this sub-
paragraph for a public water system granted a variance shall
require compliance by the system with each contaminant level
requirement with respect to which the variance was granted as
expeditiously as practicable (as the State may reasonably de-
termine).
“(B) A State which has primary enforcement responsibility
for public water systems may grant to one or more public wa-
ter systems within its jurisdiction one or more variances from
any provision of a national primary drinking water regulation
which requires the use of a specified treatment technique with
respect to a contaminant if the public water system applying
for the variance demonstrates to the satisfaction of the State
that such treatment technique is not necessary to protect the
health of persons because of the nature of the raw water source
of such system. A variance granted under this subparagraph
shall be conditioned on such monitoring and other requirements
as the Administrator may prescribe
“(C) Before a variance proposed to be granted by a State un-
der subparagraph (A) or (B) may take effect, such State shall
provide notice and opportunity for public hearing on the pro-
posed variance. A notice given pursuant to the preceding sen-
tence may cover the granting of more than one variance and a
hearing held pursuant to such notice shall include each of the
variances covered by the notice. The State shall promptly no-
tify the Administrator of all variances granted by it Such
notification shall contain the reason for the varianee (and in
the case of a variance under subparagraph (A), the basis for
the finding required by that subparagraph before the granting
of the variance) and documentation of the need for the vari-
ance
“(D) Each public water system’s variance granted by a State
under subparagraph (A) shall be conditioned by the State upon
compliance by the public water system with the schedule pre-
scribed by the State pursuant to that subparagraph The re-
quirements of each schedule prescribed by a State pursuant to
that subparagraph shall be enforceable by the State under its
laws. Any requirement of a schedule on which a variance grant-
ed under that subparagraph is conditioned may be enforced
under section 1414 as if such requirement was part of a na-
tional primary drinking ater regulation.
1919
-------
P.L. 93-523 LAWS OF 93rd CONG.—2nd SESS. Dec. 16
“(E) Each schedule prescribed by a State pursuant to sub-
paragraph (A) shall be deemed approved by the Administrator
unless the variance for which it was prescribed is revoked by
the Administrator under subparagraph (G) or the schedule is
revised by the Administrator under such subparagraph.
“(F) Not later than 18 months after the effective date of the
interim national primary drinking water regulations the Ad-
ministrator shall complete a comprehensive review of the vari-
ances granted under subparagraph (A) (and schedules pre-
scribed pursuant thereto) and under subparagraph (B) by the
States during the one-year period beginning on such effective
date. The Administrator shall conduct such subsequent re-
views of variances and schedules as he deems necessary to
carry out the purposes of this title, but each subsequent review
shall be completed within each 3-year period following the com-
pletion of the first review under this subparagraph. Before
conducting any review under this subparagraph, the Adminis-
trator shall publish notice of the proposed review in the Fed-
eral Register Such notice shall (i) provide information re-
specting the location of data and other information respecting
the variances to be reviewed (including data and other informa-
tion concerning new scientific matters bearing on such vari-
ances), and (ii) advise of the opportunity to submit comments
on the variances reviewed and on the need for continuing them.
Upon completion of any such review, the Administrator shall
publish in the Federal Register the results of his review to-
gether with findings responsive to comments submitted in con-
nection with such review
“(G)(i) If the Administrator finds that a State has, in a sub-
stantial number of instances, abused its discretion in granting
variances under subparagraph (A) or (B) or that in a substan-
tial number of cases the State has failed to prescribe schedules
in accordance with subparagraph (A), the Administrator shall
notify the State of his findings. In determining if a State has
abused its discretion in granting variances in a substantial num-
ber of instances, the Administrator shall consider the number
of persons who are affected by the variances and if the require-
ments applicable to the granting of the variances were com-
plied with A notice under this clause shall—
“(I) identify each public water system with respect to
which the finding was made,
“(II) specify the reasons for the finding, and
“(III) as appropriate, propose revocations’ of specific
‘ariances oi propose re ised schedules or other require-
ments for specific public water systems granted variances,
or both
“(ii) The Administrator shall provide reasonable notice and
public hearing on the provisions of each notice given pursant
to clause (i) of this subparagraph. After a hearing on a notice
pursuant to such clause, the Administrator shall (I) rescind the
1920
-------
1974
Dec. 16 SAFE DRINKING WATER ACT P.L. 93-523
finding for which the notice was given and promptly notify the
State of such rescission, or (II) promulgate (with such modifi-
cations as he deems appropriate) such variance revocations and
revised schedules or other requirements proposed in such notice
as he deems appropriate. Not later than 180 days after the
date a notice is given l)ursuant to clause ( I) of this subpara-
graph, the Administrator shall complete the hearing on the no-
tice and take the action required by the preceding sentence
“(iii) If a State is notified under clause (i) of this subpara-
graph of a finding of the Administrator made with respect to
a variance granted a public water system within that State or
to a schedule or other requirement for a ariance and if, before
a revocation of such variance or a revision of such schedule or
other requirement promulgated by the Administrator takes ef-
fect, the State takes corrective action with respect to such vari-
ance or schedule or other requirement which the Administrator
determines makes his finding inapplicable to such variance or
schedule or other requirement, the Administrator shall rescind
the application of his finding to that variance or schedule or
other requirement No variance revocation or revised schedule
or other requirement may take effect before the expiration of 90
days following the date of the notice in which the revocation
or revised schedule or other requirement was proposed
“(2) If a State does not have plimary enforcement responsi-
bility for public water systems, the Administrator shall have
the same authority to grant variances in such State as the State
would have under paragraph (1) if it had primary enforcement
responsibility
“(3) The Administrator may grant a ‘ilariance from any treat-
ment technique requirement of a national primary drinking wa-
ter regulation upon a showing by any person that an alternative
treatment technique not included in such requirement is at least
as efficient in lowering the level of the contaminant with re-
spect to which such requirement was prescribed A variance
under this paragraph shall be conditioned on the use of the
alternatj e treatment technique which is the basis of the van-
- a n ce
“(b) Any schedule or other iequiiement on which a ‘arlance
granted under paragraph (1)(E) or (2) of subsection (a) is condi-
tioned may be enforced under section 1414 as if such schedule or
other requirement as part of a national primary drinking ater
regulation
“(c) If an application for a variance under subsection (a) is
made, the State recei ing the application or the Administrator, as
the case max’ be, shall act upon such application within a reason-
able period (as determined under regulations prescribed b the Ad-
ministrator) after the date of Its submission
“(d) For purposes of this section, the term ‘treatment technique
requirement’ means a requiiement in a national primaiy drinking
water regulation which specifies for a contaminant (in accordance
1921
-------
P.L. 93—523 LAWS OF 93rd CONG.—2nd SESS. Dec. 16
with section 1401(1)(C)(li)) each treatment technique known to the
Administrator which leads to a reduction in the level of such con-
taminant sufficient to satisfy the requirements of section 1412(b)
(3).
‘EXEMPTIONS
“Sec. 1416. (a) A State which has primary enforcement respon-
sibility may exempt any public water system within the State’s juris-
diction from any requirement respecting a maximum contaminant
level or any treatment technique requirement, or from both, of an
applicable national primary drinking water regulation upon a find-
ing that—
“(1) due to compelling factors (which may include economic
factors), the public water system is unable to comply with such
contaminant level or treatment technique requirement,
“(2) the public water system was in operation on the effec-
tive date of such contaminant level or treatment technique re-
quirement, and
“(3) the granting of the exemption will not result in an un-
reasonable risk to health
“(b)(1) If a State grants a public water system an exemption un-
der subsection (a), the State shall prescribe, within one year of the
date the exemption is granted, a schedule for—
“(A) compliance (including increments of progress) by the
public water system with each containment level requirement
and treatment technique requirement with respect to which the
exemption was granted, and
“(B) implementation by the public water system of such con-
trol measures as the State may require for each containment, 36
subject to such contaminant level requirement or treatment
technique requirement, during the period ending on the date
compliance with such requirement is required.
Before a schedule prescribed by a State pursuant to this subsection
may take effect, the State shall provide notice and opportunity for a
public hearing on the schedule A notice given pursuant to the pre-
ceding sentence may cover the prescribing of more than one such
schedule and a hearing held pursuant to such notice shall include
each of the schedules covered by the notice.
“(2)(A) A schedule prescribed pursuant to this subsection for a
public water system granted an exemption under subsection (a)
shall require compliance by the system with each contaminant level
and treatment technique requirement with respect to which the ex-
emption was granted as expeditiously as practicable (as the State
may reasonably determine) but (except as provided in subparagraPh
(B))—
“(i) in the case of an exemption granted with respect to a
contaminant level or treatment technique requirement pre-
scribed by the interim national primary drinking water regula-
36a. So In orIginai Probabiy should
read “contaminant”
1922
-------
CODE
1974
Dec. 16 SAFE DRINKING WATER ACT P.L. 93-523
tions promulgated under section 1412(a), not later than Janu-
ary 1, 1981; and
“(ii) in the case of an exemption granted with respect to a
contaminant level or treatment technique requirement pre-
scribed by revised national primary drinking water regulations,
not later than seven years after the date such requirement takes
effect
“(B) Notwithstanding clauses (i) and (ii) of subparagraph (A)
of this paragraph, the final date for compliance prescribed in a
schedule prescribed pursuant to this subsection for an exemption
granted for a public water system which (as determined by the State
granting the exemption) has entered into an enforceable agreement
to become a part of a regional public water system shall—
“(i) in the case of a schedule prescribed for an exemption
granted with respect to a contaminant level or treatment tech-
nique requirement prescribed by interim national primary drink-
ing water regulations, be not later than January 1, 1983; and
“(ii) in the case of a schedule prescribed for an exemption
granted with respect to a contaminant level or treatment tech-
nique requirement prescribed by revised national primary drink-
ing water tegulations, be not later than nine years after such
requirement takes effect.
‘(3) Each public water system’s exemption granted by a State
under subsection (a) shall be conditioned by the State upon com-
pliance by the public water system with the schedule prescribed by
the State pursuant to this subsection The requirements of each
schedule prescribed by a State pursuant to this subsection shall be
enforceable by the State under its laws Any requirement of a
schedule on which an exemption granted under this section is con-
ditioned may be enforced under section 1414 as if such requirement
was part of a national primary drinking water regulation.
“(4) Each schedule prescribed by a State pursuant to this subsec-
tion shall be deemed approved by the Administrator unless the ex-
emption for which it was prescribed is revoked by the Administrator
under subsection (d)(2) or the schedule is revised by the Adminis-
trator under such subsection
“(c) Each State which grants an exemption under subsection (a)
shall promptly notify the Administrator of the granting of such
exemption Such notification shall contain the reasons for the ex-
emption (including the basis for the finding required by subsection
(a)(3) befote the exemption may be granted) and document the
need for the exemption
“(d) (1) Not later than 18 months after the effective date of the
interim national primary drinking water regulations the Adminis-
trator shall complete a comprehensive review of the exemptions
granted (and schedules prescribed pursuant thereto) by the States
during the one-year period beginning on such effective date The
Administrator shall conduct such subsequent reviews of exemptions
and schedules as he deems necessary to cairy out the purposes of
this title, but each subsequent review shall be completed within each
1923
-------
P.L. 93-523 LAWS OF 93rd CONG.—2nd SESS. Dec. 16
3-year period following the completion of the first review under this
subparagraph. Before conducting any review under this subpara.
graph, the Administrator shall publish notice of the proposed review
in the Federal Register. Such notice shall (A) provide information
respecting the location of data and other information respecting the
exemptions to be reviewed (including data and other information
concerning new scientific matters bearing on such exemptions), and
(B) advise of the opportunity to submit comments on the exemp-
tions reviewed and on the need for continuing them. Upon com-
pletion of any such review, the Administrator shall publish in the
Federal Register the results of his review together with findings
responsive to comments submitted in connection with such review.
“(2)(A) If the Administrator finds that a State has, in a substan-
tial number of instances, abused its discretion in granting exemp-
tions under subsection (a) or failed to prescribe schedules in ac-
cordance with subsection (b), the Administrator shall notify the
State of his finding. In determining if a State has abused its dis-
cretion in granting exemptions in a substantial number of instances,
the Administrator shall consider the number of persons who are
affected by the exemptions and if the requirements applicable to
the granting of the exemptions were complied with A notice under
this subparagraph shall—
“(1) identify each exempt public water system with respect
to which the finding was made,
“(ii) specify the reasons for the finding, and
“(iii) as appropriate, propose revocations of specific exemp-
tions or propose revised schedules for specific exempt public
water systems, or both
“(B) The Administrator shall provide reasonable notice and pub-
lie hearing on the provisions of each notice given pursuant to sub-
paragraph (A). After a hearing on a notice pursuant to subpara-
graph (A), the Administrator shall (‘) rescind the finding for which
the notice was given and promptly notify the State of such rescis-
sion, or (ii) promulgate (with such modifications as he deems ap-
propriate) such exemption revocations and revised schedules pro-
posed in such notice as he deems appropriate Not later than 180
days after the date a notice is given pursuant to subparagraph (A),
the Administrator shall complete the hearing on the notice and take
the action required by the preceding sentence
“(C) If a State is notified under subparagraph (A) of a finding
of the Administrator made with respect to an exemption granted a
public water system within that State or to a schedule prescribed
pursuant to such an exemption and if before a revocation of such
exemption or a revision of such schedule promulgated by the Ad-
ministrator takes effect the State takes corrective action with re-
spect to such exemption or schedule which the Administrator deter-
mines makes his finding inapplicable to such exemption or schedule,
the Administrator shall rescind the application of his finding to
that exemption or schedule No exemption revocation or revised
schedule may take effect before the expiration of 90 days following
1924
-------
CODE
1974
Dec. 16 SAFE DRINKING WATER ACT P.L. 93-523
the date of the notice in which the revocation or revised schedule
was proposed
“(e) For purposes of this section, the term ‘treatment technique
requirement’ means a requirement in a national primary drinkIng
water regulation which specifies for a contaminant (in accordance
with section 1401(1)(C)(ii)) each treatment technique known to the
Administrator which leads to a reduction in the level of such con-
taminant sufficient to satisfy the requirements of section 1412(b)
(3)
“(f) If a S ate does not have primary enforcement responsibility
for public water systems, the Administrator shall have the same
authority to exempt public water systems in such State from maxi-
mum contaminant level requirements and treatment technique re-
quirements under the same conditions and in the same manner as
the State would be authorized to grant exemptions under this sec-
tion if it had primary enforcement responsibility.
“(g) If an application for an exemption under this section is
made, the State receiving the application or the Administrator, as
the case may be, shall act upon such application within a reasonable
period (as determined under regulations prescribed by the Admin-
istrator) after the date of its submission
“Part C—Protection of Underground Sources of Drinking Water
‘REGULATIONS FOR STATE PROGRAMS
“Sec. 1421 (a)(1) The Administrator shall publish proposed
regulations for State underground injection control programs with-
in 180 days after the date of enactment of this title Within 180
days after publication of such proposed regulations, he shall promul-
gate such regulations ith such modifications as he deems appro-
priate Any regulation under this subsection may be amended from
time to time
“(2) Any regulation under this section shall be proposed and pro-
mulgated in accordance with section 553 of title 5, United States
Code (relating to rulemaking), except that the Administrator shall
pr ’ide opportunity for public hearing prior to promulgation of such
regulations In proposing and promulgating regulations under this
Section, the Administiator shall consult %%ith the Secretary, the Na-
tional Drinking Water Ad isor Council, and other appropriate Fed-
eral entities and ith interested State entities
“(b)(1) Regulations under subsection (a) foi State underground
injection programs shall contain minimum requirements for effec-
tive programs to prevent underground injection hich endangers
drinking water souices within the meaning of subsection (d)(2)
Such regulations shall require that a State l)i’ogi’am, in order to be
approved under section 1422—
“(A) shall prohibit, effective three years after the date of
the enactment of this title, any underground injection in such
State hich is not authorized b a permit issued by the State
except that the regulations may permit a State to authorize un-
derground injection by rule),
1925
-------
P.L. 93-523 LAWS OF 93rd CONG.—2nd SESS. Dec. 16
“(B) shall require (i) in the case of a program which pro-
vides for authorization of underground injection by permit, that
the applicant for the permit to inject must satisfy the State that
the underground injection will not endanger drinking water
sources, and (ii) in the case of a program which provides for
such an authorization by rule, that no rule may be promulgated
which authorizes any underground injection which endangers
drinking water sources;
“(C) shall include inspection, monitoring, recordkeeping, and
reporting requirements, and
“(D) shall apply (i) as prescribed by section 1447(b), to un-
derground injections by Federal agencies, and (ii) to under-
ground injections by any other person whether or not occurring
on property owned or leased by the United States.
“(2) Regulations of the Administrator under this section for State
underground injection control programs may not prescribe require-
ments which interfere with or impede—
“(A) the underground injection of brine or other fluids
which are brought to the surface in connection with oil or nat-
ural gas production, or
“(B) any underground injection for the secondary or tertiary
recovery of oil or natural gas,
unless such requirements are essential to assure that underground
sources of drinking water will not be endangered by such injection.
“(c)(1) The Administrator may, upon application of the Governor
of a State which authorizes underground injection by means of per-
mits, authorize such State to issue (without regard to subsection
(b)(1)(B)(i)) temporary permits for underground injection which
may be effective until the expiration of four years after the date
of enactment of this title, if—
“(A) the Administrator finds that the State has demonstrated
that it is unable and could not reasonably have been able to
process all permit applications within the time available,
“(B) the Administrator determines the adverse effect on the
environment of such temporary permits is not unwarranted;
“(C) such temporary permits will be issued only with respect
to injection wells in operation on the date on which such State’s
permit program approved under this part first takes effect and
for which there was inadequate time to process its permit appli-
cation, and
“(D) the Administiator determines the temporary permits
require the use of adequate safeguards established by rules
adopted by him
“(2) The Administiatoi may, upon application of the Governor of
a State hich authorizes underground injection by means of per-
mits, authorize such State to issue (without regard to subsection
(b)(1)(B)( )), but after reasonable notice and hearing, one or more
temporary permits each of which is applicable to a particular injec-
tion well and to the underground injection of a particular fluid and
which may be effecti e until the expiration of four years after the
1926
-------
C ODE
1974
Dec. 16 SAFE DRINKING WATER ACT P.L. 93-523
date of enactment of this title, if the State finds, on the record of
such hearing—
“(A) that technology (or other means) to permit safe injec-
tion of the fluid in accordance with the applicable underground
injection control program is not generally available (taking costs
into consideration)
“(B) that injection of the fluid would be less harmful to
health than the use of other available means of disposing of
waste or producing the desired product, and
“(C) that available technology or other means have been em-
ployed (and will be employed) to reduce the volume and toxicity
of the fluid and to minimize the potentially adverse effect of
the injection on the public health
“(d) For purposes of this part,
“(1) The term ‘underground injection’ means the subsurface
emplacement of fluids by well injection
“(2) Underground injection endangers drinking water sources
if such injection may result in the presence in underground wa-
ter which supplies or can reasonably be expected to supply any
public atei- system of any contaminant, and if the presence of
such contaminant may result in such system’s not complying
with any national primary drinking water regulation or may
otherwise athersely affect the health of persons
STATE PRi3iAJ y ENFORCE rE T R [ ’SPO’ S1BiLITY
“Sec. 1422 (a) Within 180 days aftei- the date of enactment of
this title, the Administrator shall list .n the Federal Register each
State for which in his judgment a State underground injection con-
trol program may be necessary to assui-e that underground injec-
tion will not endangei• drinking water sources Such list may be
amended from time to time
“(b)(1)(A) Each State listed under subsection (a) shall within
270 days after the date of promulgation of any regulation under sec-
tion 1421 (or, if latei-, within 270 days after such State is first listed
under subsection (a)) submit to the Administrator an application
which tontains a showing satisfactory to the Administratoi that the
State—
“(i) has adopted after reasonable notice and public hearings,
and vill implement, an undet-giound injection control pi-ogi-am
which meets the lequiroments of regulations in effect under sec-
tion 1421, and
“(ii) ilj keel) such records and make such reppits with re-
spect to its activities under its undergi-ound injection control
program as the Administi-ator may require by regulation
“(B) Within 270 days of any amendment of a regulation under
section 1421 revisIng or adding any requirement iespecting State
underground injection control programs, each State listed under
subsection (a) shall submit (in such form and mannei as the Ad-
ministrator ma%- require) a notice to the Administrator containing
1927
-------
P.L. 93—523 LAWS OF 93rd CONG.—2nd SESS. Dec. 16
a showing satisfactory to him that the State underground injection
control program meets the revised or added requirement.
“(2) Within ninety days after the State’s application under para-
graph (1)(A) or notice under paragraph (1)(B) and after reason-
able opportunity for presentation of views, the Administrator shall
by rule either approve, disapprove, or approve in part and disap-
prove in part, the State’s underground injection control program.
“(3) If the Administrator approves the State’s program under
paragraph (2), the State shall have primary enforcement responsi-
bility for underground water sources until such time as the Admin-
istrator determines, by rule, that such State no longer meets the
requirements of clause (i) or (ii) of paragraph (1)(A) of this sub-
section.
“(4) Before promulgating any rule under paragraph (2) or (3)
of this subsection, the Administrator shall provide opportunity for
public hearing respecting such rule
“(c) If the Administrator disapproves a State’s program (or part
thereof) under subsection (b)(2), if the Administrator determines
under subsection (b) (3) that a State no longer meets the require-
ments of clause (i) or (ii) of subsection (b) (1) (A), or if a State
fails to submit an application or notice before the date of expira-
tion of the period specified in subsection (b) (1), the Administrator
shall by regulation within 90 days after the date of such disap-
proval, determination, or expiration (as the case may be) prescribe
(and may from time to time by regulation revise) a program ap-
plicable to such State meeting the requirements of section 1421(b)
Such program may not include requirements which interfere with
or impede—
“(1) the underground injection of brine or other fluids which
are brought to the surface in connection with oil or natural gas
production, or
“(2) any underground injection for the secondary or tertiary
recovery of oil or natural gas,
unless such requirements are essential to assure that underground
sources of drinking water will not be endangered by such injection.
Such program shall apply in such State to the extent that a program
adopted by such State which the Administrator determines meets
such requiiements is not in effect Before promulgating any regula-
tion under this section, the Administrator shall provide opportunity
for public hearing respecting such regulation.
“(d) For purposes of this title, the term ‘applicable underground
injection control program’ ith respect to a State means the pro-
gram (or most recent amendr ent thereof) (1) which has been adopt-
ed by the State and which has been approved under subsection (b),
or (2) which has been prescribed by the Administrator under sub-
section (C)
FAILURE OF STATE TO ASSCRE ENFORCEMENT OF PROGRAM
‘Sec 1423 (a)(1) Whenever the Administrator finds during a
period during which a State has primary enforcement responsibility
1928
-------
1974
Dec 16
SAFE DRINKING WATER ACT
P.L. 93—523
for underground water sources (within the meaning of section 1422
(b)(3)) that any person who is subject to a requirement of an ap-
plicable underground injection control program in such State is
violating such requirement, he shall so notify the State and the per-
son violating such requirement If the Administrator finds such
failure, to comply extends beyond the thirtieth day after the date
of such notice, he shall give public notice of such finding and re-
qest the State to report within 15 days after the date of such public
notice as to the steps being taken to bring such person into compli-
ance with such requirement (including reasons for anticipated steps
to be taken to bring such person into compliance with such require-
ment and for any failure to take steps to bring such person into com-
pliance with such requirement) If—
“(A) such failure to comply extends beyond the sixtieth day
after the date of the notice given pursuant to the first sentence
of this paragraph, and
“(B) (i) the State fails to submit the report requested by the
Administrator within the time period prescribed by the preced-
ing sentence, oi
“(ii) the State submits such report within such period but
the Administrator, after considering the report, determines that
by failing to take necessary steps to bi’ing such person into com-
pliance by such sixtieth day the State abused its discretion in
carrying out primary enforcement responsibility for under-
ground water sources.
the Administrator may commence a civil action under subsection
(b)(1).
“(2) Whenever the Administrator finds during a period during
which a State does not ha’e primary enforcement responsibility for
underground water sources that any person subject to any require-
ment of any applicable underground injection control program in
such State is violating such requirement, he may commence a civil
action under subsection (b)( 1)
“(b)(1) When authorized by subsection (a), the Administrator
may bring a civil action under this paragraph in the appropriate
United States district court to require compliance with any require.
ment of an applicable underground injection control program The
court may enter such judgment as protection of public health may
require, including, in the case of an action brought against a person
who violates an applicable requirement of an underground injection
control program and ho is located in a State which has primary
enforcement, responsibility for underground water sources, the im-
position of a civil penal of not to exceed $5,000 for each day such
person violates such requirement after the expiration of 60 days
after receiving notice under subsection (a)(1)
“(2) Any person sho iolates any requirement of an applicable
underground injection control program to which he is subject dur-
ing any period for which the State does not have primary enforce-
ment responsibility for underground sater sources (A) shall be sub-
ject to a civil penalty of not more than $5,000 for each day of such
1929
-------
P.L. 93-523 LAWS OF 93rd CONG.—2nd SESS. Dec. 16
violation, or (B) if such violation is willful, such person may, in
lieu of the civil penalty authorized by clause (B), be fined not more
than $10,000 for each day of such violation.
“(c) Nothing in this title shall diminish any authority of a State
or political subdivision to adopt or enforce any law or regulation
respecting underground injection but no such law or regulation
shall relieve any person of any requirement otherwise applicable
under this title.
INTERIM REGULATiON OF UNDERGROUND INJECTIONS
“Sec. 1424. (a)(1) Any person may petition the Administrator
to have an area of a State (or States) designated as an area in
which no new underground injection well may be operated during
the period beginning on the date of the designation and ending on
the date on which the applicable underground injection control pro-
gram covering such area takes effect unless a permit for the opera-
tion of such well has been issued by the Administrator under sub-
section (b). The Administrator may so designate an area within
a State if he finds that the area has one aquifer which is the sole or
principal drinking water source for the area and which, if con-
taminated, would create a significant hazard to public health.
“(2) Upon receipt of a petition under paragraph (1) of this sub-
section, the Administrator shall publish it in the Federal Register
and shall provide an opportunity to interested persons to submit
written data, views, or arguments thereon Not later than the 30th
day following the date of the publication of a petition under this
paragraph in the Federal Register, the Administrator shall either
make the designation for which the petition is submitted or deny
the petition.
“(b)(1) During the period beginning on the date an area is desig-
nated under subsection (a) and ending on the date the applicable
underground injection control program covering such area takes ef-
fect, no new underground injection well may be operated in such
area unless the Administrator has issued a permit for such opera-
tio n
“(2) Any person may petition the Administrator for the issuance
of a permit for the operation of such a well in such an area A peti-
tion submitted under this paragraph shall be submitted in such man-
ner and contain such information as the Administrator may require
by regulation Upon receipt of such a petition, the Administrator
shall publish it in the Federal Register The Administrator shall
give notice of any proceeding on a petition and shall provide oppor-
tunity for agency hearing The Administrator shall act upon such
petition on the record of any hearing held pursuant to the preced-
ing sentence respecting such petition. Within 120 days of the publi-
cation in the Federal Register of a petition submitted under this
paragraph, the Administrator shall either issue the permit for which
the petition was submitted or shall deny its issuance.
“(3) The Administrator may issue a permit for the operation of
a new underground injection well in an area designated under sub-
1930
-------
1974
Dec. 16 SAFE DRINKING WATER ACT P.L. 93-523
section (a) only if he finds that the operation of such well will not
cause contamination of the aquifer of such area so as to create a
significant hazard to public health The Administrator may condi.
tion the issuance of such a permit upon the use of such control
measures in connection with the operation of such well, for which
the permit is to be issued, as he deems necessary to assure that the
operation of the well will not contaminate the aquifer of the desig.
nated area in which the well is located so as to create a significant
hazard to public health
°(c) Any person who operates a new underground injection well
in violation of subsection (b), (1) shall be subject to a civil penalty
of not more than $5,000 for each day in which such violation occurs,
or (2) if such violation is willful, such person may, in lieu of the
civil penalty authorized by clause (1), be fined not more than $10,000
for each day in which such violation occurs If the Administrator
has reason to believe that any person is violating or will violate sub-
section (b), he may petition the United States district court to issue
a temporary restraining order or injunction (including a mandatory
injunction) to enforce such subsection.
“(d) For purposes of this section, the term ‘new underground in-
jection well means an underground injection well whose operation
was not approved by appropriate State and Federal agencies before
the date of the enactment of this title.
“(e) If the Administrator determines, on his own initiative or upon
petition, that an area has an aquifer which is the sole or principal
drinking water source for the area and which, if contaminated,
would create a significant hazard to public health, he shall publish
notice of that determination in the Federal Register After the pub-
lication of any such notice, no commitment for Federal financial as-
sistance (through a grant, contract, loan guarantee, or otherwise)
may be entered into for any project which the Administrator deter-
mines may contaminate such aquifer through a recharge zone so as
to create a significant hazard to public health, but a commitment for
Federal financial assistance may, if authorized under another pro-
vision of law, be entered into to plan or design the project to assure
that it will not so contaminate the aquifer
“Part D—Emergency Powers
EMERGENCY POWERS
‘Sec 1431 (a) Not uthstanding any other pro ision of this title,
the Administrator, upon receipt of information that a contaminant
which is present in or is likely to enter a public water system may
present an Imminent and substantial endangerment to the health of
persons, and that appropriate State and local authorities have not
acted to protect the health of such persons, may take such actions
as he may deem necessary in order to protect the health of such
persons To the extent he determines it to be practicable in light
of such imminent endangeiment, he shall consult with the State
and local authorities in order to confirm the correctness of the in-
1931
-------
P.L. 93—523 LAWS OF 93rd CONG.—2nd SESS. Dec.. 16
formation on which action proposed to be taken under this sub-
section is based and to ascertain the action which such authorities
are or will be taking. The action which the Administrator may take
may include (but shall not be limited to) (1) issuing such orders
as may be necessary to protect the health of persons who are or
may be users of such system (including travelers), and (2) com-
mencing a civil action for appropriate relief, including a restrain-
ing order or permanent or temporary injunction.
“(b) Any person who willfully violates or fails or refuses to
comply with any order issued by the Administrator under subsec-
tion (a)(1) may, in an action brought in the appropriate United
States district court to enforce such order, be fined not more than
$5,000 for each day in which such violation occurs or failure to
comply continues.
“Part E—General Provisions
“ASSURANCE OF AVAILABILITY OF ADEQUATE SUPPLIES OF
C1 EMICALS NECESSARY FOR TREATMENT OF WATER
“Sec 1441 (a) If any person who uses chlorine, activated car-
bon, lime, ammonia, soda ash, potassium permanganate, caustic soda,
or other chemical or substance for the purpose of treating water in
any public water system or in any public treatment works determines
that the amount of such chemical or substance necessary to effec-
tively treat such water is not reasonably available to him or will riot
be so available to him when required for the effective treatment of
such water, such person may apply to the Administrator for a cer-
tification (hereinafter in this section referred to as a certifjcation of
need’) that the amount of such chemical or substance which such
person requires to effectively treat such water is not reasonably
available to him or will not be so available when required for the
effective treatment of such water.
“(b)(1) An application for a certification of need shall be in such
form and submitted in such manner as the Administrator may require
and shall (A) specify the persons the applicant determines are able
to provide the chemical or substance with respect to which the ap-
plication is submitted, (B) specify the persons from whom the appli-
cant has sought such chemical or substance, and (C) contain such
other information as the Administrator ma require
“(2) Upon receipt of an application under this section, the Ad-
ministrator shall (A) publish in the Federal Register a notice of
the receipt of the application and a brief summary of it, (B) notify
in writing each person whom the President or his delegate (after
consultation ith the Administrator) determines could be made
subject to an order required to be issued upon the issuance of the
certification of need applied for in such application, and (C) provide
an opportunit for the submission of written comments on such ap-
plication The requirements of the preceding sentence of this para-
graph shall not apply when the Administrator for good cause finds
(and incorporates the finding with a brief stater’ent of reasons
1932
-------
1974
Dec. 16 SAFE DRINKING WATER ACT P.L. 93-523
therefor in the order issued) that waiver of such requirements is nec-
essary in order to protect the public health
“(3) Within 30 days after—
“(A) the date a notice is published under paragraph (2) in
the Federal Register with respect to an application submitted
under this section for the issuance of a certification of need, or
“(B) the date on which such application is received if as
authorized by the second sentence of such paragraph no notice
is published with respect to such application,
the Administrator shall take action either to issue or deny the issu-
ance of a certification of need.
“(c)(1) If the Administrator finds that the amount of a chemical
or substance necessary for an applicant under an application submit-
ted under this section to effectively treat water in a public water
system or in a public treatment works is not reasonably available to
the applicant or will not be so available to him when required for the
effective treatment of such water, the Administrator shall issue a
certification of need Not later than seven days following the issu-
ance of such certification, the President or his delegate shall issue
an order requiring the provision to such person of such amounts of
such chemical or substance as the Administrator deems necessary in
the certification of need issued for such person. Such order shall
apply to such manufactuiei-s, producers, processors, distributors,
and repackagers of such chemical or substance as the President or
his delegate deems necessary and appropriate, except that such order
may not apply to any manufacturer, producer, or processor of such
chemical or substance who manufactures, produces, or processes (as
the case may be) such chemical or substance solely for its own use
Persons subject to an oi der issued under this section shall be given
a reasonable opportunit3 to consult with the President or his dele-
gate with respect to the implementation of the order.
‘(2) Oiders which die to be issued under paragraph (1) to manu-
facturers, produceis, and processors of a chemical or substance shall
he equitably apportioned, as far as practicable, among all manufac-
turers, producers, and processors of such chemical or substance.
and orders which are to be issued under paragraph (1) to distrib-
utors and repackagers of a chemical or substance shall be equitably
apportioned, as far as practicable, among all distributors and re-
packagers of such chemical or substance In apportioning orders
issued undei paragraph ii) to manufacturers, producers, processors,
distributors and repackagers of chlorine, the President or his dele-
gate shall, in carrying out the requirements of the preceding sen-
tence, consider—
“ IA) the geographical relationships and established com-
mercial relationships bet seen such manufacturers, producers,
processors, distributors, and repackagers and the persons for
whom the orders are issued,
“(B ) in the case of oIders to be issued to producers of chlor-
ine, the (i) amount of chlorine historically supplied by each
such producer to treat ssater in public water systems and public
I US Cong & Adni ‘l ion 74—i30 1933
-------
P.L. 93—523 LAWS OF 93rd CONG.—2nd SESS. Dec. 16
treatment works, and (ii) share of each such producer of the
total annual production of chlorine in the United States, and
“(C) such other factors as the President or his delegate may
determine are relevant to the apportionment of orders in accord-
ance with the requirements of the preceding sentence.
“(3) Subject to subsection (f), any person for whom a certification
of need has been issued under this subsection may upon the expira-
tion of the order issued under paragiaph (1) upon such certification
apply under this section for additional certifications
“(d) There shall be available as a defense to any action brought
for breach of contract in a Federal or State court arising out of
delay or failure to provide, sell, or offer for sale or exchange a
chemical or substance subject to an order issued pursuant to sub-
section (c)(1), that such delay or failure was caused solely by com-
pliance with such order.
“(e)(1) Whoever knowingly fails to comply with any order issued
pursuant to subsection (c)(1) shall be fined not more than $5,000
for each such failure to comply
“(2) Whoever fails to comply with any order issued pursuant to
subsection (c)(1) shall be subject to a civil penalty of not more
than $2,500 for each such failure to comply
“(3) Whenever the Administrator or the President or his delegate
has reason to believe that any person is violating or will violate any
order issued puisuant to subsectioA (c)(1), he may petition a United
States district court to issue a temporary restraining order or pre-
liminary or permanent injunction (including a mandatory injunc-
tion) to enfoi’ce the pros ision of such order
“ f) No certification of need or order issued under this section
may iemain in effect—
“(1) for more than one year, or
“(2) after June 30, 1977,
whichevei’ occurs first
RESEARCF!. TECHNICAL ASSISTANCE INFORMATION.
TRAINING OF PERSONNEL
“Sec 1442 (a)(1) The Administrator may conduct research, stud-
ies, and demonstrations relating to the causes, diagnosis, treatment,
control, and pre ention of physical and mental diseases and other
impairments of man iesulting directly or indirectly from contami-
nants in watei, or to the provision of a dependably safe supply of
drinking water, including—
“(A) impro ed methods (i) to identify and measure the ex-
istence of contaminanrs in dunking water (including methods
which may be used by State and local health and water officials),
and (ii) to identify the source of such contaminants,
“(B) improved methods to identify and measure the health
effects of contaminants in drinking water.
“(C) new methods of treating raw water to prepare it for
d”inking, so as to improve the efficiency of water treatment and
t remove contaminants from water,
1934
-------
1974
Dec. 16 SAFE DRINKING WATER ACT P.L. 93-523
“(D) improved methods for providing a dependably safe
supply of drinking water, including improvements in water
purification and distribution, and methods of assessing the
health related hazards of drinking water, and
“(E) improved methods of protecting underground water
sources of public water systems from contamination
“(a) The Administrator shall, to the maximum extent feasible,
provide technical assistance to the States and municipalities in the
establishment and administration of public water system supervision
programs (as defined in section 1443(c) (1)).
“(3) The Administrator shall conduct studies, and make periodic
reports to Congress, on the costs of carrying out regulations pre-
scribed under section 1412.
“(4) The Administrator shall conduct a survey and study of—
“(A) disposal of waste (including residential waste) which
may endanger underground water which supplies, or can reason-
ably be expected to supply, any public water systems, and
“(B) means of control of such waste disposal
Not later than one year after the date of enactment of this title, he
shall transmit to the Congress the results of such survey and study,
together with such recommendations as he deems appropriate.
“(5) The Administraoi shall carry out a study of methods of
underground injection which do not result in the degradation of
underground drinking water sources.
“(6) The Administrator shall carry out a study of methods of pre-
venting, detecting, and dealing with surface spills of contaminants
which may degrade underground water sources for public water
systems
“(7) The administrator shall carry out a study of virus con-
tamination of drinking water sources and means of control of such
contamination.
“(8) The Administrator shall carry out a study of the nature and
extent of the impact on underground water which supplies or can
reasonably be expected to supply public water systems of (A) aban-
doned injection or extraction wells (B) intensive application of
pesticides and fertilizers in underground water recharge areas, and
(C) ponds, pools, lagoons, pits, or other surface disposal of con-
taminants in underground water recharge areas
“(9) The Administrator shall conduct a comprehensive study of
public ater supplies and drinking water sources to determine the
nature, extent, sources of and means of control of contamination by
chemicals or other substances suspected of being carcinogenic. Not
later than six months after the date of enactment of this title, he
ThaI! transmit to the Congress the initial results of such study, to-
gether with such recommendations for further review and corrective
action as he deems appropriate
“(b) In carrying out this title, the Administrator is authorized
to-
“(1) collect and make available information pertaining to
research, investigations, and demonstrations with respect to
1935
-------
P.L. 93—523 LAWS OF 93rd CONG.—2nd SESS. Dec. 16
providing a dependably safe supply of drinking water together
with appropriate recommendations in connection therewith;
“(2) make available research facilities of the Agency to ap-
propriate public authorities, institutions, and individuals en-
gaged in studies and research relating to the purposes of this
title,
“(3) make grants to, and enter into contracts with, any
public agency, educational institution, and any other organiza-
tion, in accordance with procedures prescribed by the Admin-
istrator, under which he may pay all or a part of the costs (as
may be determined by the Administrator) of any project or
activity which is designed—
“(A) to develop, expand, or carry out a program (which
may combine training education and employment) for train-
ing persons for occupations involving the public health
aspects of providing safe drinking water;
“(B) to train inspectors and supervisory personnel to
train or supervise persons in occupations involving the
public health aspects of providing safe drinking water;
or
“(C) to develop and expand the capability of programs of
States and municipalities to carry out the purposes of this
title (other than by carrying out State programs of public
water system supervision or underground water source pro-
tection (as defined in section 1443(d))).
“(c) There are authorized to be appropriated to carry out the pro-
visions of this section $15,000,000 for the fiscal year ending June 30,
1975 $25,000,000 for the fiscal year ending June 30, 1976, and
$35,000,000 for the fiscal year ending June 30, 1977.
GRANTS FOR STATE PROGRAMS
“Sec 1443. (a)(1) From allotments made pursuant to para-
graph (4), the Administrator may make grants to States to carry out
public water system supervision programs
‘(2) No grant may be made under paragraph (1) unless an appli-
cation therefor has been submitted to the Administrator in such form
and manner as he may tequire The Administrator may not approve
an application of a State for its first grant under paragraph (1’ un-
less he determines that the State—
“(A) has established or s ill establish within one year from
the date of such grant a public water system supervision pro-
gram, and
“(B) will, within th t one year, assume primary enforcement
responsibility for public water systems within the State
No grant may be made to a State under paragraph (1) for any period
beginning more than one year after the date of the State’s first grant
unless the State has assumed and maintains primary enforcement
responsibility for public water systems within the State.
“(3) A grant under paragraph (1) shall be made to cover not
more than 75 per centum of the grant recipient’s costs (as determined
1936
-------
1974
Dec. 16 SAFE DRINKING WATER ACT P.L. 93-523
under regulations of the Administrator) in carrying out, during the
one-year period beginning on the date the grant is made, a public
water system supervision program
“(4) In each fiscal year the Administrator shall, in accordance
with regulations, allot the sums appropnated for such year under
paragraph (5) among the States on the basis of population, geo-
graphical area, number of public water systems, and other relevant
factors. No State shall receive less than 1 per centum of the annual
appropriation for grants under paragraph (1): Provided, That the
Administrator may, by regulation, reduce such percentage in accord-
ance with the criteria specified in this paragraph: And provided
further, That such percentage shall not apply to grants allotted to
Guam, American Samoa, or the Virgin Islands.
“(5) For purposes of making grants under paragraph (1) there
are authorized to be appropriated $15,000,000 for the fiscal year end-
ing June 30, 1976, and $25,000,000 for the fiscal year ending June
30, 1977
“(b)(1) From allotments made pursuant to paragraph (4), the
Administrator may make grants to States to carry out underground
water source protection programs
“(2) No grant may be made under paragraph (1) unless an appli-
cation therefor has been submitted to the Administrator in such
form and manner as he may require. The Administrator may not
approve an application of a State for its first grant under paragraph
(1) unless he determines that the State—
“(A) has established or will establish within two years from
the date of such grant an underground water source protection,
and
“(B) will, within such two years, assume primary enforce-
ment responsibility for underground water sources within the
State.
No grant may be made to a State under. paragraph (1) for any period
beginning more than two years after the date of the State’s first
grant unless the State has assumed and maintains primary enforce-
rnent responsibility for underground water sources within the State.
“(3) A grant under paragraph (1) shall be made to cover not more
than 75 per centum of the grant recipient’s costs (as determined
under regulations of the Administrator) in carrying out, during the
one -year period beginning on the date the grant is made, an under-
ground water source protection program.
“(4) In each fiscal year the Administrator shall, in accordance
with regulations, allot the sums appropriated for such year under
paragraph (5) among the States on the basis of population, geograph-
ical area, and other relevant factors.
“(5) For purposes of making grants under paragraph (1) there
are authorized to be appropriated $5,000,000 for the fiscal year end-
ing June 30, 1976, and $7,500,000 for the fiscal year ending June 30,
1977
1937
-------
Pt. 93-423 LAWS OF 93rd CONG.—2nd SESS. Dec . 16
“(c) For purposes of this section:
“(1) The term ‘public water system supervision program’
means a program for the adoption and enforcement of drinking
water regulations (with such variances and exemptions from
such regulations under conditions and in a manner which is
not less stringent than the conditions under, and the manner
in, which variances and exemptions may be granted under sec-
tions 1415 and 1416) which are no less stringent than the na-
tional primary drinking water regulations under section 1412,
and for keeping records and making reports required by section
14 13(a) (3).
“(2) The term ‘underground water source protection pro-
gram’ means a program for the adoption and enforcement of a
program which meets the requirements of regulations under
section 1421 and for keeping records and making reports re-
quired by section 1422(b)(1) (A) (ii)
SPECIAL STUDY AND DEMONSTRATiON PROJECT GRANTS,
GUARANTEED LOANS
“Sec. 1444 (a) The Administrator may make grants to any person
for the purposes of—
“(1) assisting in the development and demonstration (includ-
ing construction) of any project which wilt demonstrate a new
or improved method, approach, or technology, for providing a
dependably safe supply of drinking water to the public, and
“(2) assisting in the development and demonstration (includ-
ing construction) of any project which will investigate and
demonstrate health implications involved in the reclamation, re-
cycling, and reuse of waste waters for drinking and the proc-
esses and methods for the preparation of safe and acceptable
drinking water.
“(b) Grants made by the Administrator under this section shall
be subject to the following limitations:
“(1) Grants under this section shall not exceed 66% per cen-
turn of the total cost of construction of any facility and 75 per
centum of any other costs, as determined by the Administrator.
“(2) Grants under this section shall not be made for any proj-
ect involving the construction or modification of any facilities
for any public water system in a State unless such project has
been approved by the State agency charged with the responsibil-
ity for safety of drinking water (or if there is no such agency in
a State , by the State health authority)
“(3) Grants under this section shall not be made for any proj-
ect unless the Administrator determines, after consulting the
National Drinking Water Advisory Council, that such project
will serve a useful purpose relating to the development and
demonstration of new or improved techniques, methods, or tech-
nologies for the provision of safe water to the public for
drinking.
1938
-------
I i7 4
D cc. 16 SAFE DRINKING WATER ACT P.L. 93-523
“(4) Priority for grants under this section shall be given
where there are known or potential public health hazards
hich require advanced technology for the removal of particles
which are too small to be removed by ordinary treatment tech-
nology.
‘(c) For the purposes of making grants under subsections (a) and
(b) of this section there are authorized to be appropriated $7,500,000
for the fiscal year ending June 30, 1975, and $7,500,000 for the fiscal
year ending June 30, 1976, and $10,000,000 for the fiscal year ending
June 30, 1977
“(d) The Administrator during the fiscal years endipg June 30,
1975. and June 30, 1976, shall carry out a program of guaranteeing
loans made by private lenders to small public water systems for the
purpose of enabling such systems to meet national primary drinking
water regulations (including interim regulations) prescribed under
section 1412 No such guarantee may be made with respect to a
system unless (1) such system cannot reasonably obtain financial
assistance necessary to comply with such regulations from any other
source, and (2) the Administrator determines that any facilities con-
structed with a loan guaranteed under this subsection is not likely to
be made obsolete by subsequent changes in primary regulations.
The aggregate amount of indebtedness guaranteed with respect to
any system may not exceed $50,000 The aggregate amount of in-
debtedness guaranteed under this subsection may not exceed
$50,000,000 The Administrator shall prescribe regulations to carry
out this subsection
RECORDS AND INSPECTIONS
“Sec. 1445. (a Every person who is a supplier of water, who is or
may be otherwise subject to a primary drinking water regulation pre-
scribed under section 1412 or to an applicable underground injec-
tion control program (as defined in section 1422(c)), who is or may
be subject to the permit requirement of section 1424 or to an order is-
sued under section 1441, or who is a grantee, shall establish and
maintain such records, make such reports, conduct such monitoring,
and provide such information as the Administrator may reasonably
require by regulation to assist him in establishing regulations under
this title, in detei mining hether such person has acted or is acting
in compliance with this title, 01 in administering any program of
financial assistance under this title
“ib)(1) Except as pro ided in paragraph (2), the Administrator,
or representatives of the Administiator duly designated by him, upon
presenting appropriate ciedentials and a written notice to any
supplier of water or other person subject to a national primary drink-
ing atei regulation prescribed under section 1412 or applicable
underground injection control program (or person in charge of any
of the property of such suppliei or other person), is authorized to
enter an - establishment, facility, or other propetty of such supplier
or other person in order to determine whether such supplier or other
person has acted or is acting in compliance with this title, including
1939
-------
P.L. 93-523 LAWS OF 93rd CONG.—2nd SESS. Dec. 16
for this purpose, inspection, at reasonable times, of records, files.
papers, processes, controls, and facilities, or in order to test any
feature of a public water system, including its raw water source.
The Administrator or the Comptroller General (or any representa-
tive designated by either) shall have access for the purpose of audit
and examination to any records, reports, or information of a grantee
which are required to be maintained under subsection (a) or which
are pertinent to any financial assistance under this title.
“(2) No entry may be made under the first sentence of paragraph
(1) in an establishment, facility, or other property of a supplier of
water or other person subject to a national primary drinking water
regulation if the establishment, facility, or other property is located
in a State which has primary enforcement responsibility for public
water systems unless, before written notice of such entry is made, the
Administrator (or his representative) notifies the State agency
charged with responsibility for safe drinking water of the reasons
for such entry. The Administrator shall, upon a showing by the
State agency that such an entry will be detrimental to the administra-
tion of the State’s program of primary enforcement responsibility,
take such showing into consideration in determining whether to make
such entry. No State agency which receives notice under this para-
graph of an entry proposed to be made under paragraph (1) may
use the information contained in the notice to inform the person
whose property is proposed to be entered of the proposed entry, and
if a State agency so uses such information, notice to the agency under
this paragraph is not required until such time as the Administrator
determines the agency has provided him satisfactory assurances
that it will no longer so use information contained in a notice under
this paragraph
“(c) Whoever fails or refuses to comply with any requirement of
subsection (a) or to allow the Administrator, the Comptroller Gen-
eral, or representatives of either, to enter and conduct any audit or
inspection authorized by subsection (b) may be fined not more than
$5,000.
“(d)(1) Subject to paragraph (2), upon a showing satisfactory to
the Administrator by any person that any information required un-
der this section from such person, if made public, would divulge
trade secrets or secret processes of such person, the Administrator
shall consider such information confidential in accordance with
the purposes of section 1905 of title 18 of the United States Code
If the applicant fails to make a showing satisfactory to the Ad-
ministrator, the Administrator shall give such applicant thirty days’
notice before releasing the information to which the application re-
lates (unless the public he ilth or safety requires an earlier release
of such information)
“(2) Any information required under this section (A) may be
disclosed to other officers. employees, or authorized representatives
of the United States concerned with carrying out this title or to com-
mittees of the Congress, or hen relevant in any proceeding under
this title, and (B) shall be disclosed to the extent it deals with the
1940
-------
Dec. 16 SAFE DRINKING WATER ACT P.L. 93-523
level of contaminants in drinking water For purposes of this sub-
section the term ‘information required under this section’ means any
papers, books, documents, or information, or any particular part
thereof, reported to or otherwise obtained by the Administrator under
this section.
“(e) For purposes of this section, (1) the term ‘grantee’ means any
person who applies for or receives financial assistance, by grant,
contract, or loan guarantee under this title, and (2) the term
person’ includes a Federal agency.
NATIONAL DRINKING WATER ADVISORY COUNCIL
“Sec. 1446. (a) There is established a National Dri i iking Water
Advisory Council which shall consist of fifteen members appointed
by the Administrator after consultation with the Secretary Five
members shall be appointed from the general public; five members
shall be appointed from appropriate State and local agencies con-
cerned with water hygiene and public water supply; and five mem-
bers shall be appointed from representatives of private organiza-
tions or groups demonstrating an active interest in the field of wa-
ter hygiene and public water supply Each member of the Council
shall hold office for a term of three years, except that—
“(1) any member appointed to fill a vacancy occurring prior
to the expiration of the term for which his predecessor was ap-
pointed shall be appointed for the remainder of such term, and
‘(2) the terms of the members first taking office shall expire
as follows: Five shall expire three years after the date of en-
actment of this title, five shall expire two years after such date,
and five shall expire one year after such date, as designated by
the Administrator at the time of appointment
The members of the Council shall be eligible for reappointment
“(b) The Council shall advise, consult with, and make recommen-
dations to, the Administrator on matters relating to activities, func-
tions, and policies of the Agency under this title.
“(c) Members of the Council appointed under this section shall,
while attending meetings or conferences of the Council or otherwise
engaged in business of the Council, receive compensation and allow-
ances at a rate to be fixed by the Administrator, but not exceeding
the daily equivalent of the annual rate of basic pay in effect for
grade GS—18 of the General Schedule foi- each day (including travel-
time) during which they are engaged in the actual performance of
duties vested in the Council While away from their homes or reg-
ular places of business in the performance of services for the Coun-
cil, members of the Council shall be allo ed travel expenses, includ-
ing per diem in lieu of subsistence, in the same manner as persons
employed intermittently in the Government service are allowed ex-
penses under section 5703(b) of title 5 of the United States Code.
“(d) Section 14(a) of the Federal Advisory Committee Act (relat-
ing to termination) shall not apply to the Council.
1941
-------
P.L 93—523 LAWS OF 93rd CONG.—.2nd SESS. Dec. 16
“FEDERAL AGENCIES
“Sec. 1447 (a) Each Federal agency having jurisdiction over
any federally owned or maintained public water system shall com-
ply with all national primary drinking water regulations in effect
under section 1412, and each Federal agency shall comply with any
applicable underground injection control program, and shall keep
such records and submit such reports as may be required under such
program.
“(b) The Administrator shall waive compliance with subsection
(a) upon request of the Secretary of Defense and upon a determina-
tion by the President that the requested waiver is necessary in the
interest of national security. The Administrator shall maintain a
written record of the basis upon which such waiver was granted and
make such record available for in camera examination when relevant
in a judicial proceeding under this title. Upon the issuance of such
a waiver, the Administrator shall publish in the Federal Register a
notice that the waiver was granted for national security purposes,
unless, upon the request of the Secretary of Defense, the Administra-
tor determines to omit such publication because the publication it-
self would be contrary to the interests of national security, in which
event the Administrator shall submit notice to the Armed Services
Committee of the Senate and House of Representatives
JUDiCiAL REVIEW
“Sec. 1448 (a) A petition for review of—
“(1) action of the Administrator in promulgating any na-
tional primary drinking water regulation under section 1412,
any regulation under section 1413(b)(1), any regulation under
section 1414(c). any regulation for State underground injection
control programs under section 1421, or any general regulation
for the administration of this title may be filed only in the Unit-
ed States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit;
and
“(2) action of the Administrator in promulgating any other
regulation under this title, issuing any order under this title, or
making any determination under this title may be filed only in
the United States court of appeals for the appropriate circuit.
Any such petition shall be filed within the 45-day period beginning
on the date of the promulgation of the regulation or issuance of the
order with respect to which review is sought or on the date of the
determination with respect to which review is sought, and may be
filed after the expiration of such 45-day period if the petition is
based solely on grounds arising after the expiration of such period
Action of the Administiator with respect to which review could have
been obtained under this subsection shall not be subject to judicial
review in any civil or criminal proceeding for enforcement or in any
civil action to enjoin enforcement.
‘(b) The United States district courts shall have jurisdiction of
actions brought to review (1) the granting of, or the refusing to
1942
-------
Dec. 16 SAFE DRINKING WATER ACT P.L. 93-523
grant, a variance or exemption under section 1415 or 1416 or (2) the
requirements of any schedule prescribed for a variance or exemption
under such section or the failure to prescribe such a schedule. Such
an action may only be brought upon a petition for review filed with
the court within the 45-day period beginning on the date the action
sought to be reviewed is taken or, in the case of a petition to review
the refusal to grant a variance or exemption or the failure to pre-
scribe a schedule, within the 45-day period beginning on the date
acti n is required to be taken on the variance, exemption, or sched-
ule, as the case may be. A petition for such review may be filed
after the expiration of such period if the petition is based solely on
grounds arising after the expiration of such period. Action with
respect to which review could have been obtained under this subsec-
tion shall not be subject to judicial review in any civil or criminal
proceeding for enforcement or in any civil action to enjoin enforce-
men t
“(c) In any judicial proceeding in which review is sought of a
determination under this title required to be made on the record
after notice and opportunity for hearing, if any party applies to
the court for leave to adduce additional evidence and shows to the
satisfaction of the court that such additional evidence is material
and that there were reasonable grounds for the failure to adduce
such evidence in the proceeding before the Administrator, the court
may order such additional evidence (and evidence in rebuttal there-
of) to be taken before the Administrator, in such manner and upon
such terms and conditions as the court may deem proper. The Ad-
ministrator may modify his findings as to the facts, or make new
findings, by reason of the additional evidence so taken, and he shall
file such modified or new findings, and his recommendation, if any,
for the modification or setting aside of his original determination,
with the return of such additional evidence.
CITIZENS CIVIL ACTION
“Sec. 1449 (a) Except as provided in subsection (b) of this sec-
tion, any person may commence a civil action on his own behalf—
“(1) against any person (including (A) the United States,
and (B) any other governental instrumentality or agency to the
extent permitted by the eleventh amendment to the Constitution)
who is alleged to be in violation of any requirement prescribed
by or under this title, or
“(2) against the Administrator here there is alleged a fail-
ure of the Administrator to perform any act or duty undt’r this
title which is not discretionary ith the Administrator
No action may be brought under paiagraph (1) against a public wa-
ter system for a violation of a requirement prescribed by or under
this title which occurred within the 27-month period beginning on
the first day of the month in which this title is enacted. The United
States district courts shall have jurisdiction, without regard to the
amount in controversy or the citizenship of the parties, to enforce in
an action brought under this subsection any requirement prescribed
1943
-------
P.L. 93-523 LAWS OF 93rd CONG.—2nd SESS. Dec. 16
by or under this title or to order the Administrator to perform an
act or duty described in paragraph (2), as the case may be.
“(b) No civil action may be commenced—
“(1) under subsection (a)(1) of this section respecting viola-
tion of a requirement prescribed by or under this title—
“(A) prior to sixty days after the plaintiff has given no-
tice of such violation (i) to the Administrator, (ii) to any
alleged violator of such requirement and (iii) to the State
in which the violation occurs, or
“(B) if the Administrator, the Attorney General, or the
State has commenced and is diligently prosecuting a civil
action in a court of the United States to require compliance
with such requirement, but in any such action in a court of
the United States any person may intervene as a matter of
right, or
“(2) under subsection (a)(2) of this section prior to sixty
days after the plaintiff has given notice of such action to the
Administrator
Notice required by this subsection shall be given in such manner as
the Administrator shall prescribe by regulation. No person may
commence a civil action under subsection (a) to require a State to
prescribe a schedule under section 1415 or 1416 for a variance or
exemption, unless such person shows to the satisfaction of the court
that the State has in a substantial number of cases failed to pre-
scribe such schedules
“(c) In any action under this section. the Administrator or the
Attorney General, if not a party, may intervene as a matter of right.
“(d) The court, in issuing any final order in any action brought
under subsection (a) of this section, may award costs of litigation
(including reasonable attorney and expert witness fees) to any par-
ty whenever the court determines such an award is appropriate
The court may, if a temporary restraining order or preliminary in-
junction is sought, require the filing of a bond or equivalent securi-
ty in accordance with the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure
“(e) Nothing in this section shall restrict any right which any
person (or class of persons) may have under any statute or com-
mon law to seek enforcement of any tequirement prescribed by or
under this title or to seek any other relief
GE\ERAL PROVISIONS
“Sec 1450 (a)(1) The Administrator is authorized to prescribe
such regulations as are necessary or appropriate to carry out his
functions under this title
“(2) The Administratoi may delegate any of his functions un-
der this title (other than prescribing regulations) to any officer or
employee of the Agency
“(b) The Administrator, with the consent of the head of any
other agency of the United States, may utilize such officers and em-
ployees of such agency as- he deems necessary to assist him in carry-
ing out the purposes of this title.
1944
-------
1974
Dec. 16 SAFE DRINKING WATER ACT P.L. 93-523
“Cc) Upon the request of a State or interstate agency, the Ad-
ministrator may assign personnel of the Agency to such State or
interstate agency for the purposes of carrying out the provisions of
this title.
“(d)(l) The Administrator may make payments of grants under
this title (after necessary adjustment on account of previously made
underpayments or overpayrnents) in advance or by way of reim-
bur ement, and in such installments and on such conditions as he
may determine
“(2) Financial assistance may be made available in the form of
grants only to individuals and nonprofit agencies or ‘institutions
For purposes of this paragraph, the term ‘nonprofit agency or in-
stitution’ means an agency or institution no part of the net earnings
of which inure, or may lawfully inure, to the benefit of any private
shareholder or individual.
“(e) The Administrator shall take such action as may be neces-
sary to assure compliance with provisions of the Act of March 3,
1931 (known as the Davis-Bacon Act; 40 U S.C 276a—276a(5)) The
Secretary of Labor shall have, with respect to the labor standards
specified in this subsection, the authority and functions set forth
in Reorganization Plan Numbered 14 of 1950 (15 F R. 3176; 64 Stat
1267) and section 2 of the Act of June 13, 1934 (40 USC 276c)
“(f) The Administrator shall request the Attorney General to
appear and represent him in any civil action instituted under this
title to which the Admintstratoi is a party. Unless, within a rea-
sonable time, the Attorney General notifies the Administrator that
he will appear in such action, attorneys appointed by the Adminis-
trator shall appear and represent him.
“(g) The provisions of this title shall not be construed as affect-
ing any authority of the Administrator under part G of title Ill
of this Act.
“(h) Not later than April 1 of each year, the Administrator shall
submit to the Committee on Commerce of the Senate and the Com-
mittee on Interstate and Foreign Commerce of the House of Repre-
sentatives a report respecting the activities of the Agency under
this title and containing such recommendations for legislation as
he considers necessary. The report of the Administrator under this
subsection which is due not later than April 1, 1975, and each sub-
sequent report of the Administrator under this subsection shall in-
clude a statement on the actual and anticipated cost to public water
systems in each State of compliance with the requirements of this
title. The Office of Management and Budget may review any re-
port required by this subsection before its submission to such com-
mittees of Congress, but the Office may not revise any such report,
require any revision in any such report, or delay its submission be-
yond the day prescribed for its submission, and may submit to such
committees of Congress its comments respecting any such report.
“(i)(1) No employer mar discharge any employee or otherwise
discriminate against any employee with respect to his compensation,
1945
-------
P.L. 93-523 LAWS OF 93rd CONG.—2nd SESS. Dec. 16
terms, conditions, or privileges of employment because the employee
(or any person acting pursuant to a request of the employee) has—
“(A) commenced, caused to be commenced, or is about to com-
mence or cause to be commenced a proceeding under this title
or a proceeding for the administration or enforcement of drink-
ing water regulations or underground injection control pro-
grams of a State,
“(B) testified or is about to testify in any such proceeding,
or
“(C) assisted or participated or is about to assist or partici-
pate in any manner in such a proceeding or in any other ac-
tion to carry out the purposes of this title.
“(2)(A) Any employee who believes that he has been discharged
or otherwise discriminated against by any person in violation of
paragraph (1) may, within 30 days after such violation occurs, file
(or have any person file on his behalf) a complaint with the Sec-
retary of Labor (hereinafter in this subsection referred to as the
‘Secretary’) alleging such discharge or discrimination. Upon re-
ceipt of such a complaint, the Secretary shall notify the person
named in the complaint of the filing of the complaint.
“(B)(i) Upon receipt of a complaint filed under subparagraph
(A), the Secretary shall conduct an investigation of the violation
alleged in the complaint Within 30 days of the receipt of such com-
plaint, the Secretary shall complete such investigation and shall
notify in writing the complainant (and any person acting in his be-
half) and the person alleged to have committed such violation of the
results of the investigation conducted pursuant to this subparagraph.
Within 90 days of the receipt of such complaint the Secretary shall,
unless the proceeding on the complaint is terminated by the Secre-
tary on the basis of a settlement entered into by the Secretary and
the person alleged to have committed such violation, issue an or-
der either providing the relief prescribed by clause (ii) or deny-
ing the complaint. An order of the Secretary shall be made on the
record after notice and opportunity for agency hearing. The Sec-
retary may not enter into a settlement terminating a proceeding on
a complaint without the participation and consent of the complainant.
“(ii) If in response to a complaint filed under subparagraph (A)
the Secretary determines that a violation of paragraph (1) has oc-
curred, the Secretary shall order (I) the person who committed such
violation to take affirmative action to abate the violation, (II) such
person to reinstate the complainant to his former position togeth-
er vith the compensation (including back p iy), terms, conditions,
and privileges of his employment. (III) compensatory damages, and
(IV) where appropriate, exemplary damages If such an order is
issued, the Secretary, at the request of the complainant, shall assess
against the person against whom the order is issued a sum equal to
the aggregate amount of all costs and expenses (including attorneys’
fees) reasonably incurred, as determined by the Secretary, by the
complainant for, or in connection with, the bringing of the complaint
upon which the order was issued.
1946
-------
Dec. 16 SAFE DRINKING WATER ACT P.L. 93-523
“(3) (A) Any person adversely affected or aggrieved by an order
issued under paragraph (2) may obtain review of the order in the
United States Court of Appeals for the circuit in which the viola-
tion, with respect to which the order was issued, allegedly occurred.
The petition for review must be filed within sixty days from the issu-
ance of the Secretary’s order. Review shall conform to chapter 7
of title 5 of the United States Code. The commencement of proceed-
ings under this subparagraph shall not, unless ordered by the court,
operate as a stay of the Secretary’s order
“(B) An order of the Secretary with respect to which review
could have been obtained under subparagraph (A) shall not be
subject to judicial review in any criminal or other civil proceeding
“(4) Whenever a person has failed to comply with an order issued
under paragraph (2)(B), the Secretary shall file a civil action in the
United States District Court for the district in which the violation
was found to occur to enforce such order In actions brought under
this paragraph, the district courts shall have jurisdiction to grant
all appropriate relief including, but not limited to, injunctive relief,
compensatory, and exemplary damages. Civil actions filed under this
paragraph shall be heard and decided expeditiously
“(5) Any nondiscretionary duty imposed by this section is enforce-
able in mandamus proceeding brought under section 1361 of title
28 of the United States Code
“(6) Paragraph (1) shall not apply with respect to any employee
who, acting ithout direction from his employer (or the employer’s
agent), deliberately causes a violation of any requirement of this
title.”
(b) Section 2(f) of the Public Health Service Act is amended
by inserting “(1)” after “except that” and by inserting before the
semicolon at the end thereof the following “, and (2) as used in
title XIV such term includes Guam, American Samoa, and the Trust
Territory of the Pacific Islands”
RURAL WATER SURVEY
Sec. 3 (a) The Administrator of the Environmental Protection
Agency shall (after consultation with the Secretary of Agriculture
and the several States) enter into arrangements with public or
private entities as may be appropriate to conduct a survey of the
q antity. quality, and availability of rural drinking water supplies
Such survey shall include, but not be limited to, the consideration of
the number of residents in each rural area—
(1) presentl being inadequately served by a public or private
drinking %ater supply system, or by an indi idual home drink-
ing water supply system,
(2) presently having limited or otherwise inadequate ac-
cess to drinking watei
(3) who, due to the absence or inadequacy of a drinking
water supply system, aie exposed to an increased health haz-
ard, and
37. 42 U S C A ) 201(t)
1947
-------
P.L. 93-523 LAWS OF 93rd CONG.—2ncl SESS. Dec. 16
(4) who have experienced incidents of chronic or acute ill-
ness, which may be attributed to the absence or inadequacy of
a drinking water supply system
(b) Such survey shall be completed within eighteen months of the
date of enactment of this Act and a final report thereon submitted,
not later than six months after the completion of such survey, to the
President for transmittal to the Congress. Such report shall include
recommendations for Improving rural water supplies
Cc) There are authorized to be appropriated to carry out the pro-
visions of this section $1,000,000 for the fiscal year ending June 30,
1975; $2,000,000 for the fiscal year ending June 30, 1976, and
$1,000,000 for the fiscal year ending June 30, 1977.
BOTTLED DRINKING WATER
Sec. 4. Chapter 1V of the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic
Act 3t is amended by adding after section 409 the following new
section:
“BOTTLED DRINKING WATER STANDARDS
“Sec 410. Whenever the Administrator of the Environmental
Protection Agency prescribes interim or revised national primary
drinking water regulations under section 1412 of the Public Health
Service Act, the Secretary shall consult with the Administrator and
within 180 days after the promulgation of such drinking water regu-
lations either promulgate amendments to regulations under this chap-
ter applicable to bottled drinking water or publish in the Federal
Register his reasons for not making such amendments “.
Approved Dec 16, 1974
VESSELS-_NET TONNAGE FOR WASTE MATERIALS
For Legislative History of Act, see p 6306
PUBLIC LAW 93—524; 88 STAT 1694
(S 1353)
An Act to deduct from ros. tonnage rn determiriin flat tonna9e those
spaces on board vessels used for waste materials.
Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United
States of America in Congress assembled, That
Section 4153 of the Revised Statutes (46 U S.C. 77)39 is amended by
inserting following paragraph Cd) the following new paragraph.
“(e) Space occupied by machinery used exclusively to separate.
clarify, purify, or process, a ship’s own slop oil mixture, tank-clean-
ing residue, bilge residue, or other waste materials, including sewage
garbage, galley v.astes, or trash and space occupied by any tank,
tanks, or collection area used e cclusively for the carriage or collec-
tion of such slop oil mixture, tank-cleaning residue, or other waste
materials, but not to exceed a maximum space deduction established
38. 21 IJSCA I 341 et seq
39 46 USCA ) 77
1948
-------
SAFE DRINKING WATER ACT
42 U.S.C. 300f to 300j-26
L History of the StbteLM & / q t
Congress enacted the Safe Drinking Water Act in 1974 in response to contamination detected in
the water supplies of a number of large cities. The purpose of the legislation was to assure that water
supply systems serving the public meet minimum national standards for the protection of public health.
Prior to 1974, EPA was authorized to prescribe federal drinking water standards only for water
supplies used by interstate commerce carriers. Furthç more, those standards could only be enforced
with respect to contaminants capable of causing comn unicable disease. The 1974 legislation amended
the Public Health Service Act of 1944 (West’s Environmental Law Statutes includes the Safe Drinking
Water Act under the heading Public Health Service Act).
The 1974 legislation (1) established the public water supply program which authorized EPA to
establish federal standards applicable to all public water systems for the protection from all harmful
contaminiuits, (2) established the underground injection control program which authorized EPA to
establish federal standards for protection of underground sources of drinking water, and (8) established
a joint federal-state system for implementing and enforcing both of these programs.
Congress amended the SDWA in 1986 with the primary changes being to establish deadlines for
setting standards for the public water supply program. Congress believed that EPA’s progress in
setting national standards was inadequate and the amendments required EPA to regulate 83 named
contaminAnts within three years of enactment and required regulation of an additional 25 contaminantr.
every three years thereafter.
IL Public Water Supp y Program -
A. Definitions (Section 1401)
NRtinmIl primary drinking water regulations” (NPDWRs) are the regulations that EPA
promulgates establishing either maximum contaminant levels or treatment technologr requirements
(referred to as “treatment techniques” in the SDWA) for contaminants which the Administrator
determines may have an adverse effect on the health of persons. NPDWRs apply to all public water
systems and include monitoring and reporting requirements,
Public water systems” are defined as systems that serve piped water for human consumption that
have at least 15 service connections or regularly serve at least 25 individuals. Systems can be publicly
or privately owned.
By regulation EPA has divided public water systems into community; non-transient non-community;
and transient non-community. Community systems provide water to year-round residents. Non-
transient non-community systems regularly serve at least 25 of the same people over six months of the
year (i .e., schools, factories). Transient non-community systems may include restaurants, gas stations,
and campgrounds. See 40 CFR 141.2.
There are approximately 220,000 public water systems in the United States subject to the
requirements of the SDWAI 60,000 of these systems are community and the rest serve non-community
populations. While over 80% of the population is served by only approximately 1200 large public water
systems, the vast majority of the regulated systems are small with about 64% serving fewer than 500
people (87% of community water systems serve fewer than 3,300 people).
Many issues arise over the coverage of this definition. For example, in 1993, the Ninth Circuit held
that a irrigation district was not a public water system even though the district sold untreated drinking
water from its irrigation canals to 5700 residential customers. The court held the District not to be a
PWS because its system was not ‘piped.” Imperial Irrigation District v. EPA , 4 F.3d 774 (9th Cir.
1993).
B. National Primary Drinking Water Regulations (Section 1412)
-------
2
This section contains the framework for (1) selection of contaiminants for regulation. (2) schedule
for proposal and promulgation of regulations, and (3) the factors and criteria to be considered in
establishing the regulations.
C. Selection of ContaminRnts and Schedule for Rei ulation ( Section 1412(b)(1)-(3) )
Sections 1412(b)(1) and (2) identi1 83 contaminants (by reference to an EPA FR notice) for which
the AdminiRtrator is to promulgate NPDWRs. The se tion also sets deadlines for issuance of
regulations for those 83 contaminants. The Administrator is authorized to substitute 7 contaminants
on the list.
These specific requirements were added in the 1986 amendments. To date, EPA has promulgated
regulations for 75 of the 83 contaminants. The Agency is under court order to promulgate NPDWRs
for the remaining contaminants. (All NPDWRS have been promulgated pursuant to court-ordered
deadlines established in citizen suits brought by the Bull Run Coalition or related individuals). EPA
also is under court order to promulgate NPDWRs for the first set of 25 additional contaminants
required to be regulated (section 1412(b)(3)(C)).
D. Msi imum Contaminant Level Goals ( Section 1412(b)(1) and ( 4) .
The Act requires that when EPA promulgates a NPDWR for a contaminant, it must also publish a
ma imuin contaminant level goal (MCLG) for that contaminant. MCLGS do not constitute regulatory
requirements which impose any obligations on public water systems. Bather, MCLGs are health goals
that are to be set at a level which, in the Administrator’s judgment, “no known or anticipated adverse
effects on the health of persons occur and which allows for an adequate margin of safety.” Section
1412(b)(4). MCLGs appear in EPA’s regulations at 40 CFR Subpart F. -
In 1985, EPA adopted its policy of setting MCLGS at zero for known and probable human
carcinogens. See 50 FR 46880, 46895 (Nov. 13, 1985). The Agency explained that MCLGs of zero for
carcinogens would best reflect the Agency’s general philosophy that, as a goal, carcinogens should not
be present in drinking water. EPA’s decision to set zero MCLGs was upheld in Natural Resources
Defense Council v. Thomas , 824 F.2d 1211 (D.C. Cir. 1987) (EPA’s determination was “well within the
bounds of its authority” under the SDWA). at 1213.
E. Setting NPDWRs - the Enforceable Requirements ( Section 1412(b)(1) and ( 5) - ( 8) .
NPDWRs include either maximum contaminant levels (MCLs) or treatment technique
requirements as well as compliance monitoring requirements for individual contaminants. A maximum
contaminant level (MCL ) sets a level of the contaminant not to be exceeded by public water systems
and is to be set as close to the MCLG as is “feasible.” The Act defines feasible to mean “feasible with
the use of the best technology, treatment techniques or other means which the Administrator finds
are available (taking costs into consideration).” Section 1412(b)(5). MCLs appear at 40 CFR Part 141,
Subparts B and G. EPA has regulated most contaminants by promulgating MCLs -. as opposed to
promulgating a treatment technique.
In establishing an MCL, EPA must identifS’ technologies that it finds to be available for use in
meeting the MCL. EPA may not require the use of any specified technology for purposes of meeting
the MCL. (Section 1412(b)(6)).
Under CERCLA and RCRA, MCLs and non-zero MCLGs are generally used as standards for
cleanup of groundwater and surface water used as drinking water sources. See 40 CFR
300.430(e)(2)(i)(B) and (C); 55 Fed. Reg. at 30876 (proposed 40 CFR 264.521(a), currently used as
guidance under RCRA). For these purposes, the standards generally must be attained in the
contaminated aquifer or surface water body (rather than after wellhead treatment), unless attainment
is not technically practicable. Litigation challenging several MCLs was brought by manufacturers of
the chemicals being regulated based on the manufacturers’ concerns regarding cleanup liability.
International Fabricare Inst. v. EPA 972 F.2d 384 (D.C. Cir. 1992).
-------
3
A treatment technique requirement imposes an obligation on public water systems to use an
identified treatment technolo r and it must “prevent known or anticipated adverse effects on the
health of persons to the extent feasible.” Section 1412(b)(7)(A). EPA may establish treatment
technique requirements in lieu of an MCL if it is not economically or technologically feasible to
ascertain the level of the contaminant.
NPDWRS also include requirements for monitoring and use of analytical methods (40 CFR Part
141, Subpart C) and for reporting, public notification, and record keeping (40 CFR Part 141, Subpart
D). /
NPDWRS become effective 18 months after promulgation. (Section 1412(b)(10).
-------
4
F. Treatment Techniques ( Section 1412(b)(?) and ( 8)) .
EPA has established treatment techniques for control of lead and copper (40 CFR Part 141,
Subpart D and for filtration and disinfection (40 CFR Part 141, Subpart H). While only used in these
two rulemnkings, treatment techniques have been projected to impose the greatest costs among EPA’s
drinking water rules. -
EPA’s 1989 filtration and disinfection rule required all systems to filter and disinfect if the system
could not meet specified criteria regarding the levels of inicrobials and turbidity in the water and
maintain a watershed control program which minimizes the potential for contamination by Giardia
lamblia cysts and viruses.
The greatest controversy concerning implementation of the filtration rule has involved the New
York City drinking water system. The major drinking water resevoirs for the NYC system are not
filtered. To filter the system would cost the City billions of dollars. The City, State, and EPA have all
been working to develop an adequate watershed protection program to avoid the need to filter.
The other major treatment technique rule established corrosion control practices and replacement
of lead service lines as requirements to control levels of lead in drinking water. Also a controversial
rule, the rule was upheld in most respects in American Water Works Association v. EPA . 40 F3d. 1288
(D.C. Cir. 1994).
G. State Primary (Section 1413 )
States, territories, and Indian tribes may assume primary enforcement responsibility (primacy) for
the public water system program. To date, 54 states and territories have primacy (Wyoming is the
only unauthorized state). To be authorized and to retain primacy, state, territories, or tribes must
adopt regulations no less stringent than the federal regulations.
EPA’s primacy regulations are set forth in 40 CFR Part 142, Subpart B. In 1989 EPA amended its
primacy regulations to provide that EPA could grant states with primacy up to two years after the
effective date of new NPDWRS (18 months after promulgation) to amend their state programs. The
rule was challenged by National Wildlife Federation arguing that the rule illegally authorized ‘split
primacy” during the extension period, since EPA would be implementing the new rules itself during
that period. The rule was upheld in NWF v. EPA . 980 F.2d 765 (D.C. Cir. 1992) (the EPA approach is
not forbidden by the SDWA and is a reasonable response to the difficulties faced by the states in
amending their programs).
H. Federal Enforcement and Public Notification ( Section 1414 )
For states that are granted primacy, EPA retains authority to oversee the operation of the state
programs and under certain conditions, to take enforcement actions under the federal regulations
against public water systems where the state has failed to do so. The Act also authorizes EPA
generally to act to protect public health in cases of emergency, where the state itself has not protected
against the endangerment. (Section 1431). Of course, EPA is exclusively responsible for enforcing the
federal drinking water program requirements in states that do not have primacy.
Section 1414(c) also requires public water systems to give notice to persons served by the systems
of failure to comply with national primary drinking water regulations or when the systems have a
variance or exemption. This section also authorizes the Administrator to prescribe by regulation the
manner, form and frequency of notificaton. Detailed regulations appear at 40 CFR 141.32.
I. Variance and Exemptions (Section 1415 and 1416 )
The Act authorizes the State or EPA (whichever has primary enforcement responsibility) to grant
variances or exemptions to systems that do not comply with the regulations. A variance may be
granted to a system that does not meet an MCL after installation of the best available technologr. A
-------
5
variance may be granted from a treatment technique requirement if a system demonstrates it has
installed treatment as effective as the treatment technique or that treatment is unnecessary to protect
public health.
An exemption may be granted to a system that does not comply with any MCL or treatment
technique due to compelling factors (which may include economic factors). Exemptions must prescibe
compliance within 12 months. For systems that have 500 or fewer service connections, exemptions
may be renewed for additional two-year periods if the pystem is taking all practicable steps to comply.
J. Major Implementation Issues
L Impact of Regulations on States and Public Water Systems
As the Agency meets the statutory requirements of the 1986 amendments, increasing concern
is being expressed about the impact of the growing number of regulatory requirements on those
responsible for implementing the regulations -- the state regulators and the regulated public water
systems.
EPA estimates that the costs of compliance for all systems will reach $3 billion a year for the next
two decades. But, it is the small systems that face the greatest challenges in complying with the
SDWA requirements since they lack both the financial resources and the technical and managerial
expertise to cope with the increasing complexity of monitoring and water treatment. Accordingly,
much of the concern expressed about the burden of the drinking water program focuses on the small
systems. -
Issues arose as to whether, in recognition of financial and technical limitations, small systems
should be subject to less stringent requirements than large systems. Or, should “waiver” procedures be
available to smcill systems that cannot comply. While these approaches would provide some fiscal relief,
they raised questions on the appropriateness of exposing people in small towns to greater health risks.
As early as 1991, Administrator Reilly, in testimony before Congress, recognized the increasing
demands on public water systems and primacy states for implementation of the drinking water
program. In the 1993 Appropriations Act, Congress
directed the Agency to submit a report to Congress concerning implementation of the SDWA and
possible statutory changes. -
Reauthorization efforts were very active in 1998 and 1994. Both the Senate and House passed
comprehensive amendments but the session of Congress ended before the two bills could go to
conference.
2. The Role of Cost in Dedsionmiikjng
As discussed above, EPA is to set NPDWRS based on what is feasible. The Act defines feasible
to mean what is feasible using the best technolo available, taking cost into consideration.
EPA has traditionally analyzed the cost of regulations in terms of affordability for large public
water systems; this approach reflects the legislative history of the SDWA. The 1974 House Report
provides that “the Committee intends that the Administrator’s determination of what methods are
generally available (taking cost into account) is to be based on what may reasonably be afforded by
large metropolitan or regional public water systems.’ Because of economies of scale available to large
systems, the cost of technologr has generally not been a limiting factor in setting regulations.
However, as the number of drinking water regulations increases, the national costs of
implementing these regulations have caused concern in some quarters. As a result, there have been a
number of recommendations as to how the Agency should factor cost into its regulatory decisions.
It has been suggested that the Agency should not look at the costs of implementing each regulation
separately, but should estimate the costs of implementing all applicable drinking water regulations.
-------
6
Many have recommended that EPA should not regulate contamirurnt at levels where the benefits do
not outweigh the costs of regulation. This cost-benefit argument arises more frequently now that EPA
is generally addressing contaminants that pose fewer health risks and occur less frequently.
In proposing regulations for radionudlides (including radon), EPA proposed to use a cost-
effectiveness approach in setting the standards. The Agency received a great many comments from the
public on the radionudlides proposal and the cost-effectiveness analysis. In general, industry 1 water
systems and State commenters agreed with the approa h and encouraged its further use. However,
environmental commenters opposed it. NRDC indicated that the cost-effectiveness approach is an
“extremely dangerous attack on the fundamental requirements of the SDWA that was directly rejected
by Congress during the 1986 legislative amendment debates.” The Agency has not finalized this rule or
use the cost effectiveness approach in any existing rules.
3. Disinfectants and Disinfection By-products Rule
Currently, the major regulatory focus in the drinking water program is to reduce levels of
disease-causing microorganisms and disinfection byproducts (DBPs). The task is to balance the risks --
to reduce exposure to disinfectants and DBPs without causing an increase in microbial contarnini tion.
More than 220 million people in the U.S. receive disinfected water (typically chlorinated) from
public water supplies. All disinfected water has DBPs which are formed by naturally occurring organics
reacting with disinfectarits. As a result, by-products are more common in surface water than ground
water. About half of the population is served by surface water systems and could be exposed to
significant lifetime cancer risk from by-products. Only one group of DBPs is currently regulated. EPA
promulgated limits on concentrations of one family of toxic chlorine compounds, total trihalomethanes
(rrHMs), in 1979; these regulations apply only to systems serving more than 10,000 people. Newly
identified DBPs, dichloroacetic acid (DCA) and bromate are much more toxic than any of the TI’HMs.
Based on tentative risk numbers, 200 cancer cases per year are estimated to be caused by DBPs
(mostly DCA).
In 1989, EPA promulgated the surface water treatment rule (SWTR) that established minimum
levels of disinfection needed to limit human exposure to microbiological contaminants. The SWTR
requires systems to maintain a disinfectant residual throughout the distribution system to protect from
system failure and growth from bacterial pathogens. In regulating DBPs, EPA will need to ensure that
water systems can effectively provide treatment that controls both DBPs and microbiological
organisms.
In 1992, EPA initiated a negotiated rulemAking process under the Federal Advisory Committee
Act (FACA) and the Negotiated RulemAking Act of 1990 to develop a proposed DBP rule. The
negotiating committee included representatives of the regulated industry, environmental groups, health
professions, consumer groups, State and local officials, State regulators, and EPA. The group met from
November 1992 through June 1993, and reviewed various technologies (including alternate disinfectants
such as ozone and chioramines), the cost and performance of the technologies, and the downside risks
of the various technologies.
The negotiating committee agreed on a series of regulatory actions to address the
microbial/disinfection problem. The first regulation is a monitoring rule to collect information on
occurrence of inicroorgainisms and DBPs and specific engineering data on how public water systems
currently control such contaminants. The Information Collection Rule (ICR) was proposed on February
10, 1994 (59 FR 6333), and OW expects to issue the final ICR in April 1996. Only very large systems
will be subject to the ICR and that information will be maintained in an EPA database. Because of the
complexity in analyzing microbial contaminants, particularly cryptosporidium, the Agency will need to
evaluate laboratories for their analytical capability, and will authorize those laboratories that can be
used under the ICR. Actual monitoring is expected to begin in January 1997.
On July 29, 1994, EPA proposed the other two regulations agreed to in the negotiated
rulemaking the disinfectant and disinfection byproducts (DIDBP) rule (59 FR 38668), and the
enhanced surface water treatment rule (ESWTR) (59 FR 38832).
-------
7
The DIDBP rule proposed MCLGs and MCLS and NPDWRs (either MCLs or treatment techniques)
for three disinfectants (chlorine, chiorainines and chlorine dioxide), as well as a number of organic and
inorganic DBP8. This Stage 1 DIDBP rule was based on information available to the negotiators; the
contaminants in the D/DBP rule were counted against the “next 25” contaminants required to be
regulated under the SDWA. The proposed ESWTR describes options for providing additional
protection from high densities of pathogens in poor quality source waters, and from the protozoan
cryptospordium that was not regulated in the surface water rule. The ICR will provide information
necessary to determine whether the ESWTR will be promulgated, and on the need for, and content of,
a long-term (Stage 2) D/DBP rule. /
In addition to this group of regulations, EPA is also developing a groundwater disinfection
proposaL
K Redirection and Reauthorization 1995-1996
1. Redirection . As noted above, concerns about the drinking water program, and particularly
about the demanth of the regulatory program, were reflected in the SDWA reauthorization efforts of
1993-1994. In the spring and summer of 1995, EPA’s Office of Water conducted an extensive
reassessment of the program with the assistance of a large group of “stakeholders”. The central goal
of the redirection is to maximize the use of federal resources to ensure safe drinking water. A series
of public meetings were held to solicit ideas, su estions, and options regarding specific activities, and
as the basis for strategic decisions on program directions and resource allocations.
In November 1995, EPA’s Office of Water released a draft redirection proposal which identified
four redirection objectives: sound science and adequate data; risk-based regulatory priorities; flexible
partnerships with state governments; and community-based, effective source water protection. The
draft proposal also indicated the shifts in current Office of Water resources that would be needed to
address these objectives. In particular, EPA proposed to focus its regulatory resources on the DIDBP
regulatory package, and to seek extensions of the other regulations currently under court-ordered
schedules.
The draft redirection proposal is still under review.
-------
8
2. Reauthorization . On October 12, 1995, Senators Kempthorne, Chafee, Baucus, and Reid all
sponsered a bill to reauthorize the SDWA. The Senate passed the bill, S. 1316, by a vote of 99.0. The
major provisions of the bill are:
• state revolving loan funds (SRFs) to capitalize drinking water treatment like those used to
finance sewage treatment.
• changes to standard setting that eliminate the’ requirement to regulate 25 contaminants every
3 years, and add a requirement for cost-benefit analys s for each new standard.
• more flexibility for States in monitoring, including alternative monitoring programs.
• streamlined variances to provide flexibility for small public water systems, and extended
compliance deadlines.
The House has recently begun hearings on SDWA reauthorization.
UL Underground Injection Control Program
A. Overview
1. Goals . The Underground Injection Control (UIC) program is a preventative
program to protect underground sources of drinking water (USDWs) from endangerment due to
contamination by underground injection of fluida USDWS vary in depth and quality from pristine
aquifers a few feet deep to aquifers a mile or deeper containing 10,000 mg/i of dissolved solids. (Yver
50% of the U.S. population draws upon USDWs for drinking water. This percentage is increasing as
population is moving to formerly rural areas. TJSDWs are also important for irrigation and livestock
watering.
2. Key defmitions . The following legal terms define the jurisdiction and mandate of
the UIC program.
o Underground Injection - the subsurface emplacement of fluids through a dug hole
which is deeper than the widest surface dimension. Due to the “deeper than wide” criterion,
the defmition excludes ponds, lagoons, and other surface waters. EPA also has interpreted this
definition as excluding the placement of containerized fluid in underground caves.
o Endangerment . underground injection endangers a USDW if such injection may cause
the migration of injected or formation fluids into a USDW if the presence of such
contaminant [ 1] may result in such system’s not complying with any national primary drinking
water regulation or [ 2] may otherwise adversely affect the health of persons.
o Fluid - any material that flows or moves; may be gaseous, liquid, semisolid, or in any
other state. “Fluids” need not be waste or hazardous; as a result, the program is broader in
scope than RCRA’s universe of regulated materials.
o Underground Source of Drinking Water - groundwater aquifer which could supply a
public water system (i.e. at least 25 people), contains <10,000 ppm total dissolved solids
(TDS), and is not an exempted aquifer. (One can petition EPA to exempt an aquifer from
protection if it cannot and will not in the future serve as a source of drinking water for reasons
listed in 40 CFR §146.4 (e.g. too contaminated).)
3. Statutory and regulatory reQuirements .
The statutory authorization and mandates of this program are found in §1421-1425 of the Safe
Drinking Water Act. The federal regulations implementing the program are found at 40 C.F.R. 124,
144, 145, 146 and 147.
-------
9
The technical requirements for injection differ by well “class” as explained below. For Classes
I, LI, and II I, the requirements include location, construction, performance, monitoring, plugging and
abandonment standards for fluid disposal.
Class I - hazardous, municipal, and industrial waste disposal in deep wells. Approximately 60%
of the liquid hazardous wastes disposed of on land are disposed through about 190 Class I
hazardous waste wells. -
Class II- brine disposal and oil and gas storage wells. There are over 160,000 Class U wells;
these wells pose a potential endangerment to USDWs of brine contamination. -.
Class ifi - solution mining wells. There are about 10,000 Class ifi wells; these wells pose a
potential endangerment to USDWS due to radioactive and cyanide contamination.
Class N - hazardous and radioactive waste disposal in shallow wells. These wells are banned
unless they are being used in connection with a RCRA or CERCLA cleanup.
Class V - injection wells not included in other classes. Historically, EPA has not established
regulatory requirements for these wells, which may number over 200,000 and include a wide
variety of types such as gas station service wells, industrial drainage wells, agricultural drainage
wells, and septic systems. EPA has recently proposed a regulatory approach for these wells.
4. Primacy . Like most of the federal environmental programs, a state may
administer the TJIC program in lieu of the federal government upon approval by EPA. A state may
apply for primary enforcement responsibility (‘primacy”) if it can show it has authority under state law
to administer an effective UIC program which meets minimum federal standards. A state may apply
for Class II primacy independently of primacy over a TJIC program for other well classes. EPA has
approved 35 states for full primacy over all classes of wells and 6 states have partial primacy. EPA
directly adniinisters 16 full programs and 6 partial programs. Indian tribes may also seek primacy;
however, EPA currently administers the UIC program on all Indian lands.
5. Permitting Scheme . While the SDWA requires that all tJIC wells obtain
permits, it authorizes EPA to permit these wells by rule. The resulting permitting program varies by
well classification.
Class I: Hazardous waste injection wells must receive a UIC Class I permit comply with
RCRA permit-by-rule requirements. All other Class I wells must obtain a UIC Class I permit.
Class U: Most Class U wells require UIC permits to operate. Some Class U wells (existing
enhanced recovery and hydrocarbon storage wells) operate under a UIC permit-by-rule.
Class ifi: All Class LEE wells require UTC permits to operate.
Class N: There are no permits for these wells. Injection in these wells must be authorized as
part of a RCRA or CERCLA cleanup.
Class V: All Class V wells currently are permitted by rule. The program Director may,
where necessary, require Class V well operators to obtain an individual permit.
B. Major Implementation Issues
1. Application of RCRA to Class I IJIC Wells
Hazardous waste which is disposed of in a UIC is subject to RCRA requirements as well as the
UIC program since RCRA generally governs the disposal of hazardous waste in or on the land.
Underground injection is a form of land disposal As a result, tJIC hazardous waste wells (Class I wells)
must comply with RCRA permitting and corrective action requirements.
-------
10
In addition, under RCRA, hazardous wastes exhibiting a characteristic at the point they are
generated cannot be diluted and land disposed unless they are first treated to destroy or remove
hazardous constituents. Chemical Waste Management v. EPA , 976 F. 2d 2 (D.C. Cir. 1992), cert.
denied 113 S.Ct. 1961 (1993). As a result, RCRA land disposal restriction requirements also pertain to
UIC wells where the material disposed of is NOT hazardous waste but was hazardous waste when
generated (e.g. because the hazardous waste was diluted). This affects between one and two hundred
facilities generating billions of gallons of wastewaters. Such wastes must receive additional treatment
prior to disposal or apply for an obtain a no-migration variance from the RCRA standards.
2. IJIC State Programs Withdrawal
Like the Clean Water Act NPDES permit programs implemented by states, the UIC state programs
are also carefully watched by some environmental groups. Where states appear to have inadequate
legal authorities or implementation, EPA receives petitions to withdraw approval of those programs
and return implementation to the federal government. EPA regulations at 40 C.F.R. § 145.34(b)
provide that approval of a State UIC program may be withdrawn, and a Federal program established
in its place, when the Administrator determines, after holding a public hearing, that the State program
is not in compliance with the SDWA and EPA’s regulations. Much ener r needs to be devoted to
responding to these petitions. Currently, EPA is litigating its decision to NOT withdraw programs
from Florida and Alabama.
3. Class V Regulations
EPA recently proposed to complete its regulatory program for UIC wells with a proposal
governing Class V wells. These wells are currently authorized to operate under an authorization-by-
rule but are not subject to any regulatory requirements. Under the proposed regulation, all Class V
wells would continue to be authorized by rule. No new regulatory requirements would be established;
however, the Agency would commit to a targeted education, technical assistance, and enforcement
program under which Class V wells, particularly industrial waste wells, would be carefully monitored
for potential endangerment of USDWS and, where necessary, closed.
C. Other Groundwater Programs under the SDWA
1. Sole source aquifer designation
The sole source aquifer designation process under Section 1424(e) of the SDWA was
established to prevent Federal financially assisted projects from causing contamination to those
aquifers which are the sole or principal source of drinking water for an area. Any person may petition
for designation, or the Administrator may designate without petition. An SSA designation is based on
factors such as the extent to which the aquifer is the sole source of drinking water for the area served
and whether the water supplied by the aquifer can be replaced by alternate water supply sources at
reasonable costs.
Once an SSA designation has been made, the SDWA gives EPA the authority to review those
projects in the SSA which could contaminate the aquifer. If the Administrator determines that a
project may conaminate the aquifer so as to create a significant hazard to public health, there can be
no commitment of federal fmancial assistance.
2. Wellhead protection programs
Under the SDWA, States are required to prepare and submit a wellhead protection program to
protect groundwater that supplies wells and well fields that support public drinking water systems.
These programs are implemented primarily at the State level, with municipalities implementing
programs that reflect State requirements or incentives. Under a WIIPP, a State or locality delineates
the wellhead protection area, identifies sources of contamination in the wellhead protection area, and
develops management approaches. The program is used to set priorities for permitting, well closures,
and enforcement actions and provide guidance and outreach materials to owners and operators of
potential contamination sources. As of mid-1995, 40 States and territories had approved programs.
-------
11 -
3. Groundwater olicv and comprehensive state
Eroundwater protection programs
The Office of Ground Water and Drinking Water within OW has primary responsibility within
EPA for implementing the Agency’s ground water protection strategr and supporting States in their
ground water protection efforts. This office works with Regional ground water offices to foster
cooperation within the Agency in resolving ground water issues and provide specialized hydrogeological
expertise. In addition, the Regional ground water offices play the key role in EPA’s efforts to build
State and local capacity for ground water management.
In July 1989, EPA Administrator William Reilly established a Ground Water Task Force,
chaired by Deputy Administrator F. Henry Habicht II, to review the Agency’s ground water protection
program and to develop concrete principles and objectives to ensure effective and consistent decision-
mnking in all Agency decisions affecting the resource. The outcome of this effort was a set of policy
and implementation principles, published in July 1991, that are intended to protect the nation’s ground
water resources and guide the Agency’s future groundwater protection efforts.
In particular, the ground water principles contained in the report emphasize prevention of
contamination and prioritizing actions based on use, value, and vulnerability. The report also
recognized that States have an important role in ground water protection and that the Agency should
encourage the States to play a critical role in priority-setting. In particular, the report stated that the
Agency should promote the concept of a State Comprehensive Ground Water Protection Program.
In 1993, EPA issued guidance for States interested in creating a Comprehensive State
Ground Water Protection Program (‘CSGWPP”). This program is an EPA-State initiative designed to
coordinate all groundwater-related programs in a State through resource-based decisionm king. -
CSGWPP provides States with the flexibility to set priorities and focus resources on protecting
USDWs from potential sources of contamination. EPA provides CWGWPP guidance and endorses
State programs. States which receive EPA endorsement of their CSGWPP programs are offered
flexibility in the operation of their groundwater programs and technical assistance. Eleven States and
two tribes have very active CSGWPP programs so far.
-------
March 19, 1996
MARINE PROTECTION, RESEABCH AND SANCTUARIES ACT
I. OVERVIEW
The Marine Protection, Research, and Sanctuaries Act of 1972 (“MPRSA”), 33 U.S.C. § 1401, et
was enacted to regulate the dumping of all typespf materials in ocean waters and to prevent or
strictly limit the dumping in ocean waters of any material that would adversely affect human health,
welfare, and amenities, and the marine environment, ecological systems, and economic potentialities.
The MPRSA permitting program covers:
o Transportation of any material from the United States for the purpose of dumping it
into ocean waters. MPRSA
§ 101(a)(1);
o Transportation of any material from any location by (1) vessels or aircraft registered in
the U.S. or flying the U.S. flag or (2) U.S. departments, agencies or instrumentalities for the purpose
of dumping it into ocean waters. MPRSA § 101(a)(2);
o Dumping of any material transported from a location outside the U.S. into the U.S.
territorial sea or the contiguous zone to the extent it may affect the territorial sea or territory of the
United States. MPRSA § 101(b).
The MPRSA is the U.S. domestic legislation that implements the London Convention, an
international treaty governing the dumping of material at sea. The Act was passed in 1972, prior to
the adoption of the London Convention later that same year. Substantial amendments to the MPRSA
were enacted in 1974 to align the MPRSA with the terms of the Convention.
The MPRSA requires that in establishing criteria for the issuance of ocean dumping permits,
the Administrator is to apply the standards and criteria binding on the United States under the
London Convention, but only to the extent this can be done without relaxing any stricter requirements
of the Act.
U. KEY TERMINOLOGY
The following legal terms define the jurisdiction and mandate of the ocean dumping regulatory
program:
o Dumping -- “A disposition of material,” but it does not include:
Disposition of effluent from outfall structures regulated under the Clean Water Act, Refuse
Act, or Atomic Energy Act;
Routine discharge of effluent incidental to the propulsion of, or operation of motor-driven
equipment on, vessels;
Construction of any fixed structure or artificial island nor the intentional placement of any
device in ocean waters or on or in submerged land beneath such waters, for a purpose other than
disposal, when such construction or placement is otherwise regulated by Federal or State law or occurs
pursuant to any authorized Federal or State program;
Deposit of oyster shells or other materials for the purpose of developing, maintaining or
harvesting fisheries resources, when it is otherwise regulated by Federal or State law or occurs
pursuant to an authorized Federal or State program. MPRSA
-------
2
§ 3(f ).
o Material -- Broadly defined as “matter of any kind or description.” The Act enumerates
various types of matter that are specifically included in the definition of material. The list is similHr to
the Clean Water Act definition of “pollutant.” There are two specific exclusions: (1) Sewage from
vessels within the meaning of § 312 of the Clean Water Act is not “material” regulated under the
MPRSA; and (2) Oil within the meaning of § 311 of the Clean Water Act is included only to the extent
it is taken on board a vessel or aircraft for the purpose of dumping. MPRSA § 3(c).
o Ocean waters -- Those waters of the open ‘seas lying seaward of the baseline from which the
territorial sea is measured, as found in the Convention on the Territorial Sea and the Contiguous Zone.
MPRSAU(b).
o Transport or Transportation The carriage and related handling of any material by a
vessel, or by any other vehicle, including aircraft. MPRSA § 3W.
UI. PERMIT ISSUANCE AND SITE DESIGNATION
Permitting Authorities . EPA is the permitting authority for all materials other than dredged
materiaL MPRSA § 102(a). The Army Corps of Engineers permits the disposal of dredged material,
subject to EPA review and concurrence. MPRSA § 103(a).
Permitting Criteria . For materials not subject to MPRSA dumping prohibitions, a permit may
be issued if the dumping “will not unreasonably degrade or endanger human health, welfare, or the
marine environment, ecological systems, or economic potentialities.” MPRSA § 102(a), 103(a). -
Dumping of materials may not take place in the absence of an ocean dumping permit. In issuing
MPRSA permits, EPA and the Corps are to consider a range of environmental and economic factors, as
well as the “need” for the proposed dumping and the availability of feasible land-based alternatives.
MPRSA 102(a); 40 CFR Part 227. The !vEPRSA is not technolo -basecL
The regulatory criteria implementing the statute rely primarily on bioassay test results to
determine the acceptability of material for disposal. The testing procedures involve evaluation of the
liquid, suspended particulate, and solid phases of the material to be dumped. Generally materials are
subjected to toxicity and bioaccumulation bioassay tests to determine their suitability for ocean
disposal. See 40 CFR Part 227. EPA and the Corps have issued detailed testing guidance for dredged
material, known as the “Green Book.” Parallel guidance for material other than dredged material is
known as the ‘Blue Book.’
Prohibited and Restricted Materials . Ocean disposal of the foliowing materials is prohibited:
o Radiological, chemical, and biological warfare agents, MPRSA § 102(a);
o High level radioactive waste, MPRSA § 102(a) [ the term is defined at MPRSA § 3(j)];
o Medical waste, MPRSA § 102(a);
o Sewage sludge and industrial waste, MPRSA § 104B;
o Persistent inert synthetic or natural materials which may float or remain in suspension in
the ocean, 40 CFR 227.5(d);
o Dumping that would violate applicable water quality standards, 40 CFR § 227.27.
Certain materials (the so-called “listed constituents”) generally may not be dumped as other
than “trace contaminants,’ except on an emergency basis. The “listed constituents” are organohalogen
compounds; mercury and mercury compounds; cadmium and cadmium compounds; oil of any kind
insofar as it is not regulated under the Clean Water Act; and known or suspected carcinogens,
mutagens, or teratogens. The determination as to whether these materials are present as “trace
contaminants” involves an effects-based evaluation (“the dumping of the materials will not cause
significant undesirable effects... ”), not a “ de minimis ’ test. 40 CFR § 227.6. ‘Listed constituents” may
be dumped as other than trace contaminants if they are present as chemical compounds or forms that
are non-toxic to marine life and non-bioaccumulative in the marine environment, or are rapidly
rendered non-toxic to marine life and non-bioaccumulative in the marine environment by chemical or
-------
3
biolpgical degradation in the sea. 40 CFR § 227.6.
MPRSA § 104(i) requires a joint resolution of Congress to authorize EPA to issue a permit to
allow the disposal of “low level radioactive waste,” a term that is not specifically defined. Disposal of
fish wastes does not require a permit unless the wastes are to be deposited in protected or enclosed
coastal waters or EPA finds that deposit could endanger health or the environment. 40 CFR §
220.1(c). -
/
Types of Permits . EPA regulations provide for the issuance of general permits, especial
permits” (actually, the type of EPA permit issued for normal dumping operations), emergency permits,
interim permits, research permits, and permits for incineration at sea (but see “Major Implementation
Issues” below). 40 CFR
§ 220. The EPA permitting regulations include the opportunity for an adjudicatory hearing. 40 CFR
Part 222. General permits have been issued to allow the burial at sea of human remains, the disposal
of target vessels by the U.S. Navy, and the disposal of other vessels. 40 CFR Part 229.
Site Designation . EPA also is charged with designating sites at which permitted disposal may
take place. Sites are to be designated in a manner consistent with the criteria for evaluation of
permits. MPRSA § 102(c). The statute directs EPA to utilize whenever feasible sites beyond the
continental shelf when selecting ocean dumping sites. MPRSA § 102(a)(1). The goal of site designation
is to match material to site characteristics and avoid sensitive areas. EPA site designation is performed
through notice and comment rulemaking. Under a voluntary policy, EPA also prepares Environmental
Impact Statements for site designations. Designated sites are listed at 40 CFR 228.14 and 228.15.
Dredged Material Permitting by Corps . Permits for the transportation of dredged material for
purposes of dumping into ocean waters are issued under § 103 by the Army Corps of Engineers. The
Corps is directed to apply the EPA criteria relating to the effects of dumping in its permitting
decisions. MPRSA § 103(b) and (c). EPA must concur or decline to concur in writing with the
determination of the Secretary as to compliance with the criteria. MPRSA § 103(c)(2). The Corps may
not issue a permit if the EPA criteria are not met, unless the Corps certifies that there are no
economically feasible alternatives to dumping and requests a waiver of the criteria from EPA.
MPRSA § 103(d). EPA is to grant a waiver request within thirty days unless EPA finds that the
dumping will result in “an unacceptably adverse impact” to municipal water supplies, shellfish beds,
wildlife, fisheries, or recreational areas. MPRSA § 103(d). The MPRSA provides that the ocean
dumping of dredged material from federal projects does not require a permit; however, in evaluating
disposal of dredged material from federal projects, the Corps is to apply the same criteria, procedures,
and requirements that apply to the issuance of permits. MPRSA
§ 102(e).
The Corps is directed to use sites designated by EPA to the maximum extent feasible when
selecting locations for the disposal of dredged materials. MPESA § 103(e). When the use of a site
designated by EPA is not feasible, the Corps may select its own site for disposal of dredged material.
The Act was amended in 1992 to limit the use of Corps-selected sites to a five year period, with one
possible five year extension. MPRSA § 103(b). The 1992 amendments also require EPA, in
conjunction with the Corps, and with opportunity for public comment, to develop site management
plans for dredged material disposal sites designated by EPA. MPRSA § 102(c).
IV. ENFORCEMENT, PREEMPTION, AND JUDICIAL REViEW
Enforcement . Civil administrative enforcement authority is vested in the Administrator by
MPRSA § 105(a). Violations of the statute, applicable regulations, or a permit are punishable by a civil
penalty of not more than $50,000 for each violation, to be assessed by the Administrator. Persons who
dump medical waste in violation of the statute or regulations are subject to a civil penalty of $125,000
for each violation. If the offending party does not pay the penalty, EPA may request the Attorney
General to commence an action in the U.S. District Court.
-------
4
Criminal sanctions, including imprisonment, are available for knowing violations of the statute,
regulations, or a permit. MPRSA § 105(b). Vessels are liable in rem for civil fines and criminal
penalties. !VIPRSA § 105(e). In addition, vessels used to commit a criminal act for which a penalty is
imposed under §105(b) are subject to seizure and forfeiture. MPRSA § 105(i).
The Coast Guard is charged with conducting surveillance and other activities to prevent
unlawful ocean dumping. MPRSA
§ 107(c).
Citizen’s Suits . The Act also provides for civil suits by private parties to enjoin any person,
including the United States, who is alleged to be in violation of any prohibition, limitation, criterion, or
permit issued under the MPRSA. Notice of a citizen’s suit must be given 60 days in advance of the
commencement of any action. ?vIPRSA § 105(g).
State Authority Preserved . The Act formerly barred states from adopting or enforcing any
rule or regulation relating to any activity regulated by the MPRSA. States were allowed to propose
ocean dumping criteria to the Administrator and adopt them if the Administrator determined that the
criteria were not inconsistent with the purposes of the MPRSA. In 1992, however, the Act was
amended to provide, “except as expressly provided in [ 106(d)], nothing in this subchapter shall
preclude or deny the right of any State to adopt or enforce any requirements respecting dumping of
materials into ocean waters within the jurisdiction of the State.” MPRSA § 106(d). One exception
applies to federal projects, which may not be regulated by a state more strictly than under the MPRSA
if the Administrator makes certain enumerated findings (je., the state requirement is not supported by
relevant scientific evidence, is arbitrary, or is applied in a manner that discriminates against federal
projects). Id.
The MPRSA does not provide for federal authorization of state programs regulating ocean
dumping.
Judicial Review . The MPRSA contains no judicial review provision. Final agency actions are
subject to review in the District Courts under the Administrative Procedure Act.
V. MMOR IMPLEMENTATION ISSUES
A. Disposal of Dredged Material . Dredged material constitutes the vast bulk of material still
dumped at sea. It is the current focus of the ocean dumping program. The disposal of dredged
material at sea has become more controversial in recent years, particularly in the Northeast and
California. Much of the concern has been directed at disposal of dredged material that is or may be
contaminated with dioxin.
Recent litigation has focused on the testing that is required to be performed on dredged
material prior to disposal at sea. For example, an otherwise favorable decision of the United States
Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit has created uncertainty about the types of bioassays that EPA’s
regulations require and the number of species that must be subjected to bioassay tests. Clean Ocean
Action v. York , 57 F.3d 328 (3d Cir. 1995). EPA recently issued a proposal to clarify the bioassay
testing requirements. 61 Fed. Reg. 7,765 (February 29, 1996).
The current House bill to amend the Clean Water Act
(HR. 961) would amend the Iv [ PRSA to eliminate EPA involvement in the Corps permitting program
for dredged material, except that the Corps would be required to consult with EPA before issuing a
permit.
B. Sewage Sludge and Industrial Waste . In 1988, Congress amended the MPRSA (via the
Ocean Dumping Ban Act of 1988) to prohibit the dumping of sewage sludge and “industrial waste” by
new dumpers. MPRSA § 104B. The nine then.existing dumpers of sewage sludge (all municipalities
and counties in New York and New Jersey) and existing industrial waste dumpers were required to
cease dumping by the end of 1991.
-------
5
“Sewage sludge” is defined for purposes of the ODBA prohibitions as “any solid, semi-solid, or
liquid waste generated by a wastewater treatment plant.” “Industrial waste” is defined “any solid,
semisolid, or liquid waste generated by a manufacturing or processing plant.” Dredged material is
specifically excluded from the definition of both “industrial waste” and “sewage sludge,” along with tuna
cannery wastes from American Samoa or Puerto Rico. MPRSA § 104B(h).
EPA has not issued regulations clarifying the “industrial waste” definition. In a 1990-
memorandum, the General Counsel opined that wooden debris such as pier pilings collected from New
York Harbor, which had been treated with creosote and copper arsenate, was not “industrial waste”
because it was not generated as a waste by a manufacturing or processing plant. (The debris
historically had been burned on barges off the coast.) The memorandum noted that it did not address
whether EPA could read the industrial waste definition more expansively if, for example, a material
proposed to be dumped at sea presented a greater potential for environmental harm than the wooden
debris that was in issue.
C. Ocean Incineration . The incineration of wastes at sea (e.g , by incinerator vessels) is
considered a form of ocean dumping because it involves the transportation of materials for the purpose
of disposal, resulting in the disposition of incinerator emissions in ocean waters. Although the ocean
dumping regulations provide for the issuance of ocean incineration permits, they do not contain specific
technical provisions addressing incineration at sea.. After denying a series of very controversial
applications for ocean incineration permits, EPA announced in 1986 that it would not issue permits for
the incineration of liquid organic wastes at sea until regulations specifically addressing that activity
were promulgated. This permitting suspension was upheld in Waste Management, Inc. v. EPA. , 669 F.
Supp. 536 (D.D.C. 1987).
EPA proposed ocean incineration regulations in 1985. The proposal -. like the applications for
ocean incineration permits •- was extremely controversial. In 1989, the Agency announced that as a
result of budget priorities, it was indefinitely suspending work on the ocean incineration regulations.
That deferral decision also has been upheld. SeaBurn, Inc. v. United States , 712 F. Supp. 218 (D.D.C.
1989). The Seaflurn Court also held that the Act’s restrictions on the transportation of industrial
waste for the purpose of dumping at sea apply to the incineration of industrial waste at sea.
Currently, there is no active ocean incineration program.
Prepared by David M. Gravallese
-------
II
Calendar No. 226
104TH CONGRESS
1ST SEssioN
IReport No. 104—169]
To reauthorize and amend title X [ V of the Public Health Service Act
(commonly known as the “Safe Drinking Water Act”), and for other purposes.
IN TIlE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES
OCTOBER 12 (legislative day, OCTOBER 10), 1995
Mr. KEMP’FHORNE (for himself, Mr. CHAFEE, Mr. BAUCUS, Mr. REm, Mr.
KERREY, Mr. DOLE, Mr. DASCHLE, Mr. WARNER, Mr. SMITH, Mr.
FAIRCLOTH, Mr. IN HOFE, Mr. THOMAS, Mr. MCCONNELL, Mr. JEF-
FORDS, Mr. HATCH, Mr. SIMPSON, Mr. DOMENTICI, Mr. BURNS, Mr
CRAIG, Mr. BENNETT, Mr. EXON, Mr. CONRAD, Mr. HATFIELD, Mr.
LAUTENBERO, and Mr. THURMOND) introduced the following bill; which
was read twice and referred to the Committee on Environment and Public
Works
NOVEMBER 7, 1995
Reported by Mr. CHAFEE, with amendments
[ Omit the part struck through and insert the part printed in italicl
A BILL
To reauthorize and amend title XIV of the Public Health
Service Act (commonly known as the “Safe Drinking
Water Act”), and for other purposes.
Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representa-
2 tives of the United States of America in Congress assembled,
-------
2
1 SECTION 1. SHORT TiTLE; TABLE OF CONTENTh; REF.
2 ERENCES.
3 (a) SHORT TITLE.—This Act may be cited as the
4 “Safe Drinking Water Act Amendments of 1995”.
5 (b) TABLE OF CONTENTS.—The table of contents of
6 this Act is as follows:
Sec. 1. Short title; table of contents; references.
Sec. 2. Findings.
Sec. 3. State revolving loan funds.
Sec. 4. Selection of contaminants; schedule.
Sec. 5. Risk assessment, management, and communication.
Sec. 6. Standard-setting; review of standards.
Sec. 7. Arsenic.
Sec. 8. Radon.
Sec. 9. Sulfate.
Sec. 10. Filtration and disinfection.
Sec. 11. Effective date for regulations.
Sec. 12. TechnoIo r and treatment techniques; technoIo r centers.
Sec. 13. Variances and exemptions.
Sec. 14. Small systems; technical assistance.
Sec. 15. Capacity development; finance centers.
Sec. 16. Operator and laboratory certification.
Sec. 17. Source water quality protection partnerships.
Sec. 18. State primacy; State funding.
Sec. 19. Monitoring and information gathering.
Sec. 20. Public notification.
Sec. 21 Enforcement; judicial review.
Sec. 22. Federal agencies.
Sec. 23. Research.
Sec. 24. Definitions.
Sec. 25. Ground water protection.
Sec. 26. Lead plumbing and pipes; return flows.
Sec. 27. Bottled water.
Sec. 28. Assessing environmental priorities, costs, and benefits.
Sec. 29. Other amendments.
7 (c) REFERENCES TO TITLE X IV OF THE PUBLIC
8 HEALTH SERVICE ACT.—Except as otherwise expressly
9 provided, whenever in this Act an amendment or repeal
10 is expressed in terms of an amendment to, or repeal of,
11 a section or other provision, the reference shall be consid-
12 ered to be made to a section or other provision of title
.8 iSie R8
-------
3
1 XLV of the Public Health Service Act (commonly known
2 as the “Safe Drinking Water Act”) (42 U.S.C. 300f et
3 seq.).
4 SEC. 2. FINDINGS.
5 Congress finds that—
6 (1) safe drinking water is essential to the pro-
7 tection of public health;
8 (2) because the requirements of title X [ V of the
9 Public Health Service Act (commonly known as the
10 “Safe Drinking Water Act”) (42 U.S.C. 300f et
11 seq.) now exceed the financial and technical capacity
12 of some public water systems, especially many small
13 public water systems, the Federal Goveriiment needs
14 to provide assistance to communities to help the
15 communities meet Federal drinking water require-
16 ments;
17 (3) the Federal Government commits to take
18 steps to foster and maintain a genuine partnership
19 with the States in the administration and implemen-
20 tation of the Safe Drinking Water Act;
21 (4) States play a central role in the implemen-
22 tation of safe drinking water programs, and States
23 need increased financial resources and appropriate
24 flexibility to ensure the prompt and effective devel-
.S 1316 RS
-------
4
1 opment and implementation of drinking water pro-
2 grams;
3 (5) the existing process for the assessment and
4 regulation of additional drinking water contaminants
5 needs to be revised and improved to ensure that
6 there is a sound scientific basis for drinking water
7 regulations and that the standards established ad-
8 dress the health risks posed by contaminants;
9 (6) procedures for assessing the health effects
10 of contaminants and establishing drinking water
11 standards should be revised to provide greater op-
12 portunity for public education and participation;
13 (7) in setting priorities with respect to the
14 health risks from drinking water to be addressed
15 and in selecting the appropriate level of regulation
16 for contaminants in drinking water, risk assessment
17 and benefit-cost analysis are important and useful
18 tools for improving the efficiency and effectiveness of
19 drinking water regulations to protect human health;
20 (8) more effective protection of public health re-
21 quires—
22 (A) a Federal commitment to set priorities
23 that will allow scarce Federal, State, and local
24 resources to be targeted toward the drinking
.8 1316 RS
-------
5
1 water problems of greatest public health con-
2 cern; and
3 (B) maximizing the value of the different
4 and complementary strengths and responsibil-
5 ities of the Federal and State governments in
6 those States that have primary enforcement re-
7 sponsibiity for the Safe Drinking Water Act;
8 and
9 (9) compliance with the requirements of the
10 Safe Drinking Water Act continues to be a concern
11 at public water systems experiencing technical and
12 financial limitations, and Federal, State, and local
13 governments need more resources and more effective
14 authority to attain the objectives of the Safe Drink-
15 ing Water Act.
16 SEC. 3. STATE REVOLVING LOAN FUNDS.
17 The title (42 U.S.C. 300f et seq.) is amended by add-
18 ing at the end the following:
19 “PART G—STATE REVOLVING LOAN FUNDS
20 “GENERAL AUTHORITY
21 “SEC. 1471. (a) CAPITALIZATION Glt&NT AGREE-
22 MENTS.—The Administrator shall offer to enter into an
23 agreement with each State to make capitalization grants
24 to the State pursuant to section 1472 (referred to in this
25 part as ‘capitalization grants’) to establish a drinking
•S 1316 ItS
-------
6
1 water treatment State revolving loan fund (referred to in-
2 this part as a ‘State loan fund’).
3 “(b) REQUIREMENTS OF AGREEMENTS.—An agree-
4 ment entered into pursuant to this section shall establish,
5 to the satisfaction of the Administrator, that—
6 “(1) the State has established a State loan fund
7 that complies with the requirements of this part;
8 “(2) the State loan fund will be administered by
9 an instrumentality of the State that has the powers
10 and authorities that are required to operate the
11 State loan fund in accordance with this part;
12 “(3) the State will deposit the capitalization
13 grants into the State loan fund;
14 “(4) the State will deposit all loan repayments
15 received, and interest earned on the amounts depos
16 ited into the State loan fund under this part, into
17 the State loan fund;
18 “(5) the State will deposit into the State loan
19 fund an amount equal to at least 20 percent of the
20 total amount of each payment to be made to the
21 State on or before the date on which the payment
22 is made to the State, except as provided in sub-
23 section (c)(4);
.S 1316 RS
-------
7
1 “(6) the State will use funds in the State loan
2 fund in accordance with an intended use plan pre-
3 pared pursuant to section 1474(b);
4 “(7) the State and loan recipients that receive
5 funds that the State makes available from the State
6 loan fund will use accounting procedures that con-
7 form to generally accepted accounting principles, au-
8 diting procedures that conform to chapter 75 of title
9 31, United States Code (commonly known as the
10 ‘Single Audit Act of 1984’), and such fiscal proce-
11 dures as the Administrator may prescribe; and
12 “(8) the State has adopted policies and proce-
13 dures to ensure that loan recipients are reasonably
14 likely to be able to repay a loan.
15 “(c) ADMINISTRATION OF STATE LOAN FUNDS.—
16 “(1) IN GENERAL.—The authority to establish
17 assistance priorities for financial assistance provided
18 with amounts deposited into the State loan fund
19 shall reside in the State agency that has primary re-
20 sponsibility for the administration of the State pro-
21 gram under section 1413, after consultation with
22 other appropriate State agencies (as determined by
23 the State).
24 “(2) FINANCIAL ADMINISTRATION.—A State
25 may combine the financial administration of the
‘S 13M £8
-------
8
1 State loan fund pursuant to this part with the uinan-
2 cia! administration of a State water pollution control
3 revolving fund established by the State pursuant to
4 title VI of the Federal Water Pollution Control Act
5 (33 U.S.C. 1381 et seq.), or other State revolving
6 funds providing financing for similar purposes, if the
7 Administrator determines that the grants to be pro-
8 vided to the State under this part, and the loan re-
9 payments and interest deposited into the State loan
10 fuxid pursuant to this part, wifi be separately ac-
11 counted for and used solely for the purposes of and
12 in compliance with the requirements of this part.
13 “(3) TRANSFER OF FUNDS.—
14 “(A) IN GENERAL.—Notwithstanding any
15 other provision of law, a Governor of a State
16 may—
17 “(i) reserve up to 50 percent of a cap-
18 italization grant made pursuant to section
19 1472 and add the funds reserved to any
20 funds provided to the State pursuant to
21 section 601 of the Federal Water Pollution
22 Control Act (33 U.S.C. 1381); and
23 “(ii) reserve in any year a dollar
24 amount up to the dollar amount that may
25 be reserved under clause (i) for that year
.5 1316 RS
-------
9
1 from capitalization grants made pursuant
2 to section 601 of such Act (33 U.s.c.
3 1381) and add the reserved funds to any
4 funds provided to the State pursuant to
5 section 1472.
6 “(B) STATE MATCH.—Funds reserved pur-
7 suant to this paragraph shall not be considered
8 to be a State match of a capitalization grant re-
9 quired pursuant to this title or the Federal
10 Water Pollution Control Act (33 U.S.C. 1251
11 etseq.).
12 “(4) EXTENDED PERIOD.—Notwithstanding
13 subsection (b)(5), a State shall not be required to
14 deposit a State matching amount into the fund prior
15 to the date on which each payment is made for pay-
16 ments from funds appropriated for fiscai years
17 1994, 1995, and 1996, if the matching amounts for
18 the payments are deposited into the State fund prior
19 to September 30, 1998.
20 “CAPITALIZATION GRANTS
21 “SEc. 1472. (a) GENERAL AUTHOrtITY.—The Ad-
22 ministrator may make grants to capitalize State loan
23 funds to a State that has entered into an agreement pur-
24 suant to section 1471.
25 “(b) FORMULA FOR ALLOTMENT OF FUNDS.—
.S 1816 RS
-------
10
1 “(1) IN C3ENERAL.—Subject to subsection (c)
2 and paragraph (2), funds made available to carry
3 out this part shall be allotted to States that have en-
4 tered into an agreement pursuant to section 1471 in
5 accordance with—
6 “(A) for each of fiscal years 1995 through
7 1997, a formula that is the same as the for-
8 mula used to distribute public water system su-
9 pci-vision grant funds under section 1443 in fis-
10 cal year 1995, except that the minimum propor-
11 tionate share established in the formula shall be
12 1 percent of available funds and the formula
13 shall be adjusted to include a minimum propor-
14 tionate share for the State of Wyoming; and
15 “(B) for fiscal year 1998 and each subse-
16 quent fiscal year, a formula that allocates to
17 each State the proportional share of the State
18 needs identified in the most recent survey con-
19 ducted pursuant to section 1475(c), except that
20 the minimum proportionate share provided to
21 each State shall be the same as the minimum
22 proportionate share provided under subpara-
23 graph (A).
24 “(2) OTHER JUR!SDICTIONS.—The formula es-
25 tablished pursuant to paragraph (1) shall reserve
.8 1318 R8
-------
11
1 0.5 percent of the amounts made available to carry
2 out this part for a fiscal year for providing direct
3 grants to the jurisdictions, other than Indian Tribes,
4 referred to in subsection (f).
5 “(c) RESERVATION OF FuNr s FOR INDIAN
6 TRIBES.—
7 “(1) IN GENERAL.—For each fiscal year, prior
8 to the allotment of funds made available to carry out
9 this part, the Administrator shall reserve 1.5 percent
10 of the funds for providing financial assistance to In-
11 than Tribes pursuant to subsection (f).
12 “(2) USE OF FUNDS.—Funds reserved pursu-
13 ant to paragraph (1) shall be used to address the
14 most significant threats to public health associated
15 with public water systems that serve Indian Tribes,
16 as determined by the Administrator in consultation
17 with the Director of the Indian Health Service and
18 Indian Tribes.
19 “(3) NEEDS ASSESSMENT.—The Administrator,
20 in consultation with the Director of the Indian
21 Health Service and Indian Tribes, shall, in accord-
22 ance with a schedule that is consistent with the
23 needs surveys conducted pursuant to section
24 1475(c), prepare surveys and assess the needs of
25 drinking water treatment facilities to serve Indian
•S 1316 RS
-------
12
1 Tribes, including an evaluation of the public water
2 systems that pose the most significant threats to
3 public health.
4 “(d) TECHNICAL ASSISTANCE FOR SMALL Sys-
5 TEMS.—
6 “(1) DEFINITIONS.—In this subsection:
7 “(A) SMALL SYSTEM.—The term ‘small
8 system’ means a public water system that
9 serves a population of 10,000 or fewer.
10 “(B) TECHNICAL ASSISTANCE.—The term
11 ‘technical assistance’ means assistance provided
12 by a State to a small system, including assist-
13 ance to potential loan recipients and assistance
14 for planning and design, development and im-
15 plementation of a source water quality protec-
16 tion partnership program, alternative supplies
17 of drinking water, restructuring or consolida-
18 tion of a small system, and treatment to comply
19 with a national primary drinking water regula-
20 tion.
21 “(2) RESERVATION OF FUNDS.—TO provide
22 technical assistance pursuant to this subsection,
23 each State may reserve from capitalization grants
24 received in any year an amount that does not exceed
25 the greater of—
.S 1316 RS
-------
13
1 “(A) an amount equal to 2 percent of the
2 amount of the capitalization grants received by
3 the State pursuant to this section; or
4 “(B) $300,000.
5 “(e) ALLOTMENT PERIOD.—
6 “(1) PERIOD OF AVAILABILITY FOR FINANCIAL
7 ASSISTANCE.—
8 “(A) IN GENERAL.—Except as provided in
9 subparagraph (B), the sums allotted to a State
10 pursuant to subsection (b) for a fiscal year shall
11 be available to the State for obligation during
12 the fiscal year for which the sums are author-
13 ized and during the following fiscal year.
14 “(B) FUNDS MADE AVAILABLE FOR FISCAL
15 YEARS 1995 AND 1996.—The sums allotted to a
16 State pursuant to subsection (b) from funds
17 that are made available by appropriations for
18 each of fiscal years 1995 and 1996 shall be
19 available to the State for obligation during each
20 of fiscal years 1995 through 1998.
21 “(2) REALLOTMENT OF UNOBLIGATED
22 FUNDS.—Prior to obligating new allotments made
23 available to the State pursuant to subsection (b),
24 each State shall obligate funds accumulated before a
25 date that is 1 year prior to the date of the obligation
.8 1316 RS
-------
14
1 of a new allotment from loan repayments and inter-
2 est earned on amounts deposited into a State loan
3 fund. The amount of any allotment that is not obli-
4 gated by a State by the last day of the period of
5 availability established by paragraph (1) shall be im-
6 mediately reallotted by the Administrator on the
7 basis of the same ratio as is applicable to sums allot-
8 ted under subsection (b), except that the Adniinis-
9 trator may reserve and allocate 10 percent of the re-
10 maining amount for financial assistance to Indian
11 Tribes in addition to the amount allotted under sub-
12 section (c). None of the funds reallotted by the Ad-
13 ministrator shall be realiotted to any State that has
14 not obligated all sums allotted to the State pursuant
15 to this section during the period in which the sums
16 were available for obligation.
17 “(3) ALLOTMENT OF WITHHELD FUNDS.—All
18 funds withheld by the Administrator pursuant to
19 subsection (g) and section 1442(e)(3) shall be allot-
20 ted by the Administrator on the basis of the same
21 ratio as is applicable to funds allotted under sub-
22 section (b). None of the funds allotted by the Ad-
23 ministrator pursuant to this paragraph shall be a!-
24 lotted to a State uniess the State has met the re-
25 quirements of section 1418(a).
•S 1316 RS
-------
15
1 “(f) DIRECT GRANTS.—
2 “(1) IN GENERAL.—The Administrator is au-
3 thorized to make grants for the improvement of pub-
4 lie water systems of Indian Tribes, the District of
5 Columbia, the United States Virgin Islands, the
6 Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana Islands,
7 American Samoa, and Guam and, if funds are ap-
8 propriated to carry out this part for fiscal year
9 1995, the Republic of Palau.
10 “(2) ALASKA NATIVE VILLAGES.—In the case of
11 a grant for a project under this subsection in an
12 Alaska Native village, the Administrator is also au-
13 thorized to make grants to the State of Alaska for
14 the benefit of Native villages. An amount not to ex-
15 ceed 4 percent of the grant amount may be used by
16 the State of Alaska for project management.
17 “(g) NEW SYSTEM C AcI’rY.—Beginning in fiscal
18 year 1999, the Administrator shall withhold the percent-
19 age prescribed in the following sentence of each capitaliza-
20 tion grant made pursuant to this section to a State unless
21 the State has met the requirements of section 1418(a).
22 The percentage withheld shall be 5 percent for fiscal year
23 1999, 10 percent for fiscal year 2000, and 15 percent for
24 each subsequent fiscal year.
‘S 1316 ES
-------
16
1 “ELIGIBLE ASSISTANCE
2 “SEc. 1473. (a) IN GENERAL.—The amounts depos-
3 ited into a State loan fund, including any amounts equal
4 to the amounts of loan repayments and interest earned
5 on the amounts deposited, may be used by the State to
6 carry out projects that are consistent with this section.
7 “(b) PROJECTS ELIGIBLE FOR ASSISTANCE.—
8 “(1) IN GENERAL.—The amounts deposited
9 into a State loan fund shall be used only for provid-
10 ing financial assistance for capital expenditures and
11 associated costs (but excluding the cost of land ac-
12 quisition unless the cost is incurred to acquire land
13 for the construction of a treatment facility or for a
14 consolidation project) for—
15 “(A) a project that will facilitate compli-
16 ance with national primary drinking water reg-
17 ulations promulgated pursuant to section 1412;
18 “(B) a project that will facilitate the con-
19 solidation of public water systems or the use of
20 an alternative source of water supply;
21 “(C) a project that will upgrade a drinking
22 water treatment system; and
23 “(D) the development of a public water
24 system to replace private drinking water sup-
.8 1316 RS
-------
17
1 plies if the private water supplies. pose a signifi-
2 cant threat to human health.
3 “(2) OPERATOR TRAINING.—Associated costs
4 eligible for assistance under this part include the
5 costs of training and certifying the persons who will
6 operate facilities that receive assistance pursuant to
7 paragraph (1).
8 “(3) LIMITATION.—
9 “(A) IN GENERAL—Except as provided in
10 subparagraph (B), no assistance under this
11 part shall be provided to a public water system
12 that—
13 “(i) does not have the technical, man-
14 agerial, and financial capability to ensure
15 compliance with the requirements of this
16 title; and
17 “(ii) has a history of—
18 “(I) past violations of any maxi-
19 mum contaminant level or treatment
20 technique established by a regulation
21 or a variance; or
22 “(II) significant noncompliance
23 with monitoring requirements or any
24 other requirement of a national pri-
.8 1316 R8
-------
18
1 mary drinking water regulation or
2 variance.
3 “(B) RESTRUCTURING.—A public water
4 system described in subparagraph (A) may re-
5 ceive assistance under this part if—
6 “(i) the owner or operator of the sys-
7 tern agrees to undertake feasible and ap-
8 propriate changes in operations (including
9 ownership, management, accounting, rates,
10 maintenance, consolidation, alternative
11 water supply, or other procedures) if the
12 State determines that such measures are
13 necessary to ensure that the system has
14 the technical, managerial, and financial ca-
15 pability to comply with the requirements of
16 this title over the long term; and
17 “(ii) the use of the assistance will en-
18 sure compliance.
19 “(c) ELIGIBLE PUBLIC WATER SYSTEMS.—A State
20 loan fund, or the Administrator in the case of direct grants
21 under section 1472(f), may provide financial assistance
22 only to community water systems, publicly owned water
23 systems (other than systems owned by Federal agencies),
24 and nonprofit noncommunity water systems.
.S 1316 RS
-------
19
1 “(d) TYPES OF ASSISTANCE.—Except as otherwise
2 limited by State law, the amounts deposited into a State
3 loan fund under this section may be used only—
4 “(1) to make loans, on the condition that—
5 “(A) the interest rate for each loan is less
6 than or equal to the market interest rate, in-
7 cluding an interest free loan;
8 “(B) principal and interest payments on
9 each loan will commence not later than 1 year
10 after completion of the project for which the
11 loan was made, and each loan will be fully am-
12 ortized not later than 20 years after the corn-
13 pletion of the project, except that in the case of
14 a disadvantaged community (as defined in sub-
15 section (e)(1)), a State may provide an ex-
16 tended term for a loan, if the extended term—
17 “(i) terminates not later than the date
18 that is 30 years after the date of project
19 completion; and
20 “(ii) does not exceed the expected de-
21 sign life of the project;
22 “(C) the recipient of each loan will estab-
23 lish a dedicated source of revenue for the repay-
24 merit of the loan; and
.S 1316 ES
-------
20
1 “(D) the State loan fund will be credited
2 with all payments of principal and interest on
3 each loan;
4 “(2) to buy or refinance the debt obligation of
5 a municipality or an intermunicipal or interstate
6 agency within the State at an interest rate that is
7 less than or equal to the market interest rate in any
8 case in which a debt obligation is incurred after Oc-
9 tober 14, 1993, or to refinance a debt obligation for
10 a project constructed to comply with a regulation es-
11 tablished pursuant to an amendment to this title
12 made by the Safe Drinking Water Act Amendments
13 of 1986 (Public Law 99—339; 100 Stat. 642);
14 “(3) to guarantee, or purchase insurance for, a
15 local obligation (all of the proceeds of which finance
16 a project eligible for assistance under subsection (b))
17 if the guarantee or purchase would improve credit
18 market access or reduce the interest rate applicable
19 to the obligation;
20 “(4) as a source of revenue or security for the
21 payment of principal and interest on revenue or gen-
22 era! obligation bonds issued by the State if the pro-
23 ceeds of the sale of the bonds will be deposited into
24 the State loan fund;
.S 1316 RS
-------
21
1 “(5) as a source of revenue or security for the
2 payment of interest on a local obligation (all of the
3 proceeds of which finance a project eligible for as-
4 sistance under subsection (b)); and
5 “(6) to earn interest on the amounts deposited
6 into the State loan fund.
7 “(e) ASSISTANCE FOR DISADVANTAGED COMMU-
8 NITrES.—
9 “(1) DEFINITION OF DISADVANTAGED COMMU-
10 NITY.—In this subsection, the term ‘disadvantaged
11 community’ means the service area of a public water
12 system that meets affordability criteria established
13 after public review and comment by the State in
14 which the public water system is located. The Ad-
15 niinistrator may publish information to assist States
16 in establishing affordability criteria.
17 “(2) LoAN SUBSIDY.—Notwithstandlng sub-
18 section (d), in any case in which the State makes a
19 loan pursuant to subsection (d) to a disadvantaged
20 community or to a community that the State expects
21 to become a disadvantaged community as the result
22 of a proposed project, the State may provide addi-
23 tional subsidization (including forgiveness of prin-
24 cipal).
.8 1316 RB
-------
22
1 “(3) TOTAL AMOUNT OF SUBSIDIES.—For each
2 fiscal year, the total amount of loan subsidies made
3 by a State pursuant to paragraph (2) may not cx-
4 ceed 30 percent of the amount of the capitalization
5 grant received by the State for the year.
6 “(f) SOURCE WATER QUALITY PROTECTION AND CA-
7 PACITY DEVELOPMENT.—
8 “(1) IN GENERAL.—Notwithstanding subsection
9 (b)(1), a State may—
10 “(A) provide assistance, only in the form
11 ofaloan,to—
12 “(i) any public water system described
13 in subsection (c) to acquire land or a con-
14 servation easement from a willing seller or
15 grantor, if the purpose of the acquisition is
16 to protect the source water of the system
17 from contamination; or
18 “(ii) any community water system de-
19 scribed in subsection (c) to provide funding
20 in accordance with section
21 1419(d)(1)(C)(i);
22 “(B) provide assistance, including technical
23 and, financial assistance, to any public water
24 system as part of a capacity development strat-
.S 1316 RS
-------
23
1 egy developed and implemented in accordance
2 with section 1418(c); and
3 “(C) make expenditures from the capital-
4 ization grant of the State for fiscal years 1996
5 and 1997 to delineate and assess source water
6 protection areas in accordance with section
7 1419, except that funds set aside for such ex-
8 penditure shall be obligated within 4 fiscal
9 years.
10 “(2) LIMITATION.—For each fiscal year, the
11 total amount of assistance provided and expendi-
12 tures made by a State under this subsection may not
13 exceed 4 15 percent of the amount of the capital-
14 ization grant received by the State for that ycar .
15 year and may not exceed 10 percent of that amount
16 for any one of the following activities:
17 “(A) To acquire land or conservation ease-
18 ments pursuant to paragraph (1)(A)(i).
19 “(B) To provide funding to implement rec-
20 ommendations of source water quality protection
21 partnerships pursuant to paragraph (1)(A)(ii).
22 “(C) To provide assistance through a capac-
23 ity development strategy pursuant to paragraph
24 (1)(B).
.8 131 ES
-------
24
1 “(D) To make e penditure,9 to delineate or
2 assess source water protection areas pursuant to
3 paragraph (1)(C).
4 “STATE LOAN FUND ADMINISTRATION
5 “SEc. 1474. (a) ADMINISTRATION, TECHNICAL As-
6 SISTANCE, AND MANAGEMENT.—
7 “(1) ADMINISTRATION.—EaCh State that has a
8 State loan fund is authorized to expend from the an-
9 nual capitalization grant of the State a reasonable
10 amount, not to exceed 4 percent of the capitalization
11 grant made to the State, for the costs of the admin-
12 istration of the State loan fund.
13 “(2) STATE PROGRAM MANAGEMENT ASSIST-
14 ANCE.—
15 “(A) IN GENERAL.—Each State that has a
16 loan fund is authorized to expend from the an-
17 nual capitalization grant of the State an
18 amount, determined pursuant to this para-
19 graph, to carry out the public water system su-
20 pervision program under section 1443(a) and
21 to—
22 “(i) administer, or provide tecimical
23 assistance through, source water quality
24 protection programs, including a partner-
25 ship program under section 1419; and
.8 1316 RS
-------
25
1 “(ii) develop and implement a capac —
2 ity development strategy under section
3 1418(c) in the State.
4 “(B) LIMrrATION.—Amounts expended by
5 a State pursuant to this paragraph for any fis-
6 cal year may not exceed an amount that is
7 equal to the amount of the grant funds avail-
8 able to the State for that fiscal year under sec-
9 tion 1443(a)..
10 “(C) STATE FUNDS.—For any fiscal year,
11 funds may not be expended pursuant to this
12 paragraph unless the Administrator determines
13 that the amount of State funds made available
14 to carry out the public water system supervision
15 program under section 1443(a) for the fiscal
16 year is not less than the amount of State funds
17 made available to carry out the program for fis-
18 cal year 1993.
19 “(b) INTENDED USE PLANS.—
20 “(1) IN GENERAL.—After providing for public
21 review and comment, each State that has entered
22 into a capitalization agreement pursuant to this part
23 shall annually prepare a plan that identifies the in-
24 tended uses of the amounts available to the State
25 loan fund of the State.
.8 1316 R8
-------
26
1 “(2) CONTENTS.—AIi intended use plan shall
2 include—
3 “(A) a list of the projects to be assisted in
4 the first fiscal year that begins after the date
5 of the plan, including a description of the
6 project, the expected terms of financial assist-
7 ance, and the size of the cormnunity served;
8 “(B) the criteria and methods established
9 for the distribution of funds; and
10 “(C) a description of the financial status of
11 the State loan fund and the short-term and
12 long-term goals of the State loan fund.
13 “(3) USE OF FUNDS.—
14 “(A) IN GENERAL.—An intended use plan
15 shall provide, to the maximum extent prac-
16 ticable, that priority for the use of funds be
17 given to projects that—
18 “(i) address the most serious risk to
19 human health;
20 “(ii) are necessary to ensure compli-
21 ance with the requirements of this title (in-
22 cluding requirements for filtration); and
23 “(iii) assist systems most in need on
24 a per household basis according to State
25 affordability criteria.
.S 1316 RS
-------
27
1 “(B) LIST OF PROJECT5.—EaCh State
2 shall, after notice and opportunity for public
3 comment, publish and periodically update a list
4 of projects in the State that are eligible for as-
5 sistance under this part, including the priority
6 assigned to each project and, to the extent
7 known, the expected funding schednie for each
8 project.
9 “STATE LOAN FUND MANAGEMENT
10 “SEc. 1475. (a) IN GENERAL;—Not later than 1 year
11 after the date of enactment of this part, and annually
12 thereafter, the Administrator shall conduct such reviews
13 and audits as the Administrator considers appropriate, or
14 require each State to have the reviews and audits inde-
15 pendently conducted, in accordance with the single audit
16 requirements of chapter 75 of title 31, United States
17 Code.
18 “(b) STATE REPORTS.—Not later than 2 years after
19 the date of enactment of this part, and every 2 years
20 thereafter, each State that administers a State loan fund
21 shall publish and submit to the Administrator a report on
22 the activities of the State under this part, including the
23 findings of the most recent audit of the State loan fund.
24 “(c) DRINKING WATER NEEDS SURVEY AND ASSESS-
25 MENT.—Not later than 1 year after the date of enactment
26 of this part, and every 4 years thereafter, the Adminis-
•S 1316 ES
-------
28
1 trator shall submit to Congress a survey and assessment
2 of the needs for facilities in each State eligible for assist-
3 ance under this part. The survey and assessment con-
4 ducted pursuant to this subsection shall—
5 “(1) identify, by State, the needs for projects or
6 facilities owned or controlled by community water
7 systems eligible for assistance under this part on the
8 date of the assessment (other than refinancing for a
9 project pursuant to section 1473(d)(2));
10 “(2) estimate the needs for eligible facilities
11 over the 20-year period following the date of the as-
12 sessment;
13 “(3) identify, by size category, the population
14 served by public water systems with needs identified
15 pursuant to paragraph (1); and
16 “(4) include such other information as the Ad-
17 ministrator determines to be appropriate.
18 “(d) Ev u. uATION.—The Administrator shall conduct
19 an evaluation of the effectiveness of the State loan funds
20 through fiscal year 1999. The evaluation shall be submit-
21 ted to Congress at the same time as the President submits
22 to Congress, pursuant to section 1108 of title 31, United
23 States Code, an appropriations request for fiscal year
24 2001 relating to the budget of the Environmental Protec-
25 tion Agency.
.S 1316 RS
-------
29
1 “ENFORCEMENT
2 “SEC. 1476. The failure or inability of any public
3 water system to receive funds under this part or any other
4 loan or grant program, or any delay in obtaining the
5 funds, shall not alter the obligation of the system to corn-
6 ply in a timely manner with all applicable drinking water
7 standards and requirements of this title.
8 “REGULATIONS AND GUIDANCE
9 “SEc. 1477. The Administrator shall publish such
10 guidance and promulgate such regulations as are nec-
11 essary to carry out this part, including guidance and regu-
12 lations to ensure that,—
13 “(1) each State commits and expends funds
14 from the State loan fund in accordance with the re-
15 quirements of this part and applicable Federal and
16 State laws; and
17 “(2) the States and eligible public water sys-
18 tems that receive funds under this part use account-
19 ing procedures that conform to generally accepted
20 accounting principles, auditing procedures that con-
21 form to chapter 75 of title 31, United States Code
22 (commonly known as the ‘Single Audit Act of
23 1984’), and such fiscal procedures as the Adniinis-
24 trator may prescribe.
.8 1316 1W
-------
30
1 “AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS
2 “SEC. 1478. (a) GENERAL AUTHORI Z ATION.—There
3 are authorized to be appropriated to the Environmental
4 Protection Agency to carry out this part $600,000,000 for
5 fiscal year 1994 and $1,000,000,000 for each of fiscal
6 years 1995 through 2003.
7 “(b) HEALTH EFFECTS RESEARCH.—From funds
8 appropriated pursuant to this section for each fiscal year,
9 the Administrator shall reserve $10,000,000 for health ef-
10 fects research on drinking water contaminants authorized
11 by section 1442. In allocating funds made available under
12 this subsection, the Administrator shall give priority to re-
13 search concerning the health effects of cryptosporidium,
14 disinfection byproducts, and arsenic, and the implementa-
15 tion of a research plan for subpopulations at greater risk
16 of adverse effects pursuant to section 1442(1).
17 “(c) MONITORING FOR UNREGULATED CONTAMI-
18 NANTS.—From funds appropriated pursuant to this see-
19 tion for each fiscal year beginning with fiscal year 1997,
20 the Administrator shall reserve $2,000,000 to pay the
21 costs of monitoring for unregulated contaminants under
22 section 1445(a)(2)(D).
23 “(d) SM iL SYSTEM TECHNICAL ASSISTANCE.—
24 “(1) IN GENERAL.—Subject to paragraph (2),
25 from funds appropriated pursuant to this section for
.S 1316 ES
-------
31
1 each fiscal year for which the appropriation made
2 pursuant to subsection (a) exceeds $800,000,000,
3 the Administrator shall reserve to carry out section
4 1442(g) an amount that is equal to any amount by
5 which the amount made available to carry out see-
6 tion 1442(g) is less than the amount referred to in
7 the third sentence of section 1442(g).
8 “(2) MAXIMUM AMOUNT.—For each fiscal year,
9 the amount reserved under paragraph (1) shall be
10 not greater than an amount equal to the lesser of—
11 “(A) 2 percent of the funds appropriated
12 pursuant to this section for the fiscal year; or
13 “(B) $10,000,000.”.
