$£2
lu
I v
(, ...
»J I
!
*
\ i ,v
ftmf
J.L,
./ 'A
'/ *
\
m
rv
/ /
w
1 I'
annual report
2 0 0 3 1
-------
Safe
Drinking
Water H4tline
Fiscal Year 2003
Annual Report
October 2002 - September 2003
-------
Table of Contents
Introduction 1
Hotline Statistics Summary 3
Annual Trends 5
Citizens' Questions 7
Questions and Answers 8
Federal Register Summaries 23
Hotline Statistics 30
Safe Drinking Water Hotline
National Toll-free No.: (800) 426-4791 or (877) EPAWATER
See past monthly reports at
http ://www. e pa. q o v/sa fewate r/h otl i n e/re po rts. ht m I
For More Information Contact:
Harriet Hubbard, EPA Project Officer
(202) 564-4621 Operated by Booz Allen Hamilton
Under Contract #GS-10F-0090J
EPA DISCLAIMER
Answers to questions in the Safe Drinking Water Hotline monthly report are intended to be purely informational and are based on
SDWA provisions, EPA regulations, guidance, and established policy effective at the time of publication. The answers given
reflect EPA staffs best judgment at the time and do not represent a final or official EPA interpretation. This report does not
substitute for the applicable provisions of statutes and regulations, guidance, etc., nor is it a regulation itself. Thus, it does not
impose legally-binding requirements on EPA, States, or the regulated community. An answer to a question in this report may be
revised at any time to reflect EPA's revisions to existing regulations, changes in EPA's approach to interpreting its regulations or
statutory authority, or for other reasons. EPA may provide a different answer to a question in this report in the future.
Also, an answer provided in this report may not apply to a particular situation based upon the circumstances. Any decisions
regarding a particular case will be made based on the applicable statutes and regulations. Therefore, interested parties are free to
raise questions and objections about the appropriateness of the application of an answer in this report to a particular situation, and
EPA will consider whether or not the recommendations or interpretations in the answer are accurate and appropriate in that
situation. The information in this report is not intended, nor can it be relied upon, to create any rights enforceable by any party in
litigation with the United States.
-------
Annual Report
Iqwjrgxf wlrq#
The Safe Drinking Water Act (SDWA) is the national law that ensures the quality of America's drinking water
and furthers EPA's mission to protect human health and safeguard the environment. The Act, as amended in
1996, requires the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) to provide atoll-free hotline that consumers can
call to obtain accurate and real-time information about annual water quality reports and drinking water
contaminants (42 U.S.C. 300g-3, Section (4)(A) and (4)(B)). The Safe Drinking Water (SDW) Hotline, operated
by Booz Allen Hamilton, provides this essential public outreach service for EPA's Office of Ground Water and
Drinking Water (OGWDW), the office that is responsible for implementing the SDWA. The Hotline also
answers questions about federal drinking water regulations and standards, source water protection, and the
Underground Injection Control (UIC) program. In fiscal year 2003 (FY 2003), the Hotline responded to 21,602
phone calls and 3,304 e-mail inquiries resulting in more than 31,351 questions. These inquiries came from a
diverse audience including public water systems (PWSs), federal, state and local governments, businesses, and
citizens. These inquiries reflected several "hot topics" and initiatives, including the following:
• Vulnerability Assessments and Emergency Response Plans - As a result of the passage of the Public
Health Security and Bioterrorism Preparedness and Response Act of 2002, community water systems
(CWSs) serving a population of 3,300 or more are required to submit certification of completion of their
vulnerability assessments and emergency response plans to EPA. The Hotline received questions
primarily about proper submission procedures and submission deadlines.
• Household Water Emergencies - In contrast to the drought of 2002, there was an increase in calls to the
SDW Hotline concerning contaminated water due to floods, hurricanes, and blackouts. Hotline staff
coordinated with OGWDW personnel to provide appropriate referrals and current information for home
water disinfection and storage.
• Consumer Confidence Reports - The Hotline experienced its annual increase in the volume of calls and e-
mails related to the nationwide distribution of the consumer confidence reports (CCRs). The increase in
inquiries was primarily during the months of May through July.
• Public Notification for Total Organic Carbons (TOCs) - Many consumers across the country received
public notices that their water systems had failed to achieve the TOC percent removal levels required by
the Stage 1 Disinfectants and Disinfection Byproducts Rule. To efficiently assist callers with their
questions and concerns the SDW Hotline staff developed a series of questions and answers about TOC
and associated public notices.
The SDW Hotline's staff of safe drinking water regulatory experts responded to an average of 125 questions each
operating day of FY 2003, providing real-time assistance to Hotline user's questions ranging from regulatory and
policy clarifications, to document requests and Internet availability of information, to EPA training registration
assistance, to referrals for additional sources of information from other federal agencies, organizations, states, and
local public water systems. Additionally, Spanish-speaking staff responded to over 60 requests for drinking water
information. This number includes Spanish e-mails and Spanish-speaking callers who choose to utilize the option
of leaving a message in a voice mailbox as directed by the Hotline phone system greeting. Information
Specialists recommended thousands of documents, many of which were processed for hard copies, provided over
18,000 referrals to relevant agencies and organizations when inquiries required information beyond the purview
of the Hotline, and drafted 92 formal Questions and Answers and 41 Federal Register summaries.
The Hotline's mission of providing quality technical assistance continues to be enhanced through technological
advances and operational improvements. The SDW Hotline phone tree now offers callers several new self-serve
options intended to provide useful information and reduce the hold time required to reach an Information
Specialist. During this fiscal year, over 11,000 callers opted to hear the recorded message about local drinking
water quality. In addition, callers seeking information about private household wells now have the option of a
direct transfer to the Water System Council's Wellcare Hotline.
Safe Drinking Water Hotline
-1-
-------
Annual Report
In order to provide real-time outreach service to water professionals, regulators, and the general public the Hotline
must maintain the most current information and consistently strive to understand each caller's needs and interests.
The SDW Hotline monthly report, Water Lines, is published in response to those needs. Water Lines contains
typical questions answered by Hotline staff, abstracts of pertinent Federal Register entries, call and e-mail
statistics, caller profiles, and water facts. The FY 2003 Safe Drinking Water Hotline Annual Report is a review of
the cumulative statistics, trend analyses, Questions and Answers, and Federal Register summaries gathered from
the Water Lines reports.
Safe Drinking Water Hotline
-2-
-------
Annual Report
K rvdqh#/vdwb/wlf v#/xp p du
The Safe Drinking Water (SDW) Hotline answers questions, via telephone and e-mail, related to the Safe
Drinking Water Act and the National Primary Drinking Water Regulations. Hotline Information Specialists also
assist customers in accessing relevant regulations, Federal Register notices, and EPA guidance documents, via
Internet and in hard copy, and provide helpful referrals for questions beyond the Hotline's purview. Additionally,
the Hotline offers its services in both English and Spanish. During FY 2003, the Hotline responded to 21,602
telephone calls and 3,304 e-mails. A single call or e-mail often generated multiple questions, and a total of
31,351 questions were answered by the Hotline in FY 2003. Detailed statistics of the breakdown in the types
callers and the topics of questions they asked are included in the Appendix of this report.
Calls and E-mails Comparison: The inquiry volume for FY 2003 is lower than the total inquiry volume
received during FY 2002. This is possibly attributed to an increase in Internet use to obtain documents and
general information and a decrease in significant regulatory development over the past year.
Inquiry Mode
FY 2003
FY 2002
Calls
21,602
25,311
Emails
3,304
3,738
Total
24,906
29,049
The following chart illustrates the distribution of calls and e-mails in FY 2003, compared to FY 2002. While the
number of e-mails received each month remained fairly steady, the total number of calls peaked in June and July
due to the annual distribution of consumer confidence reports (CCRs).
Distribution of Calls and E-mails
Sep
Aug
Jul
~ Calls FY03
~ Calls FY02
¦ E-mails FY03
~ E-mails FY02
Jun
May
Apr
Mar
Feb
Jan
Dec
Nov
Oct
0
500
1,000
1,500
2,000
2,500
3,000
3,500
4,000
Number of Calls and E-mails
Safe Drinking Water Hotline
-3-
-------
Annual Report
Customer Profiles: As illustrated by the chart below, the Hotline serves a diverse group of customers. Of the
24,906 calls and e-mails received during the FY 2003, the largest category of Hotline customers, by far, are
citizens who obtain their drinking water from public water systems and citizens who have private
household wells. Citizens are followed by consultants, PWS operators, government officials, others, and
academic institutions. The "other" category in the chart below includes analytical laboratories, people who
accessed the Hotline from other countries, environmental groups, individuals who communicated with Hotline
staff in Spanish, medical professionals, and news media representatives.
Customer Profile
citizen
3.33£
Citizen
Private well
Consu Itants
PWS
Operators
1,592
1.375
1,303
Otner
13,824
Government
5,000
10,000
15,000
Top Ten Referrals: Referrals are often provided when questions require input from state and local water
programs, not-for-profit organizations, or other federal agencies. In FY 2003, the Hotline provided over 18,000
referrals including, EPA's Web site for frequently requested documents, state laboratory certification offices for
questions regarding tap water testing, and local water systems for water system specific information. The top ten
referrals are displayed below.
Top Ten Referrals Frequently Provided by the Safe Drinking Water Hotline
merican Groundwater T
Water Systems Council
Public Health
Other Hot i
EPA Regional
Other
State Drinking Water
3rogram Office
NSF/Water Qua
Underwriter's
ity Association/
Laboratories
State
Certifi
Laboratory
ation Officer
.ocaI Water System
1,500 2,000
Number of Referrals
Safe Drinking Water Hotline
-4-
-------
Annual Report
Top Ten Topics: Year after year, certain issues, such as local drinking water quality and tap water testing,
consistently top the list of the most frequently discussed topics at the Safe Drinking Water Hotline. The table
below lists the ten topics that were most frequently discussed with Hotline callers and via e-mail during FY 2003.
