STEERING COMMITTEE CONFERENCE CALL
ETV DRINKING WATER SYSTEMS CENTER
December 3, 2008
A Steering Committee (SC) conference call was held on December 3, 2008 to review the current
status of the Environmental Technology Verification (ETV) Drinking Water Systems (DWS)
Center and to discuss future initiatives. Many SC members were present in person for the call,
because they were at the NSF headquarters for another meeting. The conference call commenced
at 10:30 AM EST, and ended at noon. Below is a list of attendees:
Attendees:
In Person
Bartley, Bruce - NSF International
Blumenstein, Michael - NSF International
Bernados, Brian - California Department of Public Health, Drinking Water Program
Cleland, Jim - Michigan Department of Environmental Quality
Nieminski, Eva- Utah Department of Environmental Quality
Sakaji, Rick - East Bay Municipal Utility District (California)
Weise, James - Alaska Department of Environmental Conservation (ADEC)
By phone
Adams, Jeff- U.S. EPA/Office of Research and Development (ORD) (participated by phone)
Biberstine, Jerry - National Rural Water Association (NRWA)
Logsdon, Gary - consulting engineer
Osterhoudt, Darrell - Association of State Drinking Water Administrators (ASDWA)
Bruce Bartley, the DWS Center Manager, began by welcoming the group and thanked
everyone for their participating.
New Steering Committee Members
B. Bartley began the call by notifying the SC that there is currently no industry
representation on the committee. He asked for the committee to contact him with any
suggestions for industry committee members.
New EPA Agreement
B. Bartley then notified the SC that NSF and EPA signed a new agreement for NSF to
operate the ETV DWS Center for another three years. The EPA is waiting to see how the
Obama administration affects ETV funding. EPA has asked NSF to put together a "wish
list" for ETV funding priorities.
ETV Funding Priorities
NSF's wish list currently includes the following items, in no particular order:
• Emerging contaminants
• Water treatment for pharmaceutical products or personal care products
• Technologies to assist communities in complying with Long Term 2 Enhanced
Surface Water Treatment Rule (LT2ESWTR) and the Groundwater Rule
-------
• Water scarcity issues
• Emergency water treatment systems
• Nanotechnologies
• Water supply infrastructure issues
B. Hartley discussed that EPA and NSF have a relatively new agreement through the
ETV wastewater center to investigate pipe lining technologies and biofilm treatment
technologies. B. Bartley stated that an EPA priority is cost effectiveness of the
technology.
B. Bartley asked the SC for input on treatment technology priorities.
James Weise stated that small systems technologies are a big issue for the State of
Alaska, especially small systems for less than 50 people.
Jim Cleland stated that arsenic is still a big issue for small system compliance. Brian
Bernados added that arsenic treatment residuals disposal is a big issue. J. Cleland
responded that the waste disposal problem almost excludes ion exchange technologies as
a realistic option.
Rick Sakaji asked whether the priorities should be based on emerging issues that will
likely be a bigger problem 5-15 years in the future, such as emerging contaminants that
don't yet have an allowable maximum contaminant level (MCL), or whether the priorities
should be more based on compliance with existing rules. R. Sakaji added that he thinks
the ETV program should be focused on verifying existing technologies, and leave the
health effects MCL issues requiring research to organizations like AWWARF (now
Water Research Foundation).
J. Weise added that perhaps NSF should be collaborating more with Water Research
Foundation.
J. Adams replied that currently EPA has limited funds for ETV, so they want to focus on
high priority issues like small systems. In the past, EPA has tried to tack on small
research items along with standard verification tests.
J. Weise suggested that EPA and NSF look at the Water Research Foundation projects
list for 2009 for possible collaborations.
Gary Logsdon suggested trying to add a Water Research Foundation representative to the
SC.
B. Bartley replied that Rob Renner from Water Research Foundation is on the NSF
Council of Public Health Consultants.
-------
J. Weise suggested that NSF also contact Chris Rayburn at Water Research Foundation,
who is the Director of Research Management.
Eva Nieminski commented that she thinks ETV should focus primarily on treatment of
contaminants that are currently a high priority, and then secondarily focus on
technologies for monitoring emerging contaminants.
B. Bartley next brought up the topic of offering an NSF certification for ETV verified
products. This certification would be performance-based, whereas NSF/ANSI Standard
61 certifications are only for the materials of construction. The certifications would be
primarily for UV systems and membrane modules. B. Bartley asked the group whether
they think this is a good idea.
R. Sakaji noted that the ETV program has always been careful to state that ETV is not a
certification. R. Sakaji asked why not expand NSF/ANSI Standard 55 to encompass UV
for small systems?
B. Bartley replied that the NSF Joint Committee overseeing the POU DWTU standards
discussed the matter, and decided not to expand the scope of NSF 55 for UV to make it
consistent with the LT2ESWTR and the EPA UV Disinfection Guidance Manual.
B. Bartley added that NSF is also offering to be a central portal for the States and others
for administering UV test data, and providing QA review of UV pilot test data. B.
Bartley added that NSF offering UV testing, or UV existing data review outside of ETV
would provide a lower cost alternative for UV verifications.
R. Sakaji stated that he thinks the NSF certification and UV data portal ideas are OK if
the DWTU Joint Committee doesn't want to expand Standard 55.
G. Logsdon stated that he supports the idea of NSF offering certifications outside of
ETV.
R. Sakaji asked if NSF has a test protocol ready for UV systems. B. Bartley replied that
NSF is working on a test plan for a UV system following the EPA UV Disinfection
Guidance Manual single set-point approach. From that document NSF will develop a
generic test protocol. There was also the suggestion to work with the authors of the 10
states Standards concerning UV validation, NSF certification and use of ETV.
B. Bartley then summarized the priorities list:
1. Technologies that address compliance with existing drinking water rules.
2. NSF and EPA should try to coordinate more with the Water Research Foundation.
3. Monitoring technologies for emerging contaminants.
E. Nieminski added that NSF and EPA should get involved with Water Research
Foundation early, during the RFP creation phase.
-------
J. Cleland suggested WQA representation on the SC. B. Hartley replied that he would
contact WQA about it.
B. Bartley stated that the SC might need another conference call in February when the
EPA's request for guidance is released.
J. Weise suggested that the SC have another conference call in 6 months so NSF and
EPA could provide an update.
B. Bartley thanked everyone for participating, and ended the call.
Next Meeting / Web Call - Mark Your Calendars
Tentatively the ETV "in person / web based" meeting of ETV DWSC stakeholders is
scheduled for the first day in December which is December 1, 2009. NSF will provide an
update in the summer of 2009.
------- |