14 SEC. 4. SFTRCTION OF CONTAMINANTS; SChEDULE.
15 (a) STANii Jus.—Section 1412(b) (42 U.S.C. 300g—
16 1(b)) is amended by striking “(b)(1)” and all that follows
17 through the end of paragraph (3) and inserting the follow-
18 ing:
19 “(b) STANDARDS.—
20 “(1) IDENTIFICATION OF CONTAMINANTS FOR
21 LISTING.—
22 “(A) GENERAL AUTHORITY.—The Admin-
23 istrator shall publish a maximum contaminant
24 level goal and promulgate a national primary
25 drinking water regulation for each contaminant
.S 1318 B8
-------
32
1 (other than a contaminant referred to in para-
2 graph (2) for which a national primary drinking
3 water regulation has been promulgated as of
4 the date of enactment of the Safe Drinking
5 Water Act Amendments of 1995) if the Admin-
6 istrator determines, based on adequate data
7 and appropriate peer-reviewed scientific infor-
8 mation and an assessment of health risks, con-
9 ducted in accordance with sound and objective
10 scientific practices, that—
11 “(i) the contaminant may have an ad-
12 verse effect on the health of persons; and
13 “(ii) the contaminant is known to
14 occur or there is a substantial likelihood
15 that the contaminant will occur in public
16 water systems with a frequency and at 1ev-
17 els of public health concern.
18 “(B) SELECTION AND LISTING OF CON-
19 TAMINANTS FOR CONSIDERATION.—
20 “(i) IN GENERAL.—Not later than
21 July 1, 1996 1997, the Administrator
22 (after consultation with the Secretary of
23 Health and Human Services) shall publish
24 and periodically, but not less often than
25 every 5 years, update a list of contami-
.8 1316 ItS
-------
33
1 nants that are known or anticipated to
2 occur in drinking water provided by public
3 water systems and that may warrant regu-
4 lation under this title.
5 “(ii) RESEARCH AND STUDY PLAN.—
6 At such time as a list is published under
7 clause (i), the Administrator shall describe
8 available and needed information and re-
9 search with respect to—
10 “(I) the health effects of the con-
11 taminants;
12 “(II) the occurrence of the con-
13 taminants in drinking water; and
14 “(ifi) treatment techniques and
15 other means that may be feasible to
16 control the contaminants.
17 “(iii) COMMENT .—The Administrator
18 shall seek comment on each list and any
19 research plan that is published from offi-
20 cials of State and local governments, oper-
21 ators of public water systems, the scientific
22 community, and the general public.
23 “(C) DETERMINATION.—
24 “(i) IN GENERAL.—ExCept as pro-
25 vided in clause (ii), not later than July 1,
S1316RS- 2
-------
34
1 2001, and every 5 years thereafter, the
2 Administrator shall take one of the follow-
3 -ing actions for not fewer than 5 contarni-
4 nants:
5 “(I) Publish a determination that
6 information available to the Adrninis-
7 trator does not warrant the issuance
8 of a national primary drinking water
9 regulation.
10 “(II) Publish a determination
11 that a national primary drinking
12 water regulation is warranted based
13 on information available to the Ad-
14 rninistrator, and proceed to propose a
15 maximum contaminant level goal and
16 national primary drinking water regu-
17 lation not later than 2 years after the
18 date of publication of the determina-
19 tion.
20 “(ifi) Propose a maximum con-
21 taminant level goal and national pri-
22 mary drinking water regulation.
23 “(ii) INSUFFICIENT INFORMATION.—
24 If the Administrator determines that avail-
25 able information is insufficient to make a
.8 1316 R8
-------
35
1 determination for a contaminant under
2 clause (i), the Administrator may publish a
3 determination to continue to study the con-
4 taxninant. Not later than 5 years after the
5 Administrator determines that further
6 study is necessary for a contaminant pur-
7 suant to this clause, the Administrator
8 shall make a determination under clause
9 (i).
10 “(in) ASSESSMENT.—The determina-
11 tions under clause (i) shall be based on an
12 assessment of—
13 “(I) the available scientific
14 knowledge that is consistent with the
15 requirements of paragraph (3)(A) arid
16 useful in determining the nature and
17 extent of adverse effects on the health
18 of persons that may occur due to the
19 presence of the contaminant in drink-
20 ing water;
21 “(II) information on the occur-
22 rence of the contaminant in drinking
23 water; and
24 “(III) the treatment technologies,
25 treatment techniques, or other means
.S 1316 RS
-------
36
1 that may be feasible in reducing the
2 contaminant in drinking water pro-
3 vided by public water systems.
4 “(iv) PIuORITIES.—In making deter-
5 nunations under this subparagraph, the
6 Administrator shall give priority to those
7 contaminants not currently regulated that
8 are associated with the most serious ad-
9 verse health effects and that present the
10 greatest potential risk to the health of per-
11 sons due to the presence of the contami-
12 nant in drinking water provided by public
13 water systems.
14 “(v) REvIEw.—Each document set-
15 ting forth the determination for a contami-
16 nant under clause (i) shall be available for
17 public comment before at such time as the
18 determination is published.
19 “(vi) JUDIc1M REVIEW.—Determina-
20 tions made by the Administrator pursuant
21 to clause (i)(I) shall be considered final
22 agency actions for the purposes of section
23 1448. No determination under clause (i)(I)
24 shall be set aside by a court pursuant to
25 a review authorized under that section o
.8 1316 RB
-------
37
1 othcr lftw, unless the court finds that the
2 determination is arbitrary and capricious.
3 “(D) URGENT THREATS TO PUBLIC
4 HEALTH.—The Administrator may promulgate
5 an interim national primary drinking water reg-
6 ulation for a contaminant without listing the
7 contaminant under subparagraph (B) or pub-
8 lishing a determination for the contaminant
9 under subparagraph (C) to address an urgent
10 threat to public health as determined by the
11 Administrator after consultation with and writ-
12 ten response to any comments provided by the
13 Secretary of Health and Human Services, act-
14 ing through the director of the Centers for Dis-
15 ease Control and Prevention or the director of
16 the National Institutes of Health. A determina-
17 tion for any contaminant in accordance with
18 subparagraph (C) subject to an interim regula-
19 tion under this subparagraph shall be issued
20 not later than 3 years after the date on which
21 the regulation is promulgated and the regula-
22 tion shall be repromulgated, or revised if appro-
23 priate, not later than 5 years after that date.
24 “(E) MONITORING DATA AND OTHER IN-
25 FORMATION.—The Administrator may require,
.S 1316 ItS
-------
38
1 in accordance with section 1445(a)(2), the sub-•
2 mission of monitoring data and other informa-
3 tion necessary for the development of studies,
4 research plans, or national primary drinking
5 water regulations.
6 “(2) SCHEDULES AND DEADLINES.—
7 “(A) IN GENERAL.—In the case of the con-
8 taminants listed in the Advance Notice of Pro-
9 posed Rulemaking published in volume 47, Fed-
10 eral Register, page 9352, and in volume 48,
11 Federal Register, page 45502, the Adminis-
12 trator shall publish maximum contaminant level
13 goals and promulgate national primary drinking
14 water regulations—
15 “(i) not later than 1 year after June
16 19, 1986, for not fewer than 9 of the listed
17 contaminants;
18 “(ii) not later than 2 years after June
19 19, 1986, for not fewer than 40 of the list-
20 ed contaminants; and
21 “(iii) not later than 3 years after
22 June 19, 1986, for the remainder of the
23 listed contaminants.
24 “(B) SUBSTITUTION OF CONTAMINANTS.—
25 If the Administrator identifies a drinking water
•S 1316 RS
-------
39
1 contaminant the regulation of which, in the
2 judgment of the Administrator, is more likely to
3 be protective of public health (taking into ac-
4 count the schedule for regulation under sub-
5 paragraph (A)) than a contaminant referred to
6 in subparagraph (A), the Administrator may
7 publish a maximum contaminant level goal and
8 promulgate a national primary drinking water
9 regulation for the identified contaminant in lieu
10 of regulating the contaminant referred to in
11 subparagraph (A). Substitutions may be made
12 for not more than 7 contaminants referred to in
13 subparagraph (A). Regulation of a contaminant
14 identified under this subparagraph shall be in
15 accordance with the schedule applicable to the
16 contaminant for which the substitution is made.
17 “(C) DISINFECTANTS AND DISINFECTION
18 BYPRODUCTS.—
19 “(i) INFORMATION COLLECTION
20 RULE.—
21 “(I) IN GENERAL.—Not later
22 than December 31, 1995, the Admin-
23 istrator shall, after notice and oppor-
24 tunity for public comment, promulgate
25 an information collection rule to ob-
.S 1316 RS
-------
40
1 tarn information that will facilitate
2 further revisions to the national pri-
3 mary drinking water regulation -for: -
4 disirifectants and disinfection byprod-
5 ucts, including information on micro-
6 bial contaminants such as
7 cryptosporidium.
8 “(II) Ex’PENSION.—The Admin-
9 istrator may extend the deadline
10 under subclause (I) for up to 180
11 days if the Administrator determines-
12 that progress toward approval of an
13 appropriate analytical method to
14 screen for cryptosporidium is suffi-
15 ciently advanced and approval is likely
16 to be completed within the additional
17 time period.
18 “(ii) ADDITIONAL DEADLINES.—The
19 time intervals between promulgation of a
20 final information collection rule, an In-
21 terim Enhanced Surface Water Treatment
22 Rule, a Final Enhanced Surface Water
23 Treatment Rule, a Stage I Disinfectants
24 and Disinfection Byproducts Rule, and a
25 Stage II Disinfectants and Disinfection
‘S 1316 RS
-------
41
1 Byproducts Rule shall be in accordance
2 with the schedule published in volume 59,
3 Federal Register, page 6361 (February 10,
4 1994), in table ffl.13 of the proposed In-
5 formation Collection Rule. If a delay oc-
6 curs with respect to the promulgation of
7 any rule in the timetable established by
8 this subparagraph, all subsequent rules
9 shall be completed as expeditiously as prac-
10 ticable subject to agreement by all the par-
11 ties to the negotiated rulemaking, but no
12 later than a revised date that reflects the
13 interval or intervals for the rules in the
14 timetable.
15 “(D) PRIOR REQUIREMENTS.—The re-
16 quirements of subparagraphs (C) and (D) of
17 section 1412(b)(3) (as in effect before the
18 amendment made by section 4(a) of the Safe
19 Drinking Water Act Amendments of 1995), and
20 any obligation to promulgate regulations pursu-
21 ant to such subparagraphs not promulgated as
22 of the date of enactment of the Safe Drinking
23 Water Act Amendments of 1995, are super-
24 seded by this paragraph and paragraph (1).”.
25 (b) CONFORMING AMENDMENTS.—
.S 1316 R8
-------
42
1 (1) Section 1412(a)(3) (42 U.S.C. 300g—
2 1(a)(3)) is amended by striking “paragraph (1), (2),
3 or (3) of subsection (b)” each place it appears and
4 inserting “paragraph (1) or (2) of subsection (b)”.
5 (2) Section 1415(d) (42 U.S.C. 300g—4(d)) is
6 amended by striking “section 1412(b)(3)” and in-
7 serting “section 1412(b)(7)(A)”.
8 SEC. 5. RISK ASSESSMENT, MANAGEMENT, AND COMMU-
9
10 Section 1412(b) (42 U.S.C. 300g—1(b)) (as amended
11 by section 4) is further amended by inserting after para-
12 graph (2) the following:
13 “(3) RISK ASSESSMENT, MANAGEMENT AND
14 COMMUNICATION.—
15 “(A) USE OF SCIENCE IN DECISIONMAK-
16 ING.—In carrying out this title, the Adminis-
17 trator shall use—
18 “(i) the best available, peer-reviewed
19 science and supporting studies conducted
20 in accordance with sound and objective sci-
21 entific practices; and
22 “(ii) data collected by accepted meth-
23 ods or best available methods (if the rei-
24 ability of the method and the nature of the
25 decision justifies use of the data).
.8 1316 R8
-------
43
1 “(B) PUBLIC INFORMATION.—In carrying
2 out this section, the Administrator shall ensure
3 that the presentation of information on public
4 health effects is comprehensive, informative and
5 understandable. The Administrator shall, in a
6 document made available to the public in sup-
7 port of a regulation promulgated under this see-
8 tion, specify, to the extent practicable—
9 “(i) each population addressed by any
10 estimate of public health effects;
11 “(ii) the expected risk or central esti-
12 mate of risk for the specific populations;
13 “(iii) each appropriate upper-bound or
14 lower-bound estimate of risk;
15 “(iv) each uncertainty identified in the
16 process of the assessment of public health
17 effects and research that would assist in
18 resolving the uncertainty; and
19 “(v) peer-reviewed studies known to
20 the Administrator that support, are di-
21 rectly relevant to, or fail to support any es-
22 timate of public health effects and the
23 methodology used to reconcile inconsist-
24 encies in the scientific data.
.S 1316 ES
-------
44
1 “(C) HEALTH RISK REDUCTION AND COST
2 r ysis.—
3 “(1) MAXIMUM CONTAMINANT LEV-
4 ELS.—Not later than 90 days prior to pro-
5 posing any national primary drinking
6 water regulation that includes a maximum
7 contaminant level, the Administrator shall,
8 with respect to a maximum contaminant
9 level that would be considered in accord-
10 ance with paragraph (4) in a proposed reg-
11 ulation and each alternative maximum con-
12 taminant level that would be considered in
13 a proposed regulation pursuant to para-
14 graph (5) or (6)(A), publish, seek public
15 comment on, and use for the purposes of
16 paragraphs (4), (5), and (6) an analysis
17 of—
18 “(I) the health risk reduction
19 benefits (including non-quantifiable
20 health benefits identified and de-
21 scribed by the Administrator, except
22 that such benefits shall not be used by
23 the Administrator for purposes of de-
24 termining whether a maximum con-
25 taniinant level is or is not justified
.8 1316 RH
-------
45
1 unless there is a factual basis in the
2 rulemaking record to conclude that
3 such benefits are likely to occur) ex-
4 pected as the result of treatment to
5 comply with each level;
6 “(II) the health risk reduction
7 benefits (including non-quantifiable
8 health benefits identified and de-
9 scribed by the Administrator, except
10 that such benefits shall not be used by
11 the Administrator for purposes of de-
12 termining whether a maximum con-
13 taminant level is or is not justified
14 unless there is a factual basis in the
15 rulemaking record to conclude that
16 such benefits are likely to occur) ex-
17 pected from reductions in co-occurring
18 contaminants that may be attributed
19 solely to compliance with the maxi-
20 mum contaminant level, excluding
21 benefits resulting from compliance
22 with other proposed or promulgated
23 regulations;
24 “(III) the costs (including non-
25 quantifiable costs identified and de-
.S 1316 ES
-------
46
1 scribed by the Administrator, except
2 that such costs shall not be used by
3 the Administrator for purposes of de-
4 termining whether a maximum con-
5 taminant level is or is not justified
6 unless there is a factual basis in the
7 rulemaking record to conclude that
8 such costs are likely to occur) ex-
9 pected solely as a result of compliance
10 with the maximum contaminant level,
11 including monitoring, treatment, and
12 other costs and excluding costs result
13 ing from compliance with other pro-
14 posed or promulgated regulations;
15 “(IV) the incremental costs and
16 benefits associated with each alter-
17 native maximum contaminant level
18 considered;
19 “(17) the effects of the contami-
20 nant on the general population and on
21 groups within the general population
22 such as infants, children, pregnant
23 women, the elderly, individuals with a
24 history of serious illness, or other sub-
25 populations that are identified as like-
.S 1316 RS
-------
47
1 ly to be at greater risk of adverse
2 health effects due to exposure to con-
3 taminants in drinking water than the
4 general population;
5 “(VT) any increased health risk
6 that may occur as the result of corn-
7 pliance, including risks associated
8 with co-occurring contaminants; and
9 “(VII) other relevant factors, in-
10 eluding the quality and extent of the
11 information, the uncertainties in the
12 analysis supporting subclauses (I)
13 through (VI), and factors with respect
14 to the degree and nature of the risk.
15 “(ii) TREATMENT TECHNIQUES.—Not
16 later than 90 days prior to proposing a na-
17 tional primary drinking water regulation
18 that includes a treatment technique in ac-
19 cordance with paragraph (7)(A), the Ad-
20 ministrator shaH publish and seek public
21 comment on an analysis of the health risk
22 reduction benefits and costs likely to be ex-
23 perienced as the result of compliance with
24 the treatment technique and alternative
25 treatment techniques that would be consid-
.S 1316 ES
-------
48
1 ered in a proposed regulation, taking into
2 account, as appropriate, the factors de-
3 scribed in clause (i).
4 “(iii) APPROACHES TO MEASURE A1’JD
5 VALUE BENEFITS.—The Administrator
6 may identify valid approaches for the
7 measurement and valuation of benefits
8 under this subparagraph, including ap-
9 proaches to identify consumer wiffingness
10 to pay for reductions in health risks from
11 drinking water contaminants.
12 “(iv) FORM OF NOTICE.—Whenever a
13 national primary drinking water regulation
14 is expected to result in compliance costs
15 greater than $75,000,000 per year, the
16 Administrator shall provide the notice re-
17 quired by clause (i) or (ii) through an ad-
18 vanced notice of proposed rulemaking.
19 “(v) AUTHORIZATION.—There are au-
20 thorized to be appropriated to the Adniin-
21 istrator, acting through the Office of
22 Ground Water and Drinking Water, to
23 conduct studies, assessments, and analyses
24 in support of regulations or the’ develop-
.S 1318 RS
-------
49
1 ment of methods, $35,000,000 for each of
2 fiscal years 1996 through 2003.”.
3 SEC. 6. STANDARDSE1’I’ING REVIEW OFSTANDARDS.
4 (a) IN GENER L.—Section 1412(b) (42 U.s.c.
5 300g—1(b)) is amended—
6 (1) in paragraph (4)—
7 (A) by striking “(4) Each” and inserting
8 the following:
9 “(4) GOALS AND STANDARDS.—
10 “(A) MAXIMUM CONTAMINANT LEVEL
11 G OALs.—Each”;
12 (B) in subparagraph (A) (as so des-
13 ignated), by inserting after the first sentence
14 the following: “The maximum contaminant level
15 goal for contaminants that are known or likely
16 to cause cancer in humans may be set at a level
17 other than zero, if the Administrator deter-
18 mines, based on the best available, peer-re-
19 viewed science, that there is a threshold level
20 below which there is unlikely to be any increase
21 in cancer risk and the Administrator sets the
22 maximum contaminant level goal at that level
23 with an adequate margin of safety.”;
24 (C) in the last sentence—
.S 1316 R8
-------
50
1 (i) by striking “Each national” and
2 inserting the following:
3 “(B) MAXIMUM CONTAMINANT LEVELS.—
4 Except as provided in paragraphs (5) and (6),
5 each national”; and
6 (ii) by striking “maximum level” and
7 inserting “maximum contaminant level”;
8 and
9 (D) by adding at the end the following:
10 “(C) DETERMINATION.—At the time the
11 Administrator proposes a national primary
12 drinking water regulation under this paragraph,
13 the Administrator shall publish a determination
14 as to whether the benefits of the maximum con-
15 taminant level justify, or do not justi1 y, the
16 costs based on the analysis conducted under
17 paragraph (3)(C).”;
18 (2) by striking “(5) For the” and inserting the
19 following:
20 “(D) DEFINITION OF FEASIBLE.—For
21 the”;
22 (3) in the second sentence of paragraph (4)(D)
23 (as so designated), by striking “paragraph (4)” and
24 inserting “this paragraph”;
•S 1316 ItS
-------
51
1 (4) by striking “(6) Each national” and insert-
2 ing the following:
3 “(E) FEAsrimi TECHNOLOGIES.—Each
4 national”;
5 (5) in paragraph (4)(E) (as so designated), by
6 striking “this paragraph” and inserting “this sub-
7 section”; and
8 (6) by inserting after paragraph (4) (as so
9 amended) the following:
10 “(5) ADDITIONAL HEALTH RISK CONSIDER-
11 ATIONS.— -
12 “(A) IN GENERAL.—Notwithstanding para
13 graph (4), the Administrator may establish a
14 maximum contaminant level for a contaminant
15 at a level other than the feasible level, if the
16 technolo r, treatment techniques, and other
17 means used to determine the feasible level
18 would result in an increase in the health risk
19 from drinking water by—
20 “(i) increasing the concentration of
21 other contaminants in drinking water; or
22 “(ii) interfering with the efficacy of
23 drinking water treatment techniques or
24 processes that are used to comply with
.8 1316 R8
-------
52
1 other national primary drinking water reg-
2 ulations.
3 “(B) ESTABLISHMENT OF LEVEL.—If the
4 Administrator establishes a maximum contami-
5 nant level or levels or requires the use of treat-
6 ment techniques for any contaminant or con-
7 taminants pursuant to the authority of this
8 paragraph—
9 “(i) the level or levels or treatment
10 techniques shall minimize the overall risk
11 of adverse health effects by balancing the
12 risk from the contaminant and the risk
13 from other contaminants the concentra-
14 tions of which may be affected by the use
15 of a treatment technique or process that
16 would be employed to attain the maximum
17 contaminant level or levels; and
18 “(ii) the combination of technology,
19 treatment techniques, or other means re-
20 quired to meet the level or levels shall not
21 be more stringent than is feasible (as de-
22 fined in paragraph (4)(D)).
23 “(6) ADDITIONAL HEALTH RISK REDUCTION
24 AND COST CONSIDERATIONS.—
‘S 1316 RS
-------
53
1 “(A) IN OENERAL.—Notwithstanding para-
2 graph (4), if the Administrator determines
3 based on an analysis conducted under pai a-
4 graph (3)(C) that the benefits of a maximum
5 contaminant level promulgated in accordance
6 with paragraph (4) would not justify the costs
7 of complying with the level, the Administrator
8 may, after notice and opportunity for public
9 comment, promulgate a maximum contaminant
10 level for the contaminant that m iximizes health
11 risk reduction benefits at a cost that is justified
12 by the benefits.
13 “(B) ExcEPrIoN.—The Administrator
14 shall not use the authority of this paragraph to
15 promulgate a maximum contaminant level for a
16 contaminant, if the benefits of compliance with
17 a national primaty drinking water regulation
18 for the contaminant that would be promulgated
19 in accordance with paragraph (4) experienced
20 by—
21 “(i) persons served by large public
22 water systems; and
23 “(ii) persons served by such other sys-
24 tems as are unlikely, based on information
.8 1316 ES
-------
54
1 provided by the States, to receive a van-
2 ance under section 1415(e);
3 would justify the costs to the systems of corn-
4 plying with the regulation. This subparagraph
5 shall not apply if the contaminant is found a!-
6 most exclusively in small systems (as defined in
7 section 1415(e)).
8 “(C) DISINFECTANTS AND DISINFECTION
9 BYPRODUCTS.—The Administrator may not use
10 the authority of this paragraph to establish a
11 maximum contaminant level in a Stage I or
12 Stage II national primary drinking water regu-
13 lation for contaminants that are disinfectants
14 or disinfection byproducts (as described in para-
15 graph (2)), or to establish a maximum contami-
16 nant level or treatment technique requirement
17 for the control bf cryptosporidium. The author-
18 ity of this paragraph may be used to establish
19 regulations for the use of disinfection by sys-
20 tems relying on ground water sources as re-
21 quired by paragraph (8).
22 “(D) JUDICIAL REVIEw.—A determination
23 by the Administrator that the benefits of a
24 maximum contaminant level or treatment Fe-
25 quirement justify or do not justif y the costs of
.S 1316 RS
-------
55
1 complying with the level shall be reviewed by
2 the court pursuant to section 1448 only as part
3 of a review of a final national primary drinking
4 water regulation that has been promulgated
5 based on the determination and shall not be set
6 aside by the court under that section, unless the
7 court finds that the determination is arbitrary
8 and capricious.”.
9 (b) DISINFECTANTS AN1) DIsIr, ’EcTIoN BYPROD-
10 UCTS.—The Administrator of the Environmental Protec-
11 tion Agency may use the authority of section 1412(b)(5)
12 of the Public Health Service Act (as amended by sub-
13 section (a)) to promulgate the Stage I rulemaking for dis-
14 infectants and disinfection byproducts as proposed in vol-
15 ume 59, Federal Register, page 38668 (July 29, 1994).
16 Unless new information warrants a modification of the
17 proposal as provided for in the “Disinfection and Disinfec-
18 tion Byproducts Negotiated Rulemaking Committee
19 Agreement”, nothing in such section shall be construed
20 to require the Administrator to modi1 r the provisions of
21 the rulemaking as proposed.
22 (c) REvIEw OF STANDArw5.—Section 1412(b) (42
23 U.S.C. 300g—1(b)) is amended by striking paragraph (9)
24 and inserting the following:
.8 1316 RS
-------
56
1 “(9) REVIEw AND REVISION.—The Adminis-
2 trator shall, not less often than every 6 years, review
3 and revise, as appropriate, each national primary
4 drinking water regulation promulgated under this
5 title. Any revision of a national primary drinking
6 water regulation shaH be promulgated in accordance
7 with this section, except that each revision shall
8 maintain or provide for greater protection of the
9 health of persons.”.
10 SEC. 7. ARSENIC.
11 Section 1412(b) (42 U.S.C. 300g—1(b)) is amended
12 by adding at the end the following:
13 “(12) ARSENIC.—
14 “(A) SCHEDULE AND STANDARD.—Not-
15 withstanding paragraph (2), the Administrator
16 shall promulgate a national primary drinking
17 water regulation for arsenic in accordance with
18 the schedule established by this paragraph and
19 pursuant to this subsection.
20 “(B) RESEARCH PLAN.—Not later than
21 180 days after the date of enactment of this
22 paragraph, the Administrator shall develop a
23 comprehensive plan for research in support of
24 drinking water rulemaking to reduce the uncer-
25 tainty in assessing health risks associated with
.S 1316 RS
-------
57
1 exposure to low’levels- of arsenic. The Adminis-
2 trator shall consult with the Science Advisory:
3 Board established by section 8 of the Environ-
4 mental Research, - -Development, - and Dem-
5 onstration Act of 1978 (42 U.S.C. 4365), other
6 Federal agencies, and interested public and pri-
7 vate entities.
8 “(C) RESEARCH PROJECTS.—The Admin-
9 istrator shall carry out the research plan, tak-
10 ing care to avoid duplication of other research
11 in progress. The Administrator may enter into
12 cooperative research agreements with other
13 Federal agencies, State and local governments,
14 and other interested public and private entities
15 to carry out the research plan.
16 “(D) ASSESSMENT.—Not later than 31/2
17 years after the date of enactment of this para-
18 graph, the Administrator shall review the
19 progress of the research to determine whether
20 the health risks associated with exposure to low
21 levels of arsenic are sufficiently well understood
22 to proceed with a national primary drinking
23 water regulation. The Administrator shall con-
24 suit with the Science Advisory Board, other
.8 1316 ItS
-------
58
1 Federal agencies, and other interested public
2 and private entities as part of the review.
3 “(E) PROPOSED REGULATION.—The Ad-
4 ministrator shall propose a national primary
5 drinking water regulation for arsenic not later
6 than January 1, 2000.
7 “(F) FINAi. REGULATION.—NOt later than
8 January 1, 2001, after notice and opportunity
9 for public comment, the Administrator shall
10 promulgate a national primary drinking water
11 regulation for arsenic.”.
12 SEC. 8. RADON.
13 Section 1412(b) (42 U.S.C. 300g—1(b)) (as amended
14 by section 7) is further amended by adding at the end
15 the following:
16 “(13) RADON IN DRINKING WATER.—
17 “(A) REGuLATI0N.—Notwithstanding
18 paragraph (2), not later than 180 days after
19 the date of enactment of this paragraph, the
20 Administrator shall promulgate a national pri-
21 mary drinking water regulation for radon.
22 “(B) MAXIMUM CONTAMINANT LEVEL.—
23 Notwithstanding any other provision of law, the
24 regulation shall provide for a maximum con-
.S 1316 RS
-------
59
1 taminant level for radon of 3,000 picocuries per
2 liter.
3 “(C) REVISION.—
4 “(i) IN GENERAL.—Subject to clause
5 (ii), a revision to the regulation promul-
6 gated under subparagraph (A) may be
7 made pursuant to this subsection. The revi-.
8 sion may include a maximum contaminant
9 level less stringent than 3,000 picocuries per
10 liter as provided in paragraph$ (4) and (9)
11 or a maximum contaminant level more
12 stringent than 3,000 picocuries per liter as
13 provided in clause (ii).
14 “(ii) MAXIMUM CONTAMINANT
15 LEVEL.—
16 “(I) CRITERIA FOR REVISION.—
17 The Administrator shall not revise the
18 maximum contaminant level for radon
19 to a more stringent level than the
20 level established under subparagraph
21 (B) unless—
22 “(aa) the revision is made to
23 reflect consideration of risks from
24 the ingestion of radon in drinking
.S 1316 RS
-------
60
1 water and episodic uses of drink-
2 ing water;
3 “(bb) the revision is sup-
4 ported by peer-reviewed scientific
5 studies conducted in accordance
6 with sound and objective sci-
7 entifle practices; and
8 “(cc) based on the studies,
9 the National Academy of
10 Sciences and the Science Advi-
11 sory Board, established by sec-
12 tion 8 of the Environmental Re-
13 search, Development, and Dem-
14 onstration Act of 1978 (42
15 U.S.C. 4365), consider a revision
16 of the maximum contaminant
17 level to be appropriate.
18 “(II) AMOUNT OF REVISION.—If
19 the Administrator determines to revise
20 the maximum contaminant level for
21 radon in accordance with subclause
22 (I), the maximum contaminant level
23 shall be revised to a level that is no
24 more stringent than is necessary to
25 reduce risks to human health from
.S 1316 RS
-------
61
1 radon in drinking water to a level that
2 is equivalent to risks to human health
3 from radon in outdoor air based on
4 the national average concentration of
5 - - radon in outdoor air.”.
6 SEC. 9. SULFATE.
7 Section 1412(b) (42 U.S.C. 300g—1(b)) (as amended
8 by section 8) is further amended by adding at the end
9 the following
10 “(14) SULFATE.—
11 “(A) IN GENERAL.—In the absence of sci-
12 entific evidence suggesting new or more serious
13 health effects than are suggested by the evi-
14 dence available on the date of enactment of this
15 paragraph, for the purposes of promulgation of
16 a national primary drinking water regulation
17 for sulfate, notwithstanding the requirements of
18 paragraphs (4) and (7), the Administrator shall
19 specify in the regulation—
20 “(i) a requirement for best technology
21 or other means under this subsection; and
22 “(ii) requirements for public notifica-
23 tion and options for the provision of alter-
24 native water supplies to populations at risk
.6 1316 RS
-------
62
1 as an alternative means of complying with
2 the regulation.
3 “(B) ScHEDuLE.—Notwithstanding para-
4 graph (2), the regulation referred to in sub-
5 paragraph (A) shall be promulgated not later
6 than 2 years after the date of enactment of this
7 paragraph.
8 “(C) AUTH01UTY.—Paragraph (6) shall
9 apply to the national primary drinking water
10 regulation for sulfate first promulgated after
11 the date of enactment of this paragraph only if
12 the Administrator reproposes the national pri-
13 mary drinking water regulation for sulfate after
14 that date based on evidence suggesting new or
15 more serious health effects as described in sub-
16 paragraph (A).
17 “(D) EFFECT ON OTHER LAWS.—
18 “(i) FEDERAL LAWS.—Notwithstand-
19 ing part C, section 311 of the Federal
20 Water Pollution Control Act (33 U.S.C.
21 1321), subtitle C or D of the Solid Waste
22 Disposal Act (42 U.S.C. 6921 et seq.), or
23 section 107 or 12 1(d) of the Comprehen-
24 sive Environmental Response, Compensa-
25 tion, and Liability Act of 1980 (42 U.S.C.
.S 1316 itS
-------
63
1 9607 and 9621(d)), no national primary
2 drinking water regulation for sulfate shall
3 be—
4 “(I) used as a standard for deter-
5 mining compliance with any provision
6 of any law other than this subsection;
7 “(II) used as a standard for de-
8 termining appropriate cleanup levels
9 or whether cleanup should be under-
10 taken with respect to any facility or
11 site;
12 “(ifi) considered to be an appli-
13 cable or relevant and appropriate re-
14 quirement for any such cleanup; or
15 “(IV) used for the purpose of de-
16 fining injury to a natural resource;
17 unless the Administrator, by rule and after
18 notice and opportunity for public comment,
19 determines that the regulation is appro-
20 priate for a use described in subclause (I),
21 (II), (Ill), or (IV).
22 “(ii) STATE LAws.—This subpara-
23 graph shall not affect any requirement of
24 State law, including the applicability of
25 any State standard similar to the regula-
.8 1316 ES
-------
64
1 tion published under this paragraph as a
2 standard for any cleanup action, compli-
3 ance action, or natural resource damage
4 action taken pursuant to such a law.”.
5 SEC. 10. FILTRATION AND DISINFECTION.
6 (a) FILTRATION TECHNOLOGY FOR SI &i L Sys-
7 TEMS.—Section 1412(b)(7)(C) (42 U.S.C. 300g—
8 1(b)(7)(C)) is amended by adding at the end the following:
9 “(v) FILTRATION TECHNOLOGY FOR
10 SMALL SYSTEMS.—At the same time as the
11 Administrator proposes an Interim En-
12 hanced Surface Water Treatment Rule
13 pursuant to paragraph (2)(C)(ii), the Ad-
14 ministrator shall propose a regulation that
15 describes treatment techniques that meet
16 the requirements for filtration pursuant to
17 this subparagraph and are feasible for
18 community water systems serving a popu-
19 lation of 3,300 or fewer and noncommunity
20 water systems.”.
21 (b) GROUND WATER DISINFEcTION.—The first sen-
22 tence of section 1412(b)(8) (42 U.S.C. 300g—1(b)(8)) is
23 amended—
24 (1) by striking “Not later than 36 months after
25 the enactment of the Safe Drinking Water Act
.8 1316 RS
-------
65
1 Amendments of 1986, the Administrator shall pro-
2 pose and promulgate” and inserting “M fl e timc
3 that At any time after the end of the 3-year period
4 that begins on the date of enactment of the Safe
5 Drinking Water Act Amendments of 1995 but not
6 kiter than the date on which the Administrator pro-
7 mulgates a Stage II rulemaking for disinfectants
8 and disinfection byproducts (as described in para-
9 graph (2)), the Administrator shall also promul-
10 gate”; and
11 (2) by striking the period at the end and insert-
12 ing the following: “, including surface water systems
13 and, as necessary, ground water systems. After con-
14 sultation with the States, the Administrator shall (as
15 part of the regulations) promulgate criteria that the
16 Administrator, or a State that has primary enforce-
17 ment responsibility under section 1413, shall apply
18 to determine whether disinfection shall be required
19 as a treatment technique for any public water sys-
20 tern served by ground water.”.
21 SEC. 11. EmCTWE DATE FOR REGULATIONS.
22 Section 1412(b) (42 U.S.C. 300g—1(b)) is amended
23 by striking paragraph (10) and inserting the following:
24 “(10) EFFECTIVE DATE.—A national primary
25 drinking water regulation promulgated under this
S1316RS 3
-------
66
1 section shall take effect on the date that is 3 years
2 after the date on which the regulation is promul-
3 gated unless the Administrator determines that an
4 earlier date is practicable, except that the Adminis-
5 trator, or a State in the case of an individual sys-
6 tern, may allow up to 2 additional years to comply
7 with a maximum contaminant level or treatment
8 technique if the Administrator or State determines
9 that additional time is necessary for capital improve-
10 ments.”.
11 SEC. 12. TECHNOLOGY AND TREATMENT TECHNIQUES;
12 TECHNOLOGY CENTERS.
13 (a) SYSTEM TREATMENT TEcHNOLOGIES.—Section
14 1412(b) (42 U.S.C. 300g—1(b)) (as amended by section
15 9) is further amended by adding at the end the following:
16 “(15) SYSTEM TREATMENT TECHNOLOGIES.—
17 “(A) GUIDANCE OR REGULATIONS.—
18 “(i) IN GENERAL.—At the same time
19 as the Administrator promulgates a na-
20 tional primary drinking water regulation
21 pursuant to this section, the Administrator
22 shall issue guidance or regulations describ-
23 ing all treatment technologies for the con-
24 taminant that is the subject of the regula-
25 tion that are feasible with the use of best
.S 1816 ES
-------
67
1 technology, treatment techniques, or other
2 means that the Administrator finds, after
3 examination for efficacy under field condi-
4 tions and not solely under laboratory con-
5 ditions, are available taking cost into con-
6 sideration for public water systems serv-
7 ing—
8 “(I) a population of 10,000 or
9 fewer but more than 3,300;
10 “(II) a population of 3,300 or
11 fewer but more than 500; and
12 “(ifi) a population of 500 or
13 fewer but more than 25.
14 “(ii) CONTENTS.—The guidance or
15 regulations shall identify the effectiveness
16 of the technology, the cost of the tech-
17 nology, and other factors related to the use
18 of the technology, including requirements
19 for the quality of source water to ensure
20 adequate protection of human health, con-
21 sidering removal efficiencies of the tech-
22 nology, and installation and operation and
23 maintenance requirements for the tech-
24 nology.
.8 1316 R8
-------
68
1 “(ui) Lri i1TATION.—The Adrninis-
2 trator shall not issue guidance or regula-
3 tions for a technology under this para-
4 graph unless the technology adequately
5 protects human health, considering the ex-
6 pected useful life of the technology and the
7 source waters available to systems for
8 which the technology is considered to be
9 feasible.
10 “(B) REGULATIONS AND GUIDANCE.—NOt
11 later than 2 years after the date of enactment
12 of this paragraph and after consultation with
13 the States, the Administrator shall issue guid-
14 ance or regulations under subparagraph (A) for
15 each national primary drinking water regulation
16 promulgated prior to the date of enactment of
17 this paragraph for which a variance may be
18 granted under section 1415(e). The Adminis-
19 trator may, at any time after a national pri-
20 mary drinking water regulation has been pro-
21 mulgated, issue guidance or regulations describ-
22 ing additional or new or innovative treatment
23 technologies that meet the requirements of sub-
24 paragraph (A) for public water systems de-
.8 1316 RS
-------
69
1 scribed in subparagraph (A)(i) that are subject
2 to the regulation.
3 “(C) No SPECIFIED TECHNOLOGY.—A de-
4 scription under subparagraph (A) of the best
5 technology or other means available shall not be
6 considered to require or authorize that the spec-
7 ified technology or other means be used for the
8 purpose of meeting the requirements of any na-
9 tional primary drinking water regulation.”.
10 (b) TECHNOLOGIES AND TREATMENT TECHNIQUES
11 FOR SivL u L SYsTEMs.—Section 1412(b)(4)(E) (as
12 amended by section 6(a)) is further amended by adding
13 at the end the following: “The Administrator shall include
14 in the list any technology, treatment technique, or other
15 means that is feasible for small public water systems serv-
16 ing—
17 “(i) a population of 10,000 or fewer
18 but more than 3,300;
19 “(ii) a population of 3,300 or fewer
20 but more than 500; and
21 “(iii) a population of 500 or fewer but
22 more than 25;
23 and that achieves compliance with the maxi-
24 mum contaminant level, including packaged or
25 modular systems and point-of-entry treatment
.8 1818 R8
-------
70
1 units that. are controlled by the - public water
2 system to ensure proper operation and mainte-
3 nance and compliance with the maximum con-
4 taminant level and equipped with mechanical -
5 warnings to ensure that customers are auto-
6 matically notified of operational problems.”.
7 (c) AvAILABILITY OF INFORMATION ON Si &i i Sys-
8 TEM TECHNOLOGIES.—Section 1445 (42 U.S.C. 300j—4)
9 is amended by adding at the end the following:
10 “(g) AVAILABILITY OF INFORMATION ON SMALL SYS-
11 TEM TECHNOLOGIES.—FOr purposes of paragraphs
12 (4)(E) and (15) of section 1412(b), the Administrator
13 may request information on the characteristics of commer-
14 cia1 y available treatment systems - and technologies, in-
15 eluding the effectiveness and performance of the systems
16 and technologies under various operating conditions. The
17 Administrator may specif r the form, content, and date by
18 which information sha1 be submitted by manufacturers,
19 States, and other interested persons for the purpose of
20 considering the systems and technologies in the develop-
21 ment of regulations or guidance under paragraph (4)(E)
22 or (15) of section 1412(b).”.
23 (d) SI ’L L WATER SYSTEMS TECHNOLOGY CEN-
24 TERS.—Section 1442 (42 U.S.C. 300j—1) is amended by
25 adding at the end the following:
.S 1316 RS
-------
71
1 “(h) SI I L PUBLIC WATER SYSTEMS TECHNOLOGY
2 ASSISTANCE CENTERS.—
3 “(1) GRANT PROGRAM.—The Administrator is
4 authorized to make grants to institutions of higher
5 learning to establish and operate not fewer than 5
6 small public water system technology assistance cen-
7 ters in the United States.
8 “(2) RESPONSIBILITIES OF THE CENTERS.—
9 The responsibilities of the small public water system
10 technology assistance centers established under this
11 subsection shall include the conduct of research,
12 training, and technical assistance relating to the in-
13 formation, performance, and technical needs of small
14 public water systems or public water systems that
15 serve Indian Tribes.
16 “(3) APPLICATIONS.—Any institution of higher
17 learning interested in receiving a grant under this
18 subsection shall submit to the Administrator an ap-
19 plication in such form and containing such informa-
20 tion as the Administrator may require by regulation.
21 “(4) SELECTION CRITERIA.—The Administrator
22 shall select recipients of grants under this subsection
23 on the basis of the following criteria:
24 “(A) The small public water system tech-
25 nology assistance center shall be located in a
.8 1316 ES
-------
72
1 State that is representative of the needs. of the’
2 region in which the State is located for address-
3 ing the drinking water needs of rural. small
4 communities or Indian Tribes.
5 “(B) The grant recipient shall be located
6 in a region that has experienced problems with
7 rural water supplies.
8 “(C) There is available to the grant recipi-
9 ent for carrying out this subsection dem-
10 onstrated expertise in water resources research,
11 technical assistance, and training.
12 “(D) The grant recipient shall have the ca-
13 pability to provide leadership in making na-
14 tional and regional contributions to the solution
15 of both long-range and intermediate-range rural
16 water system technology management problems.
17 “(E) The grant recipient shall have a dem-
18 onstrated interdisciplinary capability with cx-
19 pertise in small public water system technology
20 management and research.
21 “(F) The grant recipient shall have a dem-
22 onstrated capability to disseminate the results
23 of small public water system technology re-
24 search and training programs through an inter-
25 disciplinary continuing education program.
.S 1316 RS
-------
73
1 “(G) The projects that the grant recipient
2 proposes to carry out under the grant are nec-
3 essary and appropriate.
4 “(H) The grant recipient has regional sup-
5 port beyond the host institution.
6 “(I) The grant recipient shall include the
7 participation of water resources research insti-
8 tutes established under section 104 of the
9 Water Resources Research Act of 1984 (42
10 U.S.C. 10303).
11 “(5) ALASKA.—For purposes of this subsection,
12 the State of Alaska shall be considered to be a re-
13 gion.
14 “(6) CONSORTIA OF STATES.—At least 2 of the
15 grants under this subsection shall be made to con-
16 sortia of States with low population densities. In this
17 paragraph, the term ‘consortium of States with low
18 population densities’ means a consortium of States,
19 each State of which has an average population den-
20 sity of less than 12.3 persons per square mile, based
21 on data for 1993 from the Bureau of the Census.
22 “(7) ADDITIONAL CONSIDERATIONS.—At least
23 one center established under this subsection shall
24 focus primarily on the development and evaluation of
25 new technologies and new combinations of existing
.8 1316 RS
-------
74
1 technologies that are likely to provide more reliable
2 or lower cost options for providing safe drinking
3 water. This center shall be located in a geographic
4 region of the country with a high density of small
5 systems, at a urnversity with an established record
6 of developing and piloting small treatment tech-
7 nologies in cooperation with industry, States, corn-
8 munities, and water system associations.
9 “(8) AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS.—
10 There are authorized to be appropriated to make
11 grants under this subsection $10,000,000 for each
12 of fiscal years 1995 through 2003.”.
13 SEC. 13. VARIANCES AND FxIE:,%(PTIONS.
14 (a) TECHNOLOGY AND TREATMENT TECHNIQUES
15 FOR SYSTEMS ISSUED VARIANCES.—The second sentence
16 of section 1415(a)(1)(A) (42 U.S.C. 300g—4(a)(1)(A)) is
17 amended—
18 (1) by striking “only be issued to a system after
19 the system’s application of” and inserting “be issued
20 to a system on condition that the system install”;
21 and
22 (2) by inserting before the period at the end the
23 following: “, and based upon an evaluation satisfac-
24 tory to the State that indicates that alternative
.8 1316 ES
-------
75
1 sources of water are not reasonably available to the
2 system”.
3 (b) ExEMP’rloNs.—Section 1416 (42 U.S.C. 300g—
4 5) is amended—
5 (1) in subsection (a)(1)—
6 (A) by inserting after “(which may include
7 economic factors” the following: “, including
8 qualification of the public water system as a
9 system serving a disadvantaged community pur-
10 suant to section 1473(e)(1)”; and
11 (B) by inserting after “treatment tech-
12 nique requirement,” the following: “or to imple-
13 ment measures to develop an alternative source
14 of water supply,”;
15 (2) in subsection (b)(1)(A)—
16 (A) by striking “(including increments of
17 progress)” and inserting “(including increments
18 of progress or measures to develop an alter-
19 native source of water supply)”; and
20 (B) by striking “requirement and treat-
21 ment” and inserting “requirement or treat-
22 ment”; and
23 (3) in subsection (b)(2)—
24 (A) by striking “(except as provided in
25 subparagraph (B))” in subparagraph (A) and
.S 1316 R8
-------
76
1 all that follows through “3 years after the date
2 of the issuance of the exemption if’ in snbpara-
3 graph (B) and inserting the following: “not
4 later than 3 years after the otherwise applicable
5 compliance date established in section
6 1412(b)(1O).
7 “(B) No exemption shall be granted unless”;
8 (B) in subparagraph (B)(i), by striking
9 “within the period of such exemption” and in-
10 serting “prior to the date established pursuant
11 to section 1412(b)(1O)”;
12 (C) in subparagraph (B)(ii), by inserting
13 after “such financial assistance” the following:
14 “or assistance pursuant to part G, or any other
15 Federal or State program is reasonably likely to
16 be available within the period of the exemp-
17 tion”;
18 (D) in subparagraph (C)—
19 (i) by striking “500 service connec-
20 tions” arid inserting “a population of
21 3,300”; and
22 (ii) by inserting “, but not to exceed
23 a total of 6 years,” after “for one or more
24 additional 2-year periods”; and
25 (E) by adding at the end the following:
•S 1316 R8
-------
77
1 “(D) LIMITATION.—A public water system may not
2 receive an exemption under this section if the system was
3 granted a variance under section 1415(e).”.
4 SEC. 14. SMALL SYSTEMS; TECHNICAL ASSISTANCE.
5 (a) S w L SYSTEM ViUUANcES.—Section 1415 (42
6 U.S.C. 300g—4) is amended by adding at the end the fol-
7 lowing:
8 “(e) SMALL SYSTEM VARIANCES.—
9 “(1) IN GENERAL.—The Administrator (or a
10 State with primary enforcement responsibility for
11 public water systems under section 1413) may grant
12 to a public water system serving a population of
13 10,000 or fewer (referred to in this subsection as a
14 ‘small system’) a variance under this subsection for
15 compliance with a requirement specifying a maxi-
16 mum contaminant level or treatment technique con-
17 tamed in a national primary drinking water regula-
18 tion, if the variance meets each requirement of this
19 subsection.
20 “(2) AVtU1 J3IUTy OF VARIANcES.—A small
21 system may receive a variance under this subsection
22 if the system installs, operates, and maintains, in ac-
23 cordance with guidance or regulations issued by the
24 Administrator, treatment technology that is feasible
.8 1310 R8
-------
78
1 for small systems as determined by the Adminis-
2 trator pursuant to section 1412(b)(15).
3 “(3) CoNDITIoNS FOR GRANTING VARIANCES.—
4 A variance under this subsection shall be available
5 only to a system—
6 “(A) that cannot afford to comply, in ac-
7 cordance with affordability criteria established
8 by the Administrator (or the State in the case
9 of a State that has primary enforcement re-
10 sponsibility under section 1413), with a na-
11 tional primary drinking water regulation, in-
12 eluding compliance through—
13 “(i) treatment;
14 “(ii) alternative source of water sup-
15 ply; or
16 “(iii) restructuring or consolidation
17 (unless the Administrator (or the State in
18 the case of a State that has primary en-
19 forcement responsibility under section
20 1413) makes a written determination that
21 restructuring or consolidation is not fea-
22 sible or appropriate based on other speci-
23 fled public policy considerations); and
24 “(B) for which the Administrator (or the
25 State in the case of a State that has primary
‘S 1316 RS
-------
79
1 enforcement responsibility under section 1413)
2 determines that the terms of the variance en-
3 sure adequate protection of human health, con-
4 sidering the quality of the source water for the
5 system and the removal efficiencies and ex-
6 pected useful life of the treatment technology
7 required by the variance.
8 “(4) APPLICATIONS.—An application for a van-
9 ance for a national primary drinking water regula-
10 tion under this subsection shall be submitted to the
11 Administrator (or the State in the case of a State
12 that has primary enforcement responsibility under
13 section 1413) not later than the date that is the
14 later of—
15 “(A) 3 years after the date of enactment
16 of this subsection; or
17 “(B) 1 year after the compliance date of
18 the national primary drinking water regulation
19 as established under section 1412(b)(10) for
20 which a variance is requested.
21 “(5) VARIANCE REVIEW AND DECISION.—
22 “(A) TIMETABLE.—TIie Administrator (or
23 the State in the case of a State that has pri-
24 mary enforcement responsibility under section
25 1413) shall grant or deny a variance not later
.8 1316 RS
-------
80
1 than 1 year after the date of receipt of the ap
2 plication.
3 “(B) PENALTY MORATORIUM.—Each pub-
4 lie water system that submits a timely applica-
5 tion for a variance under this subsection shall
6 not be subject to a penalty in an enforcement
7 action under section 1414 for a violation of a
8 maximum contaminant level or treatment tech-
9 nique in the national primary drinking water:
10 regulation with respect to which the variance
11 application was submitted prior to the date of
12 a decision to grant or deny the variance.
13 “(6) COMPLIANCE SCHEDULES.—
14 “(A) VAJ IANcEs.—A variance granted
15 under this subsection shall require compliance
16 with the conditions of the variance not later
17 than 3 years after the date on which the van-
18 ance is granted, except that the Administrator
19 (or the State in the case of a State that has
20 primary enforcement responsibility under see-
21 tion 1413) may allow up to 2 additional years
22 to comply with a treatment technique, secure an
23 alternative source of water, or restructure if the
24 Administrator (or the State) determines that
25 additional time is necessary for capital improve-
‘S 1316 RS
-------
81
1 ments, or to allow for financial assistance pro-
2 vided pursuant to part G or any other Federal
3 or State program.
4 “(B) DENIED APPLICATIONS.—If the Ad-
5 ministrator (or the State in the case of a State
6 that has primary enforcement responsibility
7 under section 1413) denies a variance applica-
8 tion under this subsection, the public water sys-
9 tern shall come into compliance with the re-
10 quirements of the national primary drinking
11 water regulation for which the variance was re-
12 quested not later than 4 years after the date on
13 which the national primary drinking water reg-
14 ulation was promulgated.
15 “(7) DuRATIoN OF VARIANCES.—
16 “(A) IN GEN’ERAL.—The Administrator (or
17 the State in the case of a State that has pri-
18 mary enforcement responsibility under section
19 1413) shall review each variance granted under
20 this subsection not less often than every 5- years
21 after the compliance date established in the
22 variance to determine whether the system re-
23 mains eligible for the variance and is conform-
24 ing to each condition of the variance.
.S 1316 RS
-------
82
1 “(B) REVOCATION OF VARIANCES.—The
2 Administrator (or the State in the case of a
3 State that has primary enforcement responsibil-
4 ity under section 1413) shall revoke a variance
5 in effect under this subsection if the Adminis-
6 trator (or the State) determines that—
7 “(i) the system is no longer eligible
8 for a variance;
9 “(ii) the system has failed to comply
10 with any term or condition of the variance,
11 other. than a reporting or monitoring re-
12 quirement, unless the failure is caused by
13 circumstances outside the control of the
14 system; or
15 “(iii) the terms of the variance do not
16 ensure adequate protection of human
17 health, considering the quality of source
18 water available to the system and the Fe-
19 moval efficiencies and expected useful life
20 of the treatment technology required by
21 the variance.
22 “(8) INELIGIBILITY FOR VARIANCEs.—A van-
23 ance shall not be available under this subsection
24 for—
.S 1316 ES
-------
83
1 “(A) any maximum contaminant level or
2 treatment technique for a contaminant with re-
3 spect to which a national primary drinking
4 water regulation was promulgated prior to Jan-
5 uary 1, 1986; or
6 “(B) a national primary drinking water
7 regulation for a microbial contaminant (includ-
8 ing a bacterium, virus, or other organism) or an
9 indicator or treatment technique for a microbial
10 contaminant.
11 “(9) REGULATIONS AND GUIDANCE.—
12 “(A) IN GENERAL.—Not later than 2 years
13 after the date of enactment of this subsection
14 and in consultation with the States, the Admin-
15 istrator shall promulgate regulations for
16 variances to be granted under this sub section
17 The regulations shall, at a minimum, specif y—
18 “(i) procedures to be used by the Ad-
19 ministrator or a State to grant or deny
20 variances, including requirements for noti-
21 fying the Administrator and consumers of
22 the public water system applying for a
23 variance and requirements for a public
24 hearing on the variance before the variance
25 is granted;
.S 1316 R8
-------
84
1 “(ii) requirements for the installation
2 and proper operation of treatment tech-
3 nology that is feasible (pursuant to section
4 1412(b)(15)) for small systems and the fi-
5 nancial and techiiical capability to operate
6 the treatment system, including operator
7 training and certification;
8 “(iii) eligibility criteria for a variance
9 for each national primary drinking water
10 regulation, - including requirements for the
11 quality of the source water (pursuant to
12 section 1412(b)(15)(A)); and
13 “(iv) information requirements for
14 variance applications.
15 “(B) AFFORDABILITY CRITERIA.—Not
16 later than 18 months after the date of enact-
17 ment of the Safe Drinking Water Act Amend-
18 ments of 1995, the Administrator, in consulta-
19 tion with the States and the Rural Utilities
20 Service of the Department of Agriculture, shall
21 publish information to assist the States in de-
22 veloping affordability criteria. The affordability
23 criteria shall be reviewed by the States not less
24 often than every 5 years to determine if
25 changes are needed to the criteria.
.8 iaie ES
-------
85
1 “(10) REVIEW BY THE ADMINISTRATOR.—
2 “(A) IN GENERAL—The Administrator
3 shall periodically review the program of each
4 State that has primary enforcement responsibil-
5 ity for public water systems under section 1413
6 with respect to variances to determine whether
7 the variances granted by the State comply with
8 the requirements of this subsection. With re-
9 spect to affordability, the determination of the
10 Administrator shall be limited to whether the
11 variances granted by the State comply with the
12 affordability criteria developed by the State.
13 “(B) NoTicE AND PUBLICATION.—If the
14 Administrator determines that variances grant-
15 ed by a State are not in compliance with afford-
16 ability criteria developed by the State and the
17 requirements of this subsection, the Adminis-
18 trator shall notify the State in writing of the
19 deficiencies and make public the determination.
20 “(C) OBJECTIONS TO VARIANCES.—
21 “(i) B THE ADMLNISTRATOR.—The
22 Administrator may review and object to
23 any variance proposed to be granted by a
24 State, if the objection is communicated to
25 the State not later than 90 days after the
.8 1316 RS
-------
86
1 State proposes to grant the variance. If the
2 Administrator objects to the granting of a
3 variance, the Administrator shall notify the
4 State in writing of each basis for the objec-
5 tion and propose a modification to the
6 variance to resolve the concerns of the Ad-
7 ministrator. The State shall make the rec-
8 ommended modification or respond in writ-
9 ing to each objection. If the State issues
10 the variance without resolving the concerns
11 of the Administrator, the Administrator
12 may overturn the State decision to grant
13 the variance if the Administrator deter-
14 mines that the State decision does not
15 comply with this subsection.
16 “(ii) PETITION BY CONSUMERS.—Not
17 later than 30 days after a State with pri-
18 mary enforcement responsibility for public
19 water systems under section 1413 proposes
20 to grant a variance for a public water sys-
21 tern, any person served by the system may
22 petition the Administrator to object to the
23 granting of a variance. The Administrator
24 shall respond to the petition not later than
25 60 days after the receipt of the petition.
.8 1318 R8
-------
87
1 The State shall not grant the variance dur-
2 ing the 60-day period. The petition shall be
3 based on comments made by the petitioner
4 during public review of the variance by the
5 State.”.
6 (b) TECHNICAL ASSISTANCE.—SeCtiOfl 1442(g) (42
7 U.S.C. 300j—1(g)) is amended—
8 (1) in the second sentence, by inserting “and
9 multi-State regional technical assistance” after “cir-
10 cmt-rider’ “; and
11 (2) by striking the third sentence and inserting
12 the following: “The Administrator shall ensure that
13 funds made available for te hnical assistance pursu-
14 ant to this subsection are allocated among the States
15 equally. Each nonprofit organization receiving assist-
16 ance under this subsection shall consult with the
17 State in which the assistance is to be expended or
18 otherwise made available before using the assistance
19 to undertake activities to carry out this subsection.
20 There are authorized to be appropriated to carry out
21 this subsection $15,000,000 for each of fiscal years
22 1992 through 2003.”.
23 SEC. 15. CAPACiTY DEVELOPMENT; FINANCE CENTERS.
24 Part B (42 U.S.C. 300g et seq.) is amended by add-
25 ing at the end the following:
.8 1318 ES
-------
88
1 “CAPACITY DEVELOPMENT
2 “SEC. 1418. (a) STATE AUTHORITY FOR NEW Sys-
3 TEMS.—Each State shall obtain the legal authority or
4 other means to ensure that all new community water sys-
5 tems and new nontransient, noncommunity water systems
6 commencing operation after October 1, 1998, demonstrate
7 technical, managerial, and financial capacity with respect
8 to each national primary drinking water regulation in ef-
9 fect, or likely to be in effect, on the date of commencement
10 of operations.
11 “(b) SYSTEMS IN SIGr mIc T NONCOMPLIANCE.—
12 “(1) LIST.—Beginning not later than 1 year
13 after the date of enactment of this section, each
14 State shall prepare, periodically update, and submit
15 to the Administrator a list of community water sys-
16 tems and nontrarisient, noncommunity water sys-
17 tems that have a history of significant noncompli-
18 ance with this title (as defined in guidelines issued
19 prior to the date of enactment of this section or any
20 revisions of the guidelines that have been made in
21 consultation with the States) and, to the extent
22 practicable, the reasons for noncompliance.
23 “(2) REPORT.—Not later than 5 years after the
24 date of enactment of this section and as part of the
25 capacity development strategy of the State, each
.S 1316 RS
-------
89
1 State shall -report to the Administrator- on- the suc- -
2 cess of enforcement mechanisms and initial capacity
3 development efforts in assisting the public water sys-
4 tems listed under paragraph (1) to improve tech-
5 nical, managerial, and financial capacity.
6 “(c) CM’AcITY DEVELOPMENT STRATEGY.—
7 “(1) IN GENERAL.—NOt later than 4 years
8 after the date of enactment of this section, each
9 State shall develop and implement a strategy to as-
10 sist public water systems in acquiring and maintain-
11 ing technical, managerial, and financial capacity.
12 “(2) CONTENT.—In preparing the capacity de-
13 velopment strategy, the State shall consider, solicit
14 public comment on, and include as appropriate—
15 “(A) the methods or criteria that the State
16 will use to identify and prioritize the public
17 water systems most in need of improving tech-
18 nical, managerial, and financial capacity;
19 “(B) a description of the institutional, reg-
20 ulatory, financial, tax, or legal factors at the
21 Federal, State, or local level that encourage or
22 impair capacity development;
23 “(C) a description of how the State will
24 use the authorities and resources of this title or
25 other means to—
.S 1316 RS
-------
90
1 “(i) assist public water systems in
2 complying with national primary drinking
3 water regulations;
4 “(ii) encourage the development of
5 partnerships between public water systems
6 to enhance the technical, managerial, and
7 financial capacity of the systems; and
8 “(iii) assist public water systems in
9 the trainmg and certification of operators;
10 “(D) a description of how the State will es-
11 tablish a baseline and measure improvements in
12 capacity with respect to national primary drink-
13 ing water regulations and State drinking water
14 law; and
15 “(E) an identification of the persons that
16 have an interest in and are involved in the de-
17 velopment and implementation of the capacity
18 development strategy (including all appropriate
19 agencies of Federal, State, and local govern-
20 .ments, private and nonprofit public water sys-
21 tems, and public water system customers).
22 “(3) REPORT.—NOt later than 2 years after the
23 date on which a State first adopts a capacity devel-
24 opment strategy under this subsection, and every 3
25 years thereafter, the head of the State agency that
.8 1816 RS
-------
91
1 has primary responsibility to carry out this title in -
2 the State shall submit to the Governor a report that
3 shall also be available to the public on the efficacy
4 of the strategy and progress made toward improving
5 the tecimical, managerial, and financial capacity of
6 public water systems in the State.
7 “(d) FEDERAL ASSISTANCE.—
8 “(1) IN GENERAL.—The Administrator shall
9 support the States in developing capacity develop-
10 ment strategies. -
11 “(2) INFORMATIONAL ASSISTANCE.—
12 “(A) IN GENERAL.—NOt later than 180
13 days after the date of enactment of this section,
14 the Administrator shall—
15 “(i) conduct a review of- Statecapacity
16 development efforts in existence on the
17 date of enactment of this section and pub-
18 lish information to assist States and public
19 water systems in capacity development ef-
20 forts; and
21 “(ii) initiate a partnership with
22 States, public water systems, and the pub-
23 lic to develop information for States on
24 recommended operator certification re-
25 quirements.
.S 1316 ES
-------
92
1 “(B) PUBLICATION OF INFORMATION.—
2 The Administrator shall publish the information
3 developed through the partnership under sub-
4 paragraph (A)(ii) not later than 18 months
5 after the date of enactment of this section.
6 “(3) VARIANCES AND EXEMPTIONS.—Based on
7 information obtained under subsection (c)(2)(B), the
8 Administrator shall, as appropriate, modify regula-
9 tions concerning variances and exemptions for small
10 public water systems to ensure flexibility in the use
11 of the variances and exemptions. Nothing in this
.12 paragraph shall be interpreted, construed, or applied
13 to affect or alter the requirements of section 1415
14 or 1416.
-15 “(4) PROMULGATION OF DRINKING WATER
16 REGULATIONS.—In promulgating a national primary
17 drinking water regulation, the Administrator shall
18 include an analysis of the likely effect of compliance
19 with the regulation on the technical, financial, and
20 managerial capacity of public water systems.
21 “(5) GUIDANCE FOR NEW SYSTEMS.—Not later
22 than 2 years after the date of enactment of this see-
23 tion, the Administrator shall publish guidance devel-
24 - oped in consultation with the States describing legal
25 authorities and other means to ensure that all new
-.8 1816 ES
-------
93
1 community water systems and new nontransient,
2 noncommunity water systems demonstrate technical,
3 managerial, and financial capacity with respect to
4 national primary drinking water regulations.
5 “(e) ENVIRONMENTAL FINANCE CENTERS.—
6 “(1) IN GENERAL.—The Administrator shall
7 support the network of university-based Environ-
8 mental Finance Centers in providing training and
9 technical assistance to State and local officials in de-
10 veloping capacity of public water systems.
11 “(2) NATIONAL CAPACITY DEVELOPMENT
12 CLEABINGHOUSE.—Withifl the Environmental Fi-
13 nance Center network in existence on the date of en-
14 actment of this section, the Administrator shall es-
15 tablish a national public water systems capacity de-
16 velopment clearinghouse to receive, coordinate, and
17 disseminate research and reports on projects funded
18 under this title and from other sources with respect
19 to developing, improving, and maintaining technical,
20 financial, and managerial capacity at public water
21 systems to Federal and State agencies, universities,
22 water suppliers, and other interested persons.
23 “(3) CAPACITY DEVELOPMENT TECHNIQUES.—
.S 1316 RS
-------
94
1 “(A) IN GENERMJ.—The Environmentaj
2 Finance Centers shall develop and test manage-
3 rial, financial, and institutional techniques—
4 “(i) to ensure that new public water
5 systems have the technical, managerial,
6 and financial capacity before commencing
7 operation;
8 “(ii) to identify public water systems
9 in need of capacity development; and
10 “(iii) to bring public water systems
11 with a history of significant noncompliance
12 with national primary drinking water regu-
13 lations into compliance.
14 “(B) TECHNIQUES.—The techniques may
15 include capacity assessment methodologies,
16 manual and computer-based public water sys-
17 tem rate models and capital planning models,
18 public water system consolidation procedures,
19 and regionalization models.
20 “(f) AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS.—There
21 are authorized to be appropriated to carry out subsection
22 (e) $2,500,000 for each of fiscal years 1995 through
23 2003”
.8 1816 R8
-------
95
1 SEC. 16. OPERATOR AND LABORATORY CERTWICATION.
2 Section 1442 (42 U.S.C. 300j—1) is amended by in-
3 sertmg after subsection (d) the following:
4 “(e) CERTIFICATION OF OPERATORS AND LABORA-
5 TORIES.—
6 “(1) REQUIREMENT.—Begrnnrng 3 years after
7 the date of enactment of the Safe Drinking Water
8 Act Amendments of 199 5—
9 “(A) no assistance may be provided to a
10 public water system under part G unless the
11 system has entered into an enforceable commit-
12 ment with the State providing that any person
13 who operates the system will be trained and
14 certified according to requirements established
15 by the Administrator or the State (in the case
16 of a State with primary enforcement respon-
17 sibility under section 1413) not later than the
18 date of completion of the capital project for
19 which the assistance is provided; and
20 “(B) a public water system that has re-
21 ceived assistance under part G may be operated
22 only by a person who has been trained and cer-
23 tified according to requirements established by
24 the Administrator or the State (in the case of
25 a State with primary enforcement responsibility
26 under section 1413).
.8 isie ES
-------
96
1 “(2) GTJIDELINES.—_NOt later than 18 months
2 after the date of enactment of the Safe Drinking
3 Water Act Amendments of 1995 and after consulta-
4 tion with the States, the Administrator shall publish
5 information to assist States in carrying out para-
6 graph (1). In the case of a State with primary en-
7 forcement responsibility under section 1413 or any
8 other State that has established a training program
9 that is consistent with the guidance issued under this
10 paragraph, the authority to prescribe the appro-
11 priate level of training for certification for all sys-
12 tems shall be solely the responsibility of the State.
13 The guidance issued under this paragraph shall also
14 include information to assist States in certifying lab-
15 oratories engaged in testing for the purpose of corn-
16 pliance with sections 1445 and 1401(1).
17 “(3) NONCOMPLIAJ.qCE._Jf a public water sys-
18 tern in a State is not operated in accordance with
19 paragraph (1), the Administrator is authorized to
20 withhold from funds that would otherwise be allo-
21 cated to the State under section 1472 or require the
22 repayment of an amount equal to the amount of any
23 assistance under partG provided to the public water
24 system.”.
.S 1316 RS
-------
97
1 SEC. 17. SOURCE WATER QUALITY PROTECTION PARTNER-
2 sniPs.
3 Part B (42 U.S.C. 300g et seq.) (as amended by sec-
4 tion 15) is further amended by adding at the end the fol-
5 lowing:
6 “SOURCE WATER QUALITY PROTECTION PARTNERSHIP
7 PROGRAM
8 “SEC. 1419. (a) SOURCE WATER AREA DELINEA-
9 TIONS.—Except as provided in subsection (c), not later
10 than 5 years after the date of enactment of this section,
11 and after an opportunity for public comment, each State
12 shall—
13 “(1) delineate (directly or through delegation)
14 the source water protection areas for community
15 water systems in the State using hydrogeologic in-
16 formation considered to be reasonably available and
17 appropriate by the State; and
18 “(2) conduct, to the extent practicable, vulner-
19 ability assessments in source water areas determined
20 to be a priority by the State, including, to the extent
21 practicable, identification of risks in source water
22 protection areas to drinking water.
23 “(b) ALTERNATWE DELINEATIONS AND VULNER-
24 ABILITY ASSESSMENTS.—FOr the purposes of satisfying
25 the requirements of subsection (a), a State may use delin-
26 eations and vulnerability assessments conducted for—
S1316RS— —4
-------
98
1 “(1) ground water sources under a State well-
2 head protection program developed pursuant to sec-
3 tion 1428;
4 “(2) surface or ground water sources under a
5 State pesticide management plan developed pursuant
6 to the Pesticide and Ground Water State Manage-
7 ment Plan Regulation (subparts I and J of part 152
8 of title 40, Code of Federal Regulations), promul-
9 gated under section 3(d) of the Federal Insecticide,
10 Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act (7 U.S.C. 136a(d));
11 or
12 “(3) surface water sources under a State water-
13 shed initiative or to satisfy the watershed criterion
14 for determining if filtration is required under the
15 Surface Water Treatment Rule (section 141.70 of
16 title 40, Code of Federal Regulations).
17 “(c) FUNDING.—To carry out the delineations and
18 assessments described in subsection (a), a State may use
19 funds made available for that purpose pursuant to section
20 1473(f). If funds available under that section are insuffi-
21 cient to meet the minimum requirements of subsection (a),
22 the State shall establish a priority-based schedule for the
23 delineations and assessments within available resources.
24 “(d) PETITION PROGRAM.—
25 “(1) IN GENERAL.—
.S 1316 R8
-------
99
1 “(A) EsTABUSHMENT.—A State may es-
2 tablish a program under which an owner or op-
3 erator of a community water system in the
4 State, or a municipal or local goverument or po-
5 litical subdivision of a government in the State,
6 may submit a source water quality protection
7 partnership petition to the State requesting
8 that the State assist in the local development of
9 a voluntary, incentive-based partnership, among
10 the owner, operator, or government and other
11 persons likely to be affected by the rec-
12 ommendations of the partnership, to—
13 “(i) reduce the presence in drinking
14 water of contaminants that may be ad-
15 dressed by a petition by considering the
16 origins of the contaminants, including to
17 the maximum extent practicable the spe-
18 cific activities that affect the drinking
19 water supply of a community;
20 “(ii) obtain financial or technical as-
21 sistance necessary to facilitate establish-
22 ment of a partnership, or to develop and
23 implement recommendations of a partner-
24 ship for the protection of source water to
25 assist in the provision of drinking water
.8 1316 R8
-------
100
1 that complies with national primary drink-
2 ing water regulations with respect to con-
3 taniinants addressed by a petition; and
4 “(iii) develop recommendations re-
5 garding voluntary and incentive-based
6 strategies for the long-term protection of
7 the source water of community water sys-
8 tems.
9 “(B) STATE DETERMINATION.—NOt later
10 than 1 year after the date of enactment of this
11 section, each State shall provide public notice
12 and solicit public comment on the question of
13 whether to develop a source water quality pro-
14 tection partnership petition program in the
15 State, and publicly announce the determination
16 of the State thereafter. If so requested by any
17 public water system or local governmental en-
18 tity, prior to making the determination, the
19 State shall hold at least one public hearing to
20 assess the level of interest in the State for de-
21 velopment and implementation of a State source
22 water quality partnership petition program.
23 “(C) FUNDING.—EaCh State may—
24 “(i) use funds set aside pursuant to
25 section 1473(f) by the State to carry out
.S 1316 RS
-------
101
1 a program described in subparagraph (A),
2 - including assistance to voluntary local
3 partnerships for the development and im-
4 plementation of partnership recommenda-
5 tions for the protection of sourcc water ,
6 source water such as source water quality
7 assessment, contingency plans, and dem-
8 onstration projects for partners within a
9 source water area delineated under sub-
10 section (a); and
11 “(ii) provide assistance in response to
12 a petition submitted under this subsection
13 using funds referred to in subsections
14 (e)(2)(B) arid (g).
15 “(2) OBJECTWES.—The objectives of a petition
16 submitted under this subsection shall be to—
17 “(A) facilitate the local development of vol-
18 untary, incentive-based partnerships among
19 owners and operators of community water sys-
20 tems, govermnents, and other persons in source
21 water areas; and
22 “(B) obtain assistance from the State in
23 directing or redirecting resources under Federal
24 or State water quality programs to implement
25 the recommendations of the partnerships to ad-
.S 1316 RS
-------
102
1 dress the origins of drinking water contami-
2 nants that may be addressed by a petition (in-
3 eluding to the maximum extent practicable the
4 specific activities) that affect the drinking water
5 supply of a community.
6 “(3) CONTAMINANTS ADDRESSED BY A PETI-
7 TION.—A petition submitted to a State under this
8 section may address only those contaminants—
9 “(A) that are pathogenic organisms for
10 which a nationaLprimary drinking water regula-
11 tion has been established or is required under
12 section 1412(b)(2)(C); or
13 “(B) for which a national primary drinking
14 water regulation has been promulgated or pro-
15 posed and—
16 “(i) that are detected in the commu-
17 nity water system for which the petition is
18 submitted at levels above the maximum
19 contaminant level; or
20 “(ii) that are detected by adequate
21 monitoring methods at levels that are not
22 reliably and consistently, below the maxi-
23 mum contaminant level.
24 “(4) CONTENTS.—A petition submitted under
25 this subsection shall, at a minimum—
.S 1316 ES
-------
103
1 “(A) include a delineation of the source
2 water area in the State that is the subject of
3 the petition;
4 “(B) identify, to the maximum extent
5 practicable, the origins of the drinking water
6 contaminants that may be addressed by a peti-
7 tion (including to the maximum extent prac-
8 ticable the specific activities contributing to the
9 presence of the contaminants) in the source
10 water area delineated under subparagraph (A);
11 “(C) identify any deficiencies in informa-
12 tion that will impair the development of rec-
13 ommendations by the voluntary local partner-
14 ship to address drinking water contaminants
15 that may be addressed by a petition;
16 “(D) specify the efforts made to establish
17 the voluntary local partnership and obtain the
18 participation of—
19 “(i) the municipal or local government
20 or other political subdivision of the State
21 with jurisdiction over the source water area
22 delineated under subparagraph (A); and
23 “(ii) each person in the source water
24 area delineated under subparagraph (A)—
.S 1316 RS
-------
104
1 “(I) who is likely to be affected
2 by recommendations of the voluntary-
3 local partnership; and -
4 “(II) whose participation - is es-
5 sential to the success of the partner-
6 ship;
7 “(E) outline how the voluntary local part-
8 nership has or will, during development and im-
9 plementation of recommendations of the vol-
10 untary local partnership, identify, recognize and
11 take into account any voluntary or other activi-
12 ties already being undertaken by persons in the
13 source water area delineated under subpara-
14 graph (A) under Federal or State law to reduce
15 the likelihood that contaminants will occur in
16 drinking water at levels of public health con-
17 cern; and
18 “(F) specify the technical, financial, or
19 other assistance that the voluntary local part-
20 nership requests of the State to develop the
21 partnership or to implement recommendations
22 of the partnership.
23 “(e) APPROVAL OR DISAPPROVAL OF PETITIONS.—
24 “(1) IN GENERAL.—Mter providing notice and
25 an opportunity for public comment on a petition
.S 1316 RS
-------
105
1 submitted under subsection (d), the State shall ap-
2 prove or disapprove the petition, in whole or in part,
3 not later than 120 days after the date of submission
4 of the petition.
5 “(2) AI’PROvAL.—The State may approve a pe-
6 tition if the petition meets the requirements estab-
7 lished under subsection (d). The notice of approval
8 shall, at a minimum, include—
9 “(A) an identification of technical, finan-
10 cial, or other assistance that the State will pro-
11 vide to assist in addressing the drinking water
12 contaminants that may be addressed by a peti-
13 tion based on—
14 “(i) the relative priority of the public
15 health concern identified in the petition
16 with respect to the other water quality
17 needs identified by the State;
18 “(ii) any necessary coordination that
19 the State will perform of the program es-
20 tablished under this section with programs
21 implemented or planned by other States
22 under this section; and
23 “(iii) funds available (including funds
24 available from a State revolving loan fund
25 established under title VI of the Federal
.8 1816 R8
-------
106
1 Water Pollution Control Act (33 U.S.C.
2 1381 et seq.) or part U and the appro-
3 priate distribution of the funds to assist in
4 implementing the recommendations of the
5 partnership;
6 “(B) a description of technical or i nancial
7 assistance pursuant to Federal and State pro-
8 grams that is available to assist in implement-
9 ing recommendations of the partnership in the
10 petition, including—
11 “(i) any program established under
12 the Federal Water Pollution Control Act
13 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.);
14 “(ii) the program established under
15 section 6217 of the Coastal Zone Act Re-
16 authorization Amendments of 1990 (16
17 U.S.C. 1455b);
18 “ (iii) the agricultural water quality
19 protection program established under chap-
20 ter 2 of subtitle D of title XII of the Food
21 Security Act of 1985 (16 U.S.C. 3838 et
22 seq.);
23 “(iv) the sole source aquifer protection
24 program established under section 1427;
.8 1316 R8
-------
107
1 “(v) the community welihead protec-
2 tion program established under section
3 1428;
4 “(vi) any pesticide or ground water
5 management plan; and
6 “(vii) any voluntary agricultural re-
7 source management plan or voluntary whole
8 farm or whole ranch management plan de-
9 veloped and implemented under a process
10 established by the Secretary of Agriculture;
11 and
12 “ (vii ) “(viii) any abandoned well do-
13 sure program; and
14 “(C) a description of activities that will be
15 undertaken to coordinate Federal and State
16 programs to respond to the petition.
17 “(3) DISAPPROvAL.—If the State disapproves a
18 petition submitted under subsection (d), the State
19 shall notify the entity submitting the petition in
20 writing of the reasons for disapproval. A petition
21 may be resubmitted at any time if—
22 “(A) new information becomes available;
23 “(B) conditions affecting the source water
24 that is the subject of the petition change; or
.5 1316 ES
-------
108
1 “(C) modifications are made in the type of
2 assistance being requested.
3 “(f) ELIGIBILrTY FOR WATER QUALITY PROTECTION
4 ASSISTANCE.—A sole source aquifer plan developed under
5 section 1427, a wellhead protection plan developed under
6 section 1428, and a source water quality protection meas-
7 ure assisted in response to a petition submitted under sub-
8 section (d) shall be eligible for assistance under the Fed-
9 eral Water Pollution Control Act (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.),
10 including assistance provided under section 319 and title
11 V I of such Act (33 U.S.C. 1329 and 1381 et seq.), if the
12 project, measure, or practice would be eligible for assist-
13 ance under such Act. In the case of funds made available
14 under such section 319 to assist a source water quality
15 protection measure in response to a petition submitted
16 under subsection (d), the funds may be used only for a
17 measure that addresses nonpoint source pollution.
18 “(g) GRANTS To SUPPORT STATE PROGRAMS.—
19 “(1) IN GENERAL.—The Administrator may
20 make a grant to each State that establishes a pro-
21 gram under this section that is approved under
22 paragraph (2). The amount of each grant shall not
23 exceed 50 percent of the cost of administering the
24 program for the year in which the grant is available.
.8 1316 ItS
-------
109
1 “(2) APPROVAL.—In order to receive grant as-
2 sistance under this subsection, -a State shall submit
3 to’ the Administrator for approval a plan for a source
4 water quality protection partnership program that is
5 consistent with the guidance published under para-
6 graph (3). The Administrator shall approve the plan
7 if- the plan is consistent with the guidance published
8 under paragraph (3).
9 “(3) GUIDANCE.—
10 “(A) IN GENERAL.—NOt later than 1 year
11 after the date of enactment of this section, the
12 Administrator, in consultation with the States,
13 shall publish guidance to assist—
14 “(i) States in the development of a
15 source water quality protection partnership
16 program; and
17 “(ii) municipal or local governments
18 or political subdivisions of the governments
19 and community water systems in the devel-
20 opment of source water quality protection
21 partnerships and in the assessment of
22 source water quality.
23 “(B) CONTENTS OF THE GUIDANCE.—The
24 guidance shall, at a minimum—
.S 1316 RS
-------
110
1 “(i) recommend procedures for the ap-
2 proval or disapproval by a State of a peti-
3 tion submitted under subsection. (d);
4 “(ii) recommend procedures for the
5 submission of petitions developed under
6 subsection (d);
7 “(iii) recommend criteria for the. e-
8 lincation assessment of source water areas
9 within a State;
10 “(iv) describe technical or financial
11 assistance pursuant to Federal and State
12 programs that is available to address the
13 contamination of sources of drinking water
14 and to develop and respond to petitions
15 submitted under subsection (d); and
16 “(v) specify actions taken by the Ad-
17 ministrator to ensure the coordination of
18 the programs referred to in clause (iv) with
19 the goals and objectives of this title to the
20 maximum extent practicable.
21 “(4) AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS.—
22 There are authorized to be appropriated to carry out
23 .this subsection such sums as are necessary for fiscal
24 years 1995 through 2003. Each State with a plan
25 for a program approved under paragraph (2) shall
.5 1316 RS
-------
111
1 receive an equitable portion of the funds available
2 for any fiscal year.
3 “(h) STATUTORY C0NsTRucTI0N.—Nothlng in this
4 section—
5 “(1) (A) creates or conveys new authority to a
6 State, political subdivision of a State, or community
7 water system for any new regulatory measure; or
8 “(B) limits any exi3ting authority of a State,
9 political subdivision, or community water system; or
10 “(2) precludes a community water system, mu-
11 nicipal or local government, or political subdivision
12 of a government from locally developing and carry-
13 ing out a voluntary, incentive-based, source water
14 quality protection partnership to address the origins
15 of drinking water contaminants of public health con-
16 cern.”.
17 SEC. 18. STATE PRIMACY; STATE FUNDING.
18 (a) STATE PRIMARY ENFORCEMENT RESPONSIBIL-
19 ITY.—Section 1413 (42 U.S.C. 300g—2) is amended—
20 (1) in subsection (a), by striking paragraph (1)
21 and inserting the following:
22 “(1) has adopted drinking water regulations
23 that are no less stringent than the national primary
24 drinking water regulations promulgated by the Ad-
25 ministrator under section 1412 not later than 2
.S 1316 ES
-------
112
1 years after- the. date on which the regulations areT
2 promulgated by the Administrator;”; anc [
3 (2) by adding at the end the following:
4 “(c) INTERIM PRIMARY ENFORCEMENT AUTHOR-
5 ITY.—A State that has primary enforcement authority
6 under this section with respect to each existing national
7 primary drinking water regulation shall be considered to
8 have primary enforcement authority with respect to each
9 new or revised national primary drinking water regulation
10 during the period beginning on the effective date of a reg-
11 ulation adopted and submitted by the State with respect
12 to the new or revised national primary drinking water reg-
13 ulation in accordance with subsection (b)(1) and ending
14 at such time as the Administrator makes a determination
15 under subsection (b)(2) with respect to the regulation.”.
16 (b) PUBLIC WATER SYSTEM SUPERVISION PRo-
17 GRAM.—Sectjon 1443(a) (42 U.S.C. 300j—2(a)) is amend-
18 ed—
19 (1) in paragraph (3)—
20 (A) by striking “(3) A grant” and insert-
21 ing the following:
22 “(3) AMOUNT OF GRANT.—
23 “(A) IN GENERAL.—A grant”; and
24 (B) by adding at the end the following:
.8 1816 ES
-------
113
1 “(By DETERMJNATION OF COSTS.—TO de-- -,
2 termine the costs of a grant recipient pursuant
3 to this paragraph, the Administrator. shall, ’ in’
4- cooperation with the States and- not later ihan
5 180 days after the date of enactment of this
6 subparagraph, establish a resource model for••
7 the public water system supervision program
8 and review and -revise the model as necessary.
9 “(C) STATE COST ADJUSTMENTS.—The
10 Administrator shall revise cost estimates used
11 in the resource model for any particular State
12 to reflect costs more likely to be experienced in
13 that State, if—
14 “(i) the State requests the modifica-
15 tion; and
16 “(ii) the revised estimates ensure full
17 and effective administration of the public
18 water system supervision program in the
19 State and the revised estimates do not
20 overstate the resources needed to adniin-
21 ister the program.”;
22 (2) in paragraph (7), by adding at the end a
23 period and the following:
24 “For the purpose of making grants under paragraph (1),
25 there are authorized to be appropriated such sums as are
.S 1816 B8
-------
114
1 necessary for each of fiscal years 1992 and 1993 and
2 $100,000,000 for each of fiscal years 1994 through
3 2003.”; and
4 (3) by adding at the end the following:
5 “(8) RESERVATION OF FUNDS BY THE ADMIN-
6 ISTRATOR.—If the Administrator assumes the pri-
7 mary enforcement responsibility of a State public
8 water system supervision program, the Adminis-
9 trator may reserve from funds made available pursu-
10 ant to this subsection, an amount equal to the
11 amount that would otherwise have been provided to
12 the State pursuant to this subsection. The Adminis-
13 trator shaH use the funds reserved pursuant to this
14 paragraph to ensure the full and effective adminis-
15 tration of a public water system supervision program
16 in the State.
17 “(9) STATE LOAN FUNDS.—
18 “(A) RESERVATION OF FUNDS.—For any
19 fiscal year for which the amount made available
20 to the Administrator by appropriations to carry
21 out this subsection is less than the amount that
22 the Administrator determines is necessary to
23 supplement funds made available pursuant to
24 paragraph (8) to ensure the full and effective
25 administration of a public water system super-
.S 1316 R8
-------
115
1 vision program in a State (based on the- re-
2 source model developed under paragraph
3 (3)(B)), the Administrator may reserve from
4 the funds made available to the State under
5 section 1472 an amount that is equal to the
6 amount of the shortfall.
7 “(B) DUTY OF ADMINISTRATOR.—If the
8 Administrator reserves funds from the. alloca-
9 tion of a State under -subparagraph (A), the
10 Administrator shall carry out in the State—
11 “(i) each of the activities that would
12 be required of the State if the State had
13 primary enforcement authority under sec-
14 tion 1413; and
15 “(ii) each of the activities required of
16 the State by this title, other than part C,
17 but not made a condition of the author-
18 ity.”.
19 SEC. 19. MONITORING-AND INFORMATION GATHERING.;
20 (a) REGULATED CONTAMINANTS.—
21 (1) REVIEw OF EXISTING REQUIREMENTS.—
22 Section 1445(a)(1) (42 U.S.C. 300j—4(a)(1)) is
23 amended—
.S 1816 ES
-------
116
1 (A) by designating the first and second
2 sentences as subparagraphs (A) and (B), re-
3 spectively; and
4 (B) by adding at the end the following:
5 “(C) REv1Ew.—The Administrator shall
6 not later than 2 years after the date of enact-
7 ment of this subparagraph, after consultation
8 with public health experts, representatives of
9 the general public, and officials of State and
10 local governments, review the monitoring re-
11 quirements for not fewer than 12 contaminants
12 identified by the Administrator, and promulgate
13 any necessary modifications.”.
14 (2) ALTERNATIVE MONITORING PROGRAMS.—
15 Section 1445(a)(1) (42 U.S.C. 300j—4(a)(1)) (as
16 amended by paragraph (1)(B)) is further amended
17 by adding at the end the following:
18 “(D) STATE-ESTABLISHED REQUIRE-
19 MENTS.—
20 “(i) IN GENERAL.—Each State with
21 primary enforcement responsibility under
22 section 1413 may, by rule, establish alter-
23 native monitoring requirements for any na-
24 ‘tional primary drinking water regulation,
25 other than a regulation applicable to a mi-
.S 1316 ItS
-------
117
1 crobial contaminant (or an indicator of a
2 microbial contaminant). The alternative
3 monitoring requirements established by a
4 State under this clause may not take effect
5 for any national primary drinking water
6 regulation until after completion of at least
7 1 full cycle of monitoring in the State sat-
8 isfying the requirements of paragraphs (1)
9 and (2) of section 1413(a). The alternative
10 monitoring requirements may be applicable
11 to public water systems or classes of public
12 water systems identified by the State, in
13 lieu of the monitoring requirements that
14 would otherwise be applicable under the
15 regulation, if the alternative monitoring re-
16 quirements—
17 “(I) are based on use of the best
18 available science conducted in accord-
19 ance with sound and objective sci-
20 entific practices and data collected by
21 accepted methods;
22 “(II) are based on the potential
23 for the contaminant to occur in the
24 source water based on use patterns
25 and other relevant characteristics of
.8 1316 ES
-------
118
1 the contaminant or the systems sub-
2 ject to the requirements;
3 “(III) in the case of a public
4 water system or class of public water
5 systems in which a contaminant has
6 been detected at quantifiable levels
7 that are not reliably and consistently
8 below the maximum contaminant
9 level, include monitoring frequencies
10 that are not less frequent than the
11 frequencies required in the national
12 primary drinking water regulation for
13 the contaminant for a period of 5
14 years after the detection; and
15 “(IV) in the case of each con-
16 taminant formed in the distribution
17 system, are not applicable to public
18 water systems for which treatment is
19 necessary to comply with the national
20 primary drinking water regulation.
21 “(ii) COMPLIANCE AND ENFORCE-
22 MENT.—The alternative monitoring re-
23 quirements established by the State shall
24 be adequate to ensure compliance with,
25 and enforcement of, each national primary
.8 1816 R8
-------
119
1 drinking water regulation. The State may
2 review and update the alternative monitor-
3 ing requirements as necessary.
4 “(iii) APPLICATION OF SECTION
5 1413.—
6 “(I) IN GENERAL.—Each State
7 establishing alternative monitoring re-
8 quirements under this subparagraph
9 shall submit the rule to the Adrninis-
10 trator as provided in section
11 1413(b)(1). Any requirements for a
12 State to provide information support-
13 ing a submission shall be defined only
14 in consultation with the States, and
15 shall address only such information as
16 is necessary to make a decision to ap-
17 prove or disapprove an alternative
18 monitoring rule in accordance with
19 the following sentence. The Adminis-
20 trator shall approve an alternative
21 monitoring rule submitted under this
22 clause for the purposes of section
23 1413, unless the Administrator deter-
24 mines in writing that the State rule
25 for alternative monitoring does not
.S 1318 RS
-------
120
1 ensure compliance with, and enforce-
2 ment of, the national primary drink-
3 ing water regulation for the contami-
4 nant or contaminants to which the
5 rule applies.
6 “(H) ExcEPTI0Ns.—The re-
7 quirements of section 1413(a)(1) that
8 a rule be no less stringent than the
9 national primary drinking water regu-
10 lation for the contaminant or contami-
11 nants to which the rule applies shall
12 not apply to the decision of the Ad-
13 ministrator to approve or disapprove a
14 rule submitted under this clause. Not-
15 withstanding the requirements of see-
16 tion 1413(b)(2), the Administrator
17 shall approve or disapprove a rule
18 submitted under this clause within
19 180 days of submission. In the ab-
20 sence of a determination to disapprove
21 a rule made by the Administrator
22 within 180 days, the rule shall be
23 deemed to be approved under section
24 1413(b)(2).
.8 1316 ES
-------
121.
1 “(ffl) ADDITIONAL CONSIDER-
2 ATIONS.—A State shall be considered
3 to have primary enfor-cement author.-
4 ity with regard to an alternative mon-’
5 itonng rule, and the rule shall be ef-.
6 fective, on a date (determined by the
7 State) any time on or after submis-
8 sion of the rule, consistent with sec-
9 tion 1413(c). A decision by the Ad-
10 ministrator to disapprove an alter-
11 native monitoring rule under section
12 1413 or to withdraw the authority of
13 the State to carry out the rule under
14 clause (iv) may not be the basis for
15 withdrawing primary enforcement re-
16 sponsibility for a national primary
17 drinking water regulation or regula-
18 tions from the State under section
19 1413.
20 “(iv) OVERSIGHT BY THE ADMINIS-
21 TRATOR.—The Administrator shall review,
22 not less often than every 5 years, any a1’
23 ternative monitoring requirements estab-
24 lished by a State under clause (i) to deter-
25 mine whether the requirements are ade-
.8 1316 R8
-------
122
1 quate to ensure compliance with, and en-
2 forcement of, national primary drinking
3 water regulations. If the Administrator de-
4 termines that the alternative monitoring
5 requirements of a State are inadequate
6 with respect to a contaminant, and after
7 providing the State with an opportunity to
8 respond to the determination of the Ad-
9 ministrator and to correct any inadequa-
10 cies, the Administrator may withdraw the
11 authority of the State to carry out the al-
12 ternative monitoring requirements with re-
13 spect to the contaminant. If the Adminis-
14 trator withdraws the authority, the mon-
15 itoring requirements contained in the na-
16 tional primary drinking water regulation
17 for the contaminant shall apply to public
18 water systems in the State.
19 “(v) NONPRIMACY STATES.—The Gov-
20 ernor of any State that does not have pri-
21 mary enforcement responsibility under sec-
22 tion 1413 on the date of enactment of this
23 clause may submit to the Administrator a
24 request that the Administrator modify the
25 monitoring requirements established by the
.S 1316 RS
-------
123
1 Administrator and applicable to public
2 water systems in that State. After ‘con-
3 sultation with the Governor, the Adminis-
4 trator shall modify the requirements for
5 public water systems in that State if the
6 request of the Governor is in accordance
7 with each of the requirements of this sub-
8 paragraph that apply to alternative mon-
9 itoring requirements established by States
10 that have primary enforcement responsibil-
11 ity. A decision by the Administrator to ap-
12 prove a request under this clause shall be
13 for a period of 3 years and may subse-
14 quently be extended for periods of 5 years.
15 “(vi) GumANcE.—The Administrator
16 shall issue guidance in consultation with
17 the States that States may use to develop
18 State-established requirements pursuant to
19 this subparagraph and subparagraph (E).
20 The guidance shall identify options for al-
21 ternative monitoring designs that meet the
22 criteria identified in clause (i) and the re-
23 quirements of clause (ii).”.
24 (3) Si i u L SYSTEM MONIITORING.—Section
25 1445(a)(1) (42 U.S.C. 300j—4(a)(1)) (as amended
‘S 1316 RS
-------
124
1 by paragraph (2)) is further amended by adding at
2 the end the following:
3 “(E) SMALL SYSTEM MONITORING.—The
4 Administrator or a State that has primary en-
5 forcement responsibility under section 1413
6 may modify the monitoring requirements for
7 any contaminant, other than a microbial con-
8 taminant or an indicator of a microbial con-
9 taminant, a contaminant regulated on the basis
10 of an acute health effect, or a contaminant
11 formed in the treatment process or in the dis-
12 tribution system, to provide that any public
13 water system that serves a popniation of 10,000
14 or fewer shall not be required to conduct addi-
15 tional quarterly monitoring during any 3-year
16 period for a specific contaminant if monitoring
17 conducted at the beginning of the period for the
18 contaminant fails to detect the presence of the
19 contaminant in the water supplied by the public
20 water system, and the Administrator or the
21 State determines that the contaminant is un-
\
22 likely to be detected by further monitoring in
23 the period.”.
.S 1316 ES
-------
125
1 (b) UNREGULATED CoNT A MIN j ’ Ts.—Section
2 1445(a) (42 U.S.C. 300j—4(a)) is amended by striking
3 paragraphs (2) through (8) and inserting the following:
4 “(2) M0MT0RING PROGRAM FOR UNREGU-
5 bATED CONTAMINANTS.—
6 “(A) ESTABLISHMENT.—The Adniinis-
7 trator shall promulgate regulations establishing
8 the criteria for a monitoring program for un-
9 regulated contaminants. The regulations shall
10 require monitoring of drinking water supplied
11 by public water systems and shall vary the fre-
12 quency and schedule for monitoring require-
13 ments for systems based on the number of per-
14 Sons served by the system, the source of supply,
15 and the contaminants likely to be found.
16 “(B) MONITORING PROGRAM FOR CERTAIN
17 UNREGULATED CONTAMINANTS.—
18 “(i) INITIAL LIST.—Not later than 3
19 years after the date of enactment of the
20 Safe Drinking Water Amendments of 1995
21 and every 5 years thereafter, the Adminis-
22 trator shall issue a list pursuant to sub-
23 paragraph (A) of not more than 20 un-
24 regulated contaminants to be monitored by
25 public water systems and to be included in
.8 1316 RS
-------
126
1 the national drinking water occurrence
2 data base maintained pursuant to para-
3 graph (3).
4 “(u) GOVERNORS’ PETITION.—The
5 Administrator shall include among the list
6 of contaminants for which monitoring is
7 required under this paragraph each con-
8 taminant recommended in a petition signed
9 by the Governor of each of 7 or more
10 States, unless the Administrator deter-
11 mines that the action would prevent the
12 listing of other contaminants of a higher
13 public health concern.
14 “(C) MONITORING BY LARGE SYSTEMS.—A
15 public water system that serves a population of
16 more than 10,000 shall conduct monitoring for
17 all contaminants listed under subparagraph
18 (B).
19 “(D) MONITORING PLAN FOR SMALL AND
20 MEDIUM SYSTEMS.—
21 “(i) IN GENERAL.—Based on the reg-
22 ulations promulgated by the Administrator,
23 each State shall develop a representative
24 monitoring plan to assess the occurrence of
25 unregulated contaminants in public water
.8 1316 RS
-------
127
1 systems that serve a population of 10,000
2 or fewer. The plan shall require monitoring
3 for systems representative of different
4 sizes, types, and geographic locations in
5 the State.
6 “(ii) GRANTS FOR SMALL SYSTEM
7 COSTS.—From funds reserved under sec-
8 tion 1478(c), the Administrator shall pay
9 the reasonable cost of such testing and lab-
10 oratory analysis as are necessary to carry
11 out monitoring under the plan.
12 “(E) MONITORING RESULTS.—Each public
13 water system that conducts monitoring of un-
14 regulated contaminants pursuant to this para-
15 graph shall provide the results of the monitor-
16 ing to the primary enforcement authority for
17 the system.
18 “(F) WAIVER OF MONITORING REQUIRE-
19 MENT.—The Administrator shall waive the re-
20 quirement for monitoring for a contaminant
21 under this paragraph in a State, if the State
22 demonstrates that the criteria for listing the
23 contaminant do not apply in that State.
24 “(G) ANALYTICAL METHODS.—The State
25 m .y use screening methods approved by the
.5 1810 US
-------
128
1 Administrator under subsection (h) in lieu of
2 monitoring for particular contaminants under
3 this paragraph.
4 “(H) AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIA-
5 TIONS.—There are authorized to be appro-
6 priated to carry out this paragraph
7 $10,000,000 for each of fiscal years 1995
8 through 2003.”.
9 (c) NATIONAL DRINKING WATER OCCURRENCE
10 DATABASE.—Section 1445(a) (42 U.S.C. 300j—4(a)) (as
11 amended by subsection (b)) is further amended by adding
12 at the end the following:
13 “(3) NATIONAL DRINKING WATER OCCURRENCE
14 DATABASE.—
15 “(A) IN GENERAL.—Not later than 3 years
16 after the date of enactment of the Safe Drink-
17 ing Water Act Amendments of 1995, the Ad-
18 mir istrator shall assemble and maintain a na-
19 tional drinking water occurrence data base,
20 using information on the occurrence of both
21 regulated and unregulated contaminants in
22 public water systems obtained under paragraph
23 (2) and reliable information from other public
24 and private sources.
.S 1316 R8
-------
129
1 “(B) USE.—The data shall be used by the
2 Administrator in making determinations under
3 section 1412(b)(1) with respect to the occur-
4 rence of a contaminant in drinking water at a
5 level of public health concern.
6 “(C) PUBLIC RECOMMENDATIONS.—The
7 Administrator shall periodically solicit rec-
8 ommendations from the appropriate officials of
9 the National Academy of Sciences and the
10 States, and any person may submit rec-
11 ommendations to the Administrator, with re-
12 spect to contaminants that should be included
13 in the national drinking water occurrence data
14 base, including recommendations with respect
15 to additional unregulated contaminants that
16 should be listed under paragraph (2). Any rec-
17 ommendation submitted under this clause shall
18 be accompanied by reasonable documentation
19 that—
20 “(i) the contaminant occurs or is like-
21 ly to occur in drinking water; and
22 “(ii) the contaminant poses a risk to
23 public health.
S1316RS 5
-------
130
1 “(D) PUBLIC AVAILABILITY.—The infor-
2 mation from the data base shall be available to
3 the public in readily accessible form.
4 “(E) REGULATED CONTAMINANTS.—Wjth
5 respect to each contaminant for which a na-
6 tional primary drinking water regulation has
7 been established, the data base shall include in-
8 formation on the detection of the contaminant
9 at a quantifiable level in public water systems
10 (including detection of the contaminant at levels
11 not constituting a violation of the maximum
12 contaminant level for the contaminant).
13 “(F) UNREGULATED CONTAMINANTS.—
14 With respect to contaminants for which a na-
15 tional primary drinking water regulation has
16 not been established, the data base shall in-
17 dude—
18 “(i) monitoring information collected
19 by public water systems that serve a popu-
20 lation of more than 10,000, as required by
21 the Administrator under paragraph (2);
22 “(ii) monitoring information collected
23 by the States from a representative sam-
24 pling of public water systems that serve a
25 population of 10,000 or fewer; and
•S 1316 RS
-------
131
1 “(iii) other reliable and appropriate
2 monitoring information on the occurrence
3 of the contaminants in public water sys-
4 tems that is available to the Adminis-
5 trator.”.
6 (d) INFORMATION.—
7 (1) MoNITORING AND TESTING AUTHORITY.—
8 Subparagraph (A) of section 1445(a)(1) (42 U.S.C.
9 300j—4(a)(1)) (as designated by subsection
10 (a)(1)(A)) is amended—
11 (A) by inserting “by accepted methods”
12 after “conduct such monitoring”; and
13 (B) by striking “such information as the
14 Administrator may reasonably require” and all
15 that follows through the period at the end and
16 inserting the following: “such information as
17 the Administrator may reasonably require—
18 “(i) to assist the Administrator in establishing
19 regulations under this title or to assist the Adminis-
20 trator in determining, on a case-by-case basis,
21 whether the person has acted or is acting in compli-
22 ance with this title; and
23 “(ii) by regulation to assist the Administrator
24 in determining compliance with national primary
25 drinking water regulations promulgated under see-
.S 1316 RS
-------
132
1 tion 1412 or in administering any program of finan-
2 cial assistance under this title.
3 If the Administrator is requiring monitoring for purposes
4 of testing new or alternative methods, the Administrator
5 may require the use of other than accepted methods.”.
6 (2) SCREENING METHODS.—Section 1445 (42
7 U.S.C. 300j—4) (as amended by section 12(c)) is fur-
8 ther amended by adding at the end the following:
9 “(h) SCREENING METHODS.—The Administrator
10 shall review new analytical methods to screen for regulated
11 contaminants and may approve such methods as are more
12 accurate or cost-effective than established reference meth-
13 ods for use in compliance monitoring.”.
14 SEC. 20. PUBLIC NOTIFICATION.
15 Section 1414 (42 U.S.C. 300g—3) is amended by
16 striking subsection (c) and inserting the following:
17 “(c) NOTICE TO PERSONS SERVED.—
18 “(1) IN GENERAL.—Each owner or operator of
19 a public water system shall give notice to the per-
20 sons served by the system—
21 “(A) of any failure on the part of the pub-
22 lie water system to—
23 “(i) comply with an applicable maxi-
24 mum contaminant level or treatment tech-
25 nique requirement of, or a testing proce-
.S 1316 RS
-------
133
1 dure prescribed by, a national primary
2 drinking water regulation; or
3 “(ii) perform monitoring required by
4 section 1445(a);
5 “(B) if the public water system is subject
6 to a variance granted under section
7 1415(a)(1)(A), 1415(a)(2), or 1415(e) for an
8 inability to meet a maximum contaminant level
9 requirement or is subject to an exemption
10 granted under section 1416, of—
11 “(i) the existence of the variance or
12 exemption; and
13 “(ii) any failure to comply with the
14 requirements of any schedule prescribed
15 pursuant to the variance or exemption; and
16 “(C) of the concentration level of any Un-
17 regulated contaminant for which the Adminis-
18 trator has required public notice pursuant to
19 paragraph (2)(E).
20 “(2) FoRM, MANNER, AND FREQUENCY OF NO-
21 TICE.—
22 “(A) IN GENERAL.—The - Administrator
23 shall, by regulation, and after consultation with
24 the States, prescribe the manner, frequency,
S1316RS 6
-------
134
1 form, and content for giving notice under this
2 subsection. The regulations shall—
3 “(i) provide for different frequencies
4 of notice based on the differences between
5 violations that are intermittent or infre-
6 quent and violations that are continuous or
7 frequent; and
8 “(ii) take into account the seriousness
9 of any potential adverse health effects that
10 may be involved.
11 “(B) STATE REQULREMENTS.—
12 “(i) IN GENERAL.—A State may, by
13 rule, establish alternative notification re-
14 quirements—
15 “(I) with respect to the form and
16 content of notice given under and in a
17 manner in accordance with subpara-
18 graph (C); and
19 “(II) with respect to the form
20 and content of notice given under sub-
21 paragraph (D).
22 “(ii) C0NTENTs.—The alternative re-
23 quirements shall provide the same type and
24 amount of information as required pursu-
.8 1818 0$
-------
135
1 ant to this subsection aiid regulations is-
2 sued under subparagraph (A).
3 “(iii) RELATIONSHIP TO SECTION
4 1413.—Nothing in this subparagraph shall
5 be construed or applied to modify the re-
6 quirements of section 1413.
7 “(C) VIoLATIoNs WITH POTENTIAL TO
8 HAVE SERIOUS ADVERSE EFFECTS ON HUMAN
9 HEALTH .—Regulations issued under subpara-
10 graph (A) shall specify notification procedures
11 for each violation by a public water system that
12 has the potential to have serious adverse effects
13 on human health as a result of short-term expo-
14 sure. Each notice of violation provided under
15 this subparagraph shall—
16 “(i) be distributed as soon as prac-
17 ticable after the occurrence of the viola-
18 tion, but not later than 24 hours after the
19 occurrence of the violation;
20 “(ii) provide a clear and readily un-
21 derstandable explanation of—
22 “(I) the violation;
23 “(II) the potential adverse effects
24 on human health;
.8 1816 R8
-------
136
1 “(ifi) the steps that the public
2 water system is taking to correct the
3 violation; and
4 “(rV) the necessity of seeking a!-
5 ternative water supplies until the vio-
6 lation is corrected;
7 “(iii) be provided to the Administrator
8 or the head of the State agency that has
9 primary enforcement responsibility under
10 section 1413 as soon as practicable, but
11 not later than 24 hours after the occur-
12 rence of the violation; and
13 “(iv) as required by the State agency
14 in general regulations of the State agency,
15 or on a case-by-case basis after the con-
16 sultation referred to in clause (iii), consid-
17 ermg the health risks involved—
18 “(I) be provided to appropriate
19 broadcast media;
20 “(II) be prominently published in
21 a newspaper of general circulation
22 serving the area not later than 1 day
23 after distribution of a notice pursuant
24 to clause (i) or the date of publication
25 of the next issue of the newspaper; or
.S 1316 RS
-------
137
1 “(ifi) be provided by posting or
2 door-to-door notification in lieu of no-
3 tiflcation by means of broadcast
4 media or newspaper.
5 “(D) WRITTEN NOTICE.—
6 “(i) IN GENERAL.—Regulations issued
7 under subparagraph (A) shall specify noti-
8 fication procedures for violations other
9 than the violations covered by subpara-
10 grap h (C). The procedures shall specify
11 that a public water system shall provide
12 written notice to each person served by the
13 system by notice—
14 “(I) in the first bifi (if any) pre-
15 pared after the date of occurrence of
16 the violation;
17 “(II) in an annual report issued
18 not later than 1 year after the date of
19 occurrence of the violation; or
20 “(ifi) by mail or direct delivery
21 as soon as practicable, but not later
22 than 1 year after the date of occur-
23 rence of the violation.
24 “(ii) FORM AND MANNER OF NO-
25 TICE.—The Administrator shall prescribe
.8 1318 RS
-------
138
1 the form and manner of the notice to pro-
2 vide a clear and readily understandable ex-
3 planation of—
4 “(I) the violation;
5 “(II) any potential adverse health
6 effects; and
7 “(ifi) the steps that the system
8 is taking to seek alternative water
9 supplies, if any, until the violation is
10 corrected.
11 “(E) UNREGULATED CONTAMINANTS.—
12 The Administrator may require the owner or
13 operator of a public water system to give notice
14 to the persons served by the system of the con-
15 centration levels of an unregulated contaminant
16 required to be monitored under section 1445(a).
17 “(3) REPORTS.—
18 “(A) ANNUAL REPORT BY STATE.—
19 “(i) IN GENERAL.—Not later than
20 January 1, 1997, and annually thereafter,
21 each State that has primary enforcement
22 responsibility under section 1413 shall pre-
23 pare, make readily available to the public,
24 and submit to the Administrator an annual
25 report on violations of national primary
.S 1816 ES
-------
139
1 drinking water regulations by public water
2 systems in the State, including violations
3 with respect to—
4 “(I) maximum contaminant 1ev-
5 els;
6 “(II) treatment requirements;
7 “(ifi) variances and exemptions;
8 and
9 “( IV) monitoring requirements
10 determined to be significant by the
11 Administrator after consultation with
12 the States.
13 “(ii) DISTRIBUTI0N.—The State shall
14 publish and distribute summaries of the re-
15 port and indicate where the full report is
16 available for review.
17 “(B) ANNUAL REPORT BY ADMINIS-
18 TRATOR.—Not later than July 1, 1997, and an-
19 nually thereafter, the Administrator shall pre-
20 pare and make available to the public an annual
21 report summarizing and evaluating reports sub-
22 mitted by States pursuant to subparagraph (A)
23 and notices submitted by public water systems
24 serving Indian Tribes provided to the Adminis-
25 trator pursuant to subparagraph (C) or (D) of
.8 1316 RS
-------
140
1 paragraph (2) and making recommendations
2 concerning the resources needed to improve
3 compliance with this title. The report shall in-
4 elude information about public water system
5 compliance on Indian reservations and about
6 enforcement activities undertaken and financial
7 assistance provided by the Administrator on In-
8 than reservations, and shall make specific rec-
9 ommendations concerning the resources needed
10 to improve compliance with this title on Indian
11 reservations.”.
12 SEC. 21. ENFORCEMENT; JUDICIAL REVIEW;
13 (a) IN GE it&L .—Section 1414 (42 U.S.C. 300g—
14 3) is amended—
15 (1) in subsection (a)—
16 (A) in paragraph (1)—
17 (i) in subparagraph (A)—
18 (I) in clause (i), by striking “any
19 national primary drinking water regu-
20 lation in effect under section 1412”
21 and inserting “any applicable require-
22 ment”; and
23 (II) by striking “with such regu-
24 lation or requirement” and inserting
25 “with the requirement”; and
‘S 1316 RS
-------
141
1 (ii) in subparagraph (B), by striking
2 “regulation or” and inserting “applicable”;
3 and
4 (B) by striking paragraph (2) and insert-
5 ing the following:
6 “(2) ENFORCEMENT IN NONPRIMACY
7 STATES.—
8 “(A) IN GENERAL.—If, on the basis of in-
9 formation available to the Administrator, the
10 Administrator finds, with respect to a period in
11 which a State does not have primary enforce-
12 ment responsibility for public water systems,
13 that a public water system in the State—
14 “(i) for which a variance under sec-
15 tion 1415 or an exemption under section
16 1416 is not in effect, does not comply with
17 any applicable requirement; or
18 “(ii) for which a variance under sec-
19 tion 1415 or an exemption under section
20 1416 is in effect, does not comply with any
21 schedule or other requirement imposed
22 pursuant to the variance or exemption;
23 the Administrator shall issue an order under
24 subsection (g) requiring the public water system
.8 1316 R8
-------
142
1 to comply with the requirement, or commence a
2 civil action under subsection (b).
3 “(B) N0TIcE.—If the Administrator takes
4 any action pursuant to this paragraph, the Ad-
5 ministrator shall notify an appropriate local
6 elected official, if any, with jurisdiction over the
7 public water system of the action prior to the
8 time that the action is taken.”;
9 (2) in the first sentence of subsection (b), by
10 striking “a national primary drinking water regula-
11 tion” and inserting “any applicable requirement”;
12 (3) in subsection (g)—
13 (A) in paragraph (1), by striking “regula-
14 tion, schedule, or other” each place it appears
15 and inserting “applicable”;
16 (B) in paragraph (2)—
17 (i) in the first sentence—
18 (I) by striking “effect until after
19 notice and opportunity for public
20 hearing and,” and inserting “effect,”;
21 and
22 (II) by striking “proposed order”
23 and inserting “order”; and
24 (ii) in the second sentence, by striking
25 “proposed to be”; and
.3 1318 ES
-------
143
1 (C) in paragraph (3)—
2 (i) by striking subparagraph (B) and
3 inserting the following:
4 “(B) EFFECT OF PENALTY AMOUNTS.—In
5 a case in which a civil penalty sought by the
6 Administrator under this paragraph does not
7 exceed $5,000, the penalty shall be assessed by
8 the Administrator after notice and opportunity
9 for a public hearing (unless the person against
10 whom the penalty is assessed requests a hearing
11 on the record in accordance with section 554 of
12 title 5, United States Code). In a case in which
13 a civil penalty sought by the Administrator
14 under this paragraph exceeds $5,000, but does
15 not exceed $25,000, the penalty shall be as-
16 sessed by the Administrator after notice and
17 opportunity for a hearing on the record in ac-
18 cordance with section 554 of title 5, United
19 States Code.”; and
20 (ii) in subparagraph (C), by striking
21 “paragraph exceeds $5,000” and inserting
22 “subsection for a violation of an applicable
23 requirement exceeds $25,000”; and
24 (4) by adding at the end the following:
25 “(h) CONSOLIDATION INCENTWE.—
.8 1316 RS
-------
144
1 “(1) IN GENERAL.—An owner or operator of a
2 public water system may submit to the State in
3 which the system is located (if the State has primary
4 enforcement responsibility under section 1413) or to
5 the Administrator (if the State does not have pri-
6 mary enforcement responsibility) a plan (including
7 specific measures and schedules) for—
8 “(A) the physical consolidation of the sys-
9 tern with 1 or more other systems;
10 “(B) the consolidation of significant man-
11 agement and administrative functions of the
12 system with 1 or more other systems; or
13 “(C) the transfer of ownership of the sys-
14 tern that may reasonably be expected to im-
15 prove drinking water quality.
16 “(2) CONSEQUENCES OF APPROVAL.—If the
17 State or the Administrator approves a plan pursuant
18 to paragraph (1), no enforcement action shall be
19 taken pursuant to this part with respect to a specific
20 violation identified in the approved plan prior to the
21 date that is the earlier of the date on which consoli-
22 dation is completed according to the plan or the date
23 that is 2 years after the plan is approved.
24 “(i) DEFINrrION OF APPLICABLE REQUiREMENT.—
25 In this section, the term ‘applicable requirement’ means—
.S 1316 RS
-------
145
1 “(1) a requirement of section 1412, 1414,
2 1415, 1416, 1417, 1441,4442, 1445, 1147, 1463 ,
3 1464 , e 1471 ; or 1445;
4 “(2) a regulation promulgated pursuant to a
5 section referred to in paragraph (1);
6 “(3) a schedule or requirement imposed pursu-
7 ant to a section referred to in paragraph (1); and
8 “(4) a requirement of, or permit issued under,
9 an applicable State program for which the Adminis-
10 trator has made a determination that the require-
11 ments of section 1413 have been satisfied, or an ap-
12 plicable State program approved pursuant to this
13 part.”.
14 (b) STATE AUTHORITY FOR ADMINISTRATIVE PEN-
15 ALTIES.—Section 1413(a) (42 U.S.C. 300g—2(a)) is
16 amended—
17 (1) by striking “and” at the end of paragraph
18 (4);
19 (2) by striking the period at the end of para-
20 graph (5) and inserting “; and”; and
21 (3) by adding at the end the following:
22 “(6) has adopted authority for administrative
23 penalties (unless the constitution of the State pro-
24 hibits the adoption of the authority) in a maximum
25 amount—
- .8 iaie ES
-------
146
1 “(A) in the case of a system serving a pop-
2 ulation of more than 10,000, that is not less
3 than $1,000 per day per violation; and
4 “(B) in the case of any other system, that
5 is adequate to ensure compliance (as deter-
6 mined by the State);
7 except that a State may establish a maximum limita-
8 tion on the total amount of administrative penalties
9 that may be imposed on a public water system per
10 violation.”.
11 (c) JUDICIAL REvu w.—Section 1448(a) (42 U.S.C.
12 300j—7(a)) is amended—
13 (1) in paragraph (2) of the first sentence, by
14 inserting “final” after “any other”;
15 (2) in the second sentence, by striking “or issu-
16 ance of the order” and inserting “or any other final
17 Agency action”; and
18 (3) by adding at the end the following “In any
19 petition concerning the assessment of a civil penalty
20 pursuant to section 1414(g)(3)(B), the petitioner
21 shall simultaneously send a copy of the complaint by
22 certified mail to the Administrator and the Attorney
23 General. The court shall set aside et and remand
24 the penalty order if the court finds that there is not
25 substantial evidence in the record to support the
.S 1318 RS
-------
147
1 finding of a violation or that the assessment of the
2 penalty by the Administrator constitutes an abuse of
3 discretion.”.
4 SEC. 22. FEDERAL AGENCIES.
5 (a) IN GENE1 &i .—Subsections (a) and (b) of section
6 1447 (42 U.S.C. 300j—6) are amended to read as follows:
7 “(a) COMPLIANCE.—
8 “(1) IN GENERAL.—Each Federal agency shall
9 be subject to, and comply with, all Federal, State,
10 interstate, and local substantive and procedural re-
11 quirements, administrative authorities, and process
12 and sanctions concerning the provision of safe drink-
13 ing water or underground injection in the same
14 manner, and to the same extent, as any nongovern-
15 mental entity is subject to, and shall comply with,
16 the requirements, authorities, and process and sane-
17 tions.
18 “(2) ADMINISTRATWE ORDERS AND PEN-
19 ALTIES.—The Federal, State, interstate, and local
20 substantive and procedural requirements, adminis-
21 trative authorities, and process and sanctions re-
22 ferred to in paragraph (1) include all administrative
23 orders and all civil and administrative penalties or
24 fInes, regardless of whether the penalties or fines are
•S 1316 RS
-------
148
1 punitive or coercive in nature or are imposed for iso-
2 lated, intermittent, or continuing violations.
3 “(3) LIMITED WAIVER OF SOVEREIGN IMMU-
4 NITY.—The United States expressly waives any im-
5 munity otherwise applicable to the United States
6 with respect to any requirement, administrative au-
7 thority, or process or sanction referred to in para-
8 graph (2) (including any injunctive relief, adminis-
9 trative order, or civil or administrative penalty or
10 fine referred to in paragraph (2), or reasonable serv-
11 ice charge). The reasonable service charge referred
12 to in the preceding sentence includes—
13 “(A) a fee or charge assessed in connection
14 with the processing, issuance, renewal, or
15 amendment of a permit, variance, or exemption,
16 review of a plan, study, or other document, or
17 inspection or monitoring of a facility; and
18 “(B) any other nondiscriminatory charge
19 that is assessed in connection with a Federal,
20 State, interstate, or local safe drinking water
21 regulatory program.
22 “(4) CIVIL PENALTIES.—No agent, employee,
23 or officer of the United States shall be personally
24 liable for any civil penalty under this subsection with
.S 1316 RS
-------
149
1 respect to any act or omission within the scope of
2 the official duties of the agent, employee, or officer.
3 “(5) CRn nNAL SANCTIONS.—An agent, em-
4 ployee, or officer of the United States may be sub-
5 ject to a criminal sanction under a State, interstate,
6 or local law concerning the provision of drinking
7 water or underground injection. No department,
8 agency, or instrumentality of the executive, legisla-
9 tive, or judicial branch of the Federal Government
10 shall be subject to a sanction referred to in the pre-
11 ceding sentence.
12 “(b) WAIVER OF COMPLIANCE.—
13 “(1) IN GENERAL.—The President may waive
14 compliance with subsection (a) by any department,
15 agency, or instrumentality in the executive branch if
16 the President determines waiving compliance with
17 such subsection to be in the paramount interest of
18 the United States.
19 “(2) WAIVERS DUE TO LACK OF APPROPRLA-
20 TIONS.—No waiver described in paragraph (1) shall
21 be granted due to the lack of an appropriation un-
22 less the President has specifically requested the ap-
23 propriation as part of the budgetary process and
24 Congress has failed to ma1 e available the requested
25 appropriation.
‘S 1316 RS
-------
150
1 “(3) PERIOD OF WAWER.—A waiver under this
2 subsection shall be for a period of not to exceed 1
3 year, but an additional waiver may be granted for a
4 period of not to exceed 1 year on the termination of
5 a waiver if the President reviews the waiver and
6 makes a determination that it is in the paramount
7 interest of the United States to grant an additional
8 waiver.
9 “(4) REPORT.—Not later than January 31 of
10 each year, the President shall report to Congress on
11 each waiver granted pursuant to this subsection dur-
12 ing the preceding calendar year, together with the
13 reason for granting the waiver.”.
14 (b) ADMIMSTRATIVE PENALTY ORDERS.—Section
15 1447 (42 U.S.C. 300j- .6) is amended by adding at the end
16 the following:
17 “(d) ADMINISTRATIVE PENALTY ORDERS.—
18 “(1) IN GENERAL.—If the Administrator finds
19 that a Federal agency has violated an applicable re-
20 quirement under this title, the Administrator may
21 issue a penalty order assessing a penalty against the
22 Federal agency.
23 “(2) PENALTIES.—The Administrator may,
24 after notice to the agency, assess a civil penalty
.S 1816 RB
-------
151
1 against the agency in an amount not to exceed
2 $25,000 per day per violation.
3 “(3) PROCEDURE.—Before an administrative
4 penalty order issued under this subsection becomes
5 final, the Administrator shall provide the agency an
6 opportunity to confer with the Administrator and
7 shall provide the agency notice and an opportunity
8 for a hearing on the record in accordance with chap-
9 ters 5 and 7 of title 5, United States Code.
10 “(4) PUBLIC REVIEW.—
11 “(A) IN GENERAL.—Any interested person
12 may obtain review of an administrative penalty
13 order issued under this subsection. The review
14 may be obtained in the United States District
15 Court for the District of Columbia or in the
16 United States District Court for the district in
17 which the violation is alleged to have occurred
18 by the filing of a complaint with the court with-
19 in the 30-day period beginning on the date the
20 penalty order becomes final. The person filing
21 the complaint shall simultaneously send a copy
22 of the complaint by certified mail to the Admin-
23 istrator and the Attorney General.
.S 1316 BS
-------
152
1 “(B) RECORD.—The Administrator shall
2 promptly ifie in the court a certified copy of the
3 record on which the order was issued.
4 “(C) STANDARD OF REVIEW.—The court
5 shall not set aside or remand the order unless
6 the court finds that there is not substantial evi-
7 dence in the record, taken as a whole, to sup-
8 port the finding of a violation or that the as-
9 sessment of the penalty by the Administrator
10 constitutes an abuse of discretion.
11 “(D) -PROHIBITION ON ADDITIONAL PEN-
12 ALTIES.—The court may not impose an addi-
13 tional civil penalty for a violation that is subject
14 to the order unless the court finds that the as-
15 sessment constitutes an abuse of discretion by
16 the Administrator.”.
17 (c) CITIZEN ENFORCEMENT.—The first sentence of
18 section 1449(a) (42 U.S.C. 300j—8(a)) is amended—
19 (1) in paragraph (1), by striking “, or” and in-
20 serting a semicolon;
21 (2) in paragraph (2), by striking the period at
22 the end and inserting “; or”; and
23 (3) by adding at the end the following
24 “(3) for the collection of a penalty (and associ-
25 ated costs and interest) against any Federal agency
.8 1316 ES
-------
153
1 that fails, by the date that is 1 year after the effec-
2 tive date of a final order to pay a penalty assessed
3 by the Administrator under section 1447(d), to pay
4 the penalty.”.
5 (d) WASHINGTON AQUEDucT.—Section 1447 (42
6 U.S.C. 300j—6) (as amended by subsection (b)) is further
7 amended by adding at the end the following:
8 “(e) WASHINGTON AQUEDUCT.—ThC Washington
9 Aqueduct Authority, the Army Corps of Engineers, and
10 the Secretary of the Army shall not pass the cost of any
11 penalty assessed under this title on to any customer, user,
12 or other purchaser of drinking water from the Washington
13 Aqueduct system, including finished water from the
14 Dalecarlia or McMillan treatment plant.”.
15 SEC. 23. RESEARCH.
16 Section 1442 (42 U.S.C. 300j—1) (as amended by sec-
17 tion 12(d)) is further amended—
18 (1) by redesignating paragraph (3) of sub-
19 section (b) as paragraph (3) of subsection (d) and
20 moving such paragraph to appear after paragraph
21 (2) of subsection (d);
22 (2) by striking subsection (b) (as so amended);
23 (3) by redesignating subparagraph (B) of sub-
24 section (a)(2) as subsection (b) and moving such
25 subsection to appear after subsection (a);
.s 1316 RS
-------
154
1 (4) in subsection (a)—
2 (A) by striking paragraph (2) (as so
3 amended) and inserting the following:
4 “(2) INFORMATION AND RESEARCH FACILI-
5 TIES.—In cariying out this title, the Administrator
6 is authorized to—
7 “(A) collect and make available informa-
8 tion pertaining to research, investigations, and
9 demonstrations with respect to providing a de-
10 pendably safe supply of drinking water, to-
11 gether with appropriate recommendations in
12 connection with the information; and
13 “(B) make available research facilities of
14 the Agency to appropriate public authorities, in-
15 stitutions, and individuals engaged in studies
16 and research relating to this title.”;
17 (B) by striking paragraph (3);
18 (C) by redesignating paragraph (11) as
19 paragraph (3) and moving such paragraph to
20 appear before paragraph (4); and
21 (D) by adding at the end the following:
22 “(11) AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS.—
23 There are authorized to be appropriated to the Ad-
24 ministrator to carry out research authorized by this
25 section $25,000,000 for each of fiscal years 1994
.8 1316 R8
-------
155
1 through 2003, of which $4,000,000 shall be avail-
2 able for each fiscal year for research on the health
3 effects of arsenic in drinking water.”;
4 (5) in subsection (b) (as so amended)—
5 (A) by striking “subparagraph” each place
6 it appears and inserting “subsection”; and
7 (B) by adding at the end the following:
8 “There are authorized to be appropriated to
9 carry out this subsection $8,000,000 for each of
10 fiscal years 1995 through 2003.”;
11 (6) in the first sentence of subsection (c), by
12 striking “eighteen months after the date of enact-
13 ment of this subsection” and inserting “2 years
14 after the date of enactment of the Safe Drinking
15 Water Act Amendments of 1995, and every 5 years
16 thereafter”;
17 (7) in subsection (d) (as amended by paragraph
18 (1))—
19 (A) in paragraph (1), by striking “, and”
20 at the end and inserting a semicolon;
21 (B) in paragraph (2), by striking the pe-
22 nod at the end and inserting a semicolon;
23 (C) in paragraph (3), by striking the pe-
24 nod at the end and inserting “; and”;
.8 1316 88
-------
156
1 (D) by inserting after paragraph (3) the
2 following:
3 “(4) develop and maintain a system for fore-
4 casting the supply of, and demand for, various pro-
5 fessional occupational categories and other occupa-
6 tional categories needed for the protection and treat-
7 ment of drinking water in each region of the United
8 States.”; and
9 (E) by adding at the end the following:
10 “There are authorized to be appropriated to
11 carry out this subsection $10,000,000 for each
12 of fiscal years 1994 through 2003.”; and
13 (8) by adding at the end the following:
14 “(i) BIoLoGIc i MECHANISMS.—In carrying out this
15 section, the Administrator shall conduct studies to—
16 “(1) understand the mechanisms by which
17 chemical contaminants are absorbed, distributed,
18 metabolized, and eliminated from the human body,
19 so as to develop more accurate physiologically based
20 models of the phenomena;
21 “(2) understand the effects of contaminants
22 and the mechanisms by which the contaminants
23 cause adverse effects (especially noncancer and in-
24 fectious effects) and the variations in the effects
25 among humans, especially subpopulations at greater
.S 1316 R8
-------
157
1 risk of adverse effects, and between test animals and
2 humans; and
3 “(3) develop new approaches to the study of
4 complex mixtures, such as mixtures found in drink-
5 ing water, especially to determine the prospects for
6 synergistic or antagonistic interactions that may af-
7 fect the shape of the dose-response relationship of
8 the individual chemicals and microbes, and to exam-
9 me noncancer endpoints and infectious diseases, and
10 susceptible individuals and subpopulations.
11 “(j) RESEARCH PRIORITIES.—TO establish long-term
12 priorities for research under this section, the Admninis-
13 trator shall develop, and periodically update, an integrated
14 risk characterization strategy for drinking water quality.
15 The strategy shall identify unmet needs, priorities for
16 study, and needed improvements in the scientific basis for
17 activities carried out under this title. The initial strategy
18 shall be made available to the public not later than 3 years
19 after the date of enactment of this subsection.
20 “(k) RESEARCH PLAN FOR HARMFUL SUBSTANCES
21 IN DRINKING WATER.—
22 “(1) DEVELOPMENT OF PLAN.—The Adrninis-
23 trator shall—
24 “(A) not later than 180 days after the date
25 of enactment of this subsection, after consulta-
.S 1318 ES
-------
158
1 tion with the Secretary of Health and Human
2 Services, the Secretary of Agriculture, and, as
3 appropriate, the heads of other Federal agen-
4 cies, develop a research plan to support the de-
5 velopment and implementation of the most cur-
6 rent version of the—
7 “(i) enhanced surface water treatment
8 rule ( announccd Fcd. Rcg. 6332
9 ( Fcbruary 4 1994 ) 59 Fed. Reg. 38832
10 (July 29, 1994));
11 “(ii) disinfectant and disinfection by-
12 products rule (Stage 2) ( announccd
13 Fcd. Rcg. 6332 ( Fcbruary 1994 ) 59
14 Fed. Reg. 38668 (July 29, 1994)); and
15 “(iii) ground water disinfection rule
16 (availability of draft summary announced
17 at 57 Fed. Reg. 33960 (July 31, 1992));
18 and
19 “(B) carry out the research plan, after
20 consultation and appropriate coordination with
21 the Secretary of Agriculture and the heads of
22 other Federal agencies.
23 “(2) CONTENTS OF PLAN.—
24 “(A) IN GENERAL.—The research plan
25 shall include, at a minimum—
.8 1316 R8
-------
159
1 “(i) an identification and character-
2 ization of new disinfection byproducts asso-
3 ciated with the use of different disinfect-
4 ants;
5 “(ii) toxicological studies and, if war-
6 ranted, epidemiological studies to deter-
7 mine what levels of exposure from dis-
8 infectants and disinfection byproducts, if
9 any, may be associated with developmental
10 and birth defects and other potential toxic
11 end points;
12 “(iii) toxicological studies and, if war-
13 ranted, epidemiological studies to quantify
14 the carcinogenic potential from exposure to
15 disinfection byproducts resulting from dif-
16 ferent disinfectants;
17 “(iv) the development of practical an-
18 alytical methods for detecting and enumer-
19 ating microbial contaminants, including
20 giardia, cryptosporidium, and viruses;
21 “(v) the development of reliable, effi-
22 cient, and economical methods to deter-
23 mine the viability of individual
24 cryptosporidium oocysts;
‘S 1316 US
-------
160
1 “(vi) the development of dose-response
2 curves for pathogens, including
3 cryptosporidium and the Norwallc virus;
4 “(vii) the development of indicators
5 that define treatment effectiveness for
6 pathogens and disinfection byproducts; and
7 “(viii) bench, pilot, and full-scale
8 studies and demonstration projects to
9 evaluate optimized conventional treatment,
10 ozone, granular activated carbon, and
11 membrane technology for controffing
12 pathogens (including cryptosporidium) and
13 disinfection byproducts.
14 “(B) RISK DEFINITION STRATEGY.—The
15 research plan shall include a strategy for deter-
16 mining the risks and estimated extent of dis-
17 ease resulting from pathogens, disinfectants,
18 and disinfection byproducts in drinking water,
19 and the costs and removal efficiencies associ-
20 ated with various control methods for patho-
21 gens, disinfectants, and disinfection byproducts.
22 “(3) IMPLEMTENTATION OF PLAN.—In carrying
23 out the research plan, the Administrator shall use
24 the most cost-effective mechanisms available, includ-
.8 1316 S
-------
161
1 ing coordination of research with, and use of match-
2 ing funds from, institutions and utilities.
3 “(4) AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS.—
4 There are authorized to be appropriated to carry out
5 this subsection $12,500,000 for each of fiscal years
6 1997 through 2003.
7 “(1) SuBPoPuI ATIONS AT GREATER RIsK.—
8 “(1) RESEARCH PLAN.—The Administrator
9 shall conduct a continuing program of peer-reviewed
10 research to identify groups within the general popu-
11 lation that may be at greater risk than the general
12 population of adverse health effects from exposure to
13 contaminants in drinking water. Not later than 1
14 year after the date of enactment of this subsection,
15 the Administrator shall develop and implement a re-
16 search plan to establish whether and to what degree
17 infants, children, pregnant women, the elderly, mdi-
18 viduals with a history of serious illness, or other sub-
19 populations that can be identified and characterized
20 are likely to experience elevated health risks, includ-
21 ing risks of cancer, from contaminants in drinking
22 water.
23 “(2) CONTENTS OF pi .—To the extent ap-
24 propriate, the research shall be—
.5 1316 ES
-------
162
1 “(A) integrated into the health effects Fe-
2 search plan carried out by the Administrator to
3 support the regulation of specific contaminants
4 under this Act; and
5 “(B) designed to identify—
6 “(i) the nature and extent of the dc-
7 vated health risks, if any;
8 “(ii) the groups likely to experience
9 the elevated health risks;
10 “(iii) biological mechanisms and other
11 factors that may contribute to elevated
12 health risks for groups within the general
13 population;
14 “(iv) the degree of variability of the
15 health risks to the groups from the health
16 risks to the general population;
17 “(v) the threshold, if any, at which
18 the elevated health risks for a specific con-
19 taminant occur; and
20 “(vi) the probability of the exposure
21 to the contaminants by the identified
22 group.
23 “(3) REPORT.—Not later than 4 years after the
24 date of enactment of this subsection and periodically
25 thereafter as new and significant information be-
.8 1316 ES
-------
163
1 comes available, the Administrator shall report to
2 Congress on the results of the research.
3 “(4) UsE OF RESEARCH.—In characterizing the
4 health effects of drinking water contaminants under
5 this Act, the Administrator shall consider all rel-
6 evant factors, including the results of research under
7 this subsection, the margin of safety for variability
8 in the general population, and sound scientific prac-
9 tices (including the 1993 and 1994 reports of the
10 National Academy of Sciences) regarding subpopula-
11 tions at greater risk for adverse health effects.”.
12 SEC. 24. DEFINiTIONS.
13 (a) IN GENERAL.—Section 1401 (42 U.S.C. 300f) is
14 amended—
15 (1)inparagraph(1)—
16 (A) in subparagraph (D), by inserting “a.c-
17 cepted methods for” before “quality control”;
18 and
19 (B) by adding at the end the following:
20 “At any time after promulgation of a regulation re-
21 ferred to in this paragraph, the Administrator may
22 add equally effective quality control and testing pro-
23 cedures by guidance published in the Federal Reg-
24 ister. The procedures shall be treated as an alter-
.8 1318 ES
-------
164
1 native for public water systems to the quality control
2 and testing procedures listed in the regulation.”;
3 (2) in paragraph (13)—
4 (A) by striking “The” and inserting “(A)
5 Except as provided in subparagraph (B), the”;
6 and
7 (B) by adding at the end the following:
8 “(B) For purposes of part G, the term ‘State’
9 means each of the 50 States and the Commonwealth
10 of Puerto Rico.”;
11 (3) in paragraph (14), by adding at the end the
12 following: “For purposes of part G, the term m-
13 cludes any Native village (as defined in section 3(c)
14 of the Alaska Native Claims Settlement Act (43
15 U.S.C. 1602(c))).”; and
16 (4) by adding at the end the following:
17 “ (15) The (15) COMMUNITY WATER STSTEM.—
18 The term ‘community water system’ means a public
19 water system that—
20 “(A) serves at least 15 service connections
21 used by year-round residents of the area served
22 by the system; or
23 “(B) regularly serves at least 25 year-
24 round residents.
.8 1316 R8
-------
165
1 “ (16) Thc (16) N0NCOMM UNITY WATER SI’S-
2 TEM.—The term ‘noncommunity water system’
3 means a public water system that is not a commu-
4 nity water system.”.
5 (b) PUBLIC WATER SYSTEM.—
6 (1) IN GENERAL.—SeCtiOn 1401(4) (42 U.s.c.
7 300f(4)) is amended—
8 (A) in the first sentence, by striking
9 “piped water for human consumption” and in-
10 serting “water for human consumption through
11 pipes or other constructed conveyances”;
12 (B) by redesignating subparagraphs (A)
13 and (B) as clauses (i) and (ii), respectively;
14 (C) by striking “(4) The” and inserting
15 the following:
16 “(4) PUBLIC WATER SYSTEM.—
17 “(A) IN GENEIL&L.—The”; and
18 (D) by adding at the end the following:
19 “(B) CONNECTIONS.—
20 “(i) RESIDENTIAL USE.—
21 “(I) IN GENERAL.—A connection
22 described in subclause (II) shall not
23 be considered to be a connection for
24 determining whether the system is a
S 1316 RS——7
-------
166
1 public water system under this title,
2 if—
3 “(a.a) the Administrator or
4 the State (in the case of a State
5 exercising primary enforcement
6 responsibility for public water
7 systems) determines that alter-
8 native water to achieve the equiv-
9 alent level of public health pro-
10 tection provided by the applicable
11 national primary drinking water
12 regulation is provided for resi-
13 dential or similar uses for drink-
14 ing and cooking; or
15 “(bb) the Administrator or
16 the State (in the case of a State
17 exercising primary enforcement
18 responsibility for public water
19 systems) determines that the
20 water provided for residential or
21 similar uses for drinking and
22 cooking is centrally treated or
23 treated at the point of entry by
24 the provider, a pass-through en-
25 tity, or the user to achieve the
.8 1818 liS
-------
167
1 equivalent level of protection pro-
2 vided by the applicable national
3 primary drinking water regula-
4 tions.
5 “(II) C0NNECTIONS.—A connec-
6 tion referred to in this subelause is a
7 connection to a water system that
8 conveys water by a means other than
9 a pipe principally for 1 or more pur-
10 poses other than residential use
11 (which other purposes include irriga-
12 tion, stock watering, industrial use, or
13 municipal source water prior to treat-
14 ment)—
15 “(aa) for a residential use
16 (consisting of drinking, bathing,
17 cooking, or other similar use); or
18 “(bb) to a facility for a use
19 similar to a residential use.
20 “(ii) IRRIGATION DISTRICTS.—Afl irri-
21 gation district in existence prior to May
22 18, 1994, that provides primarily agricul-
23 tural service through a piped water system
24 with only incidental residential use shall
25 not be considered to be a public water sys-
.8 1318 R8
-------
168
1 tern if the system and the residential users
2 of the system comply with subclauses (I)
3 and (II) of clause (i).”.
4 (2) EFFECTIVE DATE.—The amendments made
5 by paragraph (1) shall take effect 1 year after the
6 date of enactment of this Act.
7 SEC. 25. GROUND WATER PROTECTION.
8 (a) STATE GROUND WATER PROTECTION GRANTS.—
9 Section 1443 (42 U.S.C. 300j—2) is amended—
10 (1) by redesignating subsection (c) as sub-
11 section (d); and
12 (2) by inserting after subsection (b) the follow-
13 ing:
14 “(c) STATE GROUND WATER PROTECTION
15 GRANTS.—
16 “(1) IN GENERAL.—The Administrator may
17 make a grant to a State for the development and im-
18 plementation of a State program to ensure the co-
19 ordinated and comprehensive protection of ground
20 water resources within the State.
21 “(2) GUIDANCE.—NOt later than 1 year after
22 the date of enactment of the Safe Drinking Water
23 Act Amendments of 1995, and annually thereafter,
24 the Administrator shall publish guidance that estab-
25 lishes procedures for application for State ground
.8 1316 RS
-------
169
1 water protection program assistance and that identi-
2 fies - key elements of State ground water protection
3 programs.
4 “(3) CoNDITIoNs OF GRANTS.—
5 “(A) IN GENERAL.—The Administrator
6 shall award grants to States that submit an ap-
7 plication that is approved by the Administrator.
8 The Administrator shall determine the amount
9 of a grant awarded pursuant to this paragraph
10 on the basis of an assessment of the extent of
11 ground water resources in the State and the
12 likelihood that awarding the grant will result in
13 sustained and reliable protection of ground
14 water quality.
15 “(B) INNOVATWE PROGRAM GRANTS.—
16 The Administrator may also award a grant pur-
17 suant to this paragraph for innovative programs
18 proposed by a State for the prevention of
19 ground water contamination.
20 “(C) ALLOCATION OF FUNDS.—The Ad-
21 ministrator shall, at a minimum, ensure that,
22 for each fiscal year, not less than 1 percent of
23 funds made available to the Administrator by
24 appropriations to carry out this subsection are
25 allocated to each State that submits an applica-
.S 1316 ItS
-------
170
1 tion that is approved by the Administrator pur-
2 suant to this subsection.
3 “(D) LnuTATION ON GRANTS.—No grant
4 awarded by the Administrator may be used for
5 a project to remediate ground water contamina-
6 tion.
7 “(4) COOIWINATION WITH OTHER GRANT PRO-
8 GRAMS.—The awarding of grants by the Adminis-
9 trator pursuant to this subsection shall be coordi-
10 nated with the awarding of grants pursuant to sec-
11 tion 3 19(i) of the Federal Water Pollution Control
12 Act (33 U.S.C. 1329(i)) and the awarding of other
13 Federal grant assistance that provides funding for
14 programs related to ground water protection.
15 “(5) AMOUNT OF GRANTS.—The amount of a
16 grant awarded pursuant to paragraph (1) shall not
17 exceed 50 percent of the eligible costs of carrying
18 out the ground water protection program that is the
19 subject of the grant (as determined by the Adminis-
20 trathr) for the 1-year period beginning on the date
21 that the grant is awarded. The State shall pay a
22 State share to cover the costs of the ground water
23 protection program from State funds in an amount
24 that is not less than 50 percent of the cost of con-
25 ducting the program.
‘S 1316 RS
-------
171
1 “(6) EVALUATIONS AND REPORTS.—Not later
2 than 3 years after the date of enactment of the Safe
3 Drinking Water Act Amendments of 1995, and
4 every 3 years thereafter, the Administrator shall
5 evaluate the State ground water protection programs
6 that are the subject of grants awarded pursuant to
7 this subsection and report to Congress on the status
8 of ground water quality in the United States and the
9 effectiveness of State programs for ground water
10 protection.
11 “(7) AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS.—
12 There are authorized to be appropriated to carry out
13 this subsection $20,000,000 for each of fiscal years
14 1995 through 2003.”.
15 (b) CRITICAL AQUIFER PROTECTION.—Section 1427
16 (42 U.S.C. 300h—6) is amended—
17 (1) in subsection (b)(1), by striking “not later
18 than 24 months after the enactment of the Safe
19 Drinking Water Act Amendments of 1986”; and
20 (2) in the first sentence of subsection (n), by
21 adding at the end the following:
“1992—2003 20,000,000.”.
22 (c) WELLHEAD PROTECTION AREAS.—Section
23 1428(k) (42 U.S.C. 300h—7(k)) is amended by adding at
24 the end the following:
“1992—2003 35,000,000”
.S 1316 RS
-------
172
1 (d) UNDERGROUND INJECTION CONTROL GRANT.—
2 Section 1443(b)(5) (42 U.S.C. 300j—2(b)(5)) is amended
3 by adding at the end the following:
“1992—2003 20,850,000.”.
4 (e) REPORT TO CONGRESS ON PRIVATE DRINKING
5 WATER.—Sectjon 1450 (42 U.S.C. 300j—9) is amended by
6 striking subsection (h) and inserting the following:
7 “(h) REPORT TO CONGRESS ON PRIVATE DRINKING
8 WATER.—ThC Administrator shall conduct a study to de-
9 terrnine the extent and seriousness of contamination of
10 private sources of drinking water that are not regalated
11 under this title. Not later than 3 years after the date of
12 enactment of the Safe Drinking Water Act Amendments
13 of 1995, the Administrator shall submit to Congress a re-
14 port that includes the findings of the study and rec-
15 ommendations by the Administrator concerning responses
16 to any problems identified under the study. In designing
17 and conducting the study, including consideration of re-
18 search design, methodology, and conclusions and rec-
19 ommendations, the Administrator shall consult with ex-
20 perts outside the Agency, including scientists,
21 hydrogeologists, well contractors and suppliers, and other
22 individuals knowledgeable in ground water protection and
23 remediation.”.
24 (f) NATIONAL CENTER FOR GROUND WATER RE-
25 SEARCH.—The Administrator of the Environmental Pro-
.5 1316 ES
-------
173
1 tection Agency, acting through the Robert S. Kerr Envi-
2 ronmental Research Laboratory, is authorized to reestab-
3 lish a partnership between the Laboratory and the Na-
4 tional Center for Ground Water Research, a university
5 consortium, to conduct research, training, and technology
6 transfer for ground water quality protection and restora-
7 tion.
8 SEC. 26. LEAD PLUMBING AND PIPES; RETURN FLOWS.
9 (a) FITTINGS AND FIxTuRES.—Section 1417 (42
10 U.S.C. 300g—6) is amended—
11 (1) in subsection (a)—
12 (A) by striking paragraph (1) and insert-
13 ing the following:
14 “(1) PROHIBITIONS.—
15 “(A) IN GENERAL.—No person may use
16 any pipe, any pipe or plumbing fitting or fix-
17 ture, any solder, or any flux, after June 19,
18 1986, in the installation or repair of—
19 “(i) any public water system; or
20 “(ii) any plumbing in a residential or
21 nonresidential facility providing water for
22 human consumption,
23 that is not lead free (within the meaning of
24 subsection (d)).
.8 1316 ES
-------
174
1 “(B) LEADED JOINTS.—Subparagraph (A)
2 shall not apply to leaded joints necessary for
3 the repair of cast iron pipes.”;
4 (B) in paragraph (2)(A), by inserting after
5 “Each” the following: “owner or operator of a”;
6 and
7 (C) by adding at the end the following:
8 “(3) UNLAwFuL ACTS.—Effective 2 years after
9 the date of enactment of this paragraph, it shall be
10 unlawful—
11 “(A) for any person to introduce into corn-
12 merce any pipe, or any pipe or plumbing fitting
13 or fixture, that is not lead free, except for a
14 pipe that is used in manufacturing or industrial
15 processing;
16 “(B) for any person engaged in the busi-
17 ness of seffing plumbing supplies, except manu-
18 facturers, to sell solder or flux that is not lead
19 free; or
20 “(C) for any person to introduce into corn-
21 merce any solder or flux that is not lead free
22 unless the solder or flux bears a prominent
23 label stating that it is illegal to use the solder
24 or flux in the installation or repair of any
.8 1816 R8
-------
175
1 plumbing providing water for human consump-
2 tion.”;
3 (2) in subsection (d)—
4 (A) in paragraph (1), by striking “lead,
5 and” and inserting “lead;”;
6 (B) in paragraph (2), by striking “lead.”