Topic
Questions
(phone & e-mail)
Percent of Total
Questions
Tap Water Testing
3,193*
10
Local Drinking Water Quality
2,979
10
CCR
2,606
8
Wells
1,701
5
Home Water Treatment Units
1,448
5
Lead
1,437
5
Issues requiring referrals to other EPA
offices or Hotlines
1,247
4
Issues requiring referrals to Non-EPA
governmental offices
1,118
4
SDWA Background Information
1,099
4
Coliforms
899
3
* Citizens who obtain their drinking water from private household wells asked 30 percent
of the tap water testing questions.
Annual Trends
The Hotline staff gathers general statistical data on the calls and e-mails to which it responds. These data,
combined with the staff members" insight and observations, provide a unique opportunity to identify and analyze
trends in the number and types of Hotline inquiries. Some examples of these trends are illustrated below.
Lead Questions: Questions about lead in drinking water are consistently among the most frequently asked
questions to the Hotline. The particularly high volume of lead questions received in June and July 2003 coincided
with the nationwide distribution of CCRs, each of which include specific language about lead as a contaminant of
concern.
Monthly Lead Questions
Oct-02 Nov-02 Dec-02 Jan-03 Feb-03 Mar-03 Apr-03 May-03 Jun-03 Jul-03 Aug-03 Sep-03
Month During FY 2003
Safe Drinking Water Hotline
-------
Annual Report
Coliform Bacteria Questions: The Hotline receives numerous questions about Coliform bacteria in
association with public notifications of Total Coliform Rule violations. The peak number of questions received in
October 2002 and December 2002 were associated with questions about boil water notices issued in Tampa, FL
and Boca Raton, FL, respectively. Historically, the highest volume of questions about Coliform bacteria occurs in
months during and following the summer season. Warm summer temperatures are more conducive to bacterial
growth. To better address common questions about Coliform bacteria and associated public notices, the Hotline
staff developed a set of Questions and Answers to inform the public about potential health risks associated with
the presence of Coliform bacteria in drinking water and to provide an explanation of public notification
requirements.
Monthly Coliform Bacteria Questions
$ 100
o
Feb-03 Mar-03 Apr-03 May-03 Jun-03 Jul-03
Month During FY 2003
g-03 Sep-03
Radon Questions by Water Supply Source: The Hotline continues to get questions on radon from both
household well owners and PWS customers. The following chart shows that, during most of FY 2003, citizens
asked the most questions about radon.
Comparison of Monthly Radon Questions from
Public Water System Customers and Household Well Owners
60 1
Public Water
System
Customers
Household Well
Owners
0 . . . . . . . t t t
Oct-02 Nov-02 Dec-02 Jan-03 Feb-03 Mar-03 Apr-03 May-03 Jun-03 Jul-03 Aug-03 Sep-03
Month During FY 2003
Safe Drinking Water Hotline
-6-
-------
Annual Report
Monthly Trends: The top five commonly asked questions concern tap water testing, local drinking water
quality, consumer confidence reports (CCRs), household wells, and home water treatment units. The following
chart illustrates the distribution of those questions throughout FY 2003. The dramatic increase in CCR questions
in June and July coincided with the nationwide distribution of the reports.
Monthly Trends in Water Quality Topics
900
800
700
600
Consumer Confidence Report (CCR)
Home Water Treatment Units
Local Drinking Water Quality
Tap Water Testing
Household Wells
500
400-
300
200
100
0 -I . . . T T t . . T T
Oct-02 Nov-02 Dec-02 Jan-03 Feb-03 Mar-03 Apr-03 May-03 Jun-03 Jul-03 Aug-03 Sep-03
Month During FY 2003
Citizens' Questions
Safe, clean drinking water is an issue of importance
and concern to citizens across the United States.
This is evidenced by the fact that nearly 70 percent
of Safe Drinking Water Hotline customers are private
citizens (as opposed to utility operators, government
officials, consultants, etc.). Consequently, many of
the Questions and Answers that the Hotline features
in its Monthly Reports are presented from the
citizen's perspective. During FY 2003, such
questions included the following:
I just received my water quality report. Is my water
safe to drink? (page 9)
I am concerned about the quality of my drinking
water, but I am afraid to ask the water company for
information. How can I find out if my water system is
in compliance and providing safe drinking water?
(page 10)
Are the current drinking water standards protective
of my children's health? Is there a list of drinking
water contaminants that may be particularly harmful
to children? (page 11)
I read that the National Primary Drinking Water
Regulations apply to public water systems in all
states. Does this include the District of Columbia?
(page 11)
I am concerned that the salt used for highway
deicing is contaminating my well water supply. Can
these chemicals affect the quality of my drinking
water? (page 11)
My consumer confidence report says that the water
met or exceeded all national primary drinking water
standards in 2002. Who performs the water
analysis? (page 11)
My consumer confidence report shows that my state
has given my water system a monitoring waiver.
How is this possible? (page 12)
My water system provided me with a public
notification about a health-based violation of a
drinking water regulation? Will drinking my tap water
make me sick? (page 13)
Safe Drinking Water Hotline
-7-
-------
Annual Report
My state has a maximum contaminant level (MCL) of
0.0005 mg/L for chlordane in drinking water, but the
federal standard is 0.002 mg/L. Why does the state
have a different standard? (page 13)
My neighbors and I are experiencing a type of oily
residue in our water. We have notified our water
department, but nothing has been resolved. Who
should I notify regarding this problem? (page 13)
Are drinking water additives such as chemicals used
for fluoridation and coagulation, regulated by the
Safe Drinking Water Act? (page 13)
Our water quality has been terrible for days, but the
water company says that there is no problem and
will not provide any information more current than
the 2002 annual water quality report. With whom
can I speak about this situation? (page 14)
What can I do to prepare for Hurricane Isabel or
other drinking water emergencies? (page 14)
The drinking water I receive from a public water
system has an unfamiliar odor and a slight
discoloration. I am concerned that this is an
indication of lead in my drinking water. What can I
do to determine if lead is in my drinking water?
(page 14)
Does the Lead Contamination Control Act (LCCA)
require schools to test drinking water for lead?
(page 15)
Is there a guidance document that outlines sampling
techniques for testing lead in drinking water? (page
15)
Where can I obtain a list of water coolers that are
not lead-free? (page 15)
What is hardness in water? How does it affect my
drinking water? (page 15)
I received a public notification for a radionuclide
maximum contaminant level (MCL) violation. The
notice states that the health effect is an increased
risk of cancer. Is the risk of getting cancer the same
for both short-term and long-term radionuclide
exposure through drinking water? (page 18)
Are storm water wells covered under the
Underground Injection Control Program? (page 20)
Do UIC Class V well requirements apply to a
household septic system? (page 20)
Questions and Answers
The following questions and answers, organized by
subject, represent the range of questions addressed
by the Hotline on a variety of topics. These
questions were included in FY 2003 Monthly Hotline
Reports.
Consumer Confidence Report (CCR)
Q: A community water system (CWS) is required to
complete an annual consumer confidence report
(CCR). Is it necessary to include contaminants
detected while monitoring for compliance with the
Unregulated Contaminant Monitoring Rule
(UCMR)?
A: Yes. The CCR table must contain detected
unregulated contaminants for which a CWS is
required to monitor, including the average and
range at which the contaminant is detected. The
report may include a brief explanation of why the
CWS is monitoring for unregulated contaminants
(40 CFR 141.153(d)(7)).
Q: A community water system (CWS) has performed
voluntary monitoring that indicates the presence
of non-regulated contaminants. Is this monitoring
information included in the annual consumer
confidence report (CCR)? If so, how is this
information presented?
A: EPA strongly encourages CWSs to report any
monitoring results that may indicate a health
concern, such as detection of a contaminant
above a proposed MCL or health advisory level.
EPA recommends that the CCR include the
results of the monitoring and an explanation of
the significance of the results, noting the
existence of a health advisory or a proposed
regulation. If additional information for non-
regulated contaminants is included, it must be
displayed outside of the detected contaminants
table(s) (Revised State Implementation Guidance
for the Consumer Confidence Report (CCR)
Rule, EPA816-R-01 -002, January 2001).
Safe Drinking Water Hotline
-8-
-------
Annual Report
Q: Public water systems (PWSs) are required to
report the highest contaminant level used to
determine compliance with a National Primary
Drinking Water Regulation (NPDWR) and also
the range of the detected levels in their annual
consumer confidence report (CCR)
(141.153(d)(4)(iv)). How does a PWS report the
sampling data on a CCR for a contaminant when
compliance for that contaminant is determined on
a running annual average basis?
A: When the PWS determines compliance with the
NPDWR by calculating a running annual average
of all samples taken at a sampling point, the PWS
must include the highest average of the sampling
point (as reported to the state for compliance
purposes) and the range of levels detected. If
compliance is determined by a running annual
average of all samples at all sampling points, the
PWS must include the highest average of the
contaminant levels detected and the range of
detected levels (40 CFR 141.153(d)(4)(iv)(B) and
(C)).
Q: Community water systems are required to mail or
directly deliver one copy of the annual consumer
confidence report (CCR) to each customer. Can
community water systems obtain a waiver from
this requirement?