7 and inserting “lead; and”; and
8 (C) by adding at the end the following:
9 “(3) when used with respect to plumbing fit-
10 tings and fixtures, refers to plumbing fittings and
11 fixtures in compliance with standards established in
12 accordance with subsection (e).”; and
13 (3) by adding at the end the following:
14 “(e) PLUMBING FITTINGS AND FIXTURES.—
15 “(1) IN GENERAL.—The Administrator shall
16 provide accurate and timely technical information
17 and assistance to qualified third-party certifiers in
18 the development of voluntary standards and testing
19 protocols for the leaching of lead from new plumbing
20 fittings and fixtures that are intended by the manu-
21 facturer to dispense water for human ingestion.
22 “(2) STANDARDS.—
23 “(A) IN GENERAL.—If a voluntary stand-
24 ard for the leaching of lead is not established
25 by the date that is 1 year after the date of en-
.S 1316 R8
-------
176
1 actment of this subsection, the Administrator
2 shall, not later than 2 years after the date of
3 enactment of this subsection, promulgate regu-
4 lations setting a health-effects-based perform-
5 ance standard establishing maximum leaching
6 levels from new plumbing fittings and fixtures
7 that are intended by the manufacturer to dis-
8 pense water for human ingestion. The standard
9 shall become effective on the date that is 5
10 years after the date of promulgation of the
11 standard.
12 “(B) ALTERNATWE REQUIREMENP.—If
13 regulations are required to be promulgated
14 under subparagraph (A) and have not been pro-
15 mulgated by the date that is 5 years after the
16 date of enactment of this subsection, no person
17 may import, manufacture, process, or distribute
18 in commerce a new plumbing fitting or fixture,
19 intended by the manufacturer to dispense water
20 for human ingestion, that contains more than 4
21 percent lead by cky weight.”.
22 (b) WATER RETURN FLOwS.—Section 3013 of Pub-
23 lic Law 102—486 (42 U.S.C. 13551) is repealed.
24 (c) RECORDS AND INSPECTIONS.—Subparagraph (A)
25 of section 1445(a)(1) (42 U.S.C. 300j—4(a)(1)) (as des-
.S 1316 RS
-------
177
1 ignated by section 19(a)(1)(A)) is amended by striking
2 “Every person” and ail that follows through “is a grant-
3 ee,” and inserting “Every person who is subject to any
4 requirement of this title or who is a grantee”.
5 SEC. 27. BOTFLED WATER.
6 Section 410 of the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic
7 Act (21 U.S.C. 349) is amended—
8 (1) by striking “Whenever” and inserting “(a)
9 Except as provided in subsection (b), whenever”;
10 and
11 (2) by adding at the end the following:
12 “(b)(1) After the Administrator of the Environmental
13 Protection Agency publishes a proposed maximum con-
14 taminant level, but not later than 180 days after the Ad-
15 ministrator of the Environmental Protection Agency pub-
16 lishes a final maximum contaminant level, for a contami-
17 nant under section 1412 of the Public Health Service Act
18 (42 U.S.C. 300g—1), the Secretary, Wafter public notice and
19 comment, shall issue a regulation that establishes a qual-
20 ity level for the contaminant in bottled water or make a
21 finding that a regulation is not necessary to protect the
22 public health because the contaminant is contained in
23 water in the public water systems (as defined under see-
24 tion 1401(4) of such Act (42 U.S.C. 300f(4)) and not in
25 water used for bottled drinking water. In the case of any
•S 1316 RS
-------
178
1 contaminant for which a national primary drinking water
2 regulation was promulgated before the date of enactment
3 of the Safe Drinking Water Act Amendments of 1995, the
4 Secretary shall issue the regulation or nzake the finding re-
5 qui red by this paragraph not later than 1 year after that
6 date.
7 “(2) The regulation shall include any monitoring re-
8 quirements that the Secretary determines to be appro-
9 priate for bottled water.
10 “(3) The regulation—
11 “(A) shall require that the quality level for the
12 contaminant in bottled water be as stringent as the
13 maximum contaminant level for the contaminant
14 published by the Administrator of the Environ-
15 mental Protection Agency; and
16 “(B) may require that the quality level be more
17 stringent than the maximum contaminant level if
18 necessary to provide ample public health protection
19 under this Act.
20 “(4)(A) If the Secretary fails to establish a regulation
21 within the 180-day period described in paragraph (1), the
22 regulation with respect to the final maximum contaminant
23 level published by the Administrator of the Environmental
24 Protection Agency (as described in such paragraph) shall
25 be considered, as of the date on which the Secretary is
.5 1316 RS
-------
179
1 required to establish a regulation under paragraph (1), as
2 the final regulation for the establishment of the quality
3 level for a contaminant required under paragraph (1) for
4 the purpose of establishing or amending a bottled water
5 quality level standard with respect to the contaminant.
6 “(B) Not later than 30 days after the end of the 180-
7 day period described in paragraph (1), the Secretary shall,
8 with respect to a maximum contaminant level that is con-
9 sidered as a quality level under subparagraph (A), publish
10 a notice in the Federal Register that sets forth the quality
11 level and appropriate monitoring requirements required
12 under paragraphs (1) and (2) and that provides that the
13 quality level standard and requirements shall take effect
14 on the date on which the final regulation of the maximum
15 contaminant level takes effect.”.
16 SEC. 28. ASSESSING ENVIRONMENTAL PRIORiTIES, COSTS,
17 AND BENEFITS.
18 (a) DEFINITIONS.—In this section:
19 (1) ADMINISTRATOR.—The term “Adminis-
20 trator” means the Administrator of the Environ-
21 mental Protection Agency.
22 (2) ADVERSE EFFECT ON HUMAN HEALTH.—
23 The term “adverse effect on human health” includes
24 any increase in the rate of death or serious illness,
25 including disease, cancer, birth defects, reproductive
.S 1316 RS
-------
180
1 dysfunction, developmental effects (including effects
2 on the endocrine and nervous systems), and other
3 impairments in bodily functions.
4 (3) RISK.—The term “risk” means the likeli-
5 hood of an occurrence of an adverse effect on human
6 health, the environment, or public welfare.
7 (4) SOURCE OF POLLUTION.—The term “source
8 of pollution” means a category or class of facilities
9 or activities that alter the chemical, physical, or bio-
10 logical character of the natural environment.
11 (b) FINDINGs.—Congress finds that—
12 (1) cost-benefit analysis and risk assessment
13 are useful but imperfect tools that serve to enhance
14 the information available in developing environ-
15 mental regulations and programs;
16 (2) cost-benefit analysis and risk assessment
17 can also serve as useful tools in setting priorities
18 and evaluating the success of environmental protec-
19 tion programs;
20 (3) cost and risk are not the only factors that
21 need to be considered in evaluating environmental
22 programs, as other factors, including values and eq-
23 uity, must also be considered;
.8 1316 R8
-------
181
1 (4) cost-benefit analysis and risk assessment
2 should be presented with a clear statement of the
3 . uncertainties in the analysis or assessment;
4 (5) current methods for valuing ecological re-
5 sources and assessing intergenerational effects of
6 sources of pollution need further development before
7 integrated rankings of sources of pollution based on
8 the factors referred to in paragraph (3) can be used
9 with high levels of confidence;
10 (6) methods to assess and describe the risks of
11 adverse human health effects, other than cancer,
12 need further development before integrated rankings
13 of sources of pollution based on the risk to human
14 health can be used with high levels of confidence;
15 (7) periodic reports by the Administrator on the
16 costs and benefits of regulations promulgated under
17 Federal environmental laws, and other Federal ac-
18 tions with impacts on human health, the environ-
19 ment, or public welfare, will provide Congress and
20 the general public with a better understanding of—
21 (A) national environmental priorities; and
22 (B) expenditures being made to achieve re-
23 ductions in risk to human health, the environ-
24 ment, and public welfare; and
.8 1316 RS
-------
182
1 (8) periodic reports by the Administrator on the
2 costs and benefits of environmental regulations wifi
3 also—
4 (A) provide Congress and the general pub-
5 lie with a better understanding of the strengths,
6 weaknesses, and uncertainties of cost-benefit
7 analysis and risk assessment and the research
8 needed to reduce major uncertainties; and
9 (B) assist Congress and the general public
10 in evaluating environmental protection regula-
11 tions and programs, and other Federal actions
12 with impacts on human health, the environ-
13 ment, or public welfare, to determine the extent
14 to which the regulations, programs, and actions
15 adequately and fairly protect affected segments
16 of society.
17 (c) REPORT ON ENVIRONMENTAL PRIORITIES,
18 COSTS, AND BENEFITS.—
19 (1) RMJKING.—
20 (A) IN GENERAL.—The Administrator
21 shall identify and, taking into account available
22 data (to the extent practicable), rank sources of
23 pollution with respect to the relative degree of
24 risk of adverse effects on human health, the en-
25 vironment, and public welfare.
.8 1316 R8
-------
183
1 (B) METHOD OF RANIUNG.—In carrying
2 out the rankings under subparagraph (A), the
3 Administrator shall—--
4 (i) rank the sources of pollution con-
5 sidering the extent and duration of the
6 risk; and
7 (ii) take into account broad societal
8 values, including the role of natural re-
9 sources in sustaining economic activity into
10 the future.
11 (2) EVALUATION OF REGULATORY AND OTHER
12 COSTS.—In addition to carrying out the rankings
13 under paragraph (1), the Administrator shall esti-
14 mate the private and public costs associated with
15 each source of pollution and the costs and benefits
16 of complying with regulations designed to protect
17 against risks associated with the sources of pollu-
18 tion.
19 (3) EVALUATION OF OTHER FEDERAL AC-
20 TIONS.—In addition to carrying out the require-
21 ments of paragraphs (1) and (2), the Administrator
22 shall estimate the private and public costs and bene-
23 fits associated with major Federal actions selected
24 by the Administrator that have the most significant
25 impact on human health or the environment, includ-
.S 1316 RS
-------
184
1 ing direct development projects, grant and loan pro-
2 grams to support infrastructure construction and re-
3 pair, aiid permits, licenses, and leases to use natural
4 resources or to release pollution to the environment,
5 and other similar actions.
6 (4) RIsK REDUCTION OPPORTUNITIES.—In as-
7 sessing risks, costs, and benefits as provided in
8 paragraphs (1) and (2), the Administrator shall also
9 identii y reasonable opportunities to achieve signifi-
10 cant risk reduction through modifications in environ-
11 mental regulations and programs and other Federal
12 actions with impacts on human health, the environ-
13 ment, or public welfare.
14 (5) IJNCERTAINTIES.—In evaluating the risks
15 referred to in paragraphs (1) and (2), the Adminis-
16 trator shall—
17 (A) identif y the major uncertainties associ-
18 ated with the risks;
19 (B) explain the meaning of the uncertain-
20 ties in terms of interpreting the ranking and
21 evaluation; and
22 (C) determine—
23 (i) the type and nature of research
24 that would likely reduce the uncertainties;
25 and
.S 1318 RS
-------
185
1 (ii) the cost of conducting the re-
2 search.
3 (6) CONSIDERATION OF BENEFITS.—In carry-
4 ing out this section, the Administrator shall consider
5 and, to the extent practicable, estimate the monetary
6 value, and such other values as the Administrator
7 determines to be appropriate, of the benefits associ-
8 ated with reducing risk to human health and the en-
9 vironment, including—
10 (A) .avoiding premature mortality;
11 - — (B) avoiding cancer and noncancer dis-
12 eases that reduce the quality of life;
13 (C) preserving biological diversity and the
14 sustainability of ecological resources;
15 (D) maintaining an aesthetically pleasing
16 environment;
17 (E) valuing services performed by
18 ecosystems (such as flood mitigation, provision
19 of food or material, or regulating the chemistry
20 of the air or water) that, if lost or degraded,
21 would have to be replaced by technology;
22 (F) avoiding other risks identified by the
23 Administrator; and
•S 1316 ItS
-------
186
1 (G) considering the benefits even if it is
2 not possible to estimate the monetary value of
3 the benefits in exact terms.
4 (7) REPORTS.—
5 (A) PRELIMINARY REPORT.—Not later
6 than 1 year after the date of enactment of this
7 Act, the Administrator shall report to Congress
8 on the sources of pollution and other Federal
9 actions that the Administrator will address, and
10 the approaches and methodology the Adminis-
11 trator will use, in carrying out the rankings and
12 evaluations under this section. The report shall
13 also include an evaluation by the Administrator
14 of the need for the development of methodolo-
15 gies to carry out the ranking.
16 (B) P1 RIODIc REPORT.—
17 (i) IN GENERAL.—On completion of
18 the ranking and evaluations conducted by
19 the Administrator under this section, but
20 not later than 3 years after the date of en-
21 actment of this Act, and every 3 years
22 thereafter, the Administrator shall report
23 the findings of the rankings and evalua-
24 tions to Congress and make the report
25 available to the general public.
.S 1316 RS
-------
187
1 (ii) EVALUATION OF RISKS.—Each
2 periodic report prepared pursuant to this
3 subparagraph shall, to the extent prac-
4 ticable, evaluate risk management deci-
5 sions under Federal environmental laws,
6 including title XLV of the Public Health
7 Service Act (commonly known as the “Safe
8 Drinking Water Act”) (42 U.S.C. 300f et
9 seq.), that present inherent and unavoid-
10 able choices between competing risks, in-
11 cluding risks of controlling microbial ver-
12 sus disinfection contaminants in drinking
13 water. Each periodic report shall address
14 the policy of the Administrator concerning
15 the most appropriate methods of weighing
16 and analyzing the risks, and shall incor-
17 porate information concerning—
18 (I) the severity and certainty of
19 any adverse effect on human health,
20 the environment, or public welfare;
21 (II) whether the effect is imme-
22 diate or delayed;
23 (ifi) whether the burden associ-
24 ated with the adverse effect is borne
25 disproportionately by a segment of the
.8 1318 RS
-------
188
1 general population or spread evenly
2 across the general population; and
3 (IV) whether a threatened ad-
4 verse effect can be eliminated or rem-
5 edied by the use of an alternative
6 technology or a protection mechanism.
7 (d) IMPLEMENTATION.—Ifl carrying out this section,
8 the Administrator shall—
9 (1) consult with the appropriate officials of
10 other Federal agencies and State and local govern-
11 ments, members of the academic community, rep-
12 resentatives of regulated businesses and industry,
13 representatives of citizen groups, and other knowl-
14 edgeable individuals to develop, evaluate, and inter-
15 pret scientific and economic information;
16 (2) make available to the general public the in-
17 formation on which rankings and evaluations under
18 this section are based; and
19 (3) establish, not later than 2 years after the
20 date of enactment of this Act, methods for determin-
21 ing costs and benefits of environmental regulations
22 and other Federal actions, including the valuation of
23 natural resources and intergenerational costs and
24 benefits, by rule after notice and opportunity for
25 public comment.
.S 1316 RS
-------
189
1 (e) REVIEW BY THE SCIENCE A1)VIS0RY Bo urn.—
2 Before the Administrator submits a report prepared under
3 this section to Congress, the Science Advisory Board, es-
4 tablished by section 8 of the Environmental Research, De-
5 velopment, and Demonstration Act of 1978 (42 U.S.C.
6 4365), shall conduct a technical review of the report in
7 a public session.
8 SEC. 29. O’iLLt R AMENDMENTS.
9 (a) CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS FOR THE WASHINGTON
10 AQUEDUCT.—
11 (1) AUTHORIZATIONS.—
12 (A) AUTHORIZATION OF MODERNIZA-
13 TION.—Subject to approval in, and in such
14 amounts as may be provided in appropriations
15 Acts, the Chief of Engineers of the Army Corps
16 of Engineers is authorized to modernize the
17 Washington Aqueduct.
18 (B) AuTHoRIZATIoN OF APPROPRLA-
19 TIONS.—There is authorized to be appropriated
20 to the Army Corps of Engineers borrowing au-
21 thority in amounts sufficient to cover the full
22 costs of modernizing the Washington Aqueduct.
23 The borrowing authority shall be provided by
24 the Secretary of the Treasury, under such
25 terms and conditions as are established by the
.S 1316 RS
-------
190
1 Secretary of the Treasury, after a series of con-
2 tracts with each public water supply customer
3 has been entered into under paragraph (2).
4 (2) CONTRACTS WITH PUBLIC WATER SUPPLY
5 CUSTOMERS.—
6 (A) CONTRACTS TO REPAY CORPS DEBT.—
7 To the extent provided in appropriations Acts,
8 and in accordance with subparagraphs (B) and
9 (C), the Chief of Engineers of the Army Corps
10 of Engineers is authorized to enter into a series
11 of contracts with each public water supply cus-
12 tomer under which the customer commits to
13 repay a pro-rata share of the principal and in-
14 terest owed by the Army Corps of Engineers to
15 the Secretary of the Treasury under paragraph
16 (1). Under each of the contracts, the customer
17 that enters into the contract shall commit to
18 pay any additional amount necessary to fully
19 offset the risk of default on the contract.
20 (B) OFFSETTING OF RISK OF DEFAULT.—
21 Each contract under subparagraph (A) shall in-
22 dude such additional terms and conditions as
23 the Secretary of the Treasury may require so
24 that the value to the Government of the con-
25 tracts is estimated to be equal to the
.S 1316 RS
-------
191
1 obligational authority used by the Army Corps
2 of Engineers for modernizing the Washington
3 Aqueduct at the time that each series of con-
4 tracts is entered into.
5 (C) OTHER CONDITIONS.—Each contract
6 entered into under subparagraph (A) shall—
7 (i) provide that the public water sup-
8 ply customer pledges future income from
9 fees assessM to operate and maintain the
10 Washington Aqueduct;
11 (ii) provide the United States priority
12 over all other creditors; and
13 (iii) include other conditions that the
14 Secretary of the Treasury determines to be
15 appropriate.
16 (3) BORROWING AUTHORITY.—Subject to an
17 appropriation under paragraph (1)(B) and after en-
18 tering into a series of contracts under paragraph
19 (2), the Secretary, acting through the Chief of Engi-
20 neers of the Army Corps of Engineers, shall seek
21 borrowing authority from the Secretary of the
22 Treasury under paragraph (1)(B).
23 (4) DEFINITIONS.—In this subsection:
24 (A) PUBLIC WATER SUPPLY CUSTOMER.—
25 The term “public water supply customer”
.8 1316 R8
-------
192
1 means the District of Columbia, the county of
2 Arlington, Virginia, and the city of Falls
3 Church, Virginia.
4 (B) VALUE TO THE GOVERNMENT.—The
5 term “value to the Government” means the net
6 present value of a contract under paragraph (2)
7 calculated under the rules set forth in subpara-
8 graphs (A) and (B) of section 502(5) of the
9 Congressional Budget Act of 1974 (2 U.S.C.
10 661a(5)), excluding section 502(5)(B)(i) of
11 such Act, as though the contracts provided for
12 the repayment of direct loans to the public
13 water supply customers.
14 (C) WASHINGTON AQUEDUCT.—The term
15 “Washington Aqueduct” means the water sup-
16 ply system of treatment plants, raw water in-
17 takes, conduits, reservoirs, transmission mains,
18 and pumping stations owned by the Federal
19 Government located in the metropolitan Wash-
20 ington, District of Columbia, area.
21 (b) DRINKING WATER ADVISORY COuNcIL.—The
22 second sentence of section 1446(a) (42 U.S.C. 300j—6(a))
23 is amended by inserting before the period at the end the
24 following: “, of which two such members shall be associ-
25 ated with small, rural public water systems”.
.S 1316 R8
-------
193
1 (c) SHORT TITLE.—
2 (1) IN GENERAL.—The title (42 U.S.C. 1401 et
3 seq.) is amended by inserting after the title heading
4 the following:
5 “SHORT TITLE
6 “SEC. 1400. This title may be cited as the ‘Safe
7 DrinkingWaterAct’.”.
8 (2) CONFORMING AMENDMENT.—Section 1 of
9 Public Law 93—523 (88 Stat. 1660) is amended by
10 inserting “of 1974” after ‘Water Act”.
11 (d) TECHNICAL AMENDMENTS TO SECTION HEAD-
12 INGS.—
13 (1) The section heading and subsection designa-
14 tion of subsection (a) of section 1417 (42 U.S.C.
15 300g—6) are amended to read as follows:
16 “PROHIBITION ON USE OF LEAD PIPES, FITTINGS,
17 SOLDER, AND FLUX
18 “SEC. 1417. (a)”.
19 (2) The section heading and subsection designa-
20 tion of subsection (a) of section 1426 (42 U.S.C.
21 300h—5) are amended to read as follows:
22 “REGULATION OF STATE PROGRAMS
23 “SEC. 1426. (a)”.
24 (3) The section heading and subsection designa-
25 tion of subsection (a) of section 1427 (42 U.S.C.
26 300h—6) are amended to read as follows:
.S 1316 ES
-------
194
1 “SOLE SOURCE AQUIFER DEMONSTRATION PROGRAM
2 “SEC. 1427. (a)”.
3 (4) The section heading and subsection designa-
4 tion of subsection (a) of section 1428 (42 U.S.C.
5 300h—7) are amended to read as follows:
6 “STATE PROGRAMS TO ESTABLISH WELLHEAD
7 PROTECTION AREAS
8 “SEC. 1428. (a)”.
9 (5) The section heading and subsection designa-
10 tion of subsection (a) of section 1432 (42 U.S.C.
11 300i—1) are amended to read as follows:
12 “TAMPERING WITH PUBLIC WATER SYSTEMS
13 “SEC. 1432. (a)”.
14 (6) The section heading and subsection designa-
15 tion of subsection (a) of section 1451 (42 U.S.C.
16 300j—11) are amended to read as follows:
17 “INDIAN TRIBES
18 “SEC. 1451. (a)”.
19 (7) The section heading and first word of sec-
20 tion 1461 (42 U.S.C. 300j—21) are amended to read
21 as follows:
22 “DEFINITIONS
23 “SEC. 1461. As”.
24 (8) The section heading and first word of see-
25 tion 1462 (42 U.S.C. 300j—22) are amended to read
26 as follows:
.8 1316 RS
-------
195
1 “RECALL OF DRINKING WATER COOLERS WITH LEAD-
2 LINED TANKS
3 “SEC. 1462. For”.
4 (9) The section heading and subsection designa-
5 tion of subsection (a) of section 1463 (42 U.S.C.
6 300j—23) are amended to read as follows:
7 “DRINKING WATER COOLERS CONTAINING LEAD
8 “SEC. 1463. (a)”.
9 (10) The section heading and subsection des-
10 ignation of subsection (a) of section 1464 (42 U.S.C.
11 300j—24) are amended to read as follows:
12 “LEAD CONTAMINATION IN SCHOOL DRINKING WATER
13 “SEC. 1464. (a)”.
14 (11) The section heading and subsection des-
15 ignation of subsection (a) of section 1465 (42 U.S.C.
16 300j—25) are amended to read as follows:
17 “FEDERAL ASSISTANCE FOR STATE PROGRAMS REGARD-
18 ING LEAD CONTAMINATION IN SCHOOL DRINKING
19 WATER
20 “SEC. 1465. (a)”.
.8 1316 R8
-------
Calendar No. 226
104TH CONGRESS
1ST SESSIoN
IReport No. 104—169]
A BILL
To reauthorize and amend title X IV of the Public
Health Service Act (commonly known as the
“Safe Dnnking Water Act”), and for other
purposes.
NOVEMBER 7, 1995
Reported with amendments
-------
IO S T 41
UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENC’Y
4’ -
WASHINGTON, D C 20460
L PRO
OFFICE OF
GENERAL COUNSEL
October 16, 1987
MEMORANDUM
SUBJECT: Legislative History of the Safe
Drinking Water Act Amendments of 1986
FROM; Susan G. Lepow
Associate Gene Counsel
Water Division (LE-132W)
TO: Addressees
Attached for your and your staffs use is a section-by-
section legislative history of the Safe Drinking Water Act
(SDWA) Amendments of 1986 which was prepared by our law clerk
this summer. It is organized into two volumes and keyed
to the SDW Amendments themselves. This means you will need
to know which section of the SDWA Amendments amended a parti-
cular section of the SDWA to find its legislative history. The
index to the SDWA Amendments is found at the beginning of each
volume; that should assist you in making the cross reference.
We have also included an index to each volume and have put
dividers in to separate the sections. We have not tabbed each
section but that should be easy enough for you to do if you
choose.
Volume I (pp. 1-313) contains a general section which
includes general statements regarding the SDWA Amendments as a
whole and statements pertaining to sections of the various bills
that did not become law. Volume I also includes the legislative
history of Title I of the SDWA Amendmer?ts, the provisions
related to public water systems.
-------
Volume II (pp. 314-529) ipcludes the legislative history
for Titles II and III of the SDWA Amendments. These Titles
address protection of underground sources of drinking water and
general provisions, respectively.
We hope you’ll find these volumes helpful. If you have
any questions, please give me a call.
At t a c hni en t
Addresses: Dan Berry
Glenn Unterberger
Mike Cook
Peggy Strand
Regional Counsels, I—X
-------
SAFE DRINKING WATER ACT AMENDMENTS - 1986
Pub. L.
SECTION BY SECTION LEGISLATIVE HISTORY
VOLUME 1
Pages
Ninety-ninth Congress of the United States
of America - At The Second Session — An Act 1-2
General Section • 3-57
Section 101 ...... •......... .... 58—142
Section 102 . .... ... .... ....... . . 143—185
Section 103 .. ••........ .... .... ... ... ...... •1 186—204
Section 104 •.. . . . 205—221
Section 105 222—244
Section 106 ....... •..... 245—270
Section 107 ... .. •............ .. •I••...•S.. . . ...... ..... . 271—284
Section 108 .. ,,. . . .......... •• • ••.. .. ... 285—296
Section 109 297—313
-------
000 00
000 0 00
Bhict nüIrh ongrtss of tht %1nft d tata of mtrfr
AT THE SECOND SESSIO
8, 7s.W th. City of Waitthegton on Th..day, th. tw.nty.flrse day of/onzw,y,
one thousand sun• hundred and .ightyeix
n rt
To amend the Safe Drinking Watec Act
Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Repr ntatiues of the
United States of America in Congiui a embied,
SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.
This Act may be cit as the “Safe Drinking Water Act Amend-
ments of 1986’.
TABLE OF CONTEN
Sec. 1. Short title.
TITLE I—PUBUC WATER SYSTEMS
Sec. 101. Nations ] primary drinking water r u1atAonj.
Sec. 102 Enfon ment of r uJatzo j.
Sec. 103. PubLic notification.
Sec. 104. Vananc s.
Sec. 105. Eiemptiona.
Sec. 106. Monitoring for unregulated containir nt..
Sec. 107. TechnicaJ amiatance for small .ystema.
Sec. 108. Tampering wflh public water systems.
Sec. 109. Lead fres drinking water.
TITLE U—PROTECTION OF U DERGROUND SOt.TRCF 0? DRIWKThiG
WATER
S .c. 201. Restrictions on underground injection of hazardous w and reg il.s&n
of State pr rI.ma.
Sec. 202. EflforcerflenL
Sec. 203. Sele sour aquifer demon,ti , jon pr ram.
Sec 204 Emergency poweiw.
Sec. 205. State pr rs.ma to estabLish wellhead protection aress.
TITLE m—GzNE PROVISIONS
Sec 301 Authortzation of appropriation,.
See. 302. Indian tribes.
Sec 303 Judic iaj review
Sec. 304. Miscellaneous prpvuions.
-------
OOQo 4 OOOO ü
000000
0000QO
LEGISLATIVE HISTORY
COMPILED BY:
KARINA BORROMEO
LEGAL INTERN
SUMMER - 1987
-------
Administration of Ronald Re gon, 1986 /Ju e 39
noncompliance for our security and the in-
tegrity of the arms control process
In June of last year, 1 went the extra mile.
Regrettably, the Soviets did not alter their
behavior Civen this situation, I determined
that, in the future, the United States must
base decisions regarding its strategic force
structure on the nature and magnttude of
the threat posed by Soviet strategic forces,
and not on standards contained in the
SALT structure which has been under-
mined by Soviet noncompliance, and esp&
cially in a flawed SALT II treaty which was
never ratified, would have expired if it had
been ratified, and has been violated by the
Soviet Union.
The full unplementation of the Strategic
Modernization Program is critical both to
meeting our future national security needs
and to appropriately responding to Soviet
noncompliance However, we will exercise
utmost restraint As we modernize, we will
continue to retire older forces as national
security requirements permit We do not
anticipate any appreciable growth in the
size of U S strategic forces. assuming no
significant change in the threat, we will not
deploy more strategic nuclear delivery ve-
hicles or more strategic ballistic missile war-
heads than does the Soviet Union.
As a result of my decision to retire two
POSEIDON submarines, the United States
will remain techntca(l in observance of the
terms of the SALT II Treaty for some
months. We continue to hope that the
Soviet Union will use this additional time to
take the constructive steps needed to alter
the current situation Should they do so, we
will take this into account
I want to emphasize that no policy of
üiterim restraint is a substitute for an agree-
ment on deep and equitable reductions in
offensive nuclear arms, ‘pro ided that we
can be confident of Soviet compliance tuth
it. Achie ing such reductions continues to
receive my highest priority This is the most
direct path to achieving greater stability
and a safer world
Sincerely,
lionald Beagan
Note’ This is the text of identical letters’
addressed to Thomas P 0 Weill, Jr. Speaker
of the House of Representatives, George
Bush, Pres:denrof the Senate, Barry Gold-
water, chairman of the Senate Armed Serv-
ices Committee, and Las Aspin, chairman of
the House Armed Services Committee
Safe Drinking Water Act Amendments
of 1986
Statement on Signing S 124 Into Law
June 19, 1986
I am signing today S 124, the Safe Drink-
ing Water Act Amendments of 1986 This
legislation reauthorizes and amends the law
that establishes Federal regulation of thern
Nation’s public drinking water systems
The Safe Drinking Water Act was en-
acted in 1974 to assure that public drinking
water supplies are safe Impetus for the
original law was provided by studies con-
ducted by the Environmental Protection
Agency in the early 1970 s which showed
that many public water supplies were peri-
odically contaminated by s nthetic organic
chemicals To protect the quality of the Na-
tion’s drinking water, the original law di-
rects the Administrator of the Environrnen-
tal Protection Agency to establish national
drinking water standards, enforceable by
the States, that are designed to pl- ..,tect r -ie
public health In addition, the act requires
the Administrator of the EPA to regulate
State underground injection control pro-
grams to protect underground sources of
drinking water Operators of public water
systems are required to monitor the water
quality to assure compliance with EPA
standards
E’ perience gained b the EPA and the
States in administering the Safe Drinking
Water Act has shown that some revisions to
the original Act, designed to improve pro-
gram administration, are desirable The leg-
islat ori I am signing today contains some of
these reforms, including
—provisions simplif> ing and streamlining
the standard-setting process These pro-
isions ; ill assure that drinking water
000003
831
-------
June I 9 /Adm:n:strot:o,j of Ronald Reagan 1986
contaminants will be regulated in a
more timely fashion,
—provisions strengthening the EPA’s en-
forcement authorities when a State fails
to enforce the national standards Most
importantly, the EPA is given adminis.
trative order and penalt authority, al-
lowing the EPA to take administi-ati%e
action in certain cases rather than
being forced to resort to court action in
all cases to enforce the provisions of the
act whenever a violation occurs, and
—provisions allowing the EPA, in certain
instances, to delegate enforcement au-
thority to Indian Tribes In the same
way that such authority is currently
being delegated to States
- Th. ‘legislation, however, does include
provisions that are not supported by the
administration I agree with the necessity
for the EPA to regulate drinking water con-
taminants posing a significant health threat
as expeditiously as possible I believe, how-
ever, that the statutorily mandated require-
ment to regulate specified listed contami-
nants seriously curtails the EPA Admimstra.
torUs flexibility to determine which contarni-
nants actually need to be regulated to pro-
tect the public health, and when
The legislation also provides for the estab-
lishment of a new sole Source aquifer dern-
onstration program and a new welihead
protection program that are not supported
by the administration When originally in-
troduced, we observed that these new pro-
- grams represented significant and unwar-
ranted intrusions into local and State land
use control and water use decisions Al-
though we certainly agree that ground
water needs to be protected from major
contaminants, we believe that States have
the principal role in protecting this valuable
resource, and that the EPA has sufficient
statutory authority to assist the States where
appropriate. In fact, the Federal Govern-
ment can never hope adequately to protect
the ground water resources of America
without the major participation and indeed
the leadership of State and local communi.
ties, and S. 124 reflects this important un-
derstanding.
The conference-approved version of these
provisions represents significant Improve.
rnent over the ground water pro ision con-
tained in the original House bill I am as-
sured that the ground water grant program
in S. 124 as enrolled cannot be used as an
instrument to create a new Federal regula-
tory program In fact, the only sanction ap-
plied to States that fail to develop an op.
probed ground ater program would be
the loss of their Federal grant money for
running the program Neither can the bill s
provisions establish a major Federal pres-
ence in highly sensitive local land use deci-
sions that could affect ground water I read
the bill as not authorizing direct and de-
tailed Federal Intervention in State plan-
ning and control of land use, and I hereby
direct the EPA to recogmze to the fullest
extent the primacy of State Governments in
decisions affecting ground water in the un-
plementation of this act
Further, there are certain enforcement
provisions that I believe are of questionable
validity For example, the bill uses language
that suggests that some enforcement actions
are mandatory The principle of prosecuto-
nal discretion is an essential ingredient in
the e’ecution of the laws I believe that the
Congress cannot bind the Executive in ad-
vance and remove all prosecutorial discre-
tion ithout infringing on the powers of the
Executive It is unrealistic to expect that
the EP. will ever have the resources or the
need to take formal enforcement action
against each and every violation of the act,
without regard to how trivial the violation
or unfair an enforcement action would be
Note: As enacted, S. 124 is Public Law
99—339, opproted June 19
Department of Justice
Nomination ofArnold I Burns To Be
Deputy .4ftorney General. June 19, 1986
The President today announced his inten-
tion to nominate Arnold I. Burns to be
Deputy Attorney General He would suc-
ceed D Lowell Jensen
832
-------
Corsici. R ot2 -5
Ob0 00
CORREC ONS IN THE SAFE
DRrNKrNG WATER ACT
Mr SIMpSON Mr. Pres1d L aga
after coriferri with the Democratic
leader. I ask unan n u consent that
the Senate turn to House Concur m
Resolution 346. making corrections In
the Safe Dr nking WaJ. Act.
The PRESIDING OFFICER Is
there objection to the request of the
Senator from Wyoming
Mr BYRD Mr. President there is
no obj j on thIs side The matter
has been Cleared
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The
Clerk uU state the resolution by title.
The assista leg1sjati clerk read
asfOllo s
A concurrent resolution (f-f Con Res 346i
to correct technjcaj errors in the er1rollr enc J v c ft e-i
o( tI’e bills !2 . -
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Is
11i re objeetion to the Immediate con-
-- , . — —
i dir*ij . L OQØ PS j.
Theie - beEs nø o $l ti. th n-
currt_ I - and
agreed to.
Mr. SIMPSON. Mr. Presj4e
move fl rJi1 tha vote by which
the reso1u wa agre to.
Mr BrRD. Mr. Idertt. I move to
lay th .Lfli tIo(1onthe table
The motIon to lay on the table w
agreed to.
-------
C o &, R .c- r o - 1-\ous . p c
CORRECTING TECHNICAL
ERRORS IN ENROLL .1ENT OF
S 124. SAFE DRINKING WATER
AMENDMENTS OF 1985
Mr. WAXMAN Mr Speaker. I ask
unanimous consent for the immediate
consideration of the concurrent reso-
lution (H. Con Res 346) to correct
technical errors in the enrollment of
the bill S 124.
The Clerk read the title of the con-
current resolution.
The SPEAKER pro tempore Mr
MRAZEK) Is there objection to the re•
t of the gentleman from Califor
Mr. LENT. Reserving the- right to
object. Mr. Speaker, and I ffl not
object. I Just want to confirm from the
gentleman from California that the
concurrent resolution merely cor -rect.s
three technical errors in the Senate
bill. S. 124. the Safe Drinking Water
Act Amendments of 1986, which re-
cently passed this body.
I yield to the gentleman from Cal!-
fornia.
Mr WAXMAN. Mr. Speaker, the
gentleman is correct.
Mr. LENT And these errors that .are
being corrected have to do xth sec-
tion references entirely, am I correct’
Mr WAXMAN That is correct.
Mr LENT Mr Speaker. I withdraw
my reser\ation of objection
The SPEAKER pro tempore Is
there objection to the request of the
gentleman from
There as no objection.
The Clerk read the concurrent reso-
lution, as fcUo s
That in the enrollment of the bill (S 124).
the Clerk of the senate haJl make the fol-
Io ing correc ior.s
(1) In section 101(b) in the amendment
adding a nev. section 1412b )8) strike Co FZ çz c. ..—c \ 0
1451 andlnsert 1415’
(2 In si ctuon 1O1(c)(4), strike 1420(e)
and n ert 14 l6eY
(3) In section 301ch’, stnke section 6’
and Insert section 106
The PEAKER pro ternpore The
Quest Ion is on the concurrent resolu-
tion I
The concurrent resolution was
agreed to
A motion to reconsider as laid on
the table.
-------
S 6284
tion contrnitted to quality. The days of
crackling static and noisy studio audi-
ences have given way to crystal clear
ignal .s. satellite technology and In-
tant Communication WDAY contin-
lea to serve Fargo and the surround-
.ng communities with outstanding reli-
ability.
In another year, WDAY will be 65
years old. But I think I can say with
some assurance that this venerable
station will not be retiring. I look for-
ward to another 64 years of fine pro-
gramrning and outstancljng public
service.
THE FUTURE OF ELLIS ISLAND
Mr. MOYNIff Jq, Mr. President. the
ongoing national debate about pro-
posed restorations at Ellis Island has
brought forth suggestions from every
quarter, but, unhappily, not many so-
lutions. There are a number of build-
ings on the island, all in a state of seri-
ous disrepair. The main building.
through which some 12 million hope-
ful Iinrnigrant.s entered the United
States, is now being restored. Few
complain about the nature or intent of
that effort.
But a great deal of argument does
yet surround plans for what to do with
the rest of the place. After considering
the various po sibilIt1es, including the
addition of a luxury hotel or a kind of
ethnic museum and shopping mall, it
“iecomes very clear that we need and
iught not rush to construction, The
act is that we do not have any really
good or comprehensive plan to restore
the whole of Ellis Island. A recent
New York Times editorial had it exact-
ly right: “Until there’s a very good
plan, why not choose the final option.
leaung the south section as is—what
Interior olficials call “the Fenee”
Mr. President, this Is the answer. Let
us wait a bit, until we can make a wise
and sensible decision about how to
make all of Ellis Island a place Arner-
Ica can look to with pride. I urge the
Senate to consider this editorial, and I
ask unammous consent that it be
printed in the REcoRD
There being no objection, the edito-
rial was ordered to printed in the
R:cokD. as foilows:
(From the Ne ; York Times. May 18 19861
Ti’t OTHER ELUS ISLAND
Even as you climb ashore. 10 minutes
(r’oni lower New Yora, it’s clear that the
great Ellis Island controversy arises from a
great misunderstanding Contrary to wide
public impression, no one aanc.s to desecrate
or commercialize the vast brick temple
through which 12 million people entered
America Far from it The ornate red build-
ing is eiied In scaffolding, evidence of a
loving restoration that will cost more than.
3100 million. By 1992. It will constitute a
a.st. evocative monument to the Golden
Door
Nevertheless, there’s another Ellis Island.
o the sot th separated by a ferry slip and
nly narrOwlyconnected The north part is
. eing restored without debate All the argu-
ment concerns the south part., Few of the 12
million immigrants went there, it the site
of an aoancloried hospital and two dozen
crumbling contagious-disease wards What
houid be done with these buildings and
with this other island?
ft was conflict over rival solutions in Feb-
ruary that prompted Interior Secretary
Donald Hodel to dismiss Chrysler’s Lee Ia-
cocca as head of an advisory commission.
One plan sounded like tourist plastic’ a
smorgasbord of ethnic food counters, dLs-
plays, dances. Another plan sounded per-
versely plush a hotel and conferenceeenter,
with overtones of hot tubs for the rich and
famous.
Now the partisans seem to be moving
toward a common ground, Mr. lacocca sees
merit in the ne est con!erence’center pro-
posa,l. which de-deluxes the original plan,
This may also be the choice of the advi5ory
commission and others who aant Li la Other
Ellis Island restored. It Is probably the only
option that can pay for itself.
There are appealing arguments for other
options, like restoring the hospital but
razing the small buildings—which are even
now a ruin of rust and vines and broken
glass. The quaint spitting sinks in the tuoer.
culosts wards are cracking off alligatored
walls Rubble obscures the crematorium.
morgue and mattress stenhlzer The idea Is
to tear all or most of this down and create a
park here. (acing the Statue of Liberty
The flaw in such plans Is that they cost
money, money that is nowhere in sight. Mr
lacocca’s remarkable campaign is raising
3265 million to refurbish the Statute and
rescue Ellis Island North. With the drive
almost finished and with Congress gripped
by Gramm-Rudman fever, there’s no other
source of funds. To do no more ehan raze
the buildings on the south section would
cost $10 million. Saving some and creating a
park (“Constitution Gardens.” with interna-
tional participation) would cost $40 million.
Where would the money come from?
The conference-center plan, which would
pay for Itse lf, Is by no means offensive. A fa-
cility run by universities that could host
meetings of, for instance, the World Bank
would not traduce tradition. In all, it is a
pretty good remedy—and that is precisely
its defect Until there’s a very good plan,
why not choose the final option, leaung the
south section as is—what Interior officials
call “the Fence” Restoring the north build-
ings will have already accomplished the
principal duty, to recall and honor those
who have made this a nation of immigrants,
To close the Other Ellis Island is to open
possibilit:es for a later generation, one with
a better plan and a stronger interest in
paying for it To settle for pretty good today
clangs with dull defeatism, People willing to
settle for pretty good would not have left
Cork. Cologne and Catania to make the
hard trip to Ellis Island and beiond.
SAFE DRINKING WATER AMEND-
MENTS CONFERENCE REPORT
Mr. DURENBERGER Mr. Presi-
dent, I submit a report of the commit-
tee of coq erence on S 124 and ask for
its imrneoiate consideration,
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The
report will be stated.
The assistant legislative clerk read
as follows:
The committee of conference on the dis-
agreeing votes of the two Houses on the
amendments of the House to the bill CS
124 entitled the “Safe Drinking Water
Amendr erts of 1985”. having met afte ’
full and tree conference, have agreed to rec’-
ommend and do recommend to their respecs
tive Houses this report, signed by all of the
conferees.
‘J s_ I 5,’ 5-
May 21, 1986
The PRESIDING OFFICER. With-
out objection, the Senate will proceed
to the consideration of the conference
report..
(The conference report is printed in
the House pro edtngs of the RECORD
of May 5. 1986.)
Mr. DURENBERGER. Mr. Presi-
dent. I am very pleased to bring before
the Senate today the conference
report on the Safe Drinking Water Act
Amendments of 1986. This marks the
successful conclusion of what has been
a long and difficult legisiatite process.
The first version of these amendments
was introduced in 1983. The Commit-
tee on Environment aria Public Works
first reported a bill at the end of the
98th Congress. The Senate passed its
bill last May and it ts only now that we
are able to bring the conference report
to the Senate floor.
I want to begin this morning by
thanking each of the Senate conferees
for their efforts to get this bill adopt-
ed, Senator BAucus who is the ranking
member of the subcommittee where
these amendments originated has been
a constant coauthor and partner in
the process. Senator Sr u-i’oRD, the dis-
tinguished chairman of the Committee
on Environment and Public Works.
has kept the drinking water bill near
the top of the list of his own priorities
which has made it possible to clear
each of the hurdles from hearings to
the conference report,
One of the most controversial ele.
nients oi this legislation has been the
ground water issue Ground water is
an extremely difficult subject. The
great variation in ground water uses,
resources, and problems across the
Nation makes it almost impossible to
find any national program, however
modest, that can satisfy all interests,
We think we have accomplished that
In this bill. At least we make a start.
And that would not have been possible
were it not for the patience and active
involvment of the other two Senate
conferees, At, SIMPsoN and LLOYD
B:N-rSEy. It was easy for me to take a
ground water amendment, But for
these two Senators representing West-
ern States, it was a tough road to
foilow, That we have all arrived at the
same destination and that we are all in
a reerrient on the ground water provi-
sions of this conference report is a
tribute to their legislative skills.
Mr President. the Safe Drinking
Water Act was first enacted by the
Congress in 1974 The need for a na-
tional statute to protect public health
from drinking water contaminants was
recognized by the Congress only after
surveys by the Environmental Protec-
tion Agency in the early 1970’s had
show-n that public water supplies were
widely contaminated with synthetic
organic chemicals—the new man-made
compounds that have revolutionized
every facet of American life in the ta.st
half of the 20th century. Whatever
miracles these new chemical sub-
stances have produced in the home or
\ - ,5. S €‘o &_ ’ U
CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — SENATE
-------
May 21, 1986
(at the workplace their presence in
drinking water supplies has been rec-
Ogruzed as a threat to the
Nation’s health. The public concern
for the Quality of d .rutking water par-
.ticularly in large cities drawing water
from rivers and other unprotected sur-
.face water supplies, provided the lmpe-
Us that was needed to first enact the
Safe Drinking Water Act of 1974.
The theory of the Safe Drinking
Water Act Is quite simple. The pro-
gram has two parts, First. EPA is to
establish national standards for drink-
.,ing aater quality. These standards are
numerical cnteria for each contami-
nant which may be found In a drink-
Ing water supply and which has or
may have an adverse effect on health.
The EPA standard is the maximum
concentration of the eonta inant a!-
lowable. At the time the Safe Drinking
Water Act was adopted, more than a
dozen such standards, principally for
metals and other inorganic elements,
had been established by the Public
ffealth Service. EPA was to rapidly fill
out this list with standards for a wide
range of other contaminants,
The second part of the theory of the
drinking water program is that water
suppliers, the operators of the 60.000
P&blic water systems which exist in
this country, will monitor the quality
of the water delivered to consumers
and treat that water if necessary to
assure’ that the concentration of each
- contaminant remains below the ac-
ceptable levels established by EPA.
The theory of the Safe Drinking
- Water Act is appropriate to our Feder-
al system of govermen . The central.
National Government conducts the re-
search on health effects and treat-
ment technologies that is necessary to
set standards that will provide ade-
quate protection of public health, And
local govern,n’ients. which most often
own and operate the water supply sys
tems. put the standards into practice
by applying them to the water they
deliver to the American people.
The Safe Drinking Water Act Is,
Indeed, simple in theory. In fact, Con.
gress expected the program to fail
Quickly into place. The original statute
is replete with quick deadlines stated
as mere days from enactment._60
days. 90 days. 180 days.
t is now 12 years later arid he Safe
Drinking Water Act once again comes
to the floor of the Senate with most of
the original promise LlfllUlfiJled. The
• act has failed miserably. In all of the
time that has elapsed since enactment,
the Environmental Protection Agency
has set standards for only a handful of
contaminants—six pesticides, all of
which have been banned for use—a
half a standard for thihalomethanes
one of the principal contamrnan, of
concern in the early 1970’s—and ra-
di onuclides.
5e en hundred different organic, in-
organic, biological, and radiological
contaipLi1ant have been detected in
the drni ing water upp1ies of the
United States. And yet today after 12
years under the Safe Drinking Water
Act we have standards for only 23 con.
taminarits and two-thirds of those
were established by the Public Health
Service In the 1960’s long before any-
body had even contemplated a nation-
al envu’onrnental protection agency. A
miserable, discouraging, disturbing
record—that is the legacy of the drink.
thg water program at the Federal level
of governn’ient.
“Because EPA set festarida
water systems at the local level have
tlOt monitored for the broad range of
contanijriants likely to be found in
water supplies. Even for those stand-
ards that are in place, It was soon dis-
covered that most public water sys-
tems were woefully unprepared to im-
plement the measures required of
them by the drinking water law. hi
1981, the General Accounting Office
Conducted a study of compliance by
local systems with the requiremen of
the Safe Drinking Water Act. The re-
quirements are principally of three
types. To monitor supplies for the con-
taminant,s for which EPA has set
standard,s: to report to the consumer L I
the standard is exceeded; and to take
steps to come Into compliance with the
law—to treat contaminated water—if
existing quality does not meet the na-
tional standard, GAO had a great deal
to report.
The record of the drinking water
program at the local level is a match
for our experience at the national
level of goverrunen , It Is not a happy
record. Violations are not In the hun-
dreds. Violations are not in the thou-
sands. Each year violations of the Safe
Drinking Water Act by local public
water supplie number in the tens of
thousands.
The failure of the’ program at the
local level is in large part understand-
able. The operation of the water
supply systems In most small towns is
not a high-technology endeavor, There
has been no revolution In the capacity
of small communities to protect their
water supplies from these new chemi-
cal contaminants. Water supply Is
public works. Many towns still don’t
charge consumers for water. Few small
towns can afford to pay a water engi-
neer fuiltime to run the system. Man.
agem n is quite often done by a vol.
unteer who is not by training or Incli-
nation part of the theory of the Safe
Drinking Water Act,
So the job did not get done in 90
days In 1974. Arid even with the
amendments we report today, It will be
a long time before we can say that the
promisg of the law—a safe drinking
water supply for all Americans—has
been fulfilled. Although the amend-
ments we bring back from the confer-
ence are modest in scope when viewed
in light of the public health challenge
that we face, they do contain elements
which we believe will bring the theory
of the Safe Drinking Water Act closer
to the reality of the human institu-
tioris hich day to day administer its
provisions—at all levels of govern efl ,
r\(\r)
S62 a
There are six major elen nts to’ ihese
amendments which I would like to
review for my colleagues today.
-‘ - ‘SOM i J(y
- First, EPA Is required to establish
standards for a specific list of 83 con-
tarrunants Within a 3-year period.
Second, the amendments establish a
- new benchmark based on best avail-
able treatment technology to be used
by EPA-in writing the standards that
will facilitate selection of the appro-
priate numerical criteria.
- Third, EPA is Instructed to mandate
filtration arid disinfection, or steps
equally protective of water supplies, as
appropnate treatment techniques for
all systems to remove contaminants in-
cluding contaminants for which na-
tional standards have not been set,
Fourth, local public water supply
systems will be required to mor.itor,
not only for- the contaminants for ‘j
which standards have been set as re-
quired by current law, but also for a
broad range of other contarmnants. as
well. -
Fifth, sig-nijican programs of tech-
nical and financial assistance to small I
systems for conducting monitoring
and implementing treatment tech.
niques are authorized. -
And sixth, the bill includes new pro-
grams to protect the ground water re-
sources that are used, by more than
40,000 public water systems to provide
drinking water supplies to their corn-
munitles.
Mr. President, that Is a summary of
the six major elements in the confer-
ence agreement, Working together
they are designed to correct the prob-
lems that have prevented the drinking
water law (rota fulfilling the promise
that was made 12 years ago. I would
now review each of these six elements
of the bill In some detail so that mem-
bers will understand the conference
report and to elaborate on the legisla-
tive history of the more teeh ,nicaj
items, -
SETTiNG STANDARDS
The amendments reported by the
conference require EPA to set stand.
ards for 83 specific contam nanta
within a 3-year period, By early June
1989, maximum contaminant levels for-
£3 chemical, biological, and radiologi-
cal agents specifically named in the
conference report must be promulgat-
ed by EPA.
This list is EPA’s own list. EPA is
moving In this direction, It Is some-
times sald—mxstaken ly..that the list
contains 85 contaminants. The origi-
nal lists which when combined had 85
elements also contained disinfection
and filtration among those 85 require-
ments, Those two items are included
at another point in this bill, So the
number is 83.
It Is unusual for the Senate to In-
clude a specific list of pollutants with
specific deadlines for standard,s in the
language of a bill. Choosing coqtami.
nants and scheduling the regulatory
process is not normally a Iegislz,ti e
CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — SENATE
V
-------
S 6286’ ‘CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — SENATE
function. But the history of the drink allow other substitutions and speaking
lug water program more than justifies for myseLf. I will entertain any such
the use of lists and deadlines by the proposal from the Administrator at
-‘ ongress to assure that standards are the appropriate tune and with a sym•
:tualjy established and at the earilest pathetic ear. - -
)SSIble date. - -On the subject of Substitutions
I would make specific comment on there is a parameter that I personally
the subject of deadlines to illustrate believe Is of a high priority and which
the concerns that give rise to this sec is not on the list of 83 Contaminants.
tion of the bill. Even after EPA an. but ought to be considered by the ad.
flounced its commitment to set stand. ministrator at the earliest possible
ards for all of these contarnma s. date. I believe that we need a maxj.
other parts of the executive branch mum contaminant level for the total
raised barriers to the swift and certain concentration of organic chemicals in
completion of the task. For instance, drinking water supplies, A total organ.
last September the Senate found It Ics standard would be an unusual
necessary to adopt an amendment to standard under the Drinking Water
the Superfund reauthorization which Program—most of the numbers are for
required the Office of Management specific Constituents, But it would not
and Budget to release recommended be unique. The standard for trihalo.
maximum contaminant levels for 40 methanes Is a number set for the corn-
contaminants that had been subrnittej bined concentration of four comrn
.to 0MB for review according to the pounds including chloroform and bro ..
provtsion.s of Executive Order 1291, moform, A total organics standard
The EPA proposals has been sitting on would simply expand on the concept
a desk at 0MB for 8 monthi without of the THM standard and set an upper
any response or concurrence from the bound on the combined concentration
regulatory review office, of all organic chemicals.
To be certain that such tactics will There are at least two good reasons
not ultimately defeat our Int ent in for establishing a total organics stand.
adopting these amendmenr,s, the bill ard. First, It Is obvious to anyone who
contains deadlines. These deadlines has studied the Safe Drinking Water
make the duty of the Administrator to Act that the chemical revolution In
est,abllsh standards a nondiscretlonary the marketplace moves - ’!a.ster than the
duty and allow any citizen to bring standard.settjng process at EPA. It
suit to compel action, should the Ad. takes many the
mirustrator fail to meet the timetable best of Circumstances to set a standard
- itablished in the bill. It should be for a contaminant after it has been de-
ar that it was not only the failure tected in drinking Water supplies, By
EPA that prompted us to adopt the time an enforceable standard has
these provisions, been established drinking water sup-
The list and the deadlines were both piles may have become significantly
included in the legislation sent to the Contaminated in many parts of the
conference by the Senate. These are country. A total organics number
our proposaLs. However, the current could stand.ln for a speci.fic standard,.
Administrator of the Environmental during this period of regulatory devel.
Protection Agency has many times ex- oprnent and provide at least an upper
pressed concern about this section be- bound on the amount of contarruna.
cause of the lack of any discretion in tion allowed,
Carrying out the duties as provided in Second. it Is suspected, although
the Senate bill. It was also argued In very costly to prove, that some organ-
the conference that the House bill ics which occur in combination may
Which took a very different approach have additive or synergistic effects on
to standard.setting provided the Ad. human health. A total organics stand.
ministrator with considerable dLscre- ard would assure that Americans were
tion as to which contaminants would not exposed to huge doses of harmful
be regulated chemicals In mixtures where the
The conference report, In response amount of each element Was defined
to the Administrator’s request. adds as safe by itself but where the corubi.
an element of discretion to the stand. nation presents a severe risk. In this
ard.setting process. The Administrator regard, I think of the recent MCL’s for
Is authorized to substitute up to seven volatile organics. The evidence pre-
contaminants which are not on the list sented by EPA suggests that many of
for se ven contaminants which are. lie these contaminants are found togeth-
still must set standards for 83 contami. er En water supplies. Although we
nants in 3 years. Seventy.six of those might be willing to consume water
contaminants must be from the list with five parts per billion TCE or five
published in the conference report, parts per billion benzene. water that
But seven may be items which are not contained 10 or 15 different chemicals
currently on the list, of that type with total concentrations
The Administrator has expressed to ranging up to 100 parts per billion
me personally his view that more than might reasonably be subject to a dif-
yen substitutions may be justified. ferent qualitative Judgment on health.
as we move closer to the end of even if It meets the quantitative stand.
3year ’ regulatory process. Con. ard for each of the contaminants
.ess may be persuaded that more taken individually, So I would be more
thai -i seven substitutions are justified, than sympathetic to a proposal front
If so, Congress may amend the law to EPA to substitute a total organics
000009
May 21; 1986
- f i(h ‘ li i’
standard for one of. he J ems. on the
legislated list.
Mr. President. before turning to the
secand.maior elernentof these amend.
inents let. me r ention one final sub:
ject with respect to -the standard-set-
ting process, J amending the existing
Safe Drinking Water Act to provide
this expedited standard.settuig scl-ied.
tile, we have removed several provi
sions In the law which were the foun.
dation of the process designed In 1974.
Those changes as I have tried to make
clear are most appropriate, because
the process as originally designed did
not -work. Nevertheless, there were
some concepts included in that origi.
nal framework which may still prove
useful. 11 operated on a somev. hat less
formal basis. I t t this regard. I am par-
ticalarly mindful of the role that was
established for the National Academy
of Sciences in the original act.
The National Academy of Sciences
never took well to its assignment to
quickly develop explicit recomnienda.
tioris for standards on specific con-
taminants. But the continuing studies
and reports by NAS on drinking water
and public health have provided, and
we hope will continue to provide. guid-
ance to the Agency as it conducts the
risk assessments that lead to RMCL’s
and health goals. ‘
Every risk assessment Includes
dozens of decisions to extrapolate
from the data which is available and
h:ch is relevant to a determination of
a. specific numerical standard that will
adequately protect public health,
Under current law- several consider’.
ationis Including the impact on espe-
cially susceptible persons, exposure to
the contaminants through other
media, synergistic effects and chronic
effects which fall short of adverse
health but which may increase the
risk of illness were to be considered by
NAS In making recommendations on
standards to EPA. We do not expect
this advisory relationship to be ternij.
nated by the result of these amend.
ments and find that the consideration
once assigned explicitly to NAS Should
continue to be matters that are
weighed by EPA in establishing drink.
lug water standards and health goals,
TREA M TECi{NOI,O y
Mr. President. the Second major
amendment to the Safet Drinking
Water Act made by this bill estab-
lishes a new technology benchmark in
the standard-setting process. There
are several regulatory steps in setting
a national drinking water standard.,
First, the Agency establishes a health-
based goal which under current law is
called the recommended maximum
contaminant level or RMCL Thn
number is set a level so that a person
consuming water containing that
amount of the contaminant would ex-
per ence no adverse health effects
even if the contarn ant is consumed
over a whole lifetime, By law the
RMCL also encornpames an adequate
margin of safety to protect those
-------
among us who are especially sensitive water supply systems, not all systems
to a particular or average systems. Any effort to
Once the RMCLor health goal is es- - weigh costs and benefits under the
tablished, the ad jnist or begins Safe Drinking Water Act and to set
‘ ork on the enforceable standard, the standards only where EPA can quanti-
-maximum cofltajm leveL This is fy benefits which outweigh costs
- the standard which applies to ttt would not be lawfuL The act requires
water delivered to consumers by public EPA to set a standard for every con —
water systems, i is a standai - at the tamumant that may have any adverse
tap. The MCL is set as close to the effect on health and to set the en-
goal as possible, but recognizes that forceable MCL as close to t_he health
- some water supplies have been con- goal as can be achieved by— feasible
taminated and that our capacity to technology. - - - -
renove those contaminants and reach There are two other items related to
the goal is limited by ti’e constratnt the technology factor in setting stand.
of available treatment technology. ards which need to be mentioned at
The amendment,s we will adopt this point. The first relates to granu-
today instruct the administrator to set lar act viated carbon or GAC, one of
the MCL at a ‘evel which is as close to the treatment technologies that is
the goal as possible using the best available to remove syntriecic organic
a ailabie treatment technology which chemicals from drinkiiig water sup-
is affordable for a large public water plies, in a few moments, I will be
supply system. Under current law the joined by other Members of the
admmr.istrator is to set the MCI. con. Senate for a brief colloquy on this sub-
sidering the use of treatment technol. ject, but let me say here that the con-
ogy which is “generally available.” ference report Is consistent with the
The adnnxustrator has not been able provision passed by the Senate In
In the 12 years that the drinking water regard to GAC.
program has been in place to suitably The Senate bin and the conference
define the concept “generauy avail- report establish that GAC is to be con-
able.” - sidered feasible—that is effective and
So these amendments delete the ret- affordable for large systems—to use In
erence to “generally availacle” tech- removing synthetic organic chemicals.
nology and shill to considerations In setting standards for any synthetic
more familiar in env Ironmental law. organic chemical, the administrator is
We begin here with an assumption to select a.levej which is not less than
that a public water system has a rela. the level that could be achieved using
Lively Uncontaminated water supply a feasible GAC system. -
- which nevertheless e, ceeds the At the time the Senate passed this
- RMCL—the health-based goal—for the legislation, some were proposing an
contaminant in question. The task is amendment that would have deleted
to set an enforceable standard as close GAC as the benchmark for trthalo-
to the heaith based goal as pcssible. It methanes or THM’s. The Senate did
must be achievable and, thus, must not adopt such as an ameridnient and
consider the technologies which are GAC is the benchmark for TKM’s, But
effective In removing that contarril- in using this technology factor the ad.
nant from water. EPA selects and ap- ministrator is to recognize that there
plies that technology hich is most ef- is an almost infinite variation in the
fective and which can be afforded by design of GAC systems. it is possible
the largest public Water systems con- to design such a system, where cost is
sidering the ab .Iity of the systems to not a factor, with almost unlimited Ca-
spread the cost of the treatment tech- pacity The particular GAC coniigura.
nolcgy over a large number of cortsuxn- tiori that is used in establishing the
ers. The standard, the maximum con- MCL for THTM—if, in fact. GAC is de-
taminant le el or MCL. is estsbiished termined to be the best available tech.
by factoring together these - three nology for this purpose—is to be a con-
Items The health goal, the effective- figuration that would be affordable to
ne:-s of treatment technologies In cc- large public water systems in the
nhi .ing contaminants, arid the le el of United States.
treatment that is affordable for the The second issue that needs to be
largest public water supply systems, mentioned in regard to the use of
Mr President, as I explain these technology and cost factors ui setting
amendments, it is also helpful to mdi- MCL’s v.as raised by EPA when ft pub-
‘cate what they are not. This is not an lished proposed maximum contamni-
instruction for the administrator to nant levels for eight volatile organic
conduct a cost-benefit anal ,sis to de- chemicals In November of last year. In
termine the MCI.. The law emphati. making that proposal EPA did not
cally does not pro% ide that the adrnin- follow the steps which I have ‘ust de-
istrator will set the MCI. at a level scribed They did establish RMCL’s
where benefits outweigh Costs, not for each of the contaminants. But
does it require EPA to balance costs rather than select an efiective and af-
and benefits in any other way. Cost fordable treatment technology to es-
only enters into the judgment of the tablish the MCL as close to the RMCL
administrator in defining hich treat- as possible, the Agency inserted an en-
ment technologies are to be considered tirely new concept Into the standard-
best a aila iIe technologies Amid avail- setting process.
ability En this instance is considered Before consmderir.g the effectiveness
only in the context of the largest and affordability of treatment tech-
May 21, 1986
CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — SENATE 0 Li 00 1 0
S 6287
nologies, EPA examined and included
as a consideration the availability and
effectiveness of technologies for de-
tecting these eight volatile organins in
water supplies, EPA found that there
is a limitation on the capacity of
present tec inology to detect thes
contaminants, Such a limitation is not
unexpected There is always a limit on
detection, What was unexpected is
that EPA chose one version of the
limit of detection as the drinking
water standard, the MCL, for five of
the contaminants Such a step is con-
templated no where in the Safe Drink-
ing Water Act or En these amend-
ments. - - -
This new factor—a level EPA calls
the practical quantita on lL’nit or
PQL—was not debated or considered
by the conferees on these amend-
ments. It is quite outside the scope of
the conference, since the Senate
passed Its bill in May of 1985 and the
House a month later. EPA did not pro-.
pose use of the PQL until November
of 1985. So we were unable to consider
this new issue In the conference. The
fact that we have chosen not to com-
ment on practical quantitatjon limits
should not be in any way or In any
forum considered and endorsement of
the use of this factor In the standard-
setting process. It is rather the result
of the rules under’ which the legisla-
tive process is conducted.
- However, it does seem to this Sena-
tor that the use of practical quantita-
tion limits cannot be considered as
conforming to the amendments Inat
we are adopting here today. Nowhere
does this conference report or the un-
derlying law allow EPA to set a stand-
ard which is less stringent than can be
achieved by the best available treat-
merit technology that is feasible.
PQLJs bear no relationship to the fea-
s lOility of treatment technologies. In
fact, the preamble to the MCL’s con-
tained data and Information showing
that levels much lower than the pro-
posed MCL’s could and are being
achieved in the United States by treat-
ment systems using GAC, the bench-
mark for SOC’s established by this
act.
These amendments require the con-
sideration of the best available treat-
ment- technology which is affordable
to large systems as a benchmark in
setting MCL’S. EPA’s practical quanti-
tation limits are not derived from
treatment techniques and are not even
based on the best available analyti
technology. The PQL’s are oased on
the capacity of the average lab doing a
routine analysis to detect a particular
contaminant at a reliable level.
In the preamble to these proposed
regulations, EPA makes the argument
that they cannot enforce a standard at
a level which is below the limit of de-
tection, The argument is interesting.
but largely rrelevant to the Issues at
stake here Por EPA has not proposed
a standard hich Is below the limit of
detection. Good labs using good tech-
-------
S 6288’
niques are by the data that EPA itself
presents capable of detecting levels at
only On e tenth of the level proposed
by EPA as the MCL’s for four of these
the contamjnaj All EPA need do Is
require Upgrading of the analytical
teehniques used in testing water sup.
plies for’compllance purposes. -
Of all the factors that the adminis-
trator might consider in establishing
drinking water standards, the one that
I least Useful—that is most likely to
be Out-of-date tomorrow_is the capac-
ity of the average laboratory to detect
a particular contaminant, We are
going through a literal revolution in
the analytic techniques that are used
to detect and measure pollutants and
contaminants in the environme , The
development of new techniques and
the spread of those techniques to aver.
age labs is nothing Short of phenorne-
nal.
When EPA takes the least stable of
all numbers—a concept not mentioned
in the law or the amendments_and
uses it to set MCL’s for items like
trichioroethytene benzene and vinyl
chloride, they are taking a very large
nsk that the decision will be over-
turned by a Court arid that the whole
effort to set drinking water standards
will once again be hopelessly and un-
necessarily delayed, The mandate of
the law is to see the standard as close
to the RMCL as is feasible applying
treatment techniques to relatively
clean water. To the extent that has
not been clear under current law, it is
made emphatically certain by these
amendments, That mandate has not
been satisfied. in this Senator’s judg-
mcnt, by the MCLs that were estab-
lished using practical quantitation
limits for the five volatile organics in
the November 1985 proposal.
DISiNrECTION AND FILTRATION
Mr. President, the third major ele-
ment of these amendments is found in
the provisiora for disinfection and f ii-
tration of drinking v. acer supplies The
administrator Is to promulgate re-
quirements for filtration by all sys-
tems using surface ater sources and
for disinfection by all systems, These
requirements will add to public health
protection by establishing minimum
letels of treatment and protection
e en where no specific MCL has been
‘.iolated. There are a vast array of
Siral and biological contaminants that
can be transported in drinking water
supplies These and other elements
which threaten human health can fre-
quently be removed by these widely
used treatment techniques
The provisions of the conference
report ith respect to filtration and
disinfection track the Senate bill in
t o very important respects, First, the
administrator is to consider whether
there are protectien measures that
systems relying on surface aters can
take thich-ar as protoctive of public
health as Is filtration Where such
active measures to protect watersheds
are in place, the s stern may not be re-
quired to install filtration. Second.
EPA is to pro i de technical assistance
to small systems so that’ they might ef-
fectively implement disinfection tech.
niques. “ ‘ -. ‘ ‘ - ‘ - -
• One further coimnent also needs ‘to
be made on this subject, Mr. Pi-esr-
dent. On reading the House debate on
‘the conference report or last Tuesday,
one might get the impression that no
system which is In complianc with all
the MCL’s will be required to employ
disinfection or filtration, Such an in-
terpretation would not be in conform-
ance with the legislative language re-
ported by the conference, Compliance
with existing drinking water standards
Is not an indication that there Is no
need for filtration or disinfection. Fil-
tration will be required at surface
water systems unless a system meets
equivalent health protection criteria
established by EPA. Therefore, sys-
terns in compliance with the MCL’s
are not auLomacically exempt from
the filtration requ1remen ,
MONITORING O ’NRECULk7 CON’TAMINAN’rs
The fourth major provision included
in these amendments is the program
for monitoring unregulated contanil-
nants. Under the Safe Drinking Water
Act local public water supply systems
are only required to monitor for those
contaminants for which a national
standard has been established, Be-
cause EPA has set very few standards,
an insufficient amount of morutoz-mg
has been conducted. We know that the
monitoring has been insufficient be-
cause a very few States, including my
own State of Minnesota and including
California. have Conducted Independ-
ent monitoring progran testing for a
wide range of potential contaminants.
Arid a wide range of contan ij has
been discovered, Several communities
in Minnesota which believed that their
water was safe because it met all Fed-
eral standards have been shocked and
dismayed to learn that the water is ac-
tually spiked with a toxic chemicaj,
and In some cases a mixture of chemj-
cals. that cannot be seen or tasted or
smelled. The contaminants were not
previously detected or suspected by
monitoring under the drinking water
law because there were no standards
for the chemicals in question,
These amendments will bring the
added measure of protection which is
afforded by broad gauge monitoring to
all of the Communities in the Nation.
EPA will establish a list of contami-
nants—in addition to those contami-
nants for hich standards are set—arid
the wac r supply of every cor y
will be tested at least once every 5
years for that broad range of contamj-
nants,
To make sure that this program is
effective for the thousands of small
ater systems across the country, the
Senate bill and the conference report
contain an authorization of $30 mil-
lion to pay, for the required sampling
and analysis a small syste I want
to say to my colleagues that this is not
Just another grant program which the
President and the Congress are free to
,O•000i 1
- May 21, ip86 ’
kill by failing to provide the ne essarj
appropriation. The
required to establish’ ‘ 7 ’prograrn-’for
monitoring unregulated contaminants
which is a nondiscretiona.j -y
can be eri ,for ed by anycitizen in dis-
trict court’. Small systems satisfy their
responsibilities under the amendments
by making their systems available for
sampling. The authorization Is an au-
thorization for EPA to provide the
Agency with the resources necessary
to carry out the testing that Is man-
dated. EPA cannot avoid the responsi-
bility by failing to seek—or actively
opposing_an appropriation for that
purpose, -
TECHNIC,u ASSISTANCE
The fifth major element in the con-
ference report is found in a series of
provisions to provide technical and fi-
nancial assistance to the States amid es-
pecially to small public water supply
systems, I have Just described the pro-
grain of a.sslstance 10 make sui-e that
monitoring for unregulated contain-
nant.s is conducted for small systerrtj,
This legislation meets the same objec-
tive in other ays including a substart-
tIal authorization for general techni-
cal assistance and mea ,scjres to increase
cooperation between EPA and Indian
tribes which hate experienced great
difficulty in securir.g safe and ade-
quate drinking water Supplies,
- On the subject of technical assist-
ance. I wotijd make mention of the
very important role that the National
Rural Water Association has played in
bringing the promise of safe drinking
water to the small towin and rural
communities of America, The confer-
ence report Includes specific mention
of circuit rider programs_me g
technicians who are available to a
large number of communities and
travel among them providing assist-
ance and advice in the operation of
water supply systems. This provision
was crafted with the National Rural
Water Association in mind. I would
note that the President’s budget for
1987 proposed elimination of the grant
for the National Rural Water Associa-
tion and that In response the C iniriit.
tee on En%ironrnent and Public Works
in its annual report to the Budget
Committee recommended that the
grant be continued.
LEAD BAN
Mr. President. before turning to the
subject of ground water protection in
the conrerence report, I wish to review
one other Item directly related to the
activities of the drinking water pro.
gram. When the Senate Considered
and adopted amendments to Super-
fund. Senator BRADLEY sponsored an
amendment that would ban the use of
lead pipes and solder for use iri drink-
ing water distribution systems. brhis is
a very important amendment and I am
pleased that we could include the
Bradley amendment here in the Safe
Drinking Water Act Amendments of
1986 rather than wait for action on
CONGRESSIONAL RECORD - SENATE
JTh
-------
May 21, 198$
lead in drinking water supply systems
as a part of Superfund.
Lead which leaches from solder and
pipes has become a public health con-
cern in several States and steps are
-being taken In many communities to
deal with this public health threat. A
part of the Brai:lley amendment which
we include here directly bans the use
of lead solder or lead pipe in any con-
struction which is to be a part of a
drinking water supply system. This
‘ban applies not only to materials used
in constructing the drinking water
system owned by the public water sup.
pher. but also to the pipes and solder
used in the construction of new homes
and commercial buildings.
Since EPA Is not experienced and
probably not capable of effectively en-
forcing a ban in buildings under con-
struction or repau- this legislation in-
cludes a special enforcement provision
which has created some confusion and
needs clarthcation. It is not the Inten-
tion of the conferees that EPA enforce
the ban directly on builders and con-
tractors. The ban is to be enforced
- only through State and local building
: and plumbing codes. It Is our intention
that State arid local gcvernmen
make the modifications in codes and
regulations necessary to effectuate the
ban s.c soon as possible. And we make
the ban In Federal law effective unme-
diately for that purpose. But realizing
that it will take some time for State
and local governments to modify their
laws, we do not place any sanction
against a State for failure to enforce
the ban until 2 years alter the date of
enactment of thIs legislation, If at
that point a State has not made the
changes in its regulations, the Admin-
Lstrator is authorized to withhold a
portion of the State’s drinking water
grant as a sanction,
I want to say again hov much we ap-
preciate the role that Senator Ba&ii i.zy
played in shaping this amendment, At
one point he held back the amend-
ment so we could proceed with Senate
consideration of the drinking water
bill and at every point in the process
he has been cooperative with the
needs of the committee and the views
of other members on this amendment.
His leadership on this matter has
made an Important Contribution to
public health protection andis re iard-
ed in lull today as the Senate sends
his proposal with this conference
report on to the President for signa-
ture.
GROUND WADES PROTZCTXOiI
The issue that has caused the great-
est controversy with respect to this
legislation and which delayed cornple-
tiori of the conference for so many
months is ground water protection,
the sixth and final major element of
the bill that I would review for my col-
leagues today. The souse bill included
a comprehensite ground water protec-
tion program, The Senate bill did not.
Nor ‘ as-the Senate prepared to con.
sider a comprehensive ground water
protection program as a part of this
Conference.
Thanks largely to the leadership of
Senator Mo -wym.u , the Senate bill did
Include a demonstration program for
sole source a iuifers to support a few
truly outstanding ground water pro-
tection programs across the Nation.
And I will want to comment further
on the sole source aquifer program in
a moment, but the program that we
did include was intendea -to be only a
demonstration program and was clear-
ly not the beginning of a comprehen-
sive, national program to protect our
ground water resoruces,
I have long advocated such a nation-
al program. I believe that the debate
In the Senate on a comprehensive
ground water protection bill will beg in
In the next few months. But I have
steadfastly resisted making that
debate a part of the consideration of
the drinking water amendments. The
drinking water program does not work
well. It needs attention in Its own
right. And it needs a legislative fix as
soon as possible.
Holding out for a ground water pro-
gram as a part of the drinking water
conference has only proved to slow the
process. And we still do not have the
bill signed by the President. The very
small amount that has been done In
these amendments to make a start on
ground water protection may yet turn
out to be the excuse for a Presidential
veto.
So we have resisted the House Insist-
ence on a ground water package. We
were true to the Senate’s desire in
that respect. We come back with a sole
source aquifer program which is very
much the cousin of the proposal that
we took to the conference. And ae
have a modest program for those
States whIch are ready to take steps to
protect the waters that are near to
drinking water wells used by public
water supply systems, Both of these
prograsn .s fit well within the context of
the drinking water law arid neither of
them infringes on the traditional rela.
tionship between the Federal Govern-
ment and State and local governments
In matt r of land use and water re-
sources.
Let me describe the program to pro-
tect sole source aquife first. It Is a
grant program, It authorizes assist.
arice to State and local governments to
plan arid implement programs that
will protect sole source aquife . “Sole
source aquifers” is a concept placed in
the ori ’inal Sale Drinking Water Act
to identify drinking water sources that
were especially lmportant -_unpop it
presuhiably because they would be
hard to replace should they become
contaminated. That was the concept.
Unfortunately the language in the
original statute was less than artfully
drafted. The language actually refers
to “sole or principal sources” of drink-
ing water in the text of the law. When
EPA tried to put this concept Into a
regulatory definition in the mid-1970s
they were unsuccessful, The way the
O3OO 2 S6289
statute is drafted their Is nothing
“sole” about a sole source aquifer,
Wherever mote than 50 percent of the
population relies on ground water for
drinking water, the aquifer- from
which the water is taken is by defini-
tion the principal source of drinking
water and thus subject to designation
under the drinking water law whether
or riot It Is a unique source of Supply.
EPA’s attempt to make a usefuj dis-
tthctlon between sole source aquifers
as the valuable resources we m:ght
imagine them to be and as the Con-
-gress actually defined them in 1974
never caine to a conclusion, There is
not now in regulation any provision to
carry out the requirements of the 1974
act with respect to sole source
aquIfers.
Nevertheless, and despite these all
too familiar problems with the drink-
ing water program at the Federal
level, many State and local govern-
ments have put the concept of sole
source aquifer to good use and are
busy protecting those unique and vul-
nerable drinking water resources from
contamination, One place that has
made especially significant use of the
concept is Long Lsland, NY, The ac-
quifers of Long Island which make up
a complex and interconnected hydro-
logical system are truly a sole source
of drinking water for some 3 mIllion
persons. And Long Island ha.s begun
significant efforts to protect these
aquifers In ways that might prove
useful in other parts of the Nation,
Long Island Is not the only such exam-
ple. Communities in Texas, Massachu-
setts, and Washington State are
making comparable efforts.
It is the purpose of this amendment
to provide a demonstration program to
assist those local governments which
have made a start in protecting their
sole source aquifers. It Is a demonstra-
tion program. This is not the first
cycle of some open ended Federal con-i-
initment to ground water protection,
The definition of sole source aquifer in
the Federal law could not serve useful-
ly as the foundation for any such corn.
mitment. So we are limited to demon.
stratioris. But supporting demoristra.
tions is one useful and important rote
that a national government can and
snould play in a federal system like
ours.
From the tenor of these remarks it,
should be clear that It was only
through the leadership and persist-
ence of Senator Moyrins ui that the
conference was persuaded to adopt
this demonstration program. His Lire-
less efforts overcame the doubts that
many of us had on this subject, And as
a result of his efforts an approach to
ground water protection that was pio-
neered in his State may well become
the model for other programs all
across the Nation,
Mr. President, this conference report
also,utcludes new provisions to protect
the surface arid subsurface land areas
around the drinking water wells of
CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — SENATE
-------
000013
CONGRESS1ONAL RECORD — SENATE - May 21, 1986
cused by the Attorney General in a much better matched to this task than
letter to. the conferees, we hate Is the Drinking Water Office at EPA .
dropped the Consistency requirement, Mr President, as I conclude these
• In its téad these rñénd ats ln- comments I want to say that we are
elude language which has become sir- expecially sensitive to the relationship
- tually boilerplate in other Federal betaeen the’ drinking water program
statutes. It requires Federal à encies and the efforts to develop ground
that have Jurisdiction over otential water protection arid correction pro-.
sources of contamination within well- grains both by the Federal Govern-
head areas to operate those-tacilitles merit and among the several States. In
under the same rules and regulations particular, we are concerned about the
and in the same manner as is required use of standards promulgated under
of any other person. The President is the drinking water law as central ele-
given authority to exempt any Federal n’ient.s of ground ater protection pro.
facility from this requtremen , If he grams developed by the States and as
determines that It is in the paramount cleanup standards under the Federal
interest of the United States to do so. Superfund program. Mr. President. I
As I say. Mr. President, this language am one Senator who does not bellete
which occurs in the Clean Air Act, the that the maximum contaminant levels
Clean Water Act, the Solid Waste Dii- established under the Safe Drinking
posal Act, the Supertund amendments Water Act are appropriate for use In
which are now pending in the confer- either of these ways. Drinking water
ence, and which is Included in the cur- MCL’s, as I have tried to make clear
rent law verision of the Safe Drinking here today, are not simply health
Water Act itself has become a stand- standards but include other factors, as
ard feature of Federal law to rational- well. Rather than use these standards
t.ze the regulatory status of Federal fa- developed In one context f or a public
cilities without establishing an oner- health program, in an entirely differ-
ous and complicated review process as ent setting for resource-based deci-
might be required by some interprets- sions in regard to ground water protec-
tions of the consistency language tion, it would be far better to simply
which was included In the House develop ground water protection and
amendment, correction standards directly. I hope
Mr. President, the sole source aqui- soon to suggest a oomprehensjve
fer demonstration program and the ground water protection program to
wellhead area protection program are the Senate.
new elements of the drinking water Mi-. President, I ant to once again
law that differ in important respects thank my coUeagues who served on
from the progranis that hate been in- the conferences committee and
cluded in that law In the past. At the ‘ .orked so hard to make this legisla.
State level of goternment, drinking tiori possible, With that I would rec-
water programs are most frequently omninend to the Senate the adoption of
administered by public health agen- this conference report. Thank you,
cies. That is most appropriate, since Mr. President.
the dnnlung water law is a public Mr. President, I yield at this point to
health law that involves analysis of my colleague from Montana (Mr.
water supplies and other analytical BAu s].
procedures that health departments The PRESIDtNC OFFICER. The
are best equipped to carry out. But Senator from Montana Is recognized,
these two new ground water provisions
have inmportant elements which are Mr. BAUCUS. Mr. President, I rise
focused on resource protection rather in strong support of the Safe Drinking
than public health. In that regard, it Water Act Amendments of 1986.
Is essential that EPA gute States great These amendments will strengthen
flexibility in determining which State the law to protect this Nation’s public
agencies shall administer these new water supplies. The Safe Drinking
pmgramns and not require, that they be Water Act was enacted in 1974 to
managed by the same State agencies ensure that public drinking water sup.
that carry out other parts of the plies are safe.
drinking water program. This law was enacted out of a con-
We, of course, face a similar Issue cern raised by a National Academy of
here at the Federal level The agency Sc ence’s report that found the pres-
has established an Office of Ground ence of over 700 contaminants in the
Water Protection to implement the city of New Orleans’ water supply.
national’ ground water strategy. We Since the act became law, EPA, has
see these programs as fitting into that set standards for only 22 contami-
strategy quite well and believe that flants—22 out of a minimum of 700
they should be managed iii that Office coritarnmar .ts that now exist. If we
and in coordination with other ground accept ti-us list as all’inclusive—and it
water protection efforts. To make my is not—the public is protected Iron s
point specific, EPA Is required to pro- less than three-fourths of 1 percent of
vide technical guidance to the States the contaminants in drinking water.
and public water supply systems on Even worSe, most of these contarrii.
the methods that might be used to nant.s were regulated by the public
most appropriately define wellhead health service in the early 1960’s and
protection areas. The expertise of the then incorporated into the Safe Drink-
Of f ice of Ground Water Protection is ing Water Act. Only two standards
S 6290
public water systems that rely on
ground “ater resources. This provision
was worked out in the conference as a
compromise with the House. - The
structure of the amendment is similar
to the structure of the original, corn-
prehensave House ground-water pro-
gram. But the scope of the program
the conference reports Is very much
narrower than the House bill and the
Federal-State relationship provides in-
finitely more flexibility for the States
.to ca .s1gn arid establish their own pro-
grams than would hate been provided
had we adopted the House bill.
Under the conference agreement,
the Administrator has the authority
to disapprove State-proposed welihead
protection programs. If a State devel-
ops a program and the Administrator
disapproves it, the State can choose
not to resubmit the program, and the
only consequence is that they aill not
receive Federal grants to implement
the program. States do not suffer any
sanction from the Federal Govern-
ment. other than the loss of the grant
to develop arid implement the pro-
gram, If they do not submit a program
which can be approved by the Admiri.
Istrator.
The reason that the Administrator Is
given the authority to disapprove a
State program is to make sure that
- scarce Feders,l dollars are not sent to
Support &ate welihead protection pro-
grams that are Ineffectual or inappro-
priate. If States do not submit serious
arid effective proposals, there is no
reason that they should expect Feder-
al dolla.rs under this program. By dis-
approving a State proposal, the Ad-
ministrator is able to prevent that
result. But there is no attempt here to
compel States to submit programs
that can meet the standard of some
national criteria for welihead protec-
tion.
Mr. President, although the well-
head protection program is structured
in the ways sunilar to the original
House ground-water protection pro-
gram, it is also important to point out
the ways in which it Is different from
the House bill. For one thing there Is
no provision in this section for a citi-
zen suit to enforce the requirements to
define wellhead areas, Identify sources
of contaminants or develop plunis to
protect ground-water resources, It
would not be appropriate to make the
first step In a national ground-water
protection effort a step into Federal
district court to establish the outlines
of 50 State programs in consent de-
crees approved by Federal judges,
A second element which was in the
House bill, but which is dropped from
the conference report was the require-
ment that Federal detelopment
projects or Projects assisted by Federal
funds be consistent with State or local
welihead protection prograrris. Several
Federal ‘departments and agencies x-
pressed cbncerh to the conferees about
these proposed consistency require-
ments, And in response to these re-
quests thich were summarized and to-
-------
May 21, 1986 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — SENATE
have been finalized in the last 10 MCL goal as feasible. Feasible Is de-
years. fined a.s the use of the best available
We take drinking water for granted, technology, taking cost Into account.
When you turn on the tap, you expect In the past, there has been continu-
the water to be safe. Ing debate as to whether or not granu.
A 1983 report by the Office of Tech. la.r activated carbon is considered a
r ology and Assessment found that 29 feasIble technology. Granular activat. .
percent of the ground water drinking ed carbon is the most effective tech-
supplies of the 954 U.S. cities with nology available for the control of sS’n-
populations over 10.000 8 . COnta.ml. thetic orgaruc chemicals. These
nated. An EPA study found that water amendn-ients make granular activated
from 45 percent of public water SYS- carbon the benchmark echnology.
terns relying on ground water has de- The granular activated carbon tech.
.tectable levels of volatile, organic nology will be designated as feasible.
chemicals. - Any alternative found to be the best
It is time that EPA begins aggres. available technology must be at least
sively Implementing the Safe Drinking as effective in controlling contanu.
Water Act. It Is clear that a discretion. nants as granular activated carbon.
ary approach of having EPA choose The current standard.setting prac-
what and when to regulate contarni- tice at EPA has led to the promulga-
nants Is not working. tion of at least one standard which
The Safe Drinking Water Act provided a level of protection that con.
Amendment of 1986 wIll get this im. dones a risk of 1 excess cancer death
portant public health statute back ° per 10.000 population. This level of
the track to meeting its goal—protect- health protection is unacceptable.
ing the public health. unacceptable from a public
The amendments reiterate that rec-
ommended maximum contaminant health standpoint. It is intolerable
levels are the health.based goal that when technology such as granulated
we should be striving for. The niaxi- activated carbon exists and EPA’s own
mum contaminant level goal shall be research shows that levels of organic
contaminants could be reduced to the
issued simultaneously with primary
drinking water regu.latio , linking level of detection.
these to integral concepts together. WIthin 18 months of enactment.
The amendments require the regula. EPA must promulgate regulations
tion of 83 contamInants over the next specifying criteria under which flitra.
3 years. EPA must regulate 9 contaml. tion is required’ as a treatment tech-
narita within 12 months of enactment, nique for public water systems sup-
40 addItional contaminants withIn 24 plied by surface water sources. The
months, and the remaining contami- threat of Giardla contaminating our
narita wIthin 36 months. In order to public water supplies is a growing na-
provide flexibility to EPA in Imple- tional problem as well as other filter-
meriting this requirement, the agency able contaminants. Requiring EPA to
is permitted to substitute up to seven promulgate regulations will determine
contaminants for the contaminant.s when a public water supply should use
listed in the amendments, if regulating filtration as a treatment technique for
the substitute contaminants would be public water supply systems supplied
more protective of public health. by surface water sources.
EPA must then set in place a process Within 36 months of enactment,
to develop a priority list of contami- EPA will be required to promulgate
nants which may require regulation at regulations requiring disinfection arid
3-year intervals thereafter. The specifying criteria for variances. This
agency must then propose regulations requirement will ensure the expanded
for at least 25 of these Listed contami. use of disinfection recognizing that
narita wIthin 24 months and set regu. from a public health perspective.
lations for the remaining contami. when considering adverse side effects,
nants wIthin 36 months. This provi- the technology is not always either
siori is meant to set up an ongoing prudent or efficient.
process to regulate Contaminants of A new requirement for the monitor.
concern. ing of unregulated oontamjnaflta will
In the past, there ha.s been a great allow us to begin to understand the
deal of disparity between the public nature and extent of contaminants in
health protection level of the recoin, our drinking water. The inventory of
mended maximum contaminant level these contarnj will provide a tre-
and the actual regulated standards or rnendous boost to development of a
maximum contaminant level. The national drinking water data base.
MCL goals must under these amend. T e amendment recognizes that
rnents be set at levels at which no ad. small Systems supplying less than 150
verse health effects are anticipated to service connections may be ill.
occur and which allow an adequate equipped and unprepared to arrange
margin of safety. This change in the for the analysis of samples of unregu-
law is being made to reiterate that lated contaminants. The amendments
RMCL’s are health-based standards provide that water samples are to be
while MCL’s are not. But It Is the clear made available for analysis by the En-
inigrit of Congress that MCL’s be as Vironmental Protection Agency for
close to the health-based standards as these small systems. Thus, rural areas
possible. The primary drinking water will benefit from the Increased kno l.
regulations must be set as close to the edge of the quality of their drinking
030014 S6291
water without being burdened with
unaffordable costs.
The Safe Drinking Water Act is an
important statute to provide safe
drinking water supplies In both.-rural
and urban areas. Rural areas and
small water supply systems present
particularly difficult problems in ad.
ministering a national safe drinking
water program. The amendments con-
tinue the strong congressional support
for the National Rural Water Associa-
tion and its circuit rider program. The
amendments authorize $10 million an-
nually in fiscal years 1987 through
1991 for technical assistance to small
public water supply systems. This au-
thorization will continue to enable
them to achieve and maintain compli-
ance with national drrnkmg water reg-
ulations.
The National Rural Water Associa-
tion provides a useful and important
service to ensure that rural small
water supply systems are operated in a
safe fashion. These amendments will
strengthen EPA’s ability to work coop-
eratively with the small water supply
systems.
A major source of controversy In the
amendments is in regard to ground
water protection. It makes absolutely
no sense to create regulations for the
water coming out of the well without
recognizing that certain areas immedl-
ately adjacent to a we’l may ,be con-
tributing to the contaminants found itt
that well. The area surrounding a
public water supply well is of critical
importance. Areas immediately adja-
cent to public water supply wells are
susceptible to pollution and warrant
special protection.
The welihead protection area is de-
fined as the surface and subsurface
area surrounding a water well or well
field, supplying a public water system,
through which contaminants are rea-
sonably likely to move toward and
reach the well or wellhead.
It is important to recognize that the
welihead protection program is like a
mouse as compared to an elephant in
regard to the scope of the problem
that needs to be addressed.
The wellhead area protection pro-
gram is a flexible, important step for-
ward. but It cannot replace the need
for a comprehensive ground water pro-
tection legislation. It must be recog-
nized that the wellhead protection
provision highlights the problem and
is responsive to the needs of States
that will be responsible for implement.
ing this program.
Under this new program, States are
given wide-ranging flexibility In order
to determine what type and level of
wellhead protection program makes
sense within the specific context of
the geology found ith in the individ-
ual State.
it is important to recognize that the
problems facing the Nation’s ground
w ter go far beyond the mere area ad-
jacent to a public water supply system
The committee has held a nujnber of
-------
000015
CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — SENATE May21; 1986
assure that the more rapid progress cannot meet certain requirements. -
achieved by the Agency in the last These provisions are to be used spar.
year is maintained. ingly and not as means of avoiding en-
The list of contaminants specified Is forcement actions.
a list published by EPA as Contanhi-.. In recognition of th difficulties that
nants for which they were developing ‘small water supply systems may have
the bases for regulating. Recognizing in complying with the new require-
that new information could change meats, the bill provides for technical
the priorities for ‘determining, which assistance to these systems. -
contaminant ,s should be regulated Finally, in addition to correcting de-
first, the conferees provided authority ficiencies in existing Safe Drinking
for the Administrator to substitute up Water Act programs, the bill estab-
to seven contaminants for those sped- lishes a new program to protect public
tied In the list of 83. Substitutions can water supply wells from potential con-
be made if regulation of the new con- tamiriation, My own State of Ver-
tamlnants are judged to be more pro- mont—and several other States—al-
tective of human health than regula- ready have programs to accomplish
tion of the listed contaminants.
The list is the minunuxn number of that goal. The program in the bill re-
contaminants the Administrator is ex- quires all the States to take steps to
protect their underground sources of
pected to regulate. U additional con- drinking water.
taminants prove to be of concern
during the period the Agency Is work- Mr. President, S. 124 makes major
ing on the list of 83, additional stand- improvements In the law that protects
ards should be developed, the water people drink. Where nec-
One goup of contaminants that . essary, a balance has been struck be-
ready of concern and is not on the list tween achievabthty and the goal of ad-
is the family of trihalomethanes solute safety of drinking water, but
(THM). Because these substances are the emphasis Is consistently on pro-
byproducts of the disinfection of tecting human health.
water, there is widespread exposure I urge my colleagues in the Senate—
them. Preliminary evidence indicates and the President—to recognize this as
that levels of TEM’s currently permit- important legislation that should be
ted in drinking water may constitute a enacted without further delay.
significant threat to human health. Mr. BENTSEN. Mr. President. I am
The Agency should undertake the pleased that we have completed work
review of THM’s it has Indicated it on amendments to the Safe Drinking
may begm at the earliest possible Water Act. These amendments, agreed
time, and should establish the level of upon by the conferees, produce a
protection that is needed, consistent workable and more effective drinking
with the best technology available. ater program to protect the public
Another concern that is not repre- from contaminants found in druiki.ng
sented by the specific contaminants on °‘ ater.
the list of 83 is the lack of a standard To date, the Environmental Protec-
for total organic contamination. Be. tion Agency has issued drinking water
cause of the significant scientific tin- standards for only 22 contaminants in
certainty regarding the additive or the decade since the Safe Drinking
synergistic effects of exposure to miii. Water Act was enacted. The amend-
tiple organics. the protection offered ment.s require EPA to accelerate this
by single contaminant standards may pace to and wIthin 3 years of enact.
be inadequate. Thus, the promuiga. ment to set standards for 83 corltami-
tion of maximum contaminant goals nanr.s previously listed by the Agency
and levels for total organic contamma. as contaminants of concern. In order
tion is needed. to accommodate the Administrator’s
In addition to assuring that the need for discretion and the Agency’s
Agency continues to regulate an in- comments that their concerns about
creasing number of contaminants, the some of these contaminants has de-
bill also modif es the standard-setting creased over time, we permit EPA Id
requirements of existing law and corn- substitute and set standards for up to
mands the Agency to require the high- seven new contaminants.
est feasible level of remo a ,l of con- This bill also addresses the feasibili-
taminants that are harmIul to health ty of granulated activated carbon
from drinking water. “Feasible” means (GAC) technology. Legislation passed
the highest level of removal that can by both Houses concluded that GAC Is
be achi ved by technology, the cost of available for the control of synthetic
which can be borne by large water sys. organic chemicals, taking cost into ac-
tems. count. The bill does not require the
Enforcement of drinking water use of GAC. Rather, it requires that
standards and regulations has serious- the type of removal that can be
ly lagged over the years. The bill gives achieved feasibly using GAC will be a
the Agency new administrative order benchmark against which to compare
authority which EPA has said would alternative technologies.
greatly enhance its enforcement capa- Moreover, we recognize that GAC Is
biities. The biU also requires the not. a ’one-dimensional technology. In-
Agency or the States to move expedi- stead, it is a water treatment technolo-
tiously against violators. Where neces- gy comprised of a variety of factors
sary, the law provides for variances such as retention time, the quality of
and exemptions for systems that the carbon used, and the frequency of
S 6292
hearings on ground water, and I am a
cosponsor of major ground water pro-
tection legislation to address the prob-
lem comprehensively. It Is my hope
that the committee will continue to
work toward the enactment of compre-
hensive ground water legislation,
The Safe Drinking Water Act is a
public health statute. The welihead
protection program makes sense
within that context. But the larger
problems facing this Nation’s ground
water resources are related to both
health and the environment, Protec-
tion that meets these goals is the long.
term direction for Congress to take.
The immediate goal that needs to be
addressed is getting the Sale Drinking
Water Act back on track. The Ameri-
can public deserves assurance that the
water coming out of their taps is safe
and healthful. These amendments will
take a significant step toward meeting
that goal. -
Mr. President. it Is our profound
hope that this legislation will spur
EPA and relevant agencies to do what
they should be doing, making sure
that our drinking water Is safe It Is
my strong belief that the amendments
will help us along that track and help
us achieve that goal.
I again thank the Senator from Min-
nesota.
Mr. STAFFORD. Mr. President, I
am extremely pleased to be able to
urge the Senate to approve the confer-
ence report on S. 124. the Safe Drink-
ing Water Act Amendments of 1986.
This Is the first major environmental
bill in the 99th Congress to have
reached this point in the legislative
process, and its enactment will mark a
major improvement In protection pro-
vided for drinking water in this coun-
try.
I first want to congratulate Senator
DUR5NBtRGr . the distinguished chair-
man of the Toxic Substances and En-
vironmental Oversight Subcommittee
for his leadership in shepherdmg this
bill through a long and difficult proc-
ess. Work on this legislation began in
the 98th Congress and came very close
to final passage by both Houses only
to die in the final days of that Con-
gress Arid it has taken another year
and a half in this Congress to bring us
to this point.
Senator DU1IE acRGsa has had the
able assistance of Senator BAUCUS. the
ranking minority member of the sub-
committee. These Senators’ patience
and persistence have paid off finally in
the conference report before us.
Mr. President, this bill does many
important things, most of hich the
distinguished Senator from Minnesota
has ably described, I want to add my
comments on only a few.
The bill requires the Administrator
of th,e Environmental Protection
Agency to. set standards for 83 speci-
fied eoncathinants within 3 years of
enactment. Progress in regulating
drinking water contaminants has been
very slow over the past decade, and
the provision in the bill is intended to
-------
May 2!, 1986
regeneration of the carbon. The effec-
tiveness of GAC Is also dependent
upon the character of the contami-
nant that is being treated.
For example, in the conference
-. report to this bill, the conferees indi-
cate that “as a guide as to feasibihty
- and effectiveness, the Administrator
should consider a range of granular-
activated carbon systems comparable
to those able to achieve 90- to 99-per-
cent removal of trichioroethylene?’
This reference Is intended to suggest
- that there are systems which have
been designed using GAC as a inecha-
nism to specifically remove organic
contanunanta from drinking water.
This guide is referenced to distinguish
these systems from GAC systems
which have been designed for general
odor and tast€ improvement purposes.
The guide is not intended to suggest
that a system designed for trichior-
oethylene will achieve the same level
of effectiveness for another organic
conlarninant, It Is not intended to sug-
gest that 90- to 99-percent removal is
the feasible level of removal for other
organic contaminants, With regard to
such other contam inants. GAC may
only achieve such removal rates, if It
can achieve such removal rates, at un-
reasonably great expense and time
thereby considerably changing the
factors which make up the feasibility
and effectiveness determinations. GAC
Is not the only technology available
for removifig contaminants, but it is.
as the conferees have determined, a
technology that Is available for setting
maximum contaminant levels. We
expect that removal rates arid the
technolog-ies used to set MCL’s will
vary among contaminants, so long as
all standards are established to pre-
vent k.now-n or anticipated adverse ef-
fect,s on health,
In a new section, 1426 of the Safe
Drinking Water Act, the Administra-
tor Is required, not later than 18
months after enactment, to modify
regulations previously promulgated
under the Safe Drinking Water Act to
Identify mon2toring methods for class
I injection wells. Such monitoring reg-
ulations may include ground water
monitoring. The purpose of such regu-
lations Is to assure that there is the
earliest possible detection of fluid nil-
gration from the Injection well. In con-
sidering monitoring methods, the Ad-
riiuilstrator should take into account
the risks associated with ground water
monitoring, which can disturb natural
barriers protecting the underground
injection zone. these disturbances
from ground water monitoring could,
under certain c1rcum, tances, increase
the risk of leakage from the injection
zone, in addition, ground water moni-
toring is not always reliable, since the
monitoring well may easily miss a
plume migrating from the Injection
zone.
Other monitoring methods, such as
mo ’iicoriflg of the annulis, may be
more E’ffective In prtdicting thigratlon
from the zone. Particularly useful in
CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — SENATE
many cases is monitoring of the pres-
sure of the annujis. Such a monitoring
methodology will provide early and re-
liable indication of fluid migration
without disturbing the injection zone.
It material Is migrating, the pressure
in the annulls will drop, and those
monitoring the injectu)rl well ill be
alerted to a problem. This mithod
may be more reliable than ground
water monitoring, which can easily
miss a plume leaching ft,pm the iniec-
Lion zone. -
Due to the variety of hydrogeologi-
cal climates in which underground in-
jection wells are located, permitting
States flexibility in determinL ”ig which
monitoring method is most appropri-
ate is an essential feature of any regu-
latioris. One national monitoring
methodology could well do more to
promote fluid migration from an m ec-
Lion zone than to provide early warn-
ing of such migration. States have
long experience in underground injec-
tion. and this experience should be ap-
plied to this important area of envi-
ronment.aj protection. For these rea-
sons, the conference agreement con-
tinues the current reliance on the
knowledge of the States in determin-
ing the appropriate use of ground
water monitoring methods to be iden-
tified by the Administrator. States
which regulate underground injection
currently will continue to determine
the applicability of these monitoring
methods.
The conferees agreed to add a new
section 1427 to the Safe Dnnl ing
Water Act to provide for protection of
wellheaci areas. This is a compromise
between the House, which had an ex-
pansive ground water protection pro-
gram In their bill, and the Senate,
which had no such provision.
The weLihead protection provision is
a focused provision designed to en-
courage States to protect areas around
drinking water weliheads from possi-
ble sources of contamination. Experi-
ence ha.s shown that dru-ikmg water
wells are most likely to be contaminat-
ed at the wellhead when substances on
the surface near the wellhead leach
down the well and Into the aquifer.
Many States, including Texas. al-
ready have such a program in place to
prevent this kind of contamination,
and Would riot be re uired to make ad-
ditional changes to their program
under this provision. Further, States
not choosing to comply with these pro-
visions would only be ineligible for
funds to put such a wellhead protec-
tion program in place.
More specifically, this provision re-
quires a State within 3 years to submit
a wellhead protection plan to the EPA
Adrninistrator, who only has authority
to disapprove such a plan.
The plan is to:
First, identify who in the State has
authority to develop and Implement
the plan,
Second, include information on the
welihead protection area, such as hy-
drogeological data on the flow of the
I I
J dVL)iL) S6293
aquifer arid the recharge zone, and
whatever information the State be-
lieves is necessary to determine what
area around a wellhead should be pro-
tected. in Texas, for example, the
State has determined that on the
whole, a protective radius 01150 feet is
adequate to protect drinkir.g water
wells from contaminants .hich may
have any adverse effect on the health
of persons.
-. Third, the State should also identify
likely maimiade sources of coritamina-
tion around the weithead protection
area. For example, If there is a munici-
pal landfill in the region, this should
be tdentif ed.
Fourth, the means by which the
State plans on purt ng such a program
in place, such as technical assistance,
training programs, and so forth.
should be outlined In the State plan as
well.
Fifth, recognizing that even the best
plans may be unable to prevent con-
tamination of drinking water wells.
the State should also give consider-
ation to how replacement water sup-
plies would be provided to an area de-
pendent upon drinking water wells.
Sixth, last of all, before drilling new
drinking water wells, a State plan
should require that possible contami-
nation sources be considered when se-
lecting a site for the new well, In this
way, we hope to encourage States to
plan ahead to avoid possible contami-
nation rather than have the public
face the expensive, heaLth-threatening
problems of drinking water well eon-
taxninatson.
These requirements are a common-
sense outline of the kinds of issues the
States should address when submit-
ting their wellhead protection plans.
As I have stated earlier, many States.
such as Texas, already have such a
program in place that would meet
these requirements. States where wells
are a primary source of drinking water
for many communities already have
this kind of information, arid we would
not require more. We are encouraging
States, to the extent they have not al-
ready done so, to think ahead about
the problem of drinking water well
contamination so they can pre erit
problems from occurring.
The EPA is only given authority to
disapprove such plans if it does not in-
clude one or more of the required enu-
merated element.s and is. therefore.
not adequate to protect public water
systems as required by this section, it
EPA does not respond to a State plan
within 9 months, It iS deemed ap-
proved under this section If there is a
problem with the plan, EPA is re-
quired to so inform the Governor irs
writIng. In these cases, the State
would have 6 months to resubmit their
plan,
If a State plan has been thsappro ed
by the Administrator (even it resub-
mitted), then the State is Ineligible for
assistance under triis welihead protec-
tiori pro 1sion. This is the only penalty
-------
that can be applied to the States pur-
suant to this provision. We are aware
that some States have not chosen to
protect their ground water in this
fashion and thus did not want to pe-
nalize them for forging ahead of the
Federal Government in a slightly dif-
ferent direction,
Last of all, we agreed to a provision
in the House bill addressing a problem
to brine contamination in the State of
Ohio which must also include a certif i-
Cation that there is a State program
that is being adequately enforced that
protects persons from contamination
associated with the annular injection
or surface disposal of briries from oil
and gas production. This House provi-
sion was designed to encourage the
State of Ohio to more vigorously ad-
dress its brine-related problems.
During this conference, some com-
ments were made about the sweeping
nature of this wellhead protection pro-
vision. The conferees do not intend
this to be a massive ground water pro-
tection program. The Senate. in par-
ticular, has not had an opportunity to
rev ew the Issue of ground water and
to develop a comprehensive ground
i ater protection program.
This addition to the Safe Drinking
Water Act is aimed, first, only at un-
derground sources of drinking water
and not all ground water. Second. it Is
intended to be a modest first step for
States to make. Our penalties provi-
sion makes it clear that States choos-
ing to maintain a different approach
to ground water protection will only
lose funding under this particular sec-
tion. The Senate conferees anticipate
that a more ambitious ground ater
protection program may be developed
in the near future, but this is merely a
means of encouraging States to focus
on the problem at this time.
Mr. President. I am very pleased
that this corilererice has successfully
concluded its business, and I am
pleased with the constructive and fo-
cused conference report that we have
before us today.
GRANULAR ACTIVATED CARBON TEChNOLOGY
Mr. WILSON. I would ask my distiri-
guished friend from Minnesota, the
chairman of the Safe Drinking Water
Conference Committee, to respond to
several questions concerning the
- agreement reached in conference on
the standard-setting amendments to
the act. First, it is my understanding
that the agreement reached in confer-
ence did not change the intent of the
standard-setting amendments original-
ly passed by the Senate in S. 124. Can
me chairman confirm this for the
record?
Mr. DURENBERGER. That is cor-
rect.’
Mr: WILSON. I thank the Senator
for ,ht confu-rnation and a k the able
chairmari to further clarify my under-
standing of the conference agreement
by restating how cost is to be consid-
ered ui the process of determining a
maximum contaminant level for a
drinking water contaminant,
000017
S 6294
CONGRESSIONAL RECORD —SENATE d 21, 1886
Mr. DURENBERGER. I would be tive standard. It is thecornmittee ’ ’e’c--
pleased to providesuch a clarification - pectation that-the AdnhinIStra Q 1L
for my distinguished colleague. The revise the existing THM standard on
bill directs the Administrator of EPA this basis to provide greater public
o set the maximum contaminant leve’L health prote?ction from this drinking
(MCL) as close to the maximum con-- water contaminant as soon as possible.
taminant level goal, which is based Mr. SIMPSON. As a rriernber-of the
solely on health effects data, as is fea- conference committee on this bill. I -
sible using the best available Cechnolo- ould like to confirm that this is also-
gy and taking cost into consideration, my reading of the statutory language.
The bill establishes granular activat- I would also like the chairman to pro-
ed carbon (GAC) technology as a feasi- vide responses for the record to two
ble technology for the removal of SYfl- other related questions answered at
thetic organic chemicals. The confer- the first meeting of the conferees.
ence committee recognized that the First, it is my understanding that
cost-effecti% eriess of Contaminant re- treatment technologies and means
rno al with this technology can vary other than granular acti ated carbon
from contaminant to contaminant, technology may be used to meet a
Therefore, in setting the MCL the Ad- maximum contaminant level set by
ministrator is to take cost and effec- EPA For example, if a public water
tiveness into consideration at different system chose to use chloramines
levels of contaminant removal bY rather than GAC technology to meet a
granular activated carbon technology standard for disinfection byproducts
to arrive at the final standard. The because they found it to be more cost-
Administrator’s primary consideration effective, that would be permissible
in setting a standard should, of course, under the statute.
be public health protection with tech- Mr. DURENBERGER. That Is cor-
nological and cost considerations de- rect. All systems are required to meet
fining the limits of feasibility, the established standard but are not
Mr. WILSON. Your response con- required employ a specific technology
firms my view that this regulatory in order to do so.
process will not lead to unreasonable Mr SIMPSON. In addition, it is my
costs to public water systems and the understanding that if a public water
public. My particular concern is with
trihalomethane (THM) removal where system does not exceed a maximum
contaminant level for a specific con-
a level of removal Comparable to or taminant it Is not required to install a
higher than that which could be treatment technology to remove such
achieved with GAC technology may be contaminant,
achieved more cost-effectively by
using an alternative technology. Could Mr. DURENBERGER. That is tOt-
such an alternative technology be used rect.
In this case as a basis for setting the Mr. SIMPSON. I thank the Senator
drinking water standard’ for his precise explanation and conflr-
Mr. DURENBERGER The intent of mation of ray understanding of this
the bill language regarding the feasi- important legislation.
bility of GAC was to estaolish this TRIBES AM DMEZ T
technology as a benchmark to guide Mr. HART. I would like to engage
the Agency in establishing standards, several of my distinguished colleagues.
not to preclude other comparably ef- including the chairman of the Safe
fective technologies from consider- Drinking Water Conference Commit-
ation as a basis for setting an MCL. tee, in a discussion of the amendments
The particular concern about exclu- in this bill intended to help Indian
sive consideration of GAC for trihalo- tribes address their existing drinking
methane removal is that, because of water supply problems. There is an
the particular physical and chemical urgent need for attention and assist-
characteristics of disinfection byprod- ance directed toward correcting prob-
ucts and the frequency and levels of ierns which exist at a significant
occurrence, a standard based on GAC number of systems owned and operam-
system designed specifically for a high ed by Indian tribes. As many as one-
level of THM removal may be very ex- half of the tribal water systems na-
pensi e to meet. tionwide do not meet minimal stand.
The bill language allows EPA to conS ards. This is due, in part, to poor raw
sider treatment technologies or means water quality and to the financial and
other than GAC for purposes of set- technical constraints on these systems,
tmg a standard if another technology The Ute Mountain Ute Tribe in my
or method would achieve a comparable o n State of Colorado has had to live
or higher level of removal than a fea.si- without a reliable, safe water supply
ble GAC technology could achieve. In for over 100 years. Mr. Chairman, I
the case of establishing a new stand- think the United States has a trust re-
ard for THM’s. EPA is not authorized sponsibility to help the Indian people
to select a GAC system without regard remedy such pi oblems. and that was
to cost or select a GAC system for my primary interest in originally Co.
THM emo a1 that would achieve an sponsoring these amendments to the
insignificant reduction in contanuna- Safe Drinking Water Act.
tion for an unreasonable Increase in Mr. DURENBERCJER. I agree with
cost. Therefore, the bill provides the my able colleague that we do have
Administrator the discretion necessary such a responsibility and expect that
to produce a protective and cost-effec- the relevant amendments will focus
-------
May 21, 1986
the efforts of EPA and other appropri-
ate agencies in aiding Indian tribes to
improve their essential water supplies.
Mr. ABDNOR. Mr. President, I be.
lieve that significant progress will be
made toward this objective by provid-
ing the EPA Administrator the au-
thority to treat Indian tribes as States
under the act and to provide such
tribes grant and contract assistance to
carry out functions provided by this
title. The EPA is also given discretion
to find an alternative means of meet.
ing the purposes of the act if treating
a tribe as a State aould be inappropri-
ate. -
The Indian drinking water survey re-
quired of EPA within 12 months will
serve as an important foundation of
information for determining assistance
priorities and charting progress, This
survey is to be a thorough accounting
of drinking water problems for each
Indian reservation or community.
Mr. BURDICK. As another of the
original cosponsors of these amend-
ments. I believe one of the principal
ways in which problems will be effec-
tively addressed Is through the provi-
sion of grants to tribes to implement
the requiremen of the act. I want to
unaerscore the fact that the adminis-
tration is not restricted to the 75/25
matching grant for State programs in
the case of Indian tribes. The tribes I
te resent in North Dakota could not
afford to develop these programs if
they were required to provide match-
ing funds.
Mr. DURENBERGER. I thank the
Senator from North Dakota for
making this point. The conferees rec-
ogriized that tribal governments,
unlike State governments, do not have
a regulatory program base, an under-
lying financial and budgetary founda-
tion ox- a supporting tax infrastructure
ahich could be used in cost-sharing on
these programs. Furthermore, funding
assistance priorities should be estab-
lished according to the severity of the
problems identified in the EPA survey.
Mr. BURDICK. Another key aspect
of these amendments is the earmark-
ing of technical assistance funds for
use by Indian tribes to improve the op-
eration of their supply systems and in-
crease compliance with drinking water
standards. Three percent of the tech-
nical assistance funds—authorized at a
level of $10 million per year—or a min-
imum of $280.000 is to be set aside for
this purpose, These funds will be put
to extremely good use in this manner
since Indian systems represent about
1 5 percent of small systems nation-
wide but have a standards exceedance
rate nearly four times greater than all
other public supply systems.
Mr. DURENBERGER. I thank the
Senator from North Dakota for his
comments and Join aith him and Sen-
ators HAR’r and ABDNOR in expressing
,strong interest in seeing that these
amendments result in safer drinking
water for Indian tribes.
‘FKCXNICAL ASSISTANCE
Mr. BURDICK. I would like the dis-
tinguished chairman of the conference
committee to indicate for the record
what the committee’s expectation was
with respect to the funding and imple-
mentation of the technical assistance
amendment in the bill.
Mr. DURENBERGER. I am—pleased
to respond to the Senator from North
Dakota regarding this provision which
aill be crucial to the i.mplernentation
of the acts requiretr ent,s at small
public water systems. Other amend-
ments in the bill require the issuance
of more drinking water standards
which will, in turn, require systems to
do more monitoring and to take action
when contaminants are discovered in
drinking aater supplies. The conferees
anticipated that small systems would
have difficulty complying with these
additional requiremen without ap-
proriate technical assistance. This pro-
vision may mean the difference be-
tween an effective program or wide-
spread noncompliance. Therefore, it
should be regarded as a funding priori-
ty by EPA.
The assistance provided may be in
the form of training programs, circuit-
rider programs or other activities that
will directly increase compliance.
Funds are to be used by organizations
such as the National Rural Water As-
sociation which have particular knowl-
edge of the problems and needs of
rural communities and experience In
providing on-site assistance.
Mr. SIMPSON. Today the Senate
takes up consideration of the confer-
ence report on S. 124, the Safe Drink-
ing Water Act Amendments of 1986.
As one of the Senate conferees on this
important environmental legislation, I
am most pleased that the House and
Senate have been able to formulate a
piece of legislation that will signifi-
cantly increase the level of public
health protection achieved by EPA in
regulation of our drinking water sup-
plies.
The bill agreed to by the conferees
should be very effective in helping
EPA in developing and issuing new
health based standards for drinking
water supplies. Over 750 synthetic or-
ganic chemicals, pesticides, and inor-
ganic chemicals have been found in
drinking water supplies throughout
the Nation. However, EPA has only
had an opportunity to regulate fewer
than 25 of these contaminants in the
past 12 years. The new Safe Drinking
Water bill requires EPA to set stand-
ards for 83 contaminants within the
next 3 years and this will be the main
element of this public health statute.
One of the most important issues
dealt with in the Drinking Water Con-
ference is the protection of our
groundwater resources. The conferees
crafted a new “well.head protection
area” concept that would allow States
to develop plans to prevent contamina-
tion—as defined by the Safe Drinking
Water • Act—from entering under-
ground drinking water supplies near
S 6295
the area of “draw down” for public
consumption, This rather na.rrow
ground-water provision does not cover
potential sources of drinking water or
other ground-water supplies, nor Is it
intended to regulate contaminants
other than those defined by the
Drinking Water Act. Because EPA is
directed to identify 83 new contami-
nants aithtn the next 3 years, these
will be the focus of voluntary ground-
water protection action by the States.
The ground-water provision was de-
veloped with western Senators who
have serious concerns about State
flexibility and States’ rights, In es-
sence, the ground-water protection
program is a voluntary program taken
on by States wishing to add additional
protection to underground drinking
water supplies. Each and every State
has its individual ground-a ater con-
tamination problems and the ground-
water protection program developed
by the conferees was designed to
foster individual and unique approach-
es to these problems. A State may
even choose not to adopt a ground.
water protection program if It decides
that it is unnecessary, and it may do
so without fearing any Federal penal-
ty. The legislative language ma.kes It
very clear that the States have total
flexibility to develop their own protec-
tion plans and that In no way is this
Federal law altering existing water
rights or priorities, nor are there li.ml-
tations on the ability of States to
manage, regulate, protect or Identify
ground water resources within their
Jurisdiction,
The conferees also dealt with the
highly technical issue of granular acti-
vated carbon (GAC] technologies for
removal of halogenated organic chemi-
cats, The conferees made it clear that
In setting an MCL where GAC is a
consideration, that the cost of GAC
and other alternative treatment tech-
nologies should be taken into account,
This was a positive step to assure that
communities would not be unnecessar-
ily burdened by requirements for a
level of technology which may be ever
greater than needed to protect the
public health.
The conferees have worked diligent-
ly to craft a piece of legislation which
aill put the Safe Drinking Water Act
“back on track,” with a resulting pro-
tection of our public drinking water
supplies for the next generation, I
urge the Members of the Senate to
vote affirmatively on the conference
report in order that we can send it to
the President for signature,
It has been most gratifying to me to
see the completion of action on the
Safe Drinking Water Act. The 99th
Congress has worked hard to reau-
thorize environmental legislation and
the Safe Drinking Water Act will be
the first of several environmental stat-
utes that will be reauthorized by the
Senate this year, The American people
can take heart in the progress we have
made in passing these laws that con.
CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — SENATE
-------
S 6296 .CONGRESSIONAL RECORD —SENATE 1D86
tinue to protect the public health ‘en-S to develop plans and that existing penalties (or violators of standards or
v lronrnent. - - - - - water rights and existing authorities schedules- from S.0O to $25000 per;
Mr. CRANSTON: Mr Presidér t I Tor States to manage, regulate and day. Moreover. EPA Is :authorized to
am pleased to voice my strong support protect ground water within their Ju- Issue administrative penalties of -up to
for the conference report on the Safe risdictions are not limited. -- $5,000 Courts may impose criminal
Drinking Water Amendments of 1985 •Iri sum, I believe the Saf Drinking ‘penalties of ub to 5 years In prison
(S. 124). -.. -.- -- Water Act Amenthments represent a plus a fine of U to $50,000 fo certain
It’s extremely iniporta.nf that Con- •giant step forward in Improving the violations. -
gress give flna,l appro aj to this new quality of America’s drinkin Water Another provision designed to Im-
law to protect the American people and ensuring the health of the’ ublic. prove the act is the new application of
from the growing threat of drinking -Arid I urge prompt approval of the enforcement authorities formerly
water contamination. - - conference report, available only under the Solid Waste
Since passage of the Safe Drinking Mr. MOYNIHAN Mr. President, it 15 Disposal Act to enforce the Drinking
Water Act In 1974 we hake made much with great pleasure that I rise to SUP. Water Act’s ban on class IV injection
progress in making our water safer port passage of the conference version wells which dispose of hazardous or
from bacteria and other traditional of the Safe Drinking Water Amend. radioactive wastes into or above an un-
contaminants. But there is increasing ments of 1986 in the U.S. Senate. The derground d.rinking water source. In
concern about chemical contamination House and Senate have labored long States with numerous injection wells
of drinking v.ater supplies and ground and well over this legislation, which associated with oil and gas production
water from pesticides and industrial when signed by the President. will re- the amendments require the State to
chemicals, authorize and strengthen the 1974 certify that a plan is being implement.
Today. 22 percent of the Nation’s Safe Drinking Water Act. That we
small water systems and 37 percent of were able to reach a consensus this ed to protect against leaks or malfunc-
the large water systems sup2lied by bill is extremely gratifying to me. as tions in the wells.
ground water already have at least one one who first Introduced related In addition to the measures reg-ulat-
volatile organic contaminant. In Santa ground water legislation in the Senate ing iniectiori wells which might pot-
Clara County. California 24 public and in 1982. I shall first describe the prob. lute drinking water supplies, the 1974
private wells have been polluted with lems which the Safe Drinking Water Drinking Water Act Amendments re-
Trichloroethane (TCAJ. 1,1 Dlchior- Act Is designed to address, and then quire the States to design and to carry
oethylene (DCEJ and Freon 113. In describe the “Sole Source Aquifer Pro- OU wellhead protection programs
Hanford, CA, aresenic has been found tection Demonstration Program” around public water wells. These plans
in drinking water supplies In McFar- which has important implications for will identify sources of contamination,
land, six wells have been shutdown be- the Nation as a wt ole, and for New specify duties of the local water sys-
tause of nitrate contamination. In the York State in particular. tenis nd State and local governments.
San Fernando Valley of Los Angeles, r’*’s azc i, rto &iw r?T0RCDIEN-r and describe contingency plans for a!-
Trichioroethylene ETCE], Perchlor- There are more than 200,000 public ternate drinking supplies In cases of
oethylene (PCE). Carbon Tetrachjo- water systems in the United States, . contamination. The act authorizes
ride, and Chloroform hate been de- cluding nearly 60,000 community EPA to make grants to the States for
tected in a number of public wells. Na- water systems for year round resi- 50 to 90 percent of costs of developing
tionwide over 700 contaminants have dents, In 1983. a study by the Office of and implementing these State pro.
been identified in our drinking water. Technology Assessment reported con- grs, ,
Yet to date. EPA has regl.ilated fewer tammnation in 29 percent of the ground SOLZ SOORC AQUrYE D MONStPJiTION
than 25 of them, water drinking water supplies of more PROGLU
This bill puts EPA on a schedule and than 950 U.S. cities with populations Besides these important generic pro-
requires the agency to set more na- of 10,000 people or more. Although visions in the 1986 amendments to the
tional standards for contaminants in EPA and other agencies have ideriti- Safe Drinking Water Act, I am pleased
our drinking water—regulating 85 ad- lied over 700 substances Including syn- to call the Senate’s attention to the
ditional toxic chemicals In the next 3 thetlc organic chemicals, heavy Sole Source Aquifer Demonstration
years and more thereafter—and re- metals, and pesticides In drinking Program, modeled after the Sole
quires these standards to be based on water, EPA has regulated fewer than Source Aquifer Protection Act, which
best available technology, taking costs 25 contaminants since passage of the I first introduced in 1982. This will be
into account. The legislation also in- act in 1974, of special interest to residents of Long
creases monitoring for unregulated While it is true that the act has Island, where over 3 million people
chemical Contaminants, provides tech- helped to reduce bacteria and other tra- drink from one aquifer. In Nassau
nical assistance to small rural and dltional contaminants in public water County alone, studies have detected
Indian water systems which are the supplies, I and other members of the SYnthetIc organic chemicals In 119 of
ones most often violating the law, and Environment and Public Works Corn. 389 public wells. These chemicals come
Improves enforcement by requiring mittee 2,re concerned about the health from di erse sources: Solvents from in-
EPA to take action in every case in effects of other chemical contami- dustries and resident’s homes, pesti-
which drinking water requiremen nants, In the amendments v.e have di. cides from farms, nitrates from lawn
are violated and the State does not rected EPA to establish limits for arm fertilizers, and chemicals which leach
act, additional 83 contaminants, many of from laridiills.
Especially important is a provision which are industrial sol ents and pes- New Yorkers are well aware of the
designed to prevent underground ticides known to adversely affect need to safeguard their water re-
sources which are now clean from be- human l ealth. sources, The work for the State legis-
coming Contaminated. The legislation Because reports by GAO have md i- lature, the Commission on Water Re-
would establish a nation ide program cated that EPA and some States have source Needs of Long Island, the State
requiring States to establish welihead been lax in enforcing the Safe Drink. Department of Environmental Conser-
protection areas around drinking ing Water Act, several measures in the vation, and a number of citizen groups
water system wells where pollutants amendments will strengthen enforce- has made New York a leader in ground
could flow into undergound areas con- ment. In 1984 alone, there were 64,000 water management.
taming drinking water supplies. This reported violations of drinking water The Sole Source Aquifer Demomistra-
narrow iirousion does not cover poten. standards. Of the approximately tion Program will provide Federal
tial sourcesof drinking atater or other 60,000 cominunity water systems, 842 grants ithrough EPA to finance 50 per-
ground water supplies which do not were frequent violators of the micro- cent of the costs of developing and mm-
serve as drinking water. Further, the biological standards in the act. In plernenting an aquIfer protection plan.
provision was carefully written to order to increase enforcement options States, cities, arid other qualified poUt-
make sure that States have flexibility the amendments raise maximum civil ical subdivisions are eligible to apply
-------
May 21, 1986
for these grants, which can amount to
as much as $4 million per year In Fed-
eral aid for each sole source aquifer.
This program will enable State and
local governments to cooperate with
EPA in designing these plans. The leg-
islatiort eninnerates a number of man-
datory elements for the plans, as well
as some elements which the States
may choose to include depending on
individual conditions,
I believe that the sole source provi-
sions will contribute significantly to
conservation and management of
ground water resources which are irre-
placeable. The purpose of these provi-
sions is not to prevent development,
but to allow States to encourage devel-
opment in areas best suited to it. Safe-
guards of public notice, advisory
boards, and public hearings are built
into the sole source provisions States
and localities are subject to all exist-
ing constitutional and statutory limits
on their actions. Plans must be sub-
mitted Jointly with the Governor of
the State. and must be approved by
the EPA administrator.
The safe drinking water amend-
ments authorize $10 million for fiscal
year 1987, $15 million for fiscal year
1988, and $17.5 million for each of the
3 fiscal years 1989 through 1991 to
fund the Sole Source Aquifer Demon-
stration Program, I personally sup-
ported this level of funding because I
believe adequate funding is a requisite
to the success of the program. Once
our sole source aquifers are polluted, it
is well nigh impossible to clean them
up, for both economic and technologi-
cal reasons. The prudent course Is to
keep these drinking water supplies
clean at the outset.
I believe that the Sale Dx-inklng
Water Act Amendments of 1986 move
us further toward that laudable goal.
Mr. GORTON. Mr. President, I
would like to express ray support for
the conference report on S. 124. the
Safe Drinking Water Act Amendments
of 1986 I commend my colleague, Sen-
ator DURENBERGER. chairman of the
Subcommittee on Toxic Substances
and Environmental Oversight, for his
diligent work in developing this impor-
tant legislation and guiding it through
the Senate and the conference com-
mittee to final passage. S. 124 makes
major Improvements to the existing
law arid will greatly enhance protec-
tion of our Nations drinking water.
The bill provides needed Impetus to
the Environmental Protection Agency
to issue regulatio for contaminants
of drinking Water. greatly expands the
monitoring requirements for public
water systems, and will substantially
strengthen the regulation of under-
ground injection operations that could
affect drinking water supplies.
I especially would like to commend
the committee members for their fore-
sight in establishing a new program to
protect sole source aquifers. In the
9 th. 98th. and 99th Congresses I
Joine4l Senator MOYNXHA asa cospon-
sor of the Sole Source Aquifer Protec-
CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — SENATE
tion Act designed to prevent the degre-
dation of our most critical under-
ground water supplies, I am pleased
that S. 124 incorporates the preventa-
tive approach in this bill to protect
sole source aquifers,
The Sole Source Aquifer Demonstra-
tion Program Contained In S. 124 is a
comprehensive step toward protegtirig
one of our Nation’s most valuable nat-
ural resources. Communities which
depend on one aquifer as their sole or
principle source of dri.n2ing water are
in need of special assistance to pre-
serve their vulnerable water sources.
Under the Sole Source Aquifer Dem-
onstration Program, State and local
governments and other planning agen-
cies may work with EPA in developing,
implementing, and assessing demon-
stration progi-ams designed to protect
ground water resources within desig-
nated sole source aquifer areas. EPA
will provide hail the necessary funds,
and a total of $77.5 million is author-
ized for the Sole Source Aquifer Dem-
onstration Program for fiscal years
1987 through 1991. A number of meas-
ures may be included in the protection
plans to maintain the water quality of
the aquifer, and a community can use
Its approved “208 plan” for the com-
prehensive management plan required
under this program,
The new demonstration program
will be particularly helpful to the
State ,of Washington, where a signifi-
cant portion of the population relies
on aquifers for their sole or principle
water source. The Environmental Pro-
tection Agency has designated three
aquifers in Washington as sole source
aquifers: Spokane-Rathdj-umn Prairie,
Camano Island, and Whidbey Island.
In addition, the Cross Valley, New-
berg, and Seven Lakes aquifers are
begin considered for sole source desig-
nation. The Spokane-Rathdrum Aqui-
fer, which is the only source of drink-
ing water for a metropolitan popula-
tion of approximately 320.000, is in
need of immediate assistance. The
quality of this aquifer’s water is de-
clining at a significant rate due to
seepage from septic systems. The city
of Spokane has developed a plan to
prevent further degradation of their
aquifer, a key element of which is the
use of pollution abatement measures I
would like to extend my special thanks
to Senator DURt BERGER and prafes.
siorial staff member, Heather Wicke,
for their assistance in ensuring that
Spokane will be able to use funds
under the Sole Source Aquifer Protec-
tion Program to defray the cost of pol-
lution abatement measures which pro-
vi e the only feasible option for pre-
serving Spokane’s aquifer.
I am confident that the Sole Source
Aquifer Demonstration Program Ill
accomplish its purpose of enabling
communities to take the necessary ac-
tions to preserve the quality and quan-
tity of their water sources. Further-
more, S 124 makes critical improve-
ments inthe Safe Drinking Water Act
hich ill ensure that all public water
uuuu’ u
S 6297
systems provide high quality water. I
urge my Colleagues to give this meas-
sure their full support.
Mr. HELMS. Mr. President, I shall
vote in favor of the conference report
on S. 124. the Sale Drinking Water
Act Amendments of 1986, but I am
nonetheless concerned about one sec-
tion of the bill, section 205, which will
allow substantial Federal involvement
in ground water monitoring. I feel I
should make this concern a matter of
record.
Section 205, entitled “State Pro-
grams to Establish Welihead Protec-
tion Areas,” requires each State to
submit a program within 3 years to
protect wellhead areas within its juris-
diction from contaminants that may—
and I stress the word “may”—have any
adverse effect on the health of per-
sons. Failure to create an approved
plan will prevent the State from ob-
taining Federal funds to implement
the program.
My concern with this is twofold:
First, through a sort of “carrot and a
stick” approach, the States will be
forced to develop a comprehensive fed-
erally approved plan to control
ground water Quality. Controlling
ground water quality requires monitor-
ing the land use of surface area sur-
rounding a water well or welllieid
which supplies a public water system.
The point Is. this: Control over land
use has always fallen within State and
local domain, thus this section wIll
further erode State authority to con-
trol land use.
Second, Mr. President, I’m con-
cerned about the enormous amount of
litigation which will almost certainly
arise as a result of section 205, The
section’s exposure to the citizen suit
provisions of the act expands even fur-
ther the opportunity for envirorimen-
tal activities to sue in Federal court,
and thus, is certain to add to an already
overloaded Federal docket,
Furthermore, Mr. President, the
vagueness of the statutory language in-
vites judicial policymaking, a role
hich this Senator believes should be
reserved for Congress.
Lest I be misunderstood, let rae be
clear and emphatic: Everyone fa ors
“safe drinking ater.” That is without
question But, Congress, in its zeal to
lmDlemerit noble ideas, often ends up
creating more problems than it sohes.
I hope the program created by section
205 will not travel down that path,
Mr. BRADLEY. Mr. President, I am
delighted that the conference report
on S. 124, the Safe Drinking Water
Act Amendments of 1986. take an tm-
portant step forward toward ensuring
the health of our constituents. Its
focus is an area critical yet often over-
looked. Our drinking water supply.
One element of this important bill is
a provision that I proposed which bans
the use of lead and lead solders in
drinking water systenis. This simple
i5hange wIU begin to correct a ide-
spread and long ignored healLh
hazard.
-------
S 6298
Mr. President. the problem with lead
contamination wa.s brought very close
to home for me when New Jersey
health offlciaIs found lead leaching
to drinking water on Ocean County
amounts exceeding the EPA stand-
I’d. However, this i truly a national
problem. A survey of State health
agencies revealed that 22 out of 29
States contacted have experienced dif-
ficulties With lead leaching Into drink.
Ing water. The States not reporting
any problems aLso admitted to not
having performed extensive sampling.
My office questioned States from
Maine to Texas to Callfornia. The
States of Oregon. Wisconsin, Minneso-
ta. New York. Ma.ss.achu.setts and
Delaware who have already banned
the use of lead solder and pipes in po-
table water systems. Other countries
have also recogruzed the dangers of
lead contamination and Denmark.
West Germany. Great Britain and the
Netherlands all prohibiting the use of
lead in drinking water systems.
We place great eniphasts as a,
Nation, on safe drinking water. Often.
safe drinking water requires the use of
expensive measures such as the addi-
tion of anticorrostve chenucals or ex-
pensive purification methods. The pro-
hibition of lead In drinking water sys-
tems represents a simple, inexpensive.
preventative step we can take to avoid
further contanwiatron of our drinking
water supplies. My amendment does
aot ask anyone to rip up old plumbing
tems. Rather, the amendment tries
arrest the problem before it pro-
esses further by concentrating on
new construction and repair of exist.
Ing plumbing.
I applaud my colleagues for the
progress that passage of this act repre-
sents. The threat of dnnkmg water
contamination is real, arid this act
gives the EPA the tools and the direc-
tive to meet this threat head-on.
A .RS 1tIC Ut ORtiflCtNG WATtS
Mr. HEC}fT. Mr. President. an ade-
quate supply of safe, potable water is
important to our communities. In
Nevada it can mean the difference be-
taeen survival and demise of a corn-
munity or settlement. In many of Ne-
vada’s small communities, residents
hi i e been drinking the local water un-
treated for years—certainly long
before EPA standards were estab-
iLshed. So it bothers me that EPA can
essentially close down these corrimuni-
ties by declaring their water unsafe—
not because of manmade chemicals.
but because the waters contain some
natural chemical or element.
For example. Mr. President, arseruc
occurs naturally in drinking water sup.
piles in many parts of the country. In
the Western part of the United States.
sometimes the only source of drinking
water for a community may contain
arsenic at levels higher than the cur-
EPA. ‘nterim standard, which Is
d on ‘the old public health stand
In many cases, residents of West-
wi-n towns have been drinking this
water, which contains naturally occur-
ring pentavalent arsenic, for genera-
tions. with no apparent adverse ef-
fects. The EPA. however, in develop.
trig pemanent standards, has relied on
the existing interim standards and a
study conducted in Taiwan involving
trivalent arsenic.
Mr. President. I am concerned that
the EPA, in the name of expediency, is
going to regulate the level of arsenic
In drinking water based on a study
that has no corollary in the United
States. and In so doing, caused unwar-
ranted expenditure of public arid pi’i-
vate funds to correct a nonexistent
health problem.
In 1969. the State of Nevada Health
Board conducted a hearing to deter.
mine if the level of arsenic in drinking
water In FalJon. NE. was a public
health problem. Based on expert testi.
mony, the board determined there was
no need to restrict the use of the
water supply even though at 0.10 mg/
1 it contained twice the U.S. Public
Health Service Standard of 0.05 mg/i.
They also requested a study to sub-
stantiate or refute this conclusion.
The Desert Research Institute con-
ducted a study and confirmed that
there was no risk to health from
drinking water containing arsenic at
the 0.10 mg/I level.
It appears that part of the differ-
ence of opinion as to the toxicity of ar-
seruc Is related to the type of arsenic
Involved. I ask unanimous consent
that a report prepared by the U.S.
Navy, which has a similar problem at
its Air Station at Fallon, NE, be en-
tered into the RECORD immediately fol-
lowing my statement,
This report, which was prepared by
Dr. Ed Calabrese, professor of toxicol-
ogy at the University of Massachu-
setts, argues that the toxicity of ar-
senic depends on the chemical form of
the arsenic, that trivalent arsenic is
far more toxic than pentavalenit.
The EPA is currently reviewing com-
ments on their proposed rulemaking
for recommended maximum contami-
nant leveLs. I hope that they consider
the considerable body of evidence that
argues the difference in toxicity be-
tween pentavalent anti trivalent ar-
senic, and adjust their rulerriakuig ac-
cordingly.
There being no objection, the report
was ordered to be printed In the
REcORD, as follows:
Dspannsnt-r op ‘nix vi’.
Orvsc! or nez Cier or NAvAl.
Wa, itngton, DC, Marc/i 13, 1 86.
CoseMEiix CLERK.
Criteria and SLandards bivuior., Office of
Drinktnc Water WK-55O). £nt- ronmvs-
faL Protection Agency, Washington. DC.
Dz .vR Sis’ The Federal Regsster of Noveni-
her 13. 1985 itt’ited con,rnenr.s on the EPA
proposed Recommended Maximum Con’
tainutant Levels (ltMCLs) for inorga n ic
chemicals En drinking aten 140 CPP. 141).
We are particularly concerned with the EPA
proposed RMC’L for ursenic and therefore
requested a leading toxicologist. Dr Ed Ca.
labrese. Professor of To iieo1ogy at. the Urti-
tersLtY of Ma sachu.set.ts, to re iew the
000021
‘ .May21, 1986L
RMCL for us. Dr. Calabrese’s comments are
attached.
Our strong Interest i.n the proposed
RMCL stems from the dnnjqng waler
supply at the Naval Air Station. Falion..
2 esada which originates from aelts contain
lag approximately 100 ppb of natura1iy-oc
curring pentavaient arsenic. -
Our review of Dr. Calabrese’s work con-
firm.s our concerns that the proposed nj ’.
senie RMCL Is based largely upon epidemlo-
logical data of trivalent contamination. In
the United States however. pentavalent ar•
senic is the most prevalent form in drinking
water This is particularly Important in iew
of the tact that many toxicological studies
have indicated that pentaialent arsenic is
considerably less toxic than trivalent ar-
seruc. Thus. an RMCL for arsenic based
largely upon tri ,aler.t data, will cause need-
less concern and expenditure of public
funds to build and operate water treatment
facilities,
We therefore strongly recommend that,
the proposed RMCL for arsenic recognize
the difference between the trivalent and
pentavaient forms through the establish-
ment 01 a higher RMCL for pentavaient ar-
senic.
Sincerely,
S. B. Game. Jr.,
Captain. CRC. US- Navy; Dsrectsr,
Envsronnsentai P eteelfon. Sa.fetij
anei Occupational Health Division.
A Cxrriqux or Tirz Psorosm RMCL roa
ARSCIIC
(Edward S. Calalbrese. PhD.)
ScIaccrLriC CONCLUSiONS
There Is suit icient evidence to conclude
that arsenic trloxide is a human carcinogen
based on evaiuatlons 01 the long4erm appli’
cation of Fouler’s solution It appears prob-
able that the skin cancer a.ssociated with ar’
aenic exposure in the Taiwan studies Is due
to the presence of arsenic trioxide and not
the pentavalent form in the drinking water
Attempts to validate the Taiwan study in
the U S. have not confirmed the original
Taiwan findings with three human popula-
l Ion studies showing no association between
the presence of elevated levels of arsenic in
the drinking water and the occurrence of at-
seruc induced skin cancer a,rid even the pre-
cursors of such skin cancer
The reasons for this lack of validation are
conjectural but may be related to Inadequa-
des in the sample size, duration of exposure
and range of arsenic levels In the drInking
water. Hoe ever, it may also be related in
part to the general lack of trivalent arsenic
In the water sources.
While genetic assays Ce g. sister chromatid
excliar.ge) of humans exposed to Foajer’s
solution for prolonged periods and alio had
developed skin cancer were positive Burg-
dorl, et at. 19T1). similar assays in non skin
cancerous humans exposed to drinking
water with elevated levels (110 ppb) of pen
taisJent arsenic for >5 years acre not dif-
ferent from controls Vlg. 1984).
The toxicity of arsenic depends in large
part on the chemical form of arsenic. Most
Investigators have concluded that the trii’a-
lent form Li significantly more toxic than
the pentavalent form due to its high capac-
ity to attack sulthydryl groups and thereby
disrupt many enzyme systems.
pliarmacokinetic differences are also ap
parent between the lii and pentavalent
forms of arsenic. Of particular relevance is
the significahtly larger retention of the tn.
vaient form and Its preferentially greater
deposition En skin tissue. This Is particularly
important gnen the association of arsenic
with skin cancer.
CONGRESSIONAL RECORD —SENATE
-------
May 21, 1986’
Evidence with animal modeLs indicates
• that a small percentage of pentatalerit ar•
senic is Converted to the trivalent form in
vuo. This wa.s not shown to be the case in a
limited human volunteer Study.
POLICY P.SECOEMINDATIONS S
From a human health perspective, there
is strong Justification for a drinking water
•standard for inorganic arsenic.
Based on a knowledge of the pharrnaco-
kinetics, toxicological actions and likely
mechanisms of toxicity of arsenic, Separate
arsenic RMCLs for the tri’ialent and penta.
valent forms are Justified
Gi en the size of the available data base.
• an RMCL for arsenic should be based on
- human data. The EPA should not use the
protisiorial AADI as the basis of the RMCL
in light of the fact that copious human epi
derniologic data exist on both the trita.ient
and pentat’alent forms. The extrapolative
reletence of the monkey data while prob.
ably more valuable than data from some
rodent model studies is especially limited
giten the rninlscule sample size used.
Giten the present observations that pro-
longed exposure j the U S. to pentatalent
arsenic In drinking water at levels in excess
of the standard by at least 2-fold is not asso-
ciated with skin cancer as well as not with
any of the precursors of arsenic related skin
cancer suggests that the value of 50 ppb is
consistant with protecting the public health
from this outcome It also suggests the pos-
sibility that higher levels of exposure (i.e at
least 100 ug/Li do not pose any demonstra-
ble risk of skin cancer.
The proposed RMCL has an important
public health inadequacy It deals with total
arsenic and yet the cr 1. and pentatalent
forms are believed to present ter divergent
rLsks to the public. The proposed RMCL
may be adequate when the e’cposure is pre-
dominantly from the pentavajent form with
only a small percentage in the tritalent
state However, if the situation were re-
versed., there may well be undue public
health risk. If two separate RMCLS were de-
teloped it is pos sible that the tritalent
would require a value considerably below
the 50 PPb while the pentavalent RMCL
may be justificably above the 50 ppb value
but this deternunation will require further
evaluation and toxicological assessment.
Thus, it is recommended that the EPA re-
evaluate the proposed RMCL and gite serl-
otis consideration to deteloping tao sepa-
rate standards. Clearly, such a course of
action would be both more consi.stant with
the science arid In the best interests of proS
tecting tue public health
RtSLARCH RECoMMniDArsO s
It is essential to atten t to confirm the
findings in humans that pentavalent arsenic
consumed from drinking water is not excret
ed in part, in the tritaient form.
The uptake of arsenic by foods during the
coowing process needs to be assessed
A continuous dermatological surveillance
program (or precursors of arsenic related
skin cancer in a model corflmunit) a here
“high’ levels of penta alent arsenic is
present should be undertaken This would
protide human data for talidating possible
standards A simIlar program for cltogenet-
Ic ar,d reproductive surveillance in appropri-
ately selected communities would be signifi-
cant taiue
aAcxcnou iID
I Arsenic as a Skin Carcinogen in
H u maria
The US EPA S drinking water standard
for arsenic is based in part on the premise
that inorganic arsenic is a skin carcinogen
an I imans This position is supported in
large part from a large scale human popula.
tion study In Taiwan which associated the
prevalence of skin cancer with the long
term consumption of drinking water from
welLs with high arsenic levels (Tseng et al,
1968, Tseng. 1977) The prevalence was dose
dependent While this study has been criti-
cally ret iewed on a variety of occasions and
found to have possible limitations (e.g. ob-
server bias. presence of other toxic agents in
the drinking water), its findings, neverthe.
less, are remarkably similar to reports by
other investigators from different countries
which also had. show-n that prolonged con-
sumption of water with high levels of inor-
ganic arsenic Is associated—with the occur-
rence of a variety of skin disorders including
skin cancers (Ge er, 1898, Arguello et al.,
1939, Zaldivar. 1974, and Borgono et al,
1977) In addition, it appears beyond dispute
that medicinal use of Fowler’s solution
which contains A O 3 is a human skin carcin.
ogen (Fierz. 1965. Sommers and McManus,
1953)
These studies collectively provide strong
evidence for the position that inorganic ar-
senic is a human skin carcinogen, These
data are in striking contrast to massive vol.
umes of animal model data which over-
whelmingly indicate that inorganic arsenic
is not a carcinogen (see NAS. 1977 for
ret lea). Netertheless, since the human data
are so strong and consistent, they should
override the generally negative animal
model data with respect to human hazard
assessment
2. The Historical Basis for the Arsenic
Drinking Water Standard
The original EPA approach for setting a
drinking a ater standard for arsenic was to
limit human drinking water consumption to
approximately 10 percent of that obtained
tia the diet Since a survey by Schroeder’
and Balassa (1966) suggested that 900 g/
day was the average daily human dietary
Intake, 50 g/L. ass allowed for intake from
drinking water. In the intervening ,ears
this position has appeared to become more
insecure on scientific grounds. Some of the
reasons for the eroding of confidence in this
value stems from the following observa-
tions:
(I) the original human daily dietary ar-
senic value of Schroeder and Baiassa (1966)
appears to have been found in error.