A: The governor of a state, his designee, or a tribal
leader where the tribe has met the eligibility
requirements in Section 142.72, can waive the
CCR distribution requirements for community
water systems serving fewer than 10,000
persons. A system that obtains a waiver must
inform its customers that the report will not be
mailed, publish the CCR in one or more
newspapers serving the local area, and make the
report available to the public upon request (40
CFR 141.155(g)).
Q: If a state has completed a source water
assessment, must community water systems
(CWSs) in the state include this information in
their consumer confidence reports (CCRs)?
A: Yes. If a source water assessment has been
completed, the CCRs must contain information
about the availability of the assessment and the
means to obtain it. CWSs that have received
their source water assessments must provide
brief summaries of their source water's
susceptibility to contamination. If source water
assessment information is not available, CWSs
are encouraged to include any other information
about potential sources of contamination (40 CFR
141.153(b)(2)).
Q: Community water systems (CWSs) must submit
to their primacy agencies copies of their
consumer confidence reports (CCRs), as well as
certifications stating that the reports have been
distributed to customers and that the information
is correct and consistent with the compliance
monitoring data previously submitted to the
primacy agencies (40 CFR 141.155(c)). How
long must a primacy agency retain the CCRs and
the certifications?
A: Each primacy agency must maintain copies of the
CCRs for all water systems in the state for a
period of one year. The agency must also keep
the corresponding certifications for a period of
five years (40 CFR 142.16(f)(3))
Q: Community water systems (CWSs) must mail
certifications to the primacy agencies stating that
the consumer confidence reports have been
distributed to customers, and that the information
is correct and consistent with the compliance
monitoring data previously submitted to the
primacy agencies (40 CFR 141.155(c)). Has
EPA provided guidance on acceptable
certification formats?
A: Example certification formats can be found in
Appendix C of the Revised State Implementation
Guidance for the Consumer Confidence Report
(CCR) Rule (EPA816-R-01 -002, January 2001)
and in Appendix D of Preparing Your Drinking
Water Consumer Confidence Report (EPA816-R-
01-003, January 2001).
Q: I just received my water quality report. Is my
water safe to drink?
A: Drinking water meeting national primary drinking
water standards is safe to drink, although people
with severely compromised immune systems and
children may have special needs. Public water
systems (PWSs) obtain their water from a variety
of sources and treat the water using a variety of
available treatment technologies. Because of the
different sources of water and the different ways
in which water is treated, the quality of drinking
water varies from place to place. Over 90
percent of water systems meet EPA's health-
based standards for tap water quality.
Community water systems are required to send
their customers annual consumer confidence
reports. These reports tell consumers what
contaminants have been detected in their
drinking water and how these detection levels
compare to drinking water standards. The
reports must clearly identify any data indicating
violations of health-based standards. The
indication of a violation must include language
Safe Drinking Water Hotline
-9-
-------
Annual Report
about the potential health effects from consuming
water with contaminants at levels above the
national standards (OGWDW Frequently Asked
Questions Web site, www.epa.gov/safewater/
fag/fag.html).
Q: Our utility is in the process of developing the
consumer confidence report (CCR). l/l/e would
like to use the CCR Writer v2.0 software, but we
are having difficulty downloading it from EPA's
Web site. Is the software available on CD-ROM?
A: EPA is able to provide the CCRWriter v2.0 CD-
ROM on a limited basis. New requirements (such
as the new Arsenic language) for the 2003
reports are not included in the old CD-ROM
software. EPA recently released a Web based
version of the software, CCRiWriter, which is the
most up to date software possible and includes
all new requirements. The CCRiWriter is more
user-friendly than the CD-ROM. It takes users
through all the sections of a CCR, converts lab
results into "CCR units," and allows users to
insert and edit EPA's recommended text. Users
access the secure Web site with a user id and
password and can download the finished report in
pdf or Word. A link to the CCRiWriter application
and additional information about the application is
available at www.epa.gov/safewater/ccr/
ccrwriter.html.
Q: Community water systems (CWSs) must send
copies of their consumer confidence reports
(CCRs) to their primacy agencies by July 1st of
each year (40 CFR 141.155(c)). Can Cl/l/Ss e-
mail their CCRs to the primacy agency?
A: CWSs can send their CCRs to the primacy
agencies in an electronic or hard copy format
(,Revised State Implementation Guidance for the
Consumer Confidence Report (CCR) Rule,
EPA816-R-01 -002, January 2001).
Q: I am concerned about the quality of my drinking
water, but I am afraid to ask the water company
for information. How can I find out if my water
system is in compliance and providing safe
drinking water?
A: Under the Safe Drinking Water Act, most water
suppliers are required to provide their customers
with annual drinking water quality reports, or
consumer confidence reports (CCRs). These
reports tell consumers, among other things, what
contaminants have been detected in their
drinking water and how these detection levels
compare to national drinking water standards.
The reports must be provided annually before
July 1, and, in most instances, are mailed directly
to customers' homes. Your water system's CCR
may be posted on-line at: www.epa.gov/
safewater/dwinfo.htm. Alternately, to obtain a
copy of your water system's most recent CCR or
additional information about the system, contact
your local water supplier directly. If you have
reason to believe that your water supplier is not
complying with federal drinking water regulations,
you may contact your state drinking water
program office.
Q: Must a community water system distribute
consumer confidence reports (CCRs) to
consumers who are served by the system but are
not bill-paying customers (e.g., renters or
workers)?
A: According to 40 CFR 141.155(b), a system must
make a good faith effort to distribute its CCR to
consumers who do not receive water bills, using
means recommended by the primacy agency. A
good faith effort to reach consumers would
include a mix of methods appropriate to the
particular system, such as posting the reports on
the Internet, mailing to postal patrons in
metropolitan areas, advertising the availability of
the report in the news media, publication in a
local newspaper, posting in public places such as
cafeterias or lunch rooms of public buildings,
delivery of multiple copies for distribution by
single-biller customers such as apartment
buildings or large private employers, and delivery
to community organizations.
General Regulatory
Q: A public water system (PWS) supplied by a
surface water source or a ground water source
under the direct influence of surface water must
monitor the residual disinfectant level in the
distribution system (40 CFR 141.74). At what
points in the distribution system must these
samples be taken? How often must a PWS take
samples?
A: The residual disinfectant concentration must be
measured at least at the same points in the
distribution system and at the same time as total
conforms are sampled, as specified in 40 CFR
141.21 (141.74(b)(6)®, 141.74(c)(3)®).
Monitoring frequency is based on the population
served by the water system. Samples must be
collected at regular time intervals throughout the
month (141.21). A state may specify alternate
sampling points if it determines that those points
are more representative of treated (i.e.,
disinfected) water quality in the distribution
system (141.74(b)(6)®, 141.74(c)(3)®).
Safe Drinking Water Hotline
- 10-
-------
Annual Report
Q: When a public water system samples the water to
test for metal contaminants, are the samples
taken before or after the water has been treated?
A: Systems that use ground water must take a
minimum of one sample at every entry point to
the distribution system that is representative of
each well after treatment. Systems that use
surface water or a combination of surface water
and ground water must take a minimum of one
sample at every entry point to the distribution
system after treatment or in the distribution
system at a point that is representative of each
source after treatment (40 CFR 141.23(a)(1) and
(2)).
Q: Are the current drinking water standards
protective of my children's health? Is there a list
of drinking water contaminants that may be
particularly harmful to children?
A: The National Primary Drinking Water Standards
are designed to protect children and adults. The
standards take into account the potential health
effects contaminants can have on populations
that are most at risk. Before developing a
standard, EPA conducts a risk assessment in
which scientists evaluate whether fetuses,
infants, children, or other groups are more
vulnerable to a contaminant than the general
population. The standards are set to protect the
most vulnerable group. Additionally, EPA
continues to conduct research to determine if
revisions to existing standards are necessary.
Further information about drinking water
standards for children and a list of drinking water
contaminants that may be particularly harmful to
children is available in EPA's Children and
Drinking Water Standards (EPA815-K-9-001,
December 1999) on the Internet at
www .epa.qov/safewater/kids/child.pdf.
Q: I read that the National Primary Drinking Water
Regulations apply to public water systems in all
states. Does this include the District of
Columbia?
A: Yes. The National Primary Drinking Water
Regulations apply to public water systems in all
50 states, the District of Columbia, Guam, the
Commonwealth of Puerto Rico, the Northern
Marianna Islands, the Virgin Islands, American
Samoa, and the Trust Territory of the Pacific
Islands (SDWA 1401(13)(A), 1411).
Q: I am concerned that the salt used for highway
deicing is contaminating my well water supply.
Can these chemicals affect the quality of my
drinking water?
A: Sodium chloride is the most commonly used
deicer that can affect drinking water quality.
Sodium can lead to cardiovascular, kidney, and
liver diseases, and has a direct link to high blood
pressure. Although, there is no maximum
contaminant level (MCL) or health advisory level
for sodium, there is a Drinking Water Equivalent
Level (DWEL) of 20 mg/L. This value was
developed for those individuals restricted to a
total sodium intake of 500 mg/day and are not to
be extrapolated to the entire population.
Chloride, for which EPA has established a
national secondary drinking water standard of
250 mg/L, adds a salty taste to water and
corrodes pipes. Secondary standards are
established only as guidelines to assist public
water systems in managing their drinking water
for aesthetic considerations such as taste, color,
and odor (Source Water Protection Practices
Bulletin: Managing Highway Deicing to Prevent
Contamination of Drinking Water, EPA816-F-02-
019, August 2002).
Q: My consumer confidence report says that the
water met or exceeded all national primary
drinking water standards in 2002. Who performs
the water analysis?
A: For determining compliance, a sample will only
be considered if it has been analyzed by a state
certified laboratory. However, any person
considered acceptable to the state can take
measurements for alkalinity, calcium,
conductivity, disinfectant residual,
orthophosphate, pH, silica, temperature, and
turbidity (40 CFR 141.28(a)).