Market.basket surveys of U S diets over the
past decade hate consistantly revealed that
Intake values are from 10-50 g per day or
>90% lower than originally believed (Je-
linek and Corneliussen. 1977)
(Ii) the chemical forms of arsenic in food
are no longer believed to be very reievent
for assessing the risks of consuming inor-
ganic arsenic since food-borne arsenic is
almost exeiusiveiy in the organic form and
behaves very differently both chemically
and toxieoIogicall , from inorganic species
(nil the EPA has adopted the general use
of quantitatite risk assessment (QEA) for
estimating low dose cancer risks associaTed
with carcinogen exposure U that methodol-
ogy where applied to the arsenic situation
based on the Taiwan studies, the p”edicted
upper let eis of risk would be striklng’y high
(i.e one skin cancer per 100 persons oter a
70 year lifetime) (NAS. 1983) In fact, the
risk could be so high that it is likely that
t se risks could be considered unacceptable
at commonly encountered levels
Given the iarge number of drinking water
sources that would fail to be acceptabie the
Agency has not wanted to implement in a
regulatory sense the estimate of cancer risk
predicted from the Taiwan data This select-
ed use of QRA is questionable ‘since EPA
uses it with animal studies whose extrapola-
tite rele ance and 5tudy design reletance
are in mant’ respects eten more unrealistic
than the Taiwan data This is not to sup.
gest. however, that EPA Is wrong to ignore
the risk calculations based on the Taiwan
data because of large uncertainties In the
quality of certain aspects of the data.
As a way to deal with this issue the
Agency acted responsibly by asking the Na-
tional Academy of Sciences to provide’an in-
dependent ret iew of the epidemiological
data associated with arsenic The NAS re-
tiewed these data including the existence of
set eral lImited epidemiologicaj Studies In
the US which did not show any association
between arsenic levels In drinking water and
skin cancer (Addendum 1) The NAS (1983)
concluded that the standard could stay
where it was at present given the apparent
absence of any etidence in the US that ar-
senic In drinking water was associated with
skin cancer.
The bottom line then is that the US has
an arsenic drinking water standard (or
which the original basis no longer exists but
is belieted to be protiding ‘apparent” suffi-
cient safety from skin cancer Yet, what
should the health criteria be for an arscnic
primary drinking water standard’
3. The Need for a More Toxicologically
Defensible Standard:
Should the criteria be based on the
TaIwan data’ Some of the major concerns
with this study include, in part, what was
the chemical form of arsenic and the dis-
tinct possibi lity of other toxicant.s in drink-
ing water which could have confounded the
initial interpretation of the data (EPA,
1980). It appears that pentatalent arsenic
(As-V) was not present and it appears that
arsenic trioxide (As.II1) was the predomi-
nant form (NAS. 1977, EPA. 1980). I.! one
calculates the likely amount of As consumed
over the years of exposure In Taiwan, then
the dose of arsd.nic associated with induced
skin cancer was very comparable to the esti-
mated total amount given to people who de-
teloped skin cancer following exposure to
Fowlers solution (NAS. 1977).
Since it is now generally accepted that As-
III and not As-V was the predominate chemn-
ical form of arsenic in the Taiwan wells, it
has been suggested that the arsenic stand-
ard in the U S take this chemncial speclatlon
issue into account, In fact, the arsenic form
In the drinking water of places in the U.S
where the epiderniological studies have been
negatite (Morton et al. 1976) wIth respect to
adverse health effects have been of the As-
V form (EPA. 1980). Many toxicological
studies have indicated that the As-Ill form
is considerably more toxic than the pentara
lent form (NAS. 1977) It is this issue of
chemical speciation that is crucial in the as
sesament of arsenic risk from consumption
of drinking water
For the sake of argument here, let’s
accept the assumption that As-Ill is a defI-
nite human skin carcinogen when orally
consumed Now consider experimental cvi.
dance on the fate of As-V ui animal models
and humans Research in mice indicates
that As-V is rapidly and Predominately ex-
creteci unchanged. Howeter approximately
5% of As ’V excreted In the urine is excreted
in the As III form (Vahter and Entail.
1983 ) An even higher Percentage of As-Ill
is excreted by the rabbit following As-V ex-
posure These data indicate that at least in
these two animal species that As-V is con-
tertect to As-Ill for urinary excretion In
fact, the conversion is likely to be higher
than 5% because It is believed that other
metabolites such as the mono- and dimethl I
organic metabolite forms originate through
the following metabolic scheme of As-V to
As’III to the monon’iethyl form to the di-
methil form (Vahter and EntaIl. 1983).
These data suggest that eten when oni’ conY
surnes As-V that some low l vei of As-Ill
CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — SENATE 000 D 22 S 6299
-------
000 32
S 6300
will be formed and thereby lead to some
cancer risk although considerably lower
than from just A s-U I exposure alone.
This position Is supported by tracer stud.
es which compared the tissue disposition of
.s-III and As-V in mice. This study showed
hat the As-Ill form was preferentlajly re-
tarned in the kJn by a factor of from about
2 to 8-fold greater than As-V depenaing on
the time intertal after exposure (Lindgren
et al. 1980). GIven the assumption that As-
III Is a skin carcinogen, It would appear that
It reaches the site of susceptibility ii e. sluni
In substantia lly greater amounts than does
the pentavajent form. This information sug-
gests that using total arsenic letets and cal-
culating risks of skin cancer based on stud-
ies U e Tazwani where As-LI! was the form
clearly would overstate the rsk where the
preaominant form of arsenic in the water is
pentas alent, Furthermore, Crecultus (1977),
In a limited human volunteer study, did not
find any evidence that As-V Is converted to
As-Ill In contrast to the animal data noted
above If this were the case then the risk of
skin cancer woujd be expected to be consid-
el-ably lower since dispositIon In the skin of
mice/rabbits after the As-V treatment is be-
lieved to result In large part from its reduc-
tion to the As-lI ! form,
4 Summary:
There are convincing data that arsenic Is a
human skin carcinogen, Howeter, arsenic
aopears to be carcinogenic in the As-Ill
form. The most likely reason for negative
epldemiologrcal studies In the U S with re-
spect to drinking water levels of arsenic and
. 5km cancer is that the overwheljmngly pre-
dominant fdrm of arsenic has been As-V. Of
considerable further relevance to these neg-
ative epldemiologicaj studies is that they
were also not associated with the weu recog-
ized precursors of skin Cancer (e g En-
‘eases in skin pigmentation) Furthermore.
rurnal data with mice and rabbits suggest
that the As-V form can be convened to the
trivalent form in vivo However, a compara-
ble type of study In humans did not show a
similar conversion of As-V to As-Ill,
The proposed standard of 50 ppb is there-
fore likely to be adequate (or protecting
human health (rota skin cancer when the
exposure is in the form of pentavalent ar-
senic. Howeter, It is unlikely that this value
Is sufficient to protect the public from As-
Ill Induced skin cancer even if the risk esti-
mations based on the Taiwan study are
markedly overstating the actual risk.
From a regulator-v perspectite the EPA
should ideally attempt to establish separate
standard, for As-V and As-Ill because of
their widely differing toxicities and aLso be-
cause of the established relationship be-
tween As-Ill exposure and the occurrence of
sKin cancer The problem with the present
approach of using total arsenic ‘alues Is
that the 50 ug/L. value may be very inad-
equate (or preventing As-Ill-Induced ad-
verse effects but probably adequate If the
predominant chemical speciation were As-V.
Recognition of I-his distinction also allows
the Agency to take into consideratIon the
Issue of balancing concerns of essentiality
with toxicity (Nielsen et al. 1975, Nielsen
and Shuler. 1978)
ADD 4DUM
Three epidemiological studies in the US,
did not find a positive relationship between
excess levels of arsenic in drinking water
and adverse health effects. A surtey of over
700 residents in F’nirbanics, Alaska, exposed
mean arsenic drinking water levels of 224
b displayed n b increases in skin disordçrs,
hough the longest exposure in the study
)Opliiation was only ten yeas-s IHarringion,
et al, 1978). Likewise, Morton et a! (1978)
did not report any increase in the incidence
of skin cancer between 1958 and 1971 in
L.ane County, Oregon. where the arsenic
content of the drinking water supplIes was
relatliely high, although only 5% of the ar-
senic levels of the county drinking water
supplies exceeded 100 ppb. A study in Utah
by Southwick et al (1981) compared the
health status of 145 persons consuming
drinking water with arsenic levels ateraglng
approximately 200 ppb as compared to a
matched control group of 105 parflcspan
(torn a neighboring community where
drinking water arsenic levels averaged 20
ppb The InvestIgato did not find airy cu-
taneous manifestations of arsenic toxicity,
In addition, cancer incidence and death
rates did not Indicate an excess of cancer in
the exposed community
There are a number of possible explana-
lions for the seemingly conflicting data of
the three US epideimological studies and
the Taiwan report There was a large differ-
ence in the drinking water arsenic levels
The at er-age arsenic levels of the drinking
water supplies in Taiwan considerabl - ex-
ceeded those of the US. corns-nurutles stud-
ied. In addition, the duration of exposure
and amount of arsenIc ingested in the US.
studies were much less than in the Taiwan
studies, Lack of adequate nutrition and ex-
posure to other environmental pollutants
may have exacerbate( the effects of arsenic
exposure in Taiwan In addition, as empha-
sized in the text of this report, it Is believed
that the Taiwan subjects were exposed to
trivalent arsenic In their drinking water in
Contrast to the pentatalent form in the U.S.
studies,
Anke, M.. et a! (1978) Essentiality and
function of arsenic, In Kirchgessne , M. ed.
Trace element meta llsm in man and am-
maLi Arbeitskreses dur Tierernohrungs
forachung, Werhenstephen Germany. 3.248.
Argueljo, R A. TeUo. E E.. and Cenget.
DD. (1939) Cancer and regional endemic
chronic arsenicalism. Br. J. Bernnatol. 51 548
Abst ,r
Borgono, J M. Vincent, P. Ventuj-jno, H..
and Infante. A. (1977). Arsenic in the drink-
ing water of the city of Antofagasta, Epide-
miologic2j and clirucad study before and
after the installation of a treatment plant.
Environ Health Persp, 19.103-105,
Burgdorf, W - Kur ,-irii , K, and Cervenka.
J. (1977) Eleva sister chrornatid ex-
change rate In lymphocytes of subjects
treated with arsenic Hum, Genet, 36 69-72.
Crecelius. E.A. (1977) Changes In the
chemical speciation of arsenic following In-
gestion by man Ent iron. Health Perap.
19 147-150,
.Fierz, U (1965), Katan-Inestlsche untersu-
c l rungen uber die nebenwirku en der ther-
apie mit anui’ganisc arsên bel haiitk-
rankheiten DermaLologic 131 141
Geyer. L, 1898. Ueber die chronj,schen
Hauti eranuerungen beim . ‘trsenicismus und
Betracntungen ueber die Ma,ssenerkrankun,
gen In Reichenstein in Schlesien, Arch, Der.
matol Syphijol 43 221-280
Hari-ington. J M - Middaugh. J P - Morse.
DL and H; sseworth, J (1978) A survey of
a population exposed to high concentrations
of arsenic in well water in Fairbanks.
Alaska Am J. Epidemiol 108 377-385,
Lind ren, ,. Vahier, M. amnd Dencker,
L.. (1982) Autor-adiographic studies on the
distribution of arsenic in mice and hamsters
administered ‘-As-arsenite or-arsenate,
Ada Pharniacol et Toxicol 51 253-285
Lu, FL (1978> fluorescent compounds in
potable water Supplies in areas endemic in
blackleg disease ancI ’a new look at the etiol-
ogy of biackleg disease Nail, Science Coun-
cil Monthly 6 388—403
Morton. W, Starr. 0. PohI, J. Stoner, J.
‘.Vagrter. S. and Wesaig. P (1976) Skin
May21, 198’
cancer and water arsenic In L.aneCoun y ,
Oregon. canter 37 2523-2532,. . . . , .
National Academy of Sciences. (l9’ 7) Ar.
senic Va.shrngtoij D C. - -
National Academy of Sciences. (1983),
—Drinking water and health. Vol. 5. Washing.
onDC. - , -
NIelsen, PH. GRand. SR. and M.ron.
DR (1975). Evid nce of a possible require-
ment for arsenic by the raL Fed. Proc
34923 --
NIelsen FM.. and Shuler. TR. (1973) Ar-
senic depritacion studies In chicks Fed
Proc 37 893 -
Schroeder. HA, and Balassa. J J. (1966)
Abnormal trace elements in man arsenic. J.
Chronic Dis 19 85
Somers S C.. and MCManIUS. R G (1953)
Multiple arsenical cancers of the skin arid
internal organs. Cancer 6 347-359 -
Southwicic. J W - Western, A E Beck.
MM. W’iitley. T.. Isaacs. R.. Petajan J.
and Hansen. CD (1981) Community health
associated with arsenic in drinking water in
Millard County, Utah. Report to he Health
Effects research lab US EPA.
Tseng. w -p (1977) Effects and dose-re-
sponse relatIonships of skin cancer and
blackfoot disease with arsenic Entiron.
Health Persp. 19 109-119.
Tseng, W -P. Chu, H M, How, J M., Fong.
JM. Un. CS, and Yeh. S (1968) Preta-
lence of skin cancer In an endemic area of
chronic arsenicism In Taiwan. J. National
Cancer Inst 40 453-463. -
Vahier, M. (1931). BIotransformation of
trisalerit and pentavajent Inorganic arsenic
In mice and rats. Environ. Res.’25 286-293,
Vig, B B (1984) Chromosome studies ott
human subjects exposed to arsenic in drink-
Ing water, National Tech, Inlor-m. Sen ice.
EPA-600/ 1 -84 23 -
Vahter, M and Entail. J. (1983). In .lio
reduction of arsenate In mice and rabbits.
Eniiron Res 32 14-24.
Vahter, M. and Noruu H. (1980), Metablo-
lism of ‘l4As-labeled trivalent and pentata-
lent inorganic arsenic In mice. Ensis-on. Res.
21 448—457
US. EPA (1980) AmbIent Water Quality
Criteria for Arsenic. Office of Water Reg’j-
latioris arid Standards. Washington. 0 C
US. EPA Proposed RMCLsarsenic, Fed
Register 50(219) 46959 (Nov 13. 1985,)
Zaidutar R, (1974), Arsenic contamination
of drinking water asia foodsttijfs causing en-
demic chronic poisoning Belts- PathoL Bd,
151 384-400
Mr PRESSLER. Mr. President.
water quality in the United States has
become a major health and public wel-
fare issue. The Clean Water Act. Su-
perfunid. and other Iegisla 1on hate
been debated in an effort to assure
Americans a good quality water
supply Most of these bills address the
Issue of water pollution and the poten-
tlal conutamLnation of ground water
supplies by chemicals and oilier
sources This is an important issue but
we must not forget those areas with
naturally poor quality ground water,
We should examine how we can pro-
vide people in these areas with better
quality water.
My home State of South Dakota has
naturally very poor water quality in
certain areas. Studies of South Dako-
ta’s public cQmmunity water systemni
hate foulid that 87 percent of the
water systems do not meet EPA drink.
ung water standards (or diSSolted
solids. Thirteen percent of the public
water systemn.s contained over four
‘CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — SENATE
-------
May 21, 1986
thues the amou of dissolved solids
allowed by EPA standards. Dissolved
solids in water supplies at this level
have been found to adversely affect
livestock and domestic aiiin ’ials. Three
percent of South Dakota’s public
- water systems co,a,j radium 226/228.
This poor water quality Is especially
prevalent in western South Dakota.
The water in this area contains ex-
ceedingly high levels of sodium, sul-
fate. and iron which cause digestive
problems in humans and livestock.
-These poor quality water supplies
create public health problems. I re-
cently met with a resident of western
South Dakota who had been required
- to take medication for high blood
pressure for years. }ii 5 doctor suggest-
ed he start buying his water for drink-
ing and cooking. He did this, and as a
result has been able to stop taking
medication for high blood pressure.
Owners of restaurants arid service sta-
tions in western South Dakota must
caution visitors about the possible haz-
ards of drinking the water. Wells and
water systems have a short useful life
because of the effects of the water on
the pipes. People in this area of west-
em South Dakota desperately need
good quality water. Residents in the
area have been working for over 25
years t.o develop a rural water system
to bring good water to their farms.
ranches, and rural communities.
Since South Dakota is a relatively
and State. surface water is limited.
However, the Missouri River runs
through the center of South Dakota
and is a potential source of good qual-
ity water. The WEB pipeline project in
north central South Dakota is the
largest rural water project In the
United States. This project will pro-
vide Missouri River water to 25.000
people in a 10-county area. Residents
in western South Dakota have also
proposed a similar project, and I have
introduced legislation to authorize this
project. The Lyman-Jones West River
rural water system would provide high
quality domestic water to more than
6.000 people in the area. The project
would also provide ater for hundreds
of thousands of head of livestock. Im-
proved health standards would bring
as many benefits as these economic
benefits.
Water pollution is a major concern,
but pro iding good quality water for
all Americans should also be a priori-
ty. There is no difference between
water polluted by man made causes or
by nature. The effects are the same.
We roust give the naturally occurring
water problems more attention. There
are many other areas like western to.
South Dakota where water quality is
very poor. The development of rural
water systems has helped eliminate
this problem in many areas, but there
are many more areas that still need
some type of rural aater system to im-
prove water quality I have introduced
legislation to address this problem in
South Dakota and urge roy colleagues
to examine the water quality in their
home States. Action may be needed on
a national basis to meet the unique
water needs of rural areas.
Mr. DURE’NBERGER. Mr. Presi-
dent. I now ask for the yeas and nays
on the conference report.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Is
there a sufficient second? There ap-
pears to be a sufficient second. There
is a sufficient second. - —
The yeas and nays were ordered.
The PRESIDING OFFICER, The
question is on ag’reeifl to the confer-
ence report.
The yeas and nays have been or-
dered. and the clerk will call the roll.
The assistant legislative clerk called
the roll.
Mr. SIMPSON. I announce that the
Senator from Washington (Mr.
EVANS], the Senator from Arizona
(Mr. GoI,awATrji], the Senator from
Florida [ Mrs. HAWKINS]. the Senator
from Alaska (Mr. MURXOWSKI], the
Senator from Oregon (Mr. PACK-
wooD], and the Senator from Dela-
ware (Mr. Rom] are necessarily
absent.
The PRESIDING OFFICER (Mrs.
KASSEBAUM). Are there any other Sen-
ators in the Chamber who desire to
vote?
The result was announced—yeas 94,
nays 0, as follows:
(Rollcail Vote No 106 Leg,]
YEAS—94
Andrew,
Gore
Armstrong
Gortori
Mitchell
Baucu,
Gramm
Ber.t.sen
Gre.ssley
Nickles
Biden
Haritm
BIan]an
Hart
P ci !
Boren
Hatch
Pre ier
Bozcha -1t
Hatfield
,
Proxmire
Bradley
Hecht
Bumper,
Heflin
Burdick
Heinz
Quayle
Riegie
Byrd
Helm,
Chafeg
Hoilings
Rudman
Chile,
Humphrey
Sa rbanes
Cochran
lnouye
Sasser
Cohen
.Ioh.nston
Cranston
Ki ,ssebauni
0 Ainato
Hasten
Simpson
Danfortli
Kennedy
Stafford
DeConctnl
Keri-y
Demon
Lauteiberg
Dixon
Laxait
Dodd
Leahy
Dole
Letm
Domenici
Long
Durenoerger
Lugar
Wallop
Eagieton
Ma thias
East
Mai unaga
Weicker
E on
Mattingiy
Ford
McClure
Zorm,k
Garn
McConnell
E’ . ans
NOT VOTING—S
Haakin.s Pacitwood
Murkowski Roth
So the conference report was agreed
0 1300
Mr. DURENBERGER. Madam
President, I move to reconsider the
vote by hich the conference report
was agreed to
Mr HELMS. I move to lay that
motion cri the table.
The motion to lay on the table as
agreed to.
S 6301
Mr. I 1 ER. Madam
President, let me conclude by express-
ing roy appreciation to all of my col-
leagues for the unanimous support of
the conference report I think it is an
indication, as I indicated in my earlier
remarks, that a lot of somewhat’ diver-
gent interests ended up at the same
destination at an appropriate time. I
trust that those at the White House
who will make the final decision on
whether or not this bill will be law will
take that vote that has just concluded
as an unportant message.
As I conclude, let me expresss my
appreciation, in addition to those for
whom I ha e already expressed it, es-
pecially to Jimmie Powell, who, as of
several eeks ago, celebrated his 10th
year of association, in one way or an-
other, with me, and yesterday cele-
brated his 37th birthday. I tish we
could hase come to this conclusion
yesterday, because it is Jimmie Powell
whose work on the Safe Drinking
Water Act made the reauthorization
that is before us today possible.
The other thing that he has contrib-
uted to this process is that he has
made the act itself an effective tool of
protecting municipal water supplies in
America, which it had not been until
he undertook to assist me in the proc-
ess of developing the reauthorization.
I would also give the appropriate
and deserved credit to another
• member of the st ff of t e Environ-
ment and Public Works Committee,
Heather Wicke, who has carried the
burden of weaving our way through a
variety of interests and, again, helping
us find the appropriate destination.
At the same time, I express apprecia-
tion to Ron Cooper. who is Senator
BAUCUS’S principal staff member on
this issue: to Kate KImball, from the
minority staff, to Brent Erickson, Etaff
member for Senator SIMPSON: to Jim
Strock, on the majority side: to Kathy
Cudflpp, the staff counsel: and Lee
Fuller, the minority staff director, all
of whom made more than appropriate
and significant contributions to the
development of the conference report
which we have just approved.
Madam President. I yield the floor.
Madam President, I suggest the ab-
sence of a quorum.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The
clerk will call the roll.
The legislative clerk proceeded to
call the roU.
Mr. HELMS. Madam President, I ak
unanimous consent that the order for
the quorum call be rescinded,
The PRESIDING OFFICER, With-
out objection, It is so ordered.
TRIBUTE TO THE LATE WILLIAM
C. LEE AND TO DESIGNATE
“WILLIAM C. LEE DAY”
Mr HELMS. Madam President. I ask
that the Senate now turn to Senate
Concurrent Resolution 140. to pay
tribute to the late William C. Lee and
to designate June 6. 1986, as “William
CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — SENATE
-------
V d 4 t,- ç
ZZ .D. 2HO(J M2y IS, 1g8 6
p yed* k y - In th de ’ 1o eit number of- , gthee almost
in& ps at USE )egliE*lon, any su ta . haw -aoine effect
r. MADIOA1 . . 8p ker, I yield on the health of peysons.
3 1T1&UteS 10 lb. OU 1fl1 51 f?00 3 TILlS reqwrenie,it could open the
Idaho (Mr. Ci.aw), door to lawsuits by citizens who deem
(Mr. CRAIG & ed and V.%$ gtven. certain substances other than those
permission to revue and extend his determlr ed by the State to be hazard-
remarks.)
ous If they are not included in the
Mr. CRAIG. Mr. Speaker, I would p ,
like to thank my ColleagUe foc YZ 1d- Mr. Speaker. I join every American
regretfully rise in Opposition to and I think even’ Member of this Con-
gress in a desire for clear, clean, safe
this conference report because It re- drinking water: howe er, I must
quires the States to establish wellhead oppose this bill on grounds that I
protection programs and establish think it establishes unprecedented and
wellhead protection areas.
I want to take this opportunity to unacceptable Federal jurisdiction o er
alert my colleagues to the fact that ground water reguIation , and ground
this legislation could establish Federal water controls that hate been tradi-
jurisdiction over ground water, a re- tionally those of State responsibility
source traditionally left under oc 5J Mr WAXMAN Mr. Speaker. I am
State Control, pleased to yield 5 minutes to the geii
Supporters of this provision may tleman from Ohio (Mr EcKARTI
claim that the language in this report I want to point Out the important
was drafted purposely broad In order contribution the gentleman has made
to Insure that State a.nd local govern, to this legislation before us It has
ments retain their trathtional jurisdic- taken us two Congresses to adopt this
tion. LI this is the case, then . comprc injse and his leadership in the
certain as to the Intended of pre ious Congress work ing on this leg.
this provision, Accordmg to section Islation was very significant, I do not
205. the Governor is instructed think we would be here at, this point
submit a t e plan to the Administra- without his efforts.
tar of thc nvlrorimentAJ Protectlon (Mr. ECKART of Ohio asked and
Agency that outlines a program to as given permission to revise and
protect welihead areas from contami- extend his rema.rks,)
nants which may have alverse impact Mr. ECKART of Ohio. Mr. Speaker.
or effect on the health of pemons I thank the gentleman for his very
The report further stipulates that kind remark.z
the State must modify and resubmt I would like to return the compli.
the plan if It is found to be inadequa:e ment to my friend, the gentleman
by the Administrator, from Califorrua, and to my colleague,
In my opinion, this constitutes the the gentleman from I llinois, without
beginning of Federal jurisdiction and u.hose persistence and consistent sup-
Federal control over underground port of enacting strong safe drinking
water, water protections for the Nation’s con.
Although the commendable Inten. sumers’ drinking water, we would not
tion of the conferees reportedly was to be here today Indeed, as the gentle.
retain the State and local jurisdiction man from California suggested, we
over ground water, I am unsatisfied first introduced this bill and testified
with the means employed to accorn. before his subcommittee in June of
push the end that they set out to deal 1983
with. Broad and Indefinite language is I believe this is a critical en’ iron-
a two-edged sword and all of us here in mental issue and one of great sigriifi-
the Congress know that so very well cance
I am concerned that this section In Juxtaposition to the previous re
could-encourage lawsuut.s against the marks of my colleague, the gentleman
Governor or the States should the from Idaho. let me say that I do think
State ground water plant be rejected by it is a national problem Twenty-two
the EPA or should the State fail to im- percent of the Nation’s small v ater
plement it during a time period s stems and at least 37 percent of the
deemed appropriate by citizens large ater systems supplied by
How well I have watched the water ground water already ha e at least one
qualltV standards of EPA and their volatile organic contaminant, Ten bil-
Impact upon i-ny State of Idaho and lion gallons of liquid haz,ardous aastes
the great difficulty we have had art-tv- etery year are dumped into land The
Ing at a plan, when En fact we have not land we have disco ered, Is not a yen-
yet accomplished it. table sponge capable of soaking up
Another problem arising from the these ‘ ide varieties of different forms
overly broad language Is found in the of carcinogens in a ,erItabie stew,
sentence I quoted earlier Specifically. oierno ing with substances that are
the State submitted plan must protect injurious or suspected of being injuri-
wellhe ad ar as from contaminants ous our health
which may ha’e any—and I repeat—
0 1445
any adverse effect on the health of
p ei’SOflS. If e focus for but a moment on the
Mr Speaker, such a directive could Impact on rural America. let me tell
require the State to develop a program my colleagues that a Cornell study dis.
to protect against an Indefinite covered that at least half a million
QG324 ’
- ,—r ‘
4t l
upthe - onthe
Se.nat.e bill ( the 1 ’8sfe
ng Wi1e at
The Clerk read - the tJ. of the
Senate bill.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursu-
ant to the rule, the conference report
i considered as having been read.
(For conference report and state-
ment, see proceedings of the House of
May 5, 1986
The SPEAKER pro tempore, The
gentleman from California (Mr.
WAxiw ) will be recognized for 30
minutes and the gentleman from Illi-
nois (Mr. MASICAN] will be recognrzed
for 30 minutes
The Chair recognizes the gentleman
from California (Mr. WAXMAN].
Mr. WAXMAN. Mr. Speaker, I yield
myself such time as I may consume,
(Mr. WA AN asked and given per-
mission to revise and extend his re-
marks.)
Mr. WAXMAN. Mr. Speaker, I am
very happy that today the House can
give final approval to a new law to pro-
tect the Asserican public from the
growing threat of drinking water con-
tarninatlon.
House and Senate conferees have
agreed upon amendments to the Safe
Drinking Water Act of 1Y?4. which
should do much to help stem the seri-
otis and growing problem of dangerous
chemicals leaking Into our tap water
from hazardous waste landffll , leak-
ing underground gasoline storage
tanks, and runoff front agricultural
pesticides.
I am especially pleased the conferees
have agreed that drInking water stand-
ards established to protect the public
health should reflect the use of “the
best available technology” for the re-
moval of dangerous contaminants,
Both Houses have also agreed that a
treatment technology of proven effec-
tiveness, granular activated carbon, is
feasible for the control of 3Ynthetlc or-
ganic chemicals, a. very common and
very dangero family of drinking
Water Contaminants,
These provisions will go far In pro-
tecting the American public from per-
vasive health threats, Including for ex-
ample, the known carcinogen th!oro-
form, which was found hi 57 percent
of the underground drinking water
supplies in a recent, EPA survey. EPA
will be required to dramatically tIght-
en the very weak current standard for
chloroform under this legislat.zon to
reflect the use of GAC technology,
which has been proved effective for
the tontrol of this substance and
other angeraus byproducts of the dis-
Infection process.
I want to congratulate the distin.
guished ranking minority member of
the Health and the Environment Sub-
committee. Representative MADICAM.
for his initiative and eflort which
-------
CONGRESSIONAL REcoRD — HOUSE H 2633
Mr. ,Speaker, I ,want tO pornt out that ,js protecting our Natio&s Dre’
that uhder this legislation the Federal clous ground water sources r - cct
Go ernment has primacy to set the Mr Speaker. I urge the adoption of
Standards to protect the public health the conference report I congratulate.
That is the significant a.spect of this in conclusion, my colleagues, the gen•
l g islaLion - -,, - - -- tleman from California (Mr WAxMANJ
Mr CRAIG Mr. Speaker, tould the and the gentleman from Illinois (Mr.
gentleman yield for one -n ore corn- :M DIGAN) for their dedication to this
- - . effort
Mr ECKART of Ohio (yield to the Mr MADIGAN Mr. Speaker. I yield
gentleman from Idaho for an addition- 4 minutes to the gentleman from Ne
al inquiry -, •. . ... -York (Mr Lz rrl - -
Mr CRAIG I thank the gentleman (Mr LENT asked and was gi eri per-
for yielding - . ., ti ... - -mission to re ise and extend his re-
I appreciate the gentleman s concern marks 1
and his explanation Scientists good. Mr LENT I thank the gentleman
knoialedgeable scientists oilentimes for yielding this time to me
disagree In the case of oxygen le els Mr Speaker, the conferees for the
in water as it relates to fish in the Safe Drinking Water Act amendments
Clean Water Act. ac hate scientists are to be commended for reporting a
who disagree One says, “This must be strong, yet practical piece of legisla-
the standard to maintain the li eli. tion aimed at protecting our Nations
hood of fish ‘ and another says. “No, drinking water supplies.
it can be maintained at this le el ‘ - As a cosponsor of this legislation in
Eten if a State scientist. regionally the House. 1 am pleased by the v.ide-
recognized, establishes and can prose spread bipartisan support for this
through tests that his standard is a effort and delighted that, at long last,
safe standard if it does not agree with v.e hate reached this stage in the leg-
a Federal standard and someone from istative process. - -
the EPA. the State standard is o er- S 124 provides for Improved drink.
ruled Ing water standards and stricter en-
That is ter specific to a point that forcement of those standards. Of par.
happened in Idaho That is Federal ticular importance Is the protision
primacy. as was just mentioned, over which would enhance protection of
the right of the local area or the State our underground water supplies. On
to control their water destiny Long Island. where my constituency is
The SPEAKER pro ternpore The located, as in many areas around the
time of [ he gentleman from Ohio (Mr country, underground aquifers ser e
ECKARTI has expired as the whole source of dnnking water
Mr WAXMAN Mr Speaker. I ie]d Needless to say, if these sources are
1 additional minute to the gentleman contaminated whole communities
from Ohio (Mr Eci. te-r] could be at risk
Mr ECKART of Ohio I thank Ilu Public concern over the potential for
gentleman for )ieidir.g thIs additional ground water contamination is justi
time to me lied Long Island has only one aquijer
Mr Speaker. briell to respond to which supplies the entire island’s
the gentleman from Idaho, perhaps he drinking water. The need for protec.
makes my point tion for this precious water system is
In toy own State I could not lead m particularly acute S 124 effectitely
State to drinking water regulation addresses these concerns bI providing
dealing with brine Our State discos- funding for demonstration programs
ered that we ha e brine yielded from for protecting aquifers that are the
oil and gas production almost 1 mil sole or principal source of a municipal-
lion gallons of brine produced e er it s water The bill also requires each
dab. only 10 percent pf which is dis- State to adopt and submit to the Eriti.
posed of safe1 ronrnental Protection Agency. within
This bill unfortunatel does ha’ .e 36 months, a program to protect areas
to set a national rtandard because the around public water system wells from
health of se eral States in the Mid conta [ niflaflts that may pose a health
west and the citizens who consume threat These prosisions. along with
that water is seriousll, jeopard other reforms contained in the bill.
ized I think the point of the gentle- will go a long way toward ensuring
man t om California is important safer drinking water
Minmum national staedards enforced fri addition, I am pleased o er the
at the local level with responsible help approtal of a protisiofl 1 helped craft
and guidance from the F’ederaJ Gos- which would significantly reduce the
ernment is critical because. unfortu- amount of harmful lead in our drink
natet for all of us as citizens drinking ing water This pros ision would ban
water knows rio artificial geographic the use of lead pipes or pipe fittings in
boundary or political boundary It af• the installation or repair of public
fects us all water systems The dangers of lead in
This ‘bill. I 1-hink gises EPA the ex- tiater &re well known. This provision
plicit instructions it needs to enforce would affect the reduction of hazard-
the appropriate national regulations ous lead in drtnkin$ WM .er and pro.
to get about dealing with what I be- mote the quality of our water supplIes.
liete is the most fundamental ent iron- In sum, I belitve & 124 representa in
mental problem of this decade, arid improved reform of eztst’trt sale
May 13, 1986
rural families in America are drinking
‘. .water that. If it was found ata public
bathing beach, would be labeled unfit
to swim in, let alone to drink.
Oser 700 contaminants hate been
.tdentified in our water. Yet EPA since
i-1974 has been able to regulate fewer
Ithan 2S The gentleman from Illinois
)(Mr. MADIGAN). the gentleman from
California [ Mr W,lxatAnl, and I dis.
cosered that. you can lead EPA to
water, but .ou cannot necessarily
make them regulate it That Is why
the amendments we bring forward
toda in this appropriate piece of ke
entironmental legislation are long
oserdue - .,. -
S 1 xty-four thousand tiolations ‘in
1984 01 current drinking water stand-
ards hase occurred. while enforcement
actionis indeed hate been few — -
Mr CRAIG Mr Speaker will the
gentleman ield for a question’
Mr ECKART of Ohio I would b
happy to respond -
Mr CRAIG I thank the gentleman
for ielding
Mr. Speaker. I earlier expressed my
concern on this issue V e all know
with any limited knowledge of under-
ground water, that water takes on the
character in chemicals and metals 01
the area or aquifer in which it flows.
We have found itt mans instances in
the Clean Water Act, and now’ I fear
with this act. that those uniquely dif-
(erent areas are not spoken to in the
law What happens to a State plan
where there are natural substances in
an area thas are at let els htstortcal1
acceptable and can certainly not be
changed, the citizens of that area
drink the water, but a national plan
and a national standard sa .s. ‘No.
that does not meet the Federal re•
quirements The State sa’s change but
the Feds say we cannot amend it just
for sour locale or we would hate to
change it for etery place in the
Nation -. - - ‘
Is that not Federal jurisdiction oter
local or State water rights’ —
Mr ECKART of Ohio III could re-
claim m time, Mr Speaker I would
ooint out to the gentleman that under
the conference report there are exten-
site negotiations that must take place
between State EPA s and the US EPA
in arnit ing at those locall agreed to
standards
ii would be nit hope that in this im-
port ant Federal State partnership
[ hat th pc culiarities of local problems
pa-iieular)3 would be addressed at
sule source aquifer protistons of im-
portauce or. L ,on l’ .lard and in the
State of \Vashingtorl I think that is
the kind of mechanism that would be
h Iplul
Mr CRAIG Mr Speaker would the
gcntkrnian 3ield for jusi one more’
çOmrr- u [ ’
Mr ECKART or Ohio Let me )Ield
first to m ’ friend the gentleman from
California (Mr WAXMANI
Mr WAXMAN I thank the gentle-
man for yielding
-------
0326
Ut.)
c GR€ss oNAL RFCOWD..- HOUSE : May 1 J 86.
wiser atandude. 8vfft e t- (hat can be bandied with the ex’tatlxig, tial archival depoalto,.t ,.n
ment of Lb.$ bULL. ne d to e ure , programs at the ,prese t leve and I submIt a wñtteit rePOrt c -the proposed
tha i o r drU*tng wa* leg ire intend to mU fo a vote an thb PaldeertLal archival depository. to
ndeed made Bate 1 thL. d ftttoze that t) , , ‘ President of the Snate jjà tli Spaker,oh
generatjor sa , - Mr. WAXMAN. Mr. Speaker, i 71 .-.the 1 ouse of Repre J es. ‘fli e rePort
shall Include -..
Mr. MADIOAJJ. Mr. I yield to the gentleman from Texas EMr. ‘(A) adoscriptionof tit’ ilWy. urid
4 mInutes to the gentI ftn from Utah, BU00KSI for the purpose of making a equipn erit offcred as >tt or to t made
(Mr. Nm .sorej. a member of Use sub- , u Imoua-conaentreque$%,c. 10 e c i.avaUab1e Sithout transfer of title;
Committee - - - “(B a statement specifyiog the estimated
Mr. NIElSON of Utah. I thank the total cost of the proposed depontory and
PRESIDENTIAL LIBRARIES ACT ‘the amount of the endowment for the de’
gentiemar for yleldu )g this time to - - -0 ? 1986
me. . postory required pursuant to subsection mgi
Mr. Speaker, I rise in Opposition to Mr. BROOKS. Mr. Speaker. I ask of thiS S tIOfl.
this bill on several counts. I would like unanimous consent to take from the “ (C I a statement of the term ol the pro-
to associate myself with the comments Speaker’s table tkie biJl _ (H R. 1349). to posed agreement, if any.
of the gentleman from Idaho (Mr. reduce ts at operating resideritiaj -—---- 1 a general description of the types of
papers, ’document.s, or olher,histortcaj mate.
CRAIG) that it is too much Federal con- libraries, and for tIter purposes, with rial.s proposed to be deposited in. Lhe deposi.
trol over ground water systems. ,a Senate amendment thereto, and tory to be created, and of the terms of the
In my State. many conimtinitles concur In the Senate amendment, proposed deposit.
have severa.1 sources of water, 10 or 11 - The Clerk read the title of the bill. “(El a statement of any additional Im
sources of water, and they have to re- The Clerk read the’ enate amend. provemerit.s slid equipment associated aith
quire testing of every one of those ment. as follows. - the development and operation of the de.
sources rather than at the common Strike out all after the enacting clause pository, an estimate of the costs of such
collection point It is very expensive to and improvements and equipment, and a state-
ment as to the extent to which such costs
both the communities and the State. That this Act may be cited as the ‘Preelden- will be incurred by any Federal or State toy-
In the Mouse, we took the original tial Libraries Act of 1986’. C - errunent agency, /
bill, the House bill, and kept the exist. R!SSAICH AND MUSWS( VACILrTISS - “(F) an estimate of the total annual Cost
Ing program at $69 million. The other Sr.c 2 Section 2101U ) or title 44. tjnjt,ed to the United States of ruaintamrng. operat
body went to $101 million, and a corn- States Code, is amended by Inserting beqore [ rig, and protecting the depository, and
promise lit a so-called conference the semicolon a comma and “and may lit. “(0) a certification that 8uch facility and
ended at $102 million. I do not ca.l1 elude research facilities and museum facill. equipment whether offered as a gift or
that much of a compromise, going ties In accordance with this Chapter”, made available without transfer of title)
from $69 million to $100 million. sioo FXt510ENTtALAPCV D p SITORI \ coritply with standards promulgated by the
million is not very near the middle of Szc 3 (ai Section 2112(a) of title 44 Ax hivi pursuant to paragraph (2) of this
69 and 101. It is a 45-percent increase United States Code, is s.mended to read as subsection. -
fcilow — “(4) Prior to accepting any gift under sub-
in the existing program, 91 percent of ‘(ahi) Whenthe Archivist considers it to patagmnuk (C) of paragraph U) for the pur-
hich Is In emergency assIstance, 47 be in tile public interest, the i rcfflvIst of making any physicaj or material
Ircerit in technical assistance, 26.5 may— \chanee or addition to a Presidential archival
,iercent En State-public water system ‘rAin) accept, for and Ln the name of the depository, or prior to tmplementrng any
supervision, and 728 percent In under. United States, land. a facility, and equip. pro iaiori of law requiring the making of
ground water source protection, a ment offered as a gift to the United States such a change or addition, the Archivist -
total of a 45-percent increase for the purpose of creating a. Presidential shall submit a report In writing on the pro-
archital depository, posed change or addition to the President of
o 1455 ‘iii) take title to the land, facility, and the Senate and the Speaker of the House of
In addition to that, there are new equipment on behalf of the United States Representatives. The report shall Inchide—
and (A) a description of such gift,
programs of approximately $7() mu- maintain, operate, and protect the - iS) a statement specifying the estimated
lion. The Rouse passed $40 million of land, facility, and equipment as a Presiden. total cost of the proposed physjcaj or mate-
those, and on the basis of those, I ob- (lal archival depository and as part of the rial change or addition and the amount of
Ject-ed. I felt that the sole-source aqui- natIonal archives system, the deposit In an endowment for the C posi.
fer program was a fine program, but It - Bui make agreements, upon terms and tory required pursuant to subsectIon Ig) of
should be handled by the States them- conditions the Archivist considers proper, this section in order to meet the cost of
with a State, political Subditislon. universl. such change or addition.
selves, Washington and New York ty, in titutio of higher learning, Institute. ‘C a statement of the Purpose of the
could handle those themselves and as or foundation to use as a Presidential archi- proposed change or addition and a general
far as the planning and technical as- val deiiository (and, a facility and equip- detcripti n of any papers, documents or
sistance, I felt that the States are merit of the State subdivision, university, or his’ orical materials proposed to be deposit.
more than happy to handle that on other organization, to be made available b> ed ri the depository as a result of such
their ow-n without the Federal guide. It sithout transfer of title to the United cha”georaddition.
‘isnes and the help States, and / - ‘1D a statement of any additional Im.
The conference report added $30 ‘(ii> maintain, operate, and protect the de- pro’ ernents or equipment for the depository
pository as part of the national archives ated sift such change or addition,
million additional to monitoring tin- system and — - - ‘E an estimate of tile increase In the
regulated contamrnant,s in other (C) accept, for and In the name of the total annual co St to the United States ot
,words, making them get Information United States, gills offered for the purpose maintaining, operating, and protecting the
on things which are not known to con, of making any physical or material change depository that ‘a iii result from such change
taminate and which, in some cases, are or addition to a Presidential archival deposi. or addition arid \‘—
known not to contaminate They nev- tory i’) a certification that the depositnr ,
erttteless have to monitor them, t2)The Architist thafl promulgate arelsi. and the equipment therein sill, after such
tectural and design standards applicable to char.,)e or addition, comply sith the stand.
For all those reasons, both the fiscal Presidential archiial depositories in order to ard promulgated by the ,&rchfleit pursuant
part that we cannot afford a 45.per. ensure that such depositories AI preserve to paragraph 121 of this subsection
cent increase in the existing program. Presidential records subject to chrtpter 22 of Si The Architist may not—
plus an additional $70 million, so you this title and papers arid other historical IA) accept or take title to land, a facility
have a total increase of over $100 ml)- materials accepted for deposit under section or equipment under subparagraph (Al of
‘ ‘n in thL pro n 2111 of this nile and (B) contain adequate paragraph (I) for the purpose of creating a
think t4’iat is Irresponsible in the research facilities . . Pre.sidentia?ai -chi al depository
al situation that we have and it. (3i Prior to accepting and taking title to iE enter into any agreement under sub
arty land facility, or equipment under Sub- paragraph (B) of such paragraph or an
Is bring s.dditiontaj Federal regula- paragraph A) of paragraph hI, or prior to other agreement to accept or establish a
tion, 1 do not. want. to be acCuSed of entering into any agreement wider subpara. Presidential arci’u a( depository’. Or
running for dirty water or supporting graph 5 of such paragraph or any other ‘(C) accept arty gilt under subparagraph
dirty water, but I think it Is a problem agreement to accept or establish a Presiden- (C) of such paragraph for the purpose of
-------
May 13, 1986 CONGRES8 ONAL RECORD — H ’OUS1
making any physical or material charge (.0 a Wi the total cost described In subcliuze
.PresldentiaJ archital depositors. (I l or 111i of subparagmph (Bill), as the
intll the expiration of a period of 60 da t ) - case may be, multiplied by - L
Continuous sessIon of Congress beg1Jii ng ‘ ‘lil the percentage Obtained by di idirig
the date on ahich the Arcbittst :the number of square feet by which such
the report required under paragraph (3) of depository aill exceed 70000 square feet by
this subsectlo with respect to such Presi. 70.000 , , , ‘ —
dential arrh iiaj depository or the report re- ‘(41 1! a Proposed physical or material
‘mtita Jinderpaj’agrap 14) of this subsec. -change or addition to a Presidential archival
Lion iLh respect to such change or addi. depository would result in an increase in the
Lion, as the case may be Cost,s of facilIty’ operauoos, ‘tJ e Archivist
ibi Section 2112tg of title 44 United may not accept an gift under subpara
Code, is amrr.de to rcad as folloas graph iC of paragraph ( )j for the Purpose
1g)(i) When the Archifist considers of rriakirg such a cha.nge or addition, or may
be in the publi c Interest th Archiust may not implement any pro ision of law requir.
Solicit arid accept gifts or fl1OflP ing the making of such a change or addi.
or Other property for the purpose of main tion unless the Archi ist determines that
taming operating, protei ing or impro ,ng there is a ailabie b gift or bequest for de
a Presidencisl archiiaj depository The pro posit under paragraph (2) of this subsection
reeds of gifts or begues tog , ther ith the in an endowment with respect to such de
procee from fees or from sa?es of hstori posliorl, an amount for the purpose of
cal materials copies or reprodurt ns’,cata maintaining the land, facility, and equip.
logs or Other items haung to do with a ment of such depositor) equal to the differ
P sjdc’ntia1 Brc’hi al depos’t ,r shall be enc’e between— /
paid Into an account in the National Ar “(A the amount which pursuant to p ra
chi es Trust Fund and shall be held admmn graph 3i of this subsection, would ha e
Lster d and exper >d+ ’d for the benefit and r ‘ been required to hate been available for de-
the interest of the Presidential archiial de. posit in such endowment with respect to
positori in connection with which they were such depository if such change or addition
receiied and for the same purposes and oh. h d been included in such depository on—
Jeet,s. including custodial and adminmstrati e ‘ei the date on which the A.rchnmst took
ser ices for which appropriations for the title to the land, facility, and equipment for
maintenance, operation protectior or such deposmtor under subparagraph (A> of
provernent of Presidential archisal deposi. Subsection (alit), or
tories might be expended ‘(ii) the date on which the A.rchjsist en-
“(2) The Archit t5t sh&jJ provide for the es tered Into an agreement for the creation or
tablishment in such Trust Fund of separate Such depository under subparagrap (B) of
endowments for the maintenance of the such paragraph, /
land. facilny, arid equipment of each Presi as the case may be. minus
dential archival depository to which shall “(B) the amount whIch, pursuant to para.
be credited any giu (.s or bequest,s receited graph 131 of this subsection, was required to
.under paragraph (1) that are offered for be atailable for deposit in such endowment
that purpose Income to each such endow. with respect to such depository on the date
rnent shall be asaitable to cover the cost of the Archiimst took such title or entered into
facility operatmoos, but shall not be avalj. such agreeme t as the case may be
able for the performance of archisaj func-
tions under this title
FPi . ICABii ’y
Sec 4 Paragraphs (3) and (4) of section
‘13> The ArchIt 1st shall not accept or take 2112ig ) of title 44, United States Code (as
title to afly land, facility, or equipment added by the amendment made by section
under subparagraph IA) of subsection 3(bi of this Act) shall appt with respect to
(a)(l). or enter into any agreement to Use
any lana facility, or equipment under sub- any Prmidenuaj archisal depository created
paragraph (5) of such subsection for the u a depository for the papers, documents
and other historical materials and Federal
purpose of creating a Presidential archival records pertaining to any President who
deposItor>, unless the ArChi m,st determines takes the oath of office as President for the
that there Is a%ailable. by gift or bequest for first tune on or alter Januar) 20. 1985
deposit under paragraph (2, of this subsec
- - cion in an endowment with re5pect to such STcoy Or MUSEvM OT THE PRE 5IDESjT 5
depository, an amount for the purpose of Sec 5 (a) The Archivist of the United
mainLaui, g such land, facility, and equip- Staids. in corisultaLton with the Secretary of
merit equal to—.- the Smithsoruan IriStit ti n and the Nation
IA) the product of— al Capital Planning Commission, shall sIud
“(I) the total cost of acquiring or the demand for and the cost, and space and
structing such facility and of acquiring and program requiremen of. establLshu,g a
Installing such equipment, multiplied by museum of the Presidents With respect to
‘(11120 percent plus such costs, the study shall examine the fea-
(Bilil if title to the land is to be vested in sibility of establishing and ooerating suc,h
the United Slates, the product of— museum exciusivelL with non-Federal funds
I l> the total cost of acquiring the land (bi Each Federaj agency shall cooperate
UPOfl which such (aciliiy is located, or such with the Archi ist in conducting the study
other measure of the salue of such land required b subsection (a)
is mutual)> agreed upon b the Ar hisist (C) In the annual report for fiscal year
and the donor multiplied by 1986 required by section 2108 of title 44
(lfl 20 percent or unIted States Code, the Archivist shall in
‘(ifl if title to the land f not to be vested dude a st,ar,ement of the results of the study
in the United States the product of— required by SubseetLon ( 1 and any recom-
(I) the total mat to the donor of any In- mendauoos of the Archivist with respect to
proiementa to the land upon which such (a establishing such amuaeurn_
cjl >t slocatedlothertinnsuchfaci li tyand Mr MADIOA i (during the read.
equipmenh), muitiplied b> , jj:ig) Mr Speaker, I ask Unanimous
‘ UI o percent plus - cor ent that the Senate am &ri
“(C’.if the Presidential archital deposi o be considered as res.ó and pelnt In
1fl •t er’ed TO 000 squaJ-e feet hi area an
amount eqUal tO t 1’Ie Product of— the R coan
“(I I the sum of— The SPEAKER p o tem ore; Is
(I I (.Me t l , oo . 1bed u of there ( sj toQ to the g ttw
subparagrap.is &AJ p genLe a ,n tT0 I tuo
000027
H 2635
There W I -S o ObJe t a
The SPEAKER pro tempore Is
there ob ectjoa to the Initial j quest
of the gentleman from Texas?
Mr MADIGAN. Mr. Speaker. reserv-
ing the right 10 oblect, I yield to the
gentleman from Texas (Mr BROOKS)
for a brief e cplanation of what Is
going on - -;
Mr BROOKS Mr Speaker, I thank
the. gentleman train Illinois for his
percepti e understanding of the par-
liarnent.ary situation,
Mi- , ’ Speaker, last year.,—rhe House
passed and sent to,&ti Senate the bill,
H R. 1349. amending the Presidential
Libraries Act of 1955
The bill passed by the House last
June represen an attempt to reestab-
lish the balance between public and
private support anticipated by the
original law, by limiting the operating
costs of future libraries and by shift.
trig the burden of the remaining costs
from the taxpayer to those individuals
v ho wotild raise the’ funds used to
build the libraries. This would be
achieved by reqwring future libraries
to meet certain des Ign arid archival
standards and by requiring that the
donation of a building to be used as a
Presidential library be accornpa ied by
an endowment equal to at lea,u 20 per-
Cent of the cost of building arid eqtup-
ping that facility.
The income from the endowment
would then be used to offset the build.
trig-related operations costs
The Senate amendment is consistent
with the thrust of the House-passed
bill The genalensan from Ohio [ Mr.
KINDNESS) may wish to yield to the
gentleman from Oldaliorna. the chair-
man of the subcorn,cnjtt,ee, to explain
the Senate amendment in more detail
Mr. MADIGAN Mr. Speaker, fur-
ther reserving the right to object. I
yield to the gentleman from Ohio [ Mr.
Kiremeiss] for any Contribution that
he might care to make to this unex-
pected dialog.
-. Mr. KiNDNESS. Mr Speaker. I
thank the gentleman from Illinois
(Mr. M_ADXCAN) for yielding and for
maintaining the rhythm of accoin.
pltshrnent. of the House of Represen .
Lives during the course’ uf this after.
noon through his tunely interdictto
I say to the gentleman from Illinois
that the gentleman from Texas (Mr.
BROORSJ has, I think, quite Properly
described the measure, H R 1349 I
would like to ask if the gentlem
from Illinois would allow the gentle-
man from Oklahoma (Mr. ENCtISH]
and myself to exc*tange words in a col-
loquy, U he would yield alternately to
Mr. MADIGAN. Perhaps, Mr Speak-
er. I could with w iiy reservation
mid the from Ohio (Mr
Kiim zsgJ ld mats his own reset—
vattan.
r S pe ker , I th aw my re rea-
tiara oCobtlmi..
The S1’W p O r ’
*s olI sc tb- e I re u -
-------
serving the diM
great thanks 10 t1 tein B-
linois (Mr. W Drou,I.Zj qd& like to
yield to the gent1e i Oklaho-
ma (Mr. ENOuSHI for , purpose of
explaining the Senate amendment
that has taken place In conference be-
tween the House and the Senate con-
ferees.
Mr. ENGLiSH. Mr.’ Speaker, the
Senile amendment to H.R. 1349
strengthens the Rouse passed bill by—
Requiring a proportionately larger
endowment for future libraries that
exceed 70,0000 square feet and \
Providing that additions or rnodif lea-
tions, to future libraries, that Increase
the operating cost of that facility are
accompanied by an endowment, -
The Senate version also provides
that more information be given to the
Congress than Is currently required.
Mr. KINDNI 8. Mr. Speaker, I
thank the gentleman for his response
and further reserving the right to
object. I would like to pose a couple of
questions to the gentleman. — -
First, under current law. Presiden-
tial libraries are built only with pri-
vately donated funds arid nothing In
this legislation would change that, is
that correct’
Mr. ENGLISB. That Is correct, the
,cost of building Presidential libraries
would continue to be borne by private
groups. Like, for example, the 100-
member Reagan Library Foundation
we’ve read about recently.
Mr. KINDNESS. Second, the Income
to the endowment is to be used for
building operations costs arid cot pro-
gram costs and, further, that income
would supplant, not supplement.
annual congressional appropnatiozu
for the operation of that library and.
thereby reduce the growth in the cost
to the taxpayers of operation 01 these
facilities In the future, Is that correct?
Mr. ENGLISH. That Is correct, it
would supplant most If not all of the
building operations cost appropriation.
Had this approach been in effect from
the outset, costs to the taxpayers
would be one-hall of what they are
now. / -
Mr. KINDNESS. Third, this legisla.
tion would clarify the authority of the
‘A.rchjvtst of the United Stales to solic-
it, as well as accept, gifts or bequests
for the purpose of maintaining, oper
ating, protecting, or Improving any of
the existing of future Presidential II.
brax-les. Gifts offered for the purpose
of maintenance of an existing or
future Presidential library would be
treated as an endowment, the income
to which could be used only for that
urpost ut other income. such as the
tceeils from fees or from sales of
‘i ’ilstorical materials, copies or repro-
ductions, catalogues, or other Items
having to do with a presidential U-
brary would not be so limited in it s
use; in fact the bill makes no change
thtaee ee i beuied,’lg trom the CorwnlU& óo jñe g
that orrecti -‘. c ‘ - ‘ - .O eraclons In urging the - House to
W . 1QL SE. The ntleniari’s U - adopt the Seflate amendment to ILR.
derst&ndlng Is conAstent with mine. 1349, the Presidential LibrarIes Act of’
Mi-. KINDNESS. Finally, although ‘
the endowment requirement Would L I there Is oice comment that I. and I
first ipply to the library of the incum- ,am sure other Members of Congress.
bent’s successor, the ArchtvIst s build- hear spoken often by our constituents
tag itandards for archival suitability in our districts, it is that we think that
would take immediate effect, Is that past l residents are oftentimes treated
correct? -• too generously by the taxpayers of
Mr. ENGLISH. That is correct. Both thls’country and here Is an example to
the House and Senate rejected a tighten up on the generosity of the
White House proposal that the incurs- :rreasury at this time as decided by
bent’s library be exempt from the inn- ‘this Congress to make Presidential II-
imum standards provision. , brarles largely stand on their own two
Mr. KINDNESS. Mr. Speaker, feet aith those aho supporUhe tilti.
before withdx-aaizig my reservation of mate endowing of them._
objection, I would like to remind my I would urge the pa iage of this leg-
colleagues of the obligation of the U S. i.slatlon
Government, which took effect with
\the Incumbent administration, under 0 1505
the PresidentiaL Records Act of 1978,
to be responsible for the custody, con-
trot, and preservation of, and access to
presidential records. While some have
criticised the continuance of the Presi-
dential library system, I believe that It
provides an efficient means of fulfill-
ment of the Government’s obligations
under the Pesidential Records Act.
Mr. WAXMAN. Mr. Speaker, will
the gentleman yield to me?
Mr. KINDNESS. I yield to the gen-
tleman from California.
Mr. WAXMAN. Mr. Speaker, I
thought this was an agreed-upon
report, I did not realize it was going to
Involve a lengthly debate,
Perhaps you two could work out
your differences.
Mr. KINDNESS. I thank the gentle-
man from California for his thought
there. If it sounds as though there u.s
controversy, the thought it. just to lay
down a little bit of legislative history
and go on from here. I do not believe
there Is any disagreement,
If that is correct, the gentleman
from Oklahoma (Mr. E 1OLI5H1 may
very well have a short response to
that.
Mr. ENGLISH. Mr Speaker, If the
gentleman ould yield, certainly the
gentleman’s understanding is consist-
ent with mine
Mr. KINDNESS. Mr. Speaker, I
thank the gentleman and just before
ithdrawirig my reservation of objec’
tion, I would like to remind my col-
leagues of the obligation of the U S.
Gor.ernment which took effect with
the incujnbent administration under
the Presidential Records Act of 1978
to be responsible for the custody. con-
trol and preser ation of arid access to
Presidential records That is the pur-
pose of this legislation, to make that
clearer and to set the rules for the
future aith less costs to the American
taxpayer
Mr. Speaker, :urther under my res-
ervation of obiection. I yield to the
gentleman from Idaho (Mr Ciuic)
who has. I believe, a question.
Mr CRAIG Mr. Speaker, I thank
my colleague for yielding and I would
ju. t like to join aith my colleagues
Mr. KINDNESS. 1 thank the gentle-
man, - — -
Mr ENGLISH. Will the gentleman -
yield further’
Mr. KINDNESS, I yield to the gen-
tlernan from Oklahoma.
Mr. ENGLISH. I want to thank the
gentleman from Ohio (Mr. Kz Nmsl.
our ranking minority member, for his
thoughtful and unwavering support of
this legislation. I also urge my col.
leagues to support the adoption of the
Senate amendment, and I hope that
they will join me in urging President
Peagan, whose $45 million library will,
at the Insistence of his aides, be
exempt from this cost-sa%i.rlg, deficIt.
reduction effort, and to have set an
example for the American taxpayer by
committing his library foundation to
the establishment of the operating
cost endowment.type envisioned by
both the House and the Senate.
Mr KINDNESS Mr Speaker, under
\my resercatlon, I thank the gentleman
from Oklahoma in particular for his
thoughtful approach to the resolution
o this matter o er the course of sever-
al years now, since 1982 when the
hearings acre first held, to this point
o.here v.e contemplate final passage.
Mr REID Mr Speaker I rise in support of
H 1349 as amended by the Senate The
pi r ose of this legislation. introduced by my
d strg,rshed colleague from Oklahoma. Mr
E ’,OLISI-I, will reiri-ce the costs of operating
Presidential librar’es Thig legrslauion is long
o’,erdus
My interest In the Presidential 1br ry
System began in 1983 during a meeting with
Senior Citizens in Overion, NV The residents
of O’ erton expressed their slrong oblections
to the costs of maintaining former Presidents
01 particular concern to the Overton Senior
Ct:ens waS the $ 4 miltiori spent by the
American taxpayers iri.1983 to maintain Presi.
dent1al libraries—the largest chunk of the ex-
pense associated with maintaining fom’.ei
Prestdent During the 98th Congress. I intro-
duced legislation to curtail the costs of the
Presidential Library System and have joined
Congcessn-an ENGuSM in his e’lorts to ac
corrot.sn this end ever Since
Even though the libraries are built with pr,.
vale funds, they are maintained by the taxpay-
-------
000029
• M ay1*mf
es Ope ’atrng costs for the Seven exI t?ng
Presidential libranes ee expected to be about
$146mi rohscelyeei HR 1349re-
qurres that in the Mise, private foundations
that ,btjld the libraries must establish an en-
hdowment. amounting to 20 percent of the cost
of constwcuo. , to defray operational ex-
POnSQS. A sens ie Provinon added to the bill
by the other body also places a 70000-
S iare-foo limit on the size of future libraries
requiring private funding to pick up costs as-
sociated with larger space , -
It is time for us to relieve the Federal Gov-
emmant and the taxpayers of this excessive
financial burden HR 1349 will address the
uncontroua e spending associated with main.
taming former Presidents and Still allow for the
maerrtenajice of these historical documents
For these reasons, H R 1349 deserves Our
suppon Thank you
Mr KINDNESS Mr Speaker. I
-.-withdi-aa my reservation of objection
The SPEAKER pro tempore Is
• three objection to the Initial request
of the gent1em n from Texas’ ,
There wa.s no objection
A motion to reconsider as laid on
the table. -
CONPERENc REPORT ON S 124.
SAFE DRINKING WATER ACT
-‘ AMENDMEIcFS OF 1986
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The
Chair recognizes the gentleman from
Illinois (Mr. MADIGAN).
Mr MADIGAN. Mr Speaker, I yield
5 minutes to the gentlem ,ar from
:North Carolina (Mr. BaOyau.LJ, the
ranking member of the Committee on
Energy and Commerce
(Mr BROYHILJ,, asked and was
given permission to revise and extend
his remarks)
Mr BROyffiLL. Mr Speaker. I rise
In strong support of this reauthoriza.
tlon of the Safe Drinku-i,g Water Act
amendment.s of 1986. The Safe Drink-
ing Water Act has often been over.
shadowed by more aggressive and ex-
pensive envlrot n e ’ital laws, such as
the Clean Air Act and Supei-fund, but
we now know that It is equal to those
other statutes fri Lrnportaj-ice This new
legislatjo represents a giant step for-
ward in the protection of our tap
water
Contamination of our Nation’s
drinking water supplies has become a
major public health concern Up to
this point in time, the Federal Govern-
ment has set national standards, or
maximum contanunsnt leieLs, for only
22 con minants In our dnnking at.er,
even though there may be thousands
of pollut.anta Liwading our public
water supplies. This bill will require
the reguiatmn of 85 additional tome
ctwmlcaj in the next 3 years and po-
tentMfly hundreds more 3 ’iortly there.
after.. ’Of equal tarportaj,c however, Is
the fact that this fRliiIiQfl mainLaJj
the 1mp rtazmt provisAaa current law
whL tQmafr L ernd ia o-
tec _ t fl
the o4 t
i m’ck Thi
CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — HOU5E
!? z637
aents a reasoned, balanced a ptoach to Mr DOWj ” of New York. Mr.
envil-orunental regulation, ‘ S ea - I am ple.ased today that 4
Mr. Speaker, there are t o provi- years of hard work have produced a
sions in this legislation which are es e- conference ‘report on niendment,s to
daily lrnporta.nt. -, . - - i-the Safe Drinking Water Act that ti1I
The first is desi ned to prevent tin- ‘mean high quality drinking wat.er for
derground sources of drinking water, rnUllons of Americans, I aant to thank
which are now clean. fron i-becoming the chairman and ranking minority
contaminated Section 205 of S. 124 re- member of the Health Subcommitt,ee
quires States to develop plans to pre- Representatives WAXMAN arid MAD-
vent man.made COfltamin tion from xc r , and their counterparts in the
entering underground drinking water other body for their efforts to include
supplies through ellhead areas This a program to protect the 21 sole
pro%ision requires no ne State regu- source aquifers in the United States in
latory program, but instead gives each the Safe Drinking Water Act The
State maximUm flexibilty to protect Sole Source Aquifer Demonstration
these vital resources in the way it sees Program In S. 124 will enable areas
fit. Too often environmental laws have such as Long Island to protect under-
concentrated solely on cleaning up ground stippires of drinking aater and
pollution alter it occurs This bill puts preserve lands that are critical to the
equal emphasis on guaranteeing that quality and quantity of that ground
our pure drinking water stays that Water
way Maintaining potable ground atcr in
The second provision which deserves an aquifer depends on the nature of
to be highlighted is section 107 hich the land and vegetation l ing abo e
provides for technical assistance to the aquifer’s recharge zone A re-
small water systems Currently, the charge zone is an area through which
majority of violations of the Safe precipitation and other surface runoff
Drinking Water Act occur at the thou- filters down into the water table Sev-
sands of small water systems which eral undeveloped tracts of land on
serve rural, less populated areas Long Island—including iio,ooo acres
These types of systems are prevelant of pine in eastern Suffolk County—
throughout North Carolina and most anchor the loose soil of the island’s re-
other areas of the Country Many charge areas Preserving this land is
times these systems are operated by critical to the protection of Long Is-
the town manager or local fire chief, land’s Supply of ground water.
who have little, if any, training in this However, pressure to develop these
area lands thjeat the future quality and
This bill would provide funds to es- quantity of Long Island’s only source
tabllgh cost-effecti e, but crucial tech- of drinking water, Recent facts exem
nical assistance programs for these plify the ways in which pressure to
small towns This assistance would in- recklessly develop land has led to
chide trai ung. the perform ce of en- ground water contamination Between
g’i.neenng studies, and perhaps most 1978 and mid-1981, 88 of the approxf.
importantly, the Implementation of a mately 1 000 major public drinking
“cfrctift rider” program This means water wells on Long Island were closed
that an expert in public water delivery or restricted in their use because of
would travel around a region and in- contamination from synthetic organic
struct the operat of small, rural sys- chemicals and nitrates On the east
tems on the appropriate methods of end of Long Island 1.400 private wells
monitoring, treatment, and manage- have been cofltar ’mted by pes’tiddes
ment This simple program could liter- that hate entered the aquifer system
ally eliminate thousands of violations Severe coatammation of a sole
of the law every year. and improt e the source aquifer system .means costly re-
quality Qf tap water for millions of medial action Losing a natural supply
rural Americans of water would force a community to
In closing, Mr. Speaker, I want to re- rely on bottle water, treat its tap
iterate my strong support for this bill water through filters, or eten pipe
and urge my colleagues to approve it good water from a distanct source
overwhelmingly Portions of some communitIes on Long
Mr WAXMAN Mr Speaker, may I Island, such as Bay Shore. haie been
inquire of the Chair the time I have forced to abandon their wells in fai.or
remaix ing of using public wefls The hookup
The SPEAJCER pro tempore The costs haie been expensive, Pre er-itjng
gentleman from Ca.Iilornia [ Mr. problems before they develop is sound
W x j has 22 minulies remaining, public policy that will mean cost say.
Mr. WAXMAN Mr. I. es-, I eni Ings arid clean water for millions of
pleased to yIeld 5 minutes to our col- people That wtrzt S 1 1 will do.
league, the gentleman from New Yotk The So? - th Ail ,tlIfer Demons ’it-a..
(Mr Dow-i who Introduced legisift- tfr,i, Po q t . Is ba ed on leg-
tion to deal with a very lthpo ’tanL b iizzz. FATIUCa
problem of sole source agwLe Lhlch f1 ’o cj l xi th
became the bi. a. (r part at tM- - wd ’ £n w j
l&tio tha I Is b o e u& t g. huw fl rtia ert ’a oi , 4Z
D( y t Y u’b , J Lcn t8i*a4 *- %eaThPta 1t
aed ’w g e ei s ievi d ttt quiftt d! ____
water, we w ote - -
-------
euch u Suffolk -
land within the * the Inen
In order to prot underlying
ground water. - - -
8. 124 should pr erve Long Islacd’
fragile supply of drinking water and
those lands critical Lu our water. It is
good solid preventive medicine and
will guarantee the purity and abun-
dance of clean dunking water for the
people of Long Island and the other 20
sole source aquifers, now and forever.
Mr. MADIGAN. Mr. Speaker, I yield
3 minutes to the gentleman from Coin-
rado (Mr. Sriwcc),
Mr. STR.ANG. Mr. Speaker. If I may,
I would hke to engage the chairman of
the subcommittee, Mr. WAXMAN. En a
brief colloguy regarding sectIon 205 of
the bill.
Mr. WA VIAN. Certainly.
Mr. STRANG. Regarding the text of
section 205 of the bill regarding well-
head protection and State plan.s, and
the report language on page 46. is It
the intent of the committee that. noth-
trig in this section shall interfere with
State water laws and State water ap-
propriation processes?
Mr. WAXMAN. I! the gentleman
will yield to rue, that Is correct.
Mr. STRANG. Would the chairman
agree then, for the purpose of leg-Lila-
tive history and congressional intent,
that If there is found to be any con-
flict between the provisions of this sec-
tion arid State water laws arid State
water appropriation processes, that it
Is the intent of Congress that the pri.
macy of State water laws are 1 .0 pre-
vail? -
Mr. WAXMAN. If the gentleman
will yield further. I do not anticipate
any such conflict.
Mr. STRANG. I thank the chair-
man. I would also Like to thank the
committee and the chairman and the
ranking Republican on, agreeing to
provisions in sectIon 302 whereby
Indian tribes are being treated under
the act at a par with the States in
terms of primary enforcement respon-
sibilities. Also, that you appreciate the
survey directed the legislation to as-
certain drinking water problems and
needs on Indian reservations. The
Southern tile and tiLe Mountain tile
tribes En Colorado are appreciative of
these provisions
Finally, Mr Chairman, I would paint
out that even with the assurances of
the esteemed chairman of the subcom-
rmttee, I must rise In reluctant opposi-
tion to this bill due to certain revisions
which were underscored by letters
from th.i Colorado General Assembly,
‘rom ‘.ia Thomas o( the EPA. and
rom the Justice Department, pointing
out that this Li an Intrusion of the
Federal Government Into what are
properly St&te land use and local mars-
agemerit decisions.
Ms eaker. 1 1 tthig th
-)etZei for the R*coar at this point:
cowasso Kovsz ow R itzwvr rivss.
- - - cc Aprtl 25, 19 58.
M i 8m*ieo . -
Lo oria House Office Bssllding, Waaltfttu-
tonn .
Dass Co zsaiwe Smasco: I am wrtthug
concerning tab. 1964 amendments to the
Safe Drinking Water Act which ire now In
eonlerence committee Senator StaJford and
Congressman Dirigell are the chairmen of
the Conferees My concern about the Act is
that, as I understand It. the Welihead Pro-
tection Act has been included in the pro-
posed conference committee report. The
weithead provisions, as I understand it. were
apparently written entirely by the confer-
ence committee staff without debate by
either the House or Senate Obviously, this
process is not a desirable way to pass such a
msjor piece of legislation
As a matter of fact, we have not even been
able to obtain * complete text of the well-
head provisions to review them. 1 aould
urge you to ask that such far reaching legis-
lation not be included In the final confer.
ence committee report of a measure such as
this that is bound to pass.
Not only has the procedure been violated.
but I see great potential for harm to Colora-
do and other western states If this type of
land use legislation is passed in the name of
protecting ground water Quality This type
of land use regulation might be appropriate
In the East: however. it Is Inappropriate In
the West. s-nd that Is the basis for my con-
cern In western states, as you know, drink-
ing aster supply wells often are hundreds of
feet deep, with recharge zones hundreds of
miles asay from the well site In addition.
of course. alluvial wells to Colorado have
withdrawals regulated by our surface waLer
right system. I am afraid that this legisla-
tion would interfere with our surface water
right regime I know tinue is short, so I urge
you to talk to your colleagues on the confer.
ence committee to prevent them from
making a good intentIoned inlst.ake In this
new and complex area of ground aster man-
agement,
Thank you for your attention to this
matter.
Sincerely,
Cwais PAtYLS0N.
U,S. E VIROIOnN ’TAL
Rorzc-rioN AGENCY.
WC3/tITip IOfl , D C ’, March 20, 1986.
Hon ROamT Smrioiw.
Chairman, Commitfee on Environment and
Public Works, US. Senate, Washington,
DC
Ds.tg Ms CHAIRMAN In my September 11
letter to you. I set forth the Administra-
tion a serious reservations regarding provi-
sIons in both the Senate and House versions
of the Safe Drinking Water Act amend.
menu While I am pleased to note that.
progress has been made In addressing some
of our concerns, there are still two major
issues on hlch I would like to make further
cornmeaL
CROITNO WATtR
I have learned that Conferees and their
staffs are continuing to meet to resolve dif-
ferences between 8. 124 and H R 1850 1 an,
specifically concerned about reports that
you are mo irig toaard a compromise that
would substantially enlarge the Federal r .
sponsibllliy to cor:rol greund water 1 share
this concern with Attorney General Meese,
who wrote to you on March 14
I wish to make it very clear that this Ad.
ministration t strongly opposed to legisla-
tion of a Federally-mandated or Federally.
approved ground-water reguLation program,
000O30
,_: _.
theh on oL with .ve be.
tlnwise and unnec ary. - ‘.
- The AdmInIstration takei’thls position for
several reasons first, a requirement, like the
one being considered, that States develop
eomprehensive ground-water protection pro-
grams which are then subject to Federal
review and disapproval would inevitably, de-
spite the best of intentions, involve the Fed-
eral government in sensItive locai land use
and water rlght.s decisIons This would seri-
ously disrupt aell-settled Federal/State re-
lationshipa State and local primacy over
ground-water use, even on Federal lands,
has historically been recognized by Con-
gresa. dating back to such acts as the Demert
Lands Act, the Reclamation Act of 1902. and
continuing through the Clear Water Act In
the last decade The site-specific nature of
contamInation Incidents and the character
of the groundeater resource necessitate reli-
ance on land use controls which have been
traditionally and properly the province of
State and local governments, We do not be-
lteve that the problems we are now facing
with ground-water contamination aarl’ent
the massive Shift in traditional Federal!
State roles that aould result from the cur-
rent proposed compromise. -
Second, there Is no riced for an increase in
Federal over-sight of ground water This
issue was carefully explored by EPA ahen it.
developed the Ground-Water Protection
Strategy We concluded then that sufficient
Statutory authority exists within the
Agency to protect ground water from major
contaminants of concern and that the
States have the principal role in protecting
the overall resource. Thu conclusion is still
valid. Thus position Is also strongly held by
the AssocIation of State and Interstate
Water Pollution Control Administrators and
the National Governor’s A,ssocistton, who
have thoroughly 8tudled the Issue and s-re
In agreement that no new Federal legLsla-
lion Is needed
Third. we continue to be impressed with
the efforts and progress that the States
haie made to protect their own resource
They are working closely with EPA in Im-
plementing national programs directed at
hazardous waste They are also taking re-
sportetbie steps to assess their overall prob-
lern and the need for comprehensive protec-
tIon A number of States have passed
grourid-sater legislation Some ten States
now have Ground-Water Protection Strate-
gics arid another 25 are currently developing
then, The remaining States have acL tttes
underway which sill lead to statewide
ground water strategies arid programs We
biieve that the proposal you are currently
coisidering would disrupt these efforts arid
de’ay the progress whIch Is underway
As a part of Implementing the Ground.
Water Protection Strategy. EPA has prot-id-
ed $7 million in State grants ri FY 1986 and
lu 7 million in FY 1987 for the States to use
teward developing and enhancing State
ground waler protection strategies and pro-
grams in addition. EPA is actively address-
Irg various sources of ground eater con-
lamination, such as pesticides arid under-
ground tanks through new and existing reg-
ulatory programs Problems such as septic
tank contamination are aLso being addressed
through a series of a,ditsory documents,
Also, the Agency is addressing other Issues
such as promoting consistency among EPA
programs arid policies for ground water.
identifying ground water priorities. and en-
hancing our research capacity W firmly
believe that these efforts currently being
undertaken by EPA and the increasing at-
tention to ground water protection by the
States represent substantial progress k ad-
-------
- 000031
May iS, 1986 ,. CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — HOUSE , .H 2639
- dressing our concerns about ground-water additional toxicological studies, monitoring tite decisions on land use, water allocatlqn,
quality - - programs, and surteys This work will and ocher areas of particular state and local
Fourth. we understand that the Federal enable us to re-evaluate these remaining concern I would point out that the National
consistency section has been changed to Ian- substances as well as to identify additional Got ernors Association, the Consertation
guage similar to that found in seteral other contaminants which may require future—reg- Foundatioiy,and the Association of State
• Federal entij-orsynental statutes such as the ulation We plan to address these constTiu- ‘and Interstate Water Pollution Control Ad
Resource Consertation arid Recovery Act ents in Phase V of our regulatory detelop ministrators hate all recentl > concluded
IRCRA ) and the Clean Water Act This flea -ment process After the esaluation of the that, at most, a limited federal role is appro
proi ision would protide that Federal agen- data for the Phase V contamipants, we ma priate—emphasizing the kind of technical
,ctes are subject to the substantive and pro- - determine that some may not warrant regu- assisiance that the Entironmentat Protec-
ceduraj requirements of a State program to lation - - - . ‘ ‘ ,,tion Agenc ) iEPA1 is moting rapidl3 to pro-
the same extent as other persons and au- Clearly In order to use our limited re tide as part of its groundwater strategt
rthorizes the President to exempt a Federal sources most effectitely to protect public
actitity from the requirements of a State health we need to hate this t)pe of fle’tibil As stated in more detail in the Depart
plan If he deems this to be in the para It) tO select priority contaminants for regu ment s letter of September ]3 1985 the
mount interest of the United States This lation We hate discussed with sour staff House bills approach to grounds aier it
protision raises some concerns The State the concept of substituting contaminants on ig objectionable Under the House bill
ground-water programs entisioned In these -a one for one basis for those listed in eter’- state must detelop a comprehensite
- new bills would require far less uniformit) ANPJtM 5 These substitutions would allow regulatory plan to control groundwater
and consistenc ) among the States than pro the Agenc ) to focus its resources on therm ctualit and quantit> meeting detailed fed
grams deteloped under other Federal stat cab which merit consideration I urge tou eral standards specified in the Act and then
utes such as RCRA and the Clean Water to alloti EPA to substitute up to at least must subject the plan to federal appeotal
Act There is also more poiential that con contaminants for those listed in the The detailed federal standards for (lie’
trol measures adopted b> the States could ANPRM5 grounds ater regulators plan as set forth in
take the form of land use controls which As sou continue Conference Commitiee the bill require regulations and other meai-
- could result in excessite and unwarranted deliberations I would be pleased to discuss ures for controlling all human detelopment
State intrusion into Federal policies and ac- our concerns and suggestions with )ou and actitities that affect groundwater phi-
titities The Presidential ecemption for ac other members of the Conference Commit elaborate data collection and description of
tltities deemed to be in the- paramount in tee grounds ater sources, recharge areas and
terest is a limited one which would not en The Office of Management and Budget qualiiy and the location and tspes of
tirel balance these concerns adiises us that it has no objection to the human detelopment potenliall’ affecting
Fifth, we are concerned that there has presentation of these tins from the stand groundwater throughout the state
been no opportunit > for public discussion of point of Administration policy Should a state fail to produce a regulator>
the proposed compromise Major changes in Sincerel , plan the federal goternment can be com
- a long held State responjibilti ) such as - in M THOMAS pelled to do so through court action under a
ground-water control deserte careful and - - procedure specified in the bill—though the
- deliberate scrutiny by all interested parties On-ic r or i-n c Anoanrv GENERAL federal government could not be compelled
Man) organizationj are de s eloping positions Washinpton. DC. Morch 14 1986 to directly regulate activities within the
- on the ground-water protection issue and a Hon Jot-in Dir-4cat, states
number of related bills hate been intro- Chairmen Energy and Commerce Commit This Administration firmly belietes ‘that
- duced We believe that this public dialogue tee (iS Rouse of Represenjatitcs the extenaite scheme contained in the
should be fully heard before congressional Urigfo,i DC House bill for regulating human detelop
action if any, is taken on ground water Dcss MR Cnsie SIAN We hate learn.-it
that Conferees and their staffs are continii ment actisities in eter ) state has no place in
- - - StAi ibAJtD-sE7TtNG ing to meet to resolte differences between S
Federal law If passed II would represent a
In my previous letter, I stated that the 124 and I-I R 1650 specifically concernini, federal mandate for a regulatory s>stcm
Agency needs flexibility for selecting priori initiation of a broad federal responsibilit > to that once put in place and defined in eten
- ty contaminants for regulation Consequent- control groundwater Further we undi r more detail in regulations and court deci-
l I am pleased to note that the Conferees stand that discussions to date ma ) lead the sions would net itabl> become an unwar
are Considering dropping the rational Senate Conferees to accept set eral major ranted federal bureaucratic intrusion into
basis” language in the House Bill protisions of section 203 of the House Bill human and economie affairs There is no
I continue to be concerned howe er, to which the Administration remains demonstrated urgent need giten the arras
about the proposed requirement that the strongly opposed of other federal statutes a lread ) in place
Agenc> regulate all of tbe chemicals listed The Department of Justice is particularlt- and EPA s current actitities and there
in our two Advanced Notices of Proposed concerned about these groundwater propos clearls has been inadequate analssis of the
Rule Making iANPRfvj ) without regard to ala based on our unique perspectite as the impacts of embarking on such a course
what the data on those chemicals might courtroom representatite of a host of feder We understand that current Senate staff
show The ANPRMs were never intended to al departments and agencies The ground proposals are more moderate than the
be a final list but rather were preliminary water proposals implii,ate a broad range of House bill in many respects but those pro-
working lists on which public comment and legal p 01w > issues which we identif > from posals still represent a dramatic change in
additional data were requested Requiring our litigation esperience intolting for groundwater potic > with a substantite fed
the Administrator to regulate all chemicals ample Indian water rights claims the Enti eral presence The existing federal presence
listed would preempt decisions based on ronrnental Protection Agenc > s hazardous in protecting groundwater from specific
good scientific evidence and could lead to waste enforcement program claims brought sources of contamination is substantial and
unsound and unwarranted regulations The under the Coastal Zone Management Act EPA is alread > moting toward coordinating
Agenc > must have flexibilit> to make scien the National Entironniental Polirs Act fed that federal presence and detelopmg a
tific judgmen regarding the appropriate- eral takings and condemnation laws and a strategy that states can use and adapt to
ness of establishing MCLs broad range ol other ens ironmental and meet their own unique situations
The need for flesibilit> is demonstrated natural resource legal polic> issues The Senate staff proposals under consid
b> regulatory proposals we hate made since The Department is strongly opposed to era tion howeter modestl > phrased, reQuire
mt- letter to you in September ln Notem- ihe tspe of groundwater program contained each slate to detelop an estensite plan to
ber we proposed MCLS for eight tolatile or in the J-fouse bill and current staff propos control groundwatcr qualit> and apparentl
ganic chemicals tand plan to propose an ala We urge that the Administration as a still subject those plans to federal otersight
MCL for a ninthi and we hate proposed rec- whole be gtten an adequate 0pportunit to for substantive adeouacy Vet the EPA Ad
ommended masimum contaminant letels retiew and comment on the specifics of an> ministrators responsibility in plan resiew is
IRMCL SI for 46 of thai group We also pro staff recommendations to Conferees before left unacceptably vague If the Adminiatra
posed RMCLa for three new constituents final action is taken by the Conferees tor is expected simply to determine if each
and elan to set standards for set en radionu State and local primac > oter groundwater element of a program is present without
clidea use has hisioricall > been recognized b> Con passing judgment on the adequac> of the
Based on the atailable scientific evidence gress dating back to such acts as the Desert program u-i actually meeting a subatantite
regarding the health effects caused b> the Lands Act of tB7’t and the Reclamation Act federal protection standard then this
remair.ing constituents and their fs-equencs of 1902. and continuIng through the Clean shoul4 be expl4Stly stated However If a
of occuet-ence in drinking water supplies we Water Act in tile last decade Land use deci substantive rvv t aw standard Is Intended
decided not to propose RMCLa for 22 con- aions also traditionally have been i d to then the AdmtStrator Is left without guld-
stituents at that time For three of these 22 local control However, contrary to the rep ante on many extremet difficult issues oS
constItuents we had sufficient data to de- resentatiorts madein report anguage, the bas Ic policy, aad 1 ,ta&Ict,II rU3’ be boixisal ’
termine that they do not merit MCLs Foe- House bill necessar ily would result in feder- ble to ma tha nMsd —w$tba t4asrfçr-
the remaining nineteen, we are conducting al tntnssion Into highly localIzed and sensi ence wIth prior approprailôns uyztems of
-------
p ia tl lnw Iz .rnd
__ — ent1aJ
of ay ? ve
Mie, S *3 Ie th of per.
*3z . The oveeaJ doe, •
verse pi tj to a
iiesble —. Alas, the pro ct , st d jd
doe, not take thio sc Uflt the feasIbilIty
and other esvir t Q 4
Ic tm.pact, of V&Zloui control measo , Pt.
naUy. the geograpb c scope of the protec-
Lion area is not limited to that reasonaI) y
fl ry to protect the water supply
Lake the House bill, the staff proposal (55
we under .a 4 It). regwre, that afl federally
condU ed or .xpporved activities must be
CondZteot with state piax This foes far
beyond a regu1rerflen that federsa fadMtIes
not cent rainate local wa xer supplies. This
poter.±ally state, (and, as discussed
below, any eltiSeft) commous power over a
very wkle range of federal and private Ic-
IlviU cs which may only Indo crIy affect
groun v c It at alt Thu Irogram could
even be lnLerprete to alter rmponbtJis e,
prov id ed by other federal law There is no
recu1reme f e derano of the nation-
al nterest In state plans. noth.tr elipticIdjy
preveot thipo it o of the most extreme
and unreuona Ic measure, to bar unpopu-
lar federal act.vgles of federally supported
private actwltiea
Zn addition. aboont Specific Iang J$ge to
the contrary, the exLsttng citizen sust Irov i-
‘ion In the SDWA provide a b for any
citizen to ie states or the fedraj govern.
ment over developmant and lmplemeotauon
of this program. The Judiciary will be faced
with deter njng the meaning and effect of
the vague but Lar-reac ing standaj’c , d
thus will be thrust tnLo a poUcyrxia g role
for wtuch it Li insL1t.utInn jjy ill-Suited.
The sum of these Caa-g is a prograj of
vast and a t Uy uopzedictab e djw erusoe,.
with results ranging from ezce,sjve federal
lnvolvenient in local land use to excessive
state pow er over Led&sj nolicica arid &Cth’i.
ties, with no mesna for balancing competu
Jegitlunaz.e Interests, and no clear visu i
appropriate federal and state roles.
I believe that 11 either the House bull or
the staff proposal t enacte they will di-
rupt a broad range of federal acuvsues and
strain relations among federal, state, an 4
local governments, us no small part because
of questlorij raised by propo ianguwg
whicti wouJd have to be resohed in litiga-
tIon. Therefore. I strongly urge that the
Conferees reject the new
groundwater regulatory program under cur-
rent staff consideraUo and ant adopt any
groundwater pros-rain WItho t an opportu-
nity (or full public and Admuijstrarjj n
Input
Sincerely.
sw III,
A ttornrij GeneraL
Mr. STRA.NG, Mr. Speaker. £ also
find objectionable the Lncrease In
moneys put Into thu bill by the cots-
ferees, wh1e i far exceeded the mo ieys
conteinplate j by this House when this
bill pn.used here.
The increase of $30 million, for ex-
ampLe, In new progranas is absoLutely
I varu rice wtt ,b anythtng we are
lng to do around bere uo.der the era
if Graiim-Ru
Mr. MADIOAJq, Mr Speaker, I yield
my.e f suth thne as I may Conswne.
:000032-
- - p — u - - ‘ •
the co cre I TL l L ’the Chemical Manujacturer, Aasocfas .
, 1 1T W ’ t *aSTh .cwj, 3 ‘ — * ‘e - Bale
1 . Th bU] e!iW’I ear JV.& ,,.
Te thQrt t 0 q th JTpo rtant etvi- cr Ma1 n1 aursas l Qase
Council. says. 1 ke wn* e ts
i lments1 law, whlth ex7)ired 0fl Sep W e bill w e J 1 t to tmpe .e the
tember 3 , 19e’2. - ‘- — - ‘N—ti s &4i*z , g wat ’ sispolle, on a ached
Z Introd ’uce this bLE on Mai ji 21, ule us ti m yiiomn r j Pt tf 54()fl
1985, along with ChalrniaA W* thInks It can meet
and many other Members, It aed the ChemiCal Manll-
the Sijhcomrmuee Health and the ii . ociation , envtroneiental
Environment, the Con”tmlttee groups, the Environs ental Protection
Energy and Cornnierce and the full ncy, the Democratic rs.h ,
House of Representatives all by voice and the Reiaiblican derzhip on the
vote The Senate bill, S. 124, also committee eli en acing the bill: the
Passed by voice vote. This measure was Senators from the west embracing the
formulated with the asttht,ance of the bill, the conference report and the bill
U.S. Environmentaj Prote ion pa.ssing the genate by voice vote. I
Agency, our public water utilities, the would suggest to you, Mr. Speaker,
chemical and petroleum Industries, that anybody who thinkg they found
and several envirorunental grOUps. something wrong with this has in (set,
Mr. WAXMAN has already outlined
the major features of this bill. Briefly, a very active imaginas f . And I con-
k requires EPA to set more national tt te the genUeinaz (torn Califor-
nia, the Chairman of the subcomjntt-
standards, or maximum cont.axnJnant t his leadership and the gentle.
levels, for pollutants In our drinking man from North Carolina [ Mr. Bany-
water it maintains, however, the nxuj for his leadership on this issue.
portent requlremen that costs of corn-
pliarire be t.akeri into conslderati,an Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of
when setting these maximum levels, my time.
This legiajation also increases moni. M i’. NIELSON of Utah. Mr Speaker,
toring of uru-eg -ulated contam Inant , will the gentleman yield”
ddriklng water, provide, techrncaj as Mr. MADIGAJq, Yes; I would yield
sistance to riali rural and Indian to the gentlem from Utah, I have to
water systems which are the ot iai . be careful with the I- l ine because we
often violating the law, and provIdes have another Member who has Saked
crirrimal penalties against anyone who for I-line, We have to be brse!.
Willfully tampers with a PU C w er NIELSON of Utah. I thank the
supply. gentlen n for yielding,
Finally, Mr this . I have one Question. The gentlem
taxng a modest, but very important has indicated that the aduunI rauon
provision to protect wellhead areas is for the bill. EPA saga they are
over underground sources of dnrking strong1 oppoeed to this I c l’atlan of
water, This provision requires that a federally mandated or federally ap-
States develop plans to prevent proved ground water regulau n pro-
made contamination from entering un- gram. They say it Involves the Federal
derg-round drinking water Government in sensitIve kcaA land s
-through the wellbea This narrow watef righta dechsoi ,
provision does not cover potential Mr. MADIGAN If the gentleman
sources of drinking water or other will allow me to reclaim my time, that
ground water supplies which do not statement was made by EPA before
serve as drinlctrig water, the conference conlmitt,ee report wa s
This ground water provision was de- e’.er agreed to by the conferees,
veloped with Senator SiMPSON to take Mr NIELSON of Utah. l agree with
Into aceoun the c ccrrl s of the West, that, However, you have added ti o
and both the legislativ language and miUion to what you had before, and
the oCatem t of managers make clear they were opposed to it before Iwould
that states have total flexibility to de. think they would be even more vehe
velop this protection plan and that In rnenlly opposed now
no way are we altering existing water Mr MADIG tJJ If the genUein
rights or priorities, nor or we limiting would allow me to reclaim my time.
existing authorities (or states to throughout this entire process,
manage, regulate, pro ec - identify throughout this entire process In ad-
ground water resources within their dressing all of the objections raised by
Jurisdiction, the Environmental Pr-oteetlon Agency,
they never once at any time made any
0 1515
objection based upon the amount of
I would read to you (rota the April funding In the bilL At no time
23, 1986 Issue of Chemical Week maga- throughout the entire process going
sine, the following a4-tirj e , back to the original Considerations in
The ean Water bull wins cheer, all the su1 cop1m e ’ has the EPA said
&round
one word about the funding levels In
The Safe Drinknig Water Act reauthori . the bill They do not COmmunlm,te
- Uon lifli £ppro ,e lazt week by llOI D,nd with usnt In that regard and have
Senate conferees ‘was liki as oasis in the
legislatIve ciesej-t, reirp., ,hing not throughout the entire Process.
Industry and env al Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the
“The cheir ijcaj Iricluugtry and Unlo c&z . gerit1er - from Wash Ington LMr,
bide were very please’ says Scott Din- CJSA,Pmt.zsj,
-------
May iS, 1986-
The amendments as ag eec to by the
House and the Senate conferees address
several issues which are critical to the protec-
tion of Our drinking water Perhaps the most
important is the protection of our ground
water Despite assurances from the EPA and
from the chemical companies that pesticides
Could never leach into ground water from agri-
cultural applications over the last several
years we have discovered ground water con-
tamir tion trori, pesticides in scores of rural
corrtrnijnnjes aoross the Nation In other com
murirtfes we- have discovered contamination
from a wide range of volatile organic com•
pounds which may be associated with adverse
health effects, including cancer Indeed, the
Congressional Office of Technology Assess-
ment estimates that 29 percent of the ground
water supplies of 954 U S cities with popula-
tiOnS Over 10000 are contaminated
The threat from ground water contamination
is all the more serious considenng that, for all
practical purposes, amendments agreed to by
-the Senate and the House conferees go far
toward protecting this vital reS’ urce tot our•
selves and for the nexi generation While the
welihead protection program included in the
conference reporl does not go as tar as the
ground water protection provisions included in
H P 1650, It takes a significant step forward
in requinng all states to establish programs to
protect existing wells supplying public drinking
water systems from sources of contamination,
Such as hazardous wastes, leaking under-
ground storage tanks, and pesticide applica-
tions -
The provisions agreed to by the House and
Senate conferees should also prod EPA into
issuing tong-overdue health standards for
dnnking water Despite the fact that more than
700 synthetic organic chemicals, pesticides,
heavy metals and other pollutants have been
found in our drinking water, EPA has regulated
fewer than 25 contaminants in 12 years The
conference report requires EPA to set stand-
ards for 83 contaminants within 3 years, and
provides the Administrator with narrow diswe-
hon to substitute other contaminants which he
may find to be more of a threat to public
health
The conferees and their staffs have worked
ditigently to bnng back to both Houses recom-
mendations which can put the Safe Drinking
Water Act back on course, and protect Ou’
public dnnking water supplies for the nexl
generation t urge the Members of the
to accept the conference report, and to send
it to the Senate and the White House
Mr PICKLE Mr Speaker, t nse in support
of the conference report before us t believe
the Federal Government has a legitimate role
to play in the presevation and conservation Of
this Nation’s drinking water supplies
Our State and local governments have done
8 Commendable lob of enacting laws and
progrms designed for the preservation of
water Supplies However, the problem has
grown Pollution from one area spills into an
area under a different governmental junsdic
tion Fom these reasons, Congress should act
cooperatively to maintain the quality of dnnk
ing water for the Nation
Mr Speaker as the Congressman from the
10th Congressional District in Texas, where a
portion of our drinking water is supplied from
an uncfergrouna aquifer called the Edwards
Aquifer I am particularly Supportive of the
sections of the bill dealing with tne protection
of sole-source aquifers
In my part of the country, we are very de
pendent on the Edwards Aquifer for drinking
water Yet this important Supply of water is 8
ready being threatened with various forms 01
contamination and the possibility of total Ce.
pletion
Some positive things are happening at the
State and local levels in Texas to help protect
this invaJuable resource, but they need our
‘support We. in Congress ought not to sai by
and watch the bepletion and contamination of
our dnnking water Occur
Many of our technical experts in the area of
water supply have predicted that by the
‘000033 2641
1990’s, we could face the same kind of crisis
with dnnking water Shortages that we did with
oil in the 1970’s So we have to ask our-
selves, where are we going to import safe
drinking water from, in the 1990’s, if we do
not have enough in the United States, to go
around The answer is to plan ahead We may
have to take some lumps now, but I believe it
will be worth it in the tong run Let’s take the
lead on this cntiCal issue by passing this con-
ference report today It is good for the coun-
try - -
Mrs VUCANOVICH Mr Speaker, although I
am in support of sate dnriking water and con-
cerned about contaminants that threaten
public health, I am equally concerned abouf
the standards and procedures being used by
the EPA in determining hazardous levels of
Chemicals in our water systems Specifically I
am concerned that the EPA may blindly
impose Standards that are unrelated to the
actual health hazards posed by the natural
chemicals appeanng in our dnnking water
There are areas in my distnct, specifically
Fatlon, NV, that have relied on local, untreat-
ed water for all their water needs for decades,
certainly before the EPA offered any Stand-
ards for contaminants The water Supply in
Fallon has a natural Chemical in it as do some
other Western areas That chemical is penta-
valent arsenic Among chemicals now moni-
tored by the EPA is arsenic However, the
levels which the EPA currentfy deems to be a -
health hazard were derived from a study done
in Taiwan on water contalnin9 trivalent ar-
senic, a more toxic form of arsenic - -
We know now, through years of expenence
and health studies, that the water in Fallon is
safe In fact. in 1969 a study was made by the
Desert Research Institute at the University of
Nevada specrficaify to determine whether pun-
fication was needed to render the drinking
water safe It was Concluded that no treat-
ment was necessary
Therefore, I strongly urge the EPA to first
ensure that the levels used are based on the
actual chemical appearing in the water in
Fallon—pentavajent arsenic, and second, that
the actual experience of the community and
its existing health records not be discounted
Mr McGRATH Mt Speaker, today the
House of Representatives is Considenng the
conference report on the Safe Dnnking Water
Amendments of 1956 I would like to include
in the REcoRD my heartiest congratulations
and thanks to the entire conference commit-
tee who worked so diligently in forming a very
comprehensive reauthorization of the Safe
Drinking Water Act
Especially encouraging was the commirtees
actions concerning ground water A great deal
of evidence has surfaced in recent years indi-
cating that contamination of Our Nations
ground water Supplies is increasing at a dan.
gerous pace When you Consider the fact that
abeut one half of all Amencans depend on
ground water for dnn) ng water, we can begin
tO realize the potential magnitude of this prob-
lem Citizens of Long Island consider ground
water to be one of our Nations biggest envi-
ronmental cono ns for we depend solely on
underground a tsfers for &tnking water
The conference a eemeni raas awn
prajs fror’i several envwonmental grot*as 13
well as many water sa ,p4ler aso e ‘rho
National Governora A orJaDon and the
Washington Post h so corns out 1 i sin-
‘-CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — HOUSE
Mr CHANDLER. I thank the ‘gen-
tleman for yielding -
‘. Mr. Speaker, the gentleman from Il-
linois says that anybody with a prob-
lem with the bill may well hate an
activeimagin I may be standing
In behalf of people who fit that de-
scription today But nevertheless, they
are Concerned If I may ask the chair-
• tnan of the subcommittee a question
concerning the intent of the bill Pur.
t’eyors of water in my district claim
that they are selling pure water, yet
,,they are Concerned that with this leg-
islation they will be required to treat
it Do the amendments require manda-
,tory treatment of all public water sys-
tems regardless of purity, or do they
require treatment only in documented
-problem cases’
Mr WAXMAN. Mr Speaker, will
the gentleman yield to me’
Mr CHAJ’JDLER I yield to the gen-
tleman from California
[ Mr WAXMAN I thank the gentle-
man for yielding - -
Mr Speaker, as the conference
report specifies, the amendments
direct the Administrator of EPA to
promulgate regulat1o specifying cri-
teria under which filtration is to be re-
quired or to specify procedures by
which, States ma3 require filtration
- Mr CHANDLER. Is that to say that
we can ease the minds of water district
.cominissioners who feel they have
pure water and do not want to hate to
treat it’ And in one case, in fact, they
claimed they would hate to filter out.
manganese in order to treat it, if that
becomes necessary
Mr WAXMAN It is up to EPA and
I think the report speaks for Itself If
they hate safe drinking water and
meet the standards, then it seems to
me they should not be required to do
anything more
Mr CHANDLER I think that is the
assurance that they are looking for.
Mr Chairman
Mr Speaker, I congratulate the
chairman of the subcommittee for the
bill and I thank him for his answer
Mr SCHEUER Mr Speaker today the
House takes up consideration of the confer-
ence report on S 124, the Safe Drinking
Water Act Amendments of 1986 As one of
the House Conferees on this important envi.
monrrental legislation, I am pleased that the
House and the Senate conferees have been
able to agree to a bill which significantly
Strengthens the present Sate Drinking Water
Act
-------
Mr. STALUNGS chaz ed his vote
from yea’ to nay.’
Mr SWINDALL changed his vote
from nay’ to yea.
So the conference report was agreed
to. -
The result of the vote was an-
nounced as alxnre recorded,
A motion to reconncjer was laid i
the table. -
REMOVAL OF NAME OF MEMBER
AS COSPONSOR OF ILR. 4567
Mr. PURSELL Mr. eaker, I a $c
Unanimous consent that my name be
removed as a cosponsor of H H. 4517.
The SPEAKER pro tem x re Is
there ob,ieci.uxi to the request of the
gentleman from Mlthiga.n?
There was no objee ion
CONFERENCE REPORT OW S 974.
PROTECTION AND ADVOCACY
FOR MENTALLY ILL INDIVID-
UALS ACT OF 1981
Mr WAXMAN Mr Speaker, I call
up the conference report on the
Senate bill (S 974 to provide b c pre.
tection and advocacy for mentally ill
persons.
The Clerk read the title of the
Senate bill
The SPEAKER pro ternpore Pursu-
rint to the rule, the conference report
is considered as hating been read
(For conference report and state-
ment see proceedings Of the House of
May 5. 1986 I
The SPEAKER pro tempore The
centleman from California (Mr
W XMAN) will be recognized for JO
minutes and the gentleman from Ne
York (Mr Lr rrJ will be recognized for
30 minutes
The Chair recognizes tne gc tleman
from California (Mr WAXMANJ
Mr WAXMAN Mr Speaker, I teld
m:,self such time as I may Consume
(Mr WAXMAN asked and was gitej
permission to reuse and extend his re-
marks
Mr WAXMAN Mr Speaker. I call
up the conference report to accompa-
n’. S 9 4
This bill expands the charge of the
protection and athocac agencies that
exist in all Stales to assist the de ’ e1op-
mentally disabled. Under Ibis bill.
these agencies will also protect men-
OQpO 4
óy, 1 i’SU
Rudd -
‘8 kh.2 t
i- ,-NOT VOTLNQ—
A
Bereuter
Courter
Daub
Deliums
Edgar
Fle dler
Flippo
F l -aM lvi
- Grviberg
• Holt
Hunter
L..o ios
Leach ‘LA,
Mail. hart
LiSa
0 1540
O’Br ien
Fickie -
Robinson
I e 11 ’
Lee
Sta ets
W.t It i S i s
Wilson
WOrLi ev
:1
cisi I Lw - swi , -
_____ C, ?,
Th —‘ 10K)
- .1. - - . - WIT
.1 4d Sis Snii&ala
on a — we ns Thou e ,sly n (LAd
ground r Th is tTBy Evans UL
a r es ajo S erViefrteng P uce41
f jmbec ol y uet cis’. sucoort, ___
Mr WAXMA j Mv. Speaker, I have Feigha.n
no other reqties for time, and I yield Ptc
back the balance of my time
Piano
- CVIT A!. LEA Vt Foley
Mr. WAXMAN. Mr Speaker, I ask Ford ‘Mu
Ford ‘TN ’
unanim s consent that all Members Fosier
may have 5 legislative days In which to vr nk
revise and extend their remarks on the Frenzel
Frost
conference report presently dnder con-
sideration, Cello
The SPEAKER pro tempore Is Garcia
there objection to the request of the Ga os
Oeider ison -
gentleman from CalIfornIa? Gekas
There was no objectIon. Geph .
Mr. MADIGAN Mr. Speaker, I hate Gibboc.s
Cu ‘man
no further requests for time on this
meritorious and e.xcellent conference
report, and I yield back the balance of Cozizaie-z
my time Goodhng
Gordon
The SPEAKER pro tempore. With.
out objection, the previous question is Grayiit. ,
ordered on the conference report. Gray PA, -
Green
There was no objection.
The SPEAI R pro tempore, The Guarim
question Is on the conferenre report, Gunderson
The question was taken: and the HailiOHi
Hail Raiph
Speaker pro tempore announced that Hamiiton
the ayes appeared to have it
Mr NiELSON of Utah Mr Speaker, Hatcher
Has kin.s
I object to the vote on the ground that
a quorum Is not pre sent and make the tielner
point of order that a quorum is not Reliel
present Htndon
Henry
The SPEAKER pro tern-pore Evi.
dently a quorum is not present, Hiler
The Sergeant at Arms v Il notify Hiliis
absent Members, Hookins
Howard
The vote v,as taken by electronic ifoser
deuce, and there were yeas 3-82. nays Hubbard
21. not toting 30. as follows- Hur. .35
(Roll No. 120] Hu iLo
YEAS—382 Hide
Ireland
Akak.a Boeco CothOS Jacobs
Alexander BOurt pr Combest J IOr - IS
Anderson Boutt , Conic Jenkins
Aridress Boxer Coitycra Johnson
Annunz,o -Bzeau,z Cooçcr Jones ‘NC’
Anthony Brooks coughtin Jones CIKI
App )egate Broom ,e-+d Coyrie TN
Archer Brown ‘CA) Croelceit Kaniorcki
Asp ,n Broan ‘CO Daniel Kaprur
AuCorn Broi lull Darden Ca- ,u n
Badham Bruce Dft sch lp Kast ,-nmeier
Barra.rd Br -* Da, ii l(en,p
Barnt - , , B,irLo ‘CA) de La Garz.a Kenneli 5
Bartlett Burtan ‘iN) DeLay lCid , ’ ,
Barto si Bustarnante D rri k Kindn ess
Bateroan Bvros DeWI rue Kienka
Bates Caflayw, Dickutson KoLbt-
Beth-Li CSLIiOOCU Dicks Kolicr
Be,ienson Carnei Ding.-ii Kosiina 1 ut
Beneert Carver Dpo Cuar d i LaFare
Brniie i ,r r Dixon i.ag omarcnO
Dermaj , Ch Wr Denneily Lata
Betiii Cbapmart Dorean ‘NDI Laath ‘TX
Blasgi C’ i Sap p.-ll Dornan CA) Lu’irnan Cdi’
BuiwsLm. Chappe Dosde Lehr,an ’F’L,
BJu l e clay - Doartey
Boe ti L. ’r Clin ger D c ci i :
Brig Costs Dun”ao
Bolajid Cr ib ,-, Di, rbi’n
Biner ’TNi Co e D yer
Bun,., Mu Cae )4to Dy a1iy
rnrc’
Bonkct Coi.-oian ‘MOl D oo Cheries
Colu—mnn u-r Early
, - -- - .__
- - Kramer
tflA
L4 U sot . Bcutg a
L l ’ l - R0t.nd rC’I ’y-_ McCind
- _________ - _ , ,k.ad .,W cOAl Moti m
- Ra e - -
Long Sabo
lott Savaig
t y ICA) Sa ms
Lmry tWA) &i cfn’
Lukzn
Lur idine Schroeder
Mack Schuette
MacKay - 8cbu ize
Sehumec
Manton Setberiing
Mar-key Sertsenbrenner -
Martin iit .i
Martin ‘NY , Shelby
Marunez &koraki
MaLSU I Stijander
Muvrouies Ststsky
Ma i Skelion
McCain SiaLtery
McCiosiey Siaua.hier
McCoiiurn Smith iF’L)
MeCu,’dy Smith UA)
McDad Smith ‘NEt
Smrtk , ‘NJ)
McGrath Smith Denay
M cHugh iOR )
Mciternan Smith R ct
McK inney INHI
McMjian Snoac
Mev rs Snyder
Mica So )srz
Spence
Milier (CA, Sprati
M,ier OR) St Cernisin
Mul fiWAi Stangeland
M m c i i Stark
Mitchell - St tho ln s
Moakiey Stokes
Molinin Stratton
Monisootery Stu ,
Moody 6undqu ,
Moore S’-’ -eeney
Moorhead Satit
Morruor , ‘CT) Sa indali
MorrLqon ‘WA) Synar
Mrazek Talion
Murphy Ta.uke
Tauzm
Natchar Taylor
Neal ‘Thomks ‘C M
Neison Thomas ‘G M
Niehols Tones
Now s.k Tocnc e- 5 I
Oakar Towns
Oberamar TraJicaM
Obey Traxter
Olin tidal!
Ortis Valentine
O ens Vander Jagt
Oxicy Vento
Pacxard Vus losky
Pane ua Votknter
Parr Walgrrn
Pashayan Walker
Pease Wajunan
Penny West er
Pepper Weber
Perk ,n.s Weics
Pct,’u wheat
Porter Wh , tehurst
Price Whitley
Pttrseli Whitiaker
Quiiirn Whitien
Ratiami W iiitanas
Range) Wirti ’
Ra
Reruia Wolf
Reid Woipe
Rmrliarttcon Wright
Ridge Wtd
R,naido W l,e
Ritter Ya,e,
Raberta Ya Lt-or ,
Rlino YOUr tEAK 1
Re.’ Yo .ing ‘PLI
Yo ,uig ‘MO)
R ogers Zach au
NAYS—2i
Crag
Crane
Dannemever
-------
\ ‘ A - - cL 4 - Lk c -c
3 f2 of i
____ UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
WASHINGTON. DC 20460
4 L Li Li V ,j J
MAR 20 1986
THE ADMINISTRATOR
Honorable John Dingell
Chairman, Committee on Energy
and Commerce
U.S. House of Representatives
Washington, D. C. 20515
Dear Mr. Chairman:
In my September 17 letter to you, I set forth the Admjrijs—
tration’s serious reservations regarding provisions in both
the Senate and House versions of the Safe Drinking Water Act
amendments. While I am pleased to note that progress has
been made in addressing some of our concerns, there are
still two major issues on which I would like to make further
comment.
Ground Water
I have learned that Conferees and their staffs are con-
tinuing to meet to resolve differences between S. 124 and H.R.
1650. I am specifically concerned about reports that you are
moving toward a compromise that would substantially enlarge
the Federal responsibility to control ground water. I share
this concern with Attorney General Meese, who wrote to you
on March 14.
.1 wish to make it very clear that this Administration
is strongly opoosed to legislation of a Federally—mandated
or Federally—approved ground—water regulation program. Inclu-
sion of such provisions would be unwise and unnecessary.
The Administration takes this pOsition for several reasons:
first, a requirement, like the one being considered, that States
develop comprehensive ground—water protection programs which are
then subject to Federal review and disapproval would inevitably,
despite the best of intentions, involve the Federal government
in sensitive local land u se and water rights decisions. This
would seriously disrupt well—settled Federal/State relationships.
State and local primacy over ground—water use, even on Federal
lands, has historically been recognized by Congress, dating back
to such acts as the Desert Lands Act, the Reclamation Act of 1902,
and continuing through the Clean Water Act in the last decade.
The site—specific nature of contamination incidents and the
àharacter of the groundwater resource nece sLtate reliance on
land use controls which have been traditionally and properly the
-------
000036
-2-
r
-province of State and locäl o ernments;- We do not believe hat
the problems we are now facing with ground—water contamination
warrant the massive shift in traditional Federal/State roles that
would xesult from the current proposed compromise.
Second, there is no need for an T’ncrease in Federal over-
sight of ground water. This issue was carefully explored by
EPA when it developed the Ground—Water Protection Strategy.
We concluded then that sufficient statutory authority exists
within the Agency to protect ground water from major contamj—
nants of concern and that the States have the principal role
in protecting the overall -resource. This conclusion is still
valid. — This position is also strongly held by the Association
of State and Interstate Water Pollution Control Administrators
and the r’lational Governor’s Association, who have thoroughly
studied the issue and are in agreement that no new Federal
legislation is needed.
- Third, we continue to be impressed with the efforts and
progress that the States have made to protect their own resource.
They are working closely with EPA in imDlementing national
:programs directed at hazardous waste. They are also taking
responsible steps to assess their overall problem and the
need for comprehensive protection. A number of States have
passed ground—water legislation. Some ten States now have
Ground—Water Protection Strategies and another 25 are currently
developing them. The remaining States have activities underway
which will lead to statewide ground—water strategies and programs.
We believe that the proposal you are currently considering
would disrupt these efforts and delay the progress which is
underway.
As a part of implementing the Ground—Water Protection
Strategy, EPA has provided $7 million in State grants in FY
1986 and $6.7 million in FY 1987 for the States to use toward
developing and enhancing State ground—water protection strate-
gies and programs. In addition, EPA is actively addressing
various sources of ground—water contamination, such as pesti-
cides and underground tanks through new and existing regulatory
programs. Problems such as septic-tank contamLn tion are also
being addressed through a series of advisory documents. Also,
the Agency is addressing other issues such as promoting consis-
tency among EPA programs and policies for ground water, identi-
fying ground—water priorities, and enhancing our research capacity.
We firmly believe that t iese efforts currently being undertaken
by EPA and the increasing attention to ground—water protection
by the States represent substantial progress in addressing our
concerns about ground—water quality.
Fourth, we understand that the Federal consistency section
has been changed to language similar to that found in several
‘ orhèr Federal environrnent l statutes, such as the Resource
Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA) and the Clean Water Act.
This new provision would provide that Federal agencies are
-------
-3- 00C037
subject to the substantive and pr cedural equirernents of a -‘
State”progrâmto the same extent as other persons, and author-
izes the President to exempt a Federal acfL-vity fro tt the -
requi’rements ‘of ‘á State plan if he deems this to e in the
paramctint ‘lnterest of the United States. This provision raises
some concerns. The State ground—water prqgrams envisioned by
these new bil’l ’wouLd require far less uniformity and consistency
azeong the States than programs developed under other Federal
statutes such as RCRA and the Clean Water Act. There is also
more potential that control measures adopted by the States
could take the form of land use controls which could result in
excessive and unwarranted State intrusion into Federal policies
and activities. The Presidential exemption for activities
deemed to be in the paramount interest is a limited one which
would not entirely balance these concerns. -
Fifth, we are concerned that there has been no oppor-
tunity for public discussion of the proposed compromise.
Major changes in a long—held State responsibility such as
ground—water control deserve careful and deliberate scrutiny
by all interested parties. Many organizations are developing
positions on the ground—water protection issue and a number
of related bills have been introduced. We believe that this
public dialogue should be fully heard before congressional
action, if any, is taken on ground water.
Standard—Settinc -
In my previous letter, I stated that the Agency needs
flexibility for selecting priority contaminants for regulation.
Consequently, I am pleased to note that the Conferees are
considering dropping the “rational basis” language in the House
Bill. ‘ -
I continue to be concerned, however, about the proposed
requirement that the Agency regulate all of the chemicals listed
in our two Advanced Notices of Proposed Rule Making (A? PRMs)
without regard to what. the data on those cheoicals might show.
The ANPRMs were never intended to be a final list but rather
were preliminary working lists on w iich public comment and
additional data ’ were requested. Requiring the Administrator
to regulate all chemicals listed would preemDt decisions based
on good scientific evidence and could lead to unsound and
unwarranted regulations. The Agency must have flexibility to
make scientific judgments regarding the appropriateness of
establishing MCLs. -
The need for flexibility is demonstrated by regulatory
proposals we have made since my letter to you in September. In
November, we proposed MCLs for eight volatile organic chemicals
(and plan to propose an MCL for a ninth) and we have proposed
re crnmended maximum contaminant levels (RMCLs) for 46 of that
gr up. We also proposed RMCL s for three new constituents and
plan to set standards for seven radionuclides.
-------
DUD 38
- - eased orf the available scie itific ’ evi ’derice regarding the
‘health effects caused by the remaining constituents’ and their
frequency of occurrenceindrinking atersupplie , we decided
‘not to propose RMCLs.for 22 constituents at thai time. “For
threeof these 22 coristituerits,we h ufficient data to
deteri dne :that they do not merit MCt s. For’ the remaining nine-
teen, we are conducting additional toxicological studies,
m onitoring programs, and surveys. This work will enable us to
re—evaluate these remaining substances as well as to identify
additional contaminantswhich may require future regulation.
We plan to address these constituents in Phase V of our regulatory
development process. After the evaluation of the data for the
Phase V contaminants, we may determine that some may not warrant
regulation.
Clearly, in order to use our limited resources most
effectively to protect public health, we need to have this
type of flexibility to select priority contaminants for regu—
lation. We have discussed with your staff the concept of
substituting contaminants on a one—for-one basis for those listed
in the ANPRMs. These substitutions would allow the Agency to
focus its resources on chemicals which merit consideration. I
urge you to allow EPA to substitute up to at least 15 contaminants
for those listed in the ANPRMs.
As you continue Conference Committee deLiberations, I would
be pleased to discuss our concerns and suggestions with you and
other members of the Conference Committee.
The Office of Management and Budget advises us that it has
no objection to the presentation of these views from the standpoint
of Administration policy.
incer
Lee M. Thomas
cc: House Members of
the Conference Committee
-------
000040 ...
:. i i __
càurtT sastbe CU o’cr nnofro i Mr. Se r. an. I6I0w. . i- the
goney to coos ier east In the seUi ferti i. p taeide*. ..aod bO eboId 8aIe Dnn Ai __
of si.aiidarda wbich shouid be go pr wi’ h Ia c ez.nesi áil its. for f W i&1ZIt ’ Of n.1 r J
solely by t ec n 01 public d3 Ie&s . a nt r no era. - standarc for dzmkIi t.er e it. i.
health. And iL pi uote requwe- - B4a1. be bIa iao noted Lt L 1 the iwir e f eez t 01
ments do riot go far In requb - ei.u of La ‘taM . 1.500 prfva&e Uoz of the t. mo Usg t un-
ing that coosum s be no fAed Whec we12s ‘weie oeed because 01 co,namj - eo uun ria -i to
‘poisons are diaoovered In their drink- nation that occurred from Ji ie - -vory U va& pro.
Ing water. .. - cident. More contamination Is likely if teetian for oole a d1 s.
: t Bul ILR. 1&iO. Is & conIpr ise vélil- we don’t take strong actlon. “State plaorui requlzme 1 ’ -
.cle v.tih broad support It would allow •t ow t t Rrei tAyi Du ,,y d ’grotznd sotn-c 01 thuibr w a t er.
u.s to make &igniIic&nt pr ress In the M e ally ssed with aed ton it xntsi r ai eã r qmr’ n”
cruciall} important effort to keep pace 1428 dXIXh) of a.a: 1650. This ovl- f takmg ccwu Into
r .Ith todays underst.aridixig of ibe sz will allow &nte and local be eu ng naiavn*i
threat to our drinking water, and to n ’nt to s tb r contaminatIon r . .a. i no tCalI
utilize today’s teclicologies (or assur- pr b1 ,s and take Whate, ietlor An imei bn nt I ofI w?udi
Ing that our water is safe. - - are a r - ry to protect their squifor , w adopted in su nnij e redi ed
The bill i W require EPA to get on lncluthng obtamtng natural UflC 5’ anthoritatlon levels m this I1 by
ith the itally important Job of set- tin-ted 1an crrucal to rotect the , of 46 portent er the next
ting standards for the regulation of or water quality and ieth.arge capability yo Overall. tte bill before us
game chemicaLs and other toxiC con - of soie-.oin’t a iuifer& This ability tO today all] ve over $100 million per
taminants in tap water. HR. 1650 will harm aill be important i t y j - over the r t 4 years wbesi corn-
also bring better monitoring and en• only to Long Island. but to .ny other pored with the bIll whidi passed the
forceynent programs to millions of sole ’source aquifers House overwhelmingly Congress,
Americans. Also, this bill pros ides for As * (insi rwce. I ‘P.flt tO t.Ji 5 .flk There has been some dmcusson sur-
the establishment of State plans to MAD!C.A!g and Dmvyris ECKAST. whose
protect the ground water resources comniitrnent aixi concern ve ncIe rounding the &andar aethng Ian-
ahich supply half of the U.S. popula- this k’gnlaxion p ible, and guage of this bifl. We -sr vide that
EPA must regulate a ‘St. of contami-
Lion with drinking water. Pinally. H R. Dipicn for expeditiously moving th nants wl,kh the aget.ey has already
1650 estabLishes a speeial program for legislation ttumigla the fr)iergy and lentified as potentially h rdoos, if
protecting drinking water in areas. Commerce Committee.
such as Long Island NY. a here bun- 1 urge all my colleagues to jom with there a rational basis to do so. based
dreds of thousands, or e.en millions of me in supporting tius important t7 . on a eighlng of all the v .flab}e
Amtricans rely on a single under. Mr Speaker, I reserve the l Lanoe of health evidence. This. Mr. Speaker.
ground aquifer as their Lap ‘J.ater my time gives EPA flexibility to regilate those
supp i - - - Mr MADIGAJi. Mr Speaker, I yield contaminants Whlth are betltb-tbreat-
- Mi Speaker, this bill Is the result of myself such time as I may consume ening - - -
the hard ork b mans Members on (Mr MADIGAN asked and was given On the other harm. tho tber bod
the sole source aquifer prousiori. for permission to re ise a.nd extend his rc in its bill has a olutely :equu-ed EPA
instance NORM LENT. TOM Foi,xy. and marks,) to set national standards for some 85
BiLl. CARNEY hate aLl made important Mr. M.ADIGAN. Mr. Speaker. I rse contamina,nts, regard1es. of the health
contributions to the drafting of H.R. In strong support of H FL 1650, the risk. I beliete that the reason for this
1650 - - Safe Drinking Water Act Arnendmenu Is OMBs recent refu.sal to allow the
But I uouid be remiss 111 did not of 1985. I Introduced this bill agency to publish final standards for
recognize and commend the outstand- March 21 with solid bipartisan sup- some 30 drinking water contaminan
ing efforts of Representatite ToM port and I am pleased l L aith This decision has forced th.e other
Do -NEy this very recent introduction, RR body to take these regulatory deci-
Representatite DowNtY s bill, H.R. 1650 has attracted 66 cosponsors. i into its own hands. I strorm.zls
1038 was the basis for our sole source wish to commend Congressman support the maintenance of adrnirus.
protisiorm in H R. 1650 Wsxiii.&n, the distinguished ch -man tratm’ e flexibility Ln standaj-d setting
He has done a remarkable job of of the Suteontnuttee on Health aJ’ which is found in this bill, and I also
uorking with and educating the House time Entiroriment, and Congressman join our countr ’s water utilities in
or. this issue I think the direct result DINCELL. the distinguished full com support of Federal. rather than State.
-0! his work will be safe drinking water mittee chairman, for their strong sup drinking water standards. All of oar
for millions of Americans that rely on port for this legislation which ha -s re- cit.lzens deserve equal protection from
sole source aquifers. suited in its expeditious consideration duing water Contamination.
As Mr DOwNEY has argued so per’ by this body. I believe that this legislation strikes
suasitely. the reason protection Is .Mr. Speaker, this bill is almost Iden- a sound balance between the flexibil.
need’ d is that many aquifers lie be. tical to one I introduced Last Congress, ity required to regulate the Nation’s
neath pristine and undisturbed lands H.R. 5959. which passed the House 69.000 different public aster sstems
These areas are critical to the preser. last September b a vote of 366 to 27 5J ’ld the act.ite direction needed too
ration of their aqwfer’s recharge Unfortunately, the other bixly [ a.iled pro jde cons isenti .y high quality drink.
zone—the wa.ter reaching the aquifer to consider that legislation, but i lag water throughout the country, I
depends on the nature of these lands pleased to see that it t .s, urge my colleagues to support this bill.
arid the degree of contamination of in- pa.ssed a similar bill thus year Mr. WAXMAN. Mr. Speaker, I am
flowing water Cure The need for this legislation, Mr. pleased at thus time to yield to our col—
there is no practical means to cleanse Speak.er. is obvious Our surface water leauc on the Energy arid Commerce
an aquifer s stern. supplies are polluted by over 700 syc— Committee. formerly of our subcomn-
1- Ic has pointed out that on Long thetic o’ga.nic chemicals, heavy m aAj mittee. who authored the original leg.
Island, there are 100 000 undeveloped and other pollutants. The oondtt . n of islatian which has been the basis for
acres of pine and scrub pine that lie our gro ..mnd water suppi es which much of what is in the bill today, the
abe e the recharge area and sevesni count (or 50 percent of our th’ n .i geaUema.n from Qh. (Mr. Dszorts
more areas of forested land elsea here water is aLso threatened. It is clear E( CAs,TL
on the lIstand. This land, like other re - that we mnnot solely rely on cleanup Mr. ECKART of Ohio. I thank the
charge areas around the country, has which is often technically or ecocoali- c haarrnan (or yieiding this time to me
been left in its natural conthtion and cally infeasible Pretention of con- I wish to congratulate the gentle-
remains relatively free f ian flll or tammazion is the only viable, long. man from California (Mr. W4wwil
septic tank seepage. leaks (moci uosJer- term remedy for the problem, and the gei-ith . ’rnwii frtan flhnoia (Mr.
-------
COGftE 1ON&& -HO VSE v Jasa .-J7, 1985
1n I i , Trth prbe , esdo,e UP 1d th itorj g
responsibility, the cur e L and eniusveinent of these limits. Re-
derground Injection oent.rul pz gypj
continue to ipplj. If an p.ppiJcal ls quirernenta for public notice of viola.
ground Injection control program does not lions are sti mllned. and variances
exist for an Indian Tribe, the Adm1nL U’iL i. and exemptions are extended for
shall prescribe such a program pursuant to Public water systems that canriot
subsection Cc) of this section, arid consistent- Comply with the standards, Tampering
with section 1421(b). withJn 210 days of the wlth publlc water systems Is made a
enictrneric at this Act. unless in Indian Fctie crime. And technical assist-
Tribe first obtains approval to assume P ance is provided for small water sys.
mazy enforcement responsibility f r under- term.
ground Injection controL”.
(di Ga jq ’rs—U) Section 1443(a)(2) of the Title II tighte restrictions on the
Sale Drinking Water Act is amended by underground injection of hazardous
adding a new sentence alter the final sen- wastes, a practice which threatens our
tence in that paragraph statinE The protij. drinking water supplies, and upgrades
bluons contained in the preceding two sen. the enforcement of this program. This
tences shall not apply to such grants ahen title also expands the existing pro.
made to Indian Tribes”
(2) Section 1443(b) of such Act is amended gram for the protection of sole source
by adding the folloaing new sentence after aquifers ”_especialjy important under.
the final sentence in paragraph (2) thereof, ground drinking water supplies—and
“The prohibition contained in the preceding provides for State plans to protect
sentence shall not apply to such grants other underground sources of drinking
ahen made to Indian Tribes” water
(e STUDY —The Administrator of the En. Title III renews the authorization of
tlroninental Protection Agency, in consulta-
tion aith Indian tribes, shall carry a appropriations to carry out the Safe
study to inventory the program needs of Drinking Water Act.
Indian tribes under the Sale Drinking More arid more evidence suggests
Water Act The Administrator shall prepare that our drinking water supplies are
a report detailing the results o(.such study contaminated by dangerous chemicaLs.
The report shall be submitted to the Con. Our Nation’s ground water, which sup-
gress together a.th the Presidents Budget plies half of the U.S. population ith
Request for fi.scal year 1987.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is a tap water, is becoming increasingly
second demanded’ polluted. According to a report by the
Mr. MADIGAN. Mr. Speaker, OTA. 29 percent of the ground ater
demand a second, drinking water supplies of the Us.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. With- cities with Populations o er 10.000 are
out objection, a second ill be corisid- Contaminated. EPA reports that 45
ered as ordered. percent of these public v,ater s sterr,s
There as no objection. ‘ . ,ntain organic chemicals.
The SPEAKER pro ternpore. The Even though the Congress has
gentleman from California (Mr. orked hard to control much of this
WAX.MANJ will be recogiuzed for 20 contamination through adoption of
minutes, and the gentleman from :‘ e Superfund and RCRA laws. I am
nois (Mr. MArnc tri] wiu be recognized r.ot confident that these programs will
for 20 minutes. be Implemented swiftly and eflectitely
The Chair recognizes the gentleman enough to protect our Nation’s drink-
from California (Mr. WAXMAN). ing water supplies.
LZAVZ Every day there are reports of dan-
Mr. WAXMAN. Mr. Speaker, I ask gerous chemicals appearing in drink-
unanimous consent that all Members I rig water. For instance a recent health
may have 5 legislatIve days fri which su.çvey carried out In Woburn, MA
revise and extend their remarits concluded that tap water laced with
H.R. 1650. heavy metals and organic chemicals
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is had caused perinatal deaths, ear and
there objection to the request of the eye birth defects, kidney and urinary
gentleman (torn California? disorders, and leukemia in children in
There was no objection, the area.
Mr. WAXMAN. Mr. Speaker, I yield EDB. one of the most Potent cancer.
myself such time as i may consi.ime. causing substances ever tested by EPA.
(Mr WAXMAN asked and was given has been found in tap water ui Flori-
permission to revise and extend his re da, California. and other States as
marks.) well.
Mr. WAXM.AN Mr, Speaker, the Unfortunately, EPA has chosen to
Safe Drinking Water Act Is one of the ignore, rather than respond to these
most Un ortarit public health meas- concerns. The Agency has set few
ures protecting the American people, standards and has not yet regulated
It directly addresses one of this Na. the many chemicals increasingly
tion’s most serious envlrorunent.aj found In drinJung water supplies.
health threats, the growing contarni. Moreover, enforcement of the few
nation of our drinking water with sta.nda.rd,g already on the books has
chemical poisons, been lax, with over 146,000 vIolations
The bill, as reported, contains three recorded in 1980.
titles. Title I requires the Erivironinen- H.R. 1650 does not have all Qf the
tal Protection Agency to finally get on elements that I would like to see in
with the vitally important job of es- our Safe Drinking Water Act. It has
tablishing standards for health-threat- no provisions to allow citizens afflicted
ening contaminants found in drinking by poisons In drinking Water to seek
: T
— -. - -
(al A! —Part I of the Safe Drink-
ing Watet A Is amended by adding the 1 01-
‘owing n section after sectIon 1450
,ian. 1431. u D4ANTmI
“(a) Is On a&.—8ubject to the proil.
ona of subsection (b), the A isiistrat Is
jthortzed to treat Indian Th as Stste
under th1 title. may deleg e to suc1 Thbes
pnmary enforcement responsibility fay
public water systems and for underground
injection control, and may provide such
Tribes grant and contract aasistance o
carry out functions provided by this Act,
‘(b) EPA RzcutATxoNs —
“l Si’aczric PRovisioi s.—The Adminis.
trator shall, within 18 months after the en-
actment of this section. tiromulgsze final
regulations specifying those pros isions of
this title for which It is appropriate to treat
Indian Tribes as States. Such treatment
shall be authorized only if’
(A) the Indian Tribe is recognized by the
Secretary of the Interior and has a got em.
ing body carrying out substantial goserri.
mental duties and powers:
B the functions to be exercised by the
Indian Tribe are within the ares of the
Tribal Governments jurisdiction, and
• (C) the Indian Tribe is reasonably ex-
pected to be capable, in the Administrator’s
judgment. of carrying out the functions to
be e’cercised in a manner Consistent aith
the terms and purposes of this title and of
all applicable regulations
-(2) PROVISioNS WHERE TRAThIEN’r AS
STA E IP4APPROPRI*Tg —For any protision of
this title a here treatment of Indian Tribes
as identical to States is Inappropriate, ad.
ministraiively infeasible or otherwise incon-
sistent with the purposes of this title, the
Administrator may include in the regula.
‘ions promulgated under this section. other
ieans for adminctering such protision in a
inner that will _‘nieve the purpose of the
ocision Notl”-ig in this section shall be
,.onstrued to a w Indian Tribes to assume
or maintain nary •nforcement responsi-
bility for publ water systems or for under-
ground Injecti n control in a manner less
protectise of .he healt ’b1 ’ persons than
such respons,oility may be assumed or
maintained by a State. An Indian tribe shall
not be required to exercise criminal enforce.
rnent jurisdicUoei for purposes of complying
with the preceding sentence.”,
(b) Dcrnurxoit —
1 INDLAi , rli’jL—Section i4Ol of such
Act is amended bv- ’iserting the following at
the end thereof. -
(14) The term ‘Indian Tribe’ means any
Indian tnbe hating a Federally recognized
governing body carrying out substantial
governmental duties and powers over any
ares.”.
(21 MUNICI,ALzr -y —Section 1401 of such
Act (a amended by striking out from para-
graph (10) the wor “Indian tzibs,l organi-
zation authorized by law” and substituting
“Indian Tribe.”
- (C) PRZKS.&Y Ewroac i ’r RssY’ONSIBIL.
irr.—Sectlon 1422 of such Act is amended
by adding the following new subsectIon at
the end thereof:
‘(e) An Ind ian Tribe may assume primary
enforcement responsibility for underground
injectIon control under this section consist-
ent with such regulations a., the Administra-
tor has prescribed pursuant to Part C and
section 1451 of this Act. The ares over
which such Indian Tribe exercises govern.
mental Jurisdiction need not have been
sted under subsection (a) of this section,
d sucb Tribe need not submit an applica-
ii to assume primary enforcement respon-
. iIlty within the 270’day deadline noted Ui
subsection (bH IXA) of this section. Until &i
-------
000041
CONGRESSIONAL RECOR-HOUS June 17, :1985
)Lwxa*X] and their gtaLfi for working year. we, In this Congre . must take of our grvw d water supplies by brine.
dlligentb on the crettion of a piece of the stepe necessary. to win back that It is estimated-that over .525 billion
- \‘egtslatlOri which I thln.k will close the right for the citizens of this Nation. gallons a year of brine are produced.
,ap between the good intentions of The litany of statistics can go on in Yet almost 460 billion gallons art ac-
•he Congress and the rather ignoble ‘this regard, but clearly the net result counted for. That meansalmos1 5 . .
4rfortnance of the EPA relative to Is that we are using the tech gy of — hon gallons of brine unaccounteg.Jor ,
protecting our Nation’s around witer, the 1960’s to deal with & pr.. c . rn oft -some of whichare illegaUy 4i . p e4of)
Nearly 11 years ago when we orlgi- -the 1980’s. : - .- ti t aterways. ground ater4ables,
nally embarked on the course of regu- c - - - 1Lc L ponds, rivers. - and streams of—the
lation and improvement of the’Na- - v’c r ri t tt c 1230 ‘t ,r United States. -In recent . earf 7 tte
tiori’s drinking water. e gase EPA a There are two additional provisions have discovered that LI States - gr9w-
broad regulatorY mandate, a mandate of thth legislation which I think need ing number of States hate ,j ,pprted
that frankly they have never exactly to be underscored. Our colleagues, brine contamination in ground, ater
lised up to. Bitter experiences have Congressmen DOWNEr. C&RNEY. and The consequences of tthici’)&.to a
been developed in numerous States all Fotrr. hate worked very hard to enact farmer or to a person lit ir.g of f j- eir
across the United States. from Massa- and enable this committee to present o’an s ell. is the fact that they uo nbt
chusetts to Denver, Colorado. and the proposal to have States hate plans hate an tsater: their intestmen in
from Washington down to Florida. all to protect underground sources of their farm, their land becomes usele ,s
of which underline the fact that the drinking water. Clearly what we must According to an OTA report on-proS
Nations drinking ater is rapidly be need to focus on is not only on the re- tecting the Nations ground ttak’r ’Oc
coming a cesspool filled with organic medial action that plagues each and tober 1984), u.e hate ciiscotered ,
contaminants, natural contaminants, every single State in the United Sixty thousand brine injection tteilb
the net result of which is that chemi- States, but the prevention of the
cal contamination in ground ttater spreading of these contaminants into fl operation in the 1970s nation t:de.
supplies has now been found in each other areas. We must acknott ledge Four hundred and sixty biilionrg’tl.
of our 50 United States, - clearly the contamination of ground Ions of brine per year are ri ’int’ctcd
Bitter Experiences have resulted: water does not respect municipal, into Aells (1980). - - . -
‘In Woburn. MA. chemical contami. county, or State boundaries. In fact, in OTA estimate that. currentl,” 525
nant.s in drinking water wells appear this case, an ounce of presention billion gallons/year of brine are pro.
to have contributed to statistically sig- very worth a pound of cure. duced. most of which is rein;ected - -
nificarit numbers of cases of lieukernia Only recent , hate States attempted Brine pits and basins in u e m C i 980
and birth defects. to monitor and prevent ground water yield a potential leachate tolume for
rAt least hall a million rural families contamination, and these efforts still ground water contamination of 43 bil
are drinking water that doesn t even receive less attention and fewer re- lion gallons/year.
meet standards generally acceptable as sources than surface water programs. Eight percent of the br’ne impound.
safe for public bathing beaches. Many State regulations for ground ments have high potenial to contami-
Today, we use 1960’s technology to water protection do not recognize the nate ground water. 17 percent hate po-
address 1980s problems. connection tetween surface water and tential to contaminate water ti us.
The litany . statistics goes on. and ground water and between land use snd 68 percent hate potential tocor.-
:hey have become so familiar to those and ground water Given the tariation aminate surface wells
of us workir g on this legislation that in the natural quality of ground water Michigan Department of Natural
they’ve be--rime almost mundane. And and the regional characteristics of the Resources brine study (August 1984
that’s the ‘miost fnghtening of all, be- major sources of the contamination of
cause it ‘ertainly appears they’ve ground water, there is much diversit Recent released report of the Michi-
become mundane over at EPA. in State regulatory mechanisms and gan Department of Natural Resources.
Over 200 contaminants—both organ- organizational structures. Analysis of Aromatic Hydrocarbons
Ic and synthetic—have been detected The one quarter of the States have in Oil Field Brines.” indicated signifi-
in our ground water supplies. Yet EPA adopted ground water quality stand. cant levels of known or suspected
has set only 22 mandatory drinking ards. and where they have, these often human carcinogens (benzene. ethyl-
water standa-d, ‘ ., conflict with the few standards EPA benzene. toluene. and xylene) were
Result Is a k of clear and consist- has already set. This means there is no found in a wide range of brine samples
ent program o protection of drinking comprehensive strategy for the protec- from 25 locations throughout Michi-
water and gruund water. Mr. Speaker, tion ground water. gan.
it is a &sgrace to allow statistics Uke As of 1982. 10 States has developed a Benzene (a proven human carcirio-
those I Just cited to continue to multi- system for classifying and protecting gen) was found at levels up to 6 9 parts
ply. We need a specific and concise set acquifers. and even fewer were able to per million in at least two different
of standards and regulations, and we successfully enforce their policy, samples and EPA has proposed a rec•
need to make sure that EPA enforces That Is why we need a national ommended maximum contaminant
them. We can no longer tolerate the ground water protection strategy like ie ei for benzene at zero parts per mil’
failure to regulate effec ve1y even the the one under section 203 to be lmple. lion in their noticed of proposed rule-
14 moet commonly found chemical mented by the States. EPA’s current making. , -
contaminants in our water supplies, ground water protection strategy is For those constituents, bad water is
many of which are known human car- cosmetic. 11’s time for a strong nation- the same as no water at all. The provi.
cmnogens. al guidance to unify the states and en- sions of this legislation will require
Safe Drinking Water Act Amend- courage them il l their effort to pre- States to establish ground water pro-
ment.s of 1985 add an essential piece to vent potsioning of our ground water. tection plans that include, the preven-
the solutIon of the hazardous waste The particular provisions of sectIon tion of ground water contamination
puzzle. Last year, we enacted funda- 203 supported by Congressmen from the disposal of brine.
mental reform of the Resource Con- DowNrf. Fon.rr, CAIUcEr, MADIGAN. Ground water protection plans an
servation and Recovery Act. ThIs year WAXMAJq. and myself are reflective not effective regulatory program for the
we must reform the Safe Drinking only of the peculiar needs of securing preclusion of brine into our ground
Water Act of 1974, and move quickly safe drinking water for future genera. water supplies, updated standards, and
to reauthorize a strong Superfund. We Lions but, g Vefl the fiscal constraints regulations to put the EPA on an ap-
musi’tàke positive action to stop the of the Uüited States and local govern. propriate road to regulation I think
inexorable degradation of our fragile ments. I think are appropriate and in make the Safe Drinking Water Act
environment, order as well. Amendments of 1985 an imperatite
Safe drinking water Is a fundamen- Of peculiar interest to the constitu- and important part of our erit iron-
tal right of every human being. This ents of my State is the contamination mental retinue.
-------
000042
June 17, 1985
— rr’ 1— —
“ -Mr. speaker, this legislation: has
been a long time coming. In fact. it
was just 4 years ago when another
former colleague of ours, - -now a
Member of the other body, then-Con.
gresaman ORAMM launched a serious
attack on the Integrity of the Safe
-Drinking Water Act which was re.
pelled by the adroit handiing of my
-colleague -. from California (Mr.
WAXMAN). Times have changed, and
hopefully for the better. ,
Not ithstanding that e have dra-
matically upgraded the Safe Drinking
Water Act with the provisions of law
being suggested by Mr. MADIGAN sup-
ported by Mr. WAXMAN and myself.
our time is long Oterdue The reau-
thorization and the improvement of
the Safe Drinking Water Act are im.
portant steps needed by this Nation
for oursehes and for our children. I
thank the chairman.
• The SPEAKER pro ternpore. Does
the gentleman from Illinois desire to
3ield additional time’
Mr. MADIGAN. Mr. Speaker. I
desire at the moment to reserve the
balance of my time.
Mr. WAXMAN Mr. Speaker. I ield
as much time as he may consume to
the gentleman from Ohio (Mr. SEIBcR-
LING]. - -
Mr SEIBERLING. I thank the dis.
tinguished gentleman from California.
I rise in strong support of H R 1650.
,the reauthorization of the Safe Drink-
ing Water Act. Ho e er. I object to its
being brought up on the suspension
calendar. I hate an important amend-
nwnt to this iegi lation which I ili
not be affordcd an opportunity to
Offer because e are considering this
bill und r suspension of the rules
My a!m9ldmenL ould prohibit the
additioi of chemicals to the public
ater supplies (or any purpose other
than to render such ater safe for
human consumption, to Lest the ater
for contamination, or to improse the
taste or cJarit of the ‘ater. Why such
an amendment’ -
Let me gite an example- —
Many communities add fluorides to
the ater supplies for the sole purpose
of presenting tooth decay. The prac-
tice of adding chemicals to the v.ater
supplies which do not serve the pur-
poses I just stated is wrong as a m tter
of principle. The only legitimate Justi-
fication for the Government to force
people to ingest chemicals such as
fluorides against their will ould be a
finding that there is no other feasible
ay of protecting the health of the
public. Clearly the addition of fluor-
ides to the public ater supplies fails
that test.
Worse yet, there is substantial evi-
dence that Ingestion of fluorides can
result in disfigurement and even im
pali-nient of health for many people.
Th iationai Academy of Sciences
and the World Health Organization
confirm that fluoride can cause mot-
tling of the teeth and possibly other
health risks. In these circumstances, it
Is an abuse of the powers of govern-
— • n — —- “ — fl • 1- —.
‘ CONGRESSIONAfk RECORD —HOUSE
me to’ force people to ingest. these
chemicals against their will. - ,
- For many people, the risks of fluoro-
sis arid changes in bone density. which
can be caused by the ingestion of fluo-
ride outweigh the supposed benefjt,, f
this chemical. Moreover, fluoride is
available in many other forms such as
dental fluoride- treatment5- and fluo.
ride toothpaste, indeed it.Is hard to
find toothpastes today that do not
contain fluoride. The arguments origi-
nally advanced to justify this particu-
lar form of big brotherisni have been
overtaken by events. The principle
behind the practice of fluoridating
water supplies is bad. -
We should be especially concerned
about the precedent created by adding
chemicals to the public water supply
in order to treat a small segment of
the public or to ghe people what
- someone has decided is good for them.
hether they want it or not. If it can
be done with one chemical In the
name of corribatting tooth decay in
some people, why not add iodides to
combat goiter, aspirin to combat head-
aches. tranquilizers to combat tension,
and so on’ The possibilities are end-
less. The dangers are obvious. Fluori-
dation of public water supplies should
be stopped, Certainly the House
should have an opportunity to vote on
this issue, as It will not hate under
suspension, of the rules.
‘I regret hating to make this state-
ment against the suspension calend-’.r
treatment of this bill because I thir
in all other respects It is an outstani-
ing bill and I commend the committee
for its ork in bringing it forth.
Mr. WA MAJJ Mr. Speaker, gill
the gentleman yield ’
Mr. SEIBERLING. Yes: I ould be
happy to yield to the gentleman.
Mr WAXMAN. I thank the gentle-
man for yielding.
Mr. Speaker, I appreciate the fact
the gentleman will not hate an oppor-
tunity to offer this amendment, which
I regret. I do point out the fact that
this bill has taken us a good number
of sears to finally work out. It has a
number of controversial features
which we think we hate made less conS
troversial. It Is what we call a finely
tuned compromise and only in the
spirit of trying to get a bill through
has e e taken it to the suspension cal-
endar. It is a bill that the House
passed overwhelmingly last year and
we hope will pass again so that we can
deal ich the outstanding issues on
drinking v ater hich should not mean
that the gentleman would be preclud-
ed in the future from pursuing the
substance of his proposal.
Mr. SEIBERUNG. Well, I thank the
chairman.
I would say further this bW address-
es many, many dangers that need to
be addressed In our drinking water
supply and I would not want to see
that course blocked as a result of
desire to make this bill better, But I
would hope that at some reasonable
time the gentleman would consider my
-- H 299
bill to deal with the problem of a ing
poisonous chemicals to the drtnklng
water supply, including fluor1d s’ and
possibly others ‘ - L ’
Mr. WAXMAN. I appreciate the ‘gen-
tlemari’s statment and I certainly look
forward to working with him on the
issue. - -
‘-Mr. SEIBERLING. I thank the gen.
-tlema.n. - — -
Mr. WAXMAN. Mr. Speaker, we
have no further requests for ti-me and
I yield back the balance of my time.
Mr. MADIGAJj, Mr. Speaker, I yield
myseLf 1 minute, for the purpose of
expressing my appreciation to the gen-
tleman from California (Mr. WAXMAN)
for the diligent way In which he has
brought this legislation to the floor of
the House but also to thank him for
the constructive participation of he
and his staff throughout the entire
process. And I would also like to say to
the gentlem from Ohio (Mr
Ecic &i rJ that I sincerely appreciate all
the hard work he has d--. e on this bill.
the contribution that ia.s made.
Mr McGRATH I i uuJd like to
take this opportunity to express my
support (or the Sale Drinking Water
Act H.R. 1650), whIch Is being consid-
ered today In the House of Represen-
tatives I am a cosponsor of this bill
which directs the Enviro iu ’tentaj Pro.
tection Agency (EPAI to ut t limits or
certain drinking water co’ .aminants
Our ground water us a .ast national
resource, and particula iy important
to those of us on Lc:” Island. The
U S Environmen j Protection Agency
has estimated that the amount of
ground ater is 50 times that of our
annual flow of surface water. More
than 90 percent of rural American,
and millions in our urban and subur-
ban areas, are dependent on under-
ground water for drinking supplies,
Nearly one-half of all Americans
depend on ground water for drinking
water,
A great deal of evidence has surfaced
In recent years indicating that con-
tamination of our Nation’s ground
v.ater supplies is increasing at a dan-
gerous pace This legislation would si-
multaneously propose a ininimuns
purity level goal and a national pri-
mary drinking water regulation, which
would Insure that drinking water
would not adversely affect the health
of our citizens. H.R. 1650 would In-
crease the protection of public health
by tightening requirements on EPA to
set improvement standards.