Q: In 1995, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D. C.
Circuit granted a voluntary motion to remand the
maximum contaminant level (MCL) and the
maximum contaminant level goal (MCLG) for
nickel. On what date were the standards no
longer in effect?
A: The MCL and MCLG for nickel were no longer in
effect as of February 23, 1995. This date
corresponds with the court's original remand
order. The June 29, 1995 Federal Register
notice removed the MCL and MCLG from the
Code of Federal Regulations (60 FR 33926;
33929).
Safe Drinking Water Hotline
- 11-
-------
Annual Report
Q: The 2001 edition of the CFR states that
groundwater systems must monitor quarterly for
nitrate if they get a result of < 50 percent of the
MCL (40 CFR 141.23(d)(2)). Is this a
typographical error or has the regulation
changed?
A: According to Jeanne Campbell of EPA's
OGWDW, this is a typographical error. The
correct requirement is for groundwater systems to
monitor quarterly for one year following any one
sample in which the nitrate concentration is
"greater than or equal to" 50 percent of the MCL.
Q: What are the definitions of reference dose (Rfd)
and drinking water equivalent level (DWEL)?
How does EPA use these values to develop
maximum contaminant level goals (MCLGs) for
non-carcinogenic drinking water contaminants?
A: The reference dose (Rfd) is an estimate (with
uncertainty spanning perhaps an order of
magnitude) of a daily oral exposure to the human
population (including sensitive subgroups) that is
likely to be without an appreciable risk of
deleterious effects during a lifetime. The DWEL
is a lifetime exposure concentration protective of
adverse, non-cancer health effects that assumes
all of the exposure to a contaminant is from
drinking water. The Rfd is used to determine the
DWEL and the MCLG for non-carcinogenic
contaminants, not including microbial
contaminants. The DWEL is calculated by
multiplying the Rfd by typical adult body weight
(70 kg) then dividing that value by estimated daily
water consumption (2 liters). Finally, the DWEL
is multiplied by a percentage of the total daily
exposure contributed by drinking water (often 20
percent) to determine the MCLG. Further
information on setting standards for drinking
water is available at the following Web site:
www.epa.gov/safewater/standard/settinq.html.
Q: My consumer confidence report shows that my
state has given my water system a monitoring
waiver. How is this possible?
A: A state with primary enforcement responsibility
and an approved source water assessment
program may adopt alternative monitoring
requirements (as an alternative to chemical
monitoring requirements set forth in the National
Primary Drinking Water Regulations) for public
water systems. A state program must be
adequate to assure compliance with applicable
national primary drinking water regulations
(SDWA 1418(b)(1)).
Q: What is the difference between the Central Data
Exchange (CDX), the Safe Drinking Water
Accession and Review System (SDWARS) and
the National Contaminant Occurrence Database
(NCOD)?
A: CDX is an electronic data receiving system for
most environmental compliance reporting,
including UCMR. UCMR data entered into CDX
is stored in SDWARS, which is the information
system that supports the collection of data for the
UCMR. Data in SDWARS is made publicly
available through the NCOD. NCOD contains
occurrence data about regulated and unregulated
contaminants. (Implementation Guidelines for
SDWARS/UCMR Volume I: Introduction to CDX
and UCMR Submissions, EPA816-R-01-022A,
December 2001).
Q: The maximum contaminant level (MCL) for total
coliform is based on its presence or absence in a
water sample (40 CFR 141.63(a)). Why is the
total coliform MCL based on presence or
absence rather than an estimation of coliform
density?
A: The total coliform presence-absence based MCL
is used because there is no relationship between
coliform densities and either pathogen density or
the potential for a waterborne disease outbreak
(52 FR 42224, 42227; November 3, 1987).
Additionally, coliform presence or absence
determination is easier to make then to determine
coliform density, is less influenced by sample
transit time than a density determination, and is
not subject to the calculation difficulties implicit in
the statistical methodology of coliform density
calculations (54 FR 27544, 27548; June 29,
1989).
Q: Can point-of-entry (POE) devices be used to
comply with the maximum contaminant levels
established under the National Primary Drinking
Water Regulations?
A: A public water system (PWS) may use POE
devices, provided the system achieves certain
requirements. Every building connected to the
PWS must have a POE device installed,
maintained, and adequately monitored. It is the
responsibility of the PWS to operate and maintain
the POE devices. The effective technology must
be properly applied under a plan approved by the
state. The POE devices must provide health
protection equivalent to central water treatment
and the microbiological safety of the water may
not be compromised. The state must require
adequate certification of all POE devices and, if
not included in the certification process, a
Safe Drinking Water Hotline
- 12-
-------
Annual Report
rigorous engineering design review of the POE
devices (40 CFR 141.100).
Q: My water system provided me with a public
notification about a health-based violation of a
drinking water regulation? Will drinking my tap
water make me sick?
A: A public water system's violation of a health-
based standard does not mean that the people
who consume the system's water will become
sick. A health-based violation means that either
a system has exposed its users to what EPA has
judged as an unreasonable risk of illness, or a
system has failed to treat the water to the extent
EPA has judged necessary to protect users from
an unreasonable risk of illness in the event that
the regulated contaminant is present in source
water (Providing Safe Drinking Water In America:
2000 National Public Water Systems Compliance
Report, EPA305-R-02-001, July 2002).
Q: Where can I find a list of approved analytical
methods for drinking water compliance
monitoring?
A: A list of the analytical methods approved for
compliance monitoring under the Safe Drinking
Water Act is available at www.epa.gov/safewater/
methods/methods, html.
Q: My state has a maximum contaminant level
(MCL) of 0.0005 mg/L for chlordane in drinking
water, but the federal standard is 0.002 mg/L.
Why does the state have a different standard?
A: States that are authorized to implement their own
water program may use the National Primary
Drinking Water Regulations or their own
regulations, provided that they are no less
stringent than federal standards (SDWA
1413(a)(1)).
Q: My neighbors and I are experiencing a type of
oily residue in our water. We have notified our
water department, but nothing has been resolved.
Whom do I notify regarding this problem?
A: The state drinking water program office handles
all complaints and enforcement situations against
public water systems. This is the regulatory
authority for all public water systems in the state
and can help you with this problem. State
drinking water program office contact information
is available at www.epa.gov/
safewater/dwinfo.htm.
Q: Where can I get a list of addresses for public
water systems?
A: An EPA MS Excel PivotTable with SDWIS/FED
data containing public water system addresses
can be downloaded at the following URL:
www.epa.gov/safewater/data/zips.
Q: Are drinking water additives such as chemicals
used for fluoridation and coagulation, regulated
by the Safe Drinking Water Act?
A: The Safe Drinking Water Act does not require
EPA to regulate the use of additives in drinking
water. Originally, EPA assisted states and public
water systems with the use of water additives;
however, in 1988 EPA established a cooperative
agreement with NSF International to develop
voluntary consensus safety standards for drinking
water additives (53 FR 25586, 25586; July 7,
1988).
Q: EPA has set standards (maximum contaminant
levels and treatment techniques) for
approximately 90 contaminants. What guidelines
does EPA follow to determine if a particular
contaminant will be regulated?
A: The Safe Drinking Water Act requires EPA to
consider three evaluation criteria when
determining whether or not to regulate a
substance: potential adverse health affects from
the contaminant, occurrence of the contaminant
in public water systems including the frequency it
is present at levels of public health concern, and
whether regulation of the contaminant would
present a meaningful opportunity for health risk
reduction for persons served by public water
systems (SDWA 1412(b)(1)(A)).
Q: The Safe Drinking Water Act requires EPA to
review and revise the national primary drinking
water regulations at least every six years (SDWA
1412(b)(9)). Can EPA establish a less stringent
standard for an existing national primary drinking
water regulation?
A: Yes. If new peer-reviewed scientific health
effects research indicates that a regulation could
be raised while maintaining public health
protection, then such a change is permitted. The
statute precludes EPA from using economic
impacts as the sole basis for a revision that would
provide less health protection than the current
standard (EPA Protocol for the Review of Existing
National Primary Drinking Water Regulations,
EPA815-R-03-002, June 2003).
Safe Drinking Water Hotline
- 13-
-------
Annual Report
Q: "Community water system" means a public water
system that serves at least 15 service
connections used by year-around residents or
regularly serves at least 25 year-round residents
(40 CFR 141.2). How does EPA define year-
round resident?
A: A year-round resident is an individual whose
primary residence is served by the water system.
The individual need not live at the residence for
365 days a year for it to be considered his/her
year-round residence (Public Water System
Supervision Program Water Supply Guidance
Manual, #66a, January 2000).
Q: For the purpose of determining compliance with
the maximum contaminant level (MCL) for total
conforms, does a public water system (PWS)
have to count total coliform monitoring repeat
samples in their calculations?
A: Yes. A PWS must include the results of repeat
samples in their calculations to determine
compliance with the total coliform MCL (40 CFR
141.21(a)(6)).
Q: Our water quality has been terrible for days, but
the water company says that there is no problem
and will not provide any information more current
than the 2002 annual water quality report. With
whom can I speak about this situation?
A: Public water systems oversee the drinking water
delivered to your home. First, contact your
drinking water provider. If you do not obtain a
satisfactory explanation, contact your state
drinking water program office, which has the
regulatory enforcement authority to ensure water
systems in the state are meeting all drinking
water standards. [State drinking water program
offices can be found at
www.epa.gov/safewater/dwinfo.htm.] Finally, the
Environmental Protection Agency may be able to
help. Please contact the Safe Drinking Water
Hotline if you need assistance in obtaining any
telephone numbers.
Q: How can one obtain a list of public or community
water systems that serve a certain population
size?
A: These data are generally available from the
SDWIS database, publicly accessible at
www.epa.gov/enviro/html/sdwis. Alternately, a
person may submit a Freedom of Information Act
(FOIA) request to obtain a list of systems serving
a particular population range.
Q: What can I do to prepare for Hurricane Isabel or
other drinking water emergencies?
A: EPA recommends that you have at least a three-
gallon supply of water per person. Typically, this
would be enough water for three days. Store
water in thoroughly washed plastic, glass,
fiberglass or enamel-lined metal containers. Soft
drink bottles, for instance, work very well. The
containers should be tightly sealed, labeled and
stored in a cool, dark place. Under these
conditions, water can be stored for six months.
If you do not have stored water and there is an
emergency, you can use the water in your hot-
water tank, pipes, and ice cubes. The water in the
reservoir tank of your toilet (not the bowl) can
also be used as a last resort. The following Web
sites provide additional information, including
where to find water outside your home, ways to
purify water and other steps you can take to
prepare for natural disasters.
Federal Emergency Management Agency -
www.fema.gov
American Red Cross - www.redcross.org/home
Department of Homeland Security -
www.ready.gov
Lead and Copper
Q; The drinking water I receive from a public water
system has an unfamiliar odor and a slight
discoloration. I am concerned that this is an
indication of lead in my drinking water. What can
I do to determine if lead is in my drinking water?
A: To determine if lead is in your drinking water,
contact a state certified laboratory to have your
drinking water tested for excessive lead
concentrations. Testing drinking water is
essential in determining whether lead is present
because you cannot see, taste, or smell lead in
drinking water (40 CFR 141,85(a)(1)(iv)(A)).
Contact your state certification officer to get a list
of certified laboratories in your state. To find
state certification officer contact information, call
or e-mail the Safe Drinking Water Hotline or visit
the OGWDW Web site at www.epa.gov/
safewater/fag/sco.html.
Q: A community water system that exceeds the lead
action level on the basis of tap water samples
must deliver pamphlets and/or brochures that
contain public education material to facilities and
organizations (40 CFR 141.85(c)(2)(iii)). What
type of organizations and facilities will satisfy this
requirement?
Safe Drinking Water Hotline
- 14-
-------
Annual Report
A: Facilities and organizations include Women,
Infants and Children (WIC) and /or Head Start
programs (if available); public and private
hospitals or clinics; family planning clinics; and
local welfare agencies (Lead in Drinking Water
Regulation: Public Education Guidance,
EPA816-R-02-010, June 2002).
Q: /As a community water system, how do we inform
our customers of an exceedance of the lead
action level if our billing cycle falls outside the 60-
day requirement?
A: A community water system having a billing cycle
that does not include a billing within 60 days of
exceeding the action level, or that cannot insert
information in the water utility bill without making
major changes to its billing system, may use a
separate mailing to deliver the information as
long as the information is delivered to each
customer within 60 days of exceeding the action
level (40 CFR 141.85(c)(2)®).
Q: Does the Lead Contamination Control Act
(LCCA) require schools to test drinking water for
lead?
Q: Is there a guidance document that outlines
sampling techniques for testing lead in drinking
water?
A: Sampling techniques for testing lead in drinking
water are outlined in EPA's approved methods for
compliance monitoring of lead in drinking water.
In addition, a document entitled Lead and Copper
Monitoring and Reporting Guidance for Public
Water Systems (EPA816-R-02-009) provides
guidance on lead and copper monitoring for
public water systems. This guidance document is
available at www.epa.gov/safewater/lcrmr/
finalmonitorinqquidance.pdf.
Q: Where can I obtain a list of water coolers that are
not lead-free?
A: A list of water coolers that are known to have
lead components can be found in the document
titled Lead in School Drinking Water Coolers Fact
Sheet, EPA810-F-90-021. This list was
published in the Federal Register on January 18,
1990 (55 FR 1772) and includes the companies
that manufacture the water coolers and the model
numbers.
A: No. The LCCA directed EPA to publish guidance
to assist schools, local education agencies and
day care centers in discovering the levels of lead
contamination in drinking-water coolers and
taking actions to reduce contamination. The
LCCA requires the identification of water coolers
that are not lead-free, the repair or removal of
water coolers with lead-lined tanks, a ban on the
manufacture and sale of water coolers that are
not lead free, the identification and resolution of
lead problems in schools' drinking water, and the
authorization of additional funds for lead
screening programs for children.
Q: When a public water system (PWS) asks its
customers to collect first-draw samples for lead
testing compliance, how long can the PWS wait
before performing acidification on the samples?
After acidification, must the first-draw samples
stand for a certain period of time?
A: A PWS has up to 14 days after the first-draw
samples are collected to perform the acidification.
After acidification, the samples must stand in the
original containers for the time specified in the
approved EPA method before the samples can
be analyzed (40 CFR 141.86(b)(2)).
Q: EPA recommends that schools and day care
facilities test their drinking water for lead because
it is a significant health concern, especially for
young children and infants. Is there guidance
available for schools and day care facilities that
would like to test for lead in their drinking water?
A: EPA has produced several guidance documents
that would assist schools and day care facilities
with testing for lead in drinking water. In 1994,
EPA published a guidance document entitled
Lead in Drinking Water in School and
Nonresidential Buildings, EPA812-B-94-002,
which provides an overall framework for
conducting a lead sampling program. EPA also
published a companion document entitled
Sampling for Lead in Drinking Water in Nursery
Schools and Day Care Facilities, EPA812-B-94-
003. Both of these documents are available on
the Internet at www.epa.gov/safewater/lead/
testing.htm.
Q: What is hardness in water? How does it affect
my drinking water?
A: Hardness is a measure of the amount of calcium
and magnesium in the water. It is usually
measured with combined calcium and
magnesium levels and reported as Calcium
Carbonate (CaC03). The calcium and
magnesium compounds can interfere with
Safe Drinking Water Hotline
- 15-
-------
Annual Report
corrosion control because they are less soluble at
high pH levels than at low pH levels. When
corrosion control techniques are selected and
implemented, hardness must be taken into
consideration because it can cause unintended
side effects such as increased scaling, both
within the pump station and treatment plant or out
in the service area (Revised Guidance Manual for
Selecting Lead and Copper Control Strategies,
EPA816-R-03-001, March 2003).
Microbials and Disinfection Byproducts
(MDBP)
Q: What must a public water system using chlorine
or chloramines measure to determine compliance
with the maximum residual disinfectant level
(MRDL)?
A: For compliance with the Stage 1 Disinfectants
and Disinfection Byproducts Rule, community
water systems (CWSs) and non-transient non-
community water systems (NTNCWSs) using
chlorine to maintain a residual disinfectant must
measure either free chlorine or total chlorine to
determine compliance with the MRDL. CWSs
and NTNCWs using chloramines to maintain a
residual disinfect must measure either total
chlorine or combined chlorine (63 FR 69390,
69425; December 16, 1998).
Q: The Surface Water Treatment Rule requires the
residual disinfectant concentration in water
entering the distribution system to be no less than
0.2 mg/L for more than four consecutive hours
(40 CFR 141.72(a)(3) and (b)(2)). How did EPA
arrive at the four-hour time interval?
A: EPA believes that some time allowance is allotted
for systems to restore the disinfectant residual
rather than categorically defining this absence as
a treatment technique violation. Once systems
are aware that the disinfectant concentration level
is low or absent, four hours is a reasonable
amount of time for operators to adjust and/or
repair the disinfection or monitoring equipment or
to bring backup disinfection or monitoring units
on-line (54 FR 27486, 27494; June 29, 1989).
Q: What has EPA established as the Best Available
Technology (BAT) available for compliance with
the maximum residual disinfectant levels
(MRDLs) for chlorine, chloramines, and chlorine
dioxide?
A: EPA has identified the following as the BAT to
achieve compliance with the MRDLs for chlorine,
chloramines, and chlorine dioxide: (1) control of
treatment processes to reduce the disinfectant
demand, and (2) control of disinfection treatment
processes to reduce disinfectant levels (40 CFR
141.65(c)).
Q: A community water system (CWS), using chlorine
dioxide as a disinfectant, draws routine daily
monitoring samples for chlorite at the entrance to
the distribution system. If a Cl/I/S exceeds the
MCL for chlorite, what additional monitoring must
the system conduct?
A: On each day following a routine sample
monitoring result that exceeds the chlorite MCL at
the entrance to the distribution system, the
system is required to take three chlorite
distribution system samples at the following
locations: as close to the first customer as
possible, in a location representative of average
residence time, and as close to the end of the
distribution system as possible. This follow-up
monitoring is in addition to the daily sample
required at the entrance to the distribution system
(40 CFR 141.132(b)(2)).
Q: We are going to be changing our water system's
disinfection practice. Is there a public notification
requirement when a system switches from
chlorine to chloramines?
A: According to Tom Grubbs of EPA's OGWDW,
there is no formal notification requirement when a
system changes its disinfection practice, but
there are important reasons to do so when
changing to chloramines. The system must notify
the State because lead and copper issues. Since
kidney dialysis patients will be affected, dialysis
centers, hospitals, and other health care
providers must be notified. Chloramines must be
removed from water used for dialysis, and is
more difficult than chlorine removal. In addition,
because chloramines are toxic to fish, notify pet
stores and aquariums so that they can remove
any residual chloramines.
Q: Our water system is subject to the Stage 1
Disinfectants and Disinfection Byproducts (DBP)
Rule. What requirements must we meet to
qualify for reduced monitoring for disinfectant
byproduct precursors (DBPP)?