Under the provisions of H R, 1650.
notification of violations will be made
public in order to prevent potential ad-
verse health effects. A major section
of the bill that would be particularly
important for Long Island residents is
the restriction on har rdous waste in-
jection. This restriction would prohibit
Injection of any hazardous waste into
a formation which contains a drinking
water source. Not only does the bill
provide for protection of public drink-
-------
43IO
4/, ,.
Lag water. s& a1a it provides grants
toSt&&esaammatihjng basis to offset
the coats Incurred In preparing the pe.
‘Itlon and developing the improve.
lent plan. ‘c..: - C. )I .. . , r
Access to sa drinking wat Is a
tal concern of all of our ciUzens. and
LR. 1850 would help to Insure that
the public receives the u.fest . drinking
water available. As a cosponsor of this
legislation, I urge my colleagues to
lend their full support to ensure pas.
sage of this measure..
• Mr. LENT. Mr. Speaker. I Join my
colleagues In urging support for H 3%.
1650. the Sale Drinking Water Act
Amendments. “ - ‘- -
A glass of water, at first glance
seems harmless enough—but La it?
Indeed, who would ever guess that the
aater we brush our teeth In, bathe In.
and drink every day could be poison.
[ zig us. And yet, there is mounting evi-
dence that our water supplies are con.
taminated by dangerous chemicaLs.
Despite the progress made in purify-
ing our drinking water since the pas-
sage of the 1974 Sale Drinking Water
Act we are still faced with an alarming
percentage of contaminated drinking
water supplies across the country.
Over half the country relies on
ground water !upplies for their drink-
ing water. A report Issued by the
Office of Technology Assessment de-
termined that 29 percent of the
ground water drinking water supplies
t the 954 U S. cities with populations
‘er 10,000 are Contaminated Fortu.
tely. a provi on of H 3%. 1650. the
.fe Drinking Water Act Amend-
ents. would effectively address thi.s
problem by ensuring the protection of
our sole-source ground water recharge
areas. This provision is critical to areas
like Long Island which depends solely
on underground acquifers (or its
‘drinking water. If these Valuable re-
sources are lost, our citizens will have
no other supply to turn to.
Reports of drinking water eOntanif-
nation aCrOSS th country have con-
triboted to growing public concern
over this grave national problem. In
fact, public opinion polls indicate that
an overwhelzrthig majority of Ameri-
can people believe that drinking water
-contamination Is a serious problem
which merits Immediate attention.
I believe R.R. 1854) effectively ad-
dresses our citIsei g ieglt mate concerns
over the purity of oar thinking water
3uppfles , Th leglsIat1oa Is vital to
ensure sate, healthy frbiklng water
for our genevatioq , as well as for
future generstloi
I urge my colleagues to Join me In
aupporth,g this mucji needed legisla-
tion. The health and well-being of our
citizens depent upon ow’ swift and fa-
vorable action on HR. 1650
Mr. MAD1O (, Mr. Speaker. I have
3 further- requesfa for tins., arid I
4d b k the haLtr ’ . of siy
0 1240
L’he SPEAKER pro tev,p -e. The
. uestion is on the motion offered by
f r r ’ ,l
GRS RECOW_Hou .- June i 19 ,
the gentleman fro i California (Mr. “cbxl) ta case of those mnta t
WAXLMANJ that the House suspend t ILited In the Ads ance Nouce of Proposed
rumies and pass the bill, H.R, 1650, as RuJem,j g published in volume 47. Feder.
amended. *1 Reg,s e ’, page 9352. and in tolume 48.
The question was ta.ken :Feder-al Register. page 45502. the Admiriis.
tr tor shall simulta.neou.sly pubii h naxi
thirds having voted in favor ‘ ed) -mu eon lesel goals and rorrsul..
the rules were suspended and bill, gate national primary drinking water regu-
as amended, was pam tI o -
A motion to reconsider Was laId 00 “(A) riOt I a than 12 months after the
the table. ‘ date of enactment of- the Sate Drinking
Mr. WAXjsa.a . Mr. speaker, I ask Water Act Arnendmen , of 1985 for not less
Unanimous consent to take from the than 9 of those listed contaminants.
Speakers table the Senate bill (S. 124) ‘ B) not later than 24 months after the
date of enactment for not less than 40 of
entitled the “Safe Drinking Water those listed Contaminants and
Amendment Act of 1985,” and ask for not later than 36 months after the
its inuriediate consideration. ‘date of enactment (or the remainder of such
The Clerk read the title of the listed contaminants
Senate bill. “(2)(A Not later than January I , 1988.
The SPEAK_ER pro tempore. L and at three year intect aI thereafter the
there objection to the request of the Administrator shall pub’ish a list of con-
gentleman (torn California? tamina it.s ahich. in the judgment of fte
There aas no objection. Administrator. may ha!.e an ads erse erfect
on the health of persons and are knoan or
The Clerk read the Senate bill, as anticipated to occur in public aaler s’ .stems
follows: - B For the PUrpose of establishing such
- S 124 lIst, the Administrator shall form an ads so-
Be it enacted by Uie Senate and House of ry aorxing group including members om
Represenfa ip , of the United Slates of the National Toxicology Program and the
America i* Congress assembled, Ens irOnme n(.al Protection Agenc , a Offices
SHORT TITLE - of Drinking Water, Pesticides. Toxic Sub-
stances, Ground Water. Solid Wa,)te ,“d
Sac-rio. I This Act may be cited as the Emergency Response and any others the
“Safe Drinking Water Act Amendments of Adzninistrator deems appropriate The Ad-
198 5
ministi-ators COn.sideration of priorities
- TABLE OF CONTENTS - shall Include, but not be limited to sub-
Sec I Short title stances referred to in section lOhit4 of the
PUBLIC WATER sys ’rt Comprehe iv Envuorijnentai R ponse,
Compensation, and Liability Act, and sub-
Sec. 2. National primary drinking aater stances registered a,s pestic des under the
regu:ations. Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, arid Roderiti.
See 3 Enforcement.
Sec. 4 Public notification, - - e Act
Sec. 5, Va,ria,ricea, ‘Cl Not later thari 24 months after rat
See. 8 Exempuo the Administrator shall slmuitaneou.siy
Sec. 7 Monitoring (or unregulated contami- - 000se a maximum Contaminant esel goal
nants
-d a nauonal primary drinking water regu•
Sec 8. Teehrucaj atS15tazi ., ‘ion for riot less than 25 contaminants
Sec 9 Tampering with public water sys- m the priority list established under
temns. , ,aragraph (2),
D) Not later than 36 months after list-
PROTECTION 09’ UNDERGROUND ing, the Admiz [ strator shall ilrnultarleously
SOURCES OP DRXNK_ING WATER publish a maximum contaminant goal and
Sec. 10. RestrIctions on underground mire. promulgate a nationa’ primary drinking
lIon of ha rdo waste and water regulation for those eontan,inants
regulat of State programs, Identified under subparagraph (C)
See, 11. ! ifore ij. (3) Lath maximum contaminant le’, el
Sec. 12, Sole sew’cs aquifer derior trjjjo goal established under this subeection shall
program, be set at the level at ahich no knoun or an.
G sa t ,i. PROv -ISio tiC:pated adverse effects on the health of
See, 13. Aucbnrtzauo41 of appropnaUc persons occur and which alloas an adequate
Sec. 14. Indian ir i ai org zation. margin of safety. Each national primary
Soc. 15. Jts_djci ,a1 rev ew. dr_-ilcmng aztec regulation (or a contaminant
for shich a maximum contaminant lesel
- PUBLIC WATER SYSTEM_S goal is established under this subsection
I’ArIOJca.a raz asy DM1IKT1 5O wsrra - srali specify a ma mflumfl level (or such con-
RZG OLATI0PI3 tarninant which is as close to the maximum
Sac. 2 (a) SectIon 14121*) of the Safe contami.nxifl level goal as is feasible
Drinking Water Act Is amended to read as - (4) For the purposes of tla s suinectio
follows, the term feasible’ means feasible lJ,ith the
“(al Effective on the dat- a of enactment of use of the best technology, treatment tech-
the Sale D -inklng Water Act Amendments niques and Other means v .hich the Adminu.
of 1983, each national Inter im primary trator finds, alter examination for efficacy
drinking water reguhUon promulgated under field conditions and not solely under
unc r triis aect n before a ith data of enact, laboratory COndttlori , are asaiiabte (ta lng
merit shall be deemed to be a national pci. cost into consideration) For the purpose of
mary drinking waler regulation under sub. paragraph (2). the use of gT5.nUI Z activated
section (b) No such regulation shall be re- carbon is available txking costs Into Consid.
qwred to coaipfy with Lb. standards set eralioni for the control of Synthetic organic
forth in iubs cLlon (b)(3J units_s such regu chemicals, s-nd any technology, treatment
lation is amended to establish a different technique, or other means found to be th
maximums contaminant level alter the date. best asailable (or the control of Synthetic
t enactment of suth amecmdmenta. organic et ei,iieals must be at least as e(lec.
(b) Seetlori 14l3b1 of Ih. Safe Drinking tile In Controlling Synthetic organic chemi-
Water Act Is amen by g.rlklj pars. cals as the use of gT%nuiar activated carbon.
graphs (1), (2), and (3 , and Inserting In lieu “(3) Each national primary drinking water
regulation wtuch establishes a maximum
-------
OO
C , . 0
( !:t \
ADDITIONAL VIEWS OF HON. JAMES T. BROYHILL ON H.R.
1650—SAFE DRINKING WATER ACT A fENDMENTS OF 1985
In my opinion, H.R. 1650 is, for the most part, an excellent bill
that deserves the widespread support it has received. I am especial-
ly pleased that the authorization levels for the existing programs
under this Act are set at a level which is a full 30 percent below
the most recent authorization. This bill is designed to protect our
precious drinking water supplies in an efficient, cost-effective
manner.
There is one provision in H R. 1650 which causes me some con-
cern, and I was pleased to see it clarified in Committee markup. I
want to briefly summarize the intent of the provision as agreed
upon by the Committee. In Section 101(bX2) of the bill, granular ac-
tivated carbon [ GAC] or other comparably effective technologies
are deemed feasible to control synthetic organic chemicals [ SOCs].
This language is significant because even though EPA cannot man-
date the use of a specific technology to meet a maximum contami-
nant level [ MCL] under the Act, the Agency would be required to
consider GAC when setting the actuaL MCL itself. Some fear that
this could, for practical purposes, result in the forced use of GAC
which, although highly effective for treating many contaminants, is
very expensive.
At the Committee markup we were able to agree that the use of
GAC or comparably effective adsorption technologies must be con-
sidered, but that the MCL need not be based on GAC if other, less
expensive technologies are equally effective In fact, it is generally
agreed that for some synthetic organic chemicals, such as disinfec-
tion byproducts, GAC is not the best available technology. Aer-
ation, adsorptive resins, or other technologies are recognized as
being the best available technologies for many synthetic organic
chemicals. Therefore, it must be made clear that EPA is given full
flexibility to determine that some method other than GAC is the
best technology for certain SOCs
Finally, I was concerned at the wording of the provision because
it reads, “ . . - granular activated carbon and other comparably ef-
fective technologies.” This could be interpreted to mean that GAC
would be required plus some other technology in addition to GAC
Mr. Madigan, the author of the bill, assured the Committee, howev-
er, that this was’not the intent; that the language merely means
that the Agency has the flexibility to consider other technologies in
lieu of GAC. -
With these points clarified, I am pleased to support H.R. 16o0
and look forward to it moving quickly through the House.
JAMES T. BRovi-ULL.
- (69)
-------
000045
- ADDITIONAL VIEWS OF HON. DON RITI’ER ON H.R. 1650—
THE SAFE DRINKING WATER ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1985
The Committee on Energy and Commerce has reported a bill
that would amend the Safe Drinking Water Act of 1974 to expedite
reg-ulatory action on the control of contaminants in our nation’s
drinking water supplies. The major purpose of this bill is to address
the slow pace in which the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
[ EPA] has regulated drinking water contaminants.
I would like to draw my colleagues’ attention to two amendments
that were accepted during committee markup that significantly im-
prove this legislation. The first is an amendment that clarifies the
standard-setting language of the bill—the so-called “rational basis”
language. I encouraged this amendment and believe that it will
help ensure the timely regulation of contaminants based on sound
science When passed out of the Subcommittee on Health and the
Environment, H.R. 1650 instructed the Administrator to regulate
contaminants for which there is a “rational basis to believe that
there may be an adverse effect on the health of persons.” During
hearings on this bill, we received testimony from a number of wit-
nesses who complained that the overall language was unnecessarily
vague and, thus, could led to excessive litigation and ultimately
delay the control of contaminants. Also expressed was the concern
that the term might result in the regulation of any substance
where there is a scintilla of evidence indicating that it may cause
an adverse health effect, despite other substantial evidence to the
contrary.
The amendment accepted at committee markup would merely
clarify the existing language by inserting the words “based on a
weighing of available health evidence” after the words “rational
- basis.” This language; taken verbatim from the committee report
language that accompanied this bill last year, should reduce unnec-
essary confusion and regulatory delay, while ensuring regulation
based on sound science.
The second amendment I wish to highlight is one I offered at
committee markup that would instruct the EPA to compare the
health effects of water-treatment chemicals that are purposefully
added to drinking water supplies with health effects of contami-
nants My amendment passed by voice vote Until now, the singu-
lar focus of activity has been on contaminants that are found in
raw water supplies. This focus has occurred in vacuum of the po-
tential health effects of hundreds of chemicals that are added each
day to water supplies to “purify” the water These substances often
react with trace chemicals in the water to form other chemicals of
concern, A good example is Ihe reaction of clorine with trace
chemicals ih water to form trihalomethane, a suspected carcinogen.
The carcinogenic potency of average chloroform-treated municipal
drinking water supplies has on occasion been orders of magnitude
(70)
-------
000046
71
higher than contaminated water that caused great community con-
sternation. (Ref. Dr. Bruce Ames, Chairman, Biochemistry Depart-
ment, University of California—Berkeley, TCE contaminant vs.
chloroform additive.) Also ignored are the .jnany impurities that
are found in water-treatment chemicals such as lime. The amend-
ment directs EPA to evaluate the potential health effects of water-
treatment chemicals and their byproducts and to compare these po-
tential health effects with those from contaminants from other
sources. It the major purpose of the Safe Drinking Water Act is to
reduce human health risks, we gain perspective on the degree to
which we reduce health hazards and thus must look at all sources
of pollution, including the pollution we incur in the treatment of
our water.
I believe that, for the most part, H.R. 1650 is an efficient, cost-
effective approach to protectour precious drinking water supplies.
We must be certain, however, that we rely on sound scientific prin-
ciples in controlling the risks presented by drinking water contami-
nation. That approach gives us the most expeditious route to
health-protecting and safe drinking water standards.
DON RITrER.
-------
000347
ADDITIONAL VIEWS OF HON. F )WARD C. NIELSON ON H.R.
1650—THE SAFE DRINKING WATER ACT AMENDMENTS OF
1985
H R. 1650 provides much needed revision to the Safe Drinking
%Vater Act. The bill, among other things, would require the U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency [ EPA] to propose maximum con-
taminant levels for 14 volatile organic compounds which have a po-
tential to adversely affect the health of persons. In addition, this
legislation provides for criminal penalties for persons who intro-
duce a contaminant into or otherwise tamper with a public water
system with the intent of harming people. Futhermore, it provides
for technical assistance to small water systems, such as “circuit
riders’, who provide operational training to individuals operating
these systems. This is a valuable piece of legislation which will
serve to assure safe drinking water for the American public.
The bill does go much further than is appropriate, however,
given the Act’s historical public health focus on regulating public
water systems. It does this by addressing the complex subject of
groundwater in Sections 203 and 204.
The protection of groundwater has historically been the responsi-
bility of the individual States This bill would federally mandate a
State groundwater protection program without considering existing
State laws. Not only would this legislation impact State groundwat-
er laws but it would also threaten State water resource law. In ad-
dition, the bill does not attempt to provide guidance to the EPA or
to States on how to integrate the program established by the bill
into current State law.
It is important to realize that no hearings have been specifically
held on Sections 203 and 204. These groundwater provisions have
not been fully discussed or considered. As a result, the Committee
has not heard from such groups as the National Governors Associa-
tion, National Conference of State Legislatures, National League of
Cities, National Association of Counties, National Water Resources
Association or any of the State water resource agencies, which are
most affected by these provisions. In my view, the Committee
would have benefited from the involvement of State and local gov-
ernment, as well as other interested parties.
Section 203 essentially categorizes all groundwater as “drinking
water,” whether or not it is reasonably suitable for human con-
sumption, thus making it subject to the provisions of this bill. For
example, the bill could require States to categorize certain ground.
water which is not used for livestock, irrigation or geothermal pur.
poses under State water law, as an underground source of drinking
water. Decisions regarding which groundwater should be classified
as a source of drinking water have clearly been a State responsibil.
ity and should remain as such. However, if the Congress should
decide to stabIish a strong Federal role in protecting groundwater
(72)
-------
73
resources. it should not be done in a “back door” fashion through
the Safe Drinking Water Act. Rather, the Congress should take a
comprehensive look at all groundwater and all of its uses, and In-
volve all interested Committees including the Agriculture Commit.
tee, the Interior and Insular Affairs Committee, the Public Works
and Transportation Committee, and the Judiciary Committee as
well as the Energy and Commerce Committee.
Both Sections 203 and 204 create broad new administrative au-
thorities over groundwater Section 203 would require the States to
“guarantee or provide for an alternative drinking water supply
when an underground source of drinking water is contaminated.”
Such a guarantee would require not only new regulatory programs
at the State level but would force States to guarantee quantities of
water which in some States, such as Utah, would be simply impos-
sible. In addition, Section 204 would enable the EPA to require any
person (except farmers) who contributed to the contamination of
the groundwater to pay the entire cost of providing alternative
drinking water and might even result in an order to build an
entire new public water system For example, a homeowner with a
septic tank seeping into the groundwater might be required by the
EPA to pay the entire cost of a new water system for the town in
which they live.
Another area of concern is that of costs Although the Federal
expenditures appear modest, several things must be noted. First,
the combined authorization expenditure for the two groundwater
sections is S30 million a year for the next two years, and S50 mil-
lion a year for the two years after that Second, t is likely that
Section 203 funding will be continued after the initial four years
and that Section 204 will require large funding levels in order to
complete all the projects and plans. Third, no one has estimated
the cost to the States as a result of these provisions. It seems irre-
sponsible to mandate a State program without asking for State
input and without estimating the potential costs. Finally, I doubt
that anyone has even considered the potential costs to the individ-
ual who unintentionally contaminates the groundwater and then is
responsible for supplying an alternati e water source or for the
construction of a new water supply for the community. Will indi-
viduals with septic tanks b forced into purchasing Federal ground-
water protection insurance in the event of unintentionaj contami-
nation? It appears that the costs associated with these provisions
may never be quantifiable. -
I want to make one final comment on Section 204. As I read this
section, it occurs to me that there are absolutely no limitations on
the use of grant funds for the implementation of projects. Thus, a
community could apply for funding under this provision to clean
up a Superfund site, retrofit an industrial lagoon to meet RCRA re-
quirements, clean up a brine spill from oil and gas activities, com-
plete a project necessary to comply with the Clean Water Act or
simply subsidize the regular cleanup of homeowners’ septic tanks.
The Congress should not open the door to funding all costs of com-
pliance for all Federal environmental statutes.
-------
000049
74
Although there are many positive features in H.R. 1650, I would
urge my colleagues to carefully analyze the implications of Section
203 and 204 of the bill before giving it their support.
HOWARD C. Nrnx.soN.
0
-------
OOOO5O
CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — SENATE S S397
dd have n oèMiu .ed w . 4er tAil aaèsec. .Ø BflTn Lp . the abeo ttee
&s shaLl act be sisbxet to jrjj41 ta1 review in r ing mem , M ax B ...v vg ,i
any civil or criminaL P OCftdin9 for eiiIoir - oth emb ’s of the vtro ent
meiU OF is any civil action to enjo “ and Public Works Commfttee. will
fo rvemenL
?Z)IA) U petitions , , help to assure that cit en8 in this
a ncp action have been jue i t o,. untry are provided high quality
niore United State, courts of appeals and drinking water iuppllea.
the Adminutrutor has received wntten The 8aIe Drinking Water Act was
CILICC Of the filing Of the fltit i peltttoii enacted In 1974 to provide public
more than 30 days before health protection froTu euntaminants
notice of the filing of the aecond PelsiLOn. In drinking ‘ i -er The detection of
then the r ord shell be/tied In IliaC court in
synthetic orgame che,nlcsls In the
tion, for review of the 8grne agency water supplies of a number of cities In
have been filed in two or more United States the early 1910s served as the impetus
courtj of appeaLs and the Adr,iinutr trjr has behind the act’s reforms. The art es-
received written notice afttiefihtngofoneor tablished a program to require compll•
more petitions within 39 dc v i or Less after ance with national drinking water
receiving WT iLCI,i iioftee of Of standards for eontamlnant.s that may
first petition, then the Adzniiutrgtor 1P1411 have an adverse effect on the health
promptly o4vue in writing the Adminulra.
hue Office of the V iii Led State, Court, that of persons. As an addition to the
petihoni have been filed in two or more Public Health Act, the Safe Drinking
Linited States courts oj appeals, and Water Act focused on the removal of
identify each Court for which he h j written contaminants found in water supplies
notice that such peeit ,on.s have been fiLed as a pre .entive health measure.
within 30 days or 1w of receiving Critteii The act a.lso established programs
notice of Vie filin9 of the first .uca pewion Intended to protect underground
Pursuant to a ey Lem of random selection
devised for this p ryose , ox4 within three sources of drinkmg water from con•
bi .siness dai,i after receiving audi notice tamination. Provisions In the act es-
from the 4dmtnt.str tor the Administrative tablished restrictions on the under-
Office thereupon shalt select the court In ground Injection of hazardous and
which the record shall be filed from among nonhazardous waste and provide au-
those iden!tfied by the Ad.munustrg.Lor Upon thority for the protection of desigriat-
notification of such uLeclton , tile Admints . ed sole or principal source aqullers.
tr , 3r shall protnpliy file the record in such
cc . t. For the pi rpose of review of An evaluation of the accomplish-
a.: on which liar previously been remanded ment.s of the Safe Drinking Water Act
to the Adr*lnutrctor, ti or s ait be yields both good news and bad news.
fJ ’i In the court of appeaLs which remanded The good news Is that over the inst
si. li action, decade, there have been a number of
‘B) Where petitions have been filed in improvements. The act has improved
two or more United States courtj of eppeets compliance with basic drinking water
with respect to the same agency action and stan arts It has increased monitoring
the record ha., been filed In one of such
ov zts pursuant to paragraph , , of drinking water systems and height..
Courts in which such petitions have eri.ed public awareness of the need to
filed shall promptly transfer such petiti.oru protect drinking water supplies.
to the United State., court of appeals in Ilowever, there have bee i major de.
which the record ha, been filed. Pending 5C ficlencies in the implernentatioo of
tection ofa court ptrtuant to n.bsection fI)• progrs.ms established under the act
any court (a which a petition “ that public health objectives have not
may postpone the C7e ive date of the
agency action until 15 dcv i !CCT the Admun- been fulfilled. Only 22 drthkthg water
tsirative Office has selected ttie court in standards have been established—a
i&uch Vie record shall be filet small fraction of the contaminants
“(C) Any co urt in which a pelition with that are found in pub& water systems
respect to any agency action ha.s been rued. and that may have an adverse effect
including any court selected pursuant to on human health. M ites-lng is only
enbj,aregraph IA). may transfer such requu’ed for those cant_niln*rit for
lion to any other United States Court of ap- hich there are standar so that we
peals for the conve n ience of the parties or
other-wise in the interest of u ,it1ce do not know If our water supplies are
(b) Section 1448tb1 of the Safe Drinking contaminated with other potesitlafly
Water Act is amended by deleting “45-day” harmf ul substances.
in both places where it appears arid insert The need for change In carrent pric-
ing “h’O-days” in lieu thereof tice and an effective program based on
Mr. DURENBERGER Mr. Presi. Federal cb-ijikfl g water sta ,cdarc Is fi.
dent. I move the adoption of the corn- lustrated by figures from recent me-
mitt.ee a1 iendments ports imued by the ivLronniental
The PRESIDING OFFICER The Protection Agency and others: As
question is on agreeing to the commit- many as 700 different synthetic organ-
tee amendments. Ic chemicals, heavy metals. pesticides.
The committee amendments were and other pollutants have been found
agreed to en bloc In our Nations drinting viler sup-
Mr DURENEERGER. Mr. Presi- plies. 28 percent of the water supplies
dent today we are considering S. 124. In a random aw-vey of metropolitan
the Safe Drinking Water Act Amend. systems wet’e found to be contarnthat-
ments of 1985. ed by th’ie or more toate cwgazilc cherol-
This bill, which vu de ’re Oped ,itth caLs. 63 percent of the rural water sup-
the able effort and support of our tuli plies In a ran m survey were found to
ooenmlttee chairman. Boa 9-r&rro, ,. be contaminated, and all 50 Staten
the full committ ranking member, bave reported cases of in des’*round
May 16, 1985
making nls under ap (1) there
- are authorized to be spprocristed
‘$25 000.000 for the t .1 year I$85.J
t000000 foe the fUcal ear 1986.
.8.000,000 for the flscaj year 1987.
‘8.000000 tar the r. .i year 198 5. (aMJ
1.000.000 for the f ml year i98$ and
8,000,000 for the /isml year 1990’
(d) SectIon 1441(f) of the Safe Drinking
Water Act Is amended by striking out “In
effect” and all that follows and subetltutthg
1n effect for more than one year
INDLAN SR/SAL OROAN1L4TTON
Sec 14 fa)SectunI4Ol oftheSafe Drink.
up Water Act is amended by in.serting the
fc ’llc’.cing oiler :ubaection 13
“‘14) The term indian tribol orpgn ,za.
lion’ mean, any Indian tribe, band, nation,
or other organized group or community fin.
ctuuinp any Alaska Nattre village, but not
Including aviv Alaska Native regional or ru-
tape corporation) which is recognized as cit
gibte 10- the special prc grams and sert-,cer
provided by the United States to lridian , be-
cause oJ their statu, a., indiani.
Ib The Administrator, in cooperation
with the Director 0/the In dian Health Ser.’-
ir, shall, within 12 months of enactment,
a survey of drinic.rg water on
I ndian reservation.,, identifying drinking
wcter proble’rn,s and the need, tj any, for at.
tcn alive drinking water supplies,
tci The Administrator is authorized to
make special provision for the treatment of
Indian tribe, under thu., Act, Including the
lrectment of hndictt tribe, as States to the
degree necessary to ear,-y out the purposes of
this ACL Such special provision may include
the direct provision of funds to the govern-
ing bodie, of Indies tribe.,, and the detzr,ni-
iclion of priorities by Indian tribe,, where
ot determine,d by the Administrator in co-
jperct ion with the Director of the Indian
‘ealth Service. The Administrator Is au-
ortzed to reduce the non-Federal share oth-
wise rr . , eired under sectIon 1443 with re-
spect to Indian tribes, as deter iv ,ed by the
Administrator in cooperation with the Di-
rector of the Indian Heal Vi Service.
JUDIcIAL Review
S ec IS IaJ Section 1448 Ia) of the Safe
Drinking Water Act is amended to read as
foUow s.
‘JVDiCLS.L REViEW
Src. 1448 Ia/fl , A petition for re-vie of—
fAI action of the Administrator In pro-
mlgatinp any national primary driruking
water regulation under section 1412. any
regulation under sectIon 1413(b), any regis-
Lotion under sectIon 1424(c), any regal 01 ion
for State underground irweciioa control pea-
granu tinder section 1421. or any general
regulation for the a .dmlntsti-ation of thus
title may be filed iii the United States Court
of Appeals for the District of Columbia, or
In any United State,, court of appeals for a
circuit in which the petitioner res-ldei or
transects busiew which Li direcuy affected
by such action, and
“ (B! action of the Admlni ,tr tor in pro-
mv,Jgatinp any other regulat,on under t,his
title, issuing an order under this title, or
making any determination under this title
nay be ftlrd only In the United States court
of appeal, for a circuit in which the peti-
tioners resides or transects business which
is direcUy affected by such action.
Any such petition shall be filed within the
120-day period beginning on the date of Vie
pro-nislt’atuon of lit, regulation or wunnce
the order with respect to which review Is
• oupht’ ‘ron the dote of the deterrninatton
with respect to which rri-uew us sought, of
tier such date only (I the petition us based
on grounds which arose ajter such oat
and t n.tueth day Actioi of the
Admunistrat with respect £0 &isch rrvitv
-------
98
th1nkthg witer cont mlimtion. Taken
coilectlvely, these statistics speak
clearly to the need for an effective
rogram that will assure fundamental
public health protection.
The amendments Lu 8. 124 were de-
yeloped to rectify deficiencies In the
statutory requirements and Lmplernen-
tation of the act. The bill establishes
‘schedules and deadlines for drinking
1 water standard setting, requires simul-
taneous promulgation of drinking
water goals and standards, and re-
quires that standards be set as close to
health level goals as feasible with the
use of best available technology. The
bill also establishes a monitoring pro-
gram for unregulated contarrunants to
provide a systematic check on the
quality of each public water system’s
supply.
• The problem of viral and bacterial
contamination of drinking water sup-
- plies Is addressed In the bill by the re-
quirernents that EPA Issue criteria for
filtration of surface water supplies and
- promulgate regulations requl.rlng dis-
-infection for all public water systems.
Other provisions in the bill require
EPA to amend existing public notifica-
-tion requirements to make them more
timely and informative arid authorize
‘$10 million per year to provide tethni-
cal assistance to small systems which
have had chronic noncompliance prob-
lems. -
Amendments pertaining to the pro-
tection of underground sources of
drinking water are intended to en-
hance existing protection EPA is re-
quired to promulgate ground water
monitoring regulations for hazardous
waste Injection operations and to issue
a report on problems wflh existing
class V wells. In addition, a sole source
aquifer demonstration program Is es-
tablished for the purpose of providing
protection for particularly critical
ground water supplies and assessing
the effectiveness of specific protection
- measures. -
The bill also provides EPA new en-
forcement authority for public water
systems and ground water protection
programs established under the act to
assure timely and effective enforce-
ment of existing and new regulatory
requirements.
The bill authorizes appropriations of
$131,300,000 to be expended to fulfill
existing responsibilities and new ac
tlvities authorized in this bill for fiscal
years 1986 through 1990 In addition, a
total of 830 miUion is authorized for
monitormg of unregulated contarni.
nant.s and $20 million per year for
fiscal years 1987-90 is authorized for
the sole source aquifer demonstration
program.
Mr. President. I urge my colleagues
to vote for this bill which will help to
assure that citizens throughout this
courtry will have- safe thinking water
supplies now and In the future. -
Mr. BENTSEN. Mr. President, I
would like to state my support of S.
124. the Safe Drinking Water Act
Amendments of 1985. I would also like
to express my appreciation to Sena-
toil STAFFORD. D TRZN ERGER. and
BAUCTS for their efforts.
These amendments to the Safe
Drinking Water Act are significant
modifications that should enhance’—
EPAs ability to improve the quality of
our drinking water. While the quality
of water has improved ovei . - the last
decade due to this act and tfle Clear
Water Act, there are many tasks yet
undone. Enactment of this legislation
will provide EPA with the mandate it
apparently needs to accomplish these
tasks.
Key among the provisions in S. 124
are the new enforcement provisions
for underground injection wells. Previ-
ously the Administrator of the EPA
had recourse only through the courts
to penalize violators—an inefficient
and the t1xne consummg method for
minor violations. S. 124 makes admin-
istrative order authority available to
the Administrator so the Agency can
more effectively enforce its regula-
tions and the law -
Section 11 of the bill, which author-
izes this administrative authority, also
Imposes fines of up to $5,000 per day
for oil and gas Injection eU violators
and up to 825.000 per day for hazard-
ous waste well violators. The different
pen lties that may be assessed under
this section are Important and realis-
tic: They promote compliance while
recognizing that the threat to the en-
vironrnent from these t o types o
welLs is not the same
I hope my colleagues i.ll join me i
support of this legislation,
Mr. STAFFORD. Mr. President,
want to commend the disting-uishe
Senator from Minnesota. the chair
man of the Subcommittee on Toxic
Substances and Environmental Over-
sight, for guiding S. 124 through the
Environment and Public Works Corn-
rnittee and bringing it to the floor of
the Senate.
The Safe Drinking Water Amend-
ments of 1985 contain major improve-
ments ti.. the law that is intended to
protect the Nation’s drinking water
supplies. The bill proudes needed t in-
petus to the Environmental Protection
Agency to Issue regulations for con-
tan’iinants of thinking aater. a needed
prod as the Agency has been for too
slow in its regulatory efforts
The bill aLso takes a major step
toward identifying the nature and
scope of contamination of drinking
water . It does this by greatly expand
lr-ig the monitoring that is required of
public water systems
Finally, the bill will prcAide better
regulation of underground Injection
operations that could affect thinking
ater supplies,
In short the bill Is a major improve-
ment of existing law and should be
passeØ by the Senate.
Mr. SiMPSON Mr President, I
would take this opportunity to hearti-
ly congratulate Senator D RZNBERGrR
and his fine staff members. Heather
Wicke and Jimmy Powell. for the fine
O OO3 1 May)& J985
work they have’ done on th ‘Safe
Drinking Water Act reauthorization.
This public health measure is of criti-
cal importance to the American public.
-There is a continually and growing
awareness in ‘this country that- con-
tamination of drinking water supplies
has occurred as a result of the map-
•propriate or erroneous siting of toxic
- waste dumps, vajious nonpoint pollu.
tion seepage and other contamination.
- Many of the municipal water sys-
tems currently In service are using
technology that Is over 100 years old
Progress is needed in increasing the ef-
fectiveness of the methods that are
used to remove pollutants from our
drinking water supplies and the Safe
Drinking Water Act reauthorization is
a fine forward step In providing clean-
er drinking water to all Americans. -
Senator DuBvrs cnt Is a fine friend
and a pragmatic and considerate Sena-
tor. He is sensitively aware of the
ground water contamination problems
that we find in various regions of this
country. I think all of us on the Envi-
ronment and Public Works Committee
recognize that ground water contami-
nation Is a growing problem that Con-
gress must deal with. However, I be-
lieve It Is prudent and reasonable to
leave a full and comprehenslvi ap-
proach to ground water regulation for
another day. The new requirements
that will result from passage of this
bill are very significant and will con-
tribute significantly to protection of
the environment and public health I
firmly believe that this bill is generalS
ly sound and that there is genuine
flexibility for the proper administra-
tion of this act by the EPA Adininis-
trator.
This legislation also contains a Judi-
cial review provision which I authored
and which I believe will facilitate the
equitable and reasonable deterrnina.
lion of venue. I remain concerned that
the standard setting language may not
hate the desirable amount of flexibil-
ity for the EPA and I would anticipate
that the members of the House will
consider the Implications of any overly
restrictive regulatory language in this
regard.
I do look tor ard to seeing this bill
signed into law during thir session of
Congress and I trust that most of my
colleagues will lend their support to
this important peace of public health
legislation.
Mr BENTSEN I would like to raise
a concern that has come to my atten-
tion only recently It appears that the
Environmental Protection Agency Is
not consistent In applying permit re-
quirements for fluids brought to the
surface In connection with oU or natu
ral gas production Several EPA re-
gions with a majority of oil and gas
production facilities treat these fluids
as pdrt of the class I Injection well
program. However, some exceptions to
this policy have recently occurred.
which has created some confusion
with respect to certain fluids.
CCONGRESSIONAL RECORD —SENATE
-------
Way 16 1984 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD —SENATE
For example, In Cci o ac u1Iers In particular, are marvels of
1QD wUl not permit the Injection of the natural world. We must protect
‘ &ter produced along with d l - these treasures from pollution By
ide at the McElmo DQ P ’ Jd Into acting now to prevent further con-
class II disposal well. EPA has IS- tamLnatlon of our ground ater, we can
‘ed a class I n aj - ous permit avoid tragic problems in the future.
uch veils. ‘--- --“ ‘- ‘- ‘(h This bill is another step toward that
1n California. region T X requires a goal. Yet there Is much left to be done
class V permit for wells which inject before our groundwater resources are
produced water commingled with field - fully protected I urge my colleagues
scrubber waste waters. Texas. Louisi- to support this bin to protect ouFmcst
arm, Kansas, Okialiorna. and other vital resource—water -
States, however, approve class II injec- Mr. MOYNIHAN. Mr. President, I
tion for multiple waste waters a.ssoci- would like to express my support for
ated with oil and gas operations. S 124. the Safe Drinking Water Act
Mr SIMPSON. I commend the Sen- Amendments of 1985. 1 commend Sen-
ator f rum Texas for raising this Issue ator DURE amG R for working so dill.
for I had intended to do so In my gently to develop the legislation and
judgment, It is appropriate that all the steer it through comzniUee consider-
material described by my friend from atlon so early In this Congress S. 124
Texas be handled with his States class would protect the Nations drinking
II program. However, at a minimum, water supplies by establishing a more
the EPA should review Its regulations aggressive, systematic process for set-
in order to assure consistent applies- ting new maximum contaminant
Lion of permit requirements, levels.
Mr. DUREN EROER As I am not This bill would hasten the n g ,ected
familiar with the speethc technical effort to establish standards for harm-
Issues involved In this ease, I am not ful chemicals that contaminate drink-
able to Judge what action, If any, the ing water supplies. The Environmental
Agency should take, However, I agree Protection Agency would be required
that EPA should strive to achieve con- to promulgate standards for a specific
sistency In the appiiestlon of its regu- set of chemicals, and the bill provides
lations to Injection well activities, strict deadioies. Equally Important.
Mr. ZVANS. Mr. President.. I rise In the Agency would periodically review
support of this bn ’tant piece of leg- the need for regulating additional sub-
islation. I comxnersd my colleague. Mr. stances that could threaten the health
1 )u u av’as , for a job well done. He of drinking water consumers. Maxi-
as pursued L aU to protect our mum contaminant levels would be set
“ater resources for a mun of years. as close as feasible to a goal at which
at pear he produced a set of Safe no adverse health effects occur.
Inking Water Im enta In S. 134 has one major omlsslomv it
- ne waning days of the Pith Congrem. lacks a comprehensive program to ad-
Unfortunately, the erush of pending dress the serious problem of ground-
legislation and time stole o opportu- water contamination. I am. however,
to consider tli.aL bilL Through his very pleased that the bill Includes a
conttnued efforts, we are able to con- sole source aquifer demonstration pro-
eider that bill. Through his tthued gram. I first introduced the Sole
efforts, we are able to comider Safe Source Aquifer Protection Act in 1982
Drinking Water Act amendments early and reintroduced it on January 3.
in this Congress. I applaud his pereer- 1985. Although not as generous or fa.r-
verance. reaching as my bill, the demonstration
This is an Important and timely bill, program In 6. 124 would be the first
Its provisions strengthen the existing significant federally assisted effort to
drinking water statute. additional pro- prevent the degradation of our most
tection cannot wait any longer. I am critical underground v,ater supplies
particularly pleased that this bill con- The Environmental Protection
Laths a new program to encourage the Agency has to date designated 20 sole
- protection of sole sow-ce aquifers, the source aquifers, under ground reserves
Sole Source Aquifer Demonstration that are the only source of drinking
Program. This program reflects ow- water for a region. One of these lies
recognition of the delicate, often pi-e- under Long Island On Long Island.
carlous. Lance between the health of nearly 3 million people dr:nk from one
an aquifers and the use of the lands well, And this well Is rapidly becoming
surrounding It.. Some comxnuruties polluted by toxic chemicals. In Naasau
have already aekno ledged this rein- County alone 119 of the 389 public
tionship and have taken measures to wells have detectable levels of synthet-
protect their aquifers. I believe such Ic organic chemicals Throughout both
communities deser-ve special consider- Long Island counties. Nassau and Suf-
atlori. At my urging, last years’ bill folk, chemicals from diverse sources
contained language requiring that a have ended up in the water supply’
community’s previous efforts to pro- Solvents from industries and residents’
tect Its sole source aquifer be i-ecog homes, pesticides from potato farms.
nized. 8txnilar recognition is provided nitrate from lawn fer dizers. and m l-
ror Lu. this bill and I thank my ccl- merous chemicals from landfills.
ague for his response to roy requests, The only aay to prevent the prob-
Water is our must precious resource. 1cm from getting worse, on Long
.1Cc ean t exist without clean, safe Island and elsewhere. Is to plan. We
drtnklng water. Groundwater, and now realize bow i-such our activitIes on
000052
Sf339.
(“i
the land above so a,q rI1er aflect the
quality of the ground water and its vi.
ability a supply for futm’e geiem ”’
tons. As precipitation Infiltrates the
land surface arid recharges the ground’ C
-water, it carries with sut tances -
Chat have leaked into the soil or been”
placed on the land. En many cases.
water pas4ng through a relatively
small, well-defined land area recharges
a large ground water reservoir. On
- Long Island. the prime recharge zone
happens to be an area known as the
Suffolk Pine Barrens, an area of
110,000 acres or 13 percent of the
island. Careful protection of these re-
charge zones is ox of the cheapest
and most effective means of maintain-
ing good ground water quality.
Under the vokmt.ery demonstration
program, local and State goven ents
could cooperate with the EPA in the
development and bnpi tatton of
plans to protect sole source aquifers.
The EPA would provide half the nec-.
essary ftmda, and $80 million is au-
thorized for the purpose. The plans
could Include a variety of measures to
control human activity in special pi’o-
tection areas and thereby prevent con-
tamination of the sole source aquifer.
Critical parcels of land could be ac-
quired, while In other areas suitable
zoning ordinances and regulations on-
siting end design of landfills, und&-
ground storage Lanka, and other po-
tential sources of pollution could be
established. S 134 requires the Gover-
nor’s approval of the plan in States
where federally funded ‘2O8 plans”—
referring to section 24Th of the Clean
Water Act—have previously been pre-
pared. This ensures consistency with
earlier planning efforts, although I be-
lieve the Governor’s approval ahould
be required in all Sl.ates,
The sole source aquifer designation
provided by the Safe Drinking Water
Act ol’ 1914 was intended to control de-
veiopment activities of the Federal
Government in regions entirely de-
pendent on ground waLer for dr-inking
supplies. However, experience has
shown that the deiignaUon—lscklng a
broader planning and management
conte xt—Ia lne.ffectlve in controlling
many activities which may adversely
affect the quality of ground water- I
am confident that section 12 of S 124
a ill accomplish its purpose—to demon-
strate the effectiveness of a preventive
approach to protecting sole source
aquifers All my colleagues should sup-
port S. 124.
Mr BAUCUS Mr. President, I would
like to express my support for 6 124.
the Safe Drinking Water Act An-iend-
rnent of 1985
I would also like to thank nip col-
league. Senator DUa BtROtR . the
chairman of the Subcommittee on
Toxic Bubstanom and Envlrosimentaj
Oversight, for his efforts on this meas-
ure
The bill effectively addresses some
of the most ier Ous problerris plagu rig
EPA’s drinking water oflice. EPA has
-------
000053
CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — SENATE ,. May 164985
filled to develop a vigorous program, particularly Important Improve en been covered so well In the Committee
so tt t a wide variety of contamlna to the act. - . - on Envlronmen and Public Works. in.
are still regularly found In our drink. The most significant amendment to fact I have read the report language
‘Ing water and even regulated contami.. - the act Is the addition of specific dead- and some if not all, of my particular
riants are permitted to rem.aln in ow’ lines for development of drinking concerns seem to be taken care of In
rater at levels that present a signl.fl- water standards for 85 identified con -that carefully constructed language.
cant risk to public health. - - tamlnant.s. The Agency will publish However, I would like to ask the chair-
- This bill addresses these these much needed standards over the man to restate for the record how cost
--shortcomlngs in several ways. First, it next 36 months. The amendments tO will, in practice, be considered In the
• requires EPA to set standards withizi 3 this portion of the act also pz’ovide for process of determining the maximum
years for the 85 contamInants previ- streamlining of the standard setting contaminant level. • -
ously listed by EPA as contaminants process. - It Is my understanding from reading
of concern. Many of us are uncomfort. While these Improvements to the the statute and the report language
able with denying an agency discretion standard setting process are badly that the Environmental Protection
in this manner, but’ the failure of the needed, I am pleased that members of Agency Administrator would regard
EPA to meet Its responsibilities under the Environment and Public Works granular activated carbon as available
the Safe Drinking Water Act leaves us Committee have agreed to focus technology but in setting the maxi-
no alternative. The provisions in sec. future attention on the degree of mum contaminant level, he would take
tion 2 of this bill are the only means health protection provided by the cur- Into consideration coat and feasibility
we have of assuring that EPA will set rent standards and those under devel- at different levels of treatment by
standards for these contaminants opment. It has been suggested that we granular activited carbon technology
found In our drinking water that consider adding to the existing stand- in arriving at the final ma.xlmum con’
present a risk to the public health. ard setting process a safety net to taminant level. Once that level has
— The second major problem . 124 ad- assure a minimum level of public been set a water agency could use an-
dresses is the lack of information health protection. I believe this pro- other technology which Is at least as
about what substances are found in posal has merit and look forward tO effective at meeting the maximum
our drinking water. The Safe Drinking considering it more fully, contaminant level.
The second major amendment to the Can the chairman assure me that
Water Act, as enacted, required EPA act Is the provision for a sole source or cost win be taken Into account in es-
to conduct a series of studies to find
out more about the quality of critical aquifer protection demoristra- tab hthg drinking water standards?
drinking water and our ability Lion program. ThIS program is de- • Mr. DURENBERGER. That is cor-
signed to identify workable approach.
remove contaminants, Unfortunately, es to the protection of ground water rect.
practically none of these studies have
resources where these resources are a • Mr. WILSON. The Senator’s re-
been completed so we find we have criti or sole source of drinking s ,onse is most welcome, and I feel
very little reliable, national thforyna.
tion about our drinking water. S. 124 water supply. This demonstration pro- that this process will not lead to un-
grain will provide valuable insights reasonable costs to local water agen.
requires EPA to publish a list of Un- into effective methods of protecting des that will have to comply with this
regulated contamjnant,s for which
ground water resources, new legislation. My particular concern
public water systems will be required ‘ It is Important to note, however, is with triflalomethane removal where
to monitor. This will be the first na-
that the Safe Drinking Water Act a comparable or higher level may be
tionwide effort to determine what con- not designed to provide for the corn- achieved more cost effectively by
tamlnarits are found In which systems prehensive protection of the ground using an alternative technology. Can
and in what quantity.
water resource. We see Increasing cvi- the chairman tell me if these alterna.
A third significant aspect of this bill dence that ground water quality Live technologies can be used by the
are amendments to the enforcement threatened from a wide range of pollu- Administrator as the basis for setting
provisions in the act. S. 124 provIdes tion sources. Congress has provided the drlnki ig water standards?
EPA with authority to issue adininis. for controls over some of the most ob- • M . DURENBERGER. That is cor-
trative orders and increases penalties. vious threats to ground water, such as rect.
These provisions provide EPA With leaking underground storage • Mr WILSON. I thank the chairman
the means to take action against viola- which have been identified as a serious for his cooperation.
tars of drinking water standards more ,problem In the State of Maine. But we M i’. LATJ ’FENBERQ. Mr. President,
swiftly and more effectively. To date, have not rc, begun the job of working I rise in strong support of the drinking
EPA’s enforcement of these standards with State and local governmen to water bill before us. The American
can be most generously categorized design a more comprehensive ap- public Is demanding safe drinking
lax. S. 124 should prevent EPA from proach to protecting ground water re- water. They also want precious under-
Continuing its poor enforcement sources. I am hopeful that hearings ground sources of drinking water pro-
tices. scheduled soon In the Subcommittee tected The bill before us will go far in
There is one last provision of par- on Toxic Substances will be a step in meeting these goals, and I applaud the
ticular interest to States like Montana that direction, chairman of the Environment and
that contain many small public water (At the request of Mr. DUZNBERGER Public Works for the speed with which
systems. Section 8 of S. 124 provides the following colloquy was ordered to the comimttee took up this bW.
$10 million per fiscal year In technical be printed In the RECORD.) It will result In important improve.
assistance to these systems so their • Mr WILSON I would ask my distin- ments In EPA’s current drinking water
ability to comply with national drink- guishe friend from Minnesota. the program. It puts EPA on a strict
ing water standards is not Impaired chairman of the EnvI.rorunent and schedule for regulating 85 contamI-
simply because of their size. Public Works Subcommittee on Toxic na.nt.s It puts EPA on a schedule for
Mr. President, I support the Safe Substances and Environmental Over- de eloplng an additional list of sub-
Drinking Water Act Amendments of sight, to respond to several questions stances of regulating those And of
1985 because I believe enactment of concerning the intent of the standard. critical importance Is the requirement
this bill will improve the quality of our setting amendments to the act. I real. that every major water supply system
drinking water. I encourage ray ccl- Ize that there has been a good deal of conduct a baseline Inventory of un-
leagues to lend their supp to this discus ion on the Issue of granular ac- regulated contaminants In drinking
measure as well. - tlvlted carbor as the basis for deter- water and then remonitor at least
Mr. MITCH T.T. Mr. President, I mining the best technology available every 5 years.
strongly support the reauthorization for purposes of establishing the maxi- Mr. President, I am particularly In-
of the Safe Drinking Water Act. The mum contarnjnant level, and I don’t terest-ed In the public notification pro-
amendments before us today make two want to repeat the full debate that has visions of the bill. It is widely recog
-------
May 16 1985
riJzed that the current notification re-
qutreinents have tailed. The bill re-
vIses these requlreme by distin-
u1shing between violations that pose
t serious threat to public health—such
i exceedences of maximum contaml-
.ant levels—and less si r1ous violations.
I thank the chafrm of the subcom-
rnlttee, Senator Dy rsgxwzit. again
for his willingness to accept my
amendment requiring notilicatlon of
serious violations within no longer
than 14 days.
Mr. President. another issue of great
Interest to me Is the provision estab-
lishing—for the first time—a program
for protecting underground sources of
dnnking water. This provision sets up
a demonstration program for land use
planning ‘in the area affecting
aquifers It provides for 820 million
per year in matching grants for imple-
menting management plans.
Aquifer protection is critically im-
portant in New Jersey. O er 60 per-
cent of the drinking water in the State
comes from groundwater supplies. The
state of emergency due to drought
conditions and reliance on our ground.
water to pull us through the drought
brings the point home. Unfortunately.
the spreading contamination of this
resource Is sobering. Hundreds of wells
In New Jersey have been restricted or
closed because of chemical contamina-
tion.
The aquifer protection program we
are approving today is an important
step In recognizing the importance of
reventing contamination. It Is much
harder, If not Impossible, to clean up
an aquifer alter It becomes contami-
nated. I am hopeful that the township
of Rockaway, which sits atop our one
sole source aquifer in New Jersey, wili
submit an application for the demon-
stration funds and make full use of
this program.
The Committee on Environment and
Public Works plans to hold hearings In
the next month on a national ground-
water protection strategy, and I look
forward to working with members of
the committee in fashioning legisla-
tion that is larger in scope than the
proposal that we are appro thg today.
Mr. President, Senator BrADLEY anc
I planned to offer an amendment
today to ban the use of lead and lead
solder in thinking water pipes. This
amendment would have been prospec-
tive It a.s aimed at reducing the ex-
posure of the public to lead in drink-
ing water. Studies in New Jersey have
indicated that this form of exposure
ranks even higher than exposure to
lead from automobile ex iaust The
committee will hc d a heanng on lead
In drinl’.ti’.g ater before superfund is
taken up on the floor. It is m under-
standing that the amendment will be
consi c -red hen the Senate takes up
supe,rfurld on the floor,
Mr President, it is my hope that the
House will soon pass their counterpart
and th t we li1 have the opportunity
to send a strong safe drln ang water
Mar 16. 1985
DtsR Sc AroR The Safe Drinking Water
Act is one of our most critical envlronmen-
tal and public health laws. Unfortunately.
this Act has not functioned as Intended in
protecting the American public from toxic
chemicals In drinking water
Many sorely needed reforms to this law
Pave been included tn S 124. the Safe
Drinking Water A.mendxnents of 1985 This
legislatIon, sponsored by Senator David
Durenberger and unanimously reported Out
of the Senate Environment and Public
Works Committee, is scheduled for floor
action this week On behalf of a broad coaii
tion Of emironroental, industry, public in-
terest and public health organizations, ae
urge you to support this bill.
When over 100 contaminants were found
In the drinking water supplies of New One-
s-na and these supplies were linked Ith
igh rates of cancer. Congress passed the
Original Safe Drinking Water Act The 1914
law was intended to protect the public
health by giving EPA the authority to set
and enforce limits on toxic chemicals in
drinking water.
Over the past dees e. however. EPA has
u.sed this authority most reluctantly, setting
standards for only 22 drinkIng aater con-
taminants This lack of standards means not
only that treatment technologies are not ap-
plied but also that monitoring to determine
the presence of chemkals such as dioxin.
benzeiie. EDB. PC’Bs and tnicidoroethilene
Is sporadic or nonexistent in most st.a es In
addition, the enforcement of these few
standards has been iacking for example,
the General Accounting Office reported In
1982 that enforcement action ‘ranged from
none to minimal, followed no paricular pat-
tern, arid was riot as timely is it could or
shouldhave been”
S i 4 addresses many of the fa’lings of
the existing drinking as-ten program The
bill requires EPA to set standards fur oter
60 chemicals ahich threaten drinking water
supplies across the country It requires the
Office of Drinking Water to consult aith
other appropriate offices within EPA and
with the National Toxicological Program En
order to set priorities for future standard
setting It mandates the establishment of a
much-needed program to monitor for Ufl-
regulated but potentially harmful contami-
nants, and it enhances enforcement capa-
bilities with new authorities for the use of
HOUSE BUDGET PLAN
Mr DOLE. Mr President, I am not
surprised but disappointed with the
action by the House Budget Commit.-
tee I think the Democratic majority,
which is rather large in that commit-
tee, has simply walked aaay from
fiscal responsibility today The part.l-
san House budget package is a feeble
attempt at best, and the smoke s-rid
mirrors demonstrate that the House
Democrats still reflect the big govern-
ment, antidefense views of its liberal
Members. Under the House budget
plan. not one Federal program Is ter-
minated. The spending path continues
to go up—not down. The spending
r nr\-’ r ‘1
U ‘u .J i’-r
CONGRESSIONAL RECORD—SENATE - S6401
act to the President’s desk well before admInIstratIve orders by PL Senator
the summer recess. - - r - , - Durenberger’a l .latJon aures that not-i-
- , president, I’d like to commend tI s-tIon of violations of standards will be,.
the chairman of the committee, ttmelr and widespretd at the same time. it-.
allows for revisions of whit some had am
tor Smn’oRD. and chairman of the sidered a burdensome public noWicatlon
subcommittee, Senator Dun. 5 94 Ji , provides a methini
In addition, I’d like to commend the ‘ for federal, stais and local cooperation to
leadership for bringing - this bill pyot- critically needed and highly vulnena-
promptly to the floor. It is my hope ble underground sources of drinking water.
that we can get the Clean Water Act -The American public has waited too long
and the superfund to the floor as rap- for the basic protections embodied InS. 124.
Idly. We urge you to support this important legla-
Mr. PresIdent, 10 prominent environ- lation.
mental and health organizations and
Velma, Smith. Environmental Policy In-
the water and wastewater equipment autute. Julia A. Holmes, League of
mnariulacturers associations sent a Women Voters. Rich Miller, American
letter to the Senate today urging pa,s- - Nu Asaodatlon. Din Becker, Envi-
sage of this bill. Their support has ronmental Action. ReId Wilson. U.S.
been critical In passing a strong bill, Public Interest Research Group: Dr.
and I ask unanimous consent that the WIllIam H. McBeith. American Public
complete text of their letter be printed Health Auoclauon Fern Summer,
In the RECORD. Water s-nd Wastewater Equipment
Manufacturers Association. L. Geof-
There being no objection, the letter frey Webb. Friends of the Earth. Jac-
was ordered to be printed in the queline M. Warren. National Re-
Rwoan, as follows - L)efense Council, Larry WU-
SAri Danqaiiqo WArES A aNDsas-rs —Fi.ooR Dams, Sierra Club. Nancy Dribble.
Von TODAY Public Citizen’s Congress Watch. - -
- , Mr. DURENBERGER. Mr. Presi-
dent, I move the passage of the bin, as
amended.
The PRE&DING OFFICER. The
question is on the engrossment and
third reading of the bill.
The bill was ordered to be engrossed
for a third reading and was read the
third time. -
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The
question Is, Shall the bill pass?
The bill (S. 1241. as amended, was
passed.
Mr. DURENBERGER. Mr. Presi-
dent, I move to reconsider the vote by
which the bill was passed. -
Mr. BYRD. I move to lay that
motion on the table,
The motion to lay on the table was
agreed to.
Mr. DURENBERGER. Mr. Presi-
dent, I thank my colleague, the major-
ity leader, and I thank the Democratic
leader a great deal for the special
courtesy and convenience that h.as
been provided for all of us today In the
waiver of the 3-day rule and many
other considerations
Mr. BYRD Mr. President, I appreci-
ate the kind remarks of the distin-
guished Senator.
-------
2- ii- c Lc t- 7 ’ s i Lu
OC(UO 5
WATER co rAMIl *Tj fc NOW
The SP A pro ft. Under
a piew oua order of the Eor s, the gen-
Uem from IllInois CM,. soan) Is
eco ed for 30 mk m
Mr. MAD1OAN. Mr. Speaker, on
‘epte ber 18 01 li mar, the U.S.
LOuse of Rpreeentativ pass the
3afe Drinking Water Act Amendments
of 1984. whIch I Introduced, by a. vo
of 368 to 2’?. UnfortunateLy, tha sorely
needed Legislation to strengthen our
existing program to regulate drinking
water suppiles was not considered by
the other body. Today, I am proud to
be joined by our colleagues Esira
WAXMAJ!, D ia ECX 41T. and NORMAIt
Lairr In Introducing the exact bill that
passed the House last year by that
overwhelming znargln.
We must act now to diminish the
growing risks to public health from
contam1n t1on of our drinking water
supplies. This bill would do that by
modifying our current regulatory pro-
gram to require quick promulgation of
new national pollution standards,
greatly strengthc $ng the enforcement
provisions, and .blbhlng a new
Cr e o ’k for te planning of
ground water resources. I woald like to
briefly discuss the need for this leats-
l*Uon as well as some 0$ ita key provi-
along. A complete summary of the bill
will follow my remarks.
The need for this leglslatio is obvi-
ous. In a. recent EPA random survey of
• etropdUtan water system 28 pci--
t were found to be contaminated by
or more toxic Organic chemicals.
another random survey. 63 percent
he rural water supplies were also
to be coflta .mjnated_. Our surface
.ster supplies are polluted by over 700
synthetic organic chemicals, heavy
metals, pesticides and other pollut-
ants. The cOndition of our ground
water supples, which account for 50
percent of our drinking water, Is aLso
Qrourtci water Is subject to
approximately 30 different sources of
chemical contnjn tio These in-
dude hazardous waste landfI.lj . sur-
face impoundmen septic tank . and
cesspooLs, and our latest cause for con-
cern—Leaking underground storage
tanks. It is clear that we cannot solely
rely on cleanup which is often tectmj.
cally or economicaijy Infeasible. Pre-
vention of contamination is the only
viable, long-term remedy for the prob-
lem.
I would like to briefly describe some
of the key provtslon.s of this bill. The
legislation is divided into two main
titles. The first is regulation of public
water supplies, the second is a pro.
gram for the protection of under-
ground sources of drinking water.
The Sale Drinking Water Act is
based on a system of mandatory na-
tional standards set to limit conta.mt-
flant Levels so as to protect public
L ’th. T?us ,ts the cornerstone of the
lion of p ibLIc water supplies.
unately, progress In establish- -
se nsuonai maximum contami-
CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — HOUSE
flint levels has been Imieceptably
slow, To date. EPA his promulgated
less thin 20 drinkIng water standards,
and these to not Include many toxic
organic chemicals of greatest concern
to the American public.
Standard setting would be greatly
expedited under this bill. EPA Is given
strict timeables In which to decide
whether or not to regulate two lists of
contaminants which the Age ey ii .
ready has Identified as potential
health threats in drinking water. This
bill does not, however, make regula-
tory decisions for EPA. The Adminis-
trator is given full flexlbWty to weigh
the health evidence before him and
decide If there is sufficient evidence to
constitute a rational basis to act. The
bill also requires control technoigles
which are the beat available, taking
coats Into consideration, rather than
the best generally available as in cur-
rent law. These technologies must be
field tested, however, not merely
proven in a laboratory. This bill also
streamlines regulatory procedures
under the act by elimin ttng the desig-
nation of “Interim” standards and re-
quiring that maximum conta1nIru nt
level goals, formerly known as recom-
mended maximum contaminant levels.
be promulgated simultaneously with
national primary drinking water regu-
lations.
My bill contains several additional
improvements In the regulation of
public drinking water supplies. A pro.
gram Is established requiring water
companies to monitor for unregulated
contaminants, The results of this man-
Itoring would be made available to the
public. The bill greatly strengthens
the authority to enforce the drinking
water standards, EPA Is given author-
ity to issue administrative orders and
to take actions to address violations in
primacy States, where the State Is not
diligently pursuing an ertforeernent
action. EPA Is given the authority to
promulgate reasonable public notIfica-
tion requirements to relieve water
companies from overly burdensome
rules while preserving the rights of
the water consumer to know of viola-
tions which may exist. ‘1nL11y, strin-
gent criminal sanctions are instituted
for those who may tamper with a
public water system.
Title LI of the bill establishes a prorn
gram to protect our vital underground
sources of drinking water. Along with
mandating the promulgation of na-
tional drinking water reguiatlons. I
COns der this the most significant
aspect of the legislation. Injection of
hazardous aPastes above or Into a
drinking water source is banned by
this bill, except In conjunction with a
Superfund cleanup action. Mortitoring
of underground injection wells is Insti-
tuted to ensure that there Es no migra-
tion of waste as required by existing
EPA regulation , Enforcement of U1C
regulations Is also greatly strength-
ened.
Several of our Federal envlronjnen.
tal laws. Including the Clean Air Act
M xrc ’h 21, 1.98$
and the Coastal Zone Management
Act, require States to develop a
formal, legally enforceable strategy on
the use of precious natural resources.
In the area of groundwater, such plan-
fling activities are Lacking in many
‘States. My bill tecttfles this by requir-
ing each State to develop and adopt a.
plan to protect underground sources
of drinking water from contamination
which may adversely affect the health
of persons, Each plan must be ap-
proved by EPA.
The plan must contain a, number of
criteria to be approved. Among these
are the designation of regulations. In-
eluding best management prsctices
CBMP ’sJ, to protect groundwater sup-
plies. States with oil and gas explora-
tion must have provisions to protect
against contamination from brine dis-
posal. I know that some groups are
fearful that Federal involvement In
matters such as this can lead to Feder-
al land use management and other un-
desirable Intrusiong. A close examina-
tion of this provision, however. shows
that it affords a State m 1n um flex,1-
biUty In formulating a sensible strate-
gy to protect public heslth from
groundwater contamination. EPA
must approve a State’s plan unless It
clearly does not meet the require-
ments of the provision. I want to .
pha.slze that in no way does this ze
quirement preempt ongoing State as
tivitles and responsibIlitIes In the area
of water planning, water rights. or
water distribution. The State Is speclf-
Ically authorized to categorize aquifers
and provide differing levels of protec-
tion. This planning requirement corn-
plements rather than preempts State
water resources and groundwater pro-
tection laws.
My bill also provides for voluntary
State and local plans to protect sole
source aquifers, or those aquifers
which supply all of the drinking water
for a community. If these valuable re-
sources are lost, the citizens of that
area have no other supply of drinking
water Again, however, this does riot
constitute Federal land use planning
or impede States water rights In any
way, This rograzn Is completely vol-
untary on the part of local communi-
ties.
Mr Speaker, it is time 1.0 declare war
on contamination of our drinking
water supplies. This legislation strikes
a sound balance between the flexibil.
Ity required to regulate the NaLIon
89.000 different water systems and the
active direction needed to provide con-
sistently high quality drinking water
throughout the country. I hope that
many of my cofleagu s will soon be
Joining Congressmen WAXMAIq,
ECICART, Lvrr. and I In sponsoring this
legislation.
A brief summary of all of the provi-
sions of the bill Iollows.
-------
000056
ONGRESSIONAL REcoRD. HOUSE 2L1 985
“ ‘I
• tlj co, oerszicn of tibIifb1 g a de’,eicv- A Cor efl University study showed much, promote efforts by States to
m. tr er edlt vem, u,at nearly one-sixth of public water plan for the protecUon of under-
(ki state md local tmplentatj :systema violated even the most basic ground sources of drinking water, and
(1} 0* i ’ flI U of water tres ent. requirements— protect the health - of the people Of
prapz 4 ate and •‘ -that water be dlslntected to destroy this Nation. - - -- -
(m) adequate cw-. ( 4 and su-
djaease-earrytng pithogens. The - I was heartene ut yeei ‘6y the
it report estimated that a half-million many positive responses to this bill we
___ • - SPA rural homes might have bacterial received from mez rs of the public
adversely affects the esZ f øf persons. A levels In their drinking Water 1teT and the affected Interest groups. I
then approves or flssogravea the plan, . thin levels permitted for public beach- took forward to working with those
Grants of SQ percent of the rout of prepar- es. - - . “- — - - - and other Interested parties thIs year.
ing the petition are available 60 percent fl - A recently released OTA report esti- and with my distinguished colleagues
munpailues with less then 10.000 people). are 340,000—170000 in we m.ay once
Grants of 50 percent of the costs of closed and 170,000 o en1ng—eurface ag. move forward with this vital Leg-
mrntmg the plan are available (40% In mu-
nlclpsUUrs ilts less then 10,000 people. Lnuoundmenti in the country used for
The SPA ww estaniis iteria ,. the storage of Industrial. municipal, • Mr WIT. Mr. Speaker, I m m very
mine whet areas an eligible (or SPA .t and other wastes. Even though their p1e today to Join my colleagues ED
under 1424(e). -- Contents may be hazardous, most of and D ss
The bill allows the SPA (or States with them are unlined. It has been eat 1mM- Ecx.aae En Introducing the Safe Drink-
prtmary enforcement responalbWty) to ed that two-thirds lie wIthin 1 mIle of log Water Act Amendments of 1985.
bring ICIICIIJ * 51.111 51 .. a source of drinking water.
(a) any person causing or centrtbutlng to incident ,. of contamination This sorely needed legislation will
the presence of a contamIn.-i t in a R24 e) curring with I creasing and alarming modify the existing drinking water
arm whlth oaabty mar or does a frequency, and have now been report- ‘t ,m at the EDvlronmental Protee.
public water system, and ______
Lion Agency (SPAI and wU .l dImlnia i
Ib) this ronf. n Inknt may adversely ,ff ed In every one of the 50 States, and the growing risks to public health
the health of unis the more than one authoritative study has from contamination of our drinking
treated or alternate waxer supplies are pro- reported ground water contamInatIon
sIded, Such person may be required to from toxic chemlm.I water supplies. Congress first passed
supply alternative the Safe Drinking Water Act In 1974.
A federal district court review of this Unfortunately. E PA Is not up to the but SPA has regulated less than 20
order Is possible. Violation or I ttUMJ 10 task of ensuring that drinking water 1t3Ot8 In thinking water In that
comply with orders subjects the person 10 supplies In this country are kept sate 11-year period. This bill will elIn,h .te
- for hltrns.n consumption. SPA promul- these unacceptable delays. -
- gated Interim drinking water stand- Several recent survey’s show that
. C1 (GI1 ards En 1975 after the 1974 passage of surface water supplies are contarsh et.
the Safe Drinking Water Act, but tins ed by over 100 pollutants. Osnund
Studies Section (1442(1.X2)(B))—$11,3 yet to revise th water, which su Ues slightly over
lIon per year. fiscal year 1186-U. form. EPA h issued theaS ha il of our drinking water. Is afr fle -rly
- - Tethflimi 0e °° ‘ standards for fewer than two dozen threatened. This bill would force SPA
- year. flscal year 1984—U.
State Public W it-er substances during the last 10 years to face up to this fact and beitn set-
$45 million per year. fiscal year and even the Intem-im are ting acceptable levels within a strict
Undervround Water Source Protection— based largely on the 1962 Public Ilnieframne for several CCfltamin. nt .
$25 miil1o per year. fiscal year 1984-89. Health Service recommendations arid which have already been Identifled as
Development of Stat.. Plans under new ology that were gener y avail, potential health problems.
Section 203-450 mIllion for fiscal year able in 1974. I will not attempt to explain the
1986-U. Because of this slipshod perform- manY Important proVi SiOns of this bill.
Development of Special Protection Area
Plans under Sec. 204— 510 mIllion for fiscal t ’Odl1C d safe drinking water as Congressman Ma ia*it has already
ycar 1986-U. legislation Last year with my ccl- submitted a detailed summary of the
Implementation of Special tecuon leagues Mr. M wzc ur and ld legislation for the RZcOID. I would like
Ares Plans under Sec. 204—125 nilIlico (or WA.Wla. The Subcommittee Instead to highlight one section of the
fIscal year 198849.* Health and the EDv1rorime t held sev- bill, section 204, dealIng with the pro-
• Mr. ECKART of Ohio. Mr. Speaker, era] days of hea,r1n and took testt o - tection of sole source ground water me-
lt has become Increasingly apparent ny (morn leaders of the envIronmental charge areas.
that the quality of our Nation’s drink- community, officials of the public and It Is crucial that we move to protect
trig water sources, particularly those private water systems, and members of those a u1lers that serve as the sole
sources supplied by underground affected Industries. My colleagues and supply of drinking water for a commu-
s. u1fers, is one of the most urgent en- I have been impressed repeatedly by nity. If these valuable resources are
vlrorimet.aJ and health probLem.s facing the crying need to pass legislation in lost, the citizens of that area have no
us today. I believe that. .Lhe Issue Ii so this area; we must bring our drinking other supply to turn to. Long island,
critical that, L I we are fortunate, It will water protections Into the 1980’s. Ac- NY, Es one of several communities
only be the environmental Issue of the cordingly we are rei.ntr-oduclrig legisla- (aced with this threat.
decade; 11 we fail. grotmd water con- tion to reauthorize the Safe Drinking SectIon 204 of my bill would provide
taminatloni and contaminated drinking Water Act of 1974. a procedure whereby municipalities
water supplies will be the envlronmen . This bill, a reintroduction of H.P.. may petition the Governor to apply to
tal issue of the century. Consider the 5959, whIch passed the Rouse over- EPA to be designated as a ‘special pro-
growing examples of ground water whelmingly In the wanIng days of the tection area,” Such a designation
contamination. 98tti Congress, is a truly bipartisan would be based on specific, strict crite-
La one EPA study, 29 percent of the effort deserving of broad bipartisan mIs. 11 EPA agrees to so dealgnate an
Larger cities supplied by underground support. Each of the affected groups— area, a local planning entity would
sources of drlnith-mg water were found environmentalist-a, the water treat- prepare a plan designed to maintain
to have at least one volatile organic ment industry, and other Industries— national vegetative and hydrogeologi.
chemical In their water. has argued that the act should be re- cal conditions to the extent possible.
EPA’s own statlstles show that in authorized and amended. Our present This plan would Include such provi-
fiscal year 1933 there were 63,860 yb. law Is ineffective In guaranteeing pot-a. slons as Identification of s urcea of
lations,ot drinking water standards or ble water supplies for ow’ people. We ground water degradation; an assess-
mOnItOr1 g, requirements, and the re- are Introducing a bill which will push rnent f the development the area can
quired notice was given in only 13.600 EPA to do its job, provide help to the su.sta .n and stllJ protect water Quality:
ases. small water system.g that need It so a list of actions to avoid adverse im-
-------
‘ March 21, 1985
pacts on recharge capacity and water
quality: and pollution abatement
mea.sures, if appropriate, Federal
• grants of up to 50 percent of the cost
• of preparing the petition and impie-
- menttng the plan would be available.
The program Is clearly voluntary for
the community, but for those who rely
on one source for their drinking water
supply, the availability of this type of
Federal program is necessary to guar-
antee safe and healthful drinking
water for future generations.
Mr. Speaker, there has been much
focus in the past few years on the tin-
plementation and reauthorization of
our major hazardou, waste laws, the
Resource conservation and Recovery
Act (RCRAI and Superfund. As trnpor-
tant as these laws are, I believe that it
Is unfortunate that the Safe Drinking
Water Act has become the “poor
sister” of environmental laws. It has
received little attention and the reau-
thonzation Is now 244 years overdue.
All of these laws are intricately relat-
ed, and one of the primary goals of
both RCRA and Superfund is to pro-
tect our precious drinking water re-
sources. This cannot be done without
a strong Safe Drinking Water Act,
Other legtsla,tton has been intro-
duced thIs year to protect sole source
aquifers, but I am stongly supporting
• this compreheunve reauthorization
package because I am confident that It
will be the Safe Drinking Water Act
vehicle that moves through the House,
Thls very bill pasased the House last
Septembcr -18 by the Overwhelrnuigly
wide marjl.n of 386 to 27. We must
aga!n move this Important legislation
- quickly through both Rouse, of Con-
gress.
I urge my colleagues to join us in co-
sponsoring this crucial leglsiatjon .,•
• Mr. CARNEY. Mr. Speaker, I am
happy to join my colieag’ues today In
introducing the Safe Drinking Water
Act Amendments of 1985,
I believe this legislation deserves the
- highest priority of every Member of
this body As laid before you today.
this bill is a long-overdue reauthortza-
tion and updating of the Sale Drink-
ing Water Act, It was approved over-
wheliningly In the same form by this
body last fall,
I am extremely pleased that the au-
thor of this measure have again In-
cluded a section to establish a demon-
stration project to develop manage-
ment plans for the protection of sole-
source aquifers, leading to a cornpi-e-
henswe national policy for this much-
ignored resource, For far too long our
Nation’s supplies of clean ground
water have been overlooked In nation-
al legislation and policy—a problem
“out of sight and out of mind”
In my district on Long Island. 2 3
million people are totally dependent
,on an underground supply for their
.drrnklng water, NatIonwide, 90 percent
of our rui-aJ cIti .sens, and millions in
our urban and suburban centers, also
deperul on aquifers, rather than on
surface waters, The Environmental
CONGRESSIONAL RECORD—HOUSE
Protection Agency estimates that
ground water reserves are 50 times
that of our annual flow of surface
water, Clearly, protection of such a
vast and critical resource is In the best
interest,, of all, -‘
The dependency of ground water Is
clearly a national concern and is not
unique to New York. Besides the
Nassau/Suffolk aquifer, the Environ-
mental Protection Agency ha.s desig-
nated aquifers from Florida to Guam
and from Texas to Montana that
would be eligible for special protection
status and the demonstration project
created by this measure.
While not meaning to slight our ef-
forts to control acid rain and clear our
skies of pollutants, we must provide
the resources to ensure that our com-
munities and homes enjoy a clean and
safe drinking water supply. All of the
major sections of this bill share that
common goal.
Mr. Speaker, the ground water con-
cepts contained in this bill are the
seeds of a far-reaching and critically
needed national policy and I am opti-
mistic that the 99th Congress will
bring them to frultion,
COMMi ii IMPROVEMEWr
A}t DMENTS OF 1985
The SPEAKER pro tempore, Under
a previous order of the House, the gen-
tleman from Mississippi (Mr. Loi—rJ is
recognized for 30 minutes,
• Mr LOTT. Mr. Speaker, today I am
introducing the Committee Improve-
ment Amendments of 1985, a package
of seven House rules amendments de-
signed to make our committee system
more manageable, responsive, and rep-
resentative, I have introduced similar
packages In the last two Congresses,
but to date the Rules Committee has
not seen fit to report or even seriously
consider any of these suggested rules
changes,
Mr. Speaker, 20 years ago Congress-
man Boiling wrote a book entitled.
“House Out of Order,” in which he
suggested that the House was not
functioning responsibly and respon-
sively because power was too concen-
trated In the committee chairmen He
went on to suggest that power be re-
distributed to a stronger Speaker and
more active membership through the
Democratic caucus What followed was
the House revolution of the seventies
during which Mr. Boiling’s fondest
prescriptio were more than fulfilled.
JJ anything, the House overdosed on
democracy and decentralization Not
only was a long overdue committee biLl
of rights incorporated into House
rules, but an even more far-reaching
subcommittee bill of rights was guar-
anteed under the Democratic caucus
rules,
The House rapidly evolved from 21
individual poaer centers—the standing
coinznlt ’Lee chairmen—to nearly 150
coUective power centers—the standing
subcommittees What followed Is his-
tory With the proliferation of subcom-
- ,; 1373
inittees came more staff, more overlap-
ping jurisdiction , ,, duplication of
effort, turf tangles, phantom legula-
tive devices such as proxy voting and
one-third quorums, the dissipation of
Members energies and Interest. ,, and
the dissolution of a deliberative, re-
sponsive and representative legislative
process at its most critical stage—the
committee system.
Consider the fact that a decade ago,
in the 93d Congress U973-74), House
committees reported 908 public bills
and joint resolutions, passed 923 such
measures, and enacted 649, Yet, in the
98th Congress (1983-84), our commit-
tees only reported 734 bills and joint
resolutions, a 19-percent decrease from
the 93d Congress, the House passed
978 such measures, and 823 ere en-
acted Into law. Over that same decade,
the number of Rouse standing sub-
committee, increased from 119 to 146.
a 22-percent increase; the number of
subcommittee seats increased from
1,642 to 1,721; the number of Members
with 5 or more subcommittee assign-
ment increased from 154 to 198. and
committee staff shot up from 848 to
1.732, a 104-percent Increase. In sum-
mary, while subcommittee, and staff
were proliferating, committee produc-
tivity was actually declining.
Ironica lly, the “Rouse Out of Order”
of the previous decade had come full
circle and then some: It was now a
House in shambles—so cluttered, cha-
otic and crumbling that it threatened
to come tumbling in on itself from it,,
sheer weight and internal stresses. As
a response to the excesses of the
House revolution of the seventies, I
have prop ed a restoration for the
eighties which I have previously re-
ferred to as & “Blueprint for a House
that Work,,.” I have no illusions that
these seven rules changes alone will
work miracles In restoring our House
to a proud and productive Institution:
that will ultimately depend on the will
and dedication of our membership
working together to reverse past
trends and put our House back In
order, But these simple changes can
help lay a sound foundation for that
House restoration effort.
YET
The Committee Improvement
Amendment, of 1985 go to the heart of
the problem I have described by hrnit-
ing all committee,, except Appropria-
tions, to no more than 6 subcommit-
tees and all Members to no more than
four subcommittee assignments, This
would result in the elimination of 15
subcommittees In the 99th Congress,
from the present 147 down to 132. a
10.2-percent decrease. In addition.
based on data from the last Congress,
nearly 200 Members would have to
give up one or more subcommittee as-
sigytments,
With the reduction in subcommit-
tees and Member a .sMgnrnenta. the
House should also be able to reduce
the number of committee staff. Under
my proposal, the House would be
-------
D W A ocU p C i
TITLE I—PUBLIC WATER SYSTEMS -
SEC 101. NATIONAL PRIMARY DRINKING WATER REGULATIONS.
(a) SIMPLIFICATION OP STATUTORY SYs’rEM.—Sectjon 14 12(a) of the
Safe Drinking Water Act (title XIV of the Public Health Service Act; —
42 U S.C. 300f and following) is amended to read as-follows: . - . LI . -‘- ‘. 8
“(aX 1) Effective on the enactment of the Safe Drinking Water Act
Amendments of 1986, each national interim or revised primary
drinking water regulation promulgated under this section before
such nactmerit shall be deemed to be a national primary drinking
water regulation under subsection (bi No such regulation shall be
required to comply with the standards set forth in subsection b 4)
unless such regulanon is amended to establish a different maximum Li —‘i
contaminant level after the enactment of such amendments.
c, ,si f. 1
“(2) After the enactment of the Safe Drinking Water Act Amend-f
- enta of 1986 each recommended maximum contaminant level
published before the enactment of such amendments shall be
treated as a maximum contaminant level goal.
“(3) Whenever a national primary drinking water re u1ation is
proposed under paragraph (1), (2), or (3) of subsection (b) for any
contaminant, the maximum contaminant level goal for such
contaminant shall be proposed simultaneously. Whenever a national
primary drinking water regulation is promulgated under paragraph
(1), (2), or (3) of subsection (b) for any contaminant, the maximum
contaminant level goal for such contaminant shall be published
Simultaneously.
“(4) Paragraph (3) shall not apply to any recommended maximum
contaminant level published before the enactment of the Safe
Drinking Water Act Amendments of 1986.”. c , N (,
(b) STANDARD SrrTTNG Scl .iEifljlis AND Dzu? .—S j.,
1412(b) of the Safe Drinking Water Act is amended by striking ct . ’
paragraphs (1), (2), and (3), and inserting in lieu thereof the
followingS
“(1) In the case of those contaminants listed in the Advance Notice
of Proposed Rulemaking published in volume 47, Federal Register,
page 9352, and in volume 48, Federal Register, page 45502, the
Administrator shall publish maxJmurn contaminant level goals and
promulgate national primary drinking water regulations—
“(A) not later than 12 months after the enactment of the Safe
Drinking Water Act Amendments of 1986 for not less than 9 of
those listed contaminants;
“(B) not later than 24 months after such enactment for not
less than 40 of those listed Contaminants; and
“(C) not later than 36 months after such enactment for the:
remainder of such listed contaminants.
“(2XA) If the Administrator identifies a drinking water contami-
nant the regulation of which, in the judgment of the Administrator,
is more likely to be protective of public health (taking into account
the schedule for regulation under paragraph (1)) than a contaminant
referred to in paragraph (1), the Administrator may publish a
maximum contaminant level goal and promulgate a national pri-
mary drinking water regulation for such identified contaminant in
lieu of regulating the cont .aniinarit referred to in such paragraph
There may be no more than 7 contaminants in paragraph (1) for
which substitutions may be made. Regulation of a contaminant
identified under this fisragraph shall be in accordance with the
schedule applicable to the contaminant for which the substitution is
made.
“(B) If the Administrator identifies one or more contaminants for
substitution under this paragraph, the Administrator shall publish
in the Federal Register not later than one year after the enactment
of the Safe Drinking Water Act Amendments of 1986 a list of
Contaminants proposed for s bstttution, the contaminants referred
to in paragraph U) for which substitutions are to be made, and the
basis for the judgment that regulation of such proposed substitute
contaminants is more likely to be protective of public health itaking
intd account the schedule for regulation under such parag-raph
Following a period of 64) days for public comment the Administrator
shall publish in the Federal Register a final list of contaminants to
be substituted and contaminants referred to in paragraph I br
-------
S DW A - \ o
r ‘- r- z
which substitutions are to be made, together with responses to
significant comments.
“(C) Any Cont.aminRnt referred to in’paragraph (1) for which a
substitution is made, pursuant to subparagraph (A) of this para-
graph, shall be included on the priority hat to be published by the
Admin trator not later than January 1, 1988, pursuant to para-
graph (3XA).
“CD) The Administrator’s decision to re u1ate a contaminant
identified pursuant to this paragraph in lieu of a contaminant
referred to in paragraph (1) shall not be subject to judicial review.
“(3XA) The Administrator shall publish m Iimum contamingn
level goals and promulgate national primary drinking water regula-
tions for each contaminant (other than a cOntaminnnt referred to in
paragraph (1) or (2) for which a national primary drinking water
regulation was promulgated) which, in the judgment of the Adniirus.
trator, may have any. adverse effect on the health of persons and
which is known or anticipated to occur in public water systems. Not
later than January 1, 1988, and at 3 year intervals thereafter, the
Administrator shall publish a list of contaminnnts which are known
or anticipated to occur in public water 8ystenis and which may
requ ire regulation under this Act.
‘(B) For the purpose of establishing the list under subparagraph
(A), the Administrator shall form an advisory working group includ-
ing members from the National Toxicology Program and the
Environrnentaj Protection Agency’s Offices of Drinking Water,
Pesticides, Toxic Substances, Ground Water, Solid Waste and Emer-
gency Response and any others the Adrnini trator deems appro-
priate. The Administrator’s consideration of priorities shall include,
but not be limited to, substances referred to in section 101(14) of the
Comprehe iv Envirorimentaj Response, Compensation, and Liabil-
ity Act of 1980, and substances registered as pesticides under the
Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act.
“(C) Not later than 24 months after the listing of contaminants
under subparagraph (A), the Administrator shall publish proposed
maximum contaminant level goals and national primary drinking
water regulations for not less than 25 contaminants from the list
established under subparagraph (A).
“(D) Not later than 36 months after the listing of contaminants
under subparagraph (A), the Administrator shall publish a maxi-
mum contaminant goal and promulgate a national primary drink-
ing water regulation for those contaminants for which proposed’
maximum contaminant level goals and proposed national primary
drinking water regulations were published under subparagraph (C).
“(4) Each maximum contaminant level goal established under this
subsection shall be set at the level at which no known or anticipated
adverse effects on the health of persons occur and which allow5 an
adequate margin of safety Each national primary drinking water
regulation for a contaminant for which a maximum contaminant
level goal is established under this subsection shall specify a maxi-
mum level for such contaminant which is as close to the maximum
contaminant level goal as is feasible
‘ For the purposes of this subsection, the term feasible’ means
feasible with the use of the best technology, treatment techniques
and other means hich the Administrator finds, after examination
for efficac under field conditions and not solely under laboratory
conditions, are a ai!able taking cost into considerationi For the
purpose of paragraph ‘4i, granular acti ated carbon is feasible for
-------
S JA - O3OO .o
control of synthetic organic chemicals, and any technology,
treatment technique, or other means fou.nd to be the best available
for the control of synthetic organic chemicals must be at least as
effective in controlling synthetic organic chemicals as granular
activated carbon.
“(6) Each national primary drinking water regulation which
establishes a m y im contaminant level shall list the technology,
treatment techniques, and other means which the Administrator
finds to be feasible for purposes of meeting such mn’ivnum contanii-
nant level, but a regulation under this paragraph shall not require
that any specified technology, treatment technique, or other means
be used for purposes of meeting such mwrirnum Contarninfint level.
“(7XA) The Administrator is authorized to promulgate a national
primary drinking water regulation that requires the use of a treat-
ment technique in lieu of establishing a mR rirnum cOntarninnnt
level, if the Adniiniatrator makes a finding that it is not economi-
cally or technologically feasible to ascertain the level of the contami-
nant In such case, the Adminiqtrator shall identify those treatment
techniques which, in the Admtniatrator’s judgment, would prevent
known or anticipated adverse effects on the health of persons to the
extent feasible. Such regulations shall specify each treatment tech-
nique known to the Adnimiatrator which meets the requiremente of
this paragraph, but the Administrator may grant a variance from
any specified treatment technique in accordance with Section
l415(aX3).
“(B) Any schedule referred to in this subsection for the promulga-
tion of a national primary drinking water regulation for any
contaminant shall apply in the same manner if the regulation
requires a treatment technique in lieu of establishing a ma 1mum
Contaminant level.
“(CXI) Not later than 18 months after the enactment of the Safe
Drinking Water Act Amendments of 1986, the Admknintrator shall
propose and promulgate national primary drinking water regula-
tions specifying criteria under which filtration (including coagula-
tion and sedimentation, as appropriate) is required as a treatment
technique for public water systems supplied by surface water
sources. In promulgating such rules, the Administrator shall con-
sider the quality of source waters, protection afforded by watershed
management, treatment practices (such as disinfection and length of
water storage) and other factors relevant to protection of health.
“(ii) In lieu of the provisions of section 1415 the Administrator
shall specify procedures by which the State determines which public
water systems within its jurisdiction shall adopt filtration under the
criteria of clause (I). The State may require the public water system
to provide studies or other information to assist in this deterniina-
tion. The procedures shall provide notice and opportunity for public
hearing on this determination If the State determines that filtra-
tion is required, the State shall prescribe a schedule for compliance
by the public water system with the filtratioyi requirement A
schedule shall requirP ’comphance within 18 months of a deterrnina-
tion made under clause liii)
mu Within 18 months from the time that the Administrator
establishes the criteria and procedures under this subparagraph, a
State ith primary enforcement resDorisibiluty shall adopt any nec-
essary regulations to implement this subparagraph Within 12
months of adoption of such regulations the State shall make deter-
-------
So v A - -- - I 0
I-
u,._
ona regarding filtration for all tl e public water systems
‘ ‘1thin its jurisdiction supplied by surface waters.
“(iv) If a State does not have primary enforcement responsibility
for public water systems, the Administrator hAJ1 have the same
authority to make the detern nntion in clause (ii) in such State as
the State would have under that clause. Any filtration regurement
or schedule under this subparagraph shall be treated as iiit were a
re 9 uirement of a national primary drinking water regulation.
‘(8) Not later than 36 months after the enactment of the Safe
Drinking Water Act Amendments of 1986, the Administrator h 1 !
propose and promulgate national primary drinking water regula-
tions requiring disinfection as a treatment technique for all public(
water systems. The Administrator KAI1 simultaneously promulgat .e (
a rule specifying criteria that will be used by the Administrator (or
delegated State authorities) to grant variances from this require-
ment according to the provisions of sections 1415(aX1XB) and,
1415(aX3). In implementing section 1442(g) the Administrator or the
delegated State authority shall, where appropnate, give specialj
consideration to providing technical assistance to small public water!
systems in complying with the regulations promulgated under this
paragraph.”.
(c) CONFORMING CHANGas.—(1) Paragraphs (4), (5), and (6) of sec-
tion 1412(b) of the Safe Drinking Water Act are redesignated asi
paragraphs (9), (10), and (11), respectively. Paragraphs (9) and (10) of
such section 1412(b), as redesignated by this paragraph, are each
amended by striking “Revised national” in each place where it
appears and substituting “National”.
(2) Paragraph (1) of section 1413(a) of such Act is amended by
striking out subparagraphs (A) and (B) and substituting “are no less
stringent than the national primary drinking water regulations in
effect under sections 1412(a) and 1412(b);”.
(3) Section 1444(d) of such Act is amended by striking out “(includ-
ing interim regulations)”.
(4) Section 1416(e) of the Safe Drinking Water Act is amended by
striking out “1412(bX3)” and substituting “1412(b)”.
(d) REvrEw or S’r m4taJe.—Paragraph (9) of section 1412(b) of the
Safe Drinking Water Act, as redesignated by subsection (c) of this
section. is amended by adding at the end thereof the following:
“Such review 8haLl include an analysis of innovations or changes in
technology, treatment techniques or other activities that have oc-
curred over the previous 3-year period arid that may provide for
greater protection of the health of persons. The findings of such
review shall be published in the Federal Register. If, after oppor-
tun.ity for public comment, the Adxrunjstrator concludes that the I
technology, treatment techniques, or other means resulting from:
such innovations or changes are not feasible within the meaning of
paragraph (5), an explanation of 8uch conclusion shall be published
in the Federal Register.”.
(e) SCTXNCE ADVISORY BOARD—Section 1412(e) of the Safe Drink- C tt
ing Water Act is amended to read as follows . ‘ ,
“(e) The Administrator shall request comments from the Science
Ath-i oz-y Board (established under the Environmental Research,
Development, and Demonstration Act of 197S) prior to proposal of a
rraximum contaminant level goal and national primary drinking 1
water regulation The Board shall respond, as it deems appropriate.
within the time period applicable for promulgation of the national
primary drinking water standard concerned This subsection shall.
-------
( ) ti
or—
COc C -I N
CORRECTING TECHNICAL ‘ C I t
‘ERRORS IN ENROWVIENT OF
S 124. SAFE DRINKING \VATER
AMENDMENTS OF 1985
Mr WAXMAN Mr Speaker. I ask
unanimous consent for the Immediate
consideration of the concurrent reso• l ‘ 5
lution (H Con Res 346) to correct
technical errors in the enrollment of
the bill S 124
The Clerk read the title of the con•
current resolution.
The SPEAKER pro tempore Mr
MRAZEX) Is there objection to the re•
quest of the gentleman from Califor
ma’ -
Mr. LENT. Reserving the right to
object. Mr. Speaker, and I lll not
object. I Just want to confirm from the
gentleman from California that the
concurrent resolution merely corrects
three technical errors En the Senate
bill. S 124. the Safe Drinking Water
Act Amendments of 1986. which re-
cently passed this body
I yield to the gentleman from Cali
forrua.
Mr WAXMAN Mr Speaker, the
gentleman is correct
Mr LENT And these errors that are
being corrected ha e to do v ith sec-
tion referencrs entirely. am I correct
Mr WAXMAN That s correct
Mr LENT Mr Speaker. I withdraw
m reser ation of objection
The SPEAKER pro tempore Is
there objection to the request of the
gentleman from California
There aas no objection
The Clerk read the concurrent reso-
lution,asfctlo s.
..—ThaC r . the enrollment ot the bill (S 124). ‘• “ N
the Clerk of he 3erate ha1l make t1 e (01 ________
lo’ ing correciors —,
(1) n setion 1O1(bL ir the amendment
adding a ne’s CtlOn 1412(bn8L strike
S 1451 and insert - 14i5 — .
(2 I’i s ction 1O1(c1t42 strike 1420e
and in ert 1416er—<
(3) In section 301h strike section 6
and Insert sect oniO6
The SPEAKER pro tempore The
question is on the concurrent resolu-
tion
The concurre-it resolution was
agreed to
A motion to reconsider v as laid on
the table
-------
Serncji_ — VC .44f t .d i t ‘ I
SETTING STARDAaaS
The amendments reported by the
conference require EPA to set stand-
ards for 83 specific contaminants
withtn a 3-year period. By early June
1989. maximum contamina. levels for
23 chemical, biological, and radiologi-
cal agents specifically named in the
conference report must be proniulgat.
ed by EPA.
This list is EPA’S own list. EPA is
moving In this direction. It is some-
times said_mistakenly_that the list
contains 85 contaminants. The origi-
nal lists which when combined had 85
elements also Contained disinfection
and filtration among those 85 require-
rnents. Those two items are Included
at another point In this bill. So the
number is 83.
It is unusual for the Senate to In-
clude a specific list of pollutants with
Specific deadlines for standards in the
language of a bill. Choosing contan-ii.
nants and scheduling the regulatory
process is not normally a legislative
function. But the history of the drink-
lug water progmin more than ,jVstifles
the use of lists arid deadlines by the
Congress to assure that standards are
actually established and at the earliest
possible date.
I would make spec Sic-comment on
the subject of deadlines to illustrate
the concems that give rise to this sec-
tion of the bill. Even after EPA an-
flounced its commitment to set stand-
ards for all of these contaminants
other parts of the executive branch
raised barriers to the swift and certain
completion of the task. For instance.
last September the Senate found it
necessary to adopt an amendment to
the Supei-fund reauthorization which
required the Office of Management
and Budget to release recommended
maximum contaminant levels for 40
contamJnants that had been submitted
.to 0MB for review according to the
provisions of Executive Order 12291.
The EPA proposals has been sitting on
a desk at OM_B for 6 months without
any response or concurrence from the
regulatory review office.
To be certain that such tactics will
not ultimately defeat our Intent in
adopting these amendments, the bill
contains deadlines. These deadlines
make the duty of the Administrator to
establish standards a nondiscrettonary
duty and allow any citizen to bring
suit to compel action, should the Ad-
ministrator fail to meet the timetable
established in the bill. It should be
clear that it was not only the failure
of EPA that prompted us to adopt
these provisions.
The list and the deadlines were both’
included in the legislation sent to thei
conference by the Senate. These are•
our proposals. However, the current
Adinimstrator of the Envlroumental
Protection Agency has many times ex-
pressed concern about this section be-
cause of the lack of any discretion in
carrying out the duties as provided in
the Senate bill, It was also argued in
the conference that the House bill
which took a very different approach
to standard-setting provided the Ad-
ministrator with Considerable discre-
tion as to which contaminants would
be regulated.
The conference report, In response
to the Administrator’s request, adds
an element of discretion to the stand-
ard-setting process. The Administrator
is authorized to substitute up to seven,
contaminants which are not on the list I
for seven contaminants which are. He I
still must set standards for 83 contain!. I
nants in 3 years. Seventy-six of those
contaminants must be from the list
published in the conference report,
But seven may be items which are not
currently on the list.
The Admwut ator has expressed to
me personally his view that more than
seven substitutions may be Justified.
And as we move closer to the end of
this 3-year regulatory process, Con-
gress may be persuaded that more
than seven substitutions are Justified,
LI so. Congress may amend the law to
.á -’t -- z M c’)
(\ /
‘j ,J :) ) -.
allow other substitutions and speaking
for myself. I will entertain any such
propo al from the Administrator at
the appropriate time and with a sym-
pathetic ear.
On the subject of substitutions,
there is a parameter that I personally
believe is of a high priority and which
Is not on the list of 83 contaminants.
but ought to be considered by the ad-
ministrator at the earliest possible
date. I believe that we need a maxi-
mum contaminant level for the total
concentration of organic chemicals in
drinking water supplies. A total organ-
ics standard would be an unusual
standard under the Drinking Water
Program—most of the numbers are for
specific constituents. But it would not
be unique. The standard for trihalo-
methanes is a number set for the com-
bined concentration of four com-
pounds Including chlorofori and bro-
moforin. A total organics standard
would simply expand on the concept
of the THM standard and set an upper
bound on the combined concentration
of all organic chemicals,
There are at least two good reasons
for establishing a total organics stand-
ard. First, it Is obvious to anyone who
has studied the Safe Drinking Water
Act that the chemical revolution in
the marketplace moves faster than the
standard.settirig process at EPA. It
takes many months_years_under the
best of circumstances to set a standard
for a contaminant after it has been de-
tected in drinking water supplies. By
the time an enforceable standard has
been established drinking water Sup-
plies may have become significantly
contaminated in many parts of the
country. A total organics number
could stand-in for a specific staridarcL
during this period of regulatory devel-
opment and provide at least an upper
bound on the amount of contamina-
tion allowed,
Second, it Is suspected, although
very costly to prove, that some organ-
ics which occur in combination may
have additive or synergistic effects on
human health A total organi stand-
ard would assure that Americans were
not exposed to huge doses of harmful
chemicals In mixtures where the
amount of each element was defined
as safe by itself but here the combi-
nation presents a severe risk. In this
regard. I think of the recent MCLs for
volatile organics, The evidence pre-
sented by EPA suggests that many of
these contaminants are found togeth-
er In water supplies. Although we
might be willing to consume water
with five parts per billion TCE or five
parts per billion benzene. ater that
contained 10 or 15 different chemicals
of that type with total concentrations
.ranging up to 100 parts per billion
might reasonably be subject to a dif-
ferent qualitati e judgment on health.
even if It meets the quantitative stand-
ard for each of the contaminants
taken indi!,-idualiy. So I would be more i
than sympathetic to a proposal from
EPA to substitute a total orgariics
(32- Cor i&. S. i’ o3o(( ). . e .
tur wy U
P.
-------
!,y- ,L - . t) _ i c - 1 & -A-L C L m-t - r. Lt
standard for one of the items. on the
legislated list.
Mr President. before turning to the
second major element of these amend-
ments let. me mention one final sub-
ject with respect to the stanclard .set-
ting process. In amending the existing
Safe Drinking Water Act to provide
this expedited standard-setting sched-
ule. we have removed several provi-
sions En the law which were the foun-
dation of the process designed in 1974.
Those changes as I have tried to make
clear are most appropriate, because
the process as originally designed did
not work Nevertheless, there were
some concepts included in that origi-
nal framework which may still prove
useful, if operated on a somewhat less
formal basis. In this regard. I am par-
ticolarly mindful of the role that was
established for the National Academy
of Sciences in the original act.
The National Academy of Sciences
never took well to its assignment to
quickly develop explicit recomrnenda.
tions for standards on specific con-
taminants. But the continuing studies
and reports by NAS on drinking water
and public health have provided, and
we hope will continue to provide, guid-
ance to the Agency as it conducts the
risk assessments that lead to RMCL’s
and health goals.
Every risk assessment Includes
dozens of decisions to extrapolate
from the data which is available and
wh:ch is relevant to a determination of
aspecific numerical standard that will
adequately protect public health.
Under current law- several consider-
ations including the impact on espe-
cially susceptible persons, exposure to
the contaminants through other
media, synergistic effects and chronic
effects which fall short of adverse
health but which may increase the
risk of illness were to be considered by
NAS in making recommendations on
standards to EPA. We do not expect
this advisory relationship to be termi-
nated by the result of these amend.
ments and find that the consideration
once assigned explicitly to NAS should
continue to be matters that are
weighed by EPA in establishing drink-
ing ‘ ater standards and health goals
TREATMENT TEC1NOLOGY
Mr President. the second major
amendment to the Safet Drinking
Water Act made by this bill estab-
lishes a new technology benchmark in
the standard-setting process, There
are several regulatory steps in setting
a national drinking water standard.
First, the Agency establishes a health-
based goal which under current law is
called the recommended maximum
cor tarninant level or RMCL, This
n — iers set a level so that a person
consuming water containing that
amount of the contaminant would ex-i
perierice no adverse health effects
e en if the contaminant is consumed
over a whole lifetime. By law the
RMCL also encompasses an adequate
margin of safety to pi-otect those
among us who are especially sensitive
to a particular contaminant.
Once the RMCL or health goal &es-
tablished, the administrator begins
work on the enforceable standard, the
maximum contaminant level. This is
the standard which applies to the
water delivered to consumers by public
water systems. it is a standard at the
tap The MCL is set as close to the
goal as possible, but recognizes that
some water supplies have been con-
taminated and that our capacity to
remove those contaminants and reach
the goal is limited by the constraints
of a ailable treatment technology.
The amendments we will adopt
today instruct the administrator to set
the MCL at a level which is as close to
the goal as possible using the best
a ailable treatment technology which
is affordable for a large public water
supply system Under current law the
aumir.istrator is to set tne MCL con-
sidering the use of treatment technol-
ogy which is “generally available.”
The administrator has not been able
in the 12 years that the drinking water
program has been in place to suitably
define the concept ‘ generally avail-
able”
So these amendments delete the ref-
erence to “generally a ailaole” tech-
nology and shift to considerations
more familiar in environmental law.
We begin here with an assumption
that a public water system has a rela-
tively uncontaminated water supply
which nevertheless exceeds the
RMCL—the health-based goal—for the
contaminant in question, The task is
to set an enforceable standard as close
to the health-based goal as pcssible. It
must be achievable and, thus, must
consider the technologies which are
effective in remo ng that contarm-
riant from water EPA selects and ap-
plies that technology which is most ef-
fecti e and which can be afforded by
the largest public water systems con-
sidering the ab 1 lity of the systems to
spread the cost of the treatment tech-
nolcgy over a large number of consum-
ers The standard, the maximum con-
taminant Ie el or MCL. is established
by factoring together these three
items The health goal, the effective-
nc-s of treatment technologies in re-
n’ i;.ing contaminants, and the le el of
treatment that is affordable for the
largest public water supply systems.
Mr President, as I expiamn these
amenaments it is also helpful to indi-
cate what they are not This is not an
instruction for the administrator to
conduct a cost-benefit analysis to de-
termine the MCL. The law emphati-
cally does not pro ide that the admin-
istrator will set the MCL at a level
where benefits outweigh costs. nor
does it aequire EPA to balance costs
and benefits in any other way Cost
only enters into the judgment of the
administrator in defining which treat-
ment technologies are to be considered
best a amlable technologies And avail-
ability in this instance is considered
only in the conte’ct of the largest
r “ n T :/ ,
w’ater supply systems, not all systems
or average systems. Any effort to
weigh costs and benefits under the
Safe Drinking Water Act and to set
standards only where EPA can quanti-
fy benefits which outweigh costs
would not be lawful. The act requires
EPA to set a standard for every con-
taminant that may have any adverse
effect on health and to set the en-
forceable MCL as close to the health
goal as can be achieved by feasible
technology.
There are two other items related to
the technology factor in setting stand-
ards which need to be mentioned at
this point The first relates to granu-
lar act:viated carbon or GAC, one of
the treatment technologies that is
a ai1able to remove syntr.etic organic
chemicals from drinking water sup-
plies. In a few moments, I will be
joined by other Members of the
Senate for a brief colloquy on this sub-
ject, but let me say here that the con-
ference report is cons stent with the
provision passed by the Senate in
regard to GAC.
The Senate bill and the conference
report establish that GAC is to be con-
sidered feasible—that is effective and
affordable for large systems—to use in
removing synthetic organic chemicals.
In setting standards for any synthetic
organic chemical, the administrator is
to select a level which is not less than
the level that could be achieved using
a feasible GAC system.
At the time the Senate passed this
legislation, some were proposing an
amendment that would have deleted
GAC as the benchmark for trihalo-
methanes or THM’s The Senate did
not adopt such as an amendment and
GAC is the benchmark for THMs. But
in using this technology factor the ad-
ministrator is to recognize that there
is an almost infinite variation in the
design of GAC systems. it is possible
to design such a system, where cost is
not a factor, with almost unlimited ca-
pacity. The particular GAC configura-
tion that is used in establishing the
MCL for THM—ii, in fact, GAC is de-
termined to be the best available tech-
nology for this purpose—is to be a con-
figuration that would be affordable to
large p..mblic water systems in the
United States
The second issue that needs to be
mentioned in regard to the use of
technology and cost factors in settrng
MCL’S was raised by EPA when it pub-
lished proposed maximum contami-
nant levels for eight volatile organic
chemicals in November of last year. In
making that proposal EPA did not
follow the steps which I have just de-
scribed They did establish RMCL’s
for each of the contaminants. But
r ,pther than select an eflective and af-
fordable treatment technology to es—
tablish the MCL as close to the RMCL
as possible, the Agency inserted an en-
tirely new’ concept into the standard-
setting process
Before considering the effectivenesa
and affordability of treatment tech-
-------
nologies, EPA examined and included
as a consideration the availabil ity and
effectiveness of technologies for de-
tecting these eight volatile orgariics in
water supplies. EPA found that there
is a limitation on the capacity of
present technology to detect thes
contaminants. Such a limitation is not
unexpected There is always a limit on
detection. What was unexpected is
that EPA chose one version of the
limit of detection as the drinking
water standard, the MCL, for five of
the contaminants. Such a step is con-
templated no where in the Safe Drink-
ing Water Act or In these amend-
ments.
This new factor—a level EPA calls
the practical quantitation limit or
PQL.—was not debated or conszdered
by the conferees on these amend-
ments. It is Quite outside the scope of
the conference, since the Senate
passed its bill in May of 1985 and the
House a month later. EPA did not pro-
pose use of the PQL until November
of 1985 So we were unable to consider
this new issue in the conference. The
fact that we have chosen not to com-
ment on practical quantitation limits
should not be in any way or In any
forum considered and endorsement of
the use of this factor in the standard-
setting process, it is rather the result
of the rules under which the legisla-
tive process is conducted.
- However, it does seem to this Sena-
tor that the use of practical quantita-
tion limits cannot be constciered as
conforming to the amendments tnat
e are adopting here today Nowhere’
does this conference report or the un-
derlying lay, allow EPA to set a stand-,
ard hich is less stringent than can be
achieved by the best available treat-
n’sent technology that is feasible.
PQL’s bear no relationship to the lea-
sioility of treatment technologies. In
fact, the preamole to the MCL’s con-
taincd data and information showing
that let els much lower than the pro-
posed MCL’s could and are being
achieved in the United States by treat-
ment systems using GAC, the bench-
mark for SOC ’s established by this
act.
These amendments require the con-
sideratton of the best available treat-I
ment technology vdhich is a! fordable
to large systems as a benchrnai-k in
setting MCL’s. EPA’s practical quanti-
tation limits are not dertved front
treatment techniques and are not even
based on the best available analytical
technology, The PQL’s are oased on
the capacity of the average lab doing a
routine analysis to detect a particular
contaminant at a reliable level.
In the preamble to these proposed
regula 5 EPA makes the argument
that they cani-iot enforce a standard at
a le el hich is below the limit of de-
tection The argument is interesting,
but largely irrelevant to the issues at
stake here For EPA has not proposed
a standard tthich is below the limit of
detection Good labs using good tech-
niques are by the data that EPA itself
presents capable of detecting levels at
only one-tenth of the level proposed
by EPA as the MCL’s for four of these
fite contaminants. All EPA need do is
require upgrading of the analytical
techniques used in testing water sup-
plies for compliance puiposes
Of all the factors that the adrninis-
trator might consider in establishing
drinking water standards, the one that
is least useful—that is most likely to
be out-of-date tomorrow—is the capac-
ity of the average laboratory to detect
a particular contaminant, We are
going through a literal revolution in
the analytic techniques that are used
to detect and measure pollutants and
contaminants in the entironrnenx. The
development of new techniques and
the spread of those techniques to aver-
age labs is nothing short of phenome-
nal
When EPA takes the least stable of
all numbers—a concept not mentioned
in the law or the amendments—and i
uses it to set MCL’s for items like I
trich loroethylene, bentene and vinyl
chloride, they are taking a very large
risk that the decision still be over-
turned by a court and that the whole
effort to set drinking water standards
still once again be hopelessly and un-
necessarily delayed, The mandate of
the law is to set the standard as close
to the RMCL as is feasible applying
treatment techniques to relatively
clean stater. To the extent that has
not been clear under current law, it is
made emphatically certain by these
amendments. That mandate has not
been satisfied, in this Senator s judg-
ment, by the MCL’s that stere estab-
lished using practical quantitation
limits for the fit e volatile organics in
the Not ember 1985 proposal
Di SI NF ECT ION AND Fit-rRATI0N
Mr President, the third major ele-
ment of these amendments is found in
the pros isions for disinfection and fil-
tration of drinking stater supplies. The
administrator is to promulgate re-
quirements for filtration by all sys-
tems using surface ater sources and
for disinfection by all systems. These
requiremen will add to public health
protection by establishing minimum
let els of treatment and protection
eten sshere no specific MCL has heen
siulated. There are a sast array of
tiral and biological contaminants that
can be transported in drinking water
sd’pplies. These and other elements
ssliich threaten human health can fre-
quently be removed by these widely
used treatment techniques
The provisions of the conference
report stith respect to filtration and
disinfection track the Senate bill in
tsso very important respects First, the
administrator is to consider cshether
there ar protection measures that
systems relying on surface staters can
take v.hich are as protective of public i
health as is filtration. Where such
acute measures to protect uatersheds
are in place, the system may not be re-
quired to install filtration. Second,
000065
EPA is to provide technical assistanc
to small systems so that they might ef
fectisely implement disinfection tech
niqties
One further comment also needs t
be niade on this subject, Mr Presi
dent, On reading the House debate o
the conference report 01 last Tuesday
one might get the impression that no
system which is in compliance with all
the MCL’s will be required to employ
disinfection or filtration Such an In-
terpretation would not be in conform-
ance with the legislative language re-
ported by the conference. Compliance
with existing drinking water standards
Is not an indication that there is no
need for tiltration or disinfection. Fil-
tration will be required at surface
y,ater systems unless a system meets
equivalent health protection cnteria
established by EPA. Therefore, sys-
tems in compliance with the MCL’s
are not automatically exempt from
the filtration reouirempnrs
Lc nJ (L’ - Y€ L -%flJ RVt
Se t - O \ wLr
2’
Z r
-------
LJL %) -L
‘ ‘ ( QJ ccA- -
(_ -1 -y-y c t-)
STARDARD-5x’rrlNG
In my previous letter. I stated that the
Agency needs flexibility for selecting priori
ty contaminants for regulation Consequent.
ly. I sin pleased to note that the Conferees
are considering dropping the rational
ba.sis language in the House Bill
I continue to be concerned howeter.
about the proposed requirement that the
Agency regulate all of the chemicals listed
in our two Advanced Notices of Proposed i
Rule Making (ANPRMs) without regard to
shat the data on those chemicals might
shos The ANPRMS sere never intended to
be a final list but rather sere preliminary
sorking lists on shich public comment and
additional data were requested Requiring
the Administrator to regulate all chemicals
listed would preempt decisions based on
good scientific evidence and could lead to
unsound and unsarranted regu!ations The
Agenc must have flexibility to make scien-
tific judgments regarding the appropriate.
ness of establishing MCLs
The need for flexibility is demonstrated
b3 regulatory proposals se have made since
my letter to you in September In Notem-
ber tie proposed MCLs for eight tolatile or
ganic chemicals (and plan to propose an
MCL for a ninth) and tie hate proposed rec-
ommended maximum contaminant levels
(RMCL’s) for 46 of that group We also proS
posed RMCLS for three nes constituents
and plan to set standards for sesen radionu-
clides
Based on the atailable scientific evidence
regarding the health effects caused by the
remaining constituents and their frequency
of occurrence in drinking water supplies we
decided not to propose RMCLS for 22 con-
stituents at that time For three of these 22
Constltuent.s, we had sufficient data to de.
termine that they do not merit MCLs For
the remaining nineteen, we are conducting
additional toxicological studIes, monitoring
programs, and surseys This sork sill
enable us to re-evaluate these remaining
substances as sell as to identify additional
contaminants shich may require future reg-
ulation we plan to address these constitu-
ents in Phase V of our regulatory detelop
merit process After the etaluation of the
data for the Phase V contaminants tie ma
determine that some may not a arrant regu
lation
Clearly, in order to use our limited re-
sources most effectisely to protect public
health tie need to hate this tt,pe of fle’(ibil
it to select priorit contaminants for regti
lation We hate discussed u,ith sour start
the Concept of substiiuting contaminants on
a One (or one basis for those listed in
ANPRM 5 Thece SUbStitutjori 5 aould allots
the .Agenc) to locus its resources on rherni
Cats sihich merit consideration I urge tou
to allots EPA to substitute up to at least 15
Contaminants for those listed in the
A N PR Ms
As sou continue Conference Commiiiee
del lbt’rations I sould be pleased to discuss
our c’snrerns and sqggestions stith u and
Othtr raem ers of the Conference Commi
t Ci ’
The Office of ManaRement and Budget
ads sea us that it has no objection to the
present 5tion of these ieas from the stand
point of Administration policy
Sincere i 5 -
Let M THOMAS
-------
€r rt a —
Cc . No. - ‘
- ‘
flr’ r ,
TITLE 1—PUBLIC WA 7’ER SYSTEMS
SEC 101. NATIONAL PRIMARY DRINKING WA TER REGULA TION&
(a) SIMPUFICATION op STATUTORY SYsTEM—Sectwn 1412(a) of the
Safe Drinking Water Act (title XIV of the Public Health Service
Act; 42 USC SOOf and following) is amended to read as follows:
“ (aX!) Effective on the enactment of the Safe Drinking Water Act
Amendments of 1986, each national interim or revised primary
drinking Water regulation promulgated under this section before
such enactment shall be deemed to be a natioruil primary drinking
water regulation under 8ubsection (b). No such regulation shall be
required to comply with the standards Bet forth in subsection (bX4)
unless such regulation is amended to establish a different maxi-
mum contaminant level after the enactment of such amendments.
“(2) After the enactment of the Safe Drinking Water Act Amend-
ments of 1986 each recommended maximum contaminant level pub-
lished before the enactment of such amendments shall be treated as
a maximum contaminant level goaL
“(3) Whenever a national primary drinking water regulation is
proposed under paragraph (V. (2), or (3) of subsection (b) for any con-
taminant, the maximum contaminant level goal for such contami-
nant shall be proposed simultaneously. Whenever a national pri-
mary drinking water regulation is promulgated under paragraph
(1), (2), or (8) of subsection (2’) for any contaminant, the maximum
contaminant level goal for such contaminant shall be published si-
multaneously.
“(4) Paragraph (3) shall not apply to any recommended maximum
contaminant level published before the enactment of the Safe Th-znk-
ing WaterAct Amendments of 1986.’
(2’) STANJ)ARJ) SETrING SCHEDULES AND DEADLINES.—SeCt ion
1412(b) of the Safe Drinking Water Act is amended by striking para-
graphs (1), (V. and (3). and inserting in lieu thereof the following:
‘(1) In the case of those contaminants listed in the Advance
Notice of Proposed Rulemaking published in volume 47, Federal
Register, page 9852, and in volume 48, Federal Register, page 45502,
the Administrator sluill j’ublis/z maximum contaminant level goals
and promulgate nat ional primary drinking water regulations—
“(A) not later than 12 months after the enactment of the Safe
Drinking Water Act Amendments of 1986 for not less than 9 of
those listed contaminants,
“(B) not later than 24 months after such enactment for not
less than 40 of those listed contaminants, arid
“(C) not later than 36 months after such enactment for the
remainder of such 4 isted contaminants.
-------
‘Y2XA) If the Administrator identifies a drinking water Contami-
nant the regulation of which, in the judgment of the Administrator,
is more likely to be protective of public-health (taking into account
the schedule for regulation under paragraph (1)) than a Contami-
nant referred to in paragraph (LI, the Administrator may publish a
maximum contaminant level goal and promulgate a national prz-
maty drinking water regulation for such identified contaminant in
lieu of regulating the contaminant referred to in such paragraph.
There may be no more than 7 contaminants in paragraph (1) for 1
which su (ions may be made. Regulation of a contaminant
identified under this paragraph shall be in accordance with the
schedule applicable to the contaminant for which the sub tilut ion is
made.
“(B) If the Administrator identifies one or more contaminants for
substitution under this paragraph, the Administrator shall publish
in the Federal Register not later than one year after the enactment
of the Safe Drinking Water Act Amendments of 1986 a list of con-
taminants proposed for substitution, the contaminants referred to in
paragraph (1)for which substitutions are to be made, and the sis 1
for the judgment that regulation of such proposed substitute con-
taminants is more likely to be protective of public health (taking
into account the schedule for regulation under such paragraph). Fol-
lowing a period of 60 day s for public comment, the Administrator I
shall publish in the Federal Register a final list of contaminants to
be substituted and Contaminants referred to in paragraph (1) for’
which substitutjon.s are to be made, together with responses to sig-.
nificarit comments. I
“(C) Any contaminant referred t in paragraph (1) for which a
SUbstitution is made, pursuant to subparagraph (A) of this pam-
graph, 8hall be included on the priority list to be published by the
Administrator not later than January 1, 1988, pursuant to para-
graph (SXA). I
“(D) The Administrator’s decision to regulate a contaminant iden-
tified pursuant to this paragraph in lieu of a contaminant referred
to in paragraph (1) shall not be subject to judicial review.
“(JXA) The Administrator shall publish maximum contaminant
level goals and promulgate national primary drinking water regula-
tions for each contaminant (other than a contaminant referred to in
paragraph (1) or (2) for which a national primary drinking water
regulation was promulgated) which, in the judgment of the Adrnin-
istrator, may have any adverse effect on the health of persons and
which is known or ant icz)ated to occur in public water systems. Not,
later than January 1, 1.988, and at 3 year intervals thereafter, the
Administrator shall publish a list of contaminants which are
known or anticipated to occur in public water systems and which
mary require regulation under this Act.
‘(B) For the purpose of establishing the list under subparagraph,
(A). the Administrator shall form an advisory working group in-
cluding members from the National Toxicology P ogram and the
Environmental Protection Agency’s Offices of Drinking Water, Pesti-
cides. Toxic Substances, Ground Water, Solid Waste and Emergency
Response and any others the Administrator deems appropriate. The
Administrator’s consideration of priorities shall include, but not be
limited to, -èubstances teferrect to in Sectzon 101(14) of the Compre-
-------
ODOO 9
hensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act
of 1980, and substances registered as pesticides under the Federal
Insecticide, Fungicide, and Rodent icide Act.
“(C) Not later than 24 months after the listing of ontamjn43nts
under Rubparogruph (A), the Administrator 8 /loll publish proposed
maximum contaminant level goals and natwnal primary drinking
water regulations for not less than 25 contaminants from the list es-
tablished under subparagraph (A).
I ’D) Not later than 36’ months after the listing of contaminants
under subparagraph (A), the Administrator hal1 publish a maxi-
mum contaminant goal and promulgate a national primary drink-
ing water regulation for those contaminants for which proposed
maximum contaminant level goals and proposed national primary
drinking water regulations were published under subparagraph (C).
“(4) Each maximum contaminant level goal established underi
this 8ubse ctjgjn shall be set at the level at which rio known or ant ici-
pa ted adverse effects on the health of persons occur and
allows an adequate margin of safety. Each national primary drink-
ing water regulation for a contaminant for which a maximum con-
taminant level goal is established under this subsection shall speci.
1)’ a maximum level for such contaminant which is as close to the
maximum contaminant level goal as is feasibk
“(5) For the purposes of this subsection, the term easible’ means
feasible with the use of the best technology, treatment techniques
and other means which the Administrator finds, after examination
for efficacy under ricid conditions and not solely under Laboratory
conditions, are available (taking cost into consideration). For the
purpose of paragraph (4), granular activated carbon is feasible for
the control of synthetic organic chemicals, and any technology,
treatment technique, or other means found to be the best available
for the control of synthetic organic chemicals must be at Least as ef.
fective in controlling synthetic organic chemicals as granular acti-
vated carbon.
“(6) Each national primary drinking water regulation which es-
tabhshes a maximum contaminant level shall list the technology,
treatment techniques, and other means which the Administrator
finds to be feasible for purposes of meeting such maximum contami-
nant lete4 but a regulation under this paragraph shall not require
that any specified technology, treatment technique, or other means
be used for purposes of meeting such maximum contaminant level.
“(7XA) The Administrator is authorized to promulgate a national
priniuiry drinking water regulation that requires the use of a treat-
ment technique in lieu of establishing a maximum contaminant
leve4 if the Administrator makes a finding that it is not economi-
cally or technologically feasible to ascertain the level of the con•
tamirtant. In such case, the Administrator shall identify those treat.
rnent techniques which, in the Administrator’s judgment, would
prevent known or anticipated adverse effects on the health of per-
sons to the extent feasible. Such regulations shall specify each treat-
ment technique known to the Administrator which meets the re-
qiiiremnenta of this paragraph, but the Administrator may grant a
variance from any 8peczfied treatment technique in accordance with
section l415(aXS).
-------
000Q7Q
“(B) Any schedule referred to in this subsection for the promulga.
tion of a national primary drinking water regulation for any con-
taminant shall apply in the same manner if the regulation requires
a treatment technique in lieu of establishing a maximum contami-
nant leveL
d(CXj) Not later than 18 months after the enactment of the Safe
Drinking Water Act Amendments of 1986. the Administrator shall
propose and promulgate national prirna,y drinking water regula-
tions specifying criteria under which filtration (including coogula.
Lion and sedirrzentctjor as appropriate) is required as a treatment
tee kn ique for public water systems supplied by surface water
sources. In promulgating such rules, the Administrator shall consid-
er the quality of source waters, protection afforded by watershed
management, treatment practices (such as disinfection and length of
water storage) and other factors relevant to protection of health.
“(ii) In lieu of the provisions of section 1415 the Administrator
shall specify procedures by which the State determines which public
water systems within its jurisdiction shall adopt filtration under
the criteria of clause (:). The State may require the public water
system to provide studies or other information to assist in this deter-
miruitiori.. The procedures shall provide notice and opportunity for
public hearing on this determination. If the State determines that
filtration is required, the State shall prescribe a schedule for corn-
pliarice by the public water system with the filtration requirement.
A schedule shall require compliance within 18 months of a determi-
nation made under clause (iii).
“(iii) Within 18 months from the time that the Administrator es-
tabli.shes the criteria and procedures under this subparagraph, a
State with primary enforcement responsibility shall adopt any neces-
sary regulations to implement this subparagraph. Within 12 months
of adoption of such regulations the State shall make determinations
regarding filtration for all the public water systems within its Juris-
diction supplied by surface waters
“(iv) If a State does not have primary enforcement responsibility
for public water systems, the Administrator shall have the same au-
thority to make the determination in clause (ii) in such State as the
State would have under that clause. Any filtration requirement or
schedule under this subparagraph Bhall be treated as if it were a
re uzrement of a national primary drinking water regulation.
Y8) Not later than 36 months after the enactment of the Safe
Drinking Water Act Amendments of 1986, the Administrator shall
propose and promulgate national primary drinking water regula-
tions requiring disinfection as a treatment technique for all public
water systems. The Administrator shall simultaneously promulgate
a rule specifying criteria that will be used by the Administrator (or
delegated State authorities) to rant variances from this require-
rnent according to the provisions of section 1451(aK1A’B) and
1 4l5(aX3). In implementing section 1442(g) the Administrator or the
delegated State authority shall, where appropriate, give special con-
sideration to provYding technical assistance to small public water
systems in complying with the regulations promulgated under this
paragraph. ‘
(c) CO!VFORM!NG CJL4NGES.—Q) Paragraphs (4), (5), and (6) of sec-
tion 1412(b) of the Safe Drinking Water Act are redesignated as
-------
nr r r -
U U Lu
paraguphs (9), (10), and (11), respectively. Parrlgrt2ph.g (9) and (JO) of
such section 1412(b), as redesignated by this paragraph, are each
amended by 8triking “Revised national” in each place where it ap-
pears and substituting “National’: --
(2) Paragraph (1) of section l418(a) of such Act i s amended by
striking out subparugraphs (A) and (B) and substituting “are no less (7
stringent than the national primary dri?thing water regulations in
effect under sections 14 12(o) and 1412 (b);’:
(3) Section 1444(d) of such Act is amended by striking out ‘Yin.
cludirig interim regulatzons)’
(4) Section l4 2 ( ’e) of the Safe Drinking Water Act is amended by
striking out “l412.(bX3)”a 4 substituting “1412(b)’:
(d) REVIEW OF STANDARDS._PW .ag?.VJPh (9) of section 1412(b) of
the Safe Drinking Water Act, as redesignated by subsection (c) of
this section, is amended by adding at the end thereof the following:
“Such review shall include art analysis of innovations or changes in
technology, treatment techniques or other activities that have oc.
curred over the previous 3 .yeor period and that may provide for
greater protection of the health of persons. The findings of such
review shall be published in the Federal Register. I/ after opportu-
nity for public comment, the Administrator concludes that the tech-
nology, treatment techniques, or other means resulting from such in.
novations or changes are riot feasible within the meaning of para-
graph (5), an explanation of such conclusion shall be published in
the Federal Register.”
(e) SCIENCE ADVISORY BOA)w.—Section l41 (e) of the Safe Drink-
ing Water Act is amended to read as follows:
“(e) The Administrator shall request comments from the &ience
Advisory Board (established under the Environmental Research, De-
ueloprnent. and Demonstration Act of 1978) prior to proposal of a
ina.rzmurn contaminant level goal and national primary drinking
water regulation. The Board shall reapon4 as it deems appropriate,
within the time period applicable for promulgation of the national
primary drinking water standard concernecL This subsection shall,
under no circumstan , be used to delay final promulgation of any
national primary drinking water standarri’
CoN , p, S e s (- 9
8 crIoN lOl—NATION PRZ a y DRXN G WA RZG1JL(7 ONB
Standard-setting terminology
Senate bill—The Senate bill makes two changes in standard-set..
ting terminology. The bill eliminates the distinctiozi between “in.
terirn” and “revised” standaj- removing both terms from the Act,
and designates “interim” or “revised” regulations under existing
law as national primary drinking water regulations. The bill also
changes the term used to refer to the health effects level set before
the promulgation of a drinking water standard from “recommend-
ed maximum cont .aminnnt level” to “maximuxa contam inant level
goal.”
House amendincriL_The House amendment has the same provi-
sion.
Conference agreement. — Conference agreement is to adopt
the language from both bills.
Standard-setting schedules
Senate bilL—The Senate bill requires the Adminintrator to pro..
muigate national primary drinking water regulatio for the fol-
lowing list of contaminants previously published by the Agency in
advance notices of proposed rulemi ki g
-------
O3O 72
Volagile Organic Chemicals
Thehioroethylene Benzene
Tetrachioroethy lene Chlorobe i z ene
Carbon tetrachjonde D iChlorobenzefle(e)
l.l ,l-Tr ichioroeth a ne TnchJoroben.zefl )
l , 2 -Dichjo r thane l.li) ich lo ro ethylene
Vinyl chionde tran&I,2 .D ic hJo thylene
Methylene chloride Cia.l2thchJoI.oethyjer ie
Microbiology and Turbulity
Tota] coliform Viruaes
Turbidity Standard plate count
Giartha Lam blia Leg ionell a
Ir iorganice
Areenic Molybdenum
Banuin
Cadmium Sulfate
Chromium Copper
Lead Vanadium
Mercury Sodium
Nitrate Nickel
Seieni jj Zinc
Silver Thallium
Fluoride Beryllium
Muminum Cyanide
Ant.unony
&gon&cs
Endrin i ,l ,Zi’nchjoioethane
Lindane Vydate
MethoxychJor Sunazine
Toxaphene PAl-f 8
2.4-D PCB
2,4,5-Tp Atrazjne
AJd.icarb PhthaJat
Chiordane Acrylainide
Dalapoa Thbroropropone (DBCP)
Diquat I . 2 -thchioropropa ne
Endoth.ail Pentachiorophenol
Glyphoeate P ichJoram
Carbofwan Din oeeb
Alachior Ethylene dibron jde
Eplchiorohydri.n Dibromocoethane
Toluene Xylene
Adipatee Hezac hiorucyc lopentethene
2,2,7S-TCDD (Dioxin)
Rod
Radium 226 and 228 Cr a alpha particle activity
Beta particle and photon redioectiv y Radon
Uranium
The Administrator is required to establish standard for these
contamjn t according to the following schedule: at least nine
con minantg within 12 months of enactment, at least 40 addition.
al contarninath within 24 months of enactment, and the remainder
of the list within 36 months of enactment.
On Ja.riu.ary 1, 1988 arid at 3 year intervals thereafter, the Ad.
ministrator is required to publish a list of additional contam inants
that may have an adverse effect on the health of persons The Ad.
ministrator is to establish a working group with representatives
-------
from the appropriate EPA offices and the National Toxicology Pro-
gram to aasist in the development of the list. Within 36 months of
listing, EPA is required to publish maximum contaminant level
goals and promulgate maximum contaminRnt levels for not less
than 25 containinaj from the list.
House amendment.—The House amendment requires EPA to set
itandards for those Contaminnnta on the list referenced above for
which there is a rational basis, based on the weighing of all avail-
able health evidence, to believe that there may be any adverse
effect on the health of persons.
The Admini itrathr is required to publish a list, on January 1,
1988, and at annual intervals thereafter, establishing priorities for
the review of drinking water contaminants which may require reg-
ulation. Not later than three years after listing, the Administrator
is required to iasue regulations for all those contaminants on the
prior y list for which there lB a rational basis, based on the weigh.
ing of all available health evidence, to believe that the contami-
nant may have any adverse effect on the health of persona.
Conference agreement.—Th conference a reement is to adopt the
Senate bill as modified to permit the Administrator limited discre-
tion to substitute contaminants for regulation that may pose a
more significant health threat than other listed contaminants, if
the Administrator identifies a drinking water contaminant, the
regulation of which is judged to be more protective of public health
than a listed contamjna (referred to in this subsection), the Ad.
rni.nistrator may publish a maximum contaminant level goal and
promulgate a national primary drinking water regulation for such
Contarnin nt in lieu of regulating a listed contaminant. No more
than seven such substitutions are permitted. Within one year from!
the date of enactment., the Admirustrator must publish a notice in
the Federal Register containing the following information: a list of
contaminants identified for substitution, the contaminants for
which substitutions aze to be made, and the basis for the judgment
that regulation of such contaminants is more likely to be protective
of public health (taking into account the schedule for regulation
• under this subsection). Such notice is not intended to be a rulemak-
ing and the Administrator’s judgment to substitute is not subject to
judicial review so as not to delay the standard-setting process.
Following a sixty-day comment period, the Administrator shall
2ublish a final list of contamjn int to be substituted in the Federal
kCegizter. Regulation of a substituted contaminant is required to
accord with the schedule applicable to the contaminant for which
the substitution is made.
Any listed ContaminAnt which has been substituted shall be in-
cluded on the priority list of contaminants which may require regu-
lation (to be published by the Administrator not later than Janu-
ary 1, 1988) for future consideration.
Basis for stand d’setting
Senate bilZ.—The Senate bill requires that maximum contami.
nant level goals established by EPA are to be set at the level at
which no known or anticipated adverse effects on the health of per-
sons occur and which allows an adequate margin of safety. Maxi-
mum contaminAnt levels (MCLs) in the national primary drinking
-------
4
water regulations are to be set at a level 88 close to the goal as is
feasible with the use of the best technology, treatment techniques ç 3 2 .
and other means which the Administrator finds are available
(taking cost into consideration). The bill establishes that the use of
granujar activated carbon (GAC) technology is available for the
control of synthetic organic chemicals. Any technology, treatment
technique, or other means found to be the best available for the
control of synthetic organic chemicals must be at least as effective
as granular activated carbon.
Each regulation promulgated by EPA which 8ets a mRrimum
contaminant level shall list the technology, techniques and other
means which the Administrator finds to be feasible for meeting the
maximum contaminant level but shall not require that a specific
technology be used for the purposes of meeting a mn tmum con-
taminant level.
House amendment .—The House amendment is similar to the
Senate bill except that it requires the Agency to include the use of
adsorption techniques such as granular activated carbon in defin-
ing the best available technology which is feasible for the control of
synthetic organic chemicals for purposes of establishing an MCL
Con ference agreernent. m conference agreement combines pro-
visions from both bills. The conference language provides that
granular activated carbon technology is feasible for the control of
synthetic organic chemicals, and any technology, treatment tech-
nique, or other means found to be the best available for the control
of synthetic Organic chemicals must be at least as effective in con-
trolling synthetic organic chemicals as granular activated carbon
technology.
It has been determined that the use of granular activated carbon
technology is feasible to control to safe levels many of the synthetic
organic chemicals appearing in drinking water supplies across the
country. There are different levels of removal of synthetic organic
chemicals that can be accomplished with granular activated carbon’
technology. The effectiveness of contammant removal dependsi
upon the chemical ch.aracterjstj of a particular contaminant, the
number and concentration of contamjnant,s in the influent and the
treatment technology design parameters. Design variables would
include the grade of carbon used, contact time and frequency of re-
generation. In setting maximum contamlnRnt levels, the Adminia..
trator should weigh these variables with respect to the effective.
ness of granular activated carbon technology or other means found
to be feasible and at least as effective as granular activated carbon
technology. As a guide as to feasibility and effectiveness, the Ad-
miniRtrator should consider a range of granular activated carbon
system4 comparable to those able to achieve 90 to 99 percent re-
moval of trichioroethylene (as referenced in 47 Fed. Hog. 9354,
1982). The Administrator’s paramount concern should be to pre-
vent known or anticipated adverse effects on health.
Treatment technique requirements
Senate bilL—The Sefiate bill extends EPA ’s existing authority to
issue treatment technique requiremen to regulations promulgat,.
ed after the enactment of these amendments. it requires the issu-
ance of a treatment technique regulation, if the Administrator
-------
000375.
makes a flnding’that it is not economically or technologically feasi-
ble to ascertain the level of the contamjnan . In such case, the Ad- - -
mintqtra r is to identify those treatment techniques which would F’
prevent known or anticipated effects on the health of personj to
the extent feasible. Variances may be granted from a specific treat-
ment technique in accordance with section l 4 l5(aX3).
House amendnien _The House bill requires EPA to establish a
treatment technique requireme in lieu of an MCL in the case of
any contaminsflt which caanot be accuratelye h asu e j in
drinking water to establish an MCL goal.
Conference agreement._me conference agreement adopts the
Senate bill.
Filtration regulation
Senate bilL—The Senate bill requires the Administrator, within
18 months of enactment, to propose and promulgate regulations
specifying criteria under which filtration (including coagulation
and sedimentation) is required as a treatment technique for public
water systems supplied by surface water sources. Such criteria
must protect the public from bacterial and viral contamination of
these water supplies.
States with primary enforcement responsibility are given 18
months to adopt any regulatio necesaary to implement filtration
require e • Within 12 months of such adoption, EPA or the
State enforcement authority is required to make determinations re-
garding the need for filtration for all surface water systems within
their jurjsdjction Public water systems may be required to provide
studies or information to assist such determinations If filtration is
required, EPA or the delegated State authority must prescnbe a
schedule requiring compliance within 18 months of such determi-
nation.
House arnendmenL .....The House amendment has the same provi-
sion.
Conference ag’reement._ conference agreement adopts the
language in both bills.
Disinfection requirement
Senate bilL—The Senate bill requires the Administrator, within
36 months, to simultaneously issue regulations requiring disinfec-
tion and a rule specifying criteria that will be used to grant var-
iances from such requirement The Administrator or delegated
State authority is required (to the extent feasible) to provide tech-
nical assistance to small public water systems in complying with
disinfection requiremen
House cmertdment._The Administrator is required to propose
and promulgate regulations requiring disinfection as a treatment
technique for all public Iwater systems and is authorized to grant
varajic from this requirement according to the provis1o under
sections l 4 l5(aX1XB) and 14 l5(aX3).
Conference agreernent ._.. conference agreement adopts the
Senate bill with a modification of the technical assistance language
to require EPA or the delegated State authonty, where appropri-
ate, to give special consideration to providing technical assistance
-------
to small public water systems in comp1yuig with disinfection regu-
lations. -
Conforming changes
Senate bilL -The Senate bill elirnuiates the use of the term
vised national primary drinking water regulations.”
House amendment,—The House bill makes a number of conform-
ing changes which eliminate references to “interim” and “revised”
national primary drinking water regulations consistent with the
exclusive use of the term “national primary drinking water regula-
tions” in the amendments.
Conference a.greement.—The conference agreement is to adopt the
House language.
Review of standards
Senate bilL—The Senate bill modiiies the Adniiniqtrator’g exist-
ing authority to amend and review national primary drinking
water reguJations to require that an analysis of innovations or
changes in technology, treatment techniques or other activities,
which may provide for greater protection of the health of persons,
be included in such review. The Administrator is required to pub-
lish these findings in the Federal Register, including an explana-
tion of any conclusion of the Adinirustrator that changes in tech-
nology, treatment techniques, or other means are not available to
permit greater protection of the health of persons than that afford-
ed by the existing regulations.
House cmendrnent,—The House amendment has no such provi-
SiOfl.
Conference agreemerzt.—The conference agreement adopts the
Senate language with modification to indicate that if the Adrninis-
trator concludes that a standard should not be revised due to an
innovation or change in treatment technology, such conclusion
8houid be based on the judgment that the technology, treatment
technique or other means resulting from such innovation or change
is not feasible within the meaning of paragraph (4). This Language
establishes consistency between the establishment of drinking;
water regulations based on feasibility as defined in paragraph (4)
and the subsequent review and revision of such regulations.
&ience AduLgory Board
Senate bilL—The Senate bill requires the Administrator to pro-
vide the Science Advisory Board an opportunity to comment prior
to proposal or during the public comment period on a maximum
contamin ant level goal and national primary drinking water regu-
lation.
House amendment.—The House bill requires the Administrator
to request comments from the Science Advisory Board, prior to pro-
posal of a maximum contaminant level goal and national primary
drinking water regulation. The Board is required to respond, as it
deems appropriate, within the time period applicable for promulga-
tion of the national primary drinking water standard concerned.
This subsection shall not be used to delay final promulgation of
any national primary drinking water standard.
Conference agreemenL—The conference agreement is to adopt
House language.
OCOO7
-------
14. t 5 o
• ( IoI)
C ) 1 e4.
‘7,
re 101 \tTtO ,sl. PRIiISRY flHl l i\i. %% (TIM
lout LtTU)’e,.
(a) SI ’g?LIFICATION OF ST (TtTORY
SysTpai —Section 14 12(a) of the Safe Drink.
Ing Water Act is amended to read as folloes
(a) E(fectite on the date of the enact
merit of the Safe Drtnk:ng Water Act
Amendments of 1985 each national interim
primary drinkirg aster regulation promul-
gated under this section before such date of
enactment shall be deemed to be a national
primary drinking water regulation under
subsection 1W No such regul Lion shall be
required to Comply aith the standards set
forth in subsection (bfl2) unless such regu
lation is amended to establish a different
maximum Contaminant level after the date
of the enactment of such amendments
ibi EXPEDITED PROCEDURE P09 PROMIJLC (
TION —ui Section 14 l2ib) of the Safe Drink
ing Water Act IS amended by striking Out
paragraphs iii and i2 and so much q( para
graph 31 as precedes the last enience
thereof and substituting
(teAi In (he case of each of the 14 con
taminan s listed in tile Adtsnce Notice of
Proposea Rulemaicirg published in tolume
47 Federal Register page 9152 not later
than 12 months after the enactment of (lie
Safe Driri ing Water Act Amendments of
1985 the Admlnts(r2 (or shall—
(0 sImultaneously propose a ma cimum
Contaminant letel goal and a national pri
mars drinking aater regulation and a I cr
opportunity for -public comment ‘simulta
neousl publish a ma\imum contaminant
letel goal and a natio-ial prn-art 0ikrg
eater regulation for those contarninan 5 for
ehicli t ere is a rational basis ba 5 ed on a
‘(Pighing of all a’ailable health e idence to
biliele that there may be an ad erse cIfeCt
on the health of persors or
ii; publish n the Fede-al R oi ’er a de
termination that the—c is not tu ’ic i ’ it ‘
&‘-ce to Const:tute a raa.oral ba 5 i . . I -ti
.)n a .tegliing of all a’ ai.aale lt a
ce”ce to eliete that the car’ m ,,ar( —t
l ’a e an ad erse ef( ct on the 1,
per sons
Bi Ir the case of each of the ‘nii
“sr”s “,ted in the Adiarace ot cell P-r
ro.pd Ri tmaking pLbh h d in u r’e -d
F’-tieral R—gister, page 455tj2 not ‘a’ —r ti” ’)
i “‘orih, atter the enactment ol ‘ .
Dri t ’g ‘.Vtier Act .Amt-’tijntt flu
‘‘te -ttd - ’ )’r,strator sl ,ail
simulti ,eou 5 l propose . ,.,,,
co—’arnii’a-t iC’ el goal ard a —a a
nart drinking ‘tater r gihat oi
opportunity for oubluc co nrrae”t “.
r.eousl publish a masu-ni m •o a—’
. “ l uoal and natuonal pr..”i-
aster regulation for those tOn irti or
s h.ch there is a ratio—al ba,is i ’t’d on a
‘se’ ’iing of all asailable health ci th-ricg to
be ,‘ e tI-at there mat be a’’. at C
on ‘h health of persona or
‘ii publish in the F d ’i R - • ‘‘ .i d
termination that tlre—e us ot -, ‘t ci
cit nce to ronst,tute a N oral i,, ‘, ,j
a, a suiehir,g 01 all a able ‘
I e to bele e that t”e cori si-’’-
e in, ads erse on h
- Or’s
C ‘ii The Acr-iinistrator I it.
Lmurn contai-r’-a t le ’ .el goats arJ Si
.ittneousl promu!gate rational piimar,
-in itr,g eater regulaton for each io
‘L ”ce ‘other than a substanCe referred to
a subparagraph Ai or (B) for ahich a na
ont O primary drinking stater regulation
s’.aa prom .ilgatedi ehich in the judg—i nt of
the Administrator. may hate an adsersei
eutect on the health of pc-sons On Januars
1 1 83 and at annual untenals thereafter
tt Administrator shall publish a list estab-
lishing priorities for the ret tew of sub.,
tar.ces (other tI-at substances refe-red to
in subparagraph (M or ‘B) for shuch a na
t ral primary drinking eater reguation 1
‘tis promulgated) ehich mae require regu
La’ on under (his ACt in Order to prete-ac
k ‘oan or anticipated adserse eftects on thei
)“ajth oi persons Such priorities shall be
bi d upon the extent to ehicti such con-
tS - ,ifl 5nt occurs in public eater “stems
I: oughout the United Sa(es or on (he
k ‘osn or anticipated sd’.erse efietts 01 such
-ubstance on (lie health of persons In es-
tinlushing sucli priorities the Administra
I Cr consideration shall include but not be
u uted to substances reculated as toxic
‘titer poi(utar-uts under ec (uon 307 of the
Ctan ‘Aater Act and substances registered
as pOstucides under the Federal Insecticide
FUiigitid and RodCfl(iCidC Act
u> In the case of each contaminant
l-,t i’d on the prority list not lacer than 3
tears liter such listing the •Admipi ,trator
sh 5ll—
I) simultaneously propose a rna
-------
aater regulation for those contaminants for
ahich there is a rational basis, based on a
aeighuig of all asailable health esidenee to
beliese that there may be any atherse effect
on the health of persons, or
111 publish in the Federal Register a de-
termiriauon that there is not sufficient esi-
dence to constitute a rational basis, based
on a aeighing of all available health esi-
dence. to believe that the contaminant ma
hate any adserse effect on the health of
persons
(2) Each maximum contaminant letel
goal established under this subsection shall
be set at the lesel at ahcri in the Adm nis
trators judgment, no knoan or anticipated
ads erse .‘fects on the health of persons
occur and ahich aUoas an adequate margin
of sa(et Each national primars drinkiog
aater regulation for a contarn narit for
ahich a nsaximum contaminant lete-l goal is
established under this subsection shall
specift a masimum lesel for such con .a-ui-
nant ‘anich is as close to the maximum con-
taminant etel goal as is iea.sible.
•3 1A, In (he ca.se of an contam n--at
the let el of a hich cannot be aceur’s;
eooiigh measured in drink:rg aster to es-
tabii ii a maximum cora:-i-ninant lets-I goal
and ‘ahich mat hate an adterse etft’ct on
the health of persons the Admiiii irator
shall list such contam,r.ar.t und r this para-
graph in lieu of estaolishing a maximum
contarnin,inc letel goal under paragraph ill
of this subsection In lieu of essabi.sning a
n.a\imjm contaminant lese! for such con-
tarninant under this subserl ion the Adriin
istrator s iall promulgate treat-n -ot tec 1 i
i.ique for such contaminant atiich rt’quirtt
treatment “tecessars in the Admm ’rato
iuditrn rt to present knosin or ai’jctpm i
act’. ersi’ effects on the health of p€rsuns
t te e’ ti nt fa.stbe
‘B 1! as cot arrtriaot referred to
Al or 13 of subsection ib
is ti ,i” er t.h p’si-acaph ‘: nd a ratio,’
at ,.r “art dr.iikirg state— re ulai on r
“i i ii , u ’ ot trca’me -it techritiue’ i i-
nlu’ta” s promul- gated u-td’ r r.l’.’s
paragr ,, tor ur’- contamirapt the
ing ard p- mul.,a ioci under th’s paragr ’ pi1
‘,. at’ Cr —i.iie on the date referred to in sub-
p - ’ sc-a—l iA)ortB)ofsubsgctionlp,i l)for
lh. essabl,shme-it of primary drinking
stan- re:ulaticris
(. si tot later than 18 months after the
era. rr nt of the Safe Dr .nking Water Act
Anierdr’ert.s of 1985 the Administrator
shall propose and promulgate national pri-
mars a- iiking staLer reputations soecif ing
erie-ia upder .shich f. t-ation ‘including Co.
5 ,’i C.iofl ar.d sedi.nentation as appropri-
at.. ‘is req.iired as a trca ,-ie’ L tert-irtique tar
publ c stater sssler”is supplied b surfa’e
‘aser sources In promulgating such rules,
the Ac —i ‘.istrator shall conoider the quaht ’,
of mci.rce aa . .ers protection afforded bs’ as
torch, management treatment practices
(such s.c disinfecton and length of sarer
stor ’ sI i and other (actors reletant to pro-
tection of health
lii, In li:,u of the pro- tioris of section
1415 the Admini.trator shall spe ifs proce-
dures bs ‘ahicn the State determines ahich
public stater stems aith’ri its jur’sdiction
shall adopt filtration under the criteria of
clause ‘ The State m require the pub’ic
staler sSstem to pros ide studies or other in
formation to aasist in this deterr-iina(ion
‘P pro’ efiures shall pros ide notice and op.
poft units (or public hearing on this deter-
rniration If the State determines that hI-
trat ion is required the State shall prescribe
a schedule for compliance c- the public
stater system sith the filtration requ:re-
merit A schedule shall recuire compliance
a (thin 18 months of a determination made
under clause (iii)
“(III) WIthin 18 months from the tIme
that the Administrator establishes the crite-
na and procedures in this subparagraph, a
State aith primary enforcement resp -a ibl1-
ity shall adopt any necessary regulations to
implement this subparagraph Within 12
months of adoption of such regulations the
State shall maxe determinatIons regarding
filtration for all the public water systems
aithin its jurisdiction supplIed by surface
a
lis If a State does not have primary en-
forcement responsibility for pubite water
ssstems the Acisrinistrator shall hate the
same authority to make the determination
in clause iii in such State as the State
aould hate under that clause An filtration
requirement or schedule under this suboara-
graph shail be treated as if It acre a re-
quirement of a national primary drinking
stater regulation
D Eacn national primary drinking
aster regulation ahich establishes a maxi-
mum contaminant lesel shall list the tech-
nolo.cs treatment techniques, and other
r -teans ‘ahich the Administrator finds to be
feasible for purposes of meeting such maxi-
mum contaminant lesel but a regulation
under Lhs paragraph shall not require that
an s ecified technology, treatment tech-
niqiie or other means be used for purposes
of meet’ng such maximum cor.ta ninanL
le ’el
E The Administrator shall propose and
promulgate regulations requiring disinfec-
tion as a tteatment technique for all public
aater ss stems The Administrator is author.
ize ’J to grant sa-ances from this require-
ment according to the pros isiorts u.ncer sec-
tiOns 1415 a)il) ,B and 1415a)l3i
4’ The Administrator ma after oppor-
t.i’,’t fur p’iolic comment charge nasi-
mum cctitamtnant let el goas or the ii’
tabi hei undrr paragrap-a 3i and sha ,i
multsneouss stih such cha-ige ame ia e
national prircars drirk.r.g a star regitta: tis
to” , erted acrordirtl’ ,
‘2 Redesieiia..c th last sentence oi c a-
graph i3i of section 14120) of such A. as
par tgr’wh Si of such section delete g -
ails in such sentence delete para , ra:ti
and substitne subsection , after f nJs
insert after examination ior efficac
under field Conditions and not solely und’
research laboratory condrions and add
the folIos ing at tne end theeof For pur-
pases of paragraph (2i of this subsecv’u’i.
the best asailable technology ‘ahich is fea,ci
ble for the control of s ntnetic organ c
chemicals includes the use oi adsorption
techr.u ’tes such as the the use of granu ir
artisated carbon and other comparabls sf
fictise techniques
c C0 .FORMING CHsa . .css— )1) Paragrap’-c
(4i and (51 of section 1412ib) of the Sa,.,
Drink’ng V.ater Act are each amendro bs
St r.l’’ng Ret ised national .n eacn pt-..e
a here it appears and substitu:.ng -Ja .i .’r
al Parae’raphs i4, (5), and i6i of such stc-
(ii 1412ib are redesignated as paragra i’s
6L7 and 8)
(2) Paragraph U) of section 1413(a) of
such Act is amended by strtking Out sub-
paragraph IA) and IS) and substituting are
no less stringent than the national primary
dr’nking starer regulations in effect under
section 1412(a) and 1412th)’
(3) Section 1444(d) of such Act is amended
by striking out ‘Uncluding Intertm regula-
tions)
Id) Scir ’rirtc P R Revtrw —Section
14 12(e) of the Safe Drinking Water Act is
amended to read as folloas
(el The Administrator shall request com-
ments from the Science Ads isor 5 Board (es-
tablished under the EnsironmentaJ Re-
search Development, and Demonstration
Act of 19 8 prior to proposal of a ma.xiinum
i
P (J’ 5 jo
contaminant level goal and natlona pri-
mary dnnking staten regulation. The Board
shall respond as It deems appropriate
aithin tl e time period applicable for pro-
mulgation of the national primary drinking
water standard concerned This subsection
shall under no circumstances, be used to
delay final promulgation of any national
Primary drinkina aSter vandard -
-------
000379
M’ . (
c .1-{c
SEC lot NATIO4AL PRIMARY DRfl4KJNG WATER REGUL flONs.
(a) SIMPLIFICATION OF STATIJFORY SYS’r!M —Section 1412 (a) of the Safe Drinking -
Water Act is amended to read as follows.
‘(a) Effective on the date of the enactment of the Safe Drinking Water Act
Amendments of 1985, each national interim primary drinking water regulation pro-
mulgated under this section before such date of enactment shall be deemed to be a
national primary drinking water regulation under subsection b). No such reg,.ila-
tiori shall be required to comply with the standards set forth in subsection 1bX2)
unless such regulation is amended to establish a different maximum contaminant
level after the date of the enactment of such amendments,’.
(b) EXPEDITED PROCEDURE FOR PROMUWATION—(1) Section 1412th) of the Safe
Drinking Water Act is amended by striking out paragraphs (1) and (2), and so much
of paragraph 13) as precedes the last sentence thereof and substituting-
“(1 A) In the case of each of the 14 contaminants listed in the Advance Notice of
Proposed Rulernalung published in volume 47, Federal Register, page 9352. not later
than 12 months after the enactment of the Safe Drinking Water Act Amendments
of 1985, the Administrator shall—
‘(i) 5imultaneously propose a maximum contaminant level goal and a nation-
al primary drinking water regulation, and after opportunity for public corn-
merit, simultaneously pubhsh a maximum contaminant level goal and a nation-
al primary drinking water regulation for those contaminants for which there is
a rational basis, based on a weighing of all available health evidence, to believe
that there may be any adverse effect on the health of persons; or
“(ii) publish in the Federal Register a determination that there is not suffi-
cient evidence to constitute a rational basis, based on a weighing of all available I
health evidence, to believe that the contaminant may have any adverse effect
on the health of persons
“(B) Iri the case of each of the contaminants listed in the Advance Notice of Pro-
posed Rulemaking published in volume 48, Federal Register, page 45502, not later
than 36 months after the enactment of the Safe Drinking Water Act Amendments
of 1985, the Administrator shall—
“(1) simultaneously propose a maximum contaminant level goal and a nation-
al primary drinking water regulation, and after opportunity for public com-
ment, simultaneously publish a maximum contaminant level goal and national
primary drinking water regulation for those contaminants for which there is a
rational basis, based on a weighing of all available health evidence, to believe
that there may be any adverse effect on the health of persons; or
“(ii) publish in the Federal Register a determination that there is not suffi-
cient evidence to constitute a rational basis, based on a weighing of all available 1
health evidence, to believe that the contaminant may have any adverse effect
on the health of persons.
‘(CXi The Administrator shall publish maithnum contaminant level goals and si
multaneously promulgate national primary drinking water regulations for each sub-
stance (other than a substance referred to in subparagraph (A) or (B) for which a
national primary drinking water regulation was promulgated) which, in the judg-
ment of the Administrator, may have any adverse effect on the health of persons
On January 1, 1988, and at annual intervals thereafter, the Administrator shall
publLsh a list establishing priorities for the review of substances (other than sub-
stances referred to in subparagraph (A) or (B) for which a national primary drinking
water regulation was promulgated) which may require regulation under this Act in
order to prevent known or anticipated adverse effects on the health of persons Such,
priorities shall be based upon the extent to which such contaminant occurs in publicj
-------
water systems throughout the United States or on the known or anticipated adverse
effects of such substance on the health of persons In establishing such priorities the
Administrators consideration shall include, but not be limited to, substances regu-
lated as toxic water pollutants under section 307 of the Clean Water Act and sub-
stances registered as pesticides under the Federal Insecticide. Fungicide, and Roclea.
ticide Act.
“(u) In the case of each contaminant listed on the priority list, not later than 3
years after such listing, the Administrator shall— 5
“(I) simultaneously propose a maximum contarmnant level goal and a nation-
al primary drinking water regulation, and after opportunity for public com-
ment, simultaneously publish a ma.ximuin contaminant level goal and a nation-
al primary drinking water regulation for those contaminants for which there is
a rational basis, based on a weighing of all available health evidence, to believe
that there may be any adverse effect on the health of persons, or
“(U) publish in the Federal Register a determination that there is not suffi-
cient evidence to constitute a rational basis, based on a weighing of all available
health evidence, to believe that the contaminant may have any adverse effect
on the health of persons,
“12) Each maximum contaminant level goal established under this subsection
shall be set at the level at which, in the Administrators judgment, no known or
anticipated adverse effects on the health of persons occur and which allows an ade-
quate margin of safety Each national primary drinking water regulation for a con-
taminant for which a maximum contaminant level goal is established under this:
subsection shall specify a maximum level for such contaminant which is as close to
the maximum contaminant level goal as is feasible
“(31(A) In the case of any contaminant the level of which cannot be accurately
enough measured in drinking water to establish a maximum contaminant level goal
and which may have an adverse effect on the health of persons, the Administrator
shall list such contaminant under this paragraph in lieu of establishing a maximum
contaminant level goal under paragraph (1) of this subsection In lieu of establishing 1
a maximum contaminant level for such contaminant under this subsection, the Ad-
ministrator shall promulgate treatment techniques for such contaminant which re-
quires treatment necessary in the Administrator’s judgment to prevent known or
anticipated adverse effects on the health of persons to the extent feasible
(B) If any contaminant referred to in subparagraph (A) or (B) of subsection (bXl)
is listed under this paragraph (and a national primary drinking water regulation
requiring the use of treatment techniques is simultaneously promulgated under this
paragraph for such contaminant), the listing and promulgation under this para-
graph shall be made on the date referred to in subparagraph (A) or (B) of subsection
(bXl) for the establishment of primary drinking water regulations,
“(Cxi) Not later than 18 montbs after the enactment of the Safe Drinking Water
Act Amendments of 1985, the Administrator shall propose and promulgate national
primary drinking water regulations specifying criteria under which filtration (in-
cluding coagulation and sedimentation as appropriate) is required as a treatment
technique for public water systems supplied by surface water sources In promulgat-
ing such rules, the Administrator shall consider the quality of source waters, protec-
tion afforded by watershed management, treatment practices (such as disinfection
and length of water storage) and other factors relevant to protection of health.
(ii) In lieu of the provisions of section 1415 the Administrator shall specify proce-
dures by which the State determines which public water systems within ita jurisdic-
tion shall adopt filtration under the criteria of clause fi) The State may require the
public water system to provide studies or other information, to assist in this deter-
mination The procedures shall provide notice and opportunity for public hearing on
this determination If the State determines that filtration is required, the State
shall prescribe a schedule for compliance by the public water system with the filtra-
tion requirement A schedule shall require compliance within 18 months of a deter.
mination made under clause (iu).
“(iu) Within 18 months rom the time that the Administrator establishes the cri-
teria and procedures in this subparagraph, a State with primary enforcement re-
sponsibility shall adopt any necessary regulations to implement this subparagraph
Within 12 months of adoption of such regulations the State shall make determina-
tions regarding filtration for all the public water systems within its jurisdiction sup-
plied by surface waters
‘(iv) If a State does not have primary enforcement responsibility for public water
systems, the Administrator shall have the same authority to make the determina.
tion in clause (U) in such State as the State would have under that clause Any hI.
-------
tration requirement or schedule under this subparagraph shall be treated as if it
were a requirement of a national primary drinking water regulation.
“(D) Each national pnmary drinking water regulation which establishes a maxi-
mum contaminant level shall list the technology, treatment techniques, and other
means w uch the Administrator finds to be feasible for purposes of meeting such
maximum contaminant level, but a regulation under this paragraph shall not re-
quite that any specified technology, treatment technique, or other means be u ed
for pur ses of meeting such maximum contaminant level. - -
“(El The Administrator shall propose and promulgate regulations requiring disin-
fection as a treatment technique for all p iblic water systems The Administrator is
authorized to grant variances from this requiremeqt according to the provisions
under sections 1415(aX1)(B) and 1415(aX3) - ‘ . -
‘•4 The Administrator may, after opportunity for public comment, change maxi-
mum contaminant level goals, or the list established under paragraph 3). and shall
simultaneously with such change, amend the national primary drinking water regu-
lations concerned accordingly
2 Redesignate the last sentence of paragraph (3) of section 1412(b) of such Act as
paragraph 5) of such section. delete ‘generally’ in such sentence, delete “para-
graph” and substitute ‘subsection”, after “finds’ insert”, after examination for effi-
cacy under field conditions and not soley under research laboratory conditions.” and
add the following at the end thereof “For purposes of paragraph (2) of this subsec-
tion, the beet avaijable technology which is feasible for the control of synthetic or-
ganic chemicals includes the use of adsorption techniques such as the the use of
granular activated carbon and other comparably effective techniques”
(C) CONFORMING CHANGES —‘1) Paragraphs 4 and iS) of section 1412(b) of the Safe
Drinking Water Act are each amended by sinking ‘Revised national” in each place
where it appears and substituting “National” Paragraphs (4), 45), and (6) of such
section 1412(b) are redesignated as paragraphs (6), (7). and 18)
(2) Paragraph U) of section 1413(a) of such Act is amended by striking out sub-
paragraph A) and (B) and substituting “are no less stringent than the national pri-
mary drinking water regulations in etfe’ct under section 14 12(a) and 1412(b),’
(3) Section 1444(d) of such Act is amended by striking out “(including interim reg-
ulations)”
id SciE crwKc PEER REVIEW —Section 14 12(e) of the Safe Drinking Water Act is
amended to read as follows
‘(el The Administrator shall request comments from the Science Advisory Board
(established under the Environmental Research. Development, and Demonstration
Act of 1978) prior to proposal of a maximum contaminant level goal and national
primary drinking water regulation The Board shall respond, as it deems appropri-
ate, within the time period applicable for promulgation of the national primary
drinking water standard concerned. This subsection shall, under no circumstances,
be used to deLay final promulgation of any national primary drinking water stand- i
ard”
C -\ iL’ ’Y ” L , 5o
- TITLE I—PUBLIC WATER SYSTEMS
Section 101
EPA promulgated interim drinking water standards in 1975,
These standards are based largely on the 1962 recommendations of
the U S Public Health Service and require use only of technology
that was available when the Safe Drinking Water Act was passed
in 1974.
EPA was required ‘to revise the standards by the end of 1971.
These standards were to be based on the recommendations of the
National Academy of Sciences, EPA was required first to establish
recommended levels for each contaminant, taking only health into
account; and then to establish enforceable standards that would
reduce contaminant levels as much as feasible. Standards have
only been set for two Contaminan -_radionuclides and trihalo’
methanes.
-------
In March 1982, EPA issued an advanced notice of proposed rule-
making (ANPR) covering fourteen volatile synthetic organic chemi-
cals.’ EPA then proposed regulating nine of these contaminants in
June 1984.2
In October 1983, EPA issued another ANPR covering over fifty
organic, inorganic, microbial and radion icljde contaminants in
drinking water. 3 To date, there has been no proposed rulemaking
for these contaminants, but the Agency expects to have final stand-
ards by 1986
Section 101 of the bill addresses EPA’s failure to set standards
for tap water by requiring the Agency to set standards within
twelve months of enactment for the fourteen organic chemicals
listed by it in March 1982. unless it determines that there is not
sufficient evidence to constitute a rational basis, based on a weigh-
ing of all available health evidence, to believe that the contami-
nant may have any adverse effect on the health of persons EPA
would also be required to set standards within thirty-six months of
enactment for the over fifty organic, inorganic, microbial and radi.
onuclide Contaminants in drinking water listed by EPA in October
1983, unless it determines that there is not sufficient evidence to
constitute a rational basis, based on a weighing of all available
health evidence, to believe that the contaminant may have any ad-
verse effect on the health of persons
In addition, EPA would be required to set standards within three’
years of listing for other substances which, in the Administrators
judgment, may pose a threat to health, unless it determines that
there is not sufficient evidence to Constitute a rational basis, based
on a weighing of all available health evidence, to believe that the
Contaminant may have any adverse effect on the health of persons.
This would include review of the interim standards.
The Committee has inserted new language in the bill in this ses-
sion to clarify that the Administrator’s decision concerning wheth-i
er to set standards for a contaminant is to be based on an evalua- 1
tion of all available health evidence The Committee does not
intend to alter the weight that the agency ascribes to various types
of health evidence. For example, if a substance has been shown to
be carcinogenic in animal testing under the conditions of a single
properly designed and conducted test, it should still be considered
as posing a risk of cancer to humans exposed to the contaminant.
Although the Administrator’s determinations to regulate or not
will continue to involve questions of judgment and policy, the
drinking water regulations required by this section are intended to
prevent harm. As such, iron-clad proof or precise studies of actual
harm are not required.
The bill would require EPA to regulate those contaminants for
which, in the Administrator’s judgment, there is sufficient health
evidence to constitute a rational basis to believe that the contami-
nant may have any a dverse effect on the health of persons, weigh-
ing all available health evidence on the contaminant. If the Admin-
istrator decides that there is sufficient health evidence to support
OflOr )
-------
r . c’’
LJ iiJU..,.)
such a finding, he must regulate the contaminant. If the scientific -
evidence is unclear, the Administrator must err on the side of pro-
tecting public health. The Administrator must regulate if there is
a rational basis to believe that a Contaminant may have an adverse
effect on the health of persons. This decision must be rationally de-
rived from a weighing of all available health evidence. The Admin-
istrator’s decision is to be upheld if it is not arbitrary or capricious.
For instance, uranium, which has carcinogenic and chemical tox-
icity potential, is contaminating water supplies in Colorado. Yet
EPA has not set a standard for this contaminant Based upon a
review of the October 1983 ANPR, the Committee would expect
the Agency to set standards for this contaminant within three
years of enactment unless new evidence is produced.
If, in the Administrator’s judgment, there is sufficient health evi-
dence from which he can rationally conclude that a contaminant
does not present any adverse health effects, he must publish this
determination in the Federal Register. Such a determination does
not preclude or limit in any way the Administrator’s authority to
regulate the substance at a later time if, because of changed cir-
cumstances, regulation is warranted. Again, the Administrator is
required to weigh all available health evidence in determining
whether there may be any adverse effect on health. One circum-
stance which would justify a finding of “not sufficient evidence to
constitute a rational basis” would occur if the contaminant is not
found and is not likely to be found in drinking water.
A change in terminology is also made by this bill. The health-
based standards of the Act—Recommended Maximum Contaminant
Levels (RMCLs}- .are changed to maximum contaminant level goals
(MCLG 5 ji. The Committee does not intend this to be a substantive
change in the law. It merely clarifies the distinction between
RMCLS and Maximum Contaminant Levels (MCLs). MCL 5 must be
as close to the recommended maximum contaminant level as is fea-
sible. “Feasible” means with the use of technology, treatment tech-
niques or other means which the Administrator determines to be
the best available (taking cost into consideration).
The Committee has determined that the use of granular activat-
ed carbon (GAC) and other comparably effective adsorption tech-
niques are feasible to control to safe levels many of the synthetic
organic contaminants appearing in drinking water supplies across
the country.
The bill requires the Agency to include the use of GAC and simi-
lar adsorbant techniques as part of its definition of Best Available
Technology (BAT) when it develops MCLS for synthetic organic
chemicals. Designation of these technologies indicates that they are
available for use, taking cost into Consideration However, the Ad-
ministrator should only include this technology in this definiton of
BAT when it is an effective method of treating the contaminant in
question. It may b the case that aeration, adsorptive resins, or
other technologies are BAT for certain synthetic organic chemicals.
If there or other technologies are comparably effective techniques,
they may also be included as BAT and used in lieu of GAC, as de-
-------
000084
termined by the administrator. By specIfically referring to “para-
graph 2 of this subsection,” the reference to GAC is limited to es-
tablishing BAT for purposes of establishing an MCL. It does not,
therefore, establish GAC as a treatment technique in lieu of an
MCL under paragraph 3 for synthetic organic chemicals.
The National Academy of Sciences has concluded that GAC will
adsorb many organic compounds from water. According to the
Academy, properly operated GAC systems can remove or effective-
ly reduce the concentrations of synthetic organic chemicals. Ad-
sorption data for approximately 70 percent of the specific organics
that are suspected of being harmful to health are contained in the
report. 6 EPA Estimates that ninety-nine percent removal of trich-
loroethylene, a carcinogen and mutagen, can be achieved using
GAC. 7 A recent health survey carried out in Woburn, Massachu-
setts, indicated that tap water laced with heavy metals and syn-
thetic organic chemicals was highly correlated with perinatal
deaths, ear and eye birth defects, kidney and urinary disorders,
and leukemia in children in the area. Organic chemicals detected
in the drinking water supplies included trichioroethylene, 1-1-1-
trichloroethane, 1-2 transdichloroethylene, chloroform, and tn-
chlorotrifluoroethanea
The Committee is aware that EPA decided in 1978 not to require
granular activated carbon treatment for public water systems be-
cause of cost considerations. Despite this decision, EPA appears to
believe that such technology will be needed in the future to controj
many of the synthetic organic contaminants now under consider-
ation for regulation. EPA’s Director of the Office of Drinking
Water testified before the Senate that aeration or carbon adsorp-
tion are “available and effective” and will most likely be used in
those instances where serious groundwater Contamination has oc-
curred. 9
In addition, Michael Zihal, President of the Long Island Water
Co., representing the National Association of Water Companies,
testified before the Senate that: “Yes, GAC is accepted today, and
was accepted even way back when” 10 Charles Johnson, President,
C.C. Johnson & Associates, Inc. also testified before the Committee
that: “It is estimated that more than 30 treatment plants in west-’
era Europe are now using granular activated carbon on a routine
basis for removal or reduction of synthetic organic contami- 1
“ The American Water Works Association (AWWA) Re-I
‘2 National Academy of Sciences, Drinking Water and Health 251-380 (1950)
‘47 Fed Rag 935.5 (1982)
‘SW Lagakoa. B Wesaen. and M Zelen. Synop The Woburn Health Study—An Analysis
of Reproductive and Childhood Disorders and Their Relation to Environmen I Contamination
(Harvard School of Public Health. 1984) See aLso C 3 Trezek Engineering Case Study of the
Stringfellow Superfund Site (August i984) Prepared as background Information for the Office of
Technology Assesament
‘Safe Drinking Water Act Aii endment , of 1984 Hearings on S 2649 Before the Subcomm on
Toxic Subatances and Environmentel Oversight of the Comm on Environment and Public
Works, 98th Cong. 2nd Seas May 14. June ii. and June . O, i984. at p b on June ii) [ herein-
after cited as 1984 Senate Hearingaj
10 1984 Senate Hearings. supra note 9. at 17 1Mev 14 19841
‘ Safe Drinking Water Act Amendmenr.s of 1983 Hearings on HR 3200 Before the Subeom.
miltee on Health and the Environment of the Committee on Energy and Commerce. 98th Cong,
1st Seas 739 (Comm Print 98-49) (hereinafter cited as i9eJ Houso Hearing,J
-------
search Foundation workshop on volatile organic chemicals in
drinking water also found that carbon adsorption is “available”
and has been demonstrated at “full scale”. 12
The cost of GAC is also reasonable for many public water sys-
tems. For example, in 1977, an EPA research grant was awarde j to
the Cincinnati Water Works to determine the feasibility of GAC
adsorption and on-site regeneration. In 1977, carbon tetrachloride
spills from industry upstream• on the Ohio River caused alarm
among Cincinnati residents. In addition, the city’s water Contained
over 100 chemicals that could be harmful Charles Luken, of the
Cincinnati City Council, testified before the Committee that the
GAC system “would, indeed be an effective method to remove or-
game contaminan ”.i3 On the question of cost, the following ex-
change took place:
Mr. WALGREN. And what is an average dollar amount of
a monthly bill and what would be the increase in dollars?
Mr. LUKEN. The average Cincinnati resident pays—and
this is why the 20 or 30 percent may seem that terribly
large to some, because our water bills are not that
severe—the average resident pays $60 per year for water.
The city owns the water works, but it services the county.
The city is 400,000 people: the county is about a million.
The water works services the county and city rate payers
pay 80 percent less than county, so $60 for the city per
year, maybe $120 for the county per year, and you can
figure about a 3 O-percent Increase in those numbers.ta
The Committee expects that in most cases, EPA will set a maxi-
mum contaminant level as close as is feasibe to the maximum con-t
taminant level goal. However, EPA can promulgate a regulation:
that requires the use of treatment techniques in lieu of establish. 1
ing an MCL, if the Administrator makes a finding that the level
cannot be accurately enough measured in drinking water to estab-
lish a maximum contaminant level goal. This is the same as in ex-
isting law
The Committee has deleted the requirement that technology be
“generall 1 available” before the Administrator can find that it is
“feasible’. It is sufficient that the technology has been “examined
for its efficacy under field conditions and not solely under laborato.
ry conditions.” In this regard, the Committee has adopted the
recent recommendation of the National Drinking Water Advisory
Committee. 15
Each national primary drinking water regulation which estab-
lishes a maximum contaiminant level must list the technology,
treatment techniques, and other means which the Administrator
finds to be feasible for purposes of meeting the maximum contanji
nant level. But a reguliltion under this paragraph is not to require
5 The American Water Works Association Research Foundation. Final Report Workshop as
the Environmental Protection Agency Advanced Notice ot Propoeed Rulemaking on ‘ olatde
Organic Chemicals in Drinking Water at B—J2 October 22. 1982)
‘ l983 House Hearing,. supra note U. at 206
‘ ‘ Id at ill
ti ationaI Drinking Water Advisory Committee. Report of the Legss)attion Subcommitse
)Augi.ist .1 1984)
000085.
2.
-------
any specified technology, treatment technique, or other means be
used for purposes of meeting the maximum contaminant level.
Section 101 also requires that the Administrator propose and
promulgate regulations specifying criteria under which surface
waters would be treated by such processes as coagulation, sedimen-
tation, or filtration or their equivalent prior to di jnfection. In pro- .- /
mulgating such rules, the Administrator is tp consider the quality ¼i U U
of source waters, protection afforded by watershed management,
treatment practices and other factors relevant to protection of
health In lieu of the provisions of sectionl4l5, the Administrator
is to specify procedures by which the state determines which public
water systems within its jurisdiction must adopt filtration. This is
an action which an EPA workshop on microbiology recommended
to control illnesses caused by infectious agents in drinking water L6
The most serious and widespread illness is a debilitating disease
known as Giardiasis, caused by an intestinal parasite which can
find its way into drinking water Giardia cysts in drinking water
spawned some thirty-eight outbreaks of this disease in almost every
part of the country between 1972 and 1980. More than 20,000
people were affected.
The bill provides a non-exclusive list of processes which may be
necessary to prepare surface waters for disinfection The Commit-
tee recognizes that some suppliers benefit from high quality raw
supplies or watershed control programs that may render such con-
trol measures unnecessary.
In addition, the Administrator must propose and promulgate reg-
ulations requiring disinfection as a treatment technique for all
public water systems. Variances are authortzecj according to sec-
tions 1415(a)(1XB) and l415(a)(3).
The Administrator is also authorized, after opportunity for
public comment, to change maximum contaminant level goals, or
the list established for contaminants which cannot be accurately
enough measured in drinking water, to establish a maximum con-
taminant level goal. Nothing is this paragraph authorizes the Ad-
ministrator to deviate from the requirements for setting standards
established by sections 1412(bXl) (A) and (B).
Under the 1974 Act, the National Academy of Sciences had the
responsibility to evaluate health studies and recommend maximum
contaminant levels to EPA. Under Section 101 of this bill, the Ad-
ministrator is to request comments from the Science Advisory
Board prior to proposal of a maximum contaminant level goal and
a regulation.
-------
R 1 ,5O 4 d.UCLCt .. (%w,)
C d ak R
Tarts S
&ctgon JO1—3ta*dO,d leUin
1nterjn rtgULIL IOn. which have been pro. I
mul aze purauaz to 141 a)(1) of the Act I . ‘ ‘
are deemed a&hon j primary dristk ij
waLes regujaUonL” This simplifies the stat-
utory framework as there are no
reguLaUon but all regulatjon can be
amended Lmde, existing statutory condj-
lions (Ree tOlCa))
Wfthln twelve months after enactment.
the bill would reqiflre the PA to Ilmulta-
eouaLy p pose MCL goals and na&ionaj
primary drinking water (or 14
vOlatUe organic Com pou (VO ) listed by
A In the Federal Regts r for which
there Is a rational basis to believe there may
be any adverse effect on the health of per-
oce. or publish In the Federal Regi ster a
determIn,.tj that there is no auffident
ev1den to constitute a ritlonal basis to be-
heve that the contai in . may have any
adverse effect on the health of persons
(Sec IO1(bX1XA))
Within t.bIi -ty. monthe after enactment
of the bill, the same procedure would be (01.
lowed foe oontamj 5 Elated In Volun e 44
of the Federal R t er. page 45602 (Sec
1O1(bX IXB))
The jne proce u would be followed (or
&O7 6Ub ta wbjc the Admin st tor de-
Lermjs may have s .n adverse effect on the
health of persong. On January t. 1988, and
yearly thereaj , ‘A must publish a list
estshl i pr ,r1t1es and criteria for
review of ni ano which may require rog-
ulatfon to prev a known or anti p ad-
peru bea.lth elf tCts. Wlthjj three years of
lisU a C0flta.D lfl the above mwlaLory
Procedure must be followed. (Sec
1O1(bXlXC);
ct goa aye set at a level hi which no
known or ntkipste adverse effects on
biaft2 oo , with an adequa marvin of
.tetg. aUonal reg ’uIsLJo spec ify a leval
U Close tO an CL t1 U feUlbie
are Considered). Granula. - ACUV&L Ct - n
technology is specifimfly detormj to be
feesible for the control of synthefIc 0rganI
chemicals. Technology and treaEm tech.
niques must be determj ’i to be feasfhie”
under field conditions a d not solely under
r ejrth lab dluoiia.
or eQ vLenI treaum t tech.
nLqu ..haU be Proposed foe raw swlace
water sources unjese It can be shown on the
basis of a sanitary t eatment survey it La not
fleed d_. DtsinjectJon treatmei technique
regulauons are to be DrOmolga for aU
pub l ic water uysae . Variances from both
-------
\ \ crsl&. R .. S ô J- 4o
(a.e - e . 1Cr 5 .
aATIONAL PRIMAJIY DRII(afl!G WATTS
R UT O 5q 5
Szc. 2. (a) SectIon 1412(a) of the 8afe
Drinking Water Act Is amended to read as
Io1lcw
“(a) Effective on the date of enactrpent of
the Sate Drinking Water Act Amendments
of 19Z5, n.ch national Interim primary
d_rthking water regulation promu1ga J
Lmd r thts ctton before such date of enact-
ment shall be deemed to be a r .stional pi-l-
mary drinking water regulation under sub-
section (b). No such regulation shall be re-
quired to comply with the standards set
forth in aubsection (bX3) unlese such regu.
lotion is amended to establish a different
r .rf7nu i contaminaist level after the date
of enactment of such amend ier r .”,
(b) SectIon 1412(b) of the Safe Drinking
Waler Act Is amended by striking para-
gmptis (1), (2. and (3). arid b ertb ’ig In lieu
thereof the following-
[ ‘(bX lxA) In the case of the 14 Contand-
narita Listed In the Advance Notice of Pro-
posed Rulemaking published In volume 47.
Federal Register, page 9352, not later than
15 months after the date of enacs ent of
the Sale Drinking Water Act Amendments
of 1985, the Administr r shall—
( “(I) simultaneously propose maximum
contaminant level goals and national pri-
mary drinking water regWatio and, after
opVol-tunjty foe public con ent, sln,.ulta-
flev xsLy publish maxlmwn contaminant
level goals and pTon iulgate national primary
drinking water reguJa&Ion f or those con-
taminants which may have any adverse
etfect on the health of pci-sons, or
(“ (II) make and publish Ln the Federal
Register a determination that promulgation
of a national primary drinking water regula-
tion 1 not Justified under the criterion In
clause (U. Such determination by the Ad-
mlnist.rator shall be considered a final
agency action for purposes of judicial review
Under chapter VI I of title V of the United
States Code
((B) In the case of each of the contan’i
nanta listed in the Advance Notice of Pro-
posed Rulemaking published in volume 48.
Federal Register page 45502 not later than
36 mOnths after the date al enactment of
(lie Sale Drinking Water Act Amendments
of 1985. the Administrator shafl—
( (I) simultaneou , jy propose maximum
contaminant le ei goals and national pri-
mars drinking aater regu:atIOns and, after
opportunity for public comment, simuita-
neou.siy pub isii maximum contaminant
letei goals and promulgate national primary
drtrking atcr ‘regailau , ins for Lhoee Cun-
tam&nz.nts hich may hate any aa erse
effect on tile health of persons., or
( “(ii ) make ara publish in the Federal
Register a determir,auon th&L promLgation
of a nauonal pri mary drinking water regula-
tion is not justified under the Crltericni In
clause (U Such deterrmnation by the Ad-
ministralor shall be cousidered a final
ag y aeik J k ) rew w
ixider eMpter VU of tItle V the UnlZ .
Slates Code.
( “(CXD The M ’tmthistratee- iIiJ pubLish
xlwnxm contathfrta 5fl level gotls’ and ii-
multaneously promulgate national primary
drinking water regulations for each sub-
stance (other than a subst referred to
In b ragi-aph (A) or (B) for which a na-
tiorial primary drinking water regulation
was promulgated) which, In the judgment of
the Administrator. may have any adverse
effect on the health of persona On January
1, 1988, and at annual In ‘vals thereafter
the Administrator shall publish a list estab-
lishing priorities for the review of sub.
stances (other than substances referred to
In subparagraph (Al or (B)) which may re-
qnlre regulation Under this Act In order to
prevent known or anticipated adverse ef-
fects on the health of pereor , Such prior-
ities sh*ll be based upon the extent to
which such eont ianit a - in public
water systems thro ghont the United States
or on the known or anticipated adverse ef-
fects of sueti substance on the health of per-
sons. in establishing such priorities the Ad-
mlntstrators consideration shall include,
but not be llrntted to, substances regulated
as toxic water pollutants tinder sectIon 307
of the Clean Water Act and substances reg-
istered as pesticides mider the Federal In-
secticide, Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act
(“ (II) For each contaminant listed on the
priority list, the Administrator shall, within
3 years of listing—
-cii sJmultnneoualy propose a muinium
contaminant level goal and a national pr-i-
mary drinking waler regiili tion and, after
opportunity for public comment, saniult .a-
neously publish a mutmum contaminant
level goal and promulgate a national pri-
mary drinking water regulation far those
contaminants which may have any ads erse
effect on the health of persona, or
(“(U) make and pub1i b In the Federal
Register a determination that promulgation
of a national primary drlnk.ing water regula-
tion is not justified under the criterion in
subelause (I). Such determination by the
Administrator shall be considered a final
agency action for purposes of judicial review
under chapter V I! of title V of the United
States Code.]
“(b)(l) in the case qf those c ntamuionfj
lijted In the Advance Notice of Prupeied
Rulemaking pithlijhed in volwne 47, Federal
Register, page 9352, and in volume 48, Fed-
eral Reg ister, page 45-502, the Adminulrc,tcr
shall simuitaneou,aLy publish maximum con-
tamsizgnt level coals and promulgate no-
tional primary drusking water regulations—
“(Al aol iaier than 22 ,nont,ks after the
date of enactment of the Safe Drinking
Water Act Amendments af 1985 for 7 501 LeSS
than 9 of tA oi&luted contami*ant,,
“(B) not later than 24 months after the
date of enactnteizt for not te n, than 40 of
those listed contaminants, arid
“ IC) not later than 36 months after the
date of enactment for the remainder of such
listed contaminaals
“ (2 1 (A) Not later than January 1, 198i
arid at three year intervals thereafter, the
Administrator sh e ll publish a lust of con-
tarni,ianti which, in the judgment oftheAd-
mints (,-a tor may have an a4v rs eJfe ’t on
the health of person s and are known cr an
tteipated to occur in public w t r ristenis.
(B) For the purpose of e.stablusiiing such
list, lh Adi,unistrctor shall form an a4ri so-
ry working group including memberi from
the ‘ (i.e Toxicolog-y Program and the
Eavirousagcj Proteciir,n Agcnc-v’s OJ ’lc”s
of Dria.b ’ Water, Ftatscules, Toxic Sub-
stances, Gro nd Waler, Solid Weste and I
Easerge-ncy Re oittc and cay ethers tIre Ad.
SS 2LF
-
( ‘l r’ p
-‘ I sJ J
-------
OoOO&
mlnlatrstor deems appropriate, The Admfti.
tatrator’: conjideraf ion of priorUtes shall
lnclud& but not be L imited to, substance, re-
len-ed to 1* section 101 (14) of the Corn gre-
hen r i , ,, Environmental Rapon,ee. Corn pen-
3alwn. and Li bt1zty Act and substance,
registered as pesticide, undsr the Federal In.
3eCljcide Fun gwsde. and Rode,Ufc (de Act.
“ (C I Not later than 24 months after list-
ing, the Adminsjt rotor shall nmultar.eous ly
pro pose a Tnazlmum Contam inant level goal
and a national pr ilnarl, drinking water rep-
idation for not less than 25 conta ,,, ,nante
from the priority li,t e ,Uabli .sheij under
paragraph (2).
‘V .0) Not Later than 36 rnonthj after Lijt.
log, the Administrator shall simultaneously
publish a maximum contaminant goal and
promulgate a national primary drinking
water regulation for those contaminant,,
Ident ified under subparagraph IC)
(“(2] “(3) Each maximun, contaminant
level, goal established under this subsection
shall be set at the level at which no known
or anticipated adverse effects on the health
of persona occur and which allows an ade-
quate margin of safety. Each national pri-
mary drinking water regulation for a con-
taminant (or which a maximum contarni-
nant level goal L i established under this sub-
section shall specify a maximum level for
such contaminant which La as close to the
maximum contaminant level goal as Is fea.sI-
ble.
(“(3) The Administrator may. after op-
portunity for public comment, change maxi-
mum contaminant level goals, or the list es-
tablished under paragraph (C). and shall Si-
multaneously with such change, amend the
national primary drinking water regulations
concerned accordingly]
“(4) For the purposes of this subsection,
the term ‘feasible’ means feasible with the
use of the best technology, treatment tech.
niques and other mean,, which the Adminis-
trator finds, after examination for efficacy
under field conditions and not solely under
laboratory conditions, are available (taking
cost into consideration) For the purpose of
Paragraph (2). the use of granular activated
carbon is available (taking costs into consid-
eration) for the control of synthetic organic
chemicals, and any technology, treatment
technique, or other means found to be the
best available for the control of synthetic
organic chemical, must be at least as ef fee.
tive In controlling synthetic organic chemi-
cals as the use of granular activated carbon,
‘(5) Each national primary drinking water
regulation which establishes a maximum
contaninaj t level shaLl list the technology,
treatment techniques, and other means
which the Administrator finds to be feasible
for purposes of meeting such maximum con-
taminant level, but a Primary drinking
water regulation under this paragraph shall
not require that a apecLtie techaology
treatment technique, or other means be
used for purposes of meeting such ma.ri-
mum contaminant level.
“(6XA) The Administrator is authorized
to promulgate a national primary drinking
water regulation that requires the use of a
treatment technique In lieu of establishing a
maximum contaminant leiel. ii the Adn,in-
lstr ø ,’ make, a finding that it is not eco-
nomimily or technologically feasible to a.s-
certain the level of the contaminant In
such case, the Administrator shall identify
these treatment techniques which, in the
Administrator’s Judgment, aould prevent
or anticipated adverse effects on the
health of persons to the extent feasible
Such regula io halJ specify each treat-
ment technique known to the Administrator
which meet., the requLrement of this para-
graph, but the Admirn, trator may grant a
Variance from any such specified treatment
technique in accordance with sectIon
1415(a ’K3)
“(B) If any contaminant referred to in
paragraphs (b)(j) (A) or (B) Is listed under
this Paragraph (and a national primary
drinking water regulation requiring the use
of treatment techniques is simultaneously
promulgated under this pas-igraph for such
contaminant), the listing and promulgation
under this paragraph shall be made on the
date referred to In paragraphs (b)(l) (A) or
(8) for the establishment of primary drink-
ing water regulations,
“(C)(i) Not later than (12] 18 months
after the enactment of the Safe Drinking
Water Act Amendments of 1985, the Admin-
istrator shall propose and promulgate na-
tional primary drinking water regulations
specifying criteria under ahich filtration
(including coagulation and sedimentation,
as appropriate) Is required as a treatment
technique for public aaf ,er systems supplied
by surface water sources In promulgating
such rules, the Administrator shall consider
the quality of source aaters, protection af-
forded by watershed management, treat-
ment practices (such as disinfection and
length of aster storagel and other factors
relevant to protection of health
“ill) In lieu of the provisions of section
1415 the Administrator shall specify proce-
dures by which the State determines which
public water systems within its Jurisdiction
shall adopt filtration under the criteria of
clause i) The State may require the pubUc
water system to provide studies or other in-
formation, to assist En this determ1natio
The procedures shall provide notice and op-
portunity for public hearing on this deter-
mination If the State determines that fil-
tration is required, the State shall prescribe
a schedule for compliance by the public
water system with the filtration requir.
ment A schedule shall require complianc—
(as exped Itiously as practicable (a ti’-
State may reasonably determine I] with
18 months of a determination made und -
clause (iii)
“(iii) Within 18 months from the tim .
that the Administrator establishes the crite-
i-ia and procedures in this subparagraph, a
State with primary enforcement responsibil-
ity shall adopt any necessary regulations to
implement this subparagraph, Within (2
years] 12 months of adoption of such regu-
lations the State shall make determinations
regarding filtration for all the public water
systems within its Jurisdiction supplied by
surface c.aters.
“(iv) If a State does not have primary en-
torce ent responsibiliry for public water
systems, the Administrator shall have the
same authority to rnn.ke the determination
in clause (ii) in such State as the State
would have under that clause.
“ lv) Any filtration requirement or sched-
ule under this subparagraph shall be treat-
ed as If it aere a requirement Qf a national
prlrary drinking water regulation
‘( D l Not later tItan 36 months after the en-
actment of the Safe Drinking Water Act
Amendment, of 1985, (The] the Administra
tor shall propose and promulgate regiiia
tion.s requiring disinfection as a treatment
technique for all public aater systems(
The] and the Administrator shall jtniulta-
neously promulgate a nile specifying crite-
ria that aill be used by the A ministrator or
delegated tate authoritie, to grant var-
lances from this requirement according to
the provisions of sections 1415(aX1)(B) and
1415(a)(3)(, prior to Implementation of this
paragraph] The Administrator or the deie-
gated State authority shah, to the extent
feasible, provide technical assistance to
small public water systems In complying,
with this [ subsection] subparagraph,
(C) Paragr2ph,s (4) and (5 of section
1412(b) of the Sale Drinking Water Act are
amended by striking “Re%lsed national”
both times the words occur and Inserting
both times in lieu thereof “National” Para-
graphs 4). (5), and (6) of section 1412(b) of
the Safe Drinking Water Act are redesignat-
ed as paragraph (7), (8), and (9) respectively
(dl Paragraph i’7) of the Safe Drinking
Water Act a-s redesignated by subsection Ic).
is amended by adding at the end thereof the
following “Such review shall include an
analysis of innovations or changes in tech-
noloqij, treatment techniques or other activi-
ties that have occurred over the previous
three-year period and that may provide for
greater protection of the health of persons
and the findings of such review shall be pub-
lished in the Feder 1 Register If, after op-
portunity for public comment. the Adminis-
trator conclude, that changes in technology.
treatment techniques or other mean, are not
available to permit greater protection of (he
health of persons than that afforded by the
eli-sting regulations, an erplanatzon of such
conclusion, shall be published in the Federal
Register.
((d)] (ci SectIon 1412(e) of the Safe
Drinking Water Act is amended to read as
foilow a.
“(e) The Admlnjsti-ator shall provide the
Science Advisory Board, established under
the Environmental Research. Development
and Demonstration Act of 1978. an opportu-
nity to comment prior to proposal or during
Vie public comment period (of] on a inaxi-
mum contaminant level goal and national
primary drinking water regulation,”,
-------
5.R P.NC. c . bI ( 5’)
OC33 O
SECFION 1. SHORT TITLE
SECTION 2. NATIONAL PRIMARY DRINKrNG WATER REGULATIONS
SUMMARY
This section of the bill makes changes in terminology for setting
standards, includes require en ,g for schedules and deadlines, and
revises the basis for setting maximum contamjna levels.
Standard-Setting Terminology
There are two changes in stand d-setting terminology. The bill
eliminates the distinctjo between “interjxn”and “revised” stand-
ards, removing both terms from the Act, and designates “interim”
regu1atjo under existing law as national primary drinking water
reguiatjo . The bill also changes the term used to refer to the
health effects level set before the promulgation of a drinking water
standard from “recommended maximum contaminant level” to
“maximum contaminant level goal”.
Standard -Se eting &hp4ul
EPA is required to promulgate national primary drinking water
regulations for a total of 85 contamina published by the Agency
in two advance notices of prospose i rulemaking according to the
following schedule: at least nine contaminants within 12 months of
enactment, at least 40 additional contaj man within 24 months,
and the remainder of the list within 36 months. Thus, standarda
are required to be set for all 85 contamjr ants within 3 years of en-,
actment. I
On January 1, 1988, and at 3 year intervals thereafter, the Ad-.
ministrathr is required to publish a list of additional contaminants:
that may have an adverse effect on the health of persons. The Ad-
ministrator is to establish a working group with representatives
from the appropriate EPA offices and the National Toxicology Pro-
gram to assist in the development of the list. Within 36 months ofi
listing, EPA is required to publish maximum contaminant level
goals and promulgate maximum conta njnant levels for not less
than 25 contaminants from the list
Basis for Standard-Setting
Maximum contaminant level goals established by EPA are to be
set at the level at which no known or anticipated adverse effects on
the health of persons accur and which allows an adequate margin
of safety. Maximum contaminant levels in the national primaryl
-------
drinking water regulations are to be set at a level as c1 to th,
goal as is feasible with the use of the best technology, treatment
techniques and other means which the Ad nistto finds ,
available ( taking Cr’ into consideration). The bill establi*he, th 5
the , of granule. :ivated carbon is available for the control of
eynthetic organic cnemicals. Any technology, treatment technique,
or other means found to be the best available for the control of
thetie organic chemicals must be at least as effective as gran
activated carbon.
Each regulation promulgated by EPA which sets a max
Cont min nt level ah.aJl list the technology, technique, and other’
means which the Administrator finds to be available for rneet1ng
the mhtTimum contaminant level but shall not require that a
ci.flc technology be used for the purposes of meeting a m Zj u
contaminant level.
7 )eotment Techrnque Requirement
The bill authorizes EPA to promulgate a drinking water regula.j
tion that require, the use of a treatment technique to remove
contaminant rather than one that sets a mazi .im Contaminant;
level of the Administrator flnda that it is not technologically or
economicauy feasible to ascertain the level of the Contaminant
Not later than 18 months after enactment, EPA is required to
propose and promulgate regulations specifying criteria tinder
which filtration (including coagulation and sedimentation) is re-
qu.ired as a treatment technique for public water systems supplied
by surface water source,. State, with primary enforcement respon..;
sibility are required to adopt such re ulatiorj within 18 months of
their establishment and to makp individual system determinations;
within 12 months of such adoption,
Not later than 36 months after enactment, the Administrator is
required to propose and promulgate regulatio requiring diainfec.’
tion as a treatment technique for all public water systems arid to
promulgate a rule specifying cnteria that will be used to grant var-
iances from this requirement under the Act. The Administrator or
the delegate j State authority are directed to provide technical as-
8lstance to the extent feasible to small systems complying with dis-
infection regulation ,
Revision of Standards
Section 1412 of the Act require, the Administrator to review
drinking water standards every three years and revise such stand-
ard whenever change, in technology, treatment technique, or
other means of achieving compliance with applicable standards
permit greater protection of the health of persons. This require-
ment I a amended to require that an analysis of such changes be
published in the Fedeçal Register. If, after opportun ity for public
comment, the Adminigtrator concludes that changes are not avail-
able to permit greater health protection, an explanation of such
conclu iori must be published in the Federal Register.
Science Advisor 1 Board
The Adniint trator is required to provide the Science Advi ory 1
Board, established tinder the Environmental Research, Develop. 1
fl f ’ fl r ’ r
-------
L- .
merit and Demonstration Act of 19 7 an OPPortunity to comment’
prior to proposal or during the public commer period on maxi-
mum conthminm’t level goals and nation l primary drinking water
regulations.
DiSCU3 OM
The Committees primary objective in making changes to section
1412 of the Act is to expedite the procese of est.ablislung national
primary drinking water regulations, which are intended to provide
the regulatory foundation for the statute. With one class of chemi..
cala as an exception, there are no standards for synthetic organic
chemicals, which are of great public health concern. The changes
to existing aLiminiRtratlve standard-eett g procedures were made
to expedite regulation of contaminants in drinking water and to re-
quire regular review of regu1atio to make them more protective
of public health whenever possible.
The Committee is also concerned that standards for synthetic or-
ganic chemicals and other COntamlnRntS potentially harmful to
hun,nn health be protective of human health.
Standards set by the Administrator are to be protective of public
health. While cost and technology are factors to be considered in
establiahix g maximum contaminant levels under the Act, the first
priority of the Act is to protect humi n health by reducing or pre-
venting hun,an exposure to potentially harmful Cont.amins nts in
drinking water.
Stondard.g Terminology
In 1915, EPA promulgated interim drinking water regulation
for lSb si.ibstances which were derived from U.S. Public Health 1
service guidelines issued in 1962. The Agency was required to
revise these standards by 1917 based on the health effects recom-
mendations of the National Academy of Sciences. These reconimen-
dations have not been forthcoming. Revised standa.njj have been
set for only two classes of and
radium.
The distinction between interim and revised drinking water reg-
ulations is no longer relevant under the standard-setting proce-
dures prescn j in this bill. Therefore, the bill deletes the require-
‘nents that EPA issue revised national primary drinking water reg-
ulations and deems existing national ultenni primary drinking
water regulations to be national priority drinking water regula-
tions. Existing interim regulations need not comply with the new
requireme set forth in amendments to section 1412(bX2) until
those regulations are amended to establish different maximum con-
taminant levels. This change does not affect the rule-making status
of those substances for which there are existing interim regulations
and which are included in the list published in volume 48, Federal
Register, page 45502.
Standard -setting &hedules
The greatest problem with implementation of the program estab-
lished by the Safe Drinking Water Act is the failure of EPA to
issue standards for mast contaminants known or anticipated to be
-------
OCO 9
found in drinking water. The vital need for such t ndardI is exem-
plified by the fact that a number of States have been forced to
expend their limited resources to develop atanda in the absen
of Federal regulations. National drinking water standards are the
cornerstone of the Safe Drinking Water Act and their estab [ j .
ment is most appropriately a Federal responsibility. The stand .
setting schedules and deadlines established by the bill are intended
to produce certain resulta in a program that has been wrought
with uncertainty.
The 3 year schedule designated in the bill for promul?atjon of
national primaxy drinking water regulations coincides with ongo..
ing Agency ru1ernakin activities with respect to these listed con-
The Committee incorporated this schedule in recogni.i
tion of the fact that where daadlines are mandatory, they must
also be realistic.
The Administrator is to publish a list of additional Contaminan
no later than January 1, 1983, and at 3 year intervals thereafter,
which are to serve as the bails for nda.eetting activities after
the standards discussed above have been promulgated. The Adrnin.
istrator is required to establish a working group comprised of rep..
resentatives from the National To co1ogy Program and the EPA
Offices of Drinking Water, Pesticides, Thxic Substances, Ground
Water, Solid Waste and Emergenq Respons, and any others the
Administrator deems appropri .. The purpose of establishing this
advisory group is to assure that those responsible for the regulation
of tone substances and knowlegeable about cOntaminnnt pathways
and their potential health effects participate in compiling a list
that reflects collective and relative concerns about speci.flc contami-
nants known or anticipated to ocour in public water sywtenia.
Within 24 months of publiu*hing the priority list, the Administra-
tor is required to propose nhJ IiTnum COntan,ingnt level goals and
drinking water regulations for a mininnzm of 25 contamlnsints
deemed by the Administrator to be of public health concern.
Within 36 months of listing, the Administrator must promulgate
regulations for these contaminants.
Basis for Standard &tting
The bill requires that nrnrununi Contaminpnt levels be set as
cloae to the m iim ContamlriRnt level goal as is feasible with
the use of the beet technology, treatment techniques and other
means the Adminiztrator finds available ( taking cost into consider-
ation). The Committee made the change from the current “general-
ly available technology” terminology for two reasons; to expedite
the standard-setting process by defining the technology principle to
be used as the basm for establishing mJ Yflflum cofltam,nnnt levels
and to assure that 8uch standards reflect the full extent of current I
technolo y capability to move toward achievement of the health ef-
fects go E The determin , nta of technolog caJ capability are effec-
tiveness and economic feasibility. In order to provide a frame of
reference for effectiverieee and cost determinations, the bill speci-
fies that granular activated carbon technology is available for re-
moval of synthetic organic chemnicaJa.
There are significantly different types of granular activated
carbon that may be available for control of some synthetic organic
-------
00 0Q94
chemicals. Variables would include plant scale and design, grn
of carbon used, contact time, and frequency of carbon regenerat 0
The Adn iini trator should weigh these and other factors with re-
spect to their effectiveness and cost when determining which type
of g ular activated carbon should be assumed as the basis for
etaj,ljabi.ng a marimum contaminant level for any synthetic or.
ganic chemical.
There may be some cases where the granular activated carbon
treatment that has been used as the basis for establishing a maxi-
mum cont minant level may not be the most effective technolo r
for removal of particular synthetic organic chemicals. For example,
some volatile organic chemicals may be removed at higher levels
and at lower cost by the application of aeration techniques under
certain conditions. And, some disinfection byproducts, including tn-
halomethanes, may be removed as effectively at a lower cost with
the use of technologies other than granular activated carbon.
In recognition of the needed for flexibility for individual systemsi
in complying with established maximum contaminant levels, the
Administrator will not require public water systems to install the’
specific “best available technology” used to derive the maximum,
cont.arnin ant level but specify various feasible technologies which
may be used to attain such ninhirnum contaminant levels. Public
water systems may use alternative technologies, treatment tech-
niques and other means found to be effective to come into cornpIi.
ance with maximum contaminant levels. The definition of feasibili-
ty based on best available technology ( taking Cost into consider-
ation) applies to the establishment of a rr a 1mum contaminnnti
level. No comparable change has been made in existing law with I
respect to the promulgation of treatment technique requirements.
7 ’reatrnent Technique Requirements
Contamination of drinking water supplies by synthetic organic
chemicals is not the only health problem faced by public water sys-
tems. Incidences of water borne disease continue to occur. Accord-
in to EPA estimates for the period from 1978-1982 an average of
9,&)O cases per year were reported with 80%-90% of the cases an.
reported. The increasing incidence of such contamination is attrib-’
uted to a number of factors, including development of previously
protected watersheds. Filtration and disinfection techniques have
been widely proven to be effective in removing bacterial and some
viral COntamlnnnte from water. The bill requires the Administrator
to promulgate treatment technique regulations for filtration and
disinfection to assure that all public water systems are providing
basic health protection to their customers.
EPA has authority under the existing statute to promulgate such
a treatment technique requirement but has not done so.
The bill requires the Administrator to promulgate national pri-
mary drinking water regulations specifying criteria under which
filtration (including coa gulation and sedimentation, is required as a
treatment technique for public water systems supplied by surface
water sources. These criteria must protect the public from bacterial
and viral contamination.
States with primary enforcement responsibility are given 18
months to adopt any regulations necessary to implement filtration
-------
requirements. Within 12 month of adoption of such reguhtj
the primary enforcement autho is requireci to m
tions regarding filtration for all surface water Systems within iti
ju .ijdjct . States. ‘ir EPA in non-delegated St.atee may requ
public water syaten to provide studies or information to a izt in
mRking such deter ninations Notice and opportuj y for public
hearirigon de inlitions will be provided. If filtration is requirec ,
the State, or EPA in non.delegate States, must prescribe a sched-
ule and require compLian within 18 month of a determinnt oL
Within 36 month of enactment of the bill,, EPA is required to
propose and promulgate reguLations requiring disinfection as a
treatment technique for all public water systems, the Adinjnj tra.
tor shall simultaneouaiy promulgate a rule specifying criteria that
will be used by EPA or delegated State authont to grant var-
iances to systems that do not need to disinfect their water supply
to provide basic health protection from bacterisi contamm
Revision of Standonj 4
National primary drinking water regulatio are based on the
best available technology at a certain point in time. Technolog j
innovations or the development of more coat-effective means of con-
tarninant levels closer to health effects levels consistent with the
public health objective of the Act.
Although the Admin tor is currently required to review re-
vised nationa. primary drinking water regulatjo at least every 3
years and amend the regulatio whenever changes in technology,
treatment techniques and other means permit greater protection of
the health of persons, only one such reguIatjo has been reviewed
and revised by the Agency.
In order to empha ire the law’s requireme that these reviews
be conducted, the bill requires that they include an analysig of in-
novations or changes in technology, or treatment techniques that
have occurred over the 3 year period and may provide çeater
health Protection. The analysis is to be Published in the Federal
Register. If, after opportunity for public comment, the Administra.
tor concludes that changes to enhance public health protection pro-
vided by the existing regulatjo are not available, an expLanation
of that conclusion must also be published in the Federal Register.
The Committee expects that the standard.eett and review pro-
visions of this bill will stimulate technologj j innovation to im-
prove operatio capabilitj and efficiency, and cost-effectjven
f treatment. The Committee recOgnizes that research and develop-
nent activities in this area are not adequate and encourage the
water utility uiduatry to undertake such activities for the benefit of
ocal customers and the nation at large.
kience Advisory Board
The Committee anticipates that the Science Advisory Board may
e able to provide u. efu.j scientific comment, particuJarly in the
rea of health effects evaluation, to the Agency during the rul
naking process.
The bill requires the Administrator to provide the Science Advi.
ory Board an opportunjty to comment on maximu.m contaminant
evel goals and national primary druiking water regu1atjo prior
o proposal or during the public comment pe ]
ave been designated so that such opportun y shall in no way
elay t 1&4ency’a rulemaking procedures.
n r’ , “ ‘
i i;
-------
OO 39
( io
_
‘Si
SHORT TITLE
(SECTIoN 1. This act may be cited as the “Safe Drinking Water
Act’.]
SECTION!. This Act may be cited as the “Safe Drinking Water
Act Amendrnente of 1985.”
- DI7LN TrION S
Ssc. 1401. ‘
S S S S S 5
(14) the term “Indian tribal organizatia,,” means any Ind ian
tribe, band nation, or other organized group or communit, ’ (indud.
ing any Alaska Native uilla e, but not including any Alaska Natiue
regional or village corporation) which is reeog-nized as ehiqible for
the special programs and services provided by the United States to
India because of their status as lrtdjari&
NAT1ON DW4KING WATER REGULATIONS
SEc. 1412. ((aXi) The Adminiirtrator shall publish proposed na .
tionai term prunary drinking water re ulatjo within 90 days
after the date of enactment of this title. Within 180 days after such
date of enactment, he shall promulgate such regulations with such
modifications as he deems appropriate. Regulations under this
paragraph may be amended from time to time.
(2) National interim primary drinking water regulations pro-
mulgated under paragraph (1) shall protect health to the extent
feasible, using technology, treatment techniques, and other means,
which the Adminic -ator determines are generally available
(taking costs into consideration) on the date of enactment of this
title.
((3) The interim primary regulations first promulgated under
paragraph (1) shall take effect eighteen months after the date of
their rornuigation]
(a) Effective on the date of enactment of the Safe Drinking Water
Act Arnerujmente of 1985. each national interim prima ,- 1 drinking
water regulation promulgated under this section before such date of
enactment shall be deemed to be a national przmarj water regula.
(ion under subsect ion ( ) No such regulation shall be required to
comply with the standar set forth in sub8ection (bX2) unless such
regulation is amended to establish a different maximum contamni.
nant level after the date of enactment of such amendments
((bX1XA) Within 10 days of the date of the report on the study
conducted pursuant to subsection (e) is submitted to Congress, the
Administrator shall publish in the Federal Register, and provide
opportunity for comment on, the—.
((i) proposals in the report for recommended maximum con-
taxninant levels for national primary drinking water regula-
tions, and
((ii) list in the report of contanim . the levels of which in
dnnlth g water cannot be determined but which may have an
adverse effect on the health of persons.
((B) Within 90 days after the date the Administrator makes
the publication required by subparagraph (A), he shall by rule es-
tablish recommended malunum contaminaj levels for each con-
-------
000397
t&minnnt which. in his judgment based on the report on the study
conducted pursuant to subsection (e), may have any adverse effect
on the health of persona. Each such recommended TnAzlmum con.
taminant level shall be set at a level at which, in the Administra-
tor’s judgment based on :h report, no known or anticipated ad.
verse effects on the hea. of persons occur and which allows an
adequate margin of safety. In addition, he shall, on the basis of the
report on the study conducted pursuant to subsection (e), list in the
rules under this subparagraph any contaminant the level of which
cannot be accurately enough measured in drinking water to estab-
lish a recommended maximum contaminant level and which may
have any adverse effect on the health of persons. Based on informa-
tion available to him, the Administrator may by rule change rec-
ommended levels established under this subparagraph or change
such list.
((2) On the date the Administrator establishes pursuant to para-
graph (1XB) recommended mRiIrnum contaminant levels he shall
publish in the Federal Register proposed revised national primary
drinking water regulations (meeting the requirementa of paragraph
(3)). Within 180 days after the date of such proposed regulations, he
shall promulgate such revised drinking water regulations with
such modifications as he deems appropriate. -
((3) Revised national primary drinking water regulations pro-
mulgated under paragraph (2) of this subsection shall be pnniary
drinking water regulations which specify a maximum contaminant
level or require the use of treatment techniques for each contami-
nant for which a recommended marimum contaminant level is es-
tablished or which ia listed in a rule under paragraph (IXB). The
maTimum contaminant level specified in a revised national pri-
mary drinking water regtijatjon for a contaminant shall be as close
to the recommended maximum contaminant level established
under paragraph (1) B) for such contaminant as is feasible. A re-
qu.ired treatment technique for a contaminant for which a recom-
mended maximum contaminant level has been established under
paragraph (1XB) shall reduce such contaminant to a level which is
as close to the recommended ma.xlmum contaminant level for such
contaminant as is feasible. A required treatment technique for a
contaminant which is listed under paragraph (1XB) shall require
treatment neces8ary in the Administrator’s judgment to prevent
known or anticipated adverse effects on the health of persons to
the extent feasible. For purposes of this paragraph, the term “feasi-
ble” men feasible with the use of the best technology, treatment
techniques, and other means, which the Administrator finds are
generally available (taking cost into consideration).]
(bXl) In the case of those contaminants li.9ted in the Advance
Notice of P rvposed Rulemaking published in volume 47, Federal
Register, page 9S52. and in volume 48, Federal Register, page 45502,
the Administrator shall simultaneously publish maximum contami .
flout level goals and promulgate national primary drinking water
regulationa_
(A) not later than 12 months after the date of enactment of
the Safe Drinking Water Act Amendments of 1985 for not less
than 9 of those listed contaminants,
-------
(B) not later than 24 months after the date of enactment for
not less than 40 of those listed contamj)iants and
(C) not later than 86 months after the dat, of enactment for
th. remainder of such hated contamjnant&
(2XA) Not later than January 1, 1988, and at three year intervals
thereaft .,. th. Administrator shall publish a list of COntan2lrgants
which, in the jisdsnzent of the Admuustrnto, ., may have an adverse
effect on the health of persons, and are known or anticipated to
occur in public water system&
(B) For th. pur e of establishing 8uch list, the Admjiuatrl2tor
8 /loll form an advisory working group including members fr an z the
National Toxicology Progryjm and the Environmental Protection
Agency’s Offices oTDrzn ing Water, Pesticides, Toxic Sub i,r
Ground Water, Solid Waste and Enier ’ency Response arid an 7
others the Administrator deems approprzat& Th. Administrators
consideration of priorities shall include, but not be limited to, sub-
stances referred to in section 101(14) of the Comprehenawe Enviru .
mental Response, Compensatjor and Liabihi y Act, and substances
registered as pesticides under the Federal Insecticide, Fungicide,
arid Rodenticide AcL
(C) Not later than 24 months after listing the Administrator
shall simultaneously propose a maximum contaminant level qoal
and a national primary drinking water regulation for not less than
25 contaminants from the priority list established under paragraph
(2).
(D) Not later than 86 months after listing the Administrator
shall simultoneou.sly publish a maximum contaminant goal and
promulgate a national primary drinking water regulation for those
contaminants identified under subparagraph (C).
(3) Each maximum contaminant level goal established under thisi
subsection shall be set at the level at which no known or anticipat.’
ed adverse effects on the health of persons occur and which allows
an adequate margin of safety. Each national primary drznkinq
water regulat for a contaminant for which a maximum Contami.
font level goal is established under this subsection shall specify a
maximum level for such contaminant which is as close to the maxi .
mum contaminant level as is fea.sibk
(4) For the purpose of this subsectzon, the term “feasible” means
feasible with the use of the best kchnolo y, treatment techniques
and other means which th€ Administrator finds, after examination
for efficacy under field conditions and not solely under laboratory
conditions, are available (taking cost into Consideration). For the
purpose of paragraph (2), the use of granular activated carbon is
available (taking coats into consideration) for the control of synthet.
ic organic chemicals, and any technology, treatment technique, or
other means found to be the beat available for the control of synthet.
ic organic chemuxjls must be at least as effective in controlling syiz.
thetzc organic chemicals as the use of granular activated carbon.
(5) Each national primary drinking water regulation which estab-
ks / lee a maximum contomi nt level shall list the technology, treat.
meat techniques, and other means which the Administrator finds to
be feasible for purposes of meeting such maximum contaminant
leve4 but a primary drinking water regulation under this paru.
graph shall not require that a specified technology, treatment tech.
-------
000029
nique, or other ‘ne be used for purposes ôf meeting such maxi-
mum contaminant LeveL
(6XA) The Administrator is authorized to promulgate a national
primary drinking water regulation that requires the use of a treat-
ment technique in lieu of establishing a maximum contaminant
leve4 if the Administrator makes a finding that it is not economi-
cally or technologically feasible to ascertain the level of the con-!
tamznant. In suck case, the Administrator shall identify those treat-
rnent techniques which, in the Administrator’s jua gment would
prevent known or anticipated adverse effects on the health of per.
sons to th. extent feasible. Such regulations shall specify each treat-
ment technique known to the Administrator which meets the re-
quirernents of “is paragraph, but the Administrator may grant a
variance fro £ any such specified treatment technique in accordance
with sectzor 14L5(aX.V.
(B) If any contaminant referred to in paragraphs (7,K1) (A) or (B)
is listed under this paragraph (and a national primary drinking
water regulation requiring the use of treatment techniques is simul-
taneously promulgated under this paragraph for such contaminant),
the listing and promuLgation under this paragraph shall be made
on the date referred to in paragraphs (bXl) (A) or (B) for the estab.
hshment of primary drinking water regulation&
(CXi) Not later than 18 months after the enactment of the &f
Drinking Water Act Amendments of 1985, the Administrator shall!
propose and promulgate national primary drinking water r gula.i
tion specifying criteria under which filtration (including coagula-
tion and sedimentation, as appropriate) is required as a treatment
technique for public water systems 8upplied by surface water
sources. In promulgating such rules, the Administrator shall consid-
er the quality of source waters , protection afforded by watershed
management, treatment practices (such as disinfection and length of!
water storage) and other factors relevant to protection of health.
(ii) In lieu of the provisions of section 1415 the Administrator
shall specify procedures by which the State determines which public
water systems within its jurisdiction shall adopt filtration under
the criteria of clause (Q. The State may require the public water
system to provide studies or other information, to assist in this de-
termination. The procedures shall provide notice and opportunity
for public hearing on this determination. If the State determines
that filtration is required, the State shall prescribe a schedule for
cornpliarsce by the public water system with the filtration require-
msi it. A schedule shall require compliance within 18 months of a
determination made under clause (iii).
(iii) Within 18 mont/is from the tune that the Administrator es
tabhshes the criteria and procedures in this subparagraph, a State
with primary enforcement responsibility shall adopt any necessary
requlations to implement this subparagraph. Within 12 months of!
o4opticn of such regulations the State shall make determinations
regarding filtration for all the public water systems within its juris-
diction 8upplied by surface waters.
(iv) If a State does not have primary enforcement responsibility
for public water systems, the Administrator shall have the same au-
thorfly to make the determination in clause (ii) in such State as the
Stat, would have under that clause.
-------
OOO(j
f7.3 -
(u) Any filtnition requirement or schedule under this subpar .’
graph shall be treated as if it were a requirement of a Pzationalp,- .
mwy drinking water requlatzon
CD) Not later than J6 months after the enactment of the Safe
Drinking Water Act Amendments of 1985, the Administrator shall
prop e and promulgat, regulations requiring disinfection as a
treatment technique for all public water systems. And the Adminis-
trator shall simultaneously promulgat, a rule spec i/5f ing criteria
that will be used by the Administrator or delegated State authorz.
ties to grant variances from this requirement according to the provi .
sions of sections 1415(aXJXB) and l4lSi’aXJ). The Administrator or
the delegated State authority shal4 to the extent feasible, provide
technical as8istance to small public water systems in complying
with this subpara roph.
((4)] (7) (Revised national] National primary drinking water!
regulations shall be amended whenever changes in technology,
treatment techniques, and other means permit greater protection
of the health of persons, but in any event such regulations shall be
reviewed at least once every 3 years. Such review shall include Ofl!
analysis of innovations or changes in technology, treatment tech.
rsiques or other activities that have occurred over the previous three.
year period and that may provide for greater protection of the
health of persons and the findings of 8uch review shall be published
in the Federal Register. If after opportiAnzty for public comment, the
Administrator concludes that chart.ges in technology, treatment tech-
niques or other means are not available to permit greater protection
of the health of persons than that afforded by the existing regula-
tions, an explanation of such conclzs8jo; shall be published in the
Federal Register.
((5)] (8) (Revised national] National primary drinking water
regulations promulgated under this subsection (and amendments
thereto) shall take effect eighteen months after the date of their
promulgation. Regulations under subsection (a) shall be superseded
by regulations under this subsection to the extent provided by the
regulations under this subsection.
((6)] (9) No national primary drinking water regulation may re-
quire the addition of any substance for preventive health care pur-
poses unrelated to contamination of drinking water.
I S S S 5 S S
((eXi) The Administrator shall enter into appropriate arrange-
ments with the National Academy of Sciences (or with another in-
dependent scienti.fie organI7 tIon if appropriate arrangements
cannot be made with such Academy) to conduct a study to deter-
mine (A) the m iinium contaminant levels which should be recom-
mended under subsection (bX2) in order to protect the health of
persons from any known or anticipated adverse effects, and (B) the
existence of any contaminants the levels of which in drinking
water cannot be determined but which may have an adverse effect
on the health of persons.
((2) The result of the study shall be reported to Congress no
later than 2 years after the date of enactment of this title, and re-
visions thereof reflecting new information which has become avail-
able since the most recent previous report shall be reported to the
-------
03Q o;
Congre each two years thereafter. The report shall contain (A) a
8Ummary and evaluation of relevant ‘ibU .cation.e and unpublished
tudiee (B) a statement of methodol and assumptions for esti-
mating the levels at which adverse i . ..th effects may occur; (C) a
statement of methodologies and assumptions for estimating the
margin of safety which should be incorporated in the national pri.
mary drinking water regulations; (D) proposals for recommended
m zjmum contamins&nt levels for national primary drinking water
regulations, based on the methodologies, assumptions, and studies
referred to in clauses (A), (B), and (C) and in paragraph (4); (E) a
list of contaminants that level of which in drinking water cannot
be determined but which may have an adverse effect on the health
of persons; (F) recommended studies and test protocols for future
research on the health effects of drinking water contaminants, in-
cluding a list of the major research priorities and estimated costs
necessary to conduct such priority research; (G) periodic assess-
ments and evaluations of unregujated contaminants which may re-
quire continuous monitoring or regulation.
((3) In developing its proposals for recommended m imum con-
taminant level under paragraph (2ND) the National Academy of
Sciences (or other organ izAtlOit preparing the report) shall evaluate
and explain (separately and in composite) the impact of the follow.
i.ng considerations:
[ (A) The existence of groups or individuals in the population
which are more susceptible to adverse effects than the normal
healthy adult.
((B) The exposure to contaminants in other media than,
drinking water (including exposures in food, in the ambient
air, and in occupational settings) and the resulting body
burden of contaminants
[ (C) Synergistic effects resulting from exposure to or interac-
tion by two or more contaminants.
[ (D) The contaminant exposure and body burden levels
which alter physiological function or structure in a manner
reasonably suspected of increasing the risk of illness.
((4) In making the study under this subsection, the National
Academy of Sciences (or other orgarnzatjo ) shall collect and corre-
late (A) morbidity and mortality data and (B) monitored data on
the quality of drinking water. Any conclusions based on such corre-
l tion shall be included in the report of the study.
‘((5) Neither the report of the study under this subsection nor
any draft of such report shall be submitted to the Office of Man-
agement and Budget or to any other Federal agency (other than
the Environmental Protection Agency) prior to 1t8 submission to
Congress.
((6) Of th. funda authorized to be appropriatei to the Adminis-
trator by this title, such amounts as may be required shall be avail-
able to carry out the tudy and to make the report thrected by
paragraph (2) of this subsection.]
(e) The Administrator 8hall provide the Science Advisory Board,
established under the Environmental Research, Development arid
Demonstration Act of 1S78, on opportunity to comment prior to pro-
Posoiordurinq the public comment period on a maximum
nant level goat and national prt’ - drinking water regul , ,
-------
PUBUC WATER SYSTEMS
NATtot . PRISLARY DRI’(KI$G WATER
RaccL TIONs
Sec 2 si Section l4i2a, of the Safe
-)rtJiZlfig Water Act amended as
follows
(a) Effective on the date of enactment of
the Safe Drinking Water Act Amendments
of 1985 each national lntei -ijn prlmajy
drinking wafer reg-ulation promulgated
under this section before such date of enact-
ment shall be deemeil to be a national pri-
mary drinking water regulation under sub-
section (b) No such regulatIon shall be re-
quired to comply with the standard.s set
forth in subsection (b 2) unless such reg-u
letlon Is amended to establish—a different
maximum contam inant level after the date
of enactment of such amendments
(b) Section l4I2ib, of the Safe Drinking
Water Act is amended by striking para
graphs (1). (2) and (3). an InsertIng In lieu
thereof the (oUo u-ig.
- b l)(A In the case of the 14 cOntamf-
nants listed in the Athance Notice of Pro-
posed Rulemaking published In volume 47
Federal Register page 9352. not later than
15 monttis after the date of enactment of
the Sale Drinking Water Act Amendments
of 1985. the Adminjst -a r BhSJJ—
Ill SImultaneously propose m&ximum
contaminant level goals and riatlori.aJ pri-
mary dnnku g water regujacioni and, after
opportUlljty for public comment. sImulta-
neously publish maximum conu.mma t
level goals and promulgate national primary
drinking Wafer regulations for those con-
taminants Which may have any adverse
effect on the health of persons, or
ii) make and publljh In the Federal Reg-
ister a determination that promujgat Ion of a
national primary drinking water regulatIon
La not Justified under the criterion In clause
(I) Such determination by the Admthi,stra
ton shall be considered a ttr t aJ agency actIon
for purposes of Judicial review under Chap-
ter Vii of Title V of the United States Code
(B) in the case of each of the cont.a i-
nI&.nts listed In the Ad ance Notice of Pro-
posed Rulemaking published In volume 48,
Federal Register. page 45502 not later than
36 months after the date of enactment of
the Sate Drinking Water Act Amendments
of 1985. the Admi ’u trator shall—
(I) 8trnult .a .neoU . Y propose ma ‘ tuin
contan inant level goaLs and natlor. .. pri-
mary drinkjng water regulations a.nc !ter
opporturuty for public comment. s_— .lta.
neousiy publish maximum conta . - -ant
level goals and prom ulgate national p- - ary
d.rinktng water regulatIons for those on-
taminann which may have any atherse
effect on the health of persons or
“ ( II) make and publish In the Federal Reg-
ister & determj , tlon that promulgation Of a
national primary drinkj ig aater regulation
Is not Justified under the criterion In clause
(I) Such determination by the Administra
for shall be consIdered a final agency action
for purpo 5P 5 of Judicial review under Chap-
ter Vi i of Title V of the US Code
- (C)(l) The Adnijnjst r shall publish
maximum contamjnn,n level goals and ii
multaneously promulgate national prImary
drinking water regujatio for each sub
stance (other than a substance referred to
In subparagi ’ ph tA Or (B) for which a na
tiorsa .J prLmary drinking aater regulatio-i
was promulgated) which In the Judgment of
the Adl8jnistrator may have any adverse
effect on the health of persons On Januar
1 1988. and at annual iritei- als thereafter
the Administrator shall publish a list esiao
lishing priorities for the retiea of sub-
stances (other than substances referred to
in subparagraph Ai or ‘Bu which may i v-
9ul e regulation under this Act in order to
prevent known Or ant:clpated adverse ef
fect.s on the health of persons Such prior
(ties shall be based updn the extent ‘to
s- hich such contanunaiit Occurs In public
water systems throughout the United States
or on the known or anticipated adverse ef
fect,s of such substance on the health of per
sorts In establishing such priorities the Ad-
curustrator s consideration shaLl include
0002
but not be limited to substances reg-ula:e’t
as toxic water pOUut,ai- under section 30
of the Clean Water Act and substances g
lEered as pe ticldes under the Fede—al In
secticide Fungicide and Rodenttctde Act
‘(II) For each conta,mInA , t listed on the
priority list the Administrator shall. ajtf fl
three years of listing
U Simultaneously Propose a maximJrt
cont.azninant lecei goal and a national pri
mary drinking water regulation and after
Opportw’iity for public comment simuita
neousiy publish a maxImum conta u -ta.
Ie el goal and promulgate a national pr
mary drir ikJig sater regulation for those
contaminants which may have adverse ef
fects on the health of persons or
(I I) make a publish In the Federal Regis-
ter a dec.ermination that promulgation of a
national prtm.a.ry drinking water regtiJat, n
Is not Ju Jfled under the criterion In sun-
clause (I) 8uch determination by the Ad-
mi.histzasor shall be considered a final
agency sctjog for purposes of Judicial review
under Chapter VU of Title V of the US
Code
‘(2) Each maximum contam inant level
goal established under this subsection shall
be set at the level at Which no kflowri or an-
ticipated adverse effects on the health of
persons occur and which allows an adequate
margin of safety Each national primary
drinking aater regulation for a contaminant
for which a m.axtrnum Contaminant le el
goal Is established under this subsection
shall specify a maximum leval for such con.
tammant which Is as close to the maximum
contam ina,r t level goal Is feasible
‘(3) The Adnitrustrator may, alter oppor-
tunity for public comment. chs,nge maxi
mum conta in ! ant level goals, or the list es-
tablished under paragraph (C). and shall Si.
muitaneously with such change, amend the
national Primary drizik ,u-s.g water regulatio
Concerned accordingly
‘(4 For the purposes of this subsection
the term feasible means feasible with the
use of the best technology, treatment tech.
niques and other means which the Adminis-
trator finds alter examination for efficacy
under field conditions and not solely under
laboratory conditiona are avaliable (taking
cost into conslderatjon) For the purpose of
Paragraph (2). the use of granular activated
carbon is atailable (taking costs Into consid-
eration) for the control of synthetic organic
chemicals, and any technology treatment
technique, or othtr means found to be the
best available for the control of synthetic
organic chemicals must be at least as effec
tive in controlling synthetic organic chemi. -
cals as the use of granular activated carbon
“(51 Each national primary drinking waterl a
regulation which establishes a maximum
contaminant level shall list the t.echnolog ,
treatment techniques, and Other mea.nsi
ahich the Administrator finds to be feasible
for purposes of meeting such maximum con
ta.mninant level but a primary drinlting
aater regulation under this paragraph shall
not require that a specified technology
treatment technique, or Other means be
used for purposes of meeting such conta.nii
nant level -
6RA) The Admirustrator Is authorized
to promulgate a rational primary drinking
aater regulation that requires the use of a
treatment technique In lieu of eStabii,shtng a
maximum contaminant le el I! t e Admin
LStrator makes a finding that it is not eco-
flOmically or technologically feasible to as
certain the level of the contaminant In
such case, the Athisinistrit .or shall identify
those treatment techniques which, In the
Admjjiistratoz- 5 jud ent. would prevent
known or anticipated adverse effects on the
health of persona to the extent feasible
S 1 124 V . * ijj . ç c
o 1)
ti,’
Cct L’- P \. jc 1
øc 4 . i.
s ) -
-------
000103
such regulations shall 8pec [ fy each treat-
merit technique known to the Admfnj trator
which meets the requirements of this para-
graph, but the Administrator may grant a
carlance from any such specified treatment
technique in accordance with section
14 15(a)(3).
‘(B) 11 any contaJnin t refez-red to In
paragraphs (b)(l) (A) or (B) is listed under
this paragraph (and a natloriaj primary
drinking water regulation requLrtz g the use
of treatment techniques is slznultaneously
promti1ga j under this Paragraph for such
conUu mnazfl) the listing and promulgation
under this Paragraph shall be made on the
date referred to In Paragraphs (b)(1) (A)
d (B) for the estab1is ent or primary
drinking Water regWatlo
“(C)(l) Not later than 12 months after the
enactment of the Safe Dr1rikJr g Water Act
endments of 1985, the Adrnjn trator
shall propose and promulgate national pri-
nary drinking Water reguiatIo Specilying
ciilerla under Which filtration (Including co-
agulation and sedimentation as appropri-
ate) is required as a treatment technique for
public water systems supplle by surface
water sources. In promulgating such rules,
the Administrator shau consider the quality
of source waters, Protection afforded by wa-
tersheci management, treatment practices
(such as disinfection ansi length of water
storage) and other factors relevant to pro-
tection of health,
“(ii> In lieu of the provisio of section
1415 the Admlnj trator shall specify proce-
dures by which the State deternulnes which
public water systems within its jurisdiction
8hall adopt filtratIon under the criteria of
clause (I). The. State may require the public
water system to provide studies or other in.
formation, to assist in this determj atlon,
The procedures shall provide notice and op-
portunity for public hearfng on this deter.
talnatlon, U the State determines that fil-
tration is requirej, the State shall prescribe
I schedule for compliance by the public
rater system with the filtration require-
ment A schedule shall require compllan
La expec ou y as Practicab’e (as the state
may reasonably determ e).
“(ill) Within 18 months from the time
that the Admthj tra r establishes the crite.
na and procedures in thIs subparagraph, a
State With prlmaj-y enforcement responsibil.
Ily shall adopt any necessary reg’ulatzo to
bxipleme nt this sUbParagraph, Within two
sears of adoption of such regulatjo the
State shall make determfl ations regarding
filtration for all the public Water systems
Sithin it , jurisdiction supplied by surface
raters,
“ (lv ) If a State does not have primary en-
forcement responsibility for public water
‘Yatems, the Administrator shall have the
‘Roe authority to make the determination
h clause (II) in such State as the State
COuld have under that clause, Any filtration
requIre or schedule under this subpara-
Iraph shad be treated as if It were a re-
Quirernent of a national primary drinking
‘ster reguJ tion,
“(1)) The Administrator shall propose and
iromuig regWatio requiring dLsinfec.
as a treatment technique for all public
‘Iter Systems, The Adm1pj tre r shall pro-
eUlgate a rule specifying criteria that will
Used by the Administrator or delegated
&&te authorities to grant variances from
according to the,provlslo
I &eotfo , s, l 4 15(a)(l)(B) arid 14t5(a)(3), I
l lOt to ixnplementation of this Paragraph.
The Administrator or the delegated State
Slithority shall, to the extent feasible, pro,
“de technical assistance to small public
SYstems In complying With this sub-
‘ tlOfl, :.- —
Cd) Paragraphs (4) and (5) of section
1412(b) of the Safe Drinking Water Act are
amended by striking “Revlse(i national”
both times the words occur and insertin;
both times in lieu thereof “National”. Pare.
graphs (4), (5) and (6) of section 1412(b) of
the Safe Drijikj g Water Act are redesignat.
ed as paragraph (7), (8), and (9) respectively,
“Ce) Section 1412(e) of the Safe Drinking
Water Act is amended to read as follows:
‘(f) The Administrator shad provide the
Science Advisory Board, established under
the Environmentni Research, Development
and Demonstration Act of 1978, an opportu-
nity to comment prior to proposal of a max-
imuni contaxn level goal and national
primary drinking water regulation,”,
P
P. -S(
AME DMLN-r NO. 4.
Mr DC’RENBERGER (for himst i!
and Mr BA1JCt , ’ submitted an amendS
ment intended to be proposed by
them to the bill (S 124) entitled the
“Safe Drinking Water Amendinenta of
1985 . as follows
A . ’erwMrNTNo 4
St-c icjrt 1412 b) of the Safe Drinking
Water Act is amended by striking para
g’ apiis iii. (2), and (3), and inserting in 1k-u
th&—poi thi li., lotrng
(bii 1 RAt Iii the case of the 14 contama.
nant.s litUd in the Ad ance Notice of Pro
posed Riikmakirig published in iolume 47
Fede a Re ir. ige 9352. not later than
15 ron(hs after toe date of enactment of
the S ’fe Drtnkirtg ‘ stem Act Amendments
of 1 3 rI ’e AdmmL’irator shall—
(ii iVuitaneousIv propose a maximum
c’OntamInlnI le’ el goal and a national pri
maz drinking water regulation, and alter
opportunity for public comment, simulta-
neously publish a maximum contaimnant
level goal’ and a national prtrna, ’y drinking
water regulatio for those
hi e Is a rational basis to believe
any adverse e ect on a
h QLp 5i Qp or
“(U) publish tnthe Federal Register a de-
termination that there La not sufficient evt.
denee ocor u;ute a ! ttonalbaslsasbe.
lie ye that the eontam ina t maypave any
£4 ye r ae health of persona
• “(B) In the case of each of the contami-
nants listed In the Advance Notice of Pro-
posed Rulemna*ing published In Volume 48.
Federal Register. page 45502, not Later than
6 months alter the date of enactment of
the Safe Drinking Water Act Amendments
of 1984. the Administrator shall—
t” (i ) simultaneously propose a maximum
contammant level goal and a national pri-
mary drinking water regulation, and after
opporturuty for pubUc comment. scmulta-
neously publish a maximum contaznJna r t
level goal and a national prtinaz-y drinking
water regulation for those contaminants for
which there is a rational basis to believe
that there may be any adverse effect on the
health of persons, or
“ (Ii) publish In the Federal Register a de-
termination that there Is not sufficient evi-
dence to constitute a rational basis to be-
Lieve that the contaminant may have any
adverse effect on the health of persons
“(C)(i) The Adrntnistr-ator shall publish
maximum contaminant level goals a d
muiraneously promulgate national primary
di-Inking water rc 6 u!ations for each rn o ’
stance (other than a substance referred to
In subparagraph ‘-A) or SB) for which a na-
tional primary drinking water regulation
was promulgated) which, In the Judgment of
the Adonirustrator may have any adverse
effect on the health of persona On January-
1. r988. and at annual Inlet-vats thereafter,
the Administrator shall publish a list estab-
lishing priorities for the review of sub-
stances (other than substances referred to
in subparagraph (Al or (Sn which may re-
Quire regulation under this Act in order to
prevent known Or ar,ticipated adverse ef-
(ects on the health of persons, Such prior-
ities shall be based upon the extent to
which such contarnjz’ant occurs In public
water sy stem_I throughout the tJniLed States,
or on the known or anucipaled adverse ef-
fects of such Substance on the health of per-
son_I In establishing such priorities the Ad-
lntnjstrator’s consideration shall include,
but not be limited to, substances regulated
as toxic water pollutants under section 307
of the Clean Water Act and substances reg.
istered as Pesticides under the Federal In-
secticide, Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act.
‘(ii) For each c tamin&,nt listed on the
priority list, the Administrator shall. aithin
3 years of listing—
“(1) Simultaneously propose a maximum
contaminant level goal and a national pri-
mary drinking waLer regulation, and alter
opportunity for public comment, simulta.
neously publish a maximum contaminant
level goal and a natIonal primary drinking
water regulation (or thozc cønilmthants (or
which there Is a rational basIs to believe
that there may be any adverse effect on the
health of person, or
“(I I) publish In the Federal Register a de-
temunation that there Is not Sufficient cvi. I
derice to constitute a rational basis to be.
Ueve that the comt -amInant may have any
adverse effect on the health of per-sons.
-------
. 2( Lf 04 oj -\ c d t m. C 1°
(J
2 DECLARATION OF GOALS AND POLICY
3 SEC. 2. Part A of the Safe Drinking Water Act is
4 amended by adding at the end thereof the following new sec-
5 lion:
6 “DECLARATION OF GOALS AND POLICY
7 “SEC. 1400. (a) The objectives of this Act are to assure
8 I/tat all public water systems provide a safe supply of drink-
9 ing water to the people of this Nation and to protect the
10 ground water resources of this Nation from contamination.
11 In order to achieve these objectives it is hereby declared that,
12 consistent with the provisions of this Act—
13 “(1) it is the national goal that all public water
14 systems provide drinking water free of any contan?ina-
15 lion that may have any adverse effect on the health of
16 persons; and
17 — “(2) it is the national goal that all undei qround
18 sources of drinking water be protected from any con-
19 tamination that may have any adverse effect on the
20 lien/ f/ i of /)ersoiis.
21 “(b,) ft is 1/he policij of f/i is licE to i’eewjn ic, pi(’scrvc,
22 and pi’otcct 1/ic res/)onslln///,es itiid iofe of S/ales to issiirc
2:3 1/1(1/ /)i’/)Ilc wa/cr si/xlcnis /)rOi:u/e (1 safe suJ)/)Iy of ilri,ikiiuj
4 wuf( r (1) 1(1 f/ iiit u1i(/C/qronn(/ of (I)in/ /jq waler are
25 piolcc/ed [ ruin con/u iii mat ion.
-------
onr
L .’J
1 PARI b—PUBLIC WATER SYSTEMS
2 NATIONAL PRIMARY DRINKING WATER REGULATIONS
3 SEc. 3. (a) Section l 4 12(’a,.) of the Safe Drinking
4 Water Act is amended to read as follows:
5 “(a) Effective on the date of enactment of the Safe
6 Drinking Water Act Amendments of 1984, each national in-
7 terim primary drinking water regulation promulgated under
8 this section before such date of enactment shall be deemed to
9 be a national primary drinking water regulation under sub-
10 section No such regulation shall be required to comply
11 wit/i the standards set forth in subsection (b.)(2, unless such
12 regulation is amended to establish a different maximum con-
13 taminant level after the dale of enactment of such amend-
14 inents. “.
15 ( b ) Section 1412(b) of the Safe Drinking Water Act is
16 amen dccl by striking paragraphs (1) and (2), and (‘3,), and
17 inserting in lieu thereof the following:
18 “( ‘l) ( ’zi) in 1/ic case of 1 /ic 14 contaminants listed in the
19 JIdL’a nec Notice of Proposed Ruleniakiizg published in
20 volume 47 Fcdei ’al Register, page .9352, 1w! late,’ 1/1(111 iS
21 inoiiI/i, tifi ’, ’ I/ic (late of enactment of I/ic Safe Di’inkinq
22 [ VaIc,’ lie! 4 E11ie1l(i11lc)i/ , of /984, 1/ic idmi i isfi’ator s/ui/I—
si iii ullu icous1ij 1’0/)o.se iliuri 11111111 COfll(11il 1-
24 11(101 ICcel ,t/O(iIs (111(1 11(1/jO fl(ll /)l’l wary (/i’iflkilU/ IC(i/C1’
“ “/“/((llo11s (1/1(1. (I//Cl’ ()/)/)O)/ii 111/1/ foi’ / 11 (I)/ic (‘011! iiieiit,
-------
O1 i It
“J S U.)
1 simultaneously publish maximurn conlaminaht level
ç .2 c1
2 goals and promulgate nalio,rai primary drinking water
3 regulations for those contaminants which in the Ad-
4 ministrator s judgment may have any adverse effect on
5 the health of persons; or
6 “( ‘ii make and publish in the Federal Register a
7 determination that, in the Admnin’is1rator judgment,
8 promulgation of a national primary drinking water
9 regulation is not justified under 1/me criterion in clause
10 (‘i, . Such determination by the Administrator shall be
11 considered a final agency action for purposes of judi-
12 cial review under chapter J7JJ of title of the United
13 Stales Code.
14 “(‘B) in the case of each of 1/ic contaminants listed in
15 the Advance Notice of Proposed Rulemaking published in
16 volume 48, Federal Register, page 45 5O2, not later 1/ian 36
17 ‘months after 1/ic date of enactment of the Safe Drinking
18 1’J i icr Act A in en dmnenis of 1984, lii e [ dmni ii islialor s/ia ii—
19 ‘‘(i) simiillancously pi’opo e mu.vim uin conla liii—
20 ii ant le cl you 1. (111(1 hit! Ii) mu /)r!uhIa 17/ i/ri u/i hl / uiii icr
2 1 1’C(/i I latu) 118 (111(1, (1)1(1 0/1/8)1/111 11 /!/ for /111 /)IU CO ill )h1C1l I.
21 Sl 1 11 1 111(1/i (‘011811/ /) U 1)1 / 8/i IIUI.ri 18 111)? ( Dii 1(11)/i /1(1/li l( ’L’Cl
90(1/8 (1 iitl /)i’oiii lI/(J(1ie /1(lilDli(ul /111 111(1 1// (liii?’. iii!) le(u/cr
24 1Y ’/lIf1/t/0I1. ’ Jüì //io e (OI l/Ui )? i/UI iils l1 /i 1(11 ill //i( 1(1—
-------
030107
1 ministrator’g judgment may liave .gny adverse. effect on
2 the health of persons; or
3 “(ii) make and publish in the Federal Register a
4 determination that, in the Administrator’s judgment,
5 promulgation of a national primary drinking water
6 regulation is not justified under the criterion in clause
7 (‘i). Such determination by the Administrator shall be
8 considered a final agency action for purposes of judi-
9 cial review under chapter VII of title V of the United
10 States Code.
11 “(C)(’i ) The Administrator shall publish maximum con-
12 taminant level goals and simultaneously promulgate national
13 primary drinking water regulations for each substance (‘other
14 than a substance referred to in subparagraph (A) or (B) for
15 which a national primary drinking water regulation was pro-
16 mulgated,.) which, in the judgment of the Administrator, may
17 have any adverse effect on the health of persons. On January
18 1, 1988, and at annual intervals thereafter, 1/ic Adini’nisira-
19 br s/ia/i pub/is/i a list establish ivy priorities for the review of
20 s u h.s tanccs (oilier thou s a bsta uces refe?7 e(t to in s ubpo i ‘ ci y rap/i
21 (ii) or (/3)) wI , ic u may requ ire IrfJala/ion U viler 1/i is ii c i in
22 order to J)rcven/ known or unhi(:i/)atcd fi2C1 e effects Oil 1/ic
lieu//f, of /)crcons 811(11 /)riorifi(’. S/li //i be bu.scil il/)O1i 1/ic
24 ( .Li(1i/ 10 ii ’h ic/i She/i ( ‘Ofl/((flhj/j((fl/ OCCIII ’ 5 111 /11//the W(I/cr sys-
25 /euuix 1/ irolu//ul uf 1/ic U,ij/ci/ Stoles ’ or Dii 1/ic flOwul or on/icE-
-------
OO 108
1 paled adverse effects of such substance n the healt/j of per-
2 sons. In establishing such priorities the Administrator’.s con-
3 siderat ion shall include, but not be limited to, substances reg-
4 vialed as toxic water pollutants under section 307 of the
5 Clean JVater Act and substances registered as pesticides
6 under the Federal insecticide, Fungicide, and Rodenticide
7 Act.
8 “ai) For each contaminant listed on the priority list,
9 the Administrator shall, within 3 years of listing—
10 “Ui) simultaneously propose a maximum contami-
11 nant level goal and a national primary drinking water
12 regulation and, after opportunity for public comment,
13 simultaneously publish a maxim urn con Ia rn ivan t level
14 goal and pronvulgate a national primary drinking
15 water regulation for those contaminants which in 1/ic
16 Administrator judgment may have any adverse effect
17 on the health of persons; or
18 “(if) nuike and publish in the Federal Register a
19 . determination that, in 1/ic Adin in is/valor ‘ s judgment,
20 prom ii! qation of (1 notional primanj dii nhiinq wütcr
21 7cs’jiilation is not jiisIificti under 1/ ic criterion in sub—
22 cb i e (I). Si,c/, (/CIciiiiinu/ion by I/ic rl(lmiIlislialor
23 s/ia/I b cOnsu/cle(/ (1 final (ifJdncy ac/ion foi niiposes
24 O/jil(Iir!aI i(’i’I(W limier c/lap (ci VII oj lit/c l of I/ic
25 (In, (ci i iS/ales Code.
-------
000109
1 “(2) Each maximum contaminant level goal established
2 under this subsection shall he set at the level at which, in the
3 Administrator s judgment, no known or anticipated adverse
4 effects on the health of persons occur and which allows an
5 adequate margin of safely. Each national primary drinking
6 water regulation for a contaminant for which a maximum
7 contaminant level goal is established under this subsection
8 shall specify a maximum level for such contaminant which is
9 as close to the maximum contaminant level goal as is feasi-
10 ble.
11 “(‘3,)(A) The Administrator is authorized to from ulgate
12 a national primary drinking water regulation 1/tat requires
13 the use of a treatment technique in lieu of establishing a
14 maxim urn con ta in man t level, if the ildin in istrcitor in akes a
15 finding that it is not economically or technologically feasible
16 10 ascertain the level of the contaii,jiianl. In sue/i case, the
17 Admin is! rator shall identify those treatment techniques
18 which, in the tdministra’o, ‘s jiuljmeiil, would prevent
19 known or anticipated adverse effects on the heal//i of /)C7SOflS
20 to I/i c extent fca ihle. Sac/i rcyu/ulions shall spcciJ j Cue/i
2 1 lieu I 111(111 (( Cli lilt/i/C knoii’ii /0 I/iC 1( 11) 1/i l 1511(1101 ic/i ic/i iiiccts
22 1/ic req lii re /i? en Is of (Ii is pa iwj iu 1 ili, but I/ic - h/mi ii i t iii lOr
2 maij f/ia Hi a i:u i/a nec /1(i)/i (1111/ s ne/i s/wcl/ic’(l Irealinen I fech-
21 fir 1 ?! (‘ /1? (((curt/a i/CC Wi 1/i sec/lOll 11 lt ’u) (. ).
-------
0010
1 “(B) If any contaminant referred to in paragraphs
2 (b)(1) (A) or (B) is listed under this paragraph (and a na-
3 tional primary drinking water regül lion requiring the use of
4 treatment techniques is simultaneously promulgated under
5 this paragraph for such conlaminant ), the listing and pro-
6 mulgation under this paragraph shall be made on the date
7 referred to in paragraphs (b)(1) (A) and (B) for the establish-
8 ment of primary drinking water regulations.
9 “(C) The Administrator shall propose and promulgate
10 primary drinking water regulations requiring all public
11 water systems using surface water as a source of supply to
12 provide treatment by processes such as (i ) fill ratioii and (iij)
13 coagulation and sedimentation, as appropriate. The Adminis-
14 Ira/or may specify treatment techniques which are equivalent.
15 The Administrato?’ shall promulgate a rule specifying criteria
16 thai will be used by the Administrator or delegated Stale
17 authorities to grant variances from this requirement accord-
18 ing to the provisions of sections l-i15 ’c 1)(73) and l 4 1 ,5 ’a,.)
1 ) (3), prior to implcmcn/at ion of this paragraph. These criteria
20 will include an cnaluatw? of JOU) water quality, watershed
21 control and other protection ineasuics.
22 “(D) T/i e iI (/flHfl !.sbaf() r s/i a/I J)rO/ )o.se (ifl d p/on! ti/yale
23 lryul(it lOnS reqii iring disinfection aS a treatment lee/in iquc
24 for (ill /)((/m/lC wutci t/sleiiis. ‘J/ie .l(/UH/i 15(1(1(07’ • /I(i/l J)1O-
2.5 ,i u1/(1/c (1 rule .‘ peeifiji 1 )9 c v i (cram that trill he used In, ’ I/ic
-------
,4.
1 Administrator or delegated State authorities to gran! var- ‘ . 1 1
2 iances from this requirement according to the provisions of
3 sections 14 15(a) (1) (B) and l4l5(a )t3), prior to implemenia
4 lion of this paragraph. The Administrator or the delegated
5 State authority shall, to the extent feasible, provide technical
6 assistance to small public waler systems in complying with
7 this subsection.
8 “(4,) The Administrator may, after opportunity for
9 public comment, change maximum contaminant level goals,
10 or the list established under paragraph (3), and shall siinul-
11 taneously with such c/lange, amend the national primary
12 drinking waler regulations concerned accordingly.
13 “(‘5 ) For the purposes of this subsection, the term ‘feasi-
14 ble’ means feasible with 1/ic use of the best technology, treat-
15 menl techniques and other means which the Administratoi
16 finds, after examination for efficacy under field conditions
17 and not solely under laborafo, j conditions, are available
18 (taking cost into consideration). For the jntrpose of paragraph
19 (‘2 , 1/ic use of granular activated carhiii is available l(lking
20 costs into consideration, for 1/ic control of synlilelic oiqanic
21 cli emicals, (111(1 any 1cc/i noIo jy, treat iiien I 1cc/i ii ique, or of/icr
22 11IC(11I. found to lie 1/ic best ((j:(gj/((/ /c for I/ic coiilrol of
23 syiil/ic tie orqunic c/icmic(11 5 inns! he (If least us effective in
21 con hot/my syn 1/ic/u oiy , oie c/i ‘in len/ s us I/ic use of yin ii i i in i
2;3 ac/ 1L’lrlte(f (X1i/E)ii.
-------
030; :2
1 “(6) Each national primary drinking water regulation I
2 which establishes a maxinluin contaminant level shall list the
3 technology, treatment techniques, and other means which the
4 Administrator finds to be feasible for purposes of meeting
5 such maximum con taminant leve4 but a primary drinking
6 water regulation under this paragraph shall not require that
7 a specified technology, treatment technique, or other means be
8 used for purposes of meeting such contaminant level. “.
9 (d) Paragraphs (4) and (‘5,) of section 1412(b) of the
10 Scife Drinking Water Act are amended by striking “Revised
11 national” both times the words occur and inserting both times
12 in lieu thereof “National”. Paragraphs (4), (5), and (6) of
13 sec/ion 1412(b) of the Safe Drinking Water Act are redesig-
14 fluted as paragraphs (7), (8), and (9), respectively;
15 (e) Section l-il2 e , ) of the Safe Drinking IJ’atcr Jet is
16 amended to read as follows:
17 “(‘f,) The Adminisii’aioi’ shall proL’lde the Science Advi-
IS sory Board, cslablis/,cd under the Environmental I?eSCarc/,,
19 I)ecelopiitei,i and ! ci11oiis/ia1joj J ci of 1978, au O/)/)o1’/unily
20 to Coil? 111 (‘Iii /) 1101’ lo J) 10/losu I o/ (t ii? (ljt’ 11)??! 111 ( ‘0111(11/li)? (1/li
1 /(‘CC/ /0( 1/ (F IC! Il(11IO,H li /11! 111(1 1 ’!J 111’! iii, ha, l( ’(/(cr i’ejiilu/ioii
-------
O3O 13
‘ l ( !DI)
&ction 2. Declaration of goals and policy “ -
Unlike some environmental statutes, the Safe Drinking Water
Act of 19’74 does not Contain a clear statement of goals and policies.
S. 2649 adds a new section to the Act, setting forth the national
policies, and goals of assuring safe drinking water to the nation’s
population; protecting underground sources of drmking water; an J
recognizing the appropriate Federal and State roles in achieving
these goals.
Section 3. National primary drinking waler regulations
Interim and revised standards
EPA promulgated interim drinking water regulations in 1975, de-
rived from U.S. Public Health Service guidelines issued in 1962.
The Agency was required to revise these standards by 1977 based
on the health effects recommendations of the National Academy of
Sciences. Revised standards have been set only for two contami-
nants—trihalomethanes and radionuclides.
The Act, as amended, would delete the requirement that EPA
issue Revised National Primary Drinking Water Regulations. In
addition, the interim and revised regulations distinction is removed
and the national interim primary drinking water regulations are
deemed to be a national primary drinking water regulations. The
former “interim regulations” need not comply with the new re-
quirements set forth in amendments to section 1412(b)(2) until
those regulations are amended to establish different maximum con-
taminant levels.
Maximum contaminant level goals
The bill makes a change in terminology used in the Act. The
term for the health-based standards—currently called Recommend-
ed Maximum Contaminant Levels (RMCLs)—is changed to maxi-
mum contaminant level goals. This is not a change in substance,
but rather a clarification of the distinction between RMCLs and
Maximum Contaminant Levels (MCLs).
The amendments modify the existing standard-setting procedures
by requiring that maximum contaminant level goals and national
primary drinking water regulations be proposed simultaneously
and promulgated simultaneously. This change is intended to expe-
dite rule- making procedures. The bill makes a number of other
changes intended to require timely issuance of standards for those
contaminants which may have an adverse effect on health of per-
sons. -
Standard-setting deadlines
Three major new deadline provisions require regulation of poten-
tially hazardous cont.a iinants in drinking water. First, within 18
months, the Administrator is required to review 14 organic con-
taminants listed in the Advance Notice of Proposed Rulemaking
published in March, 1982, and establish national primary drinking
water regulations for those, which, in the Administrator’s judg-
ment, may have any adverse effect on health. If the Administrator
determines that regulation is not justified under this standard, con-
sidering all evidence bearing on health effects, he must publish this
determination in the Federal Register. Second, within 36 months of
enactment, the Administrator must similarly address the over
sixty organic, inorganic, microbial, and radionuclide contaminants
listed in the Advance Notice of Proposed rulemaking published in
October, 1983. Third, on January 1, 1988, and at annual intervalsi
thereafter, the Administrator must publish a list of priority con -t
-------
OCO;;4
taminant.s for regulation. The Administrator must establish maxi-
mum contaminant levels for these contaminants within three years
or determine that regulation is not justified under the statutory
standard
The Administrator is required to establish maximum contami-
nant level goals and national primary drinking water regulations
for those contaminants which, in the Administrator’s judgment,
may have any adverse effect on the health of persons. This stand-
ard is intended to be protective of public health. The Agency is ex-
pected to regulate any contaminant which meets the criteria, even
if the contaminant is not listed under the three deadline provi-
SiOfl S.
Standard -setting basis
Under the three deadline provisions, the Administrator is to reg-
ulate within the alloted time unless he makes and publishes a de-
termination that, in his judgment, regulation is not justified under
the “may have any adverse health effect” criterion. The basis for
this determination must be explained. Where scientific evidence is
not conclusive, the Act requires the Administrator to resolve uncer-
tainties in favor of protection of public health. One instance in
which the Administrator would be justified in not regulating is if
the contaminant is not found and is not likely to be found in public
water systems. The Administrator’s decision not to regulate is re-
viewable by the Court of Appeals.
Maximum contaminant leuel,s
In order to expedite standard-setting the bill modifies the exist-
ing method under current law of establishing a maximum contami-
nant level (MCL). MCLS must be set as close to the maximum con-
taminant level goal as is feasible. The term “feasible” means feasi-
ble with the use of the best technology, treatment techniques and
other means, which the Administrator finds, after examination for
efficacy under field conditions and not solely under laboratory con-
chtions, are available (taking cost into consideration). The bill
makes clear that the use of granular activated carbon is available
(taking costs into consideration) for the control of synthetic organic
chemicals. Any technology, treatment technique, or other means
found to be the best available for the control of synthetic organic
chemicals must be at least as effective in controlling synthetic or-
ganic chemicals as the use of granular activated carbon.
During the course of the hearings, the Committee heard testimo-
ny from witnesses representing the water supply industry, the En-
vironmental Protection Agency, and public health interests that
granular activated carbon technology, as used in well-operated
public system has been proven to be highly effective in removing
synthetic organic chemicals. The testimony indicates that the tech-
nology is not only proven but is available and economically feasible
for many public water systems.
The Committee recognizes that other technologies, including aer-
ation and adsorptive resins, exist which may be equally effective or
more effective than the use of granular activated carbon under cer-
tain conditions. The relative effectiveness of technologies varies ac-
cording t specific parameters of technology design and oper-
-------
(s,’’-. 4
L,. . 1 ). I )
ation and the nature of the contaminant, The use of technologies
which are more effective than granular activated carbon under
some circumstances is not precluded as the basis for setting MCLs.
The Administrator will not require public water systems to in-
stall the specific “best available technology” used to derive the
MCL but will list other technologies which might be used to attain
the MCL. Public water systems may use those or alternative tech-
nologies found equally effective, to come into compliance with the
MCL standard.
Treatment technique requirements
In addition to modifying the basis for setting maximum contami-
nant level standards, the bill also includes treatment technique re-
quirements for public water systems. This requirement is intended
to ensure that all systems are providing basic public health protec-
tion. Section 1412(b)(3)(C) requires the Administrator to propose
and promulgate regulations requiring that all public water supplies
using surface water be treated by processes such as filtration (and
coagulation and sedimentation, if appropriate), or an equivalent,
prior to disinfection unless it can be shown that such treatment is
not necessary. The Committee recognizes that some public water
systems are able to provide public health protection comparable to
that provided by filtration through a combination of other treat-
ment and non-treatment means including protection of the water-
shed. This section provides the Administrator authority to grant
variances from this requirement according to the provisions under
Sections 1415(a)(1)(B) and l415(a)(3) if the system shows that the
treatment is not needed to provide equivalent health protection.
The Administrator is required to specify the criteria to be used in
granting variances before the filtration requirements go into effect
The requirement in current law for public participation in any
variance proceeding will be applicable to filtration variance proce-
dures
EPA is also required to propose and promulgate regulations re-
quiring that all public water systems disinfect their water supplies
unless they can show that there is no need to do so. The Adminis-
trator is provided authority to grant variances from this require-
ment in accordance with Section 1415(a)(l)(B) and 1415(a)(3). EPA is
required to issue criteria for those systems which do not need to
disinfect for purposes of public health protection and should re-
ceive variances. EPA r ust issue such criteria prior to implementa-
tion of disinfection regulations.
-------
SHORT TITLE
4 SEcTIoN 1. This Act may be cited as the “Safe Drink-
5 ing Water Act Amendments of 1984”.
6 DECLARATION OF GOALS AND POLICY
7 SEC. 2. Part A of the Safe Drinking Water Act is
8 amended by adding the following new se tion:
1 “DECLARATION OF GOALS AND POLICY
2 “SEC. 1400. (a) The objectives of this Act are to assure
3 that all public water systems provide a safe supply of drink-
4 ing water to the people of this Nation and to protect the
5 ground water resources of this Nation from contamination. In
6 order to achieve these objectives it is hereby declared that,
7 consistent with the provisions of this Act—
8 “(1) it is the national goal that all public water
9 systems provide drinking water free of any contamina-
10 tion that may have any adverse effect on the health of
11 persons;
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
9
24
“(2) it is the national goal that all underground
sources of drinking water be protected from any con-
tamination that may have any adverse effect on the
health of persons; and
“(3) it is the national policy to provide adequate
controls on activities that threaten to contaminate the
ground water resources of this Nation in order to pre-
vent any such contamination.
“(b) It is the policy of the Congress to recognize, pre-
serve, and protect the responsibilities and rights of States to
assure that public water systems provide a safe supply of
drinking water and that underground sources of drinking
vater are protected from contamination.”.
\
K
S. 2c,C f9
O i 7 c Cki4 - C C&.
cc-r
2c Se 5, (. e1
, I I /
-------
1 NATIONAL PRIMARY DRINKING WATER REGULATIONS
2 SEc. 3. (a) Section 1412(a) dT the Safe Drinking Water
3 Act is amended to read as follows:
4 “(a) Effective on the date of the enactment of the Safe
5 Drinking Water Act Amendments of 1984, each national in-
6 terim primary drinking water regulation promulgated under
•7. this section before such date of enactment shall be deemed to
8 be a national primary drinking water regulation under sub-
9 section (b). No such regulation shall be required to comply
10 with the standards set forth in subsection (b)(2) unless such
11 regulation is amended to establish a different maximum con-
12 taminant level after the date of the enactment of such amend-
13 ments.”.
14 (b) Section 1412 (b) of the Safe Drinking Water Act is
15 amended by striking paragraphs (1), (2), and (3) and insert-
16 ing:
17 “(1)(A) Not later than eighteen months after the date of
18 theenactment of the Safe Drinking Water Act Amendments
19 of 1984, the Administrator shall—
20 “(i) simultaneously propose maximum contaminant
21 level goals and national primary drinking water regula-
22 tions and, after opportunity for l)1 1b11C comment, simul-
23 . tancously publish maximum contaminant level goals
24 and promulgate national primary drinking water regu-
25 lations for the fourteen contaminan!s listed in the Ad-
-------
000118
1 vance Notice of Proposed Rulerhaking published in
2 volume 47, Federal Registet. page 9352; or
3 “(ii) make and publish a determination in the Fed-
4 eral Register that for a particular contaminant listed in
5 volume 47, Federal Register, page 9352, a national
6 primary drinking water regulation is not necessary be-
7 cause the levels of such contaminant currently found in
8 public water systems do not represent a threat of a
9 known or anticipated adverse effect on the health of
10 persons.
11 “(B) Not later than 36 months after the date of enact-
12 ment of the Safe Drinking Water Act Amendments of 1984,
13 the Administrator shall—
14 “(i) simultaneously propose maximum contaminant
15 level goals and national primary drinking water regula-
16 tions and, after opportunity for public comment, simul-
17 taneously publish maximum contaminant level goals
18 and promulgate national drinking primary water regu-
19 lations for each of the contaminants listed in the Ad-
20 vance Notice of Proposed Rulemaking published in
21 volume 48, Federal Regis tcr, page 45502; or
22 “(ii) make and publish a determination in the Fed-
23 eral Register that for a particular contaminant listed in
24 - volume 48, Federal Register, page 45502, a national
25 primary drinking water regi ation is not necessary be-
-------
O Oj 19
1 cause the levels of such contaminant currently found in
2 public water systems do not represent a threat of a
3 known or anticipated adverse effect on the health of
4 persons.
5 “(C)(i) The Administrator shall publish maximum con-
6 taminant level goals and simultaneously promulgate national
7. -primary drinking water regulations for each substance (other
8 than a substance referred to in subparagraphs (A) or (B) for
9 which a national primary drinking water regulation was pro-
10 mulgated) which, in the judgment of the Administrator, may
11 have an adverse effect on the health of persons. On January
12 1, 1988, and at annual intervals thereafter, the Administra-
13 tor shall publish a list establishing priorities for the review of
14 substances (other than substances referred to in subparagraph
15 (A) or (B)) which may require regulation under this Act in
16 order to prevent known or anticipated adverse effects on the
17 health of persons. Such priorities shall be based upon the
18 extent to which such contaminant occurs in public water sys-
19 tems throughout the United States and on the known or an-
20 ticipated adverse ffects of such substance on the health of
21 persons. In establishing such priorities the Administrator’s
22 consideration shall include, but not be limited to, substances
23 regulated as, toxic water pollutants under section 307 of the
24 Clean Water Act and substances registered as pesticides
-------
1 under the Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, and Rodenticide
2 Act.
3 “(ii) For each contaminant listed on the priority list, the
4 Administrator shall, within three years of listing, simulta-
5 neouslv publish a maximum contaminant level goal and pro-
6 mulgate a national primary drinking water regulation or
7 make and publish a determination in the Federal Register for
8 such contaminant that a national primary drinking water reg-
9 uiation is not necessary because the levels of such contami-
10 nant found in public water systems do not represent a threat
11 of a known or anticipated adverse effect on the health of
12 persons.
13 “(2) Each maximum contaminant level goal established
14 under this subsection shall be set at the level at which, in the
15 Administrator’s judgment, no known or anticipated adverse
16 effects on the health of persons occur and which allows an
17 adequate margin of safety. Each national primary drinking
18 water regulation for a contaminant for which a maximum
19 contaminant level goal is established under this subsection
20 shall specify a maxinwm level for such contaminant which is
21 as close to the maximum contaminant level goal as is
22 feasible.
23 “(3)(A) The Adai inistrator is authorized to promulgate a
24 national primary drinking water regulation that requires the
25 use of a treatment technique in lieu of establishing a maxi-
OOQ,17
-------
000121
I1
1 mum contaminant level, if the Administr or makes afinding
2 of overriding economic and technological constraints on mon-
3 itoring. In such case, the Administrator shall identify those
4 treatment techniques which, in the Administrator’s judgment,
5 would prevent known or anticipated adverse effects on the
6 health of persons to the extent feasible. Such regulations
7 shall specify each treatment technique known to the Adminis-
8 trator which meets the requirements of this paragraph, but
9 the Administrator may grant a variance from any such speci-
10 fled treatment technique in accordance with section
11 1415(a)(3).
12 “(B) If any contaminant referred to in paragraphs (b)(1)
13 (A) or (B) is listed under this paragraph (and a national pri-
14 mary drinking water regulation requiring the use of treat-
15 ment techniques is simultaneously promulgated under this
16 paragraph for such contaminant), the listing and promulga-
17 tion under this paragraph shall be made on the date referred
18 to in paragraphs (b)(1) (A) and (B) for the establishment of
19 primary drinking water regulations.
20 “(0) The Administrator shall propose and promulgate
21 regulations requ ring filtration as a treatment technique for
22 all public water systems supplied by surface raw water
23 sources. The Administrator is authorized to grant variances
24 from this requireme it according to the prdvisions under
25 sections 1415(a)(1)(B) and 1415(a)(3).
-------
OOCi
1 “(D) The Administrator shall pro ose and prbmalgate I P
2 regulations requiring disinfection . s a treatment technique for
3 all public water systems. The Administrator is authorized to
4 grant variances from this requirement according to the provi-
5 sions under sections 1415(a)(1)(B) and 1415(a)(3).
6 “(4) The Administrator may, after opportunity for public
7 comment, change maximum contaminant level goals, or the
8 list established under paragraph (3), and shall simultaneously
9 with such change, amend the national primary drinking water
10 regulations concerned accordingly.
11 “(5) For the purpose of this subsection, the term ‘feasi-
12 ble’ means feasible with the use of technology, treatment
13 techniques, or other means, which the Administrator deter-
14 mines to be the best available.”.
15 (c) Sections 1412(b) (4), (5), and (6) of the Safe Drinking
16 Water Act are amended by striking the word “Revised”
17 where it appears and redesignating the paragraphs “(6)”,
18 “(7)”, and “(8)”.
19 (d) Section. 14 12(e) of the Safe Drinking Water Act is
20 amended to read as follows:
21 “(e) The Athninistrator shall provide the Science Advi-
22 sory Board, established under the Environmental Research,
23 Development, and Demonstration Act of 1978, an opportuni-
24 tv to comment prior to proposal , f a maximum contaminant
25 level goal and national primary drinking water regulation.”.
-------
t- Mt yq ,,k C , L , ( r± ;)
R R p 1 No. -c - , 1 i i, ( .; c1 Sc . o(io )
NATIONAL PRIMARY DRINKING WATER RGU .T O JS
SEC 101 (a) SIMPLIFICATION OP STATUTORY SYs1 ’sa —Section I4 12(a) of the Safe
Drinking Water Act is amended to read as follows
“(a) Effective on the date of the enactment of the Safe Drinking Water Act
Amendments of 1984, each national Interim primary drinking water regulation pro-
mulgated under this section before such date of enactment shall be deemed to be a
national primary drinking water regulation under subsection (b) No such regula-
tion shall be required to comply with the standards set forth in subsection (bX2)
unless such regulation is amended to establish a different maximum contaminant
level after the date of the enactment of such amendments”
(b) EXPEDITED PROCEDURE FOR PROMULGATION —(1) Section 1412(b) of the Safe
Drinking Water Act is amended by striking out paragraphs (1) and (2). and so much
of paragraph (3) as precedes the last sentence thereof and substituting
“(iXA) In the case of each of the 14 contaminants listed in the Advance Notice of
Proposed Rulemaking published in volume 47, Federal Register, page 9352, not later
than 12 months after the enactment of the Safe Drinking Water Act Amendments
011984, the Administrator shall—
“(i) simultaneously propose a maximum Contaminant level goal and a nation-
al primary drinking water regulation, and after opportunity for public com-
ment, simultaneously publish a maximum contaminant level goal and a nation-
al primary drinking water regulation for those contaminants for which there is
a rational basis to believe that there may be any adverse effect on the health of
persons, Or
“(ii) publish in the Federal Register a determination that there is not suffi-
cient evidence to constitute a rational basis to believe that the contaminant
may have any adverse effect on the health of persons
‘(8) In the case of each of the contaminants listed m the Advance Notice of Pro-
posed Rulemaking published in volume 48. Federal Register, page 45502, not later
than 36 months after the enactment of the Safe Drinking Water Act Amendments
of 1984, the Administrator shall—
“(i) simultaneously propose a maximum contaminant level goal and a nation-
al primary drinking water regulation, and after opportunity for public com-
ment, simultaneously publish a maximum contaminant level goal and national
primary drinking water regulation for those contaminants for which there is a
rational basis to believe that there may be any adverse effect on the health of
persons, or
“(ii) publish in the Federal Register a determination that there is not suffi-
cient evidence to constitute a rational basis to believe that the contaminant
may have any adverse effect on the health of persons
(CXi) The Administrator shall publish maximum contaminant level goals and si-
multaneously promulgate national primary drinking water regulations for each sub-
stance (other than a substance referred to in subparagraph (A) or (B) for which a
national primary drinking water regulation was promulgated) which, in the judg-
ment of the Administrator, may have any adverse effect on the health of persons
On January 1, 1988, and at annual intervals thereafter, the Administrator shall
publish a list establishing priorities for the review of substances (other than sub-
stances referred to in subparagraph (A) or (B) for which a national primary drinking
water regulation was promulgated) which may require regulation under this Act in
order to prevent known or anticipated adverse effects on the health of persons Such
priorities shall be based upon the extent to which such contaminant occurs in public
water systems throughout the United States or on the known or anticipated adverse
effects of such substance on the health of persons In establishing such priorities the
Administrator’s consideration shall include, but not be limited to, substances regu-
lated as toxic water pollutants under section 307 of the Clean Water Act and sub-
stances registered as pesticides under the Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, and Roden-
ticide Act
‘(ii) In the case of each contaminant listed on the priority list, not later than 3
years after such listing, the Administrator shall—
‘(1) simultaneously propose a maximum contaminant level goal and a nation-
al primary drinking water regulation, and after opportunity for public com-
ment, simultaneously publish a maximum contaminant level goal and a nation-
-------
00012.4
al primary drinking water regulation for those contaminaftis for which there is
a rational basis to believe that there may be any adverse effect on the health of
persons, Or
“(11) publish in the Federal Register a deterg ination that there is not suffi-
cent evidence to constitute a rational basis to believe that the contaminant may
have any adverse effect on the health of persons
“(2) Each maximum contaminant level goal established under this subsection
shall be set at the level at which, in the Administrators judgment, no known or
anticipated adverse effects on the health of persons occur and which allows an ade-
quate margin of safety Each national primary drinking water regulation for a con-
taminant for which a maximum contaminant level goal is established under this
subsection shall specify a maximum level for such contaminant which is as close to
the maximum contaminant level goal as is feasible
“(3XA) In the case of any contaminant the level of which cannot be accurately
enough measured in drinking water to establish a maximum contaminant level goal
and which may have an adverse effect on the health of persons, the Administrator
shall list such contaminant under this paragraph in lieu of establishing a maximum
contaminant level goal under paragraph (1) of this subsection In lieu of establishing
a maximum contaminant level for such contaminant under this subsection, the Ad-
ministrator shall promulgate treatment techniques for such contaminant which re-
quires treatment necessary in the Administrator’s judgment to prevent known or
anticipated adverse effects on the health of persons to the extent feasible
“(B) If any contaminant referred to in subparagraph (A) or (B) of subsection (b)(1)
is listed under this paragraph (and a national primary drinking water regulation
requiring the use of treatment techniques is simultaneously promulgated under this
paragraph for such contaminant), the listing and promulgation under this para-
graph shall be made on the date referred to in subparagraph (A) or (B) of subsection
(b)( I) for the establishment of primary drinking water regulations
“(C) The Administrator shall propose and promulgate regulations requiring that
all surface waters be treated by such processes as coagulation, sedimentation, or fil-
tration or their equivalent prior to disinfection unless it can be shown on the basis
of a sanitary survey that such treatment is not necessary The Administrator shall
develop rules for the granting of waivers for local suppliers of water prior to the
implementation of the preceding sentence -
“(D) Each national primary drinking water regulation which establishes a maxi-
mum contaminant level shall list the technology, treatment techniques, and other
means which the Administrator finds to be feasible for purposes of meeting such
maximum contaminant level, but a regulation under this paragraph shall not re-
quire that any specified technology, treatment technique, or other means be used
for purposes of meeting such maximum contaminant level
“(E The Administrator shall propose and promulgate regulations requiring disin-
fection as a treatment technique for all public water systems The Administrator is
authorized to grant variances from this requirement according to the provisions
under sections 1415(aXl)(B) and l415(aX3)
“(4) The Administrator may, after opportunity for public comment, change maxi-
mum contaminant level goals, or the list established under paragraph (3), and shall
simultaneously with such change, amend the national primary drinking water regu-
lations concerned accordingly
(2) Redesignate the last sentence of paragraph (3) of section 1412(b) of such Act as
paragraph (5) of such section, delete “generall) ” in such sentence, delete “para-
graph” and substitute ‘subsection”, after “finds’ insert “, after examination for effi-
cacy under field conditions and not soley under research laboratory conditions,” and
add the following at the end thereof “For purposes of paragraph (2) of this subsec-
tion, the best available technology which is feasible for the control of synthetic or-
ganic chemicals includes the use of adsorption techniques such as the the use of
granular activated carbon and other comparably effective techniques
(c) CONFORMiNG CHANGES —Paragraphs (4) and (5) of Section 14 12(b) of the Safe
Drinking Water Act are each amended by striking “Revised national” in each place
where it appears and substituting “National” Paragraphs (4), (5), and (6) of such
section 1412(b) are redesignated as paragraphs (6), (7), and (8)
(d) SCIENTiFIC PEEK REviEw —Section 14 12(e) of the Safe Drinking Water Act is
amended to read as follows
“(e) The Administrator shall request Comments from the Science Advisory Board
(established under the Environmental Research, Development, and Demonstration
Act of 1978) prior to propos’al of a maximum contaminant level goal and national
primary drinking water regulation The Board shall respond, as it deems appropri-
ate, within the time period applicable for promulgation of the national primary
drinking water standard concerned This subsection shall, under no circumstances, ‘
be used to delay final promulgation of any national primary drinking water stand.
ard”
-------
flA.
o. 5
r - -
%_• d J
TITLE I—PUBLIC WATER. .SYSTEMS
Section 101
EPA promulgated interim drinking water standards in 1975
These standards are based largely on the 1962 recommendations of
the U.S. Public Health Service and require use only of technology
that was available when the Safe Drinking Water Act as passed in
1974. -.__________
EPA was required to revise the standards by the end of 1977.
These standards were to be based on the recommendations of the
National Academy of Sciences. EPA was required first to establish
recommended levels for each contaminant, taking only health into
account; and then to establish enforceable standards that would
reduce contaminant levels as much as feasible Standards have
only been set for two contaminants—radionuclides and trihalo-
methanes.
In March 1982, EPA issued an advanced notice of proposed rule-
making (ANPR) covering fourteen volatile synthetic organic chemi-
cals.’ EPA then proposed regulating nine of these contaminants in
June 1984.2
In October 1983, EPA issued another ANPR covering over fifty
organic, inorganic, microbial and radionuclide contaminants in
drinking water. 3 To date, there has been no proposed
for these contaminants, but the Agency expects to have final stand-
ards by 1986
Section 101 of the bill addresses EPA’s failure to set standards i
for tap water by requiring the Agency to set standards within
twelve months of enactment for the fourteen organic chemicals
listed by it in March 1982, unless it determines that there is not
sufficient evidence to constitute a rational basis to believe that the
contaminant may have any adverse effect on the health of persons.
EPA would also be required to set standards within thirty-six
months of enactment for the over fifty organic, inorganic, microbial
and radionuclide contaminants in drinking water listed by EPA in
October 1983, unless it determines that there is not sufficient evi-
dence to constitute a rational basis to believe that the contaminant
may have any adverse effect on the health of persons.
In addition, EPA would be required to set standards within three
years of listing for other substances which, in the Administrator’s
judgment, may pose a threat to health, unless it determines that
there is not sufficient evidence to constitute a rational basis to be
lieve that the contaminant may have any adverse effect on the
health of persons. This would include review of the interim stand-
ards.
Although the Administrator’s determinations to regulate or not
will continue to involve questions of judgment and policy, the
drinking water regulations required by this section are intended to
prevent harm. As such, iron-clad proof or precise studies of actual
harm are not required
The bill would require EPA to regulate those contaminants for
which, in the Administrator’s judgment, there is sufficient evidence
to constitute a rational basis to believe that the contaminant may
have any adverse effect on the health of persons, weighing all
available health evidence on the contaminant If the Administrator
decides that there is sufficient evidence to support such a finding,
he must regulate the contaminant. If the scientific evidence is un-
clear, the Administrator must err on the side of protecting public
health The Administrator must regulate if there is a rational
‘47 Fed Reg 93.50 (i9 (2(
‘49 24,330 (i9 4)
‘48 Fed iteg 45.502(1983)
‘See Ethyl Corporeision v EPA. .4 i F 2d 1 (DC Cir). cert denied. 426 US 94 i (i976)
-------
OOO;2 .
basis to believe that a contaminant may have an adverse effect oni
the health of persons. •This decision must be rationally derived
from the evidence. The Administrator’s decision is to be upheld if it
is not arbitrary or capricious.
For instance, uranium, which has carcinogenic and chemical tox-
icity potential, is contaminating water supplies in Colorado Yet
EPA has not set a standard for this contaminant. Based upon a
review of the October 1983 ANPR, the Committee would expect
the Agency to set standards for this contaminant within three
years of enactment unless new evidence is produced.
If, in the Administrator’s judgment, there is sufficient evidence
from which he can rationally conclude that a contaminant does not
present any adverse health effects, he must publish this determina-
tion in the Federal Register. Such a determination does not pre-
clude or limit in any way the Administrator’s authority to regulate
the substance at a later time if, because of changed circumstances,
regulation is warranted. Again, the Adminstrator is required to
weigh all available evidence in determining whether there may be
any adverse effect on health. One circumstance which would justif ’
a finding of “not sufficient evidence to constitute a rational basis’
would occur if the contaminant is not found or is not likely to be
found in drinking water.
A change in terminology is also made by this bill. The health-
based standards of the Act—Recommended Maximum Contaminant
Levels (RMCLs)—are changed to maximum contaminant level goals
(MCLGs) The Committee does not intend this to be a substantive
change in the law. It merely clarifies the distinction between
RMCLs and Maximum Contaminant Levels (MCLs). MCLs must be
as close to the recommended maximum contaminant level as is fea-
sible. “Feasible” means with the use of technology, treatment tech-
niques or other means which the Administrator determines to be
the best available (taking cost into consideration).
The Committee has determined that the use of granular activat-
ed carbon (GAC) and other comparably effective adsorption tech-
niques are feasible to control to safe levels many of the synthetic
organic contaminants appearing in drinking water supplies across
the country
The bill requires the Agency to include the use of GAC and simi-
lar adsorbant techniques as part of its definition of Best Available
Technology (BAT) when it develops MCLs for synthetic organic
chemicals. Designation of these technologies indicates that these
techniques are available for use, taking cost into consideration,
However, the Administrator should only include this technology in
his definition of BAT when it is an effective method of treating the
contaminant in question .Indeed, it may very well be the case that
aeration, adsorptive resins, or other technologies are BAT for cer-
tain synthetic organic chemicals. By specifically referring to “para-
graph 2 of this subsection,” the reference to GAC is limited to es-i
tablishing BAT for purposes of establishing an MCL It does not,
theref ore, establish GAC as a treatment technique in lieu of an,
MCL under paragraph 3 for synthetic organic chemicals.
48 Fed Reg 45,520 (1983)
-------
The National Academy of Sciences has concluded that GAC will
adsorb many organic compounds from water. According to the
Academy, properly operated GAC systems can remove or effective-
ly reduce the concentrations of synthetic organic chemicals Ad-
sorption data for approximately 70 percent of the specific organics
that are suspected of being harmful to health are contained in the
report.° EPA estimates that ninety-nine percent removal of trich-
loroethylene, a carcinogen and mutagen, can be achieved using
GAC. A recent health survey carried out in Woburn, Massachu-
setts, concluded that tap water laced with heavy metals and syn-
thetic organic chemicals had caused perinatal deaths, ear and eye
birth defects, kidney and urinary disorders, and leukemia in chil-
dren in the area Organic chemicals detected in the drinking water
supplies included trichioroethylene, l-l-l-trichloroethane, 1-2 traris-
dichloroethylene, chloroform, and trlchloroti-ifluoroethane8
The Committee is aware that EPA decided in 1978 not to require
granular activated carbon treatment for public water systems be-
cause of cost considerations Despite this decision, EPA appears to
believe that such technology will be needed in the future to control
many of the synthetic organic contaminants now under consider-
ation for regulation. EPA’s Director of the Office of Drinking
Water testified before the Senate that aeration or carbon adsorp-
tion are “available and effective” and will most likely be used in
those instances where serious groundwater contamination has oc-
curred
In addition, Michael Zihal, President of the Long Island Water
Co, representing the National Association of Water Companies,
testified before the Senate that: “Yes, GAC is accepted today, and
was accepted even way back when “10 Charles Johnson, President,
C.C. Johnson & Associates, Inc. also testified before the Committee
that: “It is estimated that more than 30 treatment plants in west-
ern Europe are now using granular activated carbon on a routine
basis for removal or reduction of synthetic organic contami-
nants.” 11 The American Water Works Association (AWWA) Re-
search Foundation workshop on volatile organic chemicals in
drinking water also found that carbon adsorption is “available”
and has been demonstrated at “full scale.”i 2
The cost of GAC is also reasonable for many public water sys-
tems For example, in 1977, an EPA research grant was awarded to
the Cincinnati Water Works to determine the feasiblity of GAC ad-
‘2 National Academy of Sciences, Drinking Water and Health 25i-380(i980)
‘47 Fed Reg 9355(i982t
‘SW Lagakob. B Wessen, and M Zelen, S> nopsis The Woburn Health Study—An Analysis
of Reproductive and Childhootj Disorders and Their Relation to Environnientiji Contamination
(Harvard School of Public health i9541 See also C J Trezek, Engineering Case Study of the
Stringfellow Superfund Site (August i984 1 (Prepared as background information for the Office of
Technology As.sessmenti ‘.
‘Safe Drinking Water Act Amendmen of i984 Hearings on S 2649 lieforo the Subcomm on
Tome Substances and Environmental Oversight of the Comm on Environment and Public
Works, 98th Cong. 2d Scss (May i4 . June ii, and June 26, 1984, at p 6 on June ii) (hereinafter
cited as 1984 Senate Ileartngsj
° 1984 Senate Hearings, upra note 9, at i7 (May ii. i984t
iiSafe Drinking Water Act Atnendmente of 1)83 llruriiigq on tIE 32(10 Before the Subcom .
mitt, e on lleiilth and the Environment of the Committee on Energy and (‘uriimerce. 98th ( ong_,
1st Sesa 739 Comm Print 9 8—49lhtreinaftcr cited as t 183 house ile .irungs (
‘ The American Water Works Association Research Foundation Final Ili port Workshop on
the Environmental Protection Aginc s Advaricid Not co of i’ropuaed J(uleiniikung on VolaLile
Organic Chemicals in Drinking Water. at B (2 (Oct 22. 1982)
000127
-------
Sorption and on-site regeneration. In 1977, carbon tetrachioride
shills from industry upstream on the Ohio River caused alarm
among Cincinnati residents. In addition, the city’s water contained
over 100 chemicals that could be harmful. Charles Luken of the
Cincinnati City Council, testified before the Committee that the
GAC system “would, indeed be an effective method to remove or-
ganic contaminants”.’ On the question of cost, the following ex-
change took place:
Mr. WALGREN. And what is an average dollar amount of
a monthly bill and what would be the increase in dollars?
Mr LUKEN The average Cincinnati resident pays—and
this is why the 20 or 30 percent may seem that terribly
large to some, because our water bills are not that
severe—the average resident pays $60 per year for water.
The city owns the water works, but it services the county.
The city is 400,000 people; the county is about a million.
The water works services the county and city rate payers
pay 80 percent less than county, so $60 for the city per
year, maybe $120 for the County per year, and you can
figure about a 30-percent increase in those 4
The Committee expects that in most cases, EPA will set a maxi-
mum contaminant level as close as is feasible to the maximum con-
taminant level goal However, EPA can promulgate a regulation
that requires the use of treatment techniques in lieu of establish-
ing an MCL, if the Administrator makes a finding that the level
cannot be accurately enough measured in drinking water to estab-
lish a maximum contaminant level goal. This is the same as in ex-
isting law
The Committee has deleted the requirement that technology be
“generallj available” before the Administrator can find that it is
“feasible’ . It is sufficient that the technology has been “examined
for its efficacy under field conditions and not solely under laborato-
ry conditions.” In this regard, the Committee has adopted the
recent recommendation of the National Drinking Water Advisory
Committee 15
Each national primary drinking water regulation which estab-
lishe a maximum contaminant level must list the technology,
treatment techniques, and other means which the Administrator
finds to be feasible for purposes of meeting the maximum contami-
narit level But a regulation under this paragraph is not to require
any specified technology, treatment technique, or other means be
used for purposes of meeting the maxin-iurr, contaminant level.
Section 101 also equires that the Administrator propose and
promulgate regulations requiring that surface waters be treated by
such processes as coagulation, sedimentation, or filtration or their
equivalent prior to disinfection unless it can be shown on the basis
of a sanitary survey that such treatment is not neceessary. The
Agency is to develop rules for the granting of waivers for local sup-
198.1 house Hearings, supra note I I. at 206
“id uLZII -
N t,o 0 af Drinking Water Advisoy Committee, Report of the Legislation Sui,commit
(Aug 3, I984)
000! 28
-------
030129
pliers of water pnor to the implementation of this surface water I
treatment requirement.
This is an action which an EPA workshop on microbiology rec-
ommended to control illnesses caused by infectious agents in drink-
ing water.’ 6 The most serious and widespread illness is a debilitat-
ing disease known as Giardiasis, caused by an intestinal parasite
which can find its way into drinking water. Giardia cysts in drink-
ing water spawned some thirty-eight outbreaks of this disease in
almost every part of the country between 1972 and 1980. More
than 20,000 people were affected.
The bill provides a non-exclusive list of processes which may be
necessary to prepare surface waters for disinfection. The Commit-
tee recognizes that some suppliers benefit from high quality raw
supplies or watershed control programs that may render such con-
trol measures unneccessary In these instances, a sanitary survey
can be conducted which considers local conditions and programs,
such as watershed control, raw and treated water quality, reliabil-
ity and capacity of existing treatment and standby supplies, to
demonstrate that pretreatment processes are not necessary. In ad-
dition, a waiver process is established under this subsection to
ensure that public water systems would not have to make costly
and unnecessary investments in treatment techniques The Corn-
mittee expects that EPA will adopt procedures for public hearing
and comment prior to the granting of waivers under this provision.
In addition, the Administrator must propose and promulgate reg-
ulations requiring disinfection as a treatment technique for all
public water systems. Variances are authorized according to sec-
tions 1415(a)(1)(B) and l415(a)(3).
The Administrator is also authorized, after opportunity for
public comment, to change maximum contaminant level goals, or
the list established for contaminants which cannot be accurately
enough measured in drinking water, to establish a maximum con-
taminant level goal. Nothing in this paragraph authorizes the Ad-
ministrator to deviate from the requirements for setting standards
established by sections 1412(b)(1) (A) and (13).
Under the 1974 Act, the National Academy of Sciences had the
responsibility to evaluate health studies and recommend maximum
contaminant levels to EPA. Under Section 101 of this bill, the Ad-
ministrator is to request comments from the Science Advisory
Board prior to proposal of a maximum contaminant level goal and
a regulation.
-------
d &L cL 000L3
SHORT TITLE
4 SECTION 1. This Act may be cited as the “Safe Drink-
5 ing Water Act Amendments of 1984”.
2 NATIONAL PRIMARY DRINKING WATER REGULATIONS
3 SEC. 101. (a) SIi\IPLIFIcATI0N OF STATUTORY
4 S TsTE I._Section 1412(a) of the Safe Drinking Water Act
5 is amended to read as follows:
6 “(a) Effective on the date of the enactment of the Safe
7 Drinking Water Act Amendments of 1984, each national in-
8 terim primary drinking water regulation promulgated under
9 this section before such date of enactment shall be deemed to
10 be a national primary drinking water regulation under sub-
11 section (ii). No such regulation shall be required to comply
12 with the standards set forth in subsection (b)(2) unless such
13 regulation is atnendcd to estabhsli a dilferent maximum con—
14 tamitiant level after the date of the enactment of such amend—
1 :3 merits.’’.
I (‘ (b) E ii: riI’P1 I) PI )J’EDV1 E 1 ’Ou Puo IuLc;_ ’1’ION.—
1 7 (1) Section 14 I 2(b) of time Sale Drinking Water Act is
I 8 a mflCiI(IC(I l)V St F! king out pa ragra pbs (1) a rid (2), and so in tick
-------
00 013t
1 of paragraph (3) as precedes the last sentence thereof and
2 substituting:
3 “(1)(A) In the case of each of the 14 contaminants listed
4 in the Advance Notice of Proposed Rulemaking published in
5 volume 47, Federal Register, page 9352, not later than 12
6 months after the enactment of the Safe Drinking Water Act
7 Amendments of 1984, the Administrator shall—
8 “(i) simultaneously propose a maximum contami-
9 nant level goal and a national primary drinking water
10 regulation, and after opportunity for public comment,
11 simultaneously publish a maximum contaminant level
12 goal and a national primary drinking water regulation
13 for those contaminants for which there is a rational
14 basis to believe that there may be any adverse effect
15 on the health of Pelsons; or
16 “(ii) publish in the Federal Register a deterinina-
17 tion that there is not sufficient evidence to constitute a
18 rational basis to believe that the contaniinant may have
19 any adverse effect on the health of persons.
20 ‘‘(B) In the case of each of the conta minaiits listed in
21 the Ad Va nec Notice of PrOpOSc(1 Rulcina Li ug pIIl)hiShC(l ill
22 volume -hS, Federal Register, page 15502, not. later than 36
23 niontlis alter time naetment of thc Safe D i inking \\r;itci. Act
24 AIl lCfldIfl(’fltS ol 198 t, the AdmmnKtrator shall—
-------
1 “(i) simultaneously propose a maximum contami-
2 nant level goal and a national primary drinking water
3 regulation, and after opportuiifty for public comment,
4 simultaneously publish a maximum contaminant level
5 goal and national primary drinking water regulation for
6 those contaminants for which there is a rational basis
7 to believe that there may be any adverse effect on the
8 health of persons; or
9 “(ii) publish in the Federal Register a determina-
10 Lion that there is not sufficient evidence to constitute a
11 rational basis to believe that the contaminant may have
12 any adverse effect on the health of persons.
13 “(C)(i) The Administrator shall publish maximum con-
14 taminant level goals and simultaneously promulgate national
15 primary drinking water regulations for each substance (other
16 than a substance referred to in subparagraph (A) or (B) for
17 which a national primary drinking water regulation was
18 mulgated) which, in the judgment of the Administrator, may
19 have any adverse effect on the health of persons. On January
20 1, 1988, and at annual intervals thereafter, the Administra—
21 tor shall publish list establishing Priorities for the review of
22 substances (other thaii substances referred to in subparagraph
23 (A) or (B) for which a. national primary drinking water regu—
24 lation as proinnlg ttccl) which may ‘quirc regulation tinder
2.5 this Act in order to prevent known or ant ieipnte(l adverse
000132
-------
(\r’f 1
UI Ju
F.
1 effects on the health of persons. Such priorities shall be based
2 upon the extent to which such cbiTtaminant occurs in public
3 water systems throughout the United States or on the known
4 or anticipated adverse effects of such substance on the health
5 of persons. In establishing such priorities the Administrator’s
6 consideration shall include, but not be limited to, substances
7 regulated as toxic water pollutants under section 307 of the
8 Clean Water Act and substances registered as pesticides
9 under the Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, and Rodenticjde
10 Act.
11 “(ii) In the case of each contaminant listed on the priori-
12 tv list, not later than 3 years after such listing, the Adminis-
13 trator shall—
14 “(I) simultaneously propose a maximum contami—
15 nant level goal and a national primary drinking water
16 regulation, and after opportunity for Public comment,
17 simultaneously publish a maximum contaminant level
18 goal and a national prima rv drinking water regulation
19 for those contaminants for which there is a rational
20 basis to believe that there may be any ad erse c!fcct
21 on the liraltim ol persons; or
22 ‘‘(II) ptihlisli in I lie I1 1 c(lCrai Rc! isIer a d(’terIflhiIa—
tion that. there is not suificmcnt evidence tQ constitute a
2 ralion;il ll:L jS U) lielie e that time (Ontanmjmlaimt may have
:1 l iv ad\ i r’ e ( IU’et Oil I lie health )( i OiiS.
-------
O0 13,1
1 “(2) Each maximum contaminant level goal established
2 under this subsection shall be set a the level at which, in the
3 Administrator’s judgment, no known or anticipated adverse
4 effects on the health of persons occur and which allows an
5 adequate margin of safety. Each national primary drinking
6 water regulation for a contaminant for which a maximum
7 contaminant level goal is established under this subsection
8 shall specify a maximum level for such contaminant which is
9 as close to the maximum contaminant level goal as is
10 feasible.
11 “(3)(A) In the case of any contaminant the level of
12 which cannot be accurately enough measured in drinking
13 water to establish a maximum contaminant level goal and
14 which may have an adverse effect on the health of pe so s,
15 the Administrator shall list such contaminant under this para-
16 graph in lieu of establishing a maximum contaminant level
17 goal under paragraph (1) of this subsection. In lieu of estab-
18 lishiug a maximum contaminant level for such contaminant
19 under this subsection, the Administrator shall promulgate
20 treatment techniques for such contaminant which requires
21 trca Uncut necessary iii the Adinimmistrator’s jI!(lgnleIIt to p —
22 vent known or :m utici lmatc(l md c i e effects on the he:ilt I i of
2 tO time C \ temi t I C;1SI ide.
24 ‘‘(13) If any contain ma ut ref erred to iii sit imra P 1 (A)
2.) O (U) of S imi)sCCt lull (h)( I)is listed under this p:iragraph (and a
-------
000135
1 national primary drinking water regulation requiring he use
2 of treatment techniques is simultan usly promulgated under
3 this paragraph for such contaminant), the listing and promul-
4 gation under this paragraph shall be made on the date re-
5 ferred to in subparagraph (A) or (B) of subsection (b)(1) for
6 the establishment of primary drinking water regulations.
7 “(0) The Administrator shall propose and promulgate
8 regulations requiring that all surface waters be treated by
9 such processes as coagulation, sedimentation, or filtration or
10 their equivalent prior to disinfection unless it can be shown
11 on the basis of a sanitary survey that such treatment is not
12 necessary. The Administrator shall develop rules for the
13 granting of waivers for local suppliers of water prior to the
14 implementation of the preceding sentence.
15 “(D) Each national primary drinking water regulation
16 which establishes a maximum contaminant level shall list the
17 teehr ology, treatment techniques, and other means which the
18 Administrator finds to be feasible for purposes of meeting
19 such maximum contaminant level, but a regulation under this
20 I) lragraph shall not require that any spccific(1 technology,
21 treatment tcchniq ie, or other meaiis he lISe(l br 1)I1IP0 5C5 of
22 Iflee ting such iriax iiii ii in eon t:i in i iia ut be vel.
22 ‘ ‘( E) 91j A din in ist rator shall l) OP0SC :1 fl(l )rOfl1 U IL :I Ic
24 regithitious rNjuiriiig disluifeclion as a treatuuient teclunic 1 tic br
2; all public \vatcr systems. The .\dmiuiistrator us authorized to
-------
000136
1 grant varia es from this requirement according to the provi-
2 sions under sections 14 15(a)(1)(B) tnd 141 5(a)(3).
3 “(4) The Administrator may, after opportunity for public
4 comment, change maximum contaminant level goals, or the
5 list established tinder paragraph (3), and shall simultaneously
6 with such change, amend the national primary drinking water
7 regulations concerned accordingly.”.
8 (2) Redesignate the last sentence of paragraph (3) of
9 section 1412(b) of such Act as paragraph (5) of such section,
10 delete “generally” in such sentence, delete “paragraph” and
11 substitute “subsection”, after “finds” insert “, after examina—
12 tion for efficacy tinder field conditions and not solev under
13 research laboratory conditions,” and add the following at the
14 end thereof: “For purposes of paragraph (2) of this subsec—
15 tion, the best available technology which is feasible for the
16 control of synthetic organic chemicals includes the use of ad—
17 sorption techniques such as the the use of granular activated
18 carbon and other comparabui’ effective techniques.”.
19 (c) CON F0u 1 \i ENG C l1 Nc; ES. Paragraphs (4) an(l (5) of
20 section 141 (b) of the Safe Drinking Water Act are each
21 a mended liv striking Revisc(l national” in each place where
22 it apI)e:lrS and SIIl)Stitululg ‘‘National’’. Paragraphs (-I), (ri),
23 and (U) of stichi Se Ction I 1 12(h) a I rcdesiLrn:m ted as para—
2 t gra (6), (7), a 11(1 (8).
-------
000137
1 (d) SCIENTIFIC PEER REvIEw.—Sectjon l412(e) of the
2 Safe Drinking Water Act is amended to read as follows:
3 “(e) The Administrator shall request comments from the
4 Science Advisory Board (established under the Environmen-
5 tal Research, Development, and Demonstration Act of 1978)
6 prior to proposal of a maximum contaminant level goal and 1
7 national primary drinking water regulation. The Board shall
8 respond, as it deems appropriate, within the time period ap-
9 plicable for promulgation of the national primary drinking
10 water standard concerned. This subsection shall, under no
11 circumstances, be used to delay final promulgation of any
12 national primary drinking water standard.”.
-------
000138
H,3 oo -
IR 2_c’o,’C- -r .,
6 AMENDMENT OP SAFE DRiNKING WATER ACT
7 Sic. 2. Except as otherwise expressly provided in this
8 Act, whenever in this Act an sitiendinent or rop a1 is ax-
1) iiros iid in lernis of ai iimendnteiit to, or repeal of, a section
it sir ntl,s r provision, tli e1i’rcn n shall be considered to be a
ii r fi, ,sire to a sec hots r other provkiun of tiile X IV of the
1 I’ubhic Health Service Act, commonly referred to as the
‘2 “Sale Dniikiiig Waler Act” (42 U.S.C. 3001—300j(9)).
3 TITLE 1—PUIILIC WATER SYSTEMS
4 PHOMPT PROM(JLOATION OF NATIONAL DRINKINO WATER
5 REGULATIONS
6 SEc. 101. (a) EXPEDITED PROCEDURE FOR PROMUL-
7 OATION.—Strike out paragraphs (1), (2), and (3) of section
8 14 12(b) and substitute:
9 “(1)(A) Not later than 18 months after the date of the
10 enactment of the Safe Drinking Water Act Amendments of
11 1983, the Administrator shall promulgate recommended
12 maximum contaminant levels, and simultaneously promulgate
13 revised national primary drinking water standards, for each
14 of the fourteen contaminants listed in the Advance Notice of
15 Proposed Rulemaking published in 47 Federal Register
16 9352.
17 “(B) Not later than 3 years after the date of enactment
18 of the Safe Drinki g Water Act Amendments of 1983, the
19 Admjnistj’ator shall e8LabIish recommended maximum con-
20 taminanl levels, and simultaneously promulgate revised Ba.
21 tiunal primary drinking water regulations, (or each substance
22 (other than a contaminant referred to in subparagraph (A))
23 which is regulated as a toxic water pollutant under section
24 307 of the Clean Water Act, unless the Administrator finds,
25 after notice and opportunity fur hearing, that such substance
-------
LJLJj
1 is not found or likely to be found in drinking water. Such
2 finding shall include the results of the monitoring carried out p H
3 under section 1445(a).
4 1 ( J) Not later than 3 years after the date of enactment
5 of the Safe Drinking Water Act Amendments of 1983, the
6 Administrator shall establish recommended maximum con-
7 iaminant levels, and simultaneously promulgate revised na-
B tional primary drinking water regulations, for each substance
9 (other than a contaminant referred to in subparagraph (A) or
10 (B)) which, in the judgment of the Administrator, may have
11 an adverse effect on the health of persons.
12 “(2) At any time alter the dates referred to in paragraph
13 (1), the Adjninistraujr may promulgate recommended ma.xi-
14 mum contaminant levels, and simultaneously promulgate re-
15 vised national primary drinking water standards, for a con-
16 laminant which is not referred to in paragraph (1) and which,
17 in the judgment of the Administrator, may have an adverse
18 effect on the health of persons.
19 “(3)(A) Each recommended contaminant level estab-
20. lished under this subsection shall be set at a lovel at which, in
21 the Administrator’s judgment, no known or anticipated ad-
22 verse effects on the health of persons occur and which allows
23 an adequate maL gin of safety. Each revised national primary
24 drinking water regulation for a contaminant for which a roc.
25 omniended nmaximumn contaminant level is est.ablimjhod under
-------
OO A
1 this subsection shall specify a maximum containina,it level for
2 such contaminant which is us close to the recommended
3 maximum contaminaiit level as is feasible.
4 “(11) Each such standard shall specify the technology,
5 treatment techniques, and other means which the Adininia-
6 trator finds to be feasible (or purposes of meeting the max.i-
7 mum contanmimiant level specified in such standard, but a
8 standard under this paragraph shall not require that any
9 specified technology, treatment technique, or other means be
10 used for purposes of meeting such maximum contaminant
11 level.
12 “(4) lIthe Administrator determines that the level of
13 any contaminant cannot be accurately enough measured in
14 water to establish a maximum coiit .aminan level, in lieu of
15 establishing a recommended contaminant level the Adjuinis-
16 trator shall list such contaminant and promulgate a revised
17 national primary drinking water regulation forsuch conLami.
18 nant which requires the use of treatment techniques. Such
19 treatment techniques shall require treatment necessary in the
20 Administrator’s judgment to prevent known or anticipated
21. adverse effects on the health of persona, to the extent Teasi-
22 ble. Such regulations shall specify each treatment technique
23 known to the Administrator which meets the requirements of
24 this paragraph, but the Adm.inist.rator may grant a variance
25 from any such specified treatment technique in accordance
-------
030i i
I-\. oo
1 with section 1415(a)(3). In the case of the contaminants re-
2 (erred to in paragraph (1), any regulations promulgated for
3 such contaminants under this paragraph in lieu of a standard
4 under paragraph (1) shall be promulgated on the date re-
5 quired under paragraph (1).
6 15) The Administrator may, by rule, change recom-
7 mended maximum contaminant levels, or the list established,
8 under paragraph (4), and (simultaneously with such change)
9 amend the revised primary drinking water regulations under
10 this subsection accordingly.
11 “(6) For the purposes of this subsection, the term ‘(easi-
12 ble’ means feasible with the use of the best technology, treat-
13 ment techniques, and other means, which the Adminisirator
14 fmd are generally available (taking cost into considera-
15 Lion).”.
16 (b) CON1oI MINo CIwioEs.—(1) Paragraphs (4)
17 through (6) of section 1412(b) are redesignated as paragraphs
18 (8) through (10).
39 (2) Section 1401(1) is amended to read as follows:
20 “(1) The term ‘primary drinking water regulation’
1 meuns a regulation promulgated in accordance with section!
1412.”.
W) Section l4l is amended by adding the following
...i nc i ubRectjufl at th ’ end tlwreof:
-------
1 11(f) Each primary drinking water regulation under this
2 section shall apply to puWic water systems and shall contain ; -
3 criteria and procedures to assure a supply ol drinking water Q Q 3 1 4 2
4 which dependably complies with any maximum contaminant
5 level specified in the regulation. Such criteria and procedures
6 shall include quality control and testing procedures to insure
7 compliance with such level and to insure proper operation
8 and maintenance of the system, and requirements as to—
9 “(1) the minimum quality of water which may be
10 taken into the system, and
11 11(2) siting for new facilities for public water sys.
12 tems.”.
13 (c) NATiONAL ACADEMY OP SCIENCEB.—SeCIIOn
14 14 12(e) is amended to read as follows:
15 - “(e) The Administrator is authorized to enter into a,-
16 rangements with independent scientific organizations (includ-
17 ing the National Academy of Sciences) to assist the Adminia-
18 trator in establishing recommended maximum contaminant
19 levels and listing contaminants in accordaxice with subsection
20 (b)”,
l”(’2)(A) The Administrator shall establish a program to
2 require a represcimtative sample of various public water sys-
3 lems (including water systems of different sizes and from dif-
4 ferent regions) to monitor for unregulated cunl.amnintsnts, in-
5 cluding contaminanta which are substances listed as toxic
R wau’r nnlliitants under Section 307 of the Clean Water Act.
-------
SOWA A OGJc ’\ 000143
SEC 102. ENFORCEM OF 2EGULATION&
(a) Nor ic Sya’rt3 s.—5ectjon 1414(aX1XA) of the Safe Drinking
Water Act is amended by inserting “and such public water system
after the words “notify the State”.
(b) PRoMP’r Fznga&z. okC ( ’r.— .(1) Section 1414(aX1XB) of
the Safe Drinking Water Act is amended to read as follows
“(B) If, beyond the thirtieth day after the Administrator’s notifica-
tion under subparagraph (A), the State has not commenced appro-
priate enforcement action, the Administrator shall issue an order 0
under subsection (g) requiring the public water system to comply
with such regulation or requirement or the Administrator shall
commence a civil action under aubsectjo (b).”.
(2) Section 1414(aX2) of the Safe Drinking Water Act is amended
by striking the words “he may commence a civii action under
subsection (b)” and substituting the following: “the Administrator
shall issue an order under subsection (g) requiring the public water
system to comply with such regulation or requirement or the
Administrator shall commence a civil action under subsection (b)”.
(c)P Ai ’rizs—Section 1414(b) of the Safe Drinking Water Act is
amended as follows: P
(1) Add “, with an order issued under subsection (g),” after
“drinking water regulation” in the first sentence.
(2) Delete “willful” immediately after “there has been a” in
the second sentence.
(3) Strike out “$5,000” and substitute “$25,000”.
(d) A TLkTIvK O s.—(1) Section 1414 of the Safe Drinking
Water Act is amended by adding at the end thereof the following
new subsection: 0
“(gXl) In any case in which the Administrator is authorized to
bring a civil action under this section or under section 1445 with
respect to any regulation, schedule, or other requirement, the
Adimniatrator also may i ue an order to require compliance with
such regulation, schedu.le, or other requirement.
“(2) An order issued under this subsection shall not take effect
until after notice and opportunity for public hearing and, in the case
of a State having primary enforcement responsibility for public
water systems in that State, until after the AdminlRtrator has
provided the State with an opportunity to confer with the Admi.rus-
trator regarding the proposed order. A copy of any order proposed to
be issued under this subsection shall be sent to the appropriate State
agency of the State involved if the State has primary enforcement
responsibility for public water systems in that State. Any order
issued under this subsection shall state with reasonable specificity
the nature of the violation. In any case in which an order under this
subsection is issued to a Corporation, a copy of such order shall be
issued to appropriate corporate officers.
“(3 (A) Any person who violates, or fails or refuses to comply with,
an order under this subsection shall be liable to the United States
for a’ civil penalty of not more than £25,000 per day of violation
“ (BI Whenever any civil penalty sought by the Administrator
under this parag-raph dies not exceed a total of £5.000. the penalty
shall be assessed b the’ Administrator after notice and opportunity
for a hearing on the record in accordance with section .554 of title 5
of the United States Code
-------
I •
SC)v
S. 124—7
“(C) Whenever any civil penalty sought by the Administrator
OOO
under this paragraph exceeds $5,000. the penalty shall be assessed ‘
b a civil action brought by the Mn,iniatrator in the appropriate
T)’nited States district court (as determined under the provisions of
title 28 of the United States Code).
“(D) If any person fails to pay an asse ment of a civil enaity
after it has become a final and unappealable order, or aner the
appropriate court of appeals has entered final judgment in favor of
the Administrator, the Attorney General shall recover the amount
for which such person is liable in any appropriate district court of
the United States. In any such action, the validity and appropriate.
ness of the final order imposing the civil penalty shall not be subject
to review.”.
(2) Section 1414 of the Safe Drinking Water Act is amended by
striking the words “FAILURE BY STATE ro .sauaz” from the section
heading.
v _* .
) 2.-
- Further, there are certain enforcement
provisions that I believe are of questionable
validity For example, the bill uses language
that suegests that some enforcement actions
are m ridatory The principle of prosecuto- ,j_ 1
na! discretion is an essential ingredient in
the execution of the laws I believe that the —
Ci ( .JV’..
Congress cannot bind the Executive in ad . 4 r Ji d . .4(
vance ind remove all prosecutonial discre- I
tion ithout infringing on the powers of the
Executi e It is unrealistic to expect that
the EP will ever have the resources or the I
need to t ike formal enforcement action
against each and every violation of the act,
without regard to how trivial the violation
or unfiir an enforcement action would be
-------
)
‘ P1e , ‘ v1’
S l’i-’.4 . w -h ! z -
- )IO2 -.
—provisions strengthening the EPA ’s en-
forcement authorities when a State Fails
to enforce the national standards Most
importantly, the EPA is given adminis-
trative order and penalty authority, al-
lowing the EPA to take administrati e
action in certain cases rather than
being forced to resort to court action in
all cases to enforce the provisions of the
act whenever a violation occurs, and
Further, there are certain enforcement
provisions that I believe are of questionable
validity For example, the bill uses language
that suggests that some enforcement actions
are mandatory The principle of prosecuto-
rial discretion is an essential ingredient in
the execution of the laws I believe that the
Congress cannot bind the Executive in ad-
vance and remove all prosecutorial discre-
tion without infnngmg on the powers of the
Executive It is unrealistic to expect that
the EPA will ever have the resources or the
need to take formal enforcement action
against each and every violation of the act,
without regard to how trivial the violation
or unfair an enforcement action would be
-------
-
I )
( Th t4 ¶ ietn a(-cir,-
OQ ;
Enforcement of drinking water
standar and regulations has serious-
ly lagged over the years. The bill gives
the Agency new admlriLstratjve order
authority which EPA has said would
greatly enhance its enlorcenient capa.
biiities. The bill also requires the
Agency o !We states move
tiously against vrolators . Where neces-
sary, the law provides for variances
and exemptions for systems that
cannot meet certain requ1remen •
These provisions are to be used spar-
ingly and not as means of avoiding en-
forcement actions.
-------
000 Jq7
I32 Co ”sc, , I c S( - - k
, U
( _c
Because reports by GAO have mdi.
cated that EPA and some States have
been lax in enforcing the Safe Drink.
ing Water Act, several measures in the
amendments will strengthen enforce-
ment. In 1984 alone, there were 64,000
reported violations of drinking water
standards. Of the approximately
60,000 community water systems. 842
were frequent violators of the micro-
biological standards in the act. In
order to increase enforcement options
the amendments raise maximum civil
penalties for violators of standards or
schedules from $5,000 to $25,000 per
day. Moreover, EPA is authorized to
Issue administrative penalties of up to
$5,000 Court.s may impose criminal
penalties of up to 5 years In prison
plus a fine of up to $50,000 for certain
Violations,
-------
I- cD u -
i rj aiJ
b (r .tf- N-we - 1O2
oo(_I I .-.‘
I regretfully rise in 0ppo jtIon to
this ‘conference report because It re-
quires the States to establish wellhearj
protection programs and establish
wellhead protection areas.
I want to take this Opportunity to
alert my colleagues to the fact that
this legislation could establish Federal
Jurisdiction over ground water, a re-
source traditionally left. under local
State Control.
Supporters of this provision may
claim that the language in this report
was drafted Purposely broad in order
to insure that State and local govern-
ments retain their traditional Jurisdic-
tion. LI this is the case, then I am Un-
certain as to the intended purpose of
this provision. According to section
205. the Governor Is instructed to
submit a State plan to the Administra.
tor of the Environmenini Protection
Agency that outlIn a program to
protect wellhead areas from contami-
nants which may have adverse impact
or effect on the health of persons.
The report further stipulates that
the State must modify and resubmit
the plan if Itis found to be Inadequate
by the Adryunlstrator
In my opinion, this constttutea the
beginning of Federal Jurisdiction and
Federal control over underground
water.
Althoug1 the Commendable inten-
tion of the confereca reportedly was to
retain the State and local Jurisdiction
over ground water, I am unsatisfied
with the means employed to accom-
plish the end that they set out to deal
with. Broad and indefinite language s
a two-edged sword and all of us here in
the Congre know that so very well
I am concerned that this section
Could-encourage lawsuits against the
Governor or the States should the
State groujid water plan be rejected by
the EPA or sho d the State fail to im-
plement it during a time period
deemed appropriate by citizens
How weU I have watched the water
Quality stanthrils of EPA and their
impact upon my 3t .e of Idal’po and
the great difficulty we have had ar-nv-
ing at a plan, when In fa we have not
yet accomplished t,
Another problem &t-ls lng from the
overly broad language Is found in the
sentence i quoted earlier Specifically,
the State submitted Plan must protect
welihead areas from Contaminants
which may- hate any—and i repeat—
any adverse effect on the health of
per3on ,
Mr Speaker, such a directive could
require the State to develop a program
to protect against an indefinite
number of - 101 5fl a5 , stnce almost
ny su tazice iay h some effect
on the tiesIth of persons.
This reqwrement could open the
door to lawsuits by citizens who deem
certain substances other than those
determined by the State to be hazard-
ous If they are not included in the
plan.
Mr Speaker. 1 join every American
and I think every Member of this Con-
gress in a desire for clear, clean, safe
drinking water: howe er, I must
oppose this bill on grounds that I
think it establishes unprecedented and
unacceptable Federal jurisdiction o er
ground water regulations, and ground
water controls that have been tradi-
tionally those of State resoonsibility
Re CI 1 A O ,
- ‘
L (cç ea. r I o’)
-------
- . - -
-
H
c) -t 5
U.S. ENVIRONMEN-TAL
PROTECTION AGENcY,
Washington. DC. March 20. 1986.
Ron. Rosrar STAFFORD.
C7 ia ir,nan. Committee on Ent’ironn,.ent anti
Public Works, U.S Senate, Washington,
DC.
Da ui Ma CHAIRMAN In my-September 17
letter to you. I set forth the Administra-
tion s serious reservations regarding provi-
sions in both the Senate and House versions
of the Safe Drinking Water Act amend-
ments While I am pleased to note that
progress has been made In adâresslng some
of our concerns, there are still two major
issues on which I would like to make further
comment.
GROUND WATER
I have learned that Conferees and their
stalls are continuing to meet to resolve dii.
ferences between S. 124 and I-f R 1650 I am
specUically concerned about reports that
you are moving toward a compromise that
would substantially enlarge the Federal re-
sponsIbIlIty to control ground water I share
this concern with Attorney General Messe,
Who wrote to you on March 14
I wish to make It very clear that this Ad-
ministration is strongly Opposed to legisla-
tion of a FederaUy.manda ed or Federally.
approved ground-water regulation program.
umoa ut La pgvjvJi1 .. be
tinwlse and unne ry. ,
The Adjnlnistra&j lakes this pesition foe
sever a l reasons. fIrst, a requfrement, like the
one being considered, that States develop
Comprehensive ground-water protection pro-
granis which are then subject to Federal
review and disapproval would Inevitably, de-
spite the best of intentions. involve the Fed.
eral government In sensitive local land use
and water rights decisions. This would serf.
ously disrupt well-settled Federal/State re-
lationships. State and local primacy over
ground-water use, even on Federal lands,
has historically been recogrnzed by Con-
gress. dating back to such acts as the De iert
Lands Act, the Reclamation Act of 1902. and
continuing through the Clear Water Act in
the last decade. The site-specific nature of
contamInation incidents and the character
of the groundwater resource necessitate reli-
ance on land use controls which have been
traditionally and properly the province of
State and local governments. We do not be-
lieve that the problems we are now facing
with ground-water contamination warrent
the massive shift In traditional Federal/
State roles that would result from the cur-
rent proposed compromise.
Second. there is no need for an Increase In
Federal over-sight of ground water. This
issue was carefully explored by EPA when it
developed the Ground-Water Protection
Strategy. We concluded then that sufficient
statutory authority exists within the
Agency to protect ground water from major
contaminants of concern and that the
States have the principal role in protecting
the overall resource. This conclusion is still
valid, This position is also strongly held by
the Association of State and Interstate
Water Pollution Control Administrators and
the National Governor’s Association, who
have thoroughly 8tudied the isrue and are
in agreement that no new Federal legt,la- I
tlon is needed.
Third. we continue to be impressed with
the efforts and progress that the States
have made to protect their own resource,
They are working closely with EPA in tin-
plemenung national programs directed at
hazardous waste. They are also taking re-
sponsible steps to assess their overall prob-
lem and the need for comprehensive protec-
tion A number of States have Passed
ground-water legislation Some ten States
now have Ground-Water Protection Strate-
gios and another 25 are currently developing
them The remaining States have activities
underway which will lead to statewide
ground-water strategies and programs We
b’lieve that the proposal you are currently
considering would disrupt these efforts arid
de’ay the progress which Is underway
As a part of implementing the Ground-
water Protection Strategy. EPA has provid-
ed $7 million In State grants En FY 1988 and
$b 7 million in FY 1987 for the States to use
tov.ard developing and enhancing State
ground water protection strategies and pro-
grams In addition. EPA is actively address-
ing various sources of ground-water con-
tamination. such as pesticides and under-
ground tanks through new and e’cisting reg-
ulatory programs Problems such as septic
tank contamination are also being addressed
through a series of advisory documents.
Also, the Agency is addressing other Issues
such as promoting consistency among EPA
programs and policies for ground water.
identifying ground-water priorities, arid en-
hancing our research capacity. We firmly
believe that these efforts currently being
undertaken by EPA and the increasing at-
tRntlon to ground-water protection by the
States represent substantial progress In ad-
000 14
-------
000150
State and local primacy over groundaater
use has historically been recognized b) Con-
gress. dating back to such act.s as the Desert
Lands Act of 1877 and the Reclamation Act
of 1902, and continuing through the Clean
Water Act in the last decade Land use deci-
sions also traditionally have been left to
local control However. contrary to the rep-
resentations made In report language, the 1
House bill necessarily would result in Zeder.
al intrusion frito highly localized and sensi
tire decisions on land use, water allocation.
and other areas of particular state and local
concern I would point out that the National
Go ernors Association, the Conser%ation
Foundation and the Association of State
and Interstate Water Pollution Control Ad
rninistrators hase all recent)) concluded
that at most a limited federal role is appro
priate—emphasizing the kind of technical
assistance that the En ironmental Protec-
tion Agenc ) (EPA) is mo ing rapidly to pro
ide as part of its ground ater strateg
As stated In more detail in the Depart
meet s letter of September 13 1985 the
House bills approach to ground ater is
highl objectionable Under the 1-louse bill
eter stale must detelop a comprehensite
regulatory plan to control ground ater
qualit ) and quantit meeting detailed fed
eral standards specified in the Act and then
must subject the plan to federal approtal
The detailed federal standards for the
grounthLater regulators plan as set forth in
the bill require regulations and other mess
ures for controlling all human de elopment
actnities that affect groundwater plu
elaborate data collection and description of
groundwater sources, recharge areas and
quality and the location and tspes of
human de elopment potentiall ) affecting
ground ater throughout the state
Should a state fail to produce a regulator)
plan the federal gosernment can be com-
pelled to do so through court action under a
procedure specified In the bill—though the
federal government could not be compelled
tO directly regulate activities aithin the
states
This Administration firmly behetes that
the e’ctensi e scheme contained in the
House bill for regulating human detelop
ment actitities in eter state has no place in
Federal la If passed it gould represent a
federal mandate for a regulatory s)stcm
that once put in place and defined in esen
more detail in regulations and court deci-
sions would ine itably become an unaar-
ranted federal bureaucratic intrusion into
human and economie affairs There is no
demonstrated urgent need gi en the array
of other federal statutes already in place
and EPA a current acti ities and there
clean) ha.s been inadequate analysis of the
impacts of embarking on such a course
We understand that current Senate staff
proposals are more moderate than the
House bill in many respects, but those pro-
posals still represent a dramatic change in
groundwater polic ) with a substanti e fed-
eral presence The existing federal presence,
in protecting groundaater from specific
sources of contamination is substantial and
EPA is already moiing tos ard coordinating
that federal presence and detelopmg a
strategy that states can use and adapt to
meet their o n unique situations
The Senate staff proposals under consid-
erat ion hoae er modestl ) phrased require
each state to develop an extensi e plan to
Control groundaater qualit) and apparentl)
still subject those plans to federal o ersight
for substantive adequacy Yet the EPA Ad
rninistrator s responsibility in plan re iew is
left unacceptably vague If the Administra-
tor is expected simply to determine if each
element of a program is present. aithout
passing judgment on the adequacy of the
program in actually meeting a substanti e
federal protection standard, then this
afrould be explIcitly stated However If a
substantive review at.andarcl Is intended
then the Adm ilstrazor I s left without guid.
ance on many extremely dLtflcult i ssues of
basic polIcy. nzlct. 11 m-sybe Imposal.
ble to mesa tha 4 dwlthoULl erfe7
ence )th prior appropr a 1ons systems of
d c v- - - ‘ - - j-
Ca L
cf t rry . -L
2 t- 2(,LH
7 —
-------
000
___ __ __ - & . S
* O4 1’ * Jc ,p ç
__ ___ ‘ , 102
of eo, bjth may ?izve
r M,eyae tmracfa .e- ee tte th of per- ( “ , —
W - Tbe WO8I-i the on!- )2. • l C’ —
verse of p entl.j eont fla to & man-
Ileable evei. Also, the Protoction standard t ’ CwI \2 q t, ( h2Q. t&-v
does not take into account the feasibilIty / 1 ()
and other etwir ernaI and soele-econorn.
Ic Impacts of vahous control measures. F !. C t J-V r. ’
nally, the geographic scope of the pi-otec-
lion ares is not limited to that reasonably
necessary to protect the water supply.
Like the House bill, the stall proposal (8.5
we understand It). requires that all federally
conducted or jpported activities must be
consistent with state plans This goes far
beyond a requirement that federal f Uties
not Contaminate local water supplies. This
potentially eranta states (and. as discussed
below, any citizen) en inous power over a
very wide range of federal and private ac-
tivities which may only Indirectly affect
groundwater, hi at alL This program could
even be Interpreted to alter responSibilities I
provided by other federal law There Is no
requirement foe consideration of the nation.
al interest in state plans, nothing explicitly
prevents imposition of the most extreme
and unreasonable measures to bar unpopu-
lar federal activities of federally supported
pnvate activities
In addition, absent specific language to
the contrary, the existing citizen suit provi-
sion In the SDWA oeovtde a basis for any
citizen to sue states or the fedral govern-
ment over development and Implenientauon
of this program. The Judiciary will be faced
with deterrni,rung the meanu and effect of
the vague but far-reachin g standard, and
thus will be thrust into a potleymaicing role
for which it Is msututlonaiiy ill-suited,
The sum of these flaws is a program of
vast and whoUy unpredictable dimensl s,
with results ranging from excessive feder&l
Involvement in local land use to excessive
state power over federal policies and activi-
lIeS, wlt] no means for b lancing competing
legitimate lnterest,s, and no clear vision of
appropriate federal arid state roles.
I believe that If either the House bill or
the stall proposal Is enacted, they will dis-
runt a broad range of federal activities and
strain relations among federal, state, and
local gov mmen , in no small part because
of questlbns raised by proposed language
which would have to be resolved In litiga-
tion. Therefore, I strongly urge that the
Conferees reject the new substantive
groundwater regulatory program under cur-
rent staff consldera lop, and not adopt any
groundwater program without an oppos-tu.
nity for full public and Adminjatra n
inp ut
Sincerely. -
Enwnq M sa In.
At (orneij General
-------
tO2 -’ A’e&•
SEC JOL ENFORCEMENT OF RECULA 77ONS
(a) NOTICE SrsrEMs.—&ct ion 1414(aXJXA) of the Safe Drink- -,,
ing Water Act is amended by insertinq “and such public water
system “after the words “notify the State
(1’) PROMPT FEDERAL Ew oRcEJi w .—(1) Section l414(CXJXB) of
the Safe Drinking Water Act is amended to read as follows:
“(B) If beyond the thirtieth day after the Administrator’s notifi-
cation under subparagraph (A), the State has not commenced appro-
priate enforcement action, the Administrator shall issue an order
under subsection (gi requiring the public water system to comply
with such regulation or requirement or the Administrator shall
commence a civil action under subsection (b). ‘
(2) Section !4l4(aX2) of the Safe Drin*ing Water Act is amended
by 8trikin, 7 the words “he may commence a civil action under sub-
section (b) ‘and substituting the following: “the Administrator shall
issue an order under subsection (g) requiring the public water system
-------
‘ r 7
u,JlJ I J.)
to comply with such regulation or requirement or the Admjnisgrrztor
shall commence a civil action under subsect ion (b)’
(c) PENALTIF S.—Se tWn 1414(b) of the Safe Drinking Water Act is
amended as follows:
(1) Add U with an order issued under subsection (g),” after
“drinking water regis lotion” in the first sentence.
(2) Dekte “willful” immediately after “there has been a” in
the second sentence.
( .VStrzke out “$5,000”and substitute “$25,000’
(d) ADMINISTRATIVE OPiERS.—(J) &cti n 1414 of the Safe Drink-
ing Water Act is amended by adding at the end thereof the follow.
in new subsection. .
‘(gXl) In any case in which the Administryjtor is authorized to
bring a civil action under this section or under section 1445 with
respect to any regulation, schedule, or other requzremen4 the Ad.
minist rotor also may issue an order to require compliance with such
regulation, schedule, or other requirement.
“(2) An order issued under this Bub8ection shall not take effect
until after notice and opportunity for public hearing an4 in the
case of a State having primary enforcement responsibility for public
water systems in that State, until after the Administrator has pro.
vid&l the State with an opportunity to confer with the Administra-
tor regarding the proposed order. A copy of any order proposed to be
issued under this subsection shall be sent to the appropriate State
agency of the State involved if the State has primary enforcement
responsibility for public water systems in that State. Any order
issued under this subsection shall state with reasonabl, specificity
the nature of the vthlatwn, In any case in which an order under
this subsection is issued too corporation, a copy of such order shall
be issued to appropriate corporate officers.
“(SXA) Any person who violates, or fails or refuses to comply with,
an order under this subsection shall be liable to the United States
for a civil pena ity of riot more than $25,000 per day of violation.
“(B) Whenever any civil penalty sought by the Administrator
under this paragraph does not exceed a total of $5,00O the penalty
shall be assessed by the Adrninistratop . after notice and opportunity
for a hearing on the record in accordance with section .554 of title 5
of the United States Code.
“(C) Whenever any civil penalty sought by the Administrator
under this paragraph exceeds , ‘5,00O the penalty shall be assessed
by a civil action brought by the Administrator in the appropriate
United States district court (as determined under the provisions of
title 28 of the United States Code).
“(D) If any person fails to pay an assessment of a civil penalty
after it has becom, a final and unappealable order, or after theop-
pr priate court of appeals has entered final judgment in favor of
the Administrator, the Attorney General shall recover the amount
for which 8uCh persom is liable in any appropriate district court of
the United States. In any such action, the validity and appropriate-
ness of the final order imposing the civil penalty shall not be sub-
ject to review. ‘
(2) Section 1414 of the Safe Drinking Water Act is amended by
striking the words ‘FAILURE BY STATE TO tSSURE” from the section
heading.
-------
OOO! 4
cAcY c •. . ‘
Cr-.R P, N 0
SECTION IO2— ZNyOWIM .y or R QIJL flo
Senate bilL—The Senate bill alnendB section 1414 of the Act to:
(1) provide the additionaj authority to the Admtni trator to take
enforcement action against public water systems in violation of any
regulation (including monitorii g and notification under the Act)
(2) require the Administrator either to issue an order or institute a
judicial action against a public water system in violation when the
delegated State authority does not take appropriate enforcement
action within 30 days of notification; (3) increase the ma imui n
civil penalty from $5,000 to $25,000 per day of violation; and (4)
eliminate the requirement that a violation of the Act must be will-
ful in order for civil penalties to be assessed.
House wnendmenL_The House provision is imi1nr to the Senate
bill without a change in penalties or the elimination of the require-
merit that violations of the Act must be willful in order for civil
penalties to be assessed.
Con ference agreement.-.. Conference agreement is to adopt
the Senate language.
-------
( ‘5O 4 QZ_
Cot c . c, L4 -2A0 - o(c&A1 1 ecl. Cj t i’rti...I”+i J9 ’).
000
SEC los E r0RCEMEvToF RECtL4TiO S.
(a) Notict eo Sysrzsas —Section
1414ax1)(A) of the Safe Drinking Water
Act is amended by Inserting ‘and such
public water 8ySLem’ after the words
notify the State’.
(b) PROMPT FEDERAL ENPORCLMZWr —(1)
Section 1414(a)(1)(B) of the Safe Drinking
Water Act is amended to read as follows
‘(B If. beyond the thirtieth day after the
Administrators notUlcatton. the State has
p.42 Cfl
L cnei .u L opds$. eat ores gna
act1on ths Admlniatrascr aball iasue an
order under subsection ig requiring the
public water system to comply with such
regulation or requirerneni or shah com-
mence a civil act,inn un,I.r subsection (b) ”,
(2) Section 1414tax2) of the Sate Drink-
ing Water Act Is amended by sulking the
words he ma ,y commen a c iv Il action
under subsection (b)’ and adding the follow.
ing - •he shall L ue an order under subsec-
tion (g) requiring the public water s Sterfl to
comply with such regulation or requirement
or shall commence a civil action Under sub-
section (b)’
(C) ADMrNISTRAT!Vg ORDeRS —( I) Section
1414 of the Safe Drinking Water’Act Is
amended by adding at the end thereof the
following new subsection ig)
(glU) In any case in which the Adminis-
trator is authorized to bring a civil action
under this section with respect to any regu-
lation. schedule, or other requirement, the
Administrator also may issue an order tO re-
qtiire compliance with such regulation,
schedule or Other requirement
12) An order issued under this subsection
shall not take effect untu after notice and
opportunity for public hearing and, in the
case of a State having primary enforcement
responsibility until after the Administrator
has provided the State with an opportunity
to confer with the Administrator regarding
the proposed order A copy of any order pro-
powd to be Issued under this subsection
shail be sent to the appropriate State
ag ney of the State iniolved if the State ha
primary enforcement responsibility for
public water s stem% in that State Any
order issued under this subsection shall
state with reasonable spec:uicity the nature
of the violation In any case in which an
order under this subsection is issued to a
corporation, a copy of such order shall be
issued to appro .” - a corporate officers
i3)(A) Any person who violates or fails
or refuses L, .omply with an Order undor
paragraph shaP be liable to the United
States for a ivil ptnalty of not more than
825 000 per lay of tiotation
(B) Whe lever any civil penalty sought
by the Administrator under this paraa-raph
does not e’cceed a total of 35 000. the penal-
ty shall be assessed by the Adn iinistrat-
after notice and opportunity for a hearing
on the record in accordance with section 554
of title S of th, (J.—ited States C 1e.
(C) Whene e- any civil penalty sougtd
by the Admin g:i-ator Under this paragraph
exceeds 35 000 the penaity shall be assessed
by a civil action brought by the Mmtrustra-
tor in the appropriate tjnited States disZri
court (as determined under the provisions of
title 28 of the United States Code.
(D) I! arty person fails to pay an ass-
ment of a civil penalty aft or It baa become a
fInal and unappegia oyder. or after the
appropriate court of app l has entered
final 3udgmen in (avog of the Adrnjnistra
tor. the Attornm,y Genesal shalL recover the
amount for which aude pe o Is liable in
any appiopgi district court of the United
States In any such acsion , the validity and
appropniatefl of the final order imposing
the civil pen.aijy ahall net be subject to
review.’,
(2) Section 1414 of the Safe Drinking
Water Act is amended by striking the words i
•‘p iLu’ag BY s-rang io ASSURS” from the see- I
tion heading.
I
-------
000156
k 1 P REP. No:qC\ C - ’) f- 4(L9 )
SEC i03 ENF0RCE IENT0F RECItATIONS.
(a) No,icg ‘ro Sys’rEMs.—Section 1414(aX1XA) of the Safe Drinking Water Act is
amended by inserting ‘and such public water system” after the words “notify the
State’
(1) PR0MFr FEDERAL ENFORCEMENT —(1) Section 1414(aX1XB) of the Safe Drinking
Water Act is amended to read as follows.
“(B) If. beyond the thirtieth day after the Administrator’s notification, the State
has not commenced appropriate enforcement action, the Administrator shall issue
an order under subsection (g) requiring the public water system to comply with such
regulation or requirement or shall commence a civil action under subsection (b)”.
2) Section 1414(aX2) of the Safe Drinking Water Act is amended by striking the
words ‘he may commence a civil action under subsection (b)’ and adding the follow.
ing- ‘he shall issue an order under subsection Ig) requiring the public water system
to comply with such regulation or requirement or shall commence a civil action
under subsection (b)”
(C) ADMINISTItATIvE ORDans ‘—41) Section 1414 of the Safe Drinking Water Act is
amended by adding at the end thereof the following new subsection (g)
•‘(gXl) In any case in which the Administrator is authorized to bring a civil action
under this section with respect to any regulation, schedule, or other requirement,
the Administrator also may issue an order to require compliance with such regula-
tion, schedule, or other requirement.
“(2) An order issued under this subsection shall not take effect until after notice
and opportunity for public hearing and, in the case of a State having pnmary en-
forcement responsibthty, until after the Administrator has provided the State with
an opportunity to confer with the Administrator regarding the proposed order A
copy of any order proposed to be issued under this subsection shall be sent to the
appropriate State agency of the State involved if the State has primary enforcement
responsibility for public water systems in that State Any order issued under this
subsection shall state with reasonable specificity the nature of the violation In any
case in which an order under this subsection is issued to a corporation, a copy of
such order shall be issued to appropriate corporate officers.
“(3XA) Any person who violates, or fails or refuses to comply with, an order under
paragraph (2) shall be liable to the United States for a civil penalty of not more
than £25,000 per day of violation
“(B) Whenever any civil penalty sought by the Administrator under this pars-
graph does not exceed a total of £5,000, the penalty shall be assessed by the Admin-
istrator after notice and opportunity for a hearing on the record in accordance with
section 554 of title S of the United States Code
“(C) Whenever any civil penalty sought by the Administrator under this para-
graph exceeds £5,000, the penalty shall be assessed by a civil action brought by the
Administrator in the appropriate United States district court (as determined under
the provisions of title 28 of the United States Code).
‘(Dl If any person fails to pay an assessment of a civil penalty after it has become
a final and unappealable order, or after the appropriate court of appeals has en-
tered final judgment in favor of the Administrator, the Attorney General shall re-
cover the amount for which such person is liable in any appropriate district court of
the United States. In any such action, the validity and appropriateness of the final
order imposing the civil penalty shall not be subject to review.’.
(2) Section 1414 of the Safe Drinking Water Act is amended by striking the words
“v*n.uaz a S ’TAl’z TO ASSURI” from the section heading
-------
000 57
—
N ç? U ”-
No
Section 103
Under the 1974 Act, States are given the primary enforcement
responsibility for public water systems and act as the enforcement
authority unless EPA finds that the State is abusing its discretion.
In a State without primary enforcement responsibility, EPA may
enforce the standards directly through law suit.
In 1981 and 1982. the General Accounting Office (GAO) reviewed
implementation of the drinking water program. The GAO report
rioted that there were 146,000 violations for either failing to test or
for not meeting the drinking water quality standards reported in
1980 against 28,000 of the 65,000 community water systems. GAO
found that the enforcement actions in the EPA offices and States
included in the review ranged from none to minimal, followed no
pattern, and were not as timely as they could have or should have
been. Having reviewed the GAO report and other testimony of non-
compliance, the Committee believes that the record calls kr a sig-
nificant increase in Federal-State enforcement efforts. To this end,
this section provides that the Administrator is required to issue an
order or commence a civil action if the State has not commenced
appropriate enforcement actions within thirty days of the Adminis-
trator S notice of vio1ation.
Administrative orders are authorized in a iy case in which the
Administrator can bring a civil action under this section. An order
cannot take effect until notice and opportunity for public hearing
and in the case of a State,havirig primary enforcement responsibil-
ity, until after the Administrator has provided the State with an
opportunLty to confer with the Administrator concerning the order.
Additional due process procedures are also established for proper
issuance of orders under this section
To encourage prompt compliance with adminstrative orders, civil
penalties are set at S25,000 per day per violation. If the civil penal-
ty sought by the Administrator does not exceed a total of So,000,
the penalty must be assessed by the after notice and opportunity
for hearing on the record. If the penalty sought by the Administra-
tor exceeds 5.O00, then the penalty must be assessed by a Civil
action brought by the Administrator Failure to pay an assessment
of a civil penalty on a timely basis triggers a requirement for the
Attorney General to recover the amount in the appropriate Federal
district court. In such proceeding the validity and appropriateness
of the final order imposing the civil penalty is not subject to
review.
-------
000!5g
io2
I t R 3 (& ed
0
j,—ii -.
nec o* 1OJ—tn/o,c ,.j r
In primacy 8 tstei , the EPA requ to
oom e civil actlo or to iaaue an admin.
IlLrp.Uve order to a pub1 water lylteni to
1y with s 1fl d. 11 the &aie h&s not
‘Cted before the thjrUeth day alter no j .
on of ‘1ol*&Jce In non-prfm 8ta n
noUn n ede . and the EPA Is required to
an o O menoe a dvi i
there Ii non .compUa by a
public water system.
A4cin rty irve orders are available In lieu
of civil actiona, but In primacy 8tates may
only be luued alter c o nsultat ion with the
States and public bearing.
Clvii penajtlej of to $25000 per day are
&vaUabj
-------
£ i’i-j
Sac. 3. , , Section 1414(aX1XA) of the
Sate Drinking Water Act is amended by In-
setting •‘and such public water system”
after the words “notify the State.
L L Section l414aX1xB) of the Safe
Drinking Water Act La amended to read as
follows:
“(B) If beyond the thirtieth day after the
Administrator’s notification the State ha
not commenced appropriate enforcement
action, the Administrator shall Issue an
order under subsection (g) requiring the
public water system to comply with such
regulation or requirement or shall com-
mence a civil action under subsection (b)”
S Section 1414(aX2) of the Safe Drinking
Water Act Is amended by striking the words
“he may commence a civil action under sub
section (b)’ and inserting the foiloaing
(“he] ‘the Administrator shall issue an
order under subsection (g) requiring the
public water system to comply with such
regulation or requirement or -shall com-
mence a c lvii action under subsection (bI’.
td L Section 1414(b) of the Safe Drinking
Water Act is arr&end,ed by—
(1) adding “or with an order issued under
subsection (g)” after “drinking water regtila-
tion” in the first sentence;
(2) deleting “willful” immediately after
‘there has been a” in the second sentence;
and
(3) striking “$5,000” and substituting
‘$25,000”
(td J’ ei Section 1414 of the Safe Drink.
Act Is amended by adding at the
end thereof the following new subsection
“ (g)(l) In any case in ahich the Adnimis-
trator La authorized to bring a civil action
under this section with respect to any regu .
lation, schedule, or other requirement, the
Administrator also may issue an order to re-
quite compliance with such regulation,
schedule, or other requirement,
“(2) An order issued under this subsection
shall not take effect until after notice and
opportunity for public hearing and, In the
S c, ‘ r
\ CON&. R . S 3cfl ‘ a’toj
(4- e ’ Ici 5)
case of a State having primaj-y enforcement
respOnsibility, u nUl after the Administrator
has provided the State with an opportunity
to confer with the Administrator regarding
the proposed order A copy of any order pro-
posed to be issued under this subsection
shall be sent to the appropriate State
agency of the State involved If the State has
primary enforcement responsibility for
public water systems in that State Any
order issued under this subsection shall
state with reasonable specificity the nature
of the violation In any case in which an
order under this subsection i 5 issisci to a
corporation, a copy of such order Shall be
issued to appropriate corporate officers
- (3A) Any person aho ¶.ioiates fails, or
refuses to comply auth an order under para
graph (2) shall be liable to the United
S aces for a ciii ! penalty of not more than
$25 000 per day of violation
“(Si Wheneter any citil penait) sought
by the Administrator under this parag a h
does not exceed a total of $5 000 the peiiai
ty hall be asseased by the Administrator
after notice and opportunity for a hearing
on the record in accordance aith cection 554
of t Ue 5 of the United States Code [ The
AJm ln ’ ,,iator shall ha.e the discretion to
compron’ s”, moduf or remit aith or ai h
0111 c’onhit’u.ts. any citil pex ait assessed
under th,s sutisect ion against anj perion ]
C Whenecer a cii ii penai:y sought by
the Administrator e’ceeds $5 000 the penal-
t shall be assessed by a cii ii SCiiOfl broi’ ht
hi the Administrator in the appropriate
United States district coi’rt (as determined
under the proiisions of title 28 of the
United States Codc’)
D) If any person fails to pn an as -ses
ni.’nt of a cuiul penalc, after it has become a
i,r,ai and unappealat’e order or after the
apprc priaLe court of aopeais has entered
fit-ti iiJ 1 rment in lator of 1h Adsninis ra
cur the Attorney Gen’ral shall recoter the
arpo’Jnt for sjurh such person is hanie in i
any appropriate aus rtct court Of the Uritpd
Sts,es Ic. ar’y such action, the talic1ut and
appropriateness of the final order imposing
the ciiul pe:ia t) shail not be subject to
ret ca
it-i Secticn 1411 of the Safe Dr’riking
‘tA tier Act i amended by striking the voras
I’ tuitire O State to Assure from th title
000 159
p
-------
S 14 p S etr\
030 IGO
‘5J 1L , cç
i \CoN&i P. ..
S
A third significant aspect of this bill
are amendmen to the enforcement
provisions in the act. S. 124 provides
EPA with authority to issue adnunis.
trative orders and increases penalties.
These provisions provide EPA with
the means to take action against viola.
tors of drinking water standar more
swiftly and more effectively. To date.
EPA’s enforcement of these standar
can be most generously categoriieij as
lax. S. 124 should prevent EPA from
Ontinumg tt poor enforcement prac.
tices. -
-------
- •
• N 3. Eoacz a .r
S l TM .ay
This section amends section 1414 of the Act (1) to streamline the
proc by which the Administrator enforces against water suppli-
ers that violate the Act; (2) to require the Admim t r either to
issue an order or institute a judicial action when public water
system noncomplia with regulations or require e is found
an a State is not taking appropriate enforcement action; (3) to pro-
vide an administrative order authority to the Admimstrat (4) to
increase the mAI1mu civil penalty from $5,000 to $25,000 per day
of violation; and (5) to eliminpte the requirement that violations of
the Act must be willful in order for civil penalties to be assessed.
DISCUSSION
This section makes severs] changes in the existing law in order
to improve compliance with the Act by public water supply sys.
tems.
First, the changes streamline the cumbersome and time consum-
ing proce by which EPA can take action against water suppliers
in States with primary enforcement responsibility and rns kais EPA
enforcement actions mandatory. The bill provides that if a State
baa not commenced appropriate enforcement, action 30 days after
EPA has notified the State and water supplier of a violation, the
Administrator is required either to issue a compliance order or in-
stitute judicial action.
The bill also requires the Administrator to take enforcement ac-
tions whenever violations are found in States that do not have pri-
mary enforcement responsibility.
Current law does not require the Admini tra to take enforce-
ment action whenever violations are found.
Second, the section establis a new remedy that may be used
against a noncomplying public water supplier an athniniatrative
order which may be issued in any case where the Administrator is
authoriz to bring a civil action. The Administrative order author-
ity provides for more efficient enforcement against lees significant
violations and is expected to enable EPA to develop a more aggres-
sive enforcement program. According to EPA, the majority of viola-
tions of applicable reguIation or requlremente tinder the Safe
Drinicing Water Act are believed to be relatively minor, normally
incurring penalties of $5,000 or less. The purpose of adding admin-
istrative order authority is not to replace judicial enforcement, but
to add a complementary enforcement mechanj m.
Adznjnjntratjve penalties are not assessable in the administrative
order itself , but the Administrator may elect to assess a penalty of
up to $5,000 in accordance with the Adjnj.nj trative Procedures Act
for the violation of such an order. In the alternative, the Adniini-
trator may bring a cwil action for enforcement of the order or for
penalties of up to $25,000 per day of violation of the order, or both.
-------
The third change in existing law deletes the requirement of will.
fujness ai a condition of liability for civil penaitze . Such a condi-
tion is appropriate for criminal liability, not for Imposition of civil
penalties.
Finally, this section of the bill increases the maximum civil pen-
alty that a court may impose upon a noncomplying public water
supplier, £5,000 per day of violation to £25,000 per day of violation,
in recognition of the serlousnese of health risks posed by violatio
of Part B of the Act.
000162
-------
CciRcr S. i4
_ .5 : 1e cj. ) ( 3(19’ S”).
-
(?AILURE BY STATE TO ASSURE] ENFORCEp , 0? DRINKING WATg
REGULATIONS
Sec. 1414. (aX1XA) Whenever the Administrator finds during a
period during which a State has primary enforcement responsibil-
ity for public water systems (within the meaning of section l 4 13(a))
that any public water system—
(i) for which a variance under section 1415 or an exemption
under section 1416 is not in effect, does not comply with any
national primary drinking water regulation in effect under sec-
tion 1412, or
(ii) for which a variance under section 1415 or an exemption
under section 1416 is in effect, does not comply with any sched-
uie or other requirment imposed pursuant thereto,
he shall so notify the State and such public water system and pro-
vide such advise and technical assistance to such State and public
water system as may be appropriate to bring the system into com-
pliance with such regulation or requirement by the earliest feasible
time.
((B) If the Adrninifltrator fInds such failure to comply extends
beyond the thirtieth day after the date of the notice given pursuant
to subparagraph (A), he shall give public notice of such finding and
request the State to report within fifteen days from the date of
such public notice as to the steps being taken to bring the system
into compliance (including reasons for anticipated steps to be taken
to bring the system into compliance and for any failure to take
steps to bring the system into complia.ncei If—
((i) such failure to comply extends beyond the sixtieth da
after the date of the notice given pursuant to subparagrap
(A); and
((ii) (a) the State fails to submit the report requested by the
Administrator within the time period prescribed by the preced-
ing sentence; or
((b) The State submits such report within such period but
the Admini trator, after considering the report, determines
that the State abused its discretion in carrying out primary en-
forcement responsibility for public water systems by both—
((I) failing to implement by such sixtieth day adequate
procedures to bring the system into compliance by the ear-
liest feasible time, and
((II) failing to assure by such day the provision through
alternative means of safe drinking water by the earliest
feasible timp:
the Administrator may commence a civil action under subsection
(b).
( ) If beyond the thirtieth day after the Administrator’s notifica.
turn the State has not commenced appropriate enforcement action,
the Admznigtrrjtor shall issue an order under subsection (g) requir-
ing the public water system to comply with such regulation or re-
quirement or shall commence a ciuil action under subsection (b).
-------
000164
(2) Whenever, on the basis of inforthation available to him, the
Administrator finds during a period durinq whwh a State does not
have primary enforcement responsibility for public water systems
that a public water system in such State—
(A) for which a variance under section 1415(aX2) or an ex-
emption under section 1416 (f) is not in effect, does not comply
with any national p y drinking water regulation in effect
under section 1412, or
(B) for which a variance under section 1415(aX2) or an ex-
emption under section 1416(0 is in effect, does not comply with
any schedule or other requirement imposed pursuant thereto,
he may commence a civil action under subsection (b).]
the Admuizstrntor shall issue an order under subsection ( ) requir-
ing the Public Water System to comply with such regulation or re-
quirement or shall commence a civil action under subsectzpn (b).
(b) The AdmlniRtrator may bring a civil action in the appropriate
United States district court to require compliance with a national
primary drinking water regulation or with an order issued under
subsection (g) or with any schedule or other requirement imposed
pursuant to a variance or exemption granted under section 1415 or
1416 if—
(1) authorized under paragraph (1) or (2) of subsection (a), or
(2) if requested by (A) the chief executive officer of the State
in which is located the public water system which is not in
compliance with such regulation or requirement, or (B) the
agency of such State which has jurisdiction over compliance by
public water systems in the State with national primary drink-
ing water regulations or State drinking water regulations.
The court may enter, in an action brought under this 8ubsection,
such judgment as protection of public health may require, taking
into consideration the time necessary to comply and the availabil-
ity of alternative water suppLies; and, if the court determines that
there has been a (willful] violation of the regulation or schedule
or other requirement with respect to which the action was brought,
the court may, taking into account the seriousness of the violation,
the population at risk, and other appropriate factors, Impose on the
violator a civil penalty of not to exceed ( 5,OOO] $25, (XX) for each
day in which such violation occurs.
(c) Each owner or operator of a public water system shall give
notice to the persons served by it—
(1) of any failure on the part of the public water system to—
(A) comply with an applicable maximum contaminant
level or treatment technique requirement of, or a testing
procedure prescribed by, a national primary drinking
water regulation, or
(B) perform monitoring required by section 1445(a). and
(2) if the public water system is subject to a variance granted
under section 415(aX1XA) or 1415(aX2) for an inabilit r to meet
a maximum cdntaminant level requirement or is subject to an
exemption granted under section 1416, of—
(A) the existence of 8uch variance or exemption, and
(B) any failure to comply with the requirements of any
schedule prescribed pursuant to the variance or exemp-
tion.
-------
000165
(The Administrator Shall be reguJation prescribe the form,
manner, and frequency for giving notice under this subsection.
Notice under the first Sentence of this subsection shall be given not
less than once every 3 months, shall be given by publicatjon in a
newspaper of general circulation serving the area served by each
such water system (as determined by the Adminj tr ,r), 8hall be
furnished to the other communications media serving such area,
and shall be furnished to the communications media as soon as
practicable after the discovery of the violation with respect to
which the notice Is required. If the water bills of a public water
Syst em are issued more often th.an once every 3 months such notice
shall be included in at least one water biLl of the system every 3
months, and if a public water system issues it water bills less often
than once every 3 months, such notice shall be included in each of
the water bills issued by the system.] Wit/un 18 months after the
date of enactment of the Safe Drinking Water Act Am ndrnents of
1985, th. Administr or 8/ui!! amend such regulations to provide for
different t) s and frequencies of notice based on the differences be-
tween violation, which are intermittent or infrequent and violations
which are continuous or frequent. Such r giilatzons shall also take
into account the serzousn of any potential adverse health effects
which may be involved. Notice of any violation of a maximum con-
tamiruint level or any other violation designated by the Administra.
tor as posing a serious potential adverse health effect shall be given
as soon as possible, but in no case later than 14 days after the viola-
tion. Notice of a continuous violation of a regulation other than a
maximum contaminant level shall be given no Less frequently than
every three months. Notice of violations judged to be less serious
shall be given no less frequently than annually. Notification of such
violations to affected persons shall be as prompt as possible and
shall include notification by newspaper and shall include, unless
inappropriate, a press release to electronic media and individual
mailings. Notice under this sub8ectwn shall provide a clear and
readily understand,3bk explanation of tile violation, any potential
adverse health effects, the step8 that the system is taking to correct
such violation, and the necessity for seeking alternative water sup-
plies, if any, until the violation is correcce L Until 8LSch amended
regulations are promulga e -j, the regulations in effect on th. date of
the enactment of the Safe Drinking Water Act Amendments of 1985
shall remain in effect. The Adm istrator may also require the
owner or operator of a public water system to give notice to the
persons served by it of contaminant level of any unreguiated con-
taminant required to be monitored under section 1445(a). Any
person who willfuJly violates this subsection or regulations issued
under this subsection shall be fined not more than $5,000.
S S S
(gk’l) In any case in which the Admini.gtrijtor is authorz.zed to
bring a civil action under this section with respect to any regula-
tion, schedule, or other requirement, the Administrator also may
issue an order to require compliance with such regulation, schedule,
or other requirement.
(2) An order issued ur’4er this subsection shall not take effect
until after notice and opportunity for public hearing an4 in the
-------
fl”.r i
‘JL’LJ,
case of a Slate having primary enfort,ernent responsibility, until
after the Admzn&str,, t,,r has provided the State with on opportunity
to confer with the Administrator regarthng the proposed order. A
copy of any order propcwj to be issued under this subsection s/iou
be sent to the appropriate State agency of the State involved if the
State ha. primary enforttrnent responsibility for public water sys-
tems in that State. Any order issued under this subsection shall
state with reasonabl, specificity the nature of the violation. In any
case in which on order under this subsection is issued to a corpora-
tion, a copy of such order shall be issued to appropriate corporate
officer,.
( .t%A) Any person who violates, fails, or refuse, to comply with an
order under paragraph (2) shall be liable to the United States for a
civil penalty of not more than £ 2 S ,&Y) per day of violation.
(B) Whenever any civil penalty sought by the Admi,ñ.tnvjtor under
thi . paragraph does not exceed a total of $5,000, the penalty shall
be assessed by the Administrator after notice and opportunity for a
hearing on the record in accordan, with section .554 t f title 5 of the
United Stat,, Code.
(C) Whenever a civil penalty sought by the Administrator exceed,
$5,C the penalty shall be assessed bya civil action brought by the
Administrator in the appropriate United State, district court (as de-
termined under the provisions of title 28 of the United States Code).
(D) If any person fails to pay an a es8,rjent of a civil penalty
after it has become a final and unappeo l, order, or after the ap-
propriat, court of appeale has entered final judgment in favor of
the Administrator tn, Attorncy General shall recover the amount
for which such person in liable in any approp t, district court of
the United States. In any such action, the validity and appropriate.
ness of the final orde, imposing the civil penalty shall not be sub-
ject to review.
-------
r &a. 4 S fl& -
1( t
L k
0 --
7ORC T
SEC. 3. (a) Section 1414(a)(1)(A) of the
Safe Drinking Water Act Is amended by In- ‘7 3 9
serting “and such public water system”
after the words “notify the State”.
“(b) Section 1412(a)(1)(B) of the Safe
Drinking Water Act Is amended to read as
following:
“(B) If beyond the thirtieth day after the
Administrator’s notification the Stale has
not commenced appropriate enforcement
action, the Administrator shall issue an
order under subsection (a) requiring the
public water system to comply with such
regulation or requirement or shall corn-
mence a civil action under subsection (b),”,
(C) Section 1414(a)(2) of the Safe Drinking
Water Act Is amended by striking the words
“he may commence a civil action under sub-
section (b)’ and inserting the following: “he
shal l issue an order under subsectlo (g) re-
quiring the public water system to comply
with such regulation or requireme or shall
commence a civil action under subsection
(b)”.
(d) Section 1414 of the Safe Drinking
Water Act is amended by adding at the end
thereof the following new subsection
“(g)(l) In any case in which the Adminis. i
trator is authorized to bring a civil action
Under this section wIth respect to any reg-
ulation, schedule, or Other requ1remen the
Adxnlnjstrathr also may Issue an order to re- I
Quire compliance with such regulauon,
schedule, or Other requirement,
“(2) An order issued under this subsection
shall not take elfect until after notice and
Opportunity for public hearing and, In the i
case of a State having primary enforcement
responsibility, until after the Administrator
has provided the State with an opportunity
to confer with the Administrator regardjng
the proposed order. A copy of any order pro-
posed to be issued under this subsection
shall be sent to the appropriate state
agency of the State Involved ii the State has
primary enforcement responsibility for
public water systen In that State, Any
order Issued under this subsection shall
state with reasonable sPecificity the nature
of the violation. In any case In which an
order under this subsection is Issued to a
corporation, a copy of such order shall be
Issued to appropriate corporate officera
“(3)(A) Any person who violates, fails, or
refuses to comply with an order under para-
graph (2) shall be liable to the United i
States for a civil penalty of not more than
$25,000 per day of violation,
“(B)iWhenever a civil penalty sought by
the Administrator under this paragraph
does not exceed a total of $5,000, the penal-
ty shall be assessed by the Administrator
after notice and opportunity for a hearing
on the record In accordanee with section 554
of title 5 of the United States Code The Ad.
ministrator shall have the discretion to corn-
promise, modify, or remit, with or without
conditions, any civil penalty assessed under
this subsection against any person.
-------
“(C) Whenever a civil penalty sought by
the Administrator exceeds 15.000, the penal.
ty shall be assessed by a civil action brought
by the Administrator In the appropriate
United States district court (as determined
under the provisions of tItle 28 of the
United States Code). -
°(D) 11 any person falls to pay an assess-
ment of a clvi] penalty after It has become a
final and unappealable order, or after the
appropriate court of appeals has entered
final Judgment in favor of the Administra-
tor, the Attorney General shall recover the
amount for which such person is liable in
any appropriate district Court of the United
States. In any such action, the validity and
appropriatene of the final order imposing
the civil penalty shall not be subject to
review.”.
‘(e) Section 1414 of the Safe Drinking
Water Act is amended by striking the words
‘Failure by State to Assure” from the title.
-------
000169
- 1)2 /
Rep. . - t (
22 ENFORCE ME 1 VT
23 Si c. 4. (‘a) Scciioi, 1414( )(1 ,)( I) of the Safe Drin j,,q
24 JE’ater •1 ci i.c amended by inscrtiiiy “and . uch pub/ic waici
!/ /em ‘‘ after the words “notify the Slate ‘‘.
-------
000170
1 (b) Section 1414(a)(l)(B)of the Safe Drinking I’Va(er
2 Act is amended to read as follows:
3 “(B) If beyond the thirtieth day after the Administra-
4 br’s notification the State has not commenced appropriate
5 enforcement action, the Administrator may issue an order
6 under subsection (g) requiring the public water system to
7 comply with such regulation or requirement or may corn-
8 mence a civil action under subsection (b). “.
9 (c) Section 1414(a) (2) of the Safe Drinking T’Vaier Act
10 is amended by striking the words “he may commence a civil
11 action under subsection ‘b)” and inserting the following: “he
12 may issue an order under subsection (‘g) requiriflg the public
13 water system to comply with such regulation oi reqllirerncnl
14 or may commence a cmii ac1 on under subsectioii t ’b,.) “.
15 (ci) Section 1414 of the Safe Drinking IT’ T atcr Act is
16 amended by adding at 11w end thereof the following new sub-
17 section:
18 “ “ j) 1) In any case in which the Administrator is au-
19 tIiOrizc(i to bIIII [ J a cm ii (ic/ion nw/cr this section wit/i respect
20 to (10 J i’(’(J 111(11 i Jn, cli ed ii I c, or nt/i cr ?T1/ ii ire ìmi iii, 11w 1 din in —
21 isliwtor (i /SO 11l(t!/ iSsue (Ill oiil<, to r ’quiic couiijifiiiuice wi/li
22 s NC/I IC ’ ] 111(11 to ii, seii (d li I C, or of/i (‘1 1 (1/I/i i L ’ ni (‘iii.
• 23 • (?) A ii O1?/cr issued 11 11(1CC f/i 15 .5 U/)5 tlOii s/ui/i iwl
24 1(11 C e/f C(’I 1/ I l / ii 011 el iint e uiul (i/i/i l) U 1!] Jou piul)I1 C IS CO 1-
25 1 10/ an Ii, in f/ic ruse of o S’1uiIe Itu ci mj primary nforceinen I
-------
000 J7
1 responsibility, until after the Administy ator has provided the
2 State with an opportunity to ccipfer wit/i the Administrator
3 regarding 1/ic proposed order. A copy of any order proposed to
4 be issued under this subsection shall be sent to the appropri-
5 ate State agency of the State involved if the State has pri-
6 mary enforcement responsibility for public water systems in
7 that State. Any order issued under this subsection shall state
8 wit/i reasonable specificity the nature of the violation. In any
9 case in which an order under this subsection is issued to a
10 corporation, a copy of sue/i order shall he issued to appropri-
11 ate corporate officers.
12 “(3)(A) Any person who violates, fails, or refuses to
13 comply wit/i an order under paragraph (2) shall be liable to
14 the United States for a civil penalty of not more than
15 $25,000 per day of violation.
16 “(B) Whenever a civil penalty sought by 1/ic Adminis-
17 trator under this paragraph does not exceed a total of $5, 000,
18 the penalty shall be assessed by the Administrator after
19 notice and opportunity for a hearing on the record in accord-
20 aiice wi/h section 554 of title 5 of the United Slates C odc.
21 ‘f/ic A clminjsti /or shall linec the discrel ion to comproin ise,
22 modify, 01’ rCinit, Wi//I OP Without conditions, (InlJ civil penal-
23 ty assc e(l if in/cr (his subsec/ioii against (111 1/ /)C1 Ol1.
24 - (C) IVJi ner , a CiL’il penally 5OU(j/i/ 1)1/ I/ ic I (1/flints-
2m (I’ll/Or e.rcce(/s $5, 000, //te penally 81 1( 111 1)0 aSsessed by (1 civil
-------
000172
1 action brought by the AdministratorS in the appropriate
2 United States district court (as determined under the provi-
3 sions of title 28 of the United States Code).
4 “(D) If any person fails to pay an assessment of a civil
5 penally after it has become a final and unappealable order, or
6 after the appropriate court of appeals has entered final judg-
7 ment in favor of the Adminis1rator the Attorney General
8 s/tall recover the amount for which such person is liable in.
9 any appropriate district court of the United States. In any
10 such action, the validity and appropriateness of the final
11 order imposing ‘the civil penally s/tall not be subject to
12 review. “.
13 (e) Section 1414 of the Safe Drinkiiig T’Valei Act is
14 amended by striking the words ‘‘Failure by Stale to tssurc’’
15 from the li /Ic.
-------
000173
S, 2 -f
J21 (-
Section 4. Enforcement
Amendments in section 4 augment EPA’s enforcement authority
under current law The Administrator is provided new authority to
issue administrative orders in addition to existing authority to ini-
tiate civil proceedings against public water systems which are out
of compliance with drinking water standards in non-primacy
States. The Administrator is given the authority to issue adminis-
trative orders in primacy States, if a delegated State fails to act
against non-complying public water systems within 30 days of noti-
fication by the Administrator.
Administrative orders do not take effect until notice and oppor-
tunity for public hearing and if the order is issued to a public
water system in a primacy State, the Administrator and the State
are given the opportunity to confer. Violators of administrative
orders are subject to a penalty of up to $25,000 per day of violation.
The Administrator is authorized to assess penalties of up to $5,000
per violation after opportunity for a hearing. The Administrator
must initiate a civil action to collect penalties in excess of $5,000
per violation
The Agency has initiated only 32 Federal enforcement actions
against public water systems under the Safe Drinking Water Act.
Civil actions are generally resource intensive, and hence may not
be undertaken as readily as enforcement activity is desirable. It is
anticipated that the administrative order authority will increase
actions taken against violators and improve compliance with the
Act. This additional authority is not intended to substitute for, or
discourage the use of civil suits in cases where this course of action
is warranted and appropriate. The intent is to provide the Admin-
istrator with an effective administrative legal mechanism for expe-
diting compliance with the law.
-------
, oduc d. -‘ itO7-- 000174
S.
1 ENFORCEMENT
2 SEC. 4. (a) Section 1414(a)(1)(A) of the Safe Drinking P
3 Water Act is amended by inserting “and such public water
4 system” after the yords “notify the State”.
5 (b) Section 1414(a)(1)(B) of the Safe Drinking Water
6 Act is amended to read as follows:
“(B) If beyond the thirtieth day after the Administra-
8 tor’s notification the State has not commenced appropriate
9 enforcement action, the Administrator shall issue an order
10 under subsection (g) requiring the public water system to
11 comply with such regulation or requirement or shall corn-
12 mence a civil action under subsection (b).”.
13 (c) Section 1414(a)(2) of the Safe Drinking Water Act is
14 amended by striking the words “he may commence a civil
15 action under subsection (b)” and adding the following: “he
16 shall issue an order under subsection (g) requiring the public
17 water system to comply with such regulation or requirement
18 or shall commence a civil action under subsection (b)”.
19 (d) Section 1414 of the Safe Drinking Water Act is
20 amended by adding t the end thereof the following new sub-
21 section (g):
22 “(g)(1) In any case in which the Administrator is au-
23 thorized to bring a civil action under this section with respect
24 to any regulation, schedule, or other requirement, the Admin-
-------
000175
1 istrator also may issue an order to require compliance with • 10
2 such regulation, schedule, or other equirement.
3 “(2) An order issued under this subsection shall not take
4 effect until after notice and opportunity for public hearing
5 and, in the case of a State having primary enforcement re-
6 sponsibility, until after the Administrator has provided the
7 State with an opportunity to confer with the Administrator
8 regarding the proposed order. A copy of any order proposed
9 to be issued under this subsection shall be sent to the appro-
10 priate State agency of the State involved if the State has
11 primary enforcement responsibility for public water systems
12 in that State. Any order issued under this subsection shall
13 state with reasonable specificity the nature of the violation.
14 In any case in which an order under this subsection is issued
15 to a corporation, a copy of such order shall be issued to ap-
16 propriate corporate officers.
17 “(3)(A) Any person who violates, or fails or refuses to
18 comply with, an order under paragraph (2) shall be liable to
19 the United State s for a civil penalty of not more than
20 $25,000 per day of violation.
21 “(B) In the case of any civil penalty under this para-
22 graph which does not exceed a total of $5,000, the penalty
23 shall be assessed by the Administrator after notice and oppor-
24 tunity’for a hearing on the record in accordance with section
25 554 of title 5 of the United States Code. The Administrator
-------
0001/6
( , (0
1 shall have the discretion to compromise, modify, or remit,
2 with or without conditions, any civil penalty assessed under
3 this subsection against any person.
4 “(C) In the case of any civil penalty which exceeds
5 $5,000, the penalty shall be assessed by a civil action
6 brought by the Administrator in the appropriate United
7 States district court (as determined under the provisions of
8 title 28 of the United States Code).
9 “(D) If any person fails to pay an assessment of a civil
10 penalty after it has become a final and unappealable order, or
11 after the appropriate court of appeals has entered final judg-
12 ment in favor of the Administrator, the Attorney General
13 shall recover the amount for which such person is liable in
14 any appropriate district court of the United States. In any
15 such action, the validity and appropriateness of the final
16 order imposing the civil penalty shall not be subject to
17 review.”.
18 (e) Section 1414 of the Safe Drinking Water Act is
19 amended by striking the words “FAILURE BY STATE TO
20 ASSURE” from the title..
-------
‘k C - 9 ° 2 L’ 7
ENFORCEMENT OP REGULATIONS
Ss c 103 (a) NOTICE i’o SYSTEMS —Section 1414(aXIXA) of the Safe Drinking Water
Act is amended by inserting “and such public water System” after the words “notify
the State”
(b) PROMPT FEDERAL ENFORCEMENT —(1) Section 1414(aX1XB) of the Safe Drinking
Water Act is amended to read as follows
“(B) If, beyond the thirtieth day after the Administrator’s notification, the State
has not commenced appropriate enforcement action, the Administrator shall issue
an order under subsection (g) requiring the public water system to comply with such
regulation or requirement or shall commence a civil action under subsection (b)”
(2) Section 1414(aX2) of the Safe Drinking Water Act is amended by striking the
words “he may commence a civil action under subsection (b)” and adding the follow.
ing “he shall issue an order under subsection (g) requiring the public water system
to comply with such regulation or requirement or shall commence a civil action
under subsection (b)”
(c) ADMINISTRATIVE ORDEns —(1) Section 1414 of the Safe Drinking Water Act is
amended by adding at the end thereof the following new subsection (g)
“(g)(1) In any case in which the Administrator is authorized to bring a civil action
under this section with respect to any regulation, schedule, or other requirement,
the Administrator also may issue an order to require compliance with such regula.
tion, schedule, or other requirement
“(2) An order issued under this subsection shall not take effect until after notice
and opportunity for public hearing and, in the case of a State having primary en-
-------
0001/8
forcement responsibility, until after the Administrator has provided the State with
an opportunity to confer with the Administrator regarding the proposed order A
copy of any order proposed to be issued under this subsection shall be sent to the
appropriate State agency of the State involved if the State has primary enforcement
responsibility for public water systems in that State Any order issued under this
subsection shall state with reasonable specificity the nature of the violation In any
case in which an order under this subsection is issued to a corporation, a copy of
such order shall be issued to appropriate corporate officers
“(3XA) Any person who violates, or fails or refuses to comply with, an order under
paragraph (2) shall be liable to the United States for a civil penalty of not more
than $25,000 per day of violation
“(B) Whenever any civil penalty sought by the Administrator under this para-
graph does not exceed a total of $5,000, the penalty shall be assessed by the Admin-
istrator after notice and opportunity for a hearing on the record in accordance with
section 554 of title 5 of the United States Code
“(C) Whenever any civil penalty sought by the Administrator under this para-
graph exceeds $5,000, the penalty shall be assessed by a civil action brought by the
Administrator in the appropriate United States district court (as determined under
the provisions of title 28 of the United States Code)
“(D) If any person fails to pay an assessment of a civil penalty after it has become
a final and unappealable order, or after the appropriate court of appeals has en-
tered final judgment in favor of the Administrator, the Attorney General shall re-
cover the amount for which such person is liable in any appropriate district court of
the United States In any such action, the validity and appropriateness of the final
order imposing the civil penalty shall not be subject to review
(2) Section 1414 of the Safe Drinking Water Act is amended by striking the words
“FAILURE if STATE TO ASSURE’ from the section heading
-------
145° 5 \— \o 2_ 000179
R c Io 4 ,c\C
Section 103
Under the 1974 Act, States are given the primary enforcement
responsibility for public water systems and act as the enforcement
authority unless EPA finds that the State is abusing its discretion.
In a State without primary enforcement responsibility, EPA may
enforce the standards directly through law suit.
In 198.1 and 1982, the General Accounting Office (GAO) reviewed
implementation of the drinking water program. The GAO report
noted that there were 146,000 violations for either failing to test or
for not meeting the drinking water quality standards reported in
1980 against 28,000 of the 65,000 community water systems. GAO
found that the enforcement actions in the EPA offices and States
included in the review ranged from none to minimal, followed no
pattern, and were not as timely as they could have or should have
been. Having reviewed the GAO report and other testimony of non-
compliance, the Committee believes that the record calls for a sig-
nificant increase in Federal-State enforcement efforts To this end,
this section provides that the Administrator must issue an order or
commence a civil action if the State has not cnmrnpn ’r r rr,nri
ate enforcement actions within thirty days of the Administrator’s
notice of violation.’ 7
Administrative orders are authorized in any case in which the
Administrator can bring a civil action under this section. An order
can not take effect until notice and opportunity for public hearing
and in the case of a State having primary enforcement reponsibi-
lity, until after the Administrator has provided the State with an
opportunity to confer with the Administrator concerning the order.
Additional due process procedures are also established for proper
issuance of orders under this section.
To encourage prompt compliance with administrative orders,
civil penalties are set at $25,000 per day per violation. If the civil
penalty sought by the Administrator does not exceed a total of
$5,000, the penalty must be assessed by the Administrator after
notice and opportunity for hearing on the record. If the penalty
sought by the Administrator exceeds $5,000, then the penalty must
be assessed by a civil action brought by the Administrator. Failure
to pay an assessement of a civil penalty on a timely basis triggers a
requirement for the 4ttorney General to recover the amount in the
appropriate Federal district Court. In such proceeding the validity
and appropriateness of the final order imposing the civil penalty is
not subject to review.
-------
.R. OOoi
0
• ((q L ,
11 ENFORCEMENT OF REGULATIONS
P , 1t
12 SEC. 103. (a) NOTICE TO SYSTE 1S.—Sectjoi i 1414
13 (a)(1)(A) of the Safe Drinking Watcr Act is amended by in-
14 serting “and such public water system’’ after the words
15 ‘‘notify the State’’.
16 (b) PROMP’r FEDERAL ENFORCEMENT._(1) Section
17 1414(a)(1)(B) of the Safe Drinking Water Act is amended to
18 read as follows:
19 ‘‘(B) If, beyond the thirtieth day after the Administra—
20 tor’s notil ication, the State has not coinrneiiccd appropriate
21 ellforcemc iit action, the Adiniiiisrrator shall ISSUe an order
22 1111(101’ subsection (g) requiring I Iw pit hi Ic v a ter system to
23 cotimply vit1i such regulation L requiremcnt or s)i d1 cc j—
24 flle!ICC a c uL icLion tinder smikeet iou (h). ‘‘.
(2) Sectuni 41 -t (a )(2) of tie Safe 1)riiiki tig \Va ter .\ ci is
2( aimiencled liv lnkin 2 the ords “lie n’a (iuflh!l(II( ’c a civil
H U
-------
000181
1 action under subsection (bY’ andadding the following: “lie
2 shall issue an order under subsection (g) requiring the public
3 water system to comply with such regulation or requirement
4 or shall commence a civil action under subsection (b)”.
5 (c) ADMINISTRATIVE O1ThERs.—(1) Section 1414 of the
6 Safe Drinking Water Act is amended by adding at the end
7 thereof the following new subsection (g):
S “(g)(1) In any case in which the Administrator is au-
9 thorized to bring a civil action under this section with respect
10 to any regulation, schedule, or other requirement, the Admin-
11 istrator also may issue an order to require compliance with
12 such regulation, schedule, or other requirement.
13 “(2) An order issued under this subsection shall not take
14 effect until after notice and opportunity for public hearing
15 and, in the case of a State having primary enforcement re-
16 sponsibihty, until after the Administrator has provided the
17 Statç with an opportunity to confer with the Administrator
18 regarding the Pr01)OSed order. A COpy 0! any order prol)osecl
I 9 to he issued under this subsection shall be sent to the appro—
2() priate State agency of the State invol ed if the State has
21 Pflnl:lry eIllOrCciiient leSpOILsIhihi tv for f)IIl)I1C v a Ecu S stems
in that S atc. AIIV C I (ICF I 5lIpd Wider this subsection shall
2 state w’il Ii reasonable spuculicitv the Hal nrc of the violation.
III .IliV Cas( in \vhii(Ji :111 order under this suh ect nn iS issued
-------
000182
I to a corporation, a copy of such or jer shall ‘be issued to ap-
proprmtc corporate officers.
“(3)(A) Any person who violates, or fails or refuses to
4 comply with, an order under paragraph (2) shall be liable to
5 the United States for a civil penalty of not more than
6 $25,000 per day of violation.
7 “(B) ‘Whenever any civil penalty sought by the Adminis-
8 trator under this paragraph does not exceed a total of
9 $5,000, the penalty shall be assessed by the Administrator
10 after notice and opportunity for a hearing on the record in
11 accordance with section 554 of title 5 of the United States
12 Code.
13 “(0) WThenever aiiy civil penalty sought b the Adminis-
14 trator under this paragraph exceeds $5,000, the Penalty shall
15 he assessed by a civil action brought by the Administrator in
16 the appropriate United States district court (as determined
17 under the p s ofls of title 28 of the United States Code).
18 ‘‘(D) Tf any person fails to pay an a sessincnt, of a civil
19 pcna ltv a fter it has hccome a final and unappealable ni der, or
20 after tile appropri te court 1)! appeals li:is eiilercd linal jiidg—
21 mciit in favor ol the Adiiiiiiistrntcr, the Attorney General
22 shall i ecover the aineiiiit br \Vlli(h1 ‘ iieh [ )(‘r Ot i liaile iti
ally appi )riUte (hi5trlt t COLI! t 01 the t iited lale’ . Li itiv
21 iuhi .1(10)11, the nhiditv :iiul :1lIlroprI lte1le ot lic f:iial
co -i
-------
000133
1 onler imposing the civil penalty sh;ill be subject to
2 review.”.
3 (2) Section 141 i of the Sale Drinking Water Act is
4 amended by striking the words “FAJLLTflE BY STATE TO
5 ssui i ’’ from the section hcadin .
-------
000184
1- .3z o IILf1 3
j ‘i Th CArr j. 1 k c .U.
13 ENFORCEMENT OF REOULATIONS
14 SEa. 103. SY5TEMS NOT IN COMPLIANCE.—SOCLiOn
15 1414 is amended by sIrikii g out 1 1?A1L.UBE BY 8TATE TO
16 A88uBI ” in the title thereof and by adding the following now
17 subsection at the end thereof:
18 “(g) In the.case of any public water system which is not
19 in compliance with an interim or revised national primary
20 drinking water regulation (whichever is applicable), not later
21 than 1 yeoI alter the later of-.-.
22 “(1) the •lato on which ihe Adutinistrator deter-
mines that su, ii systeni 18 not iii coinpliaiicc, or
2 1 ‘ ‘t2) the si tO of the enuel niciit of tIns Act,
a
1 the Administrator shall cunimence a civil action or issue an
2 administrative order against the owner or operator of such
3 system unless there is in effect, within such 1-year period, a I
4 variance under SCCtiOn 1415 or an exemption under section
5 1416 which requires compliance with such standard in ac-
6 cordarico with a compliance schedule which meets the ro-
7 quirem of Section 1415 or 1416, as the case may be.”.
-------
4 o
000185
22 (d) AVMINISTRATIVE OUDaae.—Section 1414 is
23 amended by adding the following now subsections at the end
24 thereof:
1 “(g)(l) In ally case in which the Adniutistrator is au_I
‘2 tlloriLcd to bring a civil action under this section with respect
3 to any regulation, schedule, or oilier requirement, the Admin-
4 istrator may (in lieu of such a civil action) issue an order to
5 require compliance with such regulation, schedule, or other
6 requirement.
7 “(2) An order issued under this subsection shall not take
8 effect until the person to whom it is issued has had an oppor.
9 tunity to confer with the Administrator concerning the al-
10 leged violation. A copy of any order issued under this Bubsec-
11 tion shall be sent to the appropriate State agency of the State
12 involved if the State has primary enforcement responsibility
13 for public water systems in that State. Any order issued
14 under this subsection shall state with reasonable specificity
15 the nature of the violation. In any case in which an order
16 under this subsection is issued to a corporation, a copy of
17 such order shall be issued to appropriate corporate officers.
18 “(3) The Administrator shall commence a civil action
19 for a temporary or permanent injunction, or to assess and
20 recover a civil penalty of not more than $25,000 per day of
21 violation, or both, whenever any person violates or fails or
22 refuses to comply with any order issued under paragraph (1).
23 Any action under this paragraph may be brought &n the ap-
24 propriate United States district court (as determined under
25 the provisions of title 28 of the United States Code) and such
I ‘coj Iliave jurisdiction to restraiti such v di 8 t 10 , to re-
2 quire compliance, and to assess such civil penalty.
-------
UQQJ8
S D \ J A ‘ “ ‘ p t 0
SEC. 1O . PUBLIC NOTIFICATION.
Section 14 14(c) of the Safe Drinking Water Act is amended by
striking everything after the sentence “The Admi.nwtrator BhaU by
regulation prescribe the form, manner, and frequency for gwing
notice under this subsection.” and inserting the following: “Within
15 months after the enactment of the Safe Drinking Water Act
Amendments of 1986, the Administrator shall amend such regula-
tions to provide for different types and frequencies of notice based
on the differences between violations which are intermittent or
infrequent and violations which are continuous or frequent. Such
regulations shall also take into account the seriousness of any
potential adverse health effects which may be involved. Notice of
any violation of a maximum contaminant level or any other viola-
tion designated by the Administrator as posing a serious potential
adverse health effect shall be given as soon as possible, but in no
case later than 14 days after the violation. Notice of a continuous
violation of a regulation other than a maximum contaminant level
shall be given no less frequently than every 3 months. Notice of
violations judged to be less serious shall be given no less frequently
than annually. The Administrator shall specify the types of notice to
be used to provide information as promptly and effectively as pos-
sible taking into account both the seriousness of any potential
adverse health effects and the likelihood of reaching all affected
persons. Notification of violations shall include notice by general
circulation newspaper serving the area and, whenever appropriate,
shall also include a press release to electronic media and individual
mailings. Notice under this subsection shall provide a clear and
readily understandable explanation of the violation, any potential
adverse health effects, the steps that the system is talurig to correct
such violation, and the necessity for seeking alternative water
supplies, if any, until the violation is corrected. Until such amended
regulations are promulgated, the regulations in effect on the date of
the enactment of the Safe Drinking Water Act Amendments of l9 6
shall ,remain in effect The Administrator may also require the
o ner or operator of a public water system to gi e notice to the
persons ser ed b ’- it of contaminant levels of an unregulated
contaminant required to be monitored under section l435a An
person ho violates this subsection or regulations issued under this
subsection shall be subject to a cis il penalt of not to exceed
25,OOO
-------
000 1C7
€ c - - c.
Co c. Ra2. No. 2 I-4 (lID).
SEC. 193. PUBLIC NOTIFICATION.
Section 1414(c) of the Safe Drinkinf’ Water Act is amended by
strzkin.g everything after the sentence ‘The Administrator shall by
regulation prescribe the form, manner, and frequency for gwing
notice under this subsection. “ and inserting the following: “Within
15 months after the enactment of the Safe Drinking Water Act
Amendments of 1986, the Administrator shall amend such regula-
tions to provide for different types and frequencies of notice based
on the differences between violations which ore intermittent or in-
frequent and viola tuns which are continuous or frequent. Such reg-
ulation.s shall also take into account the seriousness of any potential
adverse health effects which may be involved. Notice of any viola-
tion of a maximum contaminant level or any other violation desig-
nated by the AdmznLstrtztor as posing a serious potential adverse
health effect shall be given as soon as posszble , but in no case later
than 14 days after the violation. Notice of a continuous violation of
a regulation other than a maximum contaminant level shall be
given no less frequently than every S months. Notice of violations
judged to be Less serious shall be gwen no less frequently than annu-
ally. The Administrator shall specify the types of notice to be used
to provide information as promptly and effectively as possible
aking into account both the seriousness of any potential adverse
health effects and the likelihood of reaching all affected persons.
Notification of violations shall include notice by general circulation
newspaper serving the area and whenever appropriate, shall also
include a press release to electronic media and individual mailings.
Notice under this subsection shall provide a clear and readily un-
derstandable explanation of the violation, any potential adverse
health effects, the 8teps that the system is taking to correct such vio-
lation, and the necessity for seeking alternative water supplies, if
any, until the violation is corrected. Until such amended regula-
tions are promulgated, the regulations in effect on the date of the
enactment of the Safe DrinkLng Water Act Amendments of 1986
shall remain in effect. The Administrator may also require the
owner or operator of a public water system to give notice to the per-
sons served by it of contaminant levels of any unregulated contami-
nant required to be wnrtored under section 1445(a) Any person
who violates this subsection or regulations issued under this subsec-
tion shall be subject to a civil penalty of not to exceed $25,000. ‘
-------
aou F . REP. 5 l 24 S . -
9
8 CTION 103—PIJBUC NO ICATI0N
Senate bilL—The Senate bill requires the Administrator, within
18 months of enactment, to amend existing regulations requiring
public notification for violations of public water system require-
ments to provide for different types and frequencies of notice based
on differences between intermittent or infrequent violations and
those that are continuous or frequent, t . king into account the sen.
ouanees of any potential health effects associated with 8UCh viola-
tions. Notice of any violation designated as posing a serious poten-
tial adverse health effect, including a violation of a m imum con-
taminRnt level, 8hall be given as soon as possible but not later than
14 days after the violation. Notice of continuous violations shall be
given no lees frequently than every three months. Notice of viola-
tions judged to be less serious shall be given no less frequentiy
than annually. Notification of affected persons shall include notifi-
cation by newspaper and, unless inappropriate, notice by radio, tel-
evision, and individual mfiulings .
House amend,nenL—The House amendment requires the Adinin-
istrator, within 12 months of enactment, to amend public notifica-
tion regulations to provide for different types and frequencies of
notice. No lees frequent notice than annually is permitted. Notice
of a violation of a mn inium contRminfint level and any other vio-
lation considered continuous or posing a serious potential adverse
health effect is required no lees frequently than every three
months and shall include notice in a newspaper of general circula.
tion ..
Con ferenc a€reement.—The conference agreement is to adopt the
Senate provision with modification. The Senate language requiring
specific types of notice is modified to require the Administrator to
speci.f r the types of notice to be used to provide information as
promptly and effectively as possible, taking into account both the
seriousness of any potential adverse health effects and the likeli.
hood of reaching all affected persons. Notification shall include
notice by general circulation newspaper serving the area and.
whenever appropriate; shall also include a press release to elec-
tronic media and individual ntnhlings .
-------
000189
C NGI, Cv,. .. 4- c c,
e j. C w fl -, c.V 5)
Si 101 PVbI.IC 4iTWILATh)r4.
Section 1 4 14 (c) of the Safe Drinking
Water Act is amendeci by striking out the
third and fourth sentences thereof ansI sub-
stituting. “WithIn 12 mQnths after the date - 2.
of the enactment at the Safe Drtnk.ing
Water Act Amendznentj of the Admin.
Istralor sösi such regis1 t4o to
proeide lox different types and trequevacies
of notice based on the differences between
violations which are intenniu ent or infre-
quent and violations which are continuous
or frequent Si.ich regulsteons shall also take
IfltO acc gL Lbs .eno ne of any poten-
tial adverse hes h efleei a which may be In-
volved. 1.n r c e shall notices be given less
(reqL nt. , Ihass annually Notice of any vio-
lation of a maximum contaminant level and
any other notice of a violation d ignated by
the Admirr tra r as continuous or posing a
serious potenLiaJ adverse health effect shall
be given no less frequently than every three
months and shall include notice n a news-
paper of ener-al circulation serving the area
served by the public water sysLem (as deter-
mined by the Administrator, Notice under
this subsection shall pro ide a clear and
readily understandable esplanaLion of the
violation the steps that the system is taking
to correct such iolation and the consumers
which should seek alternative water sup-
plies until the violation is corrected if it is
necessary (or conhumera to seek alternative
water supplies. Until such amendment.s are
promulgated the regua ion5 in effect on
thpa date of the enactment of the Safe
Drihkuig Water Act AmendmenLs of I 85
shall remain in effect -
-------
000170
I I (a C 4 L : tJ b- C m’ ’r . —
\-m- (\c %5
SEC 101 PIBLIC IOTlrICATI0 4
Section 1414(c) of the Safe Drinking Water Act is amended by striking out the
third and fourth sentences thereof and substituting Within 12 months after the
date of the enactment of the Safe Drinking Water Act Amendments of 1985. the
Administrator shall amend such regulations to provide for different types and fre-
quencies of notice based on the differences between violations which are intermit-
tent or infrequent and violations which are continuous or frequent Such regula-
tions shall also take into account the seripusnesa of any potential adverse health
effects which may be involved In no case shall notices be given less frequently than
annually Notice of any violation of a maximum contaminant level and any other
notice of a violation designated by the Administrator as continuous or posing a se t-i-
ous potential adverse health effect shall be given no less frequently than every
three months and shall include notice in a newspaper of general circulation serving
the area served by the public water system as determined by the Administrator,
Notice under this subsection shall provide a clear and readily understandable expla-
nation of the violation, the steps that the system is taking to correct such violation,
and the consumers which should seek alternative water supplies until the violation
is corrected if it is necessary for consumers to seek alternative water supplies Until
such amendments are promulgated, the regulations in effect on the date of the en
actment of the Safe Drinking Water Act Amendments of 1985 shall remain in
effect”
-------
OOOv)
1 o - 03
Rep. No. c C 1 c hC j
Section 104
A number of organizations testified concerning the need to
streamline the Act’s public notice requirements so as to avoid un-
important notices and place a greater focus on the more serious
violations. The public notice requirements have not functioned ef-
fectively in the past, due in part to lax enforcement by EPA and
the States. The Committee believes that public support for the pro-
gram will increase and enforcement will be enhanced if public
notice of violations is tailored to the seriousness and frequency of
the violation.
For these reasons, section 104 requires the Administrator to
amend the public notice regulations within twelve months of the
date of enactment to provide for diffenent types and frequencies of
notice based on the differences between violations which are inter-
mittent or infrequent and violations which are continuous of fre-
quent. Such regulations must also take into account the serious-
ness of any potential adverse health effects that may be involved.
Notice of any violation of a maximum contaminant level and any
notice of a violation designated by the Administrator as Continuous
or posing a serious potential adverse health effect must be given rio
less frequently than every three months and must include notice in
a newspaper of general circulation in the area served by the public
water system.
-------
000192
t ONG.R c - -o- v -
(c e ck . H
Sect n 1 d—Faib& no 1flcat o,
The bW ma.ndat EPA to pr ajbe by
rule withIn 12 months the form. manna
and frequency of the notice. All notices
must be no ie than On an annual basis
EPA Is also given authority to differentiate
between sevious and non-serious vloIatIort.,
for pwp e of notice. Serious violations
mt t be noticed in a newspap of general
cirvulatioc every 3 provide an c x .
planation of the VIO *UO , norrecalve stei
being taken and which ou ahould seek
alternative water supplies.
-------
- 000193
\3 R c s - C c ed.
PUBLIC NOTIFICATION
SEc 4 (a) Sectaon l414c) of the Sate
D’inking Water Act is aniended by striking
e crvtti,ng after the sentence “The Adnitn.
I rat r shall by regulation presCr,be the r
form, marijier, and frequençi for gi’ irig
notit’e under this subsect, op. to the sen.
ter’cp begjnmng ‘The Administrator rna
also reQuire and inserting the follosuig
Within (12] 18 Ynonth after the date of
cuacimerit of the Safe Drinising V , oter Act
AJ -iendmpnts of 1985. the Adrnizi,straror
srI , ll amend such regulariop , , to pro icje fo-
different types arid frequencies of nLtce
ba.ced on t’ e differences betacen tl&.aiions
a Ich are Intermi:tent or lnrr . ri ar.d
si ’•atIOn hich are COr.I IflUCUS or frtqueit
Such regulations shah also ta’ e into ac-
cojnt the seriousness of ans PC CrnIal ad-
terbe health ffec a uch ma h TI OJ ed
(Notice 01 ny vioiaiiori C .! a ma’ mien-. Con.
tarilnant ie el and oi her nouc of a io-
Ir’ on desigliatod b the Administrator ss
cenuinuou or po in t a e ”ious poten’ial ad
terse health t’ffrc s’ u i,e gr en no less ire-
qu ntk th ri etcr U ret’ ci ,r ith 2-id ir’ no
Case s ’a.jl nnti e he giy-’ lei ‘ ieently
tar a ri. ail3 Surh no .ce snaP Crit j,J no-
t ’:Cc -ation in a ne is ia jer of generaf circula-
li-rn serlu-ig the area serv ,d b the public
Sater s svern. Notice under this subsection
shall pr ’s’ide a clear and readily under-
standable explanation Cf the vi , lation the
steps that the system Is taking to] Notice of
any molation of a ntazllnum contaminant
level or any OIlier violation designated by
the Administrator as posing a sertous poten-
tial adverse health effect shall be given as
soon as possible, but in no case later than 14
days after the violation. Notice of a continu.
OILS violation of a regulation of her than a
maxz,num contaminant level shcil be given
no less frequently than every three moiUl q ,
Notice of violations judged to be less serious
shall be given no less frequently than annu-
ally Notification of suCh Violatio 3 to af-
fected persons shall be as prompt as possible
and shall include notification by newspaper
and shalt include unless ‘napprc,p - ate a
pre s ‘elt’ase to el.’ctronic media and inth-
victual mailings Notice under this subsec-
tion shall prom ide a clear and readily Under-
standable explanation of the i’iolation. any
potential adverse health effects, the .,ieps
f/tat the system is taking to correct such vio-
lation, and the necessity for seeking alterna-
tive aater supplies. If any, until the viola-
tion is corrected L’nti such amended regu-
lations are promuTgat d the reguIatio In
effect on the date of the enactment of the
Safe Drink’ng Waier Act Amendrnen of
1955 shall remain in effect -
-------
000! 94
t2 4 & yvvy — (03
S,R p, o. c c 5 (53 (i 5
Sscriou 4. Punuc NOTLYTCATION
SUMMARY
This section requires the Mrnini tra o to amend existing regu-
lations requiring public notification for violations of public water
system requirements to provide for different types and frequencies
of notice baeed on differences between intermittent or infrequent I o
violations and those that are continuous or frequent. The serious-
nees of any potential health effects associated with such violations
shall also be taken into account in promulgating regulations.
Notice of any violation of a n *rimum conthrninfint level or any
other violation designated as posing a serious potential adverse
health effect shall be given as soon as possible but in no case later
than 14 days after the violation. Notice of continuous violations
shall be given no lees frequently than every three months. Notice
of violations judged to be less serious ghiill be given no l fre-
quently than annually. Notification of affected persons is to be as
prompt as possible and shall include notification by newi per and.
unless inappropriate, notice by radio, television, and individual
mnilingg .
Notice is to provide an explanation of the violation, potential ad-
verse health effects to sensitive populations as well as the general
public, corrective steps, and the necessity, if any, of seeking alter-
native water supplies.
DISCUSSION
Existing regulations for public notification of violations of the
Safe Drinking Water Act have been widely criticized for bein ,
overly burdensome to water suppliers, confusing to the public, and
poorly enforced by EPA and delegated State authorities.
The bill requires the Administrator to amend these re ulations
within 18 months of enactment. Revised notification re( uirementa
will distinguish between serious and less serious violations based
on the presence of an adverse health effect or the frequency of vio-
lation. Such revisions are expected to provide the public with more
timely and meaningful information in case of a violation and to im-
prove compliance with notification requirements.
-------
000195
S,I2Lfc A.LcL — Q3
‘3 C. N& 1 cZ ,
, c) (- * tu c -c c -, S 1 . & A c -:).
PVBL!C NOTIZIC*TION -
Sac. 4. (a) Section 1414(e) of the Safe
Drinking Water Act Is amended by striking
everything after the sentence “The Adam.
Istrator shall by regulation prescribe the
forni, manner, and frequency for giving
notice under this subsection,” to the sen.
t -ence beginning “The Administrator may
also require” and Inserting the foUowthg
“Within 12 months after the date of enact-
ment of the Safe Drinking Water Act
Amendments of 1985, the Administrator
shall amend such regWatlo to provide for
different types and frequencf g of notice
based on the d1fferencp between violations
which are Intermittent or lnlcequent and
violations which are continuou,s or frequent,
Such reguiatio shall also take into ac-
count the serlousuess of any potential ad-
verse health effects which may be Involved,
Notice of any violation of a maximum con.
tani1nn t level and any other notice of a vio-
lation deslgna by the Administrator as
COflt [ nuou 2 or posing a serious potential ad-
verse health effect shall be given less fre-
quently than every three months and In no
case shall notice be given less frequently
than annually, Such notice shall include no-
tification In a newspaper of general circula-
tion serving the area served by the public
Water system. Notice under this subsection
shall provide a clear and readily under-
standable explanation of the violation, the
steps that the system Is taking to correct
such violation, and the necessity for seeking
alternative water supplies, If any, until the
violation Is corrected, Until such amended
regulatfo are promulgate the regula-
tions Iii effect on the date of enactment of I
the Safe Drinking Water Act Amendments
of 1985 shall remain in effect,”,
-------
0001 96
E.R p. o . C 1h - S.
2_u,- c L 1 c
16 PUBLIC NOTIFICATION
17 SEC. 5. (a) Section l 4 14(c) of tile Safe Drinking
18 J’Vater Act is amended by striking every /li ing after the sen-
19 tence “The Administrator shall by regulation prescribe 1/ic
20 form, manner, and frccjuency for giving notice under this
21 subsection,” to 1/ic sentence beginning “The Administrator
22 may also require” and inserting 1/ic following: “Within 12
23 mont/is after the date of enactment of 1/ic Safe Drinki’nq
24 Il 7 ater Act Amendments of 1984, (lie Administrator shall
25 amend sue/i regulations to proride for different types and fre-
26 /uenCies of miotice based on the differences between viola/ions
-------
000197.
1 which are intermittent or infrequent and violations which are
2 continuous or frequent. Such regulations shall also take into
3 account the seriousness of any potential adverse health effects
4 which may be involved. Notice of any violation of a maxi-
5 mum contaminant level and any other notice of a violation
6 designated by the Administrator as continuous or posing a
7 serious potential adverse health effect shall be given no less
8 frequently than every 3 mont/is and in no case shall notice be
9 given less frequently than annually. Such notice shall in-
10 dude notification in a newspaper of general circulation serv-
11 ing the area served by the public water system. Notice under
12 this subsection s/tall provide a clear and readily understand-
13 able explanation of the violation, the steps 1/tat the system is
14 taking to correct such violation, and 1/ic necessity for seeking
15 alternative water supplies, if any, until 1/ic violation is cor-
16 rec lcd. Until such amended regulations are promulgated, 1/ic
17 regulations in • ffect on I/ic c/ate of enactment of the Safe
18 Drinking TT 7 atcr Act Ainendnicnts of 1984 shall remain in
19 effect. “.
-------
000198
C HWRr .C 2 9
O. _(oL H
— 1 L ( V’ 4). /
&ction 5. Public not Lficat ion
The provision for public notification of violations under current f’ ’
law have been criticized for being burdensome to water suppliers,
confusing to the public, and poorly enforced by delegated States
and EPA in non-primacy States.
The amendments in section 5 require the Administrator to revise
public notification regulations within one year of enactment. Re-
vised notification requirements will distinguish between intermit-
tent, frequent, and continuous violations and take into account any
potential adverse health effects to those served by the system The
intent of this change is to distinguish between monitoring infrac-
tions as opposed to violations of MCLS or other violations which
may affect public health. Current law requires the same notifica-
tion procedures be followed in both cases. Streamlined regulations
should improve compliance with notification requiremen and pro-
vide the public with more meaningful information in the case of
violations.
-------
- /O3
,2d OOOJ9
21 PUBLIC NOTIFICATION
22 SEC. 5. (a) Section 1414(c) of the Safe Drinking Water
23 Act is amended by striking everything after the sentence
24 “The Administrator shall by regulation prescribe the form,
25 manner, and frequency for giving notice under this subsec-
26 tion” to the sentence beginning “The Administrator may also
1 require” and adding the following: “within 12 months after
2 the date of the enactment of the Safe Drinking Water Act
• 3 Amendments of 1984, the Administrator shall amend such
4 regulations to provide for different types and frequencies of
5 notice based on the differences between violations which are
6 intermittent or infrequent and violations which are continu-
7 ous or frequent. Such regulations shall also take into account
8 the seriousness of any potential adverse health effects which
9 may be involved. Notice for violations designated by the Ad-
10 ministrator as Continuous or posing a serious potential ad-
11 verse health effect shall be given no less frequently than
12 every three months and in no case shall notices be given less
13 frequently than ai nually. Until such amendments are promul-
14 gated, the regulations in effect on the date of the enactment
15 of the Safe Drinking Water Act Amendments of 1984 shall
16 remain in effect.”.
-------
OOO
\-ko Cl9L4)
PUBUC NOrIPiC oN
SEC 104 Section l 4 14(c) of the Safe Drinking Water Act is amended by striking
out the third and fourth sentences thereof and substituting ‘Within 12 months
after the date of the enactment of the Safe Drinking Water Act Amendmen of
1984, the Admintstrator shall amend such regulatio 2 to provale for different types
and frequencies of notice based on the differences between violations which are
intermittent or infrequent and violations which are continuous or frequent Such
regulations shall also take into account the seriousness of any potential adverse
health effecto which may be involvej In no case shall notices be gwen less frequent-
ly than annually. Notice of any violation of a maximum contaminant level and any
other notice of a violation designate(j by the Administrator as continuous or posing
a serious potential adverse health effect shall be given no less frequently than every
three months and shall include notice in a newspaper of general circulation serving
the area served by the public water system (as determined by the Administrator)
Notice under this subsection shall provide a clear and readily understandable expla-
nation of the violation the steps that the system is taking to correct such violation,
and the Consumers which should seek alternative water supplies until the violation
is corrected if it is necessrny for consumers to seek alternative water supplies Until
such anlendmente are promulgated, the regulations in effect on the date of the en-
actment of the Safe Drinking Water Act Amendinente of 1984 shall remain in
effect”
-------
000201
I’ :c
C,cyr trr%. n ) C —
Nc . tc ; I (vi
‘-if i
Section 104
A number of organizations testified Concerning the need to
streamline the Act’s public notice requirements so as to avoid un- P
important notices and place a greater focus on the more serious
violations. The public notice requirements have not functioned ef-
fectively in the past, due in part to lax enforcement by EPA and
the States The Committee believes that public support for the pro-
gram will increase and enforcement will be enhanced if public
notice of violations is tailored to the seriousness and frequency of
the violation.
For these reasons, section 104 requires the Administrator to
amend the public notice regulations within twelve months of the
date of enactment to provide for different types and frequencies of
notice based on the differences between violations which are inter-
mittent or infrequent and violations which are Continuous or fre-
quent. Such regulations must also take into account the serious-
ness of any potential adverse health effects that may be involved.
Notice of any violation of a maximum contaminant level and any
notice of a violation designated by the Administrator as continuous
or posing a serious potential adverse health effect must be given no
less frequently than every three months and must include notice in
a newspaper of general circulation in the area served by the public
water system.
-------
It - 103
1 R, c ç 9 )2 .Ci )OOO2O2
6 PUBLIC NOTIFICATION
7 SEC. 104. Section l 4 14(c) of the Safe Drinking Water
8 ACt is amended by striking out the third and fourth sentences
9 thereof and substituting: “Within 12 months after the date of
10 the enactment of the Safe Drinking Water Act Amendments
11 of 1984, the Admninstratoi. shall amend such regulations to
1 2 provide for d!flercnt types and frequencies of notice based on
13 the differences between violations which are imermjttcnt or
14 infrequent and violations which are continuous or frequent.
15 Such re uJatjciis shall also take into account the seriousness
16 of aitv potential adverse health effects vJiic1i may 1)0 in—
17 volved. [ n no case shall liotices be given less !rcqucimtlv than
13 annuall\. Ofi of any violation of a maximnwn coutanhjiiant
19 level aiid any other notice of a violation (leSignarcd b the
20 Adz1 i!1;st ator as C0fltjI]It D J)osiim a s riot p0 1 ential ad-
21 \ T crse he.i Itii ci leef .Thail Jn given no less frvtiuep ttv titan
22 eVery t ii!Ve iiioji Jjs aI l(I Shall I net Ode hot iC iii L iIC\VSp:1 pet of
2: general (irchhl:lt ion scr itm the :hica .SCr\ ed 1; the 1)0 1) 110
24 \;It(’r V t0m :t ’ tket !1hiII ’(I b\ thc i\dttii’iistraiot) Notice
2 3 lifter iIi ith (’(fjo t 510111 Itnividi’ ( 1 ear :ti](i e dj1v Jci-
2 st;uida Id I .I,l:Iii.)li , ) of the oLt;oii, till: tip ih:i Ito
-------
000203
1 system is taking to correct such violation, and the consumers
2 which should seek alternative water supplies until the viola—
tfon is corrected if it is necessary for consumers to seek alter-
- native water supplies. Until such amendments are promulgat
3 d, the regulations in effect on the (late of the enactment of
6 the Safe Drinking Water Act Amendments of 198 -I shall
7 remain in effect.”.
-------
7 “(B) The Administrator shall require the owner or opet- 0 0 0 2 0 4
8 at.or of a public water system to give notice toihe persons
9 served by it of contaminant levels of any unregulated can-
10 taminant required to be monitored wider this subsection.
11 Such notice shall be required not less frequently than
12 annually.”.
(-L ‘ 2OO - O3
PhJljLlc NOTICE
SEc. IOU. IN ( N .KA1,.—. -SCCLiUD 14 14(e) is amended
I
by a.lihiig tlic h.,llu i: at L ii , ’ i—iitj Ilici ‘ of: ‘‘Notice under this
suiisictiu slull pro’. .le a cic.ir aii ’l readily und rsiandahk
p.ic
I explanation of the failure, the steps that the sysLem is taking
2 to correct such failure, and the groups which should seek
3 alternative water supplies until the failure is corrected. Each
4 owner or operator of a public water system shall also give
5 annual notice to the persons served by it of the availability of
6 information under section 1445(d)(3). ”.
7 (b) AVAILAHILITY OF ll4IOHMAT IOt4 TO PUBLIC.—
8 Section 1445(d) is amended by adding the (ollowiiig new
9 paragraph at the end thereof:
10 “(3) Exco t for information for which there has been a
11 showing described in paragraph (1), any recordB, reports, or
12 information obtained under this section shall be available to
13 the public.”.
14 - (c) CONFORM INCJ AMENDMENT.—S6CIiOCI 1414(c) is
15 amended by striking out the fifth Bentence thereof.
-------
000205
IO
UC. 154. VARIANCES.
Section 1415(aX1XA) of the Safe Drinking Water Act is amended
as follows:
(1) Strike the word “despite” and substitute a period and the
followui : “A variance may only be issued to a syatem after the
system’s ‘.
(2) Strike the word “generally” before the word “available”
and after “(taking costs into consideration).” insert the follow.
ing: “The Adnunistrator shall propose and promulgate his find.
ing of the best available technology, treatment techniques or
other means available for each contamrnRnt for purposes of this
subsection at the time he proposes and promulgate. a mM mu .m
contaminant level for each such ContarrlinRnt. The Admini*tra.
tor’s finding of best available technology, treatment techniques
or other means for purposes of this subsection may vary depend-
ing on the number of persons served by the system or for other
physical conditions related to engineering feasibility and Costs
of compliance with maximum contaminant levels as considered
appropnate by the Administrator.”.
(3) Strike the words “within one year of the date” and adding
“at the time”.
(4) Add in clause (iLi after the words “water system of such’
the word “additional”.
-------
CoNc p.
SEC ISL YARJANCES
Section l4lS(axJxAJ of th Safe Drinking Water Act is amended. / 00206
as follows:
(1) Strike the word “despite” and subst itute a period and the
followirs ’: “A variance may only be issued to a system after the
system’s
(2) Strike the word “generally” before the word “available”
and after “(taking costs into consideration).” insert the follow-
ing:” he Admzn&81 rotor shallpropose arid promulgate his find.
ir qof the best available technology, treatment techniques or
ot r means available for each contaminant for purposes of this
subsection at the time he proposes and promulgates a maximum
contaminant level for each such contaminant. The Administra-
tor’s finding of best available technology, treatment techniques
or other means for purposes of this subsection may vary depend-
ing on the number of pereons served by the system or for other
physical conditions re ted to engineering feasibility and costs
of compliance with maximum contaminant leveLs as considered I
appropriate by the Administrator. ‘
(8) Strike the words “within one year of the date” and adding
“at the time ‘
(4) Add in clause (ii) afler the words ‘water r tem of such”
the word “add&tionaL ’
o- c, -,
Co
8 rION 1O4—VAlA2,rc
&na2e bilL—The Senate bill clarifies and modifies the existing
authority of EPA or a delegated State authority to grant a van-
ance from national primary drinking water regulations if, because
of the raw water quality of reasonably available sources, a system P’
exceeds a MCL after application of best available technology. The
Administrator is required to make a finding of what constitutes
best available technology for purposes of this section at the time a
maximum Contnniini nt level is promulgated. In making such a de- 1
termination so as to consider conditions at small systems, the Ad-
niinistrator may take into account the number of persons served by 1
the system or other physical conditions related to engineering fea-
sibility and costs of compliance with maximum contsrntnant levels.
EPA or the delegated State authority is required to establish a
schedule for the implementation of any additional control meas-
ures and for compliance with the regulation at the tim. a variance
í a granted.
House arnendrnenL—The House amendment is the same as the
Senate bill with one mn ior difference in terminology.
Conference agreement .—The Conference agreement adopts the
House provision with a technical change to clarify that the Adxni.n-
istrator’s determin bon of “best available techno ogy” for purposes
of implementing this section is distinct from the Administrator’s
determ tion of best available technology for purposes of estab-
lishing a mR imum cont.am nant level.
-------
ç : — Q Lf
R c. t-
K( ir. . V ’ I . .
Section 1415(axluA, of the Safe Drinking U U 0 2 0 7
Water Act is amended by—
U I striking the ord despite’ arid substl.
tuting a period and the followi,,, A van-
ance may only be issued to a s stem after
the systems.
(2) striking the aord genera)ly” before
the aord aVailable’ and by adding after
(taking cost.s into Consideration, the fol-
lowing The dminiStrator shall propose p i 2- i 2—.
and promulgate his finding of the best avail
able technoIo v. treatment techniques
other means available (or each contamina
at the time he proposes and promulgates
maximum coniamlnant level for each SU(
contaminant The Administrators findir.’
of best asailable technology, treatmer I
techniques or other means may vary d
pending on the number of persons ser ed by
the system or for other physical conditions
related to engineering feasibility and costs
of comp+4ance aith maximum contaminant
levels coisside -red approprrate by the Ad-
minlstra or ‘
(3) striking the words “within one year of
the date and adding aL the time’ and
(4) addIng in clause ( I I ) after the words
water system of such” the word “addition-
ar.
-------
000208
l t - -çt -c- { cl.. LçC 4 - .w , -, 0 L+
R, R , . I ( s)
SEC 105 VARIANCES
Section 141 aiUXA) of the Safe Drinking Water Act is amended by—
11 striking the word ‘despite’ and substituting a period and the following
“A variance may only be issued to a system after the system a”,
(2) striking the word “generally” before the word “available” and by adding
after “(taking costs into consideration)” the following ‘The Administrator
shall propose and promulgate his finding of the best available technology, treat-
ment techniques or other means available for each contaminant at the time he
proposes and promulgates a maximum contaminant level for each such con-
taminant The Administrators finding of best available technology, treatment
techniques or other means may vary depending on the number of persons
served by the system or for other ph sical conditions related to engineering fea-
sibility and costs of compliance with maximum contaminant levels as consid-
ered appropriate by the Administrator “, -
(3) striking the words “within one year of the date” and adding ‘at the time”.
and
(4) adding in clause (ii) after the words “water system of such” the word “ad-
ditional” —
-------
0002O9
R . - , ,
\- 3 (V c
Section 105
Section 1415 of the Act provides that variances from national
drinking water regulations can be granted by States with primary
enforcement responsibility for public water systems. Variances can
be granted to systems if, because of the characteristics of the raw p 2.
water sources which are reasonably available, the systems cannot
meet the requirements respecting the maximum contaminant
levels despite the application of the best technology, treatment
techniques, or other means which the Administrator finds are gen-
erally available (taking costs into consideration). This same author-
ity is available to the Administrator in States which do not. have
primacy.
Section 105 limits ‘variances in this situation exclusively to sys-
tems which have applied the best technology, treatment tech-
niques, or other means which the Administrator finds are available
(taking Costs into consideration). The Committee has deleted the re-
quirement that technology be “generally” available. It is enough
that the technology has been examined for efficacy under field con-
ditions, and not solely under research laboratory conditions. The
Administrator, is required to propose and promulgate his finding of
best available technology for each contaminant at the time he pro-
poses and promulgates a mavimum contaminant level for each con-
taminant.
In addition, the Committee recognizes that large public water
systems in many instances have a greater capacity to install and
operate control technology than smaller systems and that certain
systems may have physical conditions which limit installation of
the very best technology. For these reasons, the Administrator’s
finding of best available technology, treatment techniques or other
means may vary depending on the number of persons served by the
system or for other physical conditions related to engineering feasi-
bility and costs of compliance with maximum contaminant levels.
The Committee intends for this provision to be construed to entitle
a public water system to a variance only if physical conditions exist
which meet the requirements of this section. Under the bill, claims
relating to economic bars to compliance, other than those concern-’
ing physical constraints, can only be considered for relief under
section 1416 The State must also find that the variance does not
result in an unreasonable risk to health. This provision makes
clear that large public water systems can be required to use tech-
nologies that would not be available to small water systems.
The bill also requires that at the time a State grants a public
water system a v nance, the State must prescribe a schedule for
compliance (including increments of progress) by the public water
system with each contaminant level requirement with respect to
which the variance was granted.
-------
000213
0 ct u d.. t o
o- l3
i ic ç) (
3ect o iOi—Va,ig,
VI e from the BAT
8tAfldlrd endthg o rtaJn factor,. A
schedu le of compu e pt Th
Lime the vazjgxwce L, grs it 4
-------
00021 J
I2Lf a ‘‘i t h - -- 1o f .
L — c i Cd i ec1. 19? )
VA tLM CE5
S c S (a) Section 1415a ’ej)IA) or the
Safe Drinking Water Act is amended by
striking the ord despite’ and tr.serting in
lieu thereof the io1lo ing A tariance may
only be issued to a s sten, after the s s.
tems’ P1 (‘ 9
(hI Section 1415a ) 1)A) of the Safe
D-:nkirig Water Act is amended by striking
word ‘best’ before tech ioIog by strik-
the aord ‘generally’ before the ord
ailable’ and Lris rting in lieu thereof the
[ ord best”] words ‘(he bc ’ , arid by
‘ing after (taking costs Into coi ’sid —r-
ni” the foilo tng The Admu’,istrator
.!l propose and promuleate his finding of
tne best a ailable technology treaLment
Lechniq es or other mea ’ s a ai1abje for
each contaminant for purposes of this sub
section at the tune he proposes and promu )-
gates a maximum contaminait letel for
each such rontaminalt The Ad nintstra.
tor s finding of best a ailabjp t chnoiogy,
treatment techniques or other means for
pu poses of this subsection maw .ary de-
pending on the number of pereon , ser ed by
the s s’em or for other phssu-al cond,(ion ,s
related to engineering fenszbil.ty and COStS
of compliance aith maxir,’jm c ’cntalninant
lespls as cori.ridered appropriate by the Ad.
mm st rato
(C’, Section l4lSmailyA) of the Safe
Drtrkir.g Water Act is amended by striking
the words “a thm- one sear of the date” and
Inserting in lieu thereof at ihe time
‘d) Se(tior, I4tf ’3’*t ( i of t ie Safe
Drinking Water Act is amended by adding
after tb.e aords ater s’stcm of s ich” the
word adthtiori l
-------
000212
Cc wyy . (o4
S 1 Rep. . - (M c).
SzcrioM 5. V*.ax.u c
STJMMA&Y
Section 5 requires the Adn’iinistrator to mnke a finding of what
constitutes “best available technology” for the purpose olgranung
a variance pursuant to Section 1415 of the Act. For these purposes. I
the Adn,ini trator may take Lnto account the number of persons
served by the system, physical conditions related to engineering
feasibility and costs of compliance with m imum contaminpnt
levels. Additionally, section 5 reqiures that a State granting a vary-
ance must sunultaneousl7 prescribe a compliance and implementa-
tion schedule. Currently law permits delay of up to one year before
the State must set out a schedule. -.
DISC IJ S8ION
Section 1415 of the Act provides that variances from national
drinking water regulations may be granted by the primary enforce-
ment authority for public water systems (either the AdlninlRtrator
or a State). Under this section, variances may be granted to sys-
tems if, because of the raw water quality of reasonably available
sources, the systems cannot meet the n, T1mum conthrnlnRnt levels
despite application of the best techno1o y, treatment techniques, or
other means which the Administrator finds are available ( taking
costs into consideration).
Under this bill. EPA is required to promulgate a finding of best
available technology uiider the standard setting provisions in sec•
tion 1412 of the Act. Because there may be instances where the
best available technology specified under section 1412 may not be
economically or technologically available to smaller systems or to
systems with unusual physical conditions, the bill requires the Ad-
ministrator to promulgate a finding as to what constitutes best
available technology for the purposes of the variance provision of
the Act. The Administrator, in making such a finding, is to take
into account the number of persons served by a system, physical
conditions related to engineering feasibility and costs of compli-
ance. While the bill provides flexibility to the Adminigtrator to ac•
commodate extreme tiifferences among water systems, every deter-
mination of best available technology should have as its primary
consideration, protection of the health of those consuming the
water.
-------
- OOO213
S.’R p. N& .qq . tS S t,t.,’l S3 (ti )
SEc. 1415. (a) Notwithstanding any other provision of this part,
variances from national primary drinking water regulations may
be granted as follows:
(1XA) A State which has primary enforcement responsibility
for public water systems may grant one or more variances
from an applicable national primary drinking water regulation
to one or more public water systems within its jurisdiction,
which because of characteristics of the raw water sources
which are reasonably available to the systems, cannot meet the
requirements respecting the maximum contaminant levels of
such drinking water regulation. (despite] A variance may
only be issued to a system after the system s application of the
(best] technology, treatment techniques, or other means,
which the Administrator finds are (generally] the best avail .
able (taking costs into consideration). The Administrator shall
propose and promulgate hi., finding of the best available tech.
nology, treatment techniques or other means available for eric/i
contaminant for purposes of this subsection at the time he pro-
poses and promulgates a maximum contaminant level for erich
such contamgnanL The Administrator’s finding of best avail.
able technology, treatment techniques or other means for pur-
poses of this subsection may vwy depending on the number of
persons served by the system or for other physical conditions re-
lated to engineering I sibility and costs of compliance with
maximum contaminan. eveLe as considered appropriate by the
Administrator. Before a State may grant a variance under this
subparagraph, the State must find that the variance will not
result in an unreasonable risk to health. If a State grants a
public water system a variance under this subparagraph the
State shall prescribe (within one year of the date] at the time
the variance is granted, a schedule for—
(1) compliance (including increments of progress) by the
public water system with each contaminant level requirement
with respect to which the variance was granted, and
(ii) implementation by the public water system of such addi-
tional control measures as the Stat may require for each con-
taminarit , su ject to such contaminant level requirement,
during the period ending on the date compliance with such re-
quirement is required.
Before a schedule prescribed by a State pursuant to this subpara-
graph may take effect, the State shall provide notice and opportu-
nity for a public hearing on the schedule. A notice given pursuant
to the preceding sentence may cover the prescribing of more than
one such schedule and hearing held pursuant to such notice shall
include each of the sche u.les covered by the notice. A schedule pre-
scribed pursuant to this subparagraph for a public water system
granted a variance shall require compliance by the system with
each Contaminant level requirement with respect to which the vari-
ance was granted as expeditiously as practicable (as the State may
reasonable determine).
-------
000214
S ,IiLf OL+
3\ CQM&. 5z3 (a ,
VARLM c g a
Sm. 5. (a) Section 1415(aXIXA) of the
Safe Drinking Water Act Is amended by
striking the word ‘despite” and inserting in
lieu thereof the following’ “. A variance may
only be Issued to a system after the sys.
tem’8”. . ‘.
(b) Section 1415(a)(1XA) of the Safe
Drinking Water Act Is amended by striking
the word “beet” before technology by strik-
ing the. word “generally” before the word
“available” and Insetting in lieu thereof the
word “best”; and by adding after “(taking
Costs Into conslderationj” the foliowlng
“The AdnuInJstr r shall propose and pro-
mulgate his finding of the best available
technology, treatment techniques or other
means available for each contaminant for
purposes of this subsection at the time he
proposes and promulgates a maxhnum con-
taminant level for each such contaminant.
The AdmlnIstra ’s finding of best avail-
able technology, treatment techniques or
other mea for of thl Jbsectlon
may Vary de dln , on the number of per.
Soni served by the system or for other phys-
i J coodiuO related to englfleeruig fes.il-
bWty and CoStS of COmpliAn with mazI•
mum Con La .mjn .n leveIs as coruder ip.
prOPr.ate by the Adltithtsu ’ator
(C) Secuon l 4 lS Ix1MA) of the Safe
Dr.r ing Water Act is amend by str iking
the orc1 aithjj otis year of the date’ and
In lieu thereo ’ a: the Urne
(d l Secuon l 4 l 5 (&)(i) ( j( j of the Safe
Dinxjng Water Act Is amended b adding
after the words 5 a.ter system of Such’ the
word addjtjon J
-------
42 a d C
S i p. No. 9 - S . 2 - -
2O VARIANCES OO 215
21 SEC. 6. (a) Section l4l5 ’a) (1) (A) v/the Safe Drinking
22 Water Act is amended by striking the word “despite” and
23 inserting in lieu thereof the following: “. A variance may
24 only be issued to a system after the system “.
25 (b,) Section 1415(’a) (1) (A) of 1/ic Safe Drinking Water
26 Act is amended by striking the word “bcst”hefore technoloqy;
1 by striking the word ‘ qenerally” before the word “available”
2 and inserting in lieu thereof the word “best”; and by adding
3 after “(taking costs into consideration.)” the following: “The p .
4 Administra.tor shall propose and promulgate his finding of
5 the best available technology, treatment techniques or other
6 means available for each contaminant for purposes of this
7 subsection at the time he proposes and promulgates a maxi-
8 rnumn contaminant level for each such contaminant. The Ad-
9 ministra1or s finding of best available technology, treatment
10 techniques or other means for purposes of this subsection may
11 vary depenclilig on the number of persons served by the
12 system or for other physical conditions related to engineering
13 feasibility and costs of compliance wit/i niaxiinuiii contami-
14 nant levels as consuicred appropriate by the Ll(lminlslrator. “.
15 (c) Scction 1 115(’a,)(l)(A) of the Safe Drinking Water
16 Act is amended by striking time words ‘‘within onc year of 1/ic
17 c/ate ‘‘ and inserting in lieu tlic;’eof ‘‘cit I/ic time ‘‘.
IS (d) Section 1-115i)(J)(A)(ji,) of the Safe Drinking
ID IJ z?cr ilct is clmell(/eci b 11 nth/iiig a/Icr 1/ic words “water
20 stisteimi of such ‘‘the word ‘‘additional ‘‘.
-------
000216
_ 10 q
c C ft ( *. fl’ .c
N°• c ( - c lct :::lz -L-.
&c jofl 6. Variarjce8
Section 1415 of the Act provides that variances from national
drinking water regulations can be granted by States with primary
enforcement responsibility for public water systems. Variances can
be granted to systems, if, because of the characteristics of the raw
water sources which are reasonably available, the systems cannot
meet the requIrernen respecting the maximum contaminant
levels despite the application of the best technology, treatment
techniques, or other means which the Administrattjr finds are gen-
erally available (taking costs into consideration). This same author-
ity is available to the Administrator in States which do not have
Pilmacy.
Under this bill, EPA is required to propose and promulgate a
finding of best available technology, treatment techniques or other
means available for purposes of section 1415.
The best available technology specified under section 1412 f
standard setting purposes may not be economically or technolo
cally available to smaller systems or to systems with unusual phyi
ical conditions. EPA is thus required to promulgate a best availabi
technology under section 1415 considering the number of persor
served by the system, other physical conditions related to engrnee
ing feasiblility, and costs of compliance with maximum contam
nant levels as considered appropriate by the Administrator. Fc
large metropolitan and regional systems, the best available tech
nology under section 1415 will be the same best available technolG
gy as specified under section 1412. I
For systems that do not serve large populations or for system
with unusual physical conditions, a best available technology whic
is different from that specified in section 1412 may be appropriat
-------
S dt L ( .ui) - to
9c3.) (1 )
000217
.17 VARIANCES.
18 SEC. 6. (a) Section 1415(a)(1)(A) of the Safe Drinking
19 Water Act is amended by striking the word “despite” and
20 adding the following: “. A variance may only be issued to a
21 system after the system’s.”.
22 (b) Section 1415(a)(1)(A) of the Safe Drinking Water
23 Act is amended by striking the word “generally” before the
24 word “available” and by adding after “(taking costs into con-
25 sideration.)” the following: “The Administrator shall propose
26 ahd promulgate his finding of the best available technology,
1 treatment techniques or other means available for each con-
2 taimrient at the time he proposes and promulgates a maxi-
3 mum contaminant level for each such contaminant. The Ad-
4 ministrator’s finding of best available technology, treatment
5 techniques or other means may vary depending on the
6 number of persons served by the system or for other physical
7 conditions related to engineering feasibility and costs of corn-
8 pliance with maximum contaminant levels as considered ap-
9 propriate by the Administrator.”.
10 (c) Section 1415(a)(1)(A) of the Safe Drinking Water
11 Act is amended by striking the words “within one year of the
12 date” and adding “at the time”.
13 . (d) Section 1415(a)(1)(A)(ij) of the Safe Drinking Water
14 Act is amended by adding after the words “water system of
15 such” the word “additional”.
-------
000218
c r c-v
‘I R. Rep, N , - o 4
\— 6o (\c )
VARiANCES
SEC 105 Section 1415(aX1XA) of the Safe Drinking Water Act is amended by—
(1) striking the word “despite” and substituting a period and the following
“A variance may only be issued to a system after the system’s”,
(2) striking the word ‘generally” before the word “available” and by adding
after “(taking costs into consideration )“ the following “The Administrator
shall propose and promulgate his finding of the best available technology, treat-
ment techniques or other means available for each contaminant at the time he
proposes and promulgates a maximum contaminant level for each such con-
taminant The Administrator’s finding of best available technology, treatment
techniques or other means may vary depending on the number of persons
served by the system or for other physical conditions related to engineering fea-
sibility and costs of compliance with maximum contaminant levels as consid-
ered appropriate by the Administrator “,
(2) striking the words “within one year of the date” and adding “at the time”,
and
(4) adding in clause (ii) after the words ‘water system of such the word ad-
ditional”
-------
000219
LC n-vYrv\.rt ç kI e c1 _ (oL4
REP. N 1
&ctzon 105 - ‘-4 3
Section 1415 of the Act provides that variances from national
drinking water regulations can be granted by States with primary
‘ nforcement responsibihty for public water systems. Variances can
be granted to systems if,, because of the charateristics of the raw
water sources which are reasonably available, the systems cannot
meet the requIremen respecting the maxiurn contaminant levels
despite the application of the best technology, treatment tech-
niques, or other means which the Administrator finds are general-
ly available (taking costs into consideration) This same authority is
available to the Administrator in States which do not have prima-
cy.
Section 105 limits variances in this situation exclusively to sys-
tems which have applied the best technology treatment tech-
niques, or other means which the Administrator finds are available
(taking costs into consideration). The Committee has deleted the re-
quirement that technology be “generally” available It is enough
that the technology has been examined for efficacy under field con-
ditions, and not solely under research laboratory Conditions The
Administrator is required to propose and promulgate his finding of
best available technology for each contaminant at the time he pro-
- poses and promulgates a maxium contaminant level for each con-
tam inant
In addition, the Committee recognizes that large public water
systems in may instances have a greater capacity to install and op-
erate control technology than smaller systems and that certain sys-
tems may have physical conditions which limit installation of the
very best technology For these reasons, the Administrator’s find-
ing of best available technology treatment techniques or other
means may very depending on the number of persons served by the
system or for other physical Conditions related to engineering feasi-
bility and costs of compliance with mixium contaminant levels The
Committee intends for this provision to be construed to entitle a
public water system to a variance only if physical conditions exist
which meet the requirements of this section Under the bill, claims
relating to economic bars to compliance, other than those Concern-
ing physical Constraints, can only be Considered for relief under
section 1416. The State must also find that the variance does not
result in an unreasonable risk to health This provision makes
clear that large public? water systems can be required to use tech-
nologies that would not be available to small water systems
The bill also requires that at the time a State grants a public
water system a variance, the State must prescribe a schedule for!
compliance (Including increments of progress) by the public water
system with each contaminant level requirement with respect to
which the variance was granted.
-------
5 5 C 1 - i d - J Lf
1 R. 1 S k (C i . 2c Se , H +)
COO22o
VARL NCES
9 dcc. 105. Section l 4 15(a)(1)( of the ife Drinking
9 Water . ct is amended by—.
11 (1) striking the word “despite” and substituting a
period and the following: “A variance may only be
13 issued to a system after the system’s”;
14 (2) striking the word “generally” before the word
15 ‘‘available” and by adding after “(taking costs into
16 consideration)” the following: “The Administrator
17 shall propose and promulgate his finding of the best
18 available technology, treatment techniques or other
19 means available for each contaminant at the time lie
20’ Ploposes and promulgates a maximum contaminant
21 level for each such contamnjiiamit Tli ‘Admjiijstr:itoi.’s
22 finding of best available tcchnojor treatmnemif tech-
2:3 Imiqucs or other means may vary depending on the
24 numnljcr of persons served by the svstcnm or for other
25 plisical cOnditiofls rehi ted to engineering feasibilit
213 :111(1 costs ol corn p 1 lance wit ii maximil in con lamina lit
1 levels as considered appropriate by the’ Administra— p (
2 tor.”;
3 (3) striking the words ‘‘within one year of the
4 dat e’’ and adding ‘‘at the time’’; and
5 (4) adding in clause (ii) atter the words “water
(3 system of such’’ time word ‘‘additional ‘‘.
-------
000221
I1 I
\-L oo
OL
8 (b) VARIANCES.—(l) Section 1415(a)( IXA) is amended ‘ C’
9 by inserting the (ollowilig before the period at the end of the
10 first sentence thereof: “and specifies to be feasible in such
11 national primary drinking water regulation in accordance
12 with section 1412(b)(3)(B)’.
3 ‘thiEzcept for a variance under section 1415 or an
4 exemption und r section 1416, no aJministratjye order, judi.
5 cial decree, or other action may be taken by the Adniinistra.
8 tor, by any Ste e, or by any courtS which would have the
7 effect of delaying or making loss stringent any requirement of
8 an applicable pnmary national drinking water standard.”.
-------
000222
-
SEC. 105. EXEMPTIONS.
(a) SCREDULES —Section 1416 of the Safe Drinking Water Act is
amended as follows’
(1) In subsection (b)(1) strike out the words “within one year of
the date” and substitute “at the time”.
(2) In subsection (b)(2XAXi) strike the word “interim” and
strike the words “not later than January 1, 1984” and substitute
“not later than 12 months after enactment of the Safe Drinking
Water Act Amendments of 1986”.
(3) In subsection (bX2XAXjj) strike “revised” and strike “not
later than 7 years after the date such requirement takes effect”
and substitute “other than a regulation referred to in section
l412(a), 12 months after the date of the issuance of the
exemption”.
(4) Subsection (bX2XB) is amended to read as follows
“(B) The final date for compliance provided in any schedule in the
case of any exemption may be extended by the State (in the case of a
State which has primary enforcement responsibility) or by the
Administrator (in any other case) for a period not to exceed 3 years
after the date of the issuance of the exemption if the public water
system establishes that—
“(i) the system cannot meet the standard without capital
improvements which cannot be completed within the period of
such exemption,
“iii) in the case of a system which needs financial assistance
for the necessary improvements, the system has entered into an
agreement to obtain such financial assistance, or
“iiii the s stem has entered into an enforceable agreement to
become a part of a regional public aters stem and
the system is taking all practicable seeps to meet the standard
C’ In the case of a s stem hich does not ser’e more than iH
ser ice connections and’ hich needs financial assistance for the
necessary improternents, an e\ernpt on granted under clause ii or
(H) of sub ragraph (B) may be renewed for one or more additional
2 -year periods if the system eatabhshes that it is taking all prac-
ticable steps to meet the requirements of subparagraph (B).”.
-------
000223
IO5
CONF p. ,
I Ho
SEC ims EXEMp77ON
(a) SCW vz . tion 1416 of the Safe Drinking Water Act is
amended as follows:
(1) In subsection (bXl) strike out the words “within one year
of the date”and substitute “at the time’
(2) In subsection (bX2XAXI) strike the word “interim” and
strike the words ‘ not later than January 1, 1984” and substi-
tute “riot later than 12 mont/is after enactment of th. Safe
Drinking Water Act Amendmento of 1986’
(3) In subsection (bX2XAXjj) strike “reui.ged” and strike “not
later than 7 years after the date such requirement takes effect”
and substitute “other than a regulation referred to in section
l412(a), 12 months after the date of the issuance of the exemp-
twn’
(4) Subsection (bX2%B)is amended to read as follows:
“(B) The final date for compliance provided in any schedule in
the case of any exemption may be extended by the State (in the case
of a State which has primary enforcement responsibility) or by the
Adrnznz.stra tar (in any other case) for a period not to exceed 8 years
after the date of the issuance of the exemption if the public water
system establishp that—
) the system cannot meet the standard without capital im-
provernents which cannot be completed within the period of
such exemption,
‘Yzi) in the case of a system which needs financial assistance
for the necessary improuemen , the system has entered into an
agreement to obt jn such financial assistance, . or
“(iii) the system has entered into an enforceable agreement to
become a part of a regionalpubljc water systena, and
the system is taking all pract icabl.e steps to meet the standard.
“(C)In the case ofasystem which does not serve more than 500
service connections and which needs financial assistance for the
necessa?y improvements, an exemption granted under clause (i) or
(ii) of subparagraph (B) may be renewed for one or more additional
2 -year periods if the system establishes that it is taking all practica-
ble steps to meet the requirements of subparagraph (B). ‘
-------
C .
CONI- Rep. o. / O224
-L (
8 CTION 106—KXXMPTION8
&rzate bilL—The Senate bill amends Section 1416 of the Act to
clarify and modify the conditions under which exemptions from
drinking water regulations may be granted. The bill requires that
the enforcement authority issuing the exemption establish a com-
pliance and implementation schedule at the time an exemption is
granted and that systems currently operatmg under exemptions
from existing regulations must come into compliance within one
year of enactment. Exemptions from regulations issued after enact-
ment may be granted by the delegated State authonty or EPA for
not more than three years if a public water system demonstrates it
cannot meet the applicable standard due to specified conditions
and that the system is taking all practicable steps to meet the
standard. Systems with less than 500 service connections needing
financial assistance may receive additional two-year exemptions if
they meet specified criteria, including the taking of all practicable
steps to meet the standard.
House amendment.—The House amendment differs from the
Senate bill only in that it does not require systems, which serve
less than 500 service connections, that are applying for additional
in addition to taking
conference agreement is to adopt the
-------
l i o - ik l k4 -: 1
\31 CON&.R . 000225
( 1 eck.
sr.i.. ie4. K KqIPTlo
(a) Section 1416 of the Safe Drinking
Water Act Is amended—
(1) In subsection (b)(Lj by striking the
words “ thin one year of the date’ and
addIng at the Lime”
(2) in subsection (bX2)(A)(i) by striking
the word “Interi m” and striking the words
“not later than January 1. 1984” and adding
“not Iat.er than t’ elve months after the
date of the enactment of the Safe Drinking
Water Ac2 Amendmen of 1985. -, -j
(b) Section 1416th)(2,(A](i ) of the Safe
Drinking Water Abt is amended by striking
the word ‘levfsed ” and the words not later
than seven yea.rz after the date such re-
quirement takes effect” and adding “other
than a regulation referred to in section
14L2(a.j. L2.monQis aft the date of the is-
suance of the exemption”.
(C) Section 1416bx2)cB) iS amended to
read as loiloem.
(B The final date for compliance provid-
ed in any scbedwe In the ca.se at an ’ exemp.
Lion may be extended by the Staie (In the
case of a State which has primary enforce-
eflL r PCn..4 ljLy) Or by the A&ninis* ,-
tor (In any other ea j (Or a period not to
e cceed three years after the date of the is-
suance of the exempci if the public ater
system establishes that—
ii) the system cannot miet the standard
without capital improvements ahir-h cannot
be completed s ithin the p. riod of siiU ’i i’s-
em pt Ofl
‘(iii in the case of a s stem thich needs
financial assistance for the necissary rn-
prO ernents the c stern has enter.-d into in
agreerneri to obtain such financial t.s.sist
ance or
1 iii) the s stem has eflti’ri’d into an in
force ble agrccmin to become a part of t
regional public iaccr st’ tern
In the case of a system ahicti does not ‘ i’r e
more than 500 sersIce connections md
ahich neeth financial assisTance (or the fltc
essary irnprovemen an e’cernption cx
tended under the preceding sentence mis ’
be rereaed for one or more additional 2 I
year pt-nods if the , c(”rn establishes that it
is taking all practicable ,tips to m.i’t
stand srd
-------
000226
1-1 , o L1L1fl ed - 05
R. Rep, No 1 -f IS . - (i
SEC lO& EXEM PTIONa
(a) Section 1416 of the Safe Drinking Water Act is amended—
(1) in subsection (bU) by striking the words ‘within one year of the date’ and
adding “at the time”
(2) in subsection bX2XAXi) by striking the word “interim” and striking the
words ‘not later than January 1, 1984” and adding “not later than twelve
months after the date of the enactment of the Safe Drinking Water Act Amend-
ments of 1985”
(b) Section 1416(bX2XAXii) of the Safe Drinking Water Act is amended by striking
the word “revised” and the words “not later than seven years after the date such
requirement takes effect’ and adding “other than a regulation referred to in section
1412(a), 12 months after the date of the issuance of the exemption”
(c) Section 1416(bX2XB) is amended to read as follows
‘tB) The final date for compliance provided in any schedule in the case of any
exemption may be extended by the State Un the case of a State which has primary
enforcement responsibility) or by the Administrator (in any other case) for a period
not to exceed three years after the date of the issuance of the exemption if the
public water system establishes that—
“(i) the system cannot meet the standard without capital improvements which
cannot be completed within the period of such exemption:
‘(ii) in the case of a system which needs financial assistance for the necessary
improvements, the system has entered into an agreement to obtain such finan-
cial assistance, or
“uii) the system has entered Into an enforceable agreement to become a part
of a regional public water system
In the case of a system which does not serve more than 500 service connections and
which needs financial assistance for the necessary improvements, an exemption ex-
tended under the preceding sentence may be renewed for one or more additional 2-
year periods if the system establishes that it is taking all practicable steps to meet
the standard
-------
000227
. - C’
Section 106’
Section I 4 l6(a) of the Act authorizes a State with primary en-
forcement responsibility to ex”rnpt any public water system withm
its jurisdiction from any requirement with respect to a maximum
contaminant level or treatment technique of a national drinking
water regulation after malung certain findings. This same author.
ity is available to the Administrator in States that do not have pri-
macy Under the bill as well as the existing Act, exemptions are to
be used when economic factors are the bar to compliance.
Section 106 provides that if a State grants a public water system
an exemption under section l 4 16(a), the state must prescribe a
schedule for compliance by the public watej’ system for each con-
taminant level and treatment technique requirement for which an
exemption was granted In the case of an exemption granted for a
contaminant level or treatment technique requirement prescribed
by the national primar y drinking water regulations promulgated
under section 14 14(a), public water systems must comply within
t elve months of enactment of this bill For regulations other than
those referred to in section l4l6(a), an exemption can be granted
for a period of twelve months from the exemption’s issue date
Moreover, if a system that requires capital improvements which
cannot be completed within the period of the exemption seeks fi-
nanctal ’assist nce in the appropriate cases or has entered into an
agreement to become part of a regional public water system, it can
receive an extension of up to three years from the original exemp-
tion’s issue date Additional two-year e ctensions could be given to
small s stems (those with less than 500 service connections) that
need financial assistance for the necessary 1mprovemen and es-
tablish that they are taking all practicaole steps to meet the stand-
a rd
-------
000228
I O C t c i o
\ Co R , -\ \ o—
(dc L ea. HCL&C L2-I, 5)(
Si t 0
The bW od a P tbIe e1tenzJ of three I 3 I
Pears tO p w ith aa exen p1 ached We
[ 1 certaj criteria are met Sya with 1 s
than 500 aerv Con t
rain an IddJtIon j two years If fLnancLaJ as•
sl3tance La ne
-------
\3I-CoN. ,.
°00229
SEC 6 (a) Section 1416(b)II) of the Safe
Drinkin; Water Act is ar’ended bi striking
the o-djs aithir. one ,ear of the date” and
irisertirg in lieu thereof at the time’.
(b S ction 14L6,b )t2xA) i, of the Sale o ( , , 3 ‘
Priiik nt Water Act l amended by striking f
the ‘ord interm and srk ng the ‘sords
“r.ot later than January 1, 1P84 ar,d Insert-
ing In lieu thereof ‘not later than 12
months after the date of enactment of the
Safe Drinking Water Act Amendmen of
1 5
(C) Section 1416bi 2)(A)(ii) of the Safe
Drinkirg V ater Act L a arr.er,ded b) striking
the wo-d “reused and by striking the
words ‘not later than seven years after the
date such requirement takes effect” and In-
serting In lieu thereof ‘other than a regula-
tion referred to In aectlon 1412(a). 12
months after the date of the issuance of the
exemption’,
(d) Section 1416b)(2)(B) of the Safe
Drinking Water Act is amended to read as
follows
“(B) The final date for compliance provid-
ed in any schedule In the case of any e ’cemp-
tion may be extended by the State (In the
case of a State ahich has primary enforce-
ment responsibility) or by the Admintatra.
tor (in any other case) for a period not to
e’ceeed 3 years after the dati’ of the issuance
of the exemption L I the pub 1 ic water system
establishes that—
• Li) the system cannot meet the standard
ithout capita,) improvemen hich cannot
be completed within the period of such ex- -
emption,
“ (ii) in the case of a 5) stem ahich needs
financial assistance for the necessary Lm’
provements, the system has entered into an
agreement to obtain such financial assist-
ance, or
“(Iii) the system has entered into an en-
forceable agreement to become a part of a
regional public water system, and
- the system is taking all practicable steps to
meet the standard
“(C) In the case of a 8yStern ahich does
not ser e more than 500 sert ice connections
and hicli needs financial assistance f or the
necessar !mpro empnta an exeniption
granted ijnder subsection (b)(2)(A) (I) or ( Ii)
may be rene ed (or one or more additional
2-year periods if the system establishes (hat
it continues to meet the requirements of
subsection (B)
-------
000230
I2L -
- .)l ’4 -c ( 9 ),
SECTION 6. ExZMp’rIoNB
SUMMARY
Amendments under this Section modify the deadline. that apply
to exemptions. Under existing Section 1416 of the Act, the primary
enforcement authority (a State or EPA) has the authority to grant
exemptions to public water systems from national drinking water
standards. The bill now requires that the enforcement authority is-
suing the exemption establish a compliance and implementation
schedule at the time an exemption is granted rather than within
the one year grace period, provided i.n current law. Section 6 fur-
ther requires that systems operating under exemptions from exist-
ing regulations must come into compliance within one year of en-
actment.
Exemptions may be granted by the States or EPA for not more
than three years if the public water systems demonstrate that it
cannot meet the applicable drinking water standard within the
rn*I,Tnum 3 year period because: (1) the needed capital imprvve
ments cannot be completed within that time; (2) the y5tem needi
financiaJ assistance and has entered into an agree e to obta
such assistance; (3) the system has entered into an enforc Ie
agreement to become part of a regional public water system, ano
the system is taking all practicable stepe to meet the standarti Sys-
tems with le than 500 service connections needing financial as-
sistance may receive additjonaj two-year exemptions if they meet
certain criteria.
DISCUasION
The deadlines and eligibility criteria for exemptions are designed
to promote complin ce with applicable standards and reserve the
use of exemptions to good-faith hardship situations. Few systems
are expected to operate under exemptions after the expiration of
the one year deadline impoeed under Section 6(a).
-------
000231
N 0 .
S S S
EXEMPrION S
SEC. 1416. (a) ‘
(bXl) If a State grants a public water system an exemption under
Subsection (a), the State shall prescribe, [ within one year of the
date] at the time the exemption is granted, a schedule for—
(A) compliance (including increments of progress) by the
public water system with each contaminant level requireme
and treatment technique requirement with respect to which
the exemption was granted, and -
(B) implementation by the public water system of such con-
trol meaau. as the State may require for each contaminant,
subject to such conta.rnmant level requirement or treatment
technique requfreme , during the period ending on the date
compliance with such requirement is required.
Before a schedule prescribed by a State pursuant to this subsection
may take effect, the State shall provide notice and opportunity for
a public hearing on the schedule. A notice given pursuant to the
preceding sentence may cover the prescribing of more than one
such scheduje and a hearing held pursuant to such notice shall in-
clude each of the schedules covered by the notice.
-------
000232
(2XA) A schedule prescribed pursua- to this subsection for a
public water system granted an exen n under subsection (a)
hid1 renuire compliance by the system with each contaminant
level and treatment technique requirement with respect to which
the exemption was granted as expeditiously as practicable (as the
State may reasonably determine) but (except as provided in sub-
paragraph (B)— 3
(i) in the case of an exemption granted with respect to a con-
taminant level or treatment technique requirement prescribed
by the (interim] national primary drinking water regulations
promulgated under section 1412(a), (not later than January 1,
1984;] not later than 12 months after the date of enactment of
the Safe Drinking Water Act Amendments of 1985: and
(ii) in the case of an exemption granted with respect to a
contaminant level or treatment technique requirement pre-
scribed by (revised] national primary drinking water regula-
tions, (not later than seven years after the date such require-
ment takes effect.] other than a regulation referred to in see-
tion 1412(a) 12 months after the date of the issuance of the ex.
ernption.
((B) Notwithstanding clauses (i) and (Li) of subparagraph (A) of
this paragraph, the final date for compliance prescribed in a sched-
ule prescribed pursuant to this subsection for an exemption grant-
ed for a public water system which (as determined by the State
granting the exemption) has entered into an enforceable agreement
to become a part of a regional public water system shall—
((i) in the case of a schedule prescribed for an exemption
granted with respect to a contaminant level or treatment tech-
nique requirement prescribed by interim national primary
drinking water regulations, be not later than January 1, 1986;
and
((ii) in the case of a schedule prescribed for an exemption
granted with respect to a contam inant level or treatment tech-
nique requirement prescribed by revised national primary
drinking water regulations, be not later than nine years after
such requirement takes effect].
(B) The final date for compliance provided in any schedule in the
case of any exemption may be extended by the State (in the case of a
State which has przmai-j enforcement responsibility) or by the Ad.
m;ni.strvitor (in any other case) for a period not to exceed •8 years
after the date of the issuance of th, exemption if the public water
system establishes that—
(i) the system cannot meet the standard without capital im-
provements which cannot be completed within the period of
such exemption,
(ii) in the case of a system which needs financial assistance
for the necessary improvements, the system has entered into an
agreement to obtain such financial a8sl8tance, or
(iii) the system has entered into an enforceable agreement to
become a part of a regional public water system, and
the system is taking all practicable stepe to meet the standarcL
(C) In the case of a system which does riot serve more than 5CW)
service connections and which needs financial assistance for the
necessary improueme;ts, an exemption granted under subsection
(bX2XA) (i) or (ii) may be renewed for one or more addjtianal
periods if the system establishp that it continues to meet the
quirerrien of subsection (B).
-------
000233
S e c D- - t
Szc 6 s Secuon 1416 bi li of the S&fe
Drtri&.tng Water Act Is &znenaed by striking
the aords a’:htn one ,ear ot the date and
Insert ing in Lieu thereof at ne time
(bi Section 1416 b) kA)II ) of the Sale i -I
Drinking Water Act Is amended by str. king
the word interim and str cng the aord.s
not later than January 1. I 84 and u-.sert-
Ing in Lieu thereof not later than t2
months after the date of enactment of the
Safe Drmkmg Water Act Amendments of
1985
(C) Section 1416(bw21(A)tu, of the Safe
Drtj’.king Water Act ts azn r .ded b3 striking
the word “revIsed ar by st kir.g the
words not later than seven yea.-s after the
date such requLremen takes effect and in.
sertu-Ig In lieu thereof other than a reguja.
Lion referred to in 5ecti n ll12 aj. 12
months after the date of the issuance of the
exemption”
(dl SectIon 1416{bx2xB) of the Safe
Drinking Water Act 12 amended to read as
follows-
‘(B The final te (or comp anc prot-ti
ed in any heduj In the Case of any exerro
Lion may be extended by the State (in t-e
case of a State ahich has primary enior -c
meni responsibuityt or by the Adm inis: -.
t,or (In any other Ca.sei for a period not
exceed 3 years alter the dare of the tssuan ’-e
of the ex ption If the public water zySter i
establishes that.—
Ui the system cannot meet the st&ndard
without capital irnproveynents which cannot
be pleted within the period of such ex-
empuon.
(U) in the case of a system which needs
financial amista.,c for the necesaar , Lm.
provemen the system ha entered Into an
agreeme to obtain such financial assist-
ance or
wi the system has entered into an en-
forceable ag-’ -e - - ent to become a part of a
regional public Water Systen. and
the system Is taking all prac:icable steps to
meet the Standard
‘C) In the case of a s ste’n which doe,
not serte more than 500 5cr ce connections
and a iC ’ nee’ s (tna.nclai a .(s i .sLance for the
nece a -’ Lr c err.ent.s. an exemption
g-ra-:ed i_ricer shce: on bj 2 iAi U) or (ii)
ma be reneaed for one or more adótrortaj
2 “a.r periods if the system ast.abt. he, that.
It con tnueS to meet tne requLre efl of
subaect,on B )
-------
__ 000234
S 2 a
R. N c,
(
21 EXEMPTIONS
22 SEC. 7. a ) Section 141O’ 1) of I/i c Safe Drinking
23 Water Act is amended by striking 1/ic words “within one
24 year of (lie date” and inserting iii lieu thereof “at the tune ‘‘.
23 (b) Section l416 b) ’2,(jI)( , of 1/ic Safe Drinking
26 I Voter Act is (zmendcd hi 1 striking the word “interim ‘‘ and
-------
striking the words “not later than Ja uary 1, 1 84” and
inserting in lieu thereof “not later than 12 months after the
dale of enactment of the Safe Drinking Water Act Amend-
ments of 1984 “.
(c) Section 1416(b) (2) (4)(ij) of the Safe Drinking
Water Act is amended by striking the word ‘ revised’ and
by striking the words “not later than seven years after the
date such requirement takes effect” and inserting in lieu
thereof “other than a regulation referred to in section
l 4 l2(’a,), 12 months after the date of the issuance of the ex-
emption “.
(d) Section 1416(b) (2) (B) of the Safe Drinking JT T ater
Act is amended to read as follows:
“(‘B) The final dale for compliance proDided in any
schedule in 1/ic case of any exemption may be extended by 1/ic
State (in the case of a State which has primary enforcement
responsibility,) or by 1/ic Administrator (in any 01/icr case,)
for a period not to exceed 3 jjcars a/Icr the date of the issu-
ance of the exemption if I/ic public water system establishes
that—
“(i’ thz system CO lb of mccl I/ic s/a iithi 1(1 it’iI/i out
CO/)itcll ifliprOi’cmncnfx ic/i ic/i cull/lot b(’ COlli/)/C/C(l mci//un
f/ic /)erlo(/ of such e.rcmJ)/ ion;
“( ‘ii) in 1/it (‘USC of i sysI(’ Iii Pr/i ic/i ii (‘(‘(is fi nun -
CUt I (155! 1a iicc for the ii CCCSSti nj i iiiproccmnen Is, 1/ic
000235
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
23
24
-------
000236
1 system has entered into an agreement to obtain such fi-
2 nancial assistance; or
3 “(iii) the system has entered into an enforceable
4 agreement to become a part of a regional public water
5 system;
6 the system is taking all practicable steps to meet the stand-
7 ard.
“(C) In the case of a system which does not serve more
than 500 service connections and which needs financial as-
sistance for the necessary improvements, an exemption grant-
ed under subsection (2 (’2,)(A) (‘0 or (‘ii may be rene WeLl for
one or more additional 2 -ycar periods if the system estab-
lishc.s Mat it continues to meet f/ic requirements of subsection
(B).’
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
-------
000237
1 z o. (M %- , 1
- L k ( c ’)
Section 7. Exemptions
Sec. 1416 provides primacy States, or the Administrator in no
primacy States, the authority to grant exemptions from nation
drinking water standards to public water systems based upon ce
tam factors related to the economic condition of a system. Th
amendments require that systems operating under exemption
from existing regulations must come into compliance within on
year of enactment. Exemptions may be granted by States or th
EPA for a period not to exceed three years if the system demon
strates; that it cannot meet the standard without capital improv
ments, it has entered into a financial agreement for necessary im
provements, it is being incorporated into a regional system and it i
taking all practicable steps to meet the standard Two year exten
sions of exemptions are available to systems supplying less than
500 service connections if the State or EPA makes a finding that
the system continues to meet these conditions.
-------
— 030238
s . - 4 cft.. c
16 EXEMPTIONS
17 SEc. 7. (a) Section 1416(b)(i) of the Safe Drinking
18 Water Act is amended by striking the words “within one
19 year of the date” and adding “at the time”.
20 (b) Section 1416(b)(2)(A)(i) of the Safe Drinking Water
21 Act is amended by striking the word “interim” and striking
22 the words “not later than January 1, 1934” and adding “not
23 later than twelve months after the date of the enactment of
24 the Safe Drinking W T ater Act Amendments of 1984”.
‘C
25 (c) Section 1416(b)(2)(A)(i ) of the Safe Drinking Water
26 Act is amended by striking the word “revised” and the words
-------
000239
1 “not later than seven years after the date such reauirement p i 4
2 takes effect” and adding “other than a regulation referred to
3 in section 1412(a), 12 months fter the date of the issuance
4 of thç exemption”.
5 (d) Section l416(a)(2)(B) is amended to read as follows:
6 “(B) The final date for compliance provided in any
7 schedule in the case of any exemption may be extended by
8 the tate (in the case of a State which has primary enforce-
9 ment responsibility) or by the Administrator (in any other
10 case) for a period not to exceed three years after the date of
11 the issuance of the exemption if the public water system es-
12 tablishes that—
13 “(i) the system cannot meet the standard without
14 capital improvements which cannot be completed
15 within the period of such exemption;
16 “(ii) the system is taking all practicable steps to
17 meet the standard;
18 “(iii) in the case of a system which needs financial
19 assistance for the necessary improvements, the system
20 has enteied into an agreement to obtain such financial
21 assistance; or
22 “(iv) the system has entered into an enforceable
23 agreement to become a part of a regional public water
24 system.
-------
000240
1 In the case of a system which does not serve more than 500
2 servi e connections and which needs financial assistance for
3 the necessary improvements, an exemption granted under
4 subsection (b)(2)(A) (i) or (ii) may be renewed for one or more
5 additional 2-year periods if the system establishes that it con-
6 tinues to meet the requirements of clause (ii) of this subpara-
.7 graph.
-------
Wo, 1s- lC ’ 1 -f, c 94 1 -
f 000241
MPT10N8
SEC 106 (a) Section 1416 of the Safe Drinking Water Act is amended—
(i)in subsection (b 1)by striking the words “within one year of the date” and
adding “at the time”
(2) in subsection (bX2XAX ) by striking th’ word “interim” and striking the
words “not later than January 1, 1984” and adding “not later than twelve
montbs after the date of the enactment of the Safe Drinking Water Act Amend-
ments of 1984”
(b) Section l416(bX2XAxii) of the Safe Drinking Water Act is amended by striking
the word “revised” and the words ‘not later than seven years after the date such
requirement takes effect” and adding “other than a regulation referred to in section
I 4 12(a), 12 months after the date of the issuance of the exemption”
(C) Section i416(bx2xB) is amended to read as follows
“(B) The final date for compliance provided in any schedule in the case of any
exemption may be extended by the Stat (in the case of a State which has primary
enforcement responsibility) or by the Administrator (in any other case) for a period
not to exceed three years after the date of the issuance of the exemption if the
public water system establishes that—
“(i) the system cannot meet the standard without capital improvements which
cannot be completefj within the period of such exemption,
“(ii) in the case of a system which needs financial assistance for the necessaiy
improvements the system has entered into an agreement to obtain such finan.
cia assistance, or
“(iii) the system has entered into an enforceable agreement to become a part -
of a regional public water system
In the case of a system which does not serve more than 500 service connections and
which needs financial assistance for the necessary improvements, an exemption ex-
tended under the preceding sentence may be renewed for one or more additional 2-
year periods if the system establishes that it is taking all practicable steps to meet
the Standard
I q e 1 _ (Qt
k 1 R, ç p, No.1 - (e 3’l- c 4 % 2 .d
\— ( ‘o c .)
— -- — ____
Section 106’
Section l 4 l6(a) of the Act authorizes a State with primary en-
forcement responsibility to exempt any public water system within
its jurisdiction from any requirement with respect to a maximum
Contaminant level or treatment technique of a national drinking
water regulation after making certain findings. This same author- i
ity is available to the Administrator in States that do not have pri-
macy. Under the bill as well as the existing Act, exemptions are to
be used when economic factors are the bar to compliance
Section 1O provides that if a state grants a ‘ ‘ ‘ “ ‘ I
schedule for compliance by the public water system for each con-
taminant level and treatment technique requirement for which an
exemption was granted In the case of an exemption granted for a
contaminant level or treatment technique requirement prescribed
by the national primary drinking water regulations promulgated
under section 1414(a), public water systems must comply within
twelve months of enactment of this bill. For regulations other than
those referred to i section 1416(a), an exemption can be granted
for a period of twelve months from the exemption’s issue date
Moreover, if a system that requires capital improvements which
cannot be completed within the period of the exemption seeks fi-
nancial assistance in the appropriate cases or has entered into an
agreement to become part of a regional public water system, it can
receive an extension of up to three years from the original exemp-
tion’s issue date Additionat two-year extensions could be given to
small systems (those with less than 500 service connections) that
need financial assistance for the necessary improvements and es-
tablish that they are taking all practicable steps to meet the stand-
ard
-------
\\ 5 rLL cL oc
\ I’ . 9 ¶ ( i L )
000242
7 EXEMPTIONS
8 SEc. 106. (a) Section 1416 of the Safe Drinking Water 1
9 Act is amended—
10 (1) in subsection (b)(1) by striking the words
11 “within one year of the date” and adding “at the
12 time”.
13 (2) in subsection (b)(2)(A)(i) by striking the word
14 “interim’’ and striking the words ‘‘not later than Janu—
15 ary 1, 1984” and adding “not later than twelve
16 months after the date of the enactment of the Safe
17 Drinking Water Act Amendments of 1984”.
18 (b) Section 1416(b)(2)(A)(iI) of the Safe Drinking Water
19 Act is amended by striking the word “revised” and the words
20 “not later than seven years after the date such requirement
21 takes effect’’ and adding “other than a regulation referred to
22 in section 1412(a), 12 months after the date of the issuance
23 of the exemption”.
24 (c) Section 111 U(h)(2)( R) is a imiemided to read as follo s:
25 ‘‘(B) Time I i aI date for CO (U P 1 ia nec ‘provided in a miy
2G ehc(lu IC iii the case ol any C\ (‘mu p 111) 11 i iav he C\t eIm(lcd by
-------
59
000243
1 the State (in the case of a State which has primary enforce-
2 ment responsibility) or by the Administrator (in any other
3 case) for a period not to exceed three years after the date of
4 the issuance of the exemption if the public water system es-
5 tablishes that—
6 “(i) the system cannot meet the standard without
7 capital improvements which cannot be completed
8 within the Period of such exemption;
9 ‘‘(ii) in the case of a system which needs financial
10 assistance for the necessary improvements, the system
11 has entered into an agreement to obtain such financial
12 assistance; or
13 ‘‘(iii) the system has entered into an enforceable
14 agreement to become a part of a regional public water
15 system.
16 In the case of a system which does not serve more than 500
17 service conliections arid hicli needs financial assistance for
18 tI c necessary iml)rOvClnent S, I II CNeIIll)tioIl exietided under
1 9 tIle preceding S Ql 1 I ciic may he re flC\\ (‘ 1 for (JIIC or II1OF( ’ addi-
O lional 2-vcar j)(’riO(IS if the system estabhishics that it is laking
21 all pra(tlc;l!)Ie st( 1 )S to iHi’ct the St IlBl:Ii(l.’’.
-------
t . 3 ioO, c #4\ O
pA
13 (c) COMPLIA!4C SCIIEDULE8 FOE Ex.EMP’rIoNs.—(l)
14 Section 141q(b)(2)(AXi) is amended by 8tflking out “January
15 1. 1984” and substituting “the later of 12 months after the o o 2 4 4
16 date of the enactment of the Safe Drinking Water Act
17 Amendments of 1983 or 12 months iftei the date of the issu-
18 ance of the exemption”.
19 (2) Section 1416(bX2)(A)(ii) is amended by striking out
20 “seven years after the date such requirement takes effect”
21 and substituting “12 months after the date of the issuance of
22 the exemption”.
23 (3) Section 1416(b)(2)(B) is amended to read as follows:
24 “(B) The final date for compliance provided in any
25 schedule in the case of any exemption referred to in pars-
I graph (A) may be extended by the State (in the case of a
2 Slate which has primary enforcement responsibility) or by the
B Administrator (in any other case) for a period not to exceed 3
4 years after the date of the issuance of the exemption if the
5 public water sysuHn establishes that—
6 “(i) the system cannot meet the standard without
7 capital improvemente which cannot be completed
8 within the period of such exemption;
9 “(ü) the system is taking all practicable steps to
10 meet the standard; and
11 “(iii) in the case of a system which needs financial
12 assistance for the necessary improvements, the system
13 has entered into an agreement to seek such financial
14 assistance,
15 In the case of & system which does not have more than 500
16 service connections and does not serve more than 500 mdi-
17 vidualo and which needs financial assistance for the necessary
18 improvements, such exemption may be renewed for one or
19 more additional 8-year periods if the system o8tabhishie that
20 it continues to meet the requirements of clauses (i) through
21 (iii) of this subparagraph.”.
-------
J ’ ii I
—
SEC. 14. MON1TORI?IG FOR UNREGULATETh CONTAMflIANTS.
(a) Sizz or SYar .—Section 1445(a) of the Safe Drinking Water
Act is amended by adding at the end thereof the followin “In
requiring a public water system to monitor under this 8UbeeCtiOfl, 0 00
the Administrator may take into consideration the system size and
the Contnminanta likely to - be found in the 8ystem’s drinking
water.”. —..
(b) Mor ’rrroan ci Rz uia zi.rrs.—Sectj j 1445(a) of the Safe
Drinking Water Act is amended by adding “(1)” after “(a)” and by
adding the following at the end thereof:
“(2) Not later than 18 months after enactment of the Safe Drink-
ing Water Act A.rnendments of 1986, the Administrator shall
promulgate regulations requiring every public water system to con-
duct a monitoring program for unregulated contaminants. The regu-
lations shall require monitoring of drinking water supplied by the
system arid shall vary the frequency and schedule of monitoring
requirements for systems based on the number of persons served by
the system, the source of supply, and the contaminants likely to be
found. Each system shall be required to monitor at least once every
5 years after the effective date of the Administrator’s regulations
unless the Administrator requires more frequent monitoring.
“(3) Regulations under paragraph (2) shall list unregulated
contaminants for which systems may be required to monitor, and
shall include criteria by which the primary enforcement authority
in each State could show cause for addition or deletion of contami-
nants from the designated list. The primary State enforcement
authority may delete cont.arninRnts for an individual system, in
accordance with these critena, after obtaining approval of assess-
ment of the contaminants potentially to be found in the system. The
Administrator shall approve or disapprove such an assessment
submitted by a State within 60 days. A State may add contaminants,
in accordance with these criteria, without making an assessment,
but in no event shall such additions increase Federal expenditures
authorized by this section.
“(4) Public water systems conducting monitoring of unregulated
contaminants pursuant to this section shall provide the results of
such monitonng to the primary enforcement authority
“(5) Notification of the availability of the results of the monitoring
programs required under paragraph (2), and notification of the
availability of the results of the monitoring program referred to in
paragraph (6), shall be given to the persons served by the system and
the Administrator
“(6) The Administrator may waive the monitoring requirement
under paragraph (2) for a system which has conducted a monitoring
program after January 1, 1983, if the Administrator determines the
program to have been consistent with the regulations promulgated
und r this section
“i, Any s stem suppl’.ing less than 150 service connections shall
be treated as compl ing ith this subsection if such system pros ides
ater samples or the opportunit for sampling accord:ng to rules
established b the .Administrator -
cc; CIvIL PE ALT —Section l4-l c ol the safe Drinking %ater
Act is amended by striking ma be fined nor more trian 5 ,OO0” and
“shall be ‘subject to a civil penalty of not to exceed
-------
S €— - ‘ D - C
o -Q ,ed.
( i-k. ç
• The second part of the theory of the
dririking water program Is that water
j t#PPliers. the operators of the 60,000
- (iblic water systems which exist in
this country, will monitor the quality
of the ater delivered to consumers
- nd treat that water if necessary to
assure that the concentration of each
- contaminant remains below the ac-
cep table levels established by EPA.
MONITORiNG UNR!GUL CONTAMU1AN rS
The fourth mator provision included
in these amendments Is the progj-n fl
for monitoring unregu1ate contan ij.
nants, Under the Safe Dnnking Water
Act local public water supply systems
are only required to monitor for those
Contaminants for which a national
standard has been established. • Be-
cause EPA has set very few standards.
an insufficient amount of monitoring
has been Conducted We know that the
monitoring h s been insufficient be.
cause a very few States, Including my
own State of Minnesota and including
California, have Conducted Independ-
ent monitoring programs testing for a
wide range of potential contan mants
And a wide range of contaminants has
been discovered Several Communities
in Minnesota which beliei,ed that their
water was safe because it met all Fed-
eral standards have been shocked and
dismayed to learn that the water is ac-
tually spiked with a toxic chemical,
and in some cases a mixture of chemi-
cals, that cannot be seen or tasted or
smelled. The contaminants were not
previously detected or suspected by
monitoring under the drinking water
law because there were no standards
for the chemicals in question.
These amendments will bring the
added measure of protection which is
afforoed by broad gauge monitoring to
all of the communities in the Nation.
EPA will establish a list of contami-
nants—in addition to those contami-
nants for which standards are set—and
the water supply of every community
will be tested at least once every 5
years for that broad range of contami-
nants.
To make sure that this prOgram is
effectit e for the thousands of small
ater s ste across the country, the
Senate bill and the conference report
contain an authorization of $30 mil-
lion to pay for the required sampling
and analysis at small systems. I ant
to say to my colleagues that this is not
JUSt another grant program which the
President and the Congress are free to
—
t ’ ’to 21, lc, C \)
UO 02 46
Fourth, local public water supply
syste will be required to mor. tor.
not only for the contaminan for
which standards have been set as re-
quired by current law, but also for a
broad range of other contaminants, as
well.
Because EPA set few stanaards,
water systems at the local level have
not monitored for the broad range of
contaminants likely to be found In
water supplies. Even for those stand-
ards that are in place, it was soon dis.
covered that most public water sys-
tems were woefully unprepared to im-
plement the measures required of
them by the drmking water law. In
1981, the General Accounting Office
conducted a study of compliance by
local systems with the requlremen of
the Safe Drinking Water Act. The re-
quirements are Pnncipally of three
types. To monitor supplies for the con-
taininants for which EPA has set
standards; to report to the constm er if
the standard is exceeded: and to take
steps to come into compliance with the
law—to treat Contaminated water—If
existing quality does not meet the na-
tional standard, GAO had a great deal
to report.
kill by failing to provide the necessary
appropr a 100 The Administrator is
required to establish a program for
monitoring unregulated contaminants
which is a nondiscretionary duty that
can be enforced by any citizen in dis-
trict court Small systems satisfy their
responsibilities under the amendments
by making their systems available for
sampling The authorization is an au-
thorization for EPP. to provide the
Agency with the resources necessary
to carry out the testing that is man-
dated. EPA cannot a%oid the responsi.
bility by failing to seek_—or acti ej
OPposing_aR appropriation for that
purpose
p.
I
P
-------
000247
{ec
C N1 P. No ‘ 1— tS, Cx .) 2c N,L4.. I(1 )
SEC IH MONITORING IVR UNREGULA TED CONTAMINANTS
(ci) SIZE OF Sysrzii.—&ction 1445(a) of the Safe Drinking Water
Act is amended by adding at the end thereof the following: “In re-
quiring a public water system to monitor under this subsection, the
Administrator may take into consideration the system size and the
contaminants likely to be found in the system’s drinking water. ‘
(b) MONITORING REQU M rs.—Section l445(a) of the Safe
Drinking Water Act is amended by adding “(1)” after “(a)” and b
adding the following at the end thereofi
“(2) Not later than 18 months after enactment of the Safe Drink-
ing Water Act Amendments of 1986, the Administrator ahall pro-
mulgate regulations requiring every public water system to conduct
a monitoring program for unregulated contaminants. The regula-
tions shall require monitoring of drinking water supplied by the
system and shall vary the frequency and schedule of monitoring re-
quirements for systems based on the number of persons served by the
system, the source of supply, and the contaminants likely to be
founcL Each system shalt be required to monitor at least once every
5 years after the effective date of the Administrator’s regulations
unle&s the Administrator requires more frequent monitoring.
“(3) Regulations under p3ragraph (2) shall list unregulated con-
taminants for which systems may be required to monitor, and shall
include criteria by which the primary enforcement authority in each
State could show cause for addition or deletion of contaminants
from the de.s&gna ted list. The primary State enforcement authority
may delete contaminants for an individual system, in accordance
with these criteria, after obtaining approval of assessment of the
contaminants potentially to be found in the system. The Adrainis-
trutor shall approve or disapprove such an assessment 8ubmitted
a State within 60 days. A State may add contaminants, in acco -
ance with these criteria, without making an assessment, but in no
event shall such additions increase Federal expenditures authorized
by this section,
‘Y.4) Public water sys ferns conducting monitoring of unregulated
contaminants pursuant to this section shall provide the results of
such monitoring to the primary enforcement authority.
“(5) Notification of the availability of the results of the monitor-
ing programs required under paragraph (2), and notification of the
availability of the results of the monitoring program referred to in
paragraph (6), shall be gwen to the persons served by the system and
the Administrator.
“(6) The Administrator may waive the monitoring requirement
under paragraph (2) or a system which has conducted a monitoring
program after Januw y 1, 1988, if the Administrator determines the
program to have been consistent with the regulations promulgated
under this section,
“(7) Any system supplying less than 150 service connections shall
be treated as complying with this subsection if such system provides
water samples or the opportunity for sampling according to rules es-
tablished by the Administrator.
(ci CiviL ENALr/.—&ctwn 1445(c) of the Safe Drinking Water
Act is amended by etriking “may be fined not more than $5,000”
and inserting “shall be aubject to a civil penalty of not to exceed
-------
1QO248
NQ. - l
8tcflO 106 —MONTYoRiNO POR U RZGTJLATED CONTAM ’ j
Sen€ite bill—The Senate bill requires the Administrator to estab-
lish a program of monitoring for unregujateti contamjnax ts at all
public water systems. Within 18 months after the date of enact-
ment, the Adniinistrator shall promulgate regulatio to establish I P.
this monitoring program, including the list of contaminants for
which public water systems must monitor. Each public water
system is to monitor for this list of con taminant within a five-year
period. The Admnistratoxs regulations may provide for more fre-
quent tnonitoi-ing at larger systems or at Systems where COntaminR.
tion is more likely to occur.
The delegated State authority is authorized to delete contarni-
nants from the list established by the Administrator for an individ-
ual public water system, but only after an assessment which dem-
onstrates to the sat isfaction of the Aciminjatrator that such deleted
contaminant.g are not likely to be present in the water of that
.System.
A total of $30 million is authorized for assistance to such systems
to assure adequate monitoring of all public water systems for a
wide-range of contaminants at least once in the next five years.
Systems with less than 150 connections can satisfy the require-
ments of this section by making a supply sample of their system
available for monitoring and analysis by EPA (depending on the
Administrator’s rules) so as to assure the accurate testmg of all
such systems.
House omendr, nt._The House amendment contains a similar
provision, except that each system would have to be monitored at
least once every five years and States having primacy may also add
contaminants to the list established by the Administrator.
COWP’PRKNC! ACRK Mx .rr,_The conference substitute adopts pro-
visions from both the House and Senate bills. Monitoring for un-
regulated contaminants will be conducted at all public water sys-
tems at least once every five years. A delegated State authonty
may add COfltarnii, th to EPA’S list, but only if such addition will
not increase the cost of the monitoring program to the Federal gov-
ernment The conference report provides a total of $30 million for
assistance to small systems in the authorjzetion section 301(h). No
Bystem is to be conside exempt from this program either be-
cause of its size or because of the lack of appropriations for thia
section.
-------
s i’ s- .(+rt4.4
‘3i -oN&, R .,k c 1 o_c i -)
SEC. lea. 0 i1 5)Ri G ‘OR L RE L4TEO ( i)%. 0 0 02 4 9
TIsvr
(a) Star OF SvsrEM —Section 1445(a) of
the Safe Drinking Water Act is amended by
adding at the end thereof the folloa rig In
reQuiring a public aater s stern to monitor
under this subsection the Administrator
may take into consideration the s}stern size
arid the Contaminants likely to be found in
the system’s drinking water”
(b) MoNrrOarnc Rgq t 5 - —Section
1445(a) of the Safe Dr injting Water Act is
amended by adding (1)’ after (a) and b
adding the folloaing at the end thereof
‘(2 Not later than 18 montbs after the
date of the enactment of the Sate Drinking
Water Act Amendments of 1985. the Adnutn-
istrator shall promulgate reguiatior requir-
ing etery public aater system to conduct a
monitoring program for ‘inregulated cf n
tamtnant.s The Adminim Lor s regula ,on
shall require monitorir . drinking aatcr
supplied by the s sten L d shall tars the
frequency and schedule of monitoring re-
quirements for systems based on the
number of persons sened by the s stern and
the contamina.,its likely to t e found Each
s stern shall be required to monitor at least
once etery 5 year-s after the ,fectite date of
the Administrators regulaL ins unless the
Administrator requires more requent mom
toring
(3) The Administrar re.p .la )on3
under paragraph 2 Sha. j list uncegula). d
contaminants for a hiet -- stems ma - b r—-
Quired to monitor but each State 5hrt ’ )13s
primart enloreement responsibi1it r’a add
or delete cont mjnants for indis idu l c -
tents based on an approted assessr,e’lt of
the contaminants likt-t to be found in tit-
s stem Each such State shall Submit an as
seasmen ) ti, the Administrator Such a.ss s-
merit shall be treated as approsed ott the
date 30 days after its submission unless the
Adrnnistrator disappro es the assess’— )erit
aithin such 30 d period
‘14) Notification of the asailability of the
results of the monhtorrng programs required
under paragraph (2) and notilication o the
atailability of the results of the monitoring
program referred to in paragraph (5) shall
be giten to tne per-sorts ser.’ed by the s stern
and the Administrator
(Si The Administrator may waite the
monitoring requirement under paragraph
(2 f r a system ahich has Conducted a mon
i lo—ti ,g program after Januar 1. [ 983 if the
Adnjini, -trator determines the prog-r-am to
hate been consistent aith the regulations
promulgated under this section
‘(6) Any system supplying less than 150
sert ice connections shall be treated as corn
plying aith this subsection If such system
supplies appropriate water samples to the
Administrator The Administrator shall ar
range for the anal sts of such samples -
-------
000250
r I4 I 5O / cç r ft c t L-a ; , -
p. No ° - q4
SEC. 102. MONITORING FOR U 4REGVLATED CON ANINAN?9
(a) SIZE op Sysitai.—&ction 1445(a of the Safe Drinking Water Act is amended
by adding at the end thereof the following. “In requiring a public water system to
monitor under this subsection, the Administrator may take into consideration the
system size and the contamrn ,. likely to be found in the systems dnnking
water “.
(b) MONITORiNG REQUIREMEN es —Section l 4 45(a) of the Safe Drinking Water Act
is amended by adding “(1)” after “(si’ and by adding the foUowing at the end there-
of
“(2) Not later than 18 months after the date of the enactn ent of the Safe Drink-
ing Water Act Amendments of 1985. the Administrator shall promulgate regula. ,- 4
tions reqwrmng every public water system to conduct a momtoi-ang program for un-
regulated contaminants, The Administrator’s regulatio shall require monitoring
of drinking water supplied by the system and shall vary the frequency and schedule
of monitoring reqturementa for systems based on the number of persons served by
the system and the contaminants likely to be found. Each system shall be required
to monitor at least once every 5 years afçer the effective date of the Administrators
regulations unless the Administrator requires more frequent monitoring.
“(3) The Administrator’s regulatio under paragraph (2) shell list uni -egulated
contan,ina .s for which systems may be required to monitor, but each State which
has primary enforcement responsibility may add or delete contaminants for individ.
ual systems, based on an approved assessment of the contaminants likely to be
found in the system Each such State shall submit an assessment to the Adinmistra.
tor Such assessment shall be treated as approved on the date 30 days after its sub-
mission unless the Administrator disapproves the assessment within such 30-day
period.
“(4) Notification of the availability of the results of the monitoring prograi Fe-
quired under paragraph (2). and notification of the availability of the results of the
monitoring program referred to in paragraph (5), shall be given to the persons
served by the system and the Administrator
“(5) The Administrator may waive the monitbnng requirement under paragraph
(2) for a system which has conducted a monitoring program after January 1, 1983. if
the Administrator determines the program to have been consistent with the regula.
tions promulgated under this section
‘(6) Any system supplying less than 150 service connections shall be treated as
complying with this subsection if such system supplies appropriate water samples to
the Administrator The Administrator shall arrange for the analysis of such sam-
ples”
-------
4 1 tc- o ,
.R. qc 11 i-iO9
Section 102
Under section l445(a) of the 1974 Act, monitoring for unregulat- P 2 - ‘5
ed Contaminants was at the discretion of the EPA. Despite this au-
thority and widespread concern about the ‘quality of our drinking
water supplies, the Agency has not required monitoring for the
presence of toxic contamjnan s. The Committee believes that such
monitoring is essential to establish a data base for standard-setting
and answer pressing questions about the quality of indi. idual sup-
plies
For these reasons, section 102 of the bill would require that EPA
promulgate regulations requiring every public water system to con-
duct a monitoring program for unregulated contaminants at least
once every five years unless the Agency requires a more frequent
monitoring schedule. The Comrriittee emphasizes that this is a min-
imum monitoring requirement for all public water systems. Fre-
quency and schedule of monitoring requirements is based upon the
number of persons served and the contaminants which are likely to
be found in the tap water For systems supplying less than 150
service connections, compliance with this section is satisfied if the
system provides appropriate water samples to the Administrator
The Administrator is to arrange for the analysis of the samples
The Committee intends that EPA will establish a comprehensive
and structured program to monitor for unregulated contaminants
Naturally, this program is to be continued for contaminants for
which standards are set.
The Administrator must list unregulated contaminants that sys- =
tems may be required to monitor, but each State which has pri-
mary enforcement responsibility is given the discretion to add or
delete contaminants for individual systems based upon an EPA ap- (-
proved assessment of the Contaminants likely to be found in the
system
The Administrator can waive the monitoring requirements for a
system which has conducted a monitoring program after January
1, 1983, if the Administrator determines that the program was con-
sistent with the regulations adopted under this section. However,
because there is a need for a national data base, the Committee ex-
pects EPA to implement this waiver in a way which will allow sub-
stantially equivalent data from all public water systems
Notice of the availability of monitoring results is to be given to
customers through such means as announcements in newspapers of
general circulation in the area, bill stuffers, or other effective
means. The public is to have ready access to the results upon re-
quest to the public water system.
-------
00Q252
U. I Q5O
Ce &. , 3-
S on lOZ.MOSUOIbIQ r nregiU f ,
oo’ ’.
A, by rule. a.1J .sbHs1a $ PTO TI. of
monitoring for unleZulaz ,ed COSta is.
Monitoring freQuency Is besed on otunber of
persons served and nt.s.mln.ante likely to
be found, with miniflium reQufremen . ‘A
shill list unregu.late contamtr1n t to be
monitored for, but 8tat s can add or delete
from the list based on an approved a esa-
ment of the ntam1nz.ntj likely to be found
which aPproved by EPA. EPA shill reim.
buree the ta of monitoring for aystema
With l than [ 50 OOm3eCUOnL
-------
S 1 F K g c - . 10
t R , - ‘- ci
MO 4tT0R1NG FOR VNRZGUL , r CONT&MINASF I ’S
Sec 7. (a) Section 1445(a) of the Safe
Drtrik g Water Act Is amended by add’ng
at the end thereof the follos.mg- lrrrequir- Q (3 Q
ing a public ater system to monitor under
this subsection, the Adnumstrator may take
into consjderation the system size and the
contaminanis likely to be.tound in the s s-
tern s drtrkthg water
(b) Section 1445(a) of the Safe Drtnking
Water Act is amended by adding (1)’ after
‘(a)” and adding the foilowu ig at the end I
thereof
“(2) Not later than 18 months att r date
of enactment of the Safe Drinking Water
Act Amendments of 1985, the Adxntnj.strator
shall promulgate regulations for every
public water Sc stem to conduct a morutoring
program for unregulated contaminants
Such regulations shall require mon ltormg
of drinking aater supplied by the system.
and shall vary the frequency and schedule
of monitoring requ1J’emen for systems
based on the number of persons served by
the system, the source of supply, and the
contaminants likely to be found Each
s stem shall be requir -d to monitor at least
once within 5 years of the efftctive date of
such regulations unless the Adrninistra j-
requires more frequent monitoring
(3) Regulations under paragr iph (21
shall list unregulated contaminants for
hi h s sfen s rna, be required to monitor,
and shah Lne e criteria by ah eh the on
mary enfuic.rnlent adthOrI in eacn Si-ate
cou d shoe cause fur deb Lion of a con:arni
nant from the designated list The primary
State enforcement authority may d ’iete
contaminants (or an Indicidual s ztcm in
ancordance Situ t’ e e cri era. Sith an ap-
proted assessment of the conutminants po-
tentially to be found in the svst rn (&ny
such State must submit an assessnirnt to
the Administrator which shall be rv z-dt’d
as approced 60 days after its subnu, ion
unless the Administrator disapproves the as-
sessment] The Administrator sha,LZ approve
OP di p , e si th en asseaj,, ,.g LtÔ,iILUed
biaStgie iotthsa 90 day ,,
“(4) Pu bite water stjsLe,n.s condcf (*9
monitoring of mireptlaud eonlaminai ,
9 14 rssgn ( to Ihi, section shall p,ovidg the re
iui t , of such monitoring to 1 / I c pr.marv en.
fOrc znent aaf/iorifi
(“(4)] ‘ (5 ) NoUficatlon of the availability
of the resuftg of such monitoring program
required under paragrapb (2), and noldica.
Lion of the availability of the resujt of the
monitoring progracn referred to In par*
graph (5), shall be given to the persons
served by Lb. system and the Administrator
((5)] “(6) The Administrator may W&IVC
the morutorfng requ1remen of this subsec.
Lion for a system which has conducted a
monitoring program after January 1. 1983,
If the Administrator determines the pro-
graz to have been consIstent with the regu-
lations promulgated under this section,
[ ‘(8)) “(7) Any system supplying !e
than 150 servIce connections shah be re-
garded as complying with this subsection it
such syetens provides w*Iez samples or the
opportunity /0 , sam p11*9 Sccordlng to the
rule, estabilshed by the Administrator,
There are authorized to be approprsatecj
$30 000000 In the fiscal year ending Sep-
tember 30, 1 88 to rerxialn available until ex-
pended to carry out the provIsions of this
subsection,”,
-------
000254
- 4 - It) b
S ?.- Lk -
-s gs
ç, 2 p No. ‘ -
S cno 7. Mopirroarpro roa U?1 jy CON .TAMIN
- ST.TM ARy
Section 7 estabjjshe a mandatory monitormg program for un-
reguja Cntam Within 18 months of enactment, the Ad.
miniatrator is required to promulgate regulatjo governing this
Ixlorutoring program, including a list of contaminants for which
public water 8ystern mu.st monitor, and criteria for deleting con-
taminaiata from the list Each system ia required to monitor at
least once within 5 years of the effective date of SUCh regulatior .
The Adniinj tor may require more frequent nion1toru g depend-
ing upon factors such as the source of 8upply, the size of the
system, and the likelihoodl of contamlnRtjon
The primary enforcement authority in each State may delete
Contan ts from the design_a list (in accordance with criteria
established by the Admmi rator) for an individual system subject
to EPA approval of a contaminant assessment submitted by such
authority. The Adnijnj tra is allowed 90 days to make such a de-
termination.
The results of the monitoring shall be provided to the primajy
enforcement authority and notification of the availability of results
shall be given to persor served by the system and the Adniinistra.
tor.
The Administrator is given the authority to waive the monitor-
ing requ1rem contained in Section 7(b) for a system that has
conducted a monitormg Program after January 1, 1983 if the Ad-
minjstz-ator determines the system’s program wa consistent with
regulatio promulgated under Section 7.
A system supplying less than 150 service Connections will be re-
garded as complying with Section 7 if such system provides water
samples or the opportunity for sampling according to rules estab-
lished by the Administrator
This section authorizes £3O,O0O,o y, for the monitoring program.
-------
000255
One of the difficulties in pursuJng a national policy to coiitrol or
elimijiRte COntamulfint .! LB drinking water is the lack of reliable
data Ofl what Contam its are present in public water syste
Current law permits Administrator to require xnonitormg of P
only regulated contaminants. Since EPA baa promulga s d.
arda for only 22 contamiflR ts this morut4) j req ment applies
to a small number of contaminants that may be found in public
water systems.
The Ad nistrator should develop the list of unregulated con
nini nt t 0 be monitored by all systems based on potential health
risks and exposure to contamira ts. Contaminants may be deleted
by the primary enforcement authority from the monitoring list for
an indivjduaj system upon a showing by such authority that is ap-
proVed by EPA. It should be noted, however, that monithring pro-
grams conducted at the State level have detected the pre6en of
mafly unexpected contamjn In light of thia experience, it is an- I
ticipated that the primary enforcement authority would carefully
weigh any request to delete contamjna 5 from the designa j list
and that EPA would carefully scrutimie such requesta. Deletion of
contaminants prior to at least one initial baseline test is expec
to be infrequent and allowed only where there is coznpeuing evi-
dence that the contaminant will not be found.
The frequency and 8chedule of monitoring requireix e 8 should
vary accord r g to the number of persons served by the system, the
source of supply, and the COntAminAyits likely to be found. It is ap-
propriate for syetenis with supplies that may be subject to containj.
nation from diverse industrial municipal, and agricuJt r activi-
ties to monitor on a more frequent basis than those systems with
more protected water sUpplies. Regulations should take these dif.
fererices into account, recogmzj,ig the need for sufficient water
analyses to detect contamination given the frequent changes that
may occur in water quality. In any case, no system shall monitor
less than once in five years. In general, only the smallest Systems
are expected to monitor with this infrequency
Small systems (those supplymg less than 150 service connections)
are not burdened by the monitoring requirement as they are per-
rnitted to satisfy the monitormg requireme by submitting sam-
ples or providing an opportunity for sampling.
-------
000256
c L 9 i ,
But even thts aut auc lhttng proc.
eas will not asswe thaL e’ ery cont*zij-
rant of drthking w,.zes that threate,
health Es rev1e ed by the Agency
Therefore a second step 13 included in
the bill The bLE reqtnrea EPA to e-
tabtLth a schedule thai will as&ire
monitoring for unregWated conta,n-
nant .s by all public water supply sys .
teens. If this monitoring should t-
cate eontamlnaUo , even If the -re 13 no
natIonal health .anciards for the e m
t&mij n$. the witer supply system- 13
required to notIfy the public, the Stale
agency and th e consuming the s
of the presence of the cce taminant.
aeOtcrroRfl(c ros (G rr COiFTA 1$A.IrrS
Sec 7 (a) Section i445 a ) of the Safe
Dr ing Water Act ta amended by adding
at tie end thereof the (oUov.i g- In requu
Lng a public water system t a ionjtor under
thi.s subsection the Ad jr t cr ma take
into consideritior the s 5tem size a id the
Contanu likely to be found in the sys-
tern a anraing water
b Svcjion l445 aj of the Safe Drink.jng
Water Act is aclended by addj g (1, Lfter
(a) and addL-lg the fOllo u ’4 at the end
thereof
(2) Not later than 18 mont after date
of enacr. e of the Safe Drinking Waier
Act Am d ts 01 1985 the
afJ pl. Uhg*ze regtzja. for every
pu L1 water ay to n uct a
prova for uuli contamuw
Such r ulauons h.I.U r tilts
d kn wver suppLied by the system
and shall vary the frequency and schedule
of monitoring rquiem it. 1 for a75te.m
bs.ieci on the number 01 persons served by
the system, the ree of a1.lpply, and the
con ‘ ‘ -nr .. Likely to be found. Each
system ahall be required to monitor at least
on within five years of the effective dale
of such rgu.La ,t1o twJeaj the Adm1ni . tj
tot reqtnr more frequent mowtortng
3) R ui.nj under par1 sr pb (2)
shaH list unre u1at .ec for
sl-.ich s stem .s may be ttej ed lo monitor
and snaIl Include cr. er1a by luch the pn
mary enloroement autho ty ui eaco State
could show cause for de:et’on of a cont.amj
nant from the derig-tated L st The prinia.ry
State enforcement authority may delete
eonta.ta , for an bdl .dua1 system. to
sordwic with these criteria. with an ap-
proved a.csessment of the cort aJnir, p , pe.
tentially to be found Lii the aysten . Any
such State must submit an a.S3e, ment to
the Admizustrat whjch s ua.U be regarded
as 5pprov f 60 days after u.s sLbmi .ssion
unless the Administrator dizappro the
sessmer t
• (4, Nottflcation of the avSlJ&biflty or the
results of the monitoring progia, reguj
under paragraph (2), and notification of the
avaIlability of the results of the monitoring
program referred to In paragraph (5), shall
be given to the persons served by the system
and the Admthigtrator
‘(5) The Administrator rosy valve tne
monitoring requirement of this subsection
for a system whIch has conducted a nuoni
toruig program after January 1 1983, If the
Administrator determines the program to
have been con.sistent with the regulato
proou gaz under this section
(6) Any system suppiyu’g less tha • u
service connect Ions shall be rvg&rc.-: is
complying with thu subsection ti icn
system Drond water samples accorcl_ .r to
the ruJ ecL ,ah hed by the Admit-
There are aul,00rts ed to be approp-’ d
$30 000 000 In the flscaJ yes.r ending ,i ,,-
tember 30 1986 to remain available unr.u es
pen(1e j to carry out the pri.vi.slon .s of thi
su bsectio i_
2L 4 4 CGt
y _ _o I c_. C)?. 3 i ,3
-
2 q0
-------
000257
? - C4 o t ‘L-k —
S P. . - , - q
15 IONzTORzNG FOR UNREGULATED CONTAMINANTS
16 SEC. 8. ‘cQ Section 1445(a) of the Safe Drinking
17 IT T ater Act is amended by adding at the end thereof the fol-
18 lowing: “In requiring a public waler system to monitor under
19 this subsection, the Administrator may take into consider-
20 ation the system sire and the contaminants likel j to be fo’ind
21 in the system drinking icater. “.
22 (b) Sec/ion l445( (l) of I/ ic Safe Drinking IJ’atcr Act is
23 amen(fed by adl(luu/ “(‘1) ‘‘ a/Icr ‘‘(a) ‘‘ and athliiig 11w follow-
24 jay al/lie end thcrcof.
25 “(‘2 LVOt la/e/ than 78 months (1)/er (late of enactment of
26 1/ic SUf(’ J)i’i,iki,u, 1T’ i /cr 1e! I iiieiidin n/s of 1.984, i/in I ii-
-------
000258
1 ministrator shall promulgate regulations for ct’eri,’ /nh/)ulc ‘-J iJ .
2 waler system to conduct a moniloting program for unregulut.:
3 ed contaminants. Such regulations shall •require monitoring
4 of drinking water supplied by the system, and shall vary the
5 frequency and schedule of monitoring requirements for sys-
6 tems based on the number of persons served by the system,
7 the source of supply, and the contaminants likely to be found.
S Each system shall be required to monitor at least once within
9 5 years of the effective date of such regulations unless the
10 Administrator requires more frequent monitoring.
11 “ ‘3,) Regniations under paragraph (2) shall list unre u-
12 lated contaminants for which systems may be required to
13 monitor, and shall include criteria by which i/ic primary en-
14 forcernenl authority in each State could s/tow cause for dde-
13 lion of ci Contaminant from Ike designated list. The primary
16 Slate enforcement authority may delete contaminants, in cic-
17 co, Jance wit/i these criteria, wit/i an approved assessment of
iS i/ic contaminants potentially to be found in 1/ic system. Any
19 s ue/i Slate must submit an assessment to I/ic ildniin,s(,ator
20 ic/lid 1 s/ui/I be re [ Jar(lc(1 OS (1/)J)iO1 ’Cd 60 (laiJS (ifter i/s Su/imjs-
2 1 I Oil U)? IP S I/ic it (11111 i i is /i’11 br (liS (ip/fl’oVeS the assess in en!.
22 ‘‘(7) iVo/ifwo lioiz of (lie a ra ilab , lily of 1/ic l’esli Its of
- “1r/ iiinii ito )’! ll( ’ /)l’(H/iQ flI l’C /!l 1 il/l I/Cl J5l l’(l())(i/)/i (2) (11 1(1
2 JioI/)i. ,/ioii of 1/ic utr!i/aln/ify o/ 1/ic resu/1.s oJ (lie iflontlorinq
-------
000259
1 progra n referred to in paragraph (s), shall be given to the F L 4
2 persons served by the system and the Administrator.
3 “(5) The Administrator may waive the monitoring re-
4 quirement of this subsection for a system which has conduct-
5 ed a monitoring program after Januar j 1, 1983, if the Ad-
6 ministralor determines the program to have been consistent
7 with the regulations promulgated under this section.
8 “(6) Any system supplying less than 150 servcie coh-
9 nections shall be regarded as complying with this subsection
10 if such system provides water samples according to the rules
11 established by the Administrator. There are authorized to be
12 appropriated $30,000,000 in the fiscal year ending Seplein-
13 ber 30, 1986 to remain available until expended to carry out
14 the provision of tins subsection. “.
-------
000260
1- -
\ \Lj (
Section 8. Monitoring
This section establishes a mandatory monitoring program for un-
regulated contaminants Within 18 months of enactment, the Ad-
ministrator is required to develop regulations requiring all public
water systems to monitor for unregulated contaminants. Regula-
tions may vary for different systems based on the population
served, source of supply and the likelihood of finding certain con-
taminants. Regulations shall include a list of contaminants for
which all systems are to monitor the criteria for deletion of any
contaminant from monitoring requirements for a single public
water system. A primacy State must show cause for deletion of a
contaminant for an individual system according to such criteria,
based upon a system-by-system assessment of the likelihod of find-
ing specific contaminants. The presence of synthetic organic chemi-
cals and other contaminants may vary depending upon such factors
as geologic conditions and past and present chemical use patterns
in a particular area. States may choose to use such information to
tailor their monitoring programs with the approval of the Adminis-
trator.
Persons served by the system and EPA will be notified of the
availability of the results of the monitoring program.
Systems supplying less than 150 service connections are to pro-
vide samples to the delegated State or EPA for testing, according to
EPA rules. Thirty million dollars are authorized to pay for one-
time monitoring for these systems.
If a State can demonstrate that it has conducted an equivalent
monitoring program after January 1, 1983, the Administrator may
waive Federal monitoring requiremen .
-------
000261
Maximum contaminant levels
In order to expedite standard-setting the bill modifies the exist-
ing method under current law of establishing a maximum contami-
nant level (MCL). MCLs must be set as close to the maximum con-
taminant level goal as is feasible. The term “feasible” means feasi-
ble with the use of the best technology, treatment techniques and
other means, which the Administrator finds, after examination for
efficacy under field cond itions and not solely under laboratory con-
ditions, are available (taking cost into consideration). The bill
makes clear that the use of granular activated carbon is available
(taking costs into consideration) for the control of synthetic organic
chemicals. Any technology, treatment technique, or other means
found to be the best available for the control of synthetic organic
chemicals must be at least as effective in controlling synthetic or-
ganic chemicals as the use of granular activated carbon.
During the course of the hearings, the Committee heard testimo-
fly from witnesses representing the water supply industry, the En-
vironmental Protection Agency, and public health interests that
granular activated carbon technology, as used in well-operated
public system has been proven to be highly effective in removing
synthetic organic chemicals. The testimony indicates that the tech-
nology is not only proven but is available and economically feasible
for many public water systems.
The Committee rec ognizes that other technologies, including aer-
ation and adsorptive resins, exist which may be equally effective or
more effective than the use of granular activated carbon under cer-
tain conditions. The relative effectiveness of technologies varies ac-
cording to the specific parameters of technology design and oper-
ation and the nature of the contaminant. The use of technologies 1,
which are more effective than granular activated carbon under
some circumstances is not precluded as the basis for setting MCLs
The Administrator will not require public water systems to in-
stall the specific “best available technology” used to derive the
MCL but will list other technologies which might be used to attain
the MCL. Public water systems may use those or alternative tech-
nologies found equally effective, to come into compliance with the
MCL standard.
-------
000262
-
18 MONITORING FOR UNREGULATED CONTAMINANTS
19 SEC. 13. (a) Section 1445(a) of the Safe Drinking WTater
20 Act is amended by adding at the end thereof the following:
21 “In requiring a public water system to monitor under this
22 subsection, the Administrator may take Pinto consideraiion the
23. system size and the contaminants likely to be found in the
24 system’s drinking water.”.
-------
000263
1 (b) Section 1 4 45(a) of the Safe Drinking Water. Act is
2 amended by adding “(1)” after “(a)” and adding the following
3 at the end thereoft
4 “(2) Not later than 18 months from the date of enact-
5 ment, the Administrator shall promulgate regulations for
6 every public water system to. conduct a monitoring program
7 for unregulated contaminants. The Administrator’s regula-
8 tions shall vary the frequency and schedule of monitoring re-
9 quirement for systems based on the number of persons
10 served by the system and the contaminants likely to be found
11 but each system must be required to monitor surface sources
12 and representative supply wells at least once and such moni-
13 toring must be conducted within five years of the effective
14 date of the Administrator’s regulations. The Administrator’s
15 regulations shall list unregulated contaminants for which sys-
16 tems may be required to monitor, but the primary enforce-
17 ment authority in each State shall be given the flexibility to
18 add or delete contaminants, for individual systems, based on
19 an approved assessment of what contaminants may be found /
20 in the system. Notification of the a ailabilitv of the results of
21 such monitoring pjograms shall be given to the persons
22 served by the system and the Administrator. The Administra_
23 tor may waive this monitoring requirement for a system
24 which has conducted a monitoring program after January 1,
25 1983, if the Administrator determines the program to have
-------
000264
• 1 been consistent with the regulations promulgated under this
2 section.
3 “(3) The Administrator shall reimburse the monitoring
4 costs incurred under the regulation by systems supplying less
5 than 150 service connectjons.” .
-------
000265
Rap, No. - I 3 ,
MONITORINO FOR UNREGULATED CONTAMINANTS
SEc 102 (a) SIZE OF SYSTEM —Section 1445(a) of the Safe Drinking Water Act is
amended by adding at the end thereof the following “In requiring a public water
system to monitor under this subsection, the Administrator may take into consider-
ation the s 7 stem size and the contaminai likely to be found in the system’s drink-
ing water
(b) MONITORING REQUIREMENTS —Section 1 445(a) of the Safe Drinking Water Act
is amended by adding “(1)” after “(a)” and by adding the following at the end there-
of
“(2) Not later than 18 months after the date of the enactment of the Safe Drink-
ing Water Act Amendments of 1984, the Administrator shall promulgate regula-
tions requiring every public water system to conduct a monitoring program for un-
regulated contaminants The Administrator’s regulations shall require monitoring
of drinking water supplied by the system and shall vary the frequency and schedule
of monitoring requirements for systems based on the number of persons served by
the system and the contaminants likely to be found Each system shall be required
to monitor at least once every 5 years after the effective date of the Administrator’s
re ulations unless the Administrator requires more frequent monitoring
‘(3) The Administrator’s regulations under paragraph (2) shall list unregulated
contaminants for which systems may be required to monitor, but each State which
has primary enforcement responsibility may add or delete contaminants, for individ-
ual systems, based on an approved assessment of the contaminants likely to be
found in the system Each such State shall submit an assessment to the Administra-
tor Such assessment shall be treated as approved on the date 30 days after its sub-
mission unless the Administrator disapproves the assessment within such 30-day
period
“(4) Notification of the availability of the results of the monitoring programs re-
quired under paragraph (2), and notification of the availability of the results of the
monitoring program referred to in paragraph (5), shall be given to the persons
served by the system and the Administrator
“(5) The Administrator may waive the monitoring requirement under paragraph
(2) for a system which has conducted a monitoring program after January 1, 1983, if
the Administrator determines the program to have been consistent with the regula-
tions promulgated under this section
‘(6) Any system supplying less than 150 service connections shall be treated as
complying with this subsection if such system supplies appropriate water samples to
the Administrator The Administrator shall arrange for the analysis of such sam-
ples”
-------
000266
,erwn ,, 1 o-v
-1.R. P. N . - IO3L -f
Section 102
Under section 1445 (a) of the 1974 Act, monitoring for unregulat- . 2- 2.
ed contaminante was at the discretion of the EPA Despite this au-
thority and widespread concern about the quality of our drinking
water supplies, the Agency has not required monitoring for the
pre ence of toxic contaminanta The Committee believes that such
monitoring is essential to establish a data base for standard-setting
and answer pressing questions about the quality of individual sup-
plies.
For these reasons, section 102 of the bill would require that EPA D, 2- 3
promulgate regulations requiring every public water system to con-
duct a monitoring program for unregulated contaminan at least
once every five years unless the Agency requires a more frequent
monitoring schedule. The Committee emphasizes that this is a min-
imum monitoring requirement for all public water systems. Fre-
quency and schedule of monitoring requirements is based upon the
number of persons served and the contaminants which are likely to
be found in the tap water. For systems supplying less than 150
service connections, compliance with this section is satisfied if the
system provides appropriate water samples to the Administrator.
The Administrator is to arrange for the analysis of the samples
The Committee intends that EPA will establish a comprehensive
and structural program to monitor for unregulated contaminante
Naturally, this program is to be continued for contaminants for
which standards are set
The Administrator must list unregulated contaminants that sys-
tems may be required to monitor, but each State which has pri-
mary enforcement responsibility is given the discretion to add or
delete contaminants for individual systems based upon an EPA ap-
proved assessment of the contaminants likely to be found in the
System.
The Administrator can waive the monitoring requirements for a
system which has conducted a monitoring program after January
1, 1983, if the Administrator determines that the program was con-
sistent with the regulations adopted under this section However,
because there is a need for a national data base, the Committee ex-
pects EPA to implement this waiver in a way which will allow sub-
stantially equivalent data from all public water systems.
Notice of the availability of monitoring results is to be given- to
customers through such means as announcements in newspapers of
general circulation in the area, bill stuffers, or other effective
means The public is to have ready access to the results upon re-
quest to the public w ter system.
-------
000267
L5C 1 5c 1
) S t 4 ,
13 MONITOIUNG FOR UNREGULATED CONTAMINANTS
14 SEc. 1O . (a) SIZE OF SYS rE I.—Seetjoii 1445(a) of,
15 the Safe Drinking Water Act is amended by adding at the
16 end thereof the following: “In requiring a public water
17 system to monitor under this subsection, the Administrator
18 may take into consideration the system size and the contami-
19 nants likely to be found in the system’s (Irinking water.’’.
20 (I)) MONITORiNG REQIJ1jfl fEN’rs.Sectjo 1 l 44 5(a) of
21 the Safe Drinking Water Act is amended b adding ‘‘(1)’’
22 after ‘‘(a)’’ and by adding the following at the end thereof:
23 ‘‘(2) Not later than 18 months after the date of the en—
24 aetment of the Safe 1)rinkiug \Vater Act Ainendnieni s of!
23 1 98 -1, the Adiniin trator shall 1)rOI11l1hi atc regulations retluir—
2G in ( ‘Very J)iIbliC water system to ( ‘Ofl(hIICt :1 tliotiitoring Pro-,
-------
000268
1 gram for unregulated contaminants. Tho Administrator’s reg-
2 ulations shall r quirc monitoring of drinking water supplied
-‘Jo
3 by the system and shall vary the frequency and schedule of
4 monitoring requirements for systems based on the number of
5 persons served by the system and the contaminants likely to
6 be found. Each system shall be required to monitor at least
7 once every 5 years after the effective date of the Administra.
8 tors regulations unless the Administrator requires more fre-
9 quent monitoring.
10 “(3) The Administrator’s regulations under paragraph
11 (2) shall list unregulated contaminants for which systems may
12 be required to monitor, but each State which has primary
13 enforcement responsibility may add or delete contaminants,
14 for individual systems, based on an approved assessment of
15 the contaminants likely to be found in the system. Each such
16 State shall submit all assessment to the Administrator. Such
17 assessment shall be treated as approved on the date 30 days
18 after its submission unless the Administrator disapproves the
19 assesslneilt within such 30—day period.
20 “(4) Notjfie tjou of the availal)ihitv of the results of the
21 moult oring programs required tinder pa I I ra1)h1 (s), a uid iiot-
22 h :ttioi 1 oh hhie availal)ihIIv 01 the results of tire monitoiin
23 pro r:iin rehw red to I I paraL I alihi (5), shall be’ gi en to the
24 h)rr ()I is ser ( (I by the Svsti’in :i 11( 1 I lie .\(huu]IfljStrfltor
-------
1 “(5) The Administrator may waive the monitoring re-
2 quirement under paragraph (2) for a s stem which has con-
3 ducted a monitoring program after January 1, 1983, if the
4 Administrator determines the piogram to have been consist-
5 ent ivith the regulations l)rornul ated under this section.
6 ‘(6) Any system supplying less than 130 Service con—
7 nections shall be treated as complying with this subsection if
8 such system supplies appropriate \ ‘ate samples to the Ad—
9 ministrator. The Administrator shall arrange for the ana!vsis
10 of such samples.”.
000269
I’
-------
000270
N. 32 oO
C nrj.)
10 (c) MONITORINO BY SMALL SYUTEM&—Sectjon
11 l445(a) is amended by adding after the words “athrisLng the
12 puWic of such risk8.” the following: “In requiring a public
13 water system to monitor under this 8Ubsecljon, the Adminis-
14 trator shall (eke into account the system size and the con-
15 t.aminants likely to be found in the system’s drinking water.”.
-------
000271
V-ct-’ U - - &jL p cu t c( \ 0 -
N?. TECHNICAL ASSISTANCE FOR SMALL SYSTEMS.
Section 1442 of the Safe Drinking Water Act is amended by
adding the following new sub€ection at the end thereof:
“(g) The Administrator is authorized to provide technical assist-
ance to small public water systems to enable 8uch systems to
achieve and maintain compliance with national drinking water
regulations. Such assistance may include ‘circuit-rider’ programs,
training, and preliminary engineering.studies.”.
-------
S e o Lo e3 - 4- co- c - C
3ZCoN(c 2 f’L 0 ,
/ S e - ’v 1
TECXNIC ,4 5 ASSISTANCE
The fifth major element in the con.
terence report j found in a series of
provtsions to provide technical and fi-
nancial assistance to the States and es-
pecially to small public water Supply
Systems. I have Just described the pro
of assistance to make sure that
monitoring for unregula conta.mi.
nants is conducted for small systems
This legislation meets the same objec-
tive in other ways including a substan.
tial authorization for general techni.
cal assistance and measures to increase
cooperation between EPA and Ind ian
tribes which ha%e experienced great
difficulty in secunag safe and ade- P
quate drinking water supplies,
On the subject of technical assist-
ance. I would make mention of the
very important role that the National
Rural Water Association has played in
bringing the promise of safe drinking
water to the small towns arid rural
COmmunities of America. The confer.
ence report includes specific mention
of circuit rider Pro ams_me g
technicians who are available to a
large number of Communities and
travel among them Providing assist-
ance and advice in the operation of
water Supply syste . This provision
was Crafted with the National Rural
Water Association in mind, I would
note that the President’s budget for
1987 proposed elimination of the grant
for the National Rural Water Associa.
tion and that in response the Commit-
tee on En irorjnent and Public Wori s
in its annuaj report to the Budget
Committee recon1Jr ended that the
grant be continued.
ç .
In recognition of th difficulties that
small water supply systems may have
in complying with the new require.
ments, the bill provides for technical
LscicNnrp to these Svstems.
2 ’t) I b)
00027.2
The second
to be highllgh is section 107 which
pros ides for technj l_ assistance to
sm’all water systems Currently, the
na)onty of violations of the Safe -
Drinking Water Act Occur at the thou.
sands of small water systems hlch
serve rural, less populated areas
These types of systems are prevelant
througho North Carolina and most
other areas of the coufliry Many
times these systems are Operated by
the town manager or local fire chief
who have little, if any, training in this
area
. c z-
I ifth, sIgndi Progr of tech. /
flicaj and financial aSSiStance to srn j] - -
and imPlementing treatment tech
syste for Conducting monitoring
ruques are autho ed
-
2-CCN .
k2LQ
(
-------
000273
Co R p,N 0 . 1 2GtS . \_L q(( )
SEC l IZ TECHNICAL ASSISTANCE FY)R SMAU SYSTEAV5
Section 1442 of the Safe Drinking Water Act is amended by
adding the following new suL 8ection of the end thereo/
“(g) The Administrator is authorized to provide technical asszst-
ance to small public water systems to enable such systems to achieve
and r,viintaj compliance with national drink iri.g water regulations.
Such assistance may include ci cuit-rider’ programs, training, and p.
preliminary engineering studies. ‘
C F ç2 p No. \i-5 9 C-c tc .) 2cL L .
C M ,
FOR 8MAL 8yg gp4 —I-
Senate bilL—The Senate bill authorjz the Administrator to pro-
vide techrn assjst to sm j. public water systems to enable
SUch 8yatexns to achieve and maintain compliance with national
dnnking water regulation Such aesls .a ca may include “circuit
rider” pro -r training and prelimj y engineering studies. Ten
nullion dou.ars per year for each of fiscaJ years 1987 through 1991
are authorized to be approprjat j to implement this section. At
least 5 per cent of these funds shall be used for such technical as-
sistance to public water system owned or operated by Indian tribes
House ofnendment._The House aniendment contains a similar
prov 1s on without a set-aside of techmcaj assistance funds for use
by Indian tribes.
Conference conference agreement adopts the,
House language with modification to autho - at least 3 percent of
technical assistance funds, provided in section 3 Ol(g), for publici
water systems owned or operated by Indian tribes but in no case
less than $280,000 dollb.rs per year.
-------
000274
k i o
( Cor i&. H ’O- 1 ( 0 I 5)
•‘l•( i’ i ni H’i( U. A I 41t’ k 1 1 1 K MSIAIJ. Y,.
L LcI
Section 1442 of the Safe Drinking WaLer
Act is amended by adding the following new
subsection.
‘(g The Admtni. g -ator IS authorized to
provide Lechnicsj assistance to small public
water systema to enable such syslerTw to
achieve and mau,ta compliance with na-
t lonaj drinking water regulauons. Such as-
Sistance may mclude c lrtult-r ldej- pro-
grams. training and preliminary engineer-
ing studies. There are authorized to be ap-
propriated to carry out this sui ection.
$10 000 000 br each of the fiscal years 1986
through I98 —
-------
i 0 &4- e c t-z (r’r- ..w , . - I c
1 R. No. )( )J 4 i)
SEC los TECH ICAL ASSISTANCE FOR SMALL SYSTEMS.
Section 1442 of the Safe Drinking Water Act is amended by adding the following ,-
new subsection --
“(g) The Administrator is authorizeii to provide technical assistance to small
public water systems to enable such systems to achieve and maintain compliance
with national drinking water regu1ation Such assi tance may include circuit-rider’
programs, training, and preliminary engineering studies There are authorized to be
appropriated to carry out this subsection, £10,000,000 for each of the fiscal years
1986 through 1989 “. -
-------
- 000276
1 R, Rt . N . - t i ) ÷c . ‘ c),
Section 108
The Committee has determined that technical assistance for
small systems is inadequate. A series of seminars conducted in 1980 p 2 - 1
by the Conference of State Engineers confirmed that the lack of
technical expertise and system operator apathy are major causes of
small water systems failing to comply with requirements. The final
report on the seminar states that:
small system violations and failings come across as
multiple and frequent and the weight of their causality
falls upon the human factor. Owner and “operator”
apathy, lack of technical know-how, ignorance of State
standards and regulations—these seem to underlie the
poor performance of the small system. ’ 8 -3 b
The Committee believes that addditional technical assistance will
enhance compliance among small systems. Even though there is
some technical assistance available from EPA and the Farmers
Home Administration to the National Rural Water Association, the
Committee believes that more funding is needed for technical as-
sistance Section 108 authorizes up to $10 million per year for tech-
nical assistance programs, such as for “circuit-riders,” who could
trouble-shoot systems on a rotating basis, and training and engi-
neering studies.
-------
-\ o
000277
8cA n 1 H—Tec)uitcai au a(gnce for ImcJJ
flJkmi
The AdmInlgj . 1 Diovide techz J.
c&1 ‘rlgt n to ii public w,.t syuern
auth &a “cIjei Progr ma and opera-
to? A total of 310 mIllion a year for
4 year suthor (I to be app oprtai ed to
.rry out tb sectjon -
-------
000278
l24 4 -
\ 3\Co & L401 ( da€ &. k IL , 2S)
T 1CAL AUKSTA1!
Sac &(a)SectfoIlI442ofthe aje j
tng W*ter Act Is amended by adding the tot- I
lowing new subsectlon
“(g The Administrator is authorized to
provide technical assistance to small public
water systema or water srste,n. of Indian
tribal o, auizatto,ij to enable such systems
to achieve and maintain compliance with
national drinking water regulauon& Such
assistance may include ‘circult-ridsi” pro-
grams. training, and preliminary engineer-
ing studies. There are authorized to be ap-
propriated., to carry out this subsection
110.000.000 for each of the fiscal years 1988
throu (1989 1990. Of this sum. at lea3 t
5 per centum shall be ulili ed for technical
assl. Lance to I ndian tribal oTganiZatior ’.
-------
S,t2.* 1 L ZCL (1. C4TThrj,-y -
j t iJ ) LA - - . i-’ c• s’)
SECTION 8. TECKNICAJ.
StTMM Ey
The Administrator is authorjz j to Provide technjcal assistance
to small public water systems to enable such 8yst.ems to achieve
and maintaja complia .nc with nationaj drinking water regulatioi ,
Such assistance may i.nclude “Clrcujt..rider” programs, training,
and pre1imm y engine g studies. $10,0O0, 4y,) per year for each
plement this section.
of fiscal years 1987-1990 are authoru d to be app opriate d to im-
Noncompliance with national drinking water regulatjo 1 ha
been a chronic problem for small systems. This is due Primarily to
a lack of financial resources and technical expertise. The noncom,.
pliance situation worsen with the issuance of new regulatio 5
required by this b... unles, an increased effort is made to provide
tec_ ca1 assistance.
The bill provide, a £10 million annual authorization for technical
assistance to small systems. Such assistance may be, in the form of
training programs, “circuit-rider” programs, or other activities
which facilitate small system complian . These funds are to
be used by orgs-ni7- tion.s such as the National Rural Water A.gso.
ci.ation which have particular knowledge of Drobiems and needs of
rural com.mun 1es and experience in providing on-site assistance
with the construction, operation, and maintenance of small sys-
tems. In addition, 5 percent of the funds provided by this section is
to be set aside for technicaj a iztance to Indian tribal organij , .
tiona.
R. ZA2CH T (ICAL ASBItANCE, tNTORMATI0N, AND Tfl.ADflNO or
P 8ONN L
Sac. 1442. (aX 1) ‘ ‘ ‘
S S S S S S S
(0 There are authorized to be appropriated to carry out the pro-
visions of this section, other than subsection (aX2XB) and provisions
relating to research, $15,000,000 for the fiscal year ending June 30,
1975; 25,000,000 for the fiscal year ending June 30, 1976;
$35,000,000 for the fiscal year ending June 30, 1917; $17,000,000 for
each of the fiscal years 1978 and 1979; £21,405,000 for the fiscal
year ending September 30, 1980; $30,000,000 for the fiscal year
ending September 30, 1981; and $35,000,000 for the fiscal year
ending September 30, 1982. There are authorized to be appropri-
ated to carry out subsection (aX2XB) $8,000,000 for each of the fiscal
years 1978 through 1982. There are authorized to be appropriated to
carry out subsection (aX2 ’B), $ 11,300,000 for the fiscal year 1986,
$11,800,&k) for th, fiscal year 1987, $11 ,Y(X) ,(XJW) for the fiscal year
1988, and 11,3(X?,(KN) /br the fiscal year 1989 and Jl,300,001) for
th, fiscal year 1990.. re are authorized to be appropriated to
carry out the prouisjorgs of thu section (other than subsection (g),.
subsection (aX XB), and arovtswns relating to research), $4? O0O 000
for the fiscal year 19 6, $4 7,00 ( 1 000 for the fiscal year 1987, I
$47,000,000 for the year 1988, $4? 000,O0O /or the fiscal r
1989 and $47,000,000 jur tae fiscal year 1990. I
(g) The Administrator is authorized to provide technical assist-
ance to small public water sterns or water s y stems of Indian tribal
or ’ani.zatwns to enable sucn systems to achieve arid maintain corn-
pliance with national drinking water regulations. Such assistance
may include “circuit-rider” programs, training and preliminary en-
gineering 8tLidie& There are authorized to be aopmpruzted to carry
out thus subsection $10,CY)0,CkX) for each of time ris l years 1986
through 1990. Of th . sum, at lecat flu” •r centum shall be utilized
for technical auistazzce to Indian trzbo ganuzationa.
r 000279
P
1L-
Czr& , N 1 1
t y
- (
,_I3
-------
S \ z 4 cv , . ’ cL ce c&. ‘- I C
\ Co . S 3 , 3 CC JA 3, s)
000280
T HJICAL ASS! rrA,qct
S 8 & Sec’tic.j 14 of th Sale Dft-’ k
trig Wat Act 1. ‘Jneride oy add.ig t ie to i
losing new Su eclon — I
“(g ) The Ad. j trator t3 aut ’ortz to . 2 C
Pride caI a. .s:a.nce to smafi ub ic
W te ‘yre to ertab) suth s s:er )-.s to
achieve and au ta cV OItan.’e S.t1h na
tional drt water r 1JiaZ ’ Such a.s
ay Include c: — der pro-
grl.m.s. tr&tnu and prei mira y eng.nee- I
trig Studie s There are autt r. d to be ap
Prvpr1at to carry out ‘ s subsect (Or
$10 000 000 for each of the ft.scal years 1936
through 1989 I
S. 2- 4 V r Oj- -k( c - 10
. p. N , ) ck
15 TECIINICdL ASSiSTANCE
16 SEC. 9. (a) Section 1442 of the Safe Drinking Water
F’
17 Act is amended by adding the following new subsection:
18 “(g) The Administrator is authorized to provide 1cc/mi-
19 cal assistance to small public wafer systems to enable such
20 systems to achieve and maintain compliance wit/p ‘national
21 (ilin/ iflq watci’ regulations. Sue/i (1s.’ iSIance wag, include
22 ‘circuit-ruler 7n’oqrains, training, awl /n’c/iininury engineer-
2:3 inq studies. There (lie authorized /0 be appropriated to e irry
24 vi ii 1/i is siI/ , .sCc/jo/, $ , 000.000 Joi (‘UGh 0/ I/is fiscal i /eur ’
:2::i 1 u) i1, •v ny/ i / .98!!. “.
-------
Cr ,c
, c’, Nc .. C\ 4-i. 2 .rf ..L .
000281
Section 9. Technical assistance
Small systems have had a chronic problem in complying with na-
tional drinking water standards. This is due in large part to a lack
of technical expertise. The noncompliance situation may worsen
with the issuance of standards required by these Amendments.
Technical assistance programs, run primari y by the States, have
been productive in the past in providing small systems with much
needed aid. Section 9 provides a $5 million authorization per year
for technical assistance to small sjstems. Such assistance may be
in the form of training programs, ‘circuit rider” ‘programs or other
activities which will facilitate small system compliance.
- 1Q r
7 .(,LFC &-
; -
24 TECHNICAL ASSISTM CE
‘C
- 25 SEC. 11. (a) Section 1442 of the Safe Drinking WTater
26 Act is amended by adding the following new subsection:
1 “(g) The Administrator is authorized to provide techni-I
2 cal assistance to small public water systems to enable such
P 2.1
3 systems to achieve and maintain compliance with national
4 drinking water regulations. Such assistance may include ‘cir-
5 cuit-rider’ programs, training, and preli injnar)’ engineering
6 studies. There are authorized to be appropHated to carry out
7 this subsection, $5,000,000 for each of the fiscal years 1984
8 through 1989.”.
-------
r- p+e (i cv
No. I 2 - k S 44 . I -L,o
TECHNICAL ASSISTANCE FOR sMALL SYSTEMS
Sac 108 Section 1442 of the Safe Drinking Water Act is amended by addin the
following new subsection p 82
“(g) The Administrator is authorized to provide technical assistance to small
public water systems to enable such systems to achieve and Th intain compliance
with national drinking water regulations Such assistance may include ‘circuit-rider’
programs, training, and preliminary enginecring studies There are authorized to be
9 Ppropriated to carry out thia subsection, $10,000,000 for each of the fiscal years
986 through 1989
S e 5 — 0 4.
. ci ‘ o
Section 108
The Committee has determined that technical assistance for
small systems is inadequate. A series of seminars conducted in 1980
by the Conference of State Engineers confirmed that the lack of
technical expertise and system operator apathy are major causes of
small water systems failing to comply with requirements. The final
report on the seminar states that:
small system violations and failings come across as
multiple and frequent and the weight of their causality
falls upon the human factor. Owner and ‘operator’ apathy,
lack of technical know-how, ignorance of State standards
and regulations—these seem to underlie the poor perform-
ance of the small system.’ 8
i’he Committee believes that additional technical assistance will
‘ihance compliance among small systems. Even though there is
some technical assistance available from EPA and the Farmers ‘i
Home Administration to the National Rural Water Association, the
Committee believes that more funding is needed for technical as-
sistance. Section 108 authorizes up to $10 million per year for tech-
nical assistance programs, such as for “circuit-riders,” who could
trouble-shoot systems on a rotating basis, and training and engi-
neering studies.
-------
000283
r, . I I ‘ —
., • A L- C ’- -
i ).
24 TECIINIc 1 L ASSISTANCE FOE SMALL SYSTEMS
25 SEC. 108. Section 1442 of the Safe Drinking Water Ac F
26 is amended by adding the following flew Subsection:
I “(g) The Administrator is authorized to provide techni-
2 cal assistance to small public water systems to enable such r. c 1
3 systems to achieve and maintain compliance with national
4 drinking water regulations. Such assistance may include ‘cir-
5 cuit-rider’ programs, training, and preliminary engineering
6 studies. There are authorized to be appropriated to carry out
7 this subsection, $10,000,000 for each of the fiscal years 1986
3 through 1989.”
-------
°00284
2,7o& LO
trf 3 ? o • 4’
16 T CUflic A8818TAJ4C2 P0K )1ALt BYSTEMH
17 Siw. 104. (a) EPA A8SISTANCE._....(l) Section 1442 is
18 amended by inserting the following new subsection at the end
19 thereof:
20 “(g) The Achninistrator is authorized to provide techni.
21 cii assistance to small public waler systems to enable such
22 s ,’ tems to achieve and maintain compliance with national
23 dciiikiiig waler regalation’,. Such assistaiicn may include ‘cir-
24 c sit-ridu’ programs, traii.iug, and preliiniiiary engineerir g
25 b .tIdi. s. There are authon.•ud to be appropriated to carry out
1 this subsection, 3,0O0 ,OOo for each of the fiscal years 1984
2 through 1987.”.
3 (b) 1LEQuIRI siEuT or PRIMACY.—Section 14 13(a) is
4 amended by adding the following at the end thereof: “The
5 Administrator is also authorized to require, as a condition of
6 a State exercising.primary enforcement responsibility, that
7 the State carry out technical assistance programs (or small
8 public water systems which are substantially similar to the
9 program referred to in section l442(g).”.
-------
000285
S C W A -a p -
SEC. 108. TAMPERING WITH PUBLIC WATER SYSTEMS.
Part D of the Safe Drinking Water Act is amended by adding the
following new section after section 1431:
“SEC. 1432. TAMPERING WITH PUBLIC WATER SYSTEMS.
“(a) TAMPERING—Any person who tampers with a public water - r’ I N Ce’-
system shall be imprisoned for not more than 5 years, or fined in
accordance with title 18 of the United States Code, or both.
“(b) Arrt tp ’r OR THREAT —Any person who attempts to tamper, or - - - c -i PT,
makes a threat to tamper, with a public drinking water system be
imprisoned for not more than 3 years. or fined in accordance with
title 18 of the United States Code, or both.
“(C) CIVIL PENALTY —The Administrator may bring a civil action
in the appropriate United States district court (as determined under C i
the provisions of title 28 of the United States Code) against any
person who tampers, attempts to tamper, or makes a threat to
tamper with a public water system. The court may impose on such
person a civil penalty of not more than $50,000 for such tampering
or not more than $20,000 for such attempt or threat.
“(d) DEFTNrI ’ION w ‘TAMPP.a’.—For purposes of this section, the c7 IU •-J
term ‘tamper’ means—
“(1) to introduce a contammant into a public water system .
with the intention of harming persons; or i A I
“(2) to otherwi interfere with the operation of a public
water system with the intention of harming persons.”.
-------
‘ V
/ ‘ ,2 I L
000286
WC. is& TAMPEPJ 1 vG W177J PUBLIC WATER STSTEM&
Part D of the Safe Drinking Water Act is amended by adding the
f’ilkwing new section after section 1431:
‘R C U32. TAMPERING WITH PUBLIC WA TER SYSTEMS
“(a) TAMPERINO......Any person who tampers with a public water
‘J!tem shall be imprgsone j for not more than 5 years, or fined in
W ordance with title 18 of the United States Code, or both.
‘rb) ATTEMPT OR Th .w.—Any person who attempts to tamper,
“makes a threat to tamper, with a public drinking water system be
Imprisoned for not more than 8 years, or fined in accordance with
IltIp 18 of the Unzterj States Code, or both.
“(c) CIVIL ENALTY....7 Admjnistrrjtor may bring a civil action
In the appropriate United States district court (as determined under
th4!’ provisions of title 28 of the United States Code) against any
I’ rson who tampers, attempts to tamper, or makes a threat to
himnper with a public water system. The court may impose on such
a civil penalty of not more than $50,000 for such tampering
“ not more than $20,000 for such attempt or threat.
‘?d) DEFINfl-IOJv OF 7 jjpf —For purposes of this section, the
t ” flt ‘tamper’ means—
“(1) to introduce a cantcimjrtant into a public water system
with the intention of harming persons; or
“(2) to otherwise interfere with the operation of a public
water system with the intention ofhrirmingpersons.’.
- sac, , i S-. . i )
SECTION 1 O8— sss WITH PUBUC WAT 9YSTKa 1
&nate bilk—The Senate bill provides for penalties for persons
who attempt or threaten to tamper or actually tamper with a
pllbIjc water system. It provides EPA the authority to bring a civil
tjon in United distr ict court against any such per . The
‘OUrt may impose a civil penalty of not more than $50,000 for tam-
P ’nng or not more than $20,000 for an attempt or threat to
nmper. Criminal penalties consist of a fine of not more than
or imPn8onment for not more than 5 years, or both, for
1 nrnpering and a fine of not more than $20,000 or Imprisonment for
not more than 3 years, or both, for attempted or threatened tarn-
P ’nng.
lfou.se arnergjrne,jt_’The House amendment contains the same
provision
Conference agree, _Th conference agreement is to adopt the.
II nguage in both bills and to recognz.ze applicable provisions of the’
l nite States Code:’
-------
f-4 i o & . p tc (. 2 kl-3tO
c:Nc)-. u - a . t w
41 1117 T ’4j’ RI\i, Cliii I’l Ii i Ii C III It ‘I
T0 I..
Part D of the Safe Drinking ‘Xare r • L1 ,f -l q - ,..
amended by adding the fo(tuai g nr tr
tion at the end thereof
I I 7 T I il’ I (p l. I ’. lilt Pt Ill II -4 r it ‘1
yIN . -
‘al TIMPERINC —Any person ho tamaers
Cith a public water s ,lem ‘.haII be Iinud
not more than S50 000 or rnpru’oned (or
not more than 5 year , or butn
ib , Arrgaip’r OR THREAT—Any .person
‘ ho attempts to tamptr or ma)’’, a iPr -ai
to tampers with a puolir liroking .Lnt
• stem be lined not more than S20 000 or
imprisoned for not more than I •,i SN or
hoih -
‘C) Civii. FE tALTY —The Admini jat r
may bring a ci ii) action in the appropriate
United States district court (a.s determined
under the proiisions of title 28 of the
United States Code) against any person who
tampers, attempts to tamper, or makes a
threat to tamper with a public water
s stem The court may impose on such
person a civil penalty of not more than
£50 000 (or Such tampering or not more
than 320 000 for such attempt or threat.
d DErTNr ’rIOg or TAMPER’ —For p’,r.
poses of this section, the term tamper’
means—
U to introduce a contaminant into a
public water system with the Intention of
harming persons, or
(2) to otherwise interfere with the oper•
ation of a public water system with the in.
tention of harming persons..
-(7\ +(C YYV ’v —
0
\ 1 R. P. No. _ J rJ.> t I- Cl(i )
SEC 107 tAMPER IMG WITH PUBLIC WATER SYSTEMS.
Part D of the Safe Drinking Water Act is amended by adding the following new
section at the end thereof
“SEC 1132 TAMPERI’,G WITH P BLIC WATER SYSTEMS
‘ta) TAMPERING —Any person who tampers with a public water system shall be
fined not more than £50 000. or imprisoned for not more than 5 years. or both
“ib ArrgMpr on THREAT —Any person who attempts to tamper, or makes a threat
to tamper, with a public drinking water system be fined not more than £20,000. or
imprisoned for not more than 1 years, or both
‘(c) CIViL PENALTY —The Administrator may bring a civil action in the appropri’
ate United States district court (as determined under the provisions of title 2s of the
United States Code) against any person who tampers, attempts to tamoer, or makes
a threat to tamper with a public water system The court may irr pose on such
person a ciiil penalty of not more .rian £50,000 for such tampering or not more than
$20,000 for such attempt or threat
‘td DEFINITION or TAMPER’ —For purposes of this section, the term tamper’
means—
‘fit to introduce a Contaminant into a public water system with the intention
of harming persons, or
‘t2t to otherwise interfere with the operation of a public water system with
the intention of harming persons
-------
Th i -, t
R. No. - 1 ’ C ’- 1 1 I— 1”4 C tc
-a
000288
Section 107
Under current law there is no Federal prohibition on tampering,
or threatening to tamper, with a public water system. As a result,
the Federal Bureau of Investigations (FBI) has no authority to aid
local or State government tampering investigations. Because tarn-
pering could have severe health consequences, the Committee be-
lieves that a Federal presence is essential to preserve the security
of the nation’s public water supplies.
Under section 107, tampering with a public water system, or
theatening to tamper, would be punishable by imprisonment or
fine. Tampering would include introducing a contaminant into the
water System.
Tampering can result in a $50,000 fine or 5-year sentence, or
both. Attempted tampering a $20,000 fine or a 3 -year sentence or
both.
( 60 c . ,4 4 JJi-O ct U C C
\ \ (-\ 3R °- V 3
Sect o, 207—Tampertng ‘011 )1 public water
syst mi
This sectiOn rov1des for crlmlnij pensi. p I
ties for persons who introduce a cont&mi.
ns.nt Into, or otherwise tamper with, a
public water Iy.te . with the Lntentlon of
harmIng perions Tampering can result In a
150,000 fine and b-year aente e, atiemp ed
tamperIng a *30.000 fIn. and a a . ’eax sen.
tence.
-------
TA. W)cG WITH PUSLIC WATER SYSTEHS I _k t
Sac. V. Part D of the Safe Drinking Water
Act is amended by ).dding the foi low 1 jig new ‘\C ..
section at the end thereof:
‘TA pERflqG WITH PUBLIC WATER SYSTEX 5
‘ . 1433 (a) Any person who tampers
wth a public water system shall be fined
not more than $50000. or Inipnsoned for a i ) -
not more than 5 years, or both, tamper.
“(b) Any person who attempti to
or r .kes a threat to tamper, with a public
drinking water system shall be fined not
more than $20000, or bnprlsoned for not
more than 3 years. or both.
‘(c)TheAdmlnistrstormay bri acivli - 000289
action In the appropriate Umted States dis
Lrtct court (a. 5 determined under the provi-
alon of title 28 of the United States Code)
against any person who tampers, attempts
to tamper, or makes a threat to tamper with
a public water system. The court may
Impose on such person a c! -1I penalty of not
more than $50000 for such tampering or
not more than $20,000 for such attempt or
threat
“(d) For the purposes of th
is section, the
term ‘tamper’ means—
“(1) to Introduce a contaminant Into a
public water s st,ern with the Lnr,enuon of
harming persona, or
(2, to otherwise interfere with the oper.
ation of a public water system with the ln
tention of harming persona,”,
MPgazwu 5 ,1w ri , dIJC WAThRSYST S I S
Szc. 14JL (a) Any person who tamper! with a public water system
shall be fined not more than $50,000, or imprisoned for not more
than S yeats, or both.
(b) Any person who attempts to tamper, or makes a threat to czaç ,
tamper, with a public drinking water system shell be fined not more
than $20,( ’XX), or irnpr soned for not moretha Syears or both. A- .- - —
(c) The Adminiatriltor may bring a cwil action in the appropriate
United States district court (as determined under the provisions of
title 28 of the United States Code) against any per ofl who tamperl ,
attempts to tamper, or makes a threat to tamper with a public water
system. The court may imp4e or. tuck person a civil penalty of not
more than $50,000 for such tampersrig ’or not nwre than $20,( ’X ’X) for
auch attempt or threat.
(d) For the purpcees of this section. the term “tamper” means—
(1) to introduce a contaminant into a public water system
with the intention of harming ersons, ’ or
(2) to otherwise interfere wit the operation of a public water
system with the intention of harming persons.
-------
• a L . 2
1 t P,t’4c. ( Lfj ; 4 L 4 -t- (-I’-)
000290
SECTION 9. TA.MPIRZNG WITH PUBLIC WATER SYSTEMS
SUMMARY
This section provides for penalties for persons who attempt or
threaten to tamper or actuauy tamper with a public water system.
It provides EPA the authority to bring a civil action in United
States district court against any such person. The court may
impose a civil penalty of not more than £50,000 for tampering or
not more than £20,000 for an attempt or threat to tam .er. Crinii-
oat penalties consist of a fine of not more than £50,000 or imprison-
ment for not more than 5 year,, or both, for tampering and a fine
of not more than £20,000 or imprisonment for not more than 3
year,, or both, for attempted or threatened tampering.
DISCUS82ON
Current law does not provide for Federal intervention in actual
or threatened incidences of uiternationaj contamination of public
water systems. The purpose of providing new Federal enforcement
authori 7 is to discourage such tampering activities and to expe&te
the han ling of any cases that do occur.
S y . Ll (I. — 1
TAmRL’tC WITH ? BUC WATU SVST S
Sac 9 Part I) of the Safe Drtnking Water
Act L v amended by addrtg the foL!cv ”g ne .L
sect ori at the end thereof I
T MPLBI’JG WITH FOBiIC WAT SYSTtMS
Sac 1432 Ca) Any person who td.rnper (_ i i.. . -
with a public aater system shail be fuied .
not more than 150 000 or trnpnsoned for
riot more than 5 years or 0t1t
Ib) Any person who attempts to tamper
or makes a threat to tamper. with ft publiC
drinking water system Sh&U be frned not
more than $20 000 or Imprisoned for not
more lhan3years.Orboth •2-’ U
(C) The Ac nInisu1LOr may brthg I clvii
action Lfl the appropr se United States dts-
trlct c*,Ufl ag date rmthed tinder the provl
ilov of Utle 28 of trie United States Code’
s.ga.inst any per n wbo tampers. atterripu
to .mper or mazes a threat to tamper with
a public watec system The inUrt may
Impose on such pereon a c1 U pen.aJty of not
more than $50 000 1 or such mamperti g or
not more than $20 000 for such attempt or
thretL
id) For the pur o es of th section tl’e.
term t&mper rn.an.s .—
tl) to introduce a cotit.amL’iLnt trto a
public water system with tne inteituon of
harming persor or
(2) (0 othewte. interfere 1tft the oper
ation of a puouic water st m with the in-i
tention of harrTung pcr,oris
-------
2- C c L : -r -- - I
c c’ 1 N . .L,4( 5.)2 i £ ‘w
- 1 TAMPERING WITH PUBLIC WATER SYSTEMS
2 ‘SEC. 10.- ‘Part D of the Safe Drinking Waler Act is
3 amended by adding the following new section at 11th end 00 029 1
4 there’of.
5 “TAMPERING WITH PUBLiC WATER SYSTEMS
6 “SEC. 1432. (a) Any person who tampers with a public
7 water system shall be fined not more than $50,000, or im-
S prisoned for not more than 5 years, or both.
9 “(4) Any person who attempts to tamper or makes a
10 threat to tamper with a public drinking water system s/tall
11 be fined not more 1/ian $20,000, or imprisoned for not more
12 than 3 years, or both.
13 “(c) The Administrator may bring a civil action in the
14 appropriate United States district court (as determined under
15 the provisions of title 28 of the United States Code) again t
16 any person who tampers, attempts to tainper or makes a
17 threat to tamper with a public water system. The court may
18 impose on sue/i person a civil penalty of not more than
19 $50,000 for such tampering not more than $20,000 for
20 sue/I attempt or threat.
21 “ d For thc ’ 5uiposes of this section, the term ‘tamper’
22 means—
23 ‘‘(1) to ntroilucc (1 conlamtiwnt into a public
24 wa/cr xysteiii will, I/ ic inIcnIio of lUfl ’fll iW/ /)C7 ’OlIs; 011
to otherwise interfere will, the operation of a P
2 public water system will, I/ic intention of harming per-
3 sons.
-------
‘r\41 t .-Cfl \ )• ,L1 - lO?
S. Lfi
000292
Section 10. Tampering with public water systems.
Current law does not provide for Federal intervention in actual
or threatened incidences of international contamination of public
water systems A Federal presence would be helpful in enhancing
protection for community water supplies from criminal tampering.
Section 10 provides for criminal penalties for persons who attempt
to or threaten to tamper with a public water system with the in-
,tention of harming persons. Tampering can result in a fine of
$50,000 and/or 5 years imprisonment while attempted tampering
can result in a $20,000 fine and/or 3 years imprisonment
-------
AA - tO ‘
2 M ,Wt Grw .) 24 (I9 -{ ’
22 . TAMPERING WITH PUBLIC WATER SYSTEMS
23 SEC. 10. Part D is amended by adding the following
24 new section at the end thereof; 0 0 02 93
1 “TAMPERING WITH PUBLIC WATER SYSTEMS
2 “SEC. 1432. (a) Any person who tampers with a public
3 water system shall be fined not more than $50,000, or im- p 2
4 prisoned for not more than 5 years; or both.
5 “(b) Any person who attempts to tamper, or makes a
6 threat to tamper, with a public drinking water system be
7 fined not more than $20,000, or imprisoned for not more
8 than 3 years, or both.
9 “(c) The Administrator may bring a civil action in the
10 appropriate United States district court (as determined under
11 the provisions of title 28 of the United States Code) against
12 any person who tampers, attempts, to tamper, or makes a
13 threat to tamper with a public water system. The court may
14 impose on such person a civil penalty of not more than
15 $50,000 for such tampering or not more than $20,000 for
16 such attempt or threat.
17 “(d) For purposes of this section, the term ‘tamper’
18 means’
19 “(1) to introduce a contaminant’ into a public
20 water system ,with the intention of harming persons; or
21 “(2) to otherwise interfere with the operation of a
22 public water system with the intention of harming per-
23 Sons.”.
-------
000294
Cv -rn,r t. J4 ,cc1 -l
Q3L
TAMPERING WITH PUBLIC WATER SYSTEMS
SEc 107 Part D of the Safe Drinking Water Act is amended by adding the follow.
ing new sectiojI at the end thereof’
“TAMPERING WITH PLJBUC WATER SYSTEMS
C..A- iLçkL cL Co —
R%R p, o. c 11 . OL4,
C 1 - 2 ) (4 ..I ,o
“SEC 1432 (a) Any person who tampers with a public water system shall be fined
more than $50,000, or imprisoned for .not more than 5 years, or both
‘Ib) Any person who attempts to tamper, or makes a threat to tamper, with a
public drinking water system be fined not more than $20,000, or imprisoned for not
more than 3 years, or both
“(c) The Administrator may bring a civil action in the appropriate United States
district court (as determined under the provisions of title 28 of the United States
Code) against any person who tampers, attempts to tamper, or makes a threat to
tamper with a public water system The Court may impose on such person a civil
penalty of not more than $50,000 for such tampering or not more than $20,000 for
such attempt or threat
‘(d) For purposes of this section, the term ‘tamper’ means—
“(1) to introduce a contamlnajit into a public water system with the intention
of harming persons, or
“(2) to otherwise interfere with the operation of a public water system with
the intention of harming persons.”. --
Zc(
R, No.
Section 107
Under current law there is no Federal prohibition on tampering,
or threatening to tamper, with a public water system. As a result,
the Federal Bureau of Investigations (FBI) has no authority to aid
local or State government tampering investigations Because tam-
pering could have severe health consequences, the Committee be-
lieves that a Federal presence is essential to preserve the security
of the nation’s public water supplies.
Under section 107, tampering with a public water system, or
threatening to tamper, would be punishable by imprisonment or
fine. Tampering would include introducing a contaminant into the
water system.
Tampering can result in a $50,000 fine or 5 year sentence, or
both. Attempted tampering a $20,000 fine or a 3 -year sentence or
both.
-------
22. TAMPER1N( WITH, PUBLIC \vATE1 SYSTI MS
23 Si c. 107. Part D of the Safe Drinldng Water ct is 000295
24 amended by adding the follo lug new scction at the end F
25 thereof :
1 “TAMPERING WITH PUBLIC \VATER SYSTEMS
2 “SEC. 1432. (a) Any person v ho tampers with a public p.
3 water system shall be fined not more than $50,000, or im-
4 prisoned for not more than 5 years, or both.
5 “(b) Any person who attempts to tamper, or makes a
6 threat to tamper, with a public drinking water system be
7 fined not more than $20,000, or imprisoned for not more
8 than 3 years, or both.
9 “(c) The Administrator may bring a civil action in the
10 appropriate United States district court (as determined under
11 the provisions of title 28 of the United States Code) against
12 any person who tampers, attempts to tamper, or makes a
13 threat to tamper with a public water system. The court ma
14 impose on such person a civil penalty of not more than
15 $50,000 for such tampering or not more than $20,000 for
16 such attempt or threat.
17 ‘‘(d) For imrposes of this section, the term ‘tamper’
18 means—
19 ‘‘(1) to introduce a contaminant into a 1 )Ubhie
20 water System \VitIl the intent ion of harming j 11 : or
21 ‘‘(2) lo ot1ier e interfere \\ itli the opCt:it loll ci a
22 public \V: 1tC 1 v I’in \\ iUi I li illielItiOll of lUlfl1lilI J)(’l-
Soils.’’.
-------
“
‘- %‘‘ 14R. (5
(t 3)
16 TAMPERING WITH PUBLIC WATER SYQTEMS 0 0 02 96
17 SEc. 105. Part 1) is amended by adding the following
18 new section at the end thereo(: F’
19 “TAMPERING WITH PUBLIC WATER BYSTEMB
20 “SEc. 1432. (a) Any person who endangers the health
21 of persona by knowingly— -
22 “(1) introducing any contaminant into a public
23 water system, or
24 “(2) tampering with a public waler system
1 shall be lined not inure than $50,000, or imprisoiiuiieiic (or
2 not more than 5 years, or both. LI
3 “(b) Any person who attempts to endanger, or iiiakcs a
4 throat to endanger, the health of persons by knowingly—
5 “(1) introducing any Contaminant into a public
6 waler system, or
7 “(2) tampering with a public waler system
8 shall be fined not more than $20,000, or imprisonment (or
9 not more than 3 years, or both.
10 “(c) The Administrator may bring a civil action in the
11 appropriate United States district court (as determined under
12 the provisions of title 28 of the United States Code) against
13 any person who endangers, attempts to endanger, or makes a
14 threat to endanger, the health of persons or otherwise ren-
15 ders the water unfit for human consumption by—
16 “(1) the introduction of any contaminant into a
17 public water system, or
18 “(2) tamperIng with a public water system.
19 The court may impose on such person a civil penalty of not
20 more than $50,000 fur each day that such endangerment or
21 inuhility to consume fhia water c ists.”.
-------
SEC. 109. LEAD FREE DRINXNG WATER. A
(a) SAFE DRINKING WATER Acr AMENDMENTS.—
(1) IN. GENERAL.—Part B of the Safe Drinking Water Act is
amended by adding the following new section at the end thereof: CV ’v4&2- ’ C’JhA .I- .
SEC. 1417. PROHIBITION ON USE OF LEAD PIPES. SOLDER. AND FLUX. a , ,,_ — 10 )
“(a) IN GENERAL —
“(1) PROHIBrrION.—Any pipe. solder, or flux, which is used
after the enactment of the Safe Drinking Water Act Amend-
ments of 1986. in the installation or repair of— 1.) 0 y 9 7
-- “(A) any public water system, or
“(B) any plumbing in a residential or nonresid ’ ritial facil-
ity providing water for human consumption which is con-
nected to a public water system,
shall be lead free (within the meaning of subsection (d)) This
paragraph shall not apply to leaded joints necessary for the
repair of cast iron pipes
“ (2) PUBLIC NOTICE REQLIREMENTS — -
“(A) IN GENERAL.—Each public water system shall iden-
tify and provide notice to persons that may be affected b
lead contamination of their dnnking water where suc
contamination results from either or both of the following:
“(i) The lead content in the construction materials of
the public water distribution system.
“i1 Corroewity of the water supply sufficient to
cause leaching of lead.
The notice shall be provided in such manner and form as
may be reasonably required by the Administrator. Notice
under this paragraph shall be provided notwithstanding the
absence of a violation of any national drinking water
standard.
“(B) CoN-ltN-rs o ’ NcYrIcE.—Notice under this paragraph
shall provide a clear and readily understandable expla-
nation of—
“(i) the potential sources of lead in the drinking
water,
“(ii) potential adverse health effects,
“(111) reasonably available methods of mitigating
known or potential lead content in drinking water,
“(iv any steps the system is taking to mitigate lead,
content in drinking water, and
‘(v) the necessity for seeking alternative water sup-
plies. if any. . r j ç&c
‘Th) STATE ENFORCEMENT —
“(1) ENFORCEMENT OF PRORIBmON —The requirements of
subsection (aXl) shall be enforced in all States effective 24
months after the enactment of this section. States shall enforce
such requirements through State or local plumbing codes, or
such other means of enforcement as the State may determine to
be appropriate.
“(2) ENFORCEMENT OF PUBLIC NOTICE REQUIRKMKN’TS.—The
requirements of subsection (aX2) shall apply in all States effec-
tive 24 months after the enactment of this sectioti.
“(c) PENALTIES.—If the Adimnjstrator determines that a State is
not enforcing the requirements of subsection (a) as required pursu-
ant to subsection (b), the Administrator may withhold up to a
percent of Federal funds available to that State for State program
grants under section 1443(a).
“(d) D ’INmoN OF L o FREE —For purposes of this section, the D
term ‘lead free —
‘(1) when used with respect to solders and flux refers to I
solders and flux containing not more than 0 2 percent lead, and
“(2) when used with respect to pipes and pipe fittings refers to
pipes and pipe fittings Containing not more than 8 0 percent
lead.”.
(b) NOTIFiCATION TO STATES —The Administrator of the Environ-
rfiental Protection Agency shall notify all S :es with respect to the
requirements of section 1411 of the Public Health Service Act within
90 da s after the enactment of this Act
(C) flAN ON LEAD WATER PIPES. SOLDER. AND FLLX i x VA AND HUD
INSURED OR ASSISTED PROPERTh —
ill PROHIBITION —The becretar of Housing and Urban De el-
opment and the Administrator of tne \ eteran .Adrninistration
ma not insure or guaranteeamort age or furnish assistance
-------
coc OOO29
ntains a potable water system unless such system uses only
lead free pipe, solder, and flux.
(2) DKFINFI ’ION or z. razz.—For purposes of paragraph (1)
the term “lead free”—
(A) when used with respect to solders and flux refers to
solders and flux contrnnirig not more than 0.2 percent lead,
and
(B) when used with respect to pipes and pipe fittings
refers to pipes and pipe fittings containing not more than
8 0 percent lead.
(3) Emcmrz DATE—Paragraph (1) shall become effective 24
months after the enactment of this Act. -
(d) L Sou,ga AS * HAZARDOUS SJss’rAlrcz.—
(1) IN GENRL4L.—Sect on 2(f l) of the Federal Hazardous
Substances Act is amended by adding the following at the end
thereof: —
Ia(E) Any solder which has a lead content in excess of 0.2
percent.”.
(2) LABELING —Section 4 of the Federal Hazardous Substances
Act is amended by adding the following at the end thereof:
“(k) The introduction or delivery for introduction into Interstate
commerce of any lead solder which has a lead content in excess of
0.2 percent which does not prominently display a wa.rrung Label
stating the lead content of the solder and warning that the use of
such solder in the making of joints or fittings in any private or
public potable water supply slstem Is prohibited.”.
(3) EFFECTIVE DArE —The amendments made by thia subsec-
tion shall become effective 24 months after the enactment of
this Act.
-------
LL’ID BAN
Mr. President. before turning to the
subject of ground water protection in
the conlerence report. I wish to review
one other Item directly related to the
activities of the drinking water pro.
gram. ,When the Senate considered
and adopted amendments to Super-
fund. Senator BRADLEY sponsored an
amendment that would ban the use of
lead pipes and solder for use in drink.
ing water distribution systems. This is
a very important amendment and I am
pleased that, we could include the
Bradley amendment here in the Safe
Drinking Water Act Amendments of
1986 tather than wait for action on
lead in drinking water supply systems
as a part of Superfund.
Lead which leaches from solder and
pipes has become a public health con-
cern in several States and steps are
being taken in many communities to
deal with this public health threat. A
part of the Bradley amendment which
we include here directly bans the use
of lead solder or lead pipe in any con-
struction which Is to be a part of a
drinking water Supply s stezn. This
ban applies not only to materials used
in constructing the drinlu.ng water
system owned by the public v.ater sup-
pl er, but also to the pipes and solder
used in the construction of new homes
and commercial buildings. L 1
Since EPA is not experienced and
probably not capable of effectively en-
forcing a ban in buildings under con.
struction or repair this legislation in.
cludes a special enforcement provision
which has created some confusion and
needs claiification, It is not the inten-
tion of the conferees that EPA enforce
the ban directly on builders and con.
tractors. The ban is to be enforced
only through State and local building
and plumbing codes. It Is our intention
that State and local governmen
make the modifications in codes and
reguialio necessary to effectuate the
ban as soon as possible, And we make
the ban in Federal law effective inline-
diately for that purpose. But realizing
that It will take some time for State
arid local go ernjnents to modify their
lays, e do not place any sanction
against a State for failure to enforce I
the ban until 2 years alter the date of
enactment of this legislation. If at
that point a State has not made the
changes in its regulations, the Adrnin-
istrator is authorized to withhold a
portion of the State’s drinking water
grant as a sanction,
- tV 4 ?,tA 1 C ? . 2)
Li
P. c;
• 3()
S YtA t - P fl 0 C
kioc
S. S 2LF ot(d e {.
000299
i3 ..
One element of this important bill is . L 2. 9 ‘ 3
a pros ision that I proposed which bans
the use of lead and lead solders in
drinking water systems. This simple
change will begin- to correct a wide.
spread and long Ignored heaiLh
hazard. , -
Mr. President, the problem with lead
Contamination was brought very close
to home for me when New Jersey
health officials found lead leaching
into drinking water on Ocean County
in amounts exceeding the EPA stand-
ard. However, this is truly a national
problem. A survey of State health
agencies resealed that 22 out of 29
States contacted have experienced dif-
ficulties with lead leaching into drink-
ing water. The States not reporting
any problems also admitted to not
having performed extensive sampling.
My office questioned States from
Maine to Texas to California. The
States of Oregon, Wisconsin. Minneso-
ta. New York, Massachusetts and
Delaware who have already baru-ied
the use of lead solder and pipes in po-
table water systems. Other countries
have also recognized the dangers of
lead contamination and Denmark,
West Germany, Great Britain and the
Netherlands all prohibiting the use of
lead in drinking water systems.
We place great emphasis, as a
Nation, on sale drinking water Often,
safe drinking water requires the use of
expensive measures such as the adth-
tiori of antlcorrosmve chemicals or ex-
pensive purification methods. The pro-
hibition of lead in drinking water sys-
tems represents a simple, Inexpensive,
preventative step we can take to avoid
further contamination of our drinking
water supplies. My amendment does
not ask anyone to rip up old plumbing i
systems. Rather, the amendment tries
to arrest the problem before it pro-
gresses further by concentrating on,
new construction and repair of exist-
ing plumbing.
-------
000300
orL k C - c.
Co F, R , N .
8EC. 109. LEAD FREE DRiNKiNG WA 7I&
(a) SAFE DRINKING WA TER Ac”r AMENDMENTS.—
(1) IN GENERAL —Part B of the Safe Drinking Water Act is
amended by adding the following new section at the end there-
of
SEC. 1417. PROHIBITION ON USE OF LEAD PIPES SOLDE& AND FLUX.
“(a) IN GENE,ttj... —
“0) PR0rnBJTJON._Any pipe, solder, or flux, which is used
after the enactment of the Safe Drinking Water Act Amend-
ments of1986 , in the in.stall.at ion or repair of—
‘(A) any public water system, or
any plumbing ia a residential or nonresidential fa-
cility providing water for human consumption which is
connected to a public water system,
shall be lead free (within the meaning of subsection (d)). This
paragraph shall not apply to leaded joints necessary for the
repair of cast iron pipes.
“(2) PUBLIC NOTICE REQUREMENy ...
“(Al IN GENERAL—E,a,h public water system shall identi-
and provid, notice to persons that may be affected by
Lead contamination of their drinking water where such con-
tamination results from either or both of the following: -
“(1) The lead content in the construct ion materials of
th€ public water distribution system..
-------
“(ii) Corrosivity of the water supply sufficient to
cause leaching of lead. -
The notice shall be provided in suc)1 manner and form as
may be reasonably required by the Administrator. Notice
under this paragraph shall be provided notwithstandir g
the absence of a violation of any national drinking water
standard.
“(B) CONTENTS OF NOTICE.—Notj( under this paragraph
shall provide a clear and readily und iandcbl.e explana-
tion of—
‘ ‘i) the potential sources of lead in the drinking
water,
‘Vii)potential aduerse health effects,
“ (hi) reasonably available methods of mitigating
known or potential lead content in drinking water,
“(iv) any steps the system is taking to mitigate lead
content in drinking water, and
“(u) the necessity for seeking altet-native water sup-
plies, if any.
“(b) STATE ENFORCEMENT.—
“(1) ENFORCEMENT OF PROHJBJ’TION. —The requirements of
subsection (aXi) shall be enforced in oil States effective 24
nwnth.g after the enactment of this section. States shall enforce
such requlremen through State or local plumbing codes, or
such other means of enforcement as the State may determine to
be appropriate.
“(2) ENFORCEMENT OF Puarjc NOTICE PSQUIREMEN7 . —The re-
quirernents of subsection (aX2) shall apply in all States effective
24 month.g after the enactment of this section.
“(c) PENALTIES —If the Administrator determines that a State is
not enforcing the requlre n of subsection (a) as required pursu-
ant to subsection (b), the Administrator may withhold up to 5 per-
cent of Federal funds available to that State for State program
grants under section 1 4.43(a).
“(d) DEFINITION OF LEAD FREE.—For purposes of this section, the
term ‘lead free’—
“(1) when used with respect to solders and flux refers to sol-
ders and flux containing not more than 0.2 percent lead, and
“(2) when used with respect to pipes and pipe fittings refers to
pipes and pipe fittings containing riot more than 8.0 percent
(b) NOTIFICATION TO STATES—The Administrator of the Environ.
mental P otection Agency shall notify all States with respect to the
requirements of section 1417 of the Public Health Service Act within
90 days after the enactment o [ thi.s Act.
(c) B v ON LEAD WATER PIPES, SOLDEn, AND FLUX IN VA AND
HUD INSURED OR ASSISTED PROPERTY—.
(1) PROHIRITION. —7 Secretory of Housing and Urban De-
veloprrzent and the Administrator of the Veterans’ Adminigtrvj.
tion may not insure çr guarantee a mortgage or furnish assist-
ance with respect to newly constructed residential property
which contains a potable water system unless such system uses
only lead free pipe, solder, and flux.
000301
-------
(2) DEFINITION OF LE 4D FREE.—For purposes of paragraph (1)
theterm “Lead free”—, 000302
(A) when used with respect to 8olders and flux refers to
solders and flux containing not more than 0.2 percent lead,
and
(B) when used with respect to pipes and pipe fittings
refers to pipes and pipe fittings containing-not more than
8.Opervent lead.
(3) EFFEC-rrVE DATE.—Parngruflh (1) shall become effective 24
months after the enactment of this Act.
(d) LEAD SOLDER AS A IÜZA RDOUS SUBSTANCE.—
(1) IN GENERAL—Section 2(fXl) of the Federal Hazardous
Substances Act is amended by adding the following at the end
the reof .
‘?E) Any solder which has a lead content in escess of 0.2 per.
cent.’
(2) LkBEIJNG.—SectiOn 4 of the Federal Hazardous Sub-
stances Act is amended by adding the following at the end
thereof:
“(i) The introduction or delivery for introduction into interstate
commerce of any Lead solder which has a Lead content in escess of
0.2 percent which does not prominently display a warning label stat-
in the lead content of the solder and warning that the use of such
8Older in the making of joints or fittings in any private or public
potable water supply system is prohibited. ‘
(3) EFFECTIVE DATE.—T/Le cm.endrn.ents made by this subsec-
tion shall become effective 24 months after the enactment of
this Act.
SECrION 109—LEAD-FREE DRINKING WATER
Conference agreement.—The conference agreement adopts a pro-
vision similar to that passed with the Superfund bill with both 1 0
technical and minor substantive changes. The purpose of the
amendment is to eliminate the future use of lead in water 8upply
distribution systems and to notify persons that may be at risk from C N \ P’ cap. N o.
lead in existing systems. The amendment establishes a Federal pro-
hibition or ’ the use of lead (defined as solders and flux containing C c 1 -j
more than 0.2 percent lead, and pipes and pipe fittings containing
more than 8.0 percent lead) in any pipe, solder, or flux, which is c - - -.
used after the date of enactment in the installation or repair of
any public water system or any plumbing in a residential or non- - c ( \
residential facility, providing water for hiimnn consumption, which
is connected to a public water system.
The lead use prohibition is effective immediately. Because en-,
forcement will require States to modify their State or local plumb-
ing codes or apply other means, a period of 24 months is provided
before States are required to enforce the prohibition.
If the Administrator determines that a State is not enforcing the
p rohibition, the Administrator may withhold up to 5 percent ofj
Federal funds available to that State under section l44 (a) of the
Act. The bill also provides that the Secretary of Housing and
Urban Development and the Administrator of Veterans’ Affairs
may not insure or guarantee a mortgage or furnish assistance with
respect to newly constructed residential property, which contains a
potable water system, untes8 it uses only lead-free pipe, solder, and /) ,
flux. The bill also amends the Federal Hazardous Substances Act
to require a warning on any lead solder in excess of 0.2 percent
lead.
The bill requires the Administrator to promulgate regulations to
require public water systems to identify and provide notice to per-
sons that may be affected by lead contamination of their dnnking
water because of lead content i the construction materials .of the
public distribution system or because of corroeivity of the water
supply sufficient to cause leaching of lead. Notice to such persons is
to include specified types of information including a statement of
the generic adverse effects of lead on human health as provided in
EPA regulations.
-------
-.
s ç ; 000303
A BILL
To require pipes, solder, and flux in drinking water supply
systems to be lead free, and for other purposes.
1 Be it enacted b j the Senate and House of Representa-
2 fives of the United States of America in Congress assembled,
(fl.j
3 SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.
4 This Act may be cited as the “Lead Free Drinking
5 Water Act”.
6 SEC. 2. SAFE DRINKING WATER ACT AMENDMENTS
7 (a) IN GENERAL.—Part B of title XIX of the Public
8 health Service Act is amended by adding the following new
9 section at the end thereof:
-------
000304
1 “SEC. 1417. PROHIBITION ON USE OF LEAD PIPES, SOLDER,
2 AND FLUX.
3 “(a) IN GENERAL.—
4 “(1) PBOmBITIoN. Any pipe, solder, or flux,
5 which is used after the date of enactment of this sec-
6 tion in the installation or repair of either of the follow-
7 ing shall be lead free (as defined in subsection (d)):
8 “(A) Any public water system.
9 “(B) Any plumbing in a residential or non-
10 residential facility ‘providing water for human con-
11 sumption which is connected to a public water
12 system. -
13 This paragraph shall not apply to leaded joints neces-
14 sary for the repair of cast iron pipes.
15 “(2) PUBLIC NOTICE OF ADVERSE EFFECTS.—
16 Each community public water system shall provide
17 notice, developed in consultation with the Administra-
18 tor, to all users of the system with respect to both of
19 the following:
20 “(A) The adverse health effects of exposure
21 to lead, including a description of those popula-
22 tions vh h may be particularly sensitive to such
23 exposure.
24 “(B) Any means reasonably available to such
25 ‘ users for mitigating lead expo ure from drinking
-------
0003Q5
P ’ 3
1 water, taking into consideration the need to jcon- I
2 serve water.
3 “(b) STATE ENFORCEMENT.— -
4 “(1) ENFORCEMENT OF PROHIBITION._The re-
5 quirements of subsection (a)(1) shall apply to all States
6 effective 24 months after the date of the enactment of
7 this section. States shall enforce such requirements
8 through State or local plumbing codes, or such other
9 means of enforcement as the State may determine to
10 be appropriate.
11 “(2) ENFORCEMENT OF PtTBLIC NOTICE RE-
12 QtIIREMENTS.—The requirements of subsection (a)(2)
13 shall apply to all States effective 24 months after the
14 date of the enactment of this section.
15 “(c) PENA.LTIES.If the Administrator determines that
16 a State is not enforcing the requirements of subsection (a) as
17 required pursuant to subsection (b), the Administrator may
18 commence a civil action under section 1414(b).
19 “(d) DEFINITION OF LE 1 u FREE.—FOr purposes of
20 this section, “lead free” means solders and flux containing
21 not more than 0.2 percent lead, and pipes and pipe fittings
22 containing not more than 8.0 percent lead.”.
23 (b) CIVIL ACTION—Section 1414(b) of the Public
24 Health Service Act is amended as follows:
-------
(i) In the matter preceding paragraph (1), insert
“or with section 1417” aftef”or 1416”.
(2) In paragraph (1), insert “or under section
1417” before “, or”.
(c) NOTIFICATION TO STATES.—The Administrator of
the Environmental Protection Agency shall notify all Staths
with respect to the requirements of the amendments made by
this section within 90 days after the date of the enactment of
this Act.
SEC. 3. BAN ON LEAD WATER PIPES, SOLDER, AND FLUX IN
VA AND HUD INSURED OR ASSISTED-
PROPERTY. -
(a) PROruBITI0N._(1) The S cretary of Housing and
Urban Development and the Adinin strator of Veterans’ Af-
fairs may not insure or guarantee a mortgage or furnish as-
sistance with respect to newly constructed residential proper-
ty which contains a potable water S stem unless such system
uses only lead free pipe, solder, and flux.
(2) For purposes of paragraph (1), “lead free” means
solders and flux containing not moi than 0.2 percent lead,
and pipes and pi e fittings containing not more than 8.0 per-
cent lead.
(b) EFFECTIVE DATE.—Subsectjon (a) shall become ef-
fective 24 months after the date of the nactment of this Act.
000306
z.f
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
-------
000307
1 SEC. 4. LEAD SOLDER AS A HAZARDOUS SUBSTANCE. e
2 (a) IN GENERAL.—SeCtion 2(0(1) of the Federal Haz-
3 ardous Substances Act is amended by adding at the end
4 thereof the following:
5 “(E) Any solder which has a lead content in
6 excess of 0.2 percent.”.
7 (b) LABELING.—Sectjon 4 of the Federal Hazardous
8 Substances Act is amended by adding at the end thereof the
9 following:
10 “(k) The introduction or delivery for introduction into
11 interstate commerce of any lead solder which has a lead con-
12 tent in excess of 0.2 percent which does not prominently dis-
13 play a warning label stating the lead ‘ ntent of the solder
14 and warning that the use of such sold r in the making of
15 joints or fittings in any private or public . otable water supply
16 system is prohibited.”.
17 (c) EFFECTIVE DATE.—The amendments made by this
18 section shall become effective 24 months ifter the date of the
19 enactment of this i t.
-------
I 2 -Z3
(c L c1L,
c 7 ) - c : )
‘Invi-
- - SHORT’rrras - -
Scc 301. This title may be cited as the
“Lead Free Drinking Water Act”. -
SA’E DRINKING WATER ACT AME’iDMeNTS
Sac. 302. (a) L’i GE iEp L—Fart B of Title
XIX of the Public Health Service Act is
amended by adding ats the end thereof the
following new section: --
“PROHiBITION ON USE OF LEAD PIPES. SOLDER.
AND FLUX -
Sac 1417 (a)XyGEN L ,,_.
••(l) PROSe! rioN,—Any pipe, solder or
flux, which is used alter the date of enact-
ment of the SDWA of 1985. in toe installa-
tion or repair of— -
“(A any public water system, or
“(B) any plurribing In a residential or non
residential facility pros-iding water for
human consumption which is connected to a
public water system,
must be lead free(a.sdefined insubseetion.Cd
This paragraph shall not apply to leaded
Joints necessary for the repair of cast 1mm
pipes.
• (2) Pustic NOTICE OP ADVERSE ZPFFC’ S,—
Each community public water system shall
provide notice, developed in consultation
e.ith the Administrator to all tisers of the
system vith respect to—
‘(A) the adverse health effects of e’po-
sure to lead including a de cnption of those
populations ahuch may be particularly aen-
sitise to such e pocure, and
(B) any means reasonably asailable to
such users for nhiLig Ling lead ex jejsure
from drinking ater, taking into consider
ation the need toconser e i ater.
(b) STAT! E oRcE ’r —
“(1) Ee,osctMetiT OF PsOiiiaiTro, —The
requirements 01 ciibs tuon (s)(I) shall
apply to all States effecti e 24 months after
the date of the enactment of this section.
States hali enforce siih reqtiircmnelits
through State or local plumbing Codes.,- or
suth other mean, of enforcement, as the
State may determine to be appropriate,
“(2) E oncr’iacr or PUBLIC NOTICE nc .
QUIREMENTS —The requirements of subsee .
tlon (a)(2) shall apply to all States effective
24 months after the date of the enactinent
of this section, - .
(c) PENALIIES.—If the Adjflirustrjtor de-.
termuies that a State is not enforcing the
requirements of subsectiors (a) as regui ed
pUrSuant tO’ subsection (b), the Administra-
tor may commence a cit it action under see-
lion 1414(b). ,
‘td DEPiNrrIog or LEAD FREE —For 1r•
poses of this section, ‘lead free’ means sol.
ders and flu’c containing not more than 02
percent lead, and pipes and pipe fittings
containuig not more th.an 60 percent lead.,”.
(b) CIVIL Acuoie—Secoon 1414(b) of the
Public Realtb Service Act is amended—’-- —
1 in the- matter preceding paragrapt (1);
by inserung “. or aftb.section,14j7; after
“0r1416 ’,and .. .• .
(2) In paragraph(1), by Inserting :or
under section 1417” alter ”sjibsectfon (a)”,
(C) Norrncx-rioic T ST Tss.—The Admiri.
Istrator- of the Environmental Protection’
Agency shall riotLfy alt States with respect
to the requirements of section 1411 of the
Public Health Service Act withln 90 days-i
after the date of the enactment ot this Act.-
BAN ON LEAD WATEE FIFES. 50LD E, AND FLUX
IN Vs A?(D i (UD INSURED ORASSISTEDPROPEI’
Sac, 303. (a) PBoaiBl-r loie —U) The Seers—
tary of Housing and. Urban Development.
and the Administrator of Veterans’. Affairs
may not insure or guarantee a mortgage or
furnish assistance aitb respect to nealy
constructed residential property tshich con-
tau-is a potable water system unless such
system uses only lead free pipe, solder, and
flu’c, -- - . .. - • . - - .
(2) For purposes of paragraph U), ‘lead.
free’ means solders and flux containing riot
more than 0 2 percent lead, and pipes and
pipe fittings containing not more than 6 0
percent lead.,
(b) Errzc-’rxva DArE.—Subsection (a) shall
become effectiie 24 months after the date
of the enactment of this Act
LEAD SOt. ER AS A H Z%RDOUS SUBSTANCE
SEC. 304. (a) 1i GINaNA.1_—Sect ion 2U)tl)
of the Federal Hazardous Substances Act is
amended by adding at the end thereof the
foltotting
“CE) Any solder which ha, a lead content
in excess of 02 percenL.
(b Laeai.z ec.—Sectiori 4 of the Federal
Hasardous Substances Act is amended by
adding at the end thereof the follo wg:
1k) The introduction or deli ery for in-
troduction into interstate commerce of arty
Ie’sd solder ahich has a lead content in
e’cczan of 02 percent ahich does not promI-
ne ’itly display a warning label stating the-
l d content of the solder and warning that
the use of such solder in the making of
Joints or fittings in any prit ate or public po-
table vater supply stem is prohibited.
(ci EPCECTIVE Dara,—TFie amendments I
n l4de b} this section shalt become effettue
24 months alter the date of the enactment
of this Act -
Mr BRADLEY. Mr. President, the
amendment I send to the desk IS Ofl
bchalf of myself and my colleague
from New Jersey, Mr. LAtJTCNRERC.
The purpose oI the amendment is to
pret cut further lead cont iminatioi1 of
our Nation a drinking ttater.
Mr President, te hate long been
a-aare that lead is a dangerous sub-.
stance uhlch seriously threatens
000308
L . 2\
1
-------
i
p . I%L L2.Q 00309
OliOlic health. But we are only begin-
ig to learn of the full health ha.z-
is associated with elevated lead
.. ..vels in the blood. The risk of high.
blood pressure in adults, Impairment
of the central nervous system, retarda.
4ion of learning ability in children,
and birth defects all argue for prompt
action to reduce the level of lead In
Our environment; and, that is precisely
what this amendment will accomplish.
Most of the recent public attentjon -
ha.s focused on the lead content In ga.s-
oline as a source of environment,aj con-
tarninatlon. I have spoken many times
on the Senate- floor on the most eff 1-
dent manner in which-to address this
lssue. But another source of - lead
merit.s our’ attention a.s weU—that of
lead in our drinking water. In fact, a
1983 EPA report entitled “The Health
Hazards Associated With the Use of
Lead To Transmit Drinking Water”
clearly describes,- a -“correlation be-
tween. high concentrations of lead in
drinking water and high blood levels,”
The-report goes on to state that lead
Ingested from water can be a sigruft-
cant source of lead in humans, “ -
Therefore, Mr. President. we know
that lead is a health hazard, We also
know that If lead Is in drinking-water
it will end up in our bloodstream. But
how does- it get into our water and
- Aat can we do to stop this? The EPA
s concluded that lead enters drink-
water primarily as a result o the
corrosive action of water on pipes, fit-
tings. and solder. Several factors come
Into play. Two of the most important
being the age of the plumbing system
and the corrosiveness of the water.
The highest levels are found in new’
systems with corrosive water that is al-
lowed to stand for several hours, For
example, the first severn_i draws of
water In the morning would be most
Contaminated. However, levels i tt
excess of the maximum contaminant
level are not restricted to such circurn-
stances.
How wldespre is this problem? Mr.
President. I first learned of this prob-
lem because in ray home State of New
Jersey we have Confirmed cases of lead
leaching Into drinking water In Ocean
County in amounts exceeding the EPA
standard. However, it Is important to
note that this is truly a national prob-
lem. An informal survey performed by
members of my staff revealed that 22
out of 29 States Contacted have experi-
enced difficulties with lead leaching
into drinking water. The States not re-
porting any problems also admitted to
not having performed extensise sam-
pling. We questioned States from
Maine to Texas to Caiifornia. Leading
the way In combatino- this problem are
e States of Oregon, Wisconsin Mm.
ota. New York. Massachusetts, and
‘.taware ho have already banned
,.,e use of lead solder and pipes in p0.
table water systems. The States of
California and Virginia are considering
similar leg,siatton and. I add, they
‘have confidently predicted passage of
such legislation. If EPA follo s the
recámejidatioi àf the National Acad-
emy of Sciences and reduces the level
of lead acceptable in drinking water.
as they are expected to do, the-
number of States which have contami-
nation problems is sure to increase. In
fact, the scope of this problem is inter-
national in nature with Dejimark,
West Germany, Great Britain, and the
Netherlands all prohibiting the use of
lead lit drinking water systems.
Mr. President, now we return to the
critical question, What Can. be done to
rectify this problem? My amendment
Is a simple and effective vehicle for
dealing with this problem. It attacks
the Issue from four vantage points,
that of public water systems, private
wells, new- home construction, and
plumbing repairs . First, - It requires
that States ban the use of lead solder
and pipes In any new construction or’
repair of public water systems. Failure-
to implement such a ban could result
in civil action by the Adnuiiistrator
against the State.. Second. it prohibits
the Issuance of FHA mortgages to any
newly constructed home which utilizes
lead pipes or solder in it.s water deliv-
ery lines. Third. it mandates the Con-
sumer Product Safety Commission to
require a warning label on all packages
of lead solder in order to protect un-
suspecting homeowners who opt to
perform some plumbing tasks on their
own. Fourth, it requires that comii-iu-
nity public water systems carry out an
information campaign to make people
aware of the potential hazards associ-
ated with lead in drinking water and
the steps being taken to avoid further
problems. - -
Mr. President, alternatives to lead
solder exist. They are distinguishable
from lead solder and are equally if not
better able to provide an effective seal
without adverse health consequences.
Cost is not an issue since using alter-
nate solders and pipes will result in a
mere $10 increase in the price of a new
home. This is a negligable amount
when considering the health benefits
to be gained. The logic is overwhelm-
ing to pursue the course of action I
have outlined, Actually, there Is no
reason to retain lead as an acceptable
matenal to be used In the transmission
of potable water.
Mr. President, we place great em-
phasis, as a nation, on safe drinking
water, In fact, we have recently passed
legislation to amend the Safe Drinking
Water Ac which authorized $130 mil-
lion for fiscal year 1986. Often, safe
drinking water requires the use of ex-
pensive measures such as the addition
of anti-corrosive chemicals or fancy
purification methods What I am pro-
posing are simple, inexpensive, pre-
ventative steps we can take to avoid
further contamination of our drinking
water supplies. We are not asking
anyone to rip up old plumbing sys-
tems. Rather, we focus on arresting
the problem before It prog-resse fur-
ther by limiting ourselves to new con-
struction and repair. The choice is
clear cut. do we take action, as a nation.
to avoid further lead contamination Or
do we wait and run the risk of Increased
health hazards? -. ‘ - - . -,
Mr. President, let me emphasize that
three Important questions were an-
swered at hearings conducted by the
Committee on Environment - and
Public Works on the Safe Drinking
Water Act amendments and our Lead-
Free Drinking Water Act, Is lead in
drinking water a health ha2.ard Is
lead contamination of drinking ter
widespread? What can be done to
- avoid the leaching of lead into drink-
ing water? The witnesses were State
public health. officials, scientists, anti
engineering consultants, It is both ac-
curate and fair to say that these wit-
nesses spoke as one; each was. against.
the use of lead pipes and lead solder in
potable water systems. - One witness
went so far as to recommend a fIvefold
decrease in the EPA lead standard.
Mr. President, as I have mentioned, we-
are virtually assured that. EPA will
continue to lower the drinking water
lead standard. Again, this begs for us
to act now to avoid future problems by
eliminating sources of lead In drinking.
water,, - ‘- . ,-..,-:c.
Let me remind you. Mr. President.-
that often the biggest problems are
encountered In new homes. - These
homes are usually ow-ned by young
couples with young children_-children
who are Particularly susceptible to
the adverse effects of lead. I hope my
colleagues will join rae In supporting
th:s effort to protect our drinking
water from further lead contarnina-
tion. - — ‘ -- ‘ - -
Mr. President, that is the amend-
ment. I thank the distinguished chair-
man of the committee for his interest. -
I know this was originally due to be of.
fered several months ago and the Sen-
ator suggested that I pause, not offer
it, and we would hold a hearing in the
committee. A hearing was held. I
think the bill has been unproved as a
result of that process,
Mr. LAUTENBERG. Mr. President,
I am pleased to join my distinguished
colleague from New Jersey, Senator
BRADLEY, in offering this amendment
to ban the future use of lead in water
supply systems. This amendment is a
revised version of our bill, S. 1197, andl
Is intended to complement the Safe-I
Draking Water Act Amendments of
1985 approved in May by The Senate:
The Safe Drinking Water Act serves
to protect the public against contami-
nants in drinking water, Our amend-
ment seeks to assure that water
cleansed of lead and other contami-
nants is not despoiled by lead while
being transported to water taps, -
Two and a half years ago, EPA. de-
termined that the largest source of
lead in drinking water comes from the
Corrosion of pipes that carry water
supolies. What this means Is that no
matter how much lead is taken out of
drinking watet by water supply com-
panies, tap water will be contaminated
as lead from lead pipes and lead solder
-------
p sI 3
connecting pipes I a dissolved In drink.
jng water on its way to the tap.
This problem may be exacerbated by
keidified sources of drinking water.
The low PB of the water—its acidity—
makes the water more “aggressive”
and thus more likely to corrode lead
from pipes. New York, Minnesota and
parts of eastern Canada already warn
residents to run their water before
using it, and advise pregnant women
against Its use altogether. -
Numerous studies have demoristrat.
ed that infants-and young children are
especiaUy-susceptible--t , . lead.- Lead
causes nervous. disorders, learning dis-
abilities, and weakens tolerance to dis-
ease. --Iir addition exposure to high
levels, of lead can cause cancer and
birth defects. -‘- - - ‘- - ‘ s,
It Is clear that we mu t do- every-
thing possible to cut back -on human
exposum_to lead. whether It is In
drinking ‘water, automobile exhausts
or in paint and other products. .. -
Our amendment Is a positive step
forward In accomplishing that goal. It
prohibits the use of lead pipes, solder.
and fluxes in repairs and installation
of publi r drinking water systems The
amendment” would require States to
enforce the ban through State or local
plumbing codes or other appropriate
means. Any- State which fails to imple-
ment the ban within 2 years will risk
civil action by the EPA Administrator.
In addition, no new construction will
be eligible for guaranteed or Insured
mortgages from the Veterans Admims-
tration or the Department of Housing
and Urban Development unless the
aater system uses lead free piping,
solder, and flux. Lead free is defined
as materials containing not more than
0.2 percent lead.
The bill aLso requires that public
water supply systems, in consultation
with the EPA. conduct an information
campai i to notify users of their sys-
tems of the adverse health effects of
lead and the means by which users can
reduce the lead In their water supplies.
The bi ,U further requires notification
through the rise of labeling on lead
pipes or lead solder sold in retail estab-
lishments. The Intent of these labels is
to inform the-public that the use of
lead in drinking water systems is pro-
‘mbited’under Federal law. The con-
sumer product safety com mission will
enforce this provision through its net-
work of field inspectors.
Mr. President, this amerfdment does
not call for the retroacti e rerno’.ral of
lead pipes or pipes containing lead. It
simply requires that new pipes or
pipes that are repaired do not contain
lead. It is supported by a number of
organizations and associatious con.
cerned about lead reg’jlation. iriclud-
Irig the National Association of Full
Ser%ice Plumbing, Heating, Cooling
and Piping Product Vlholesalers.
s hich has members s hose businesses
will be impacted by this anier idmenL
Ho e er. it recognizes that there are
alternatives to lead and those aJterna-
tires should be used,
Mr. President In my home- State of
New Jersey, lead from solder in drink-
trig water pipes has been identified as
a major source of exposure to lead. In
one study, exposure to lead in drinking
water was greater than exposure to
lead from automobile emissions along
major highways. The preliminary find-
ings of a report by the New Jersey De-
partment of Environmental Protection
indicate that the problem is extensive.
of 590 wells tested in Beachwood, NJ. I
220 showed lead above the 50 ugf1,
maximum Contaminant level set under
the Safe’ Drinking Water Act. This 1
pattern is repeated In many other
areas of the northeast and the north-
W 5t.: ,:. _ --... -
‘Actlon. has been taken.. to ban 1ead
- solder in Oregon. Wisconsin, Washing-
ton. Delaware. and New York, as well
as in Denmark, West Germany. Great
Britain and the Netherlands. Given
the national and international charac-
ter of our economy, we should protect
citi,zens across the country by adding
the tTmted States to the list. - . -- -
Mr. President, the-problem of lead
contamination in our Nation’s think-
ing water is not new, and it will riot
simply disappear. If anything, it will
get worse. As time passes, deteriora-
tion of lead pipes will continue to pose
a serious health problem. This subject
deserves our immediate attention. It is
ray hope that the Senate will approve
this u-nportant amendment.
Mr. STAFFORD. Mr. President. on
behalf of the majority, and especially
In view of what the Senator from New
Jersey has said, and the hearings
which the committee held in respect
to this matter, we are prepared to
accept the Senator’s amendment.
Mr. BENTSEN. Mr. President, on
behalf of the mironty, I think the
Senator from New Jersey offered a
very excellent amendment, and I am
pleased to support it.
Mr. BRADLEY. Mr. President, I
move the amendment.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Is
there further debate on the amend-
mept? If not, the question is on agree-
ing to the amendment. of the Senator
frcm New Jersey.
The amendment (No. 634) was
agreed to
Mr. BRADLEY. Mr. President, I
mo%e to reconsider the vote by which
the amendment was agreed to,
Mr. STAFFORD I move to lay that
motion on the table.
The motion to lay on the table was
agreed to.
Mr. STAFFORD Mr. President, I
suggest the absence of a quorum.
The PRF.SIDING OFFICER. The
clerk will call the roll.
The legislative clerk proceeded to
call the roll
Mr. STAFFORD. Mr President. I
ask unanimous consent that the order
for the quorum call be rescinded.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. With’
out objection, it is so ordered.
000310
-------
J ’A cL&cccL 00031f
t is)’
C b 4 l
A BELL
Entitled the “Lead Free Drinking Water Act”.
1 Be it enacted by the Senate and Hou.5e of Representa-
2 lives of the United States of America in Congress assembled,
3 That on page 51, after line 3, insert the following:
4 “Sec. 16. Part B of the Safe Drinking Water Act is
5 amended by adding the following new section:
6 “‘PROHIBITION ON LEAD USE
7 “ ‘SEC. 1417. (a) After the date of enactment of the
8 Safe Drinking Water Act Amendment of 1985, no lead pipes
9 or lead solder shall be installed or used in the installation or
10 repair of any distribution system for drinking water, including
11 but not limited to, public water s stems, residential and non-
-------
000312
1 residential facilities for the provision of piped wat’er for
2 human consumption, and their connections to such systems.
3 Not later than two years after such date of enactment, each
4 State shall be responsible for implementing the provisions of
5 this subsection in the appropriate State codes. Any State fail-
6 ing to implement such provisions shall be ineligible to receive
7 funding under section l 4 43(a) of the Act. Enforcement of this
8 subsection shall be through appropriate State or local plumb-
9 ing code inspectors.
10 “‘(b) Beginning not later than nine months after such
11 date of enactment, any lead pipes or lead solder sold in retail
12 establishments shall contain a label clearly stating that use of
13 lead pipes or lead solder in drinking water supply systems is
14 prohibited under Federal law.
15 “ ‘(c) Not later than three months after such date of
16 enactment, the Administrator shall notify the Governor of
17 each State of the requirements and effective date of this see-
18 tion.
19 “ ‘(d) Not later than two years after such date of enact-
20 ment, each public water system shall notify all users of the
21 system of the adver’se health effects of lead exposure (includ-
22 ing a description of any scnsistive populations) and means
23 reasonably available to such users of mitigating lead exposure
24 from drinking water.’ “.
-------
- Mr. President, Senator B nt .xy and
I planned to offer an amendment
today to ban the use of lead and lead
‘solder In drinking water pipes. This -. -
amendment would have been prospec- S t-k Ai - ,t’U ct ‘ - ‘ c .A -t —
tive. It was aimed at reducing the ex-
posure of the public to lead In drink-
ing water. Studies In New Jersey have
indicated that this form of exposure C t4 &. ‘ ° 0 0 03 1 3
ranks even higher than exposure to
lçad from automobile exhaust. The
committee will held a h’ armg on lead
in drinkii g water before superfund Is
taken up on the floor. It is m under- ( ,
standing that the amendment will be 5
considered hen the Senate takes up
superfund on the floor.
-------
SAFE DRINKING WATER ACT AMFNDMENTS - 1986
Pub. L. 99-339
SECTION BY SECTION LEGISLATIVE HISTORY
VOLUME 2
Pages
Ninety-ninth Congress of the United States
of America - At The Second Session - An Act 314-317
GeneralSectjon 318
Section 201 319—351
Section2O2 352—387
Section 203 388—439
Section 204 •• •••• •• 440—442
Section 205 • . ., 443
Section 301 • 478—501
Section 302 .... • 502—510
Section 303 511—524
Section 304 ... • I. 525—529
-------
000314
ii:JH
BUwr -uffirh on rtu of tht Thntcd tatts of
AT THE SECOND SESSIONS
B. d th. City of Washiss ton on Tusday, the tw.n y.flr.t day of Jani ar ,
on thousand nina hwvk,qJ and sightyüz
n rt
- To e .nd ths Safe Drinking Water Act.
& it enacted by the &nate and House of Repr iue of the
United States of America in Con€resg awmbk4
SECTION 1. SBORT TFTLE.
This Act may be cited as the “Safe Drinking Water Act Amend-
ments of 1986”.
TABLE OF CONTEN
Sec 1. Short title.
TITLE I—PUBLIC WATER SYSTEMS
Sec. 101. Nat oneJ prtm.zy drinking water r u1atzon,.
Sec. ioa Efor me of riatione.
Sec. 103. Public notthca on.
Sec. 104. Variances.
Sec 105. Exemptions.
Sec. 106. Monitoring for unrngulated contamir.nta.
Sec. 101 Techn j sa at ce for email iyitem,.
Sec. 108. Tampering with public water ayvtema.
Sec. 109. j free drmki water.
TITLE U—PROTECTION OP LTNDERGROU SOURC OF DR NK NG
WATER
Sec. i. Restriebon., on underground injecton of hanzdoua w • and reguLs on
of State programs.
Sec. 202_ Enforcement
Sec. 203. Sole son aqmz fur demonatj on program.
Sec 204. Emergency powers.
Sec 205 State program to establish weilbead protection aresa.
TITLE rn—GENERAL PROVISIONS
Sec 301 Authori t io 0 of approprtauona.
Sec 302. Indian tribes
Sec 303 Jud czsJ review
Sec 304. Mi on eoua pro ions.
-------
Legislative History of the 1986 Amendments
to the Safe Drinking Water Act L)
000315
1. SDWA Amendments
2. President’s Statement upon signing S. 124 - (6/19/86)
into law
3. Congressional Record w/Senate Passage of (6/6/86)
Technical Corrections
4. Congressional Record w/House Passage of (6/4/86)
Technical Corrections
Congressional Record w/Senate Debate and (5/21/86)
Passage of Conference Report
,. Congressional Record w/House Debate and (5/13/86)
J Passage of Conference Report
7. Congressional Record w/Conference Report (5/5/86)
EPA’s second letter to the conferees (3/20/86)
Rep. Lent’s Lead Pipe Amendment as (10/17/85)
Introduced, H. 3579
10. Congressional Record w/Introduction of (9/17/85)
S.1197 by Sen. Bradley
11. Congressional Record w/House Passage (6/17/85)
of H.1650/s ..124
12. Committee Report on H.1650; H.1650 (6/11/85)
13. Sen. Bradley t s Lead Amendment, as introduced, (5/22/85)
S. 11 97
-------
14.
15.
16.
17.
18.
19.
20.
21.
22.
23.
-2-
OCO31
(5/16/85)
(5/1 5/85)
(3/21 /85)
(1/3/85)
(9/28/84)
(5/8/84)
(9/28/84)
(9/21 /84)
(9/1 8/84)
(7/14/83)
Congressional Record w/Senate Passage
of S.124
Committee Report on S.124
Congressional Record w/Introductjon of
H.1650 in House by Rep. Madigan
Congressional Record w/Incroductjon of
S.124 in Senate by Sen. Durenberger
S.2649 as amended by committee
S.2649 as introduced
Committee Report on S.2649
H.5959 as introduced
H.5959 as reported from Committee
H. 3200
-------
Li ., •
LEGISLATIVE HISTORY
COMPILED BY:
KARI A BORROMEO
LEGAL INTERN
SUMMER - 1987
------- |