A: Subpart H systems with an average treated water
total organic carbon (TOC) of less than 2.0 mg/L
for two consecutive years, or less than 1.0 mg/L
for one year, may reduce monitoring for both
TOC and alkalinity to one paired sample and one
source water alkalinity sample per plant per
quarter (40 CFR 141.132(d)(2)). The system
must revert to routine monitoring in the month
Safe Drinking Water Hotline
- 16-
-------
Annual Report
following the quarter when the annual average
treated water TOC is greater than or equal to 2.0
mg/L.
Q: When a public water system (PWS) monitors for
chlorine in the distribution system, is the residual
disinfectant measured as free chlorine or total
chlorine?
A: A PWS must measure residual disinfectant
concentrations with one of the analytical methods
approved by EPA for this purpose (40 CFR
141.74(a)(2)). The table in 40 CFR 141.74(a)(2)
includes EPA approved analytical methods for
residual disinfectant based on both free chlorine
and total chlorine.
Q: Is there a list of approved laboratories for
analyzing Cryptosporidium under the Long Term
2 Enhanced Surface Water Treatment Rule
(LT2ESWTR)?
A: A List of laboratories that have passed the
Laboratory Quality Assurance Evaluation
Program for Analysis of Cryptosporidium under
the Safe Drinking Water Act is posted on EPA's
Web site the following URL: www.epa.gov/
safewater/lt2/aprvlabs.html. These laboratories
have been granted "Approval Pending" status.
"Approval" status is dependent on promulgation
of the LT2ESWTR.
Q: What are the five constituents of the haloacetic
acids (HAA5) group and what is the maximum
contaminant level (MCL) and maximum
contaminant level goal (MCLG) for this group of
constituents?
A: The five haloacetic acid constituents are
monochloroacetic acid, dichloroacetic acid,
trichloroacetic acid, monobromoacetic acid, and
dibromoacetic acid. The MCL for HAA5 is 0.060
mg/L (40 CFR 141.64). This MCL is based on
the sum of the concentrations of the five
constituents (63 FR 69390, 69396; December 16,
1998). There is no MCLG for HAA5 as a group;
however, two of the five constituents,
dichloroacetic acid and trichloroacetic acid, have
individual MCLGs of zero and 0.3 mg/L,
respectively (40 CFR 141.53).
Q: What are the constituents of the total
trihalomethanes (TTHMs) group and what is the
maximum contaminant level (MCL) and maximum
contaminant level goal (MCLG) for this
contaminant group?
A: The four constituents of the TTHM group are
chloroform, bromodichloromethane,
dibromochloromethane, and bromoform. TTHMs
are regulated as a group with one MCL of 0.080
mg/L (40 CFR 141.64). Although there is no
collective MCLG for this contaminant group, three
of the four constituents, bromodichloromethane,
dibromochloromethane, and bromoform, have
individual MCLGs of zero, 0.06 mg/L, and zero,
respectively (40 CFR 141.53).
Q: The Long Term 1 Enhance Surface Water
Treatment Rule requires Subpart H community
and non-transient non-community water systems
serving less than 10,000 persons to complete a
disinfection profile. What is a disinfection profile?
A: A disinfection profile is a graphical representation
of a system's level of giardia or virus inactivation
during the course of a year. The disinfection
profile shows the log inactivation of giardia and
other viruses graphed as a function of time. It is
used in the decision making process for a
system's disinfection practices (e.g., a change in
the point of disinfection, a change in the
disinfectants used in treatment, a change in the
disinfection process, or any other modification
identified by the state) (LT1ESWTR Disinfection
Profiling and Benchmarking Technical Guidance
Manual, EPA816-R-03-004, May 2003).
Q: EPA developed a Laboratory Quality Assurance
Evaluation Program to identify laboratories that
can reliably measure the occurrence of
Cryptosporidium in surface water using EPA
Methods 1622 and 1623. How can a laboratory
obtain approval from EPA to use these methods
to monitor for Cryptosporidium?
A: The Laboratory Quality Assurance Evaluation
Program is a voluntary program. Any laboratory
may participate, provided it meets the personnel
and laboratory criteria as outlined in the March 4,
2002 Federal Register Notice (67 FR 9731).
Interested laboratories can submit completed
application packages and supporting
documentation to EPA's Laboratory Quality
Assurance Coordinator. Laboratories are
expected to analyze initial performance testing
(IPT) samples. Upon successful completion of
the IPT samples, EPA will conduct on-site
evaluations and data audits. Laboratories that
successfully complete the Laboratory Quality
Assurance Evaluation Program will be granted
"Approval Pending" status. Approval is
dependant on the promulgation of the Long Term
2 Enhanced Surface Water Treatment Rule.
Application packages and further information on
the Quality Assurance Evaluation Program are
Safe Drinking Water Hotline
- 17-
-------
Annual Report
available at the following EPA Web site:
www.epa.gov/safewater/lt2/cla final.html.
Public Notification
Q: A PWS has exceeded the MCL of 80 ppb for total
trihalomethanes (TTHMs) for calendar year 2002.
What is the public notification requirement?
A: Exceeding the MCL for TTHMs is a Tier 2
violation. Public notification for a Tier 2 violation
must be issued as soon as practical but within 30
days after a violation is discovered. For any
unresolved Tier 2 violation, a PWS must repeat
the notice every three months or until the
violation is resolved, unless the primacy agency
makes a determination that circumstances
warrant a different repeat frequency. This may
never be less frequent than once per year (40
CFR 141.203(b)). Additional guidance, including
public notice templates, is available in The Public
Notification Handbook (EPA816-R-00-010, June
2000) available at www.epa.gov/safewater/
pn.html.
Q: The Consumer Confidence Report Rule requires
annual water quality reports to contain additional
health information addressing special populations
who may be immuno-compromised. Must this
additional information also be included in public
notifications required for maximum contaminant
level, maximum residual disinfectant level, and
treatment technique violations?
A: The additional health information addressing
immuno-compromised persons required in
consumer confidence reports is not required in
any public notifications. However, the Public
Notification Rule requires the inclusion of health
effect language referring to the special health risk
for infants, young children, some elderly, and
people with severely compromised immune
systems when fecal coliform or E.coli is present.
This health effect language is not required for any
other violation (65 FR 25982, 26043; May 4,
2000).
Radionuclides
Q: I have read that it is possible to treat drinking
water with uranium contamination to levels at or
below 20 jjg/L. I have also read that EPA
proposed an MCL of 20 pg/L in 1991. Why is
uranium regulated at 30 pg/L and not 20 pg/L?
A; EPA invoked discretionary authority under
section 1412(b)(6) of the Safe Drinking Water Act
to set an MCL for uranium at a level higher than
the feasible level. Based on the relatively modest
annual cancer risk reductions between 30 |jg/L
and 20 |jg/L, the expected modest kidney toxicity
risk reductions between 30 |jg/L and 20 |jg/L, and
the high annual compliance costs for an MCL of
20 |jg/L, EPA determined that the benefits did not
justify the costs at the feasible level. EPA
determined that an MCL of 30 |jg/L maximizes
the health risk reduction benefits at a cost
justified by the benefits (65 FR 76708, 76715;
December 7, 2000).
Q: The "sum-of-the-fractions" method used to
determine MCL compliance for beta particle and
photon radioactivity expresses results in
millirem/yr; however, results of beta particle
analysis are given in pCi/L. How do you convert
pCi/L to mrem/yr for the purpose of compliance
with the beta particles and photon emitters
standard?
A: To determine compliance, each beta and photon
emitter must be converted from pCi/L to
millirem/yr using the conversion tables listed in
Maximum Permissible Body Burdens and
Maximum Permissible Concentrations of
Radionuclides in Air or Water for Occupational
Exposure [National Bureau of Standards (NBS)
Handbook 69 as amended August 1963, U.S.
Department of Commerce] (40 CFR
141.66(d)(2)). Consult section II-B.2 of the Final
Implementation Guidance for Radionuclides,
EPA816-F-00-002, for a sample calculation of
"sum-of-the-fractions" and Appendix I for the
table of derived concentrations.
Q: Can gross alpha particle activity analytical results
be substituted for radium levels when determining
compliance with the radium-226/228 standard?
A: Gross alpha particle activity results may be
substituted for the required radium-226 levels
when determining compliance, provided that the
measured gross alpha particle activity does not
exceed 5 pCi/L. If the gross alpha particle activity
result is less than the detection limit, then one-
half the detection limit (i.e., 1.5 pCi/L) is used for
radium-226 and is added to the radium-228
activity. The combined radium-226/228 value
must be used to determine compliance. If the
gross alpha particle activity result is above the
detection limit, compliance is determined using
the whole gross alpha result (40 CFR
141.26(a)(5)).
Q: I received a public notification for a radionuclide
maximum contaminant level (MCL) violation. The
notice states that the health effect is an increased
risk of cancer. Is the risk of getting cancer the
Safe Drinking Water Hotline
- 18-
-------
Annual Report
same for both short-term and long-term
radionuclide exposure through drinking water?
A: The likelihood of developing cancer or genetic
mutations from short-term exposure to the
concentrations of radionuclides found in drinking
water supplies is negligible. However, long-term
exposures may result in increased risks of
genetic disorders and other ailments such as
cancer, pre-cancerous lesions, benign tumors,
and congenital defects. For example, an
individual that is exposed to relatively high levels
of radium-228 (e.g., 20 pCi/L) in drinking water
over the course of a lifetime is projected to have
a significantly increased chance of developing
fatal cancer (roughly a one in one thousand
increased risk if exposed to radium-228 at 20
pCi/L over a lifetime of 70 years) (65 FR 76708;
December 10, 2000). For more information about
the cancer causing effects of radiation see EPA's
fact sheets on ionizing radiation and associated
health effects at www.epa.gov/radiation/docs/
ionize/ionize.htm.
Source Water Assessment
Q: Is funding available to finance assessment and
protection activities conducted under EPA's
Source Water Assessment and Protection
Program?
A: Funds are available through the Drinking Water
State Revolving Fund (DWSRF) and the Clean
Water State Revolving Fund (CWSRF) to finance
a variety of assessment and protection activities
under the Source Water Assessment and
Protection Program. Up to 10 percent of a state's
annual DWSRF allotment may be used for state
program management of the source water
protection program (SDWA 1452(g)(2)).
Additionally, 15 percent of the DWSRF may be
used for local assistance and other state
programs (SDWA 1452(k)). Further information
on using the DWSRF for source water protection
activities is available in the Fact Sheet: Using
DWSRF Set-Aside Funds for Source Water
Protection (EPA816-F-00-013) available at the
following Web site: www.epa.gov/safewater/
dwsrf/source.pdf. Additional funding through the
CWSRF is authorized by the Clean Water Act to
provide assistance to communities, water
systems, and other organizations (including land
conservation associations), for projects that
protect source water and enhance water quality.
Further information on using the CWSRF for
source water protection activities is available in
Protecting Drinking Water with the Clean Water
State Revolving Fund (EPA832-F-00-001)
available at the following Web site: www.epa.gov/
safewater/dwsrf/cwswp.html.
Q: States are required to make the results of source
water assessments available to the public
(SDWA 1453(a)(7)). How does EPA define
"public?" Does EPA provide guidance on
recommended methods states may use to make
these assessments available to the public?
A: Public is defined as all consumers in a source
water protection area as well as all other
members of the public, including federal, state,
and local government agencies. Public water
systems must include information on the
availability of completed source water
assessments in their annual consumer
confidence reports (40 CFR 141.153(b)(2)).
Additional methods for making assessment
results available to the public can be found in the
State Source Water Assessment and Protection
Programs Final Guidance (EPA816-R-97-009,
August 1997) available at www.epa.gov/
safewater/swp/swa ppg. html.
Q: Our state transportation department has plans to
move a natural spring that serves as a partial
source of drinking water for our community's well.
To whom can we address our concerns about
this proposed project?
A: If you have concerns about the potential impact
of an activity on your community's source water,
you may contact your state's Source Water
Assessment and Protection Program office. The
source water program offices for every state can
be found at www.epa.gov/safewater/dwinfo.htm.
Underground Injection Control (UIC)
Q: Is it possible to find out the number of Class II oil
and gas underground injection control (UIC) wells
in a particular state?
A: The approximate number of Class II oil and gas
UIC wells in each state is provided at
www.epa.gov/safewater/uic/classii.html. More
specific information, including the exact number
of Class II UIC wells in a state may be available
from the state's Underground Injection Control
Program contact. A list of these contacts is
available at www.epa.gov/safewater/uic/
states.html.
Safe Drinking Water Hotline
- 19-
-------
Annual Report
Q: Are storm water wells covered under the
Underground Injection Control Program?
A: Drainage wells used to drain surface fluids,
primarily storm runoff, into a subsurface formation
are considered Class V underground injection
wells and subject to the Underground Injection
Control Program (40 CFR 144.81(4)).
Q: What is the difference between aquifer recharge
wells and aquifer storage and recovery (ASR)
wells?
A: Aquifer recharge wells are used only to replenish
water in aquifers, while ASR wells are used to
store water and then recover that water for a
beneficial use (e.g., drinking water). Both types
of wells, however, may have secondary
objectives, such as subsidence control and
prevention of salt-water intrusion into fresh water
aquifers (The Class V Underground Injection
Control Study, Volume 21: Aquifer Recharge and
Aquifer Storage and Recovery Wells, EPA816-R-
99-014u, September 1999).
Q: I plan to construct a new Class V underground
injection control (UIC) well that will be associated
with the recovery of geothermal energy for the
production of electric power. Do I need to
provide notification to anyone? If so, to whom do
I need to send it and what information do I need
to include in the notification?
A: You must provide basic inventory information
about your well to your state, tribal, or EPA UIC
Director, if you have not already done so
pursuant to 40 CFR 144.26. If you are in a state
that has UIC Program primacy (i.e., the state runs
the UIC Class V Program), then you must contact
your state UIC Director to determine exactly what
information you must submit and by what date. If
you are in a state that does not have primacy for
its Class V UIC Program or in Indian Country,
then EPA implements the Class V Program (i.e.,
Direct Implementation or Dl Programs) and you
must submit the inventory information described
in 40 CFR 144.83(a)(2) prior to construction of
your well. The basic UIC inventory information
required by both primacy states and Dl states or
tribes includes the facility name and location, the
name and address of a legal contact, the
ownership of the facility, the nature and type of
well(s), and the operating status of the injection
well(s) (40 CFR 144.83).
Q: Aquifer recharge wells and aquifer storage and
recovery (ASR) wells are employed for many
purposes, including ground water resource
management, water storage and recovery,
prevention of salt water intrusion into fresh water
aquifers, and subsidence control. Must the water
injected into these wells meet all national primary
and secondary drinking water standards?
A: Injectate in aquifer recharge and ASR wells is
required by most regulatory agencies to meet
primary and secondary drinking water standards
in order to prevent degradation of ambient ground
water quality. However, aquifer recharge and
ASR wells are not specifically defined by federal
regulations and are not subject to any specific
regulations tailored just for them, but are subject
to the UIC regulations that exist for all Class V
wells (The Class V Underground Injection Control
Study, Volume 21: Aquifer Recharge and Aquifer
Storage and Recovery Wells, EPA816-R-99-
014u, September 1999).
Q: The Underground Injection Control Director may
authorize the conversion of a Class V motor
vehicle waste disposal well to another type of
Class V well if, among other things, all motor
vehicle fluids are segregated by physical barriers
and are not allowed to enter the well (40 CFR
141.89(b)). What kind of physical barrier would
meet this requirement?
A: Owners and operators must use physical barriers
such as curbs, berms, and/or other containment
structures to prevent motor vehicle fluids from
entering the converted well. These structures
should isolate the well being converted from
motor vehicle waste fluids generated or stored in
other areas of the facility (Conversion of a Motor
Vehicle Waste Disposal Well, EPA816-R-00-017,
November 2000).
Q: Do UIC Class V well requirements apply to a
household septic system?
A: The UIC requirements do not apply to "single
family residential septic wells, nor to non-
residential septic system wells which are used
solely for the disposal of sanitary waste and have
the capacity to serve fewer than 20 persons a
day." Septic system wells that are used to inject
the waste or effluent from a multiple dwelling, a
business establishment, or a community or
regional business establishment into a septic tank
are subject to the regulations governing class V
wells (40 CFR 144.81(a)(9)).
Safe Drinking Water Hotline
-20-
-------
Annual Report
Unregulated Conaminant Monitoring
Q: Large water systems required to monitor for
Aeromonas must arrange for testing using the
approved method listed in 40 CFR 141.40 Table
1, List 2. Testing must be completed by a
laboratory that is certified under 141.28
compliance analysis for coliform indicator
bacteria using an EPA approved membrane
filtration procedure and that also has been
granted approval for UCMR monitoring of
Aeromonas by successfully passing the
Aeromonas Performance Testing (PT) Program
administered by EPA (40 CFR
141,40(a)(5)(ii)(G)(3)). How can a PWS
determine if a laboratory has passed EPA's
performance testing program?
A: Laboratories approved for Aeromonas analysis
will receive approval documentation from EPA
and will be listed on EPA's Office of Ground
Water and Drinking Water Web site. EPA will
provide each successful laboratory with an
approval letter identifying the laboratory by name
and the approval date. This letter, and a copy of
the laboratory's certification under 141.28 for
compliance analysis of coliform indicator bacteria
using an EPA approved membrane filtration
procedure, may then be presented to any PWS
as evidence of a laboratory approval for
Aeromonas analysis supporting the UCMR. EPA
will also post a list of the laboratories that have
successfully completed the PT study at
www.epa.gov/safewater/standard/ucmr/aprvlabs.
html.
Q: Is a public water system (PWS) that serves
10,000 or more persons and purchases its entire
water supply from another system required to
monitor for the contaminants under the
Unregulated Contaminant Monitoring Regulation?
A: PWSs (other than transient water systems)
serving 10,000 persons or more that purchase
their entire water supplies from other wholesale
or retail public water systems must monitor for
the unregulated contaminants on the UCMR List
1 that have a sampling location indicated as
"distribution system" and, if notified by the State
or EPA, must monitor for the contaminants on
List 2 and/or List 3 that have a sampling location
indicated as "distribution system" (40 CFR
141,40(a)(iii)).
Q: l/l/e are preparing to do our Unregulated
Contaminant Monitoring Rule List 1 sampling. Is
there a time frame specified for samples to be
shipped to the laboratory for analysis?
A: Unless otherwise informed by the state or EPA of
other sampling arrangements, public water
systems monitoring for List 1 contaminants must
collect samples in a manner that allows adequate
time for the samples to be sent via overnight
delivery to the laboratory (40 CFR 141.40
(a)(5)(i)(A)). This is because some samples must
be processed within 30 hours of collection.
Q: Under the UCMR, EPA will arrange all testing
and reporting of results for all systems serving a
population of 10,000 or less (40 CFR
141.35(a)(2)). How can a small system obtain
the UCMR data results for review?
A: A hard copy of the UCMR data generated from
samples taken at PWSs serving a population of
10,000 or less will be sent to the PWS.
Q: If a PWS is forced to re-sample for a UCMR
contaminant outside the pre-determined sampling
quarter, is the entire sampling schedule altered?
A: According to the Unregulated Contaminant
Monitoring Regulation Reporting Guidance,
EPA815-R-01-029, November 2001, the only
case where monitoring schedules may change is
if all the samples for the first sampling period are
lost or damaged. In this case, the system may
monitor in another month, and reschedule
sampling based on that starting month.
Vulnerability Assessments
Q: The Public Health Security and Bioterrorism
Preparedness and Response Act requires
community water systems to complete a
vulnerability assessment (VA). What are the
deadlines for submitting a vulnerability
assessment to EPA?
A: Community water systems serving a population
of 100,000 or more must submit VAs to EPA by
March 31, 2003. Community water systems
serving a population of 50,000 or more but less
than 100,000 must submit VAs to EPA by
December 31, 2003. Community water systems
serving a population greater than 3,300 but less
than 50,000 must submit VAs to EPA by June 30,
2004.
Q: The Public Health Security and Bioterrorism
Preparedness and Response Act requires
community water systems to submit a completed
vulnerability assessment (VA) to EPA. Is EPA
currently accepting vulnerability assessments?
Safe Drinking Water Hotline
-21-
-------
Annual Report
A: According the EPA's Water Protection Task
Force, EPA is not currently accepting vulnerability
assessments. Community water systems will be
notified when and how to submit a completed
assessment. [Editors Note: As of January 2003,
EPA is accepting VAs. Guidance on the
certification and submission of vulnerability
assessments is available at www.epa.gov/
safewater/securitv/communitv.html.l
Q: Under the Public Health Security and
Bioterrorism Preparedness and Response Act of
2002 ("the Bioterrorism Act"), all community
water systems serving populations greater than
3,300 persons must conduct vulnerability
assessments. With respect to the Bioterrorism
Act, what determines the population served?
A: According to EPA's Water Protection Task Force,
this determination will be consistent with the data
reported to SDWIS. EPA will rely on the data
submitted through the state for the July 1, 2002,
SDWIS run. Although there are some basic
guidelines specific to SDWIS reporting, individual
states may vary in precisely how they determine
the population served.
Q: Community water systems (CWSs) must submit
signed certifications to EPA confirming that
vulnerability assessments have been conducted
and completed. Who is required to sign the
certification forms?
A: Owners, managers, certified operators, or other
authorized representatives of the water utilities
must sign the certification forms. Persons signing
the forms must have responsibility over the
management and daily operations of the CWSs
(,Instructions to Assist Community Water Systems
in Complying with the Public Health Security and
Bioterrorism Preparedness and Response Act of
2002, EPA810-B-02-001, January 2003).
IhghudqftJhj ]w\hu#/xp p duliv
FINAL RULES
"Guidelines Establishing Test Procedures for the
Analysis of Pollutants Under the Clean Water
Act; National Primary Drinking Water
Regulations; and National Secondary Drinking
Water Regulations; Methods Update"
October 23, 2002 (67 FR 65219)
This final rule revised wastewater and drinking
water regulations to include updated versions of test
procedures (i.e., analytical methods) for the
determination of chemical, radiological, and
microbiological pollutants and contaminants in
wastewater and drinking water. Previously
approved versions of the methods remain approved.
The effective date of this rule is November 22, 2002.
"Unregulated Contaminant Monitoring
Regulation: Approval of Analytical Method for
Aeromonas; National Primary and Secondary
Drinking Water Regulations: Approval of
Analytical Methods for Chemical and
Microbiological Contaminants"
October 29, 2002 (67 FR 65888)
EPA approved the analytical method and an
associated Minimum Reporting Level to support the
Unregulated Contaminant Monitoring Regulation's
List 2 Aeromonas monitoring. This rule also
approved EPA Method 515.4 to support previously
required National Primary Drinking Water Regulation
(NPDWR) compliance monitoring for2,4-D (as acid,
salts and esters), 2,4,5-TP (Silvex), dinoseb,
pentachlorophenol, picloram and dalapon. In
addition, EPA Method 531.2 was approved to
support previously required NPDWR monitoring for
carbofuran and oxamyl. EPA also approved seven
of the eight additional industry-developed analytical
methods that were proposed to support previously
required NPDWR compliance monitoring. Finally,
EPA updated the information concerning the
inspection of materials in the Water Docket to reflect
its new address.
Safe Drinking Water Hotline
-22-
-------
Annual Report
"National Primary Drinking Water Regulations:
Minor Revisions to Public Notification Rule,
Consumer Confidence Report Rule and
Primacy Rule"
November 27, 2002 (67 FR 70850)
EPA finalized changes to the health effects
language for di(2-ethylhexyl) adipate and di(2-
ethylhexyl) phthalate in the Public Notification Rule
and the Consumer Confidence Report (CCR) Rule.
EPA also made corrections to Appendix A of the
CCR Rule. In addition, the Agency is revising the
Primacy Rule to remove regulations pertaining to the
Administrator's authority to waive national primary
drinking water regulations for federally-owned or
operated public water systems. Congress removed
this authority in the 1996 amendments to the Safe
Drinking Water Act. The effective date of this rule is
December 27, 2002.
"Minor Clarification of National Primary Drinking
Water Regulation for Arsenic"
March 25, 2003 (68 FR 14501)
EPA announced that it is revising the rule text in
the January 2001 final rule that established the 10
parts per billion arsenic drinking water standard to
express the standard as 0.010 mg/L, in order to
clarify the implementation of the original rule. This
regulation is effective April 24, 2003.
PROPOSED RULES
"Semiannual Regulatory Agenda"
December 9, 2002 (67 FR 75168)
EPA published the "Semiannual Regulatory
Agenda" to update the public about regulations and
major policies currently under development, reviews
of existing regulations and major policies, and
regulations and major policies completed or
canceled since the last Agenda.
"Minor Clarification of National Primary Drinking
Water Regulation for Arsenic"
December 23, 2002 (67 FR 78203)
EPA proposed to revise the rule text that
established the 10 parts per billion (ppb) arsenic
drinking water standard to express the standard as
0.010 mg/L instead, in order to clarify the
implementation of the original rule.
"Spring 2003 Regulatory Agenda"
May 27, 2003 (68 FR 30942)
EPA published the Semiannual Regulatory Agenda
to update the public about regulations and major
policies currently underdevelopment, reviews of
existing regulations and major policies, and
regulations and major policies completed or
canceled since the last agenda.
"National Primary Drinking Water Regulations:
Long Term 2 Enhanced Surface Water
Treatment Rule"
August 11, 2003 (68 FR 47640)
In this document, EPA proposed National Primary
Drinking Water Regulations that require the use of
treatment techniques, along with monitoring,
reporting, and public notification requirements, for all
public water systems (PWSs) that use surface water
sources. The purpose of the Long Term 2
Enhanced Surface Water Treatment Rule
(LT2ESWTR) is to improve control of microbial
pathogens, including specifically the protozoan
Cryptosporidium, in drinking water and to address
risk trade-offs with the control of disinfection
byproducts. The LT2ESWTR will build upon the
treatment technique requirements of the Interim
Enhanced Surface Water Treatment Rule and the
Long Term 1 Enhanced Surface Water Treatment
Rule.
"National Primary Drinking Water Regulations:
Stage 2 Disinfectants and Disinfection
Byproducts Rule; National Primary and
Secondary Drinking Water Regulations:
Approval of Analytical Methods for Chemical
Contaminants"
August 18, 2003 (68 FR 49548)
In this document, EPA proposed maximum
contaminant level goals for chloroform,
monochloroacetic acid and trichloroacetic acid;
national primary drinking water regulations
(NPDWRs) that consist of maximum contaminant
levels (MCLs) and monitoring, reporting, and public
notification requirements for total trihalomethanes
and haloacetic acids; and revisions to the reduced
monitoring requirements for bromate. This
document also specifies the best available
technologies for the proposed MCLs. EPA also
proposed additional analytical methods for the
determination of disinfectants and disinfection
byproducts (DBP) in drinking water and proposed to
extend approval of DBP methods for the
determination of additional chemical contaminants.
This set of regulations proposed today is known as
the Stage 2 Disinfectants and Disinfection
Byproducts Rule.
Safe Drinking Water Hotline
-23-
-------
Annual Report
NOTICES
"Meeting of the Small Systems Affordability
Working Group of the National Drinking Water
Advisory Council"
October 8, 2002 (67 FR 62718)
EPA announced a meeting of the Small Systems
Affordability Work Group of the National Drinking
Water Advisory Council, established under the Safe
Drinking Water Act, as amended (42 U.S.C. S300f et
seq.).
"Investigator Initiated Grants: Requests for
Applications"
October 10, 2002 (67 FR 63084)
EPA provided information on the availability of a
fiscal year 2003 program announcement in which
areas of research interest, eligibility and submission
requirements, evaluation criteria, and
implementation schedules are set forth. EPA
requested research applications on "Treatment
Technologies for Arsenic Removal for Small Drinking
Water Systems."
"Announcement of a Public Stakeholder Meeting
on Drinking Water Distribution System Impacts
on Water Quality"
October 21, 2002 (67 FR 64639)
EPA scheduled a public meeting for November 14,
2002, to discuss the finished water quality in
distribution systems. The purpose of this meeting is
to provide information to stakeholders and the
public.
"Meetings of the Small Systems Affordability
Working Group of the National Drinking Water
Advisory Council"
October 23, 2002 (67 FR 65114)
EPA announced a meeting for November 7 - 8,
2002, of the Small Systems Affordability Work Group
of the National Drinking Water Advisory Council,
established under the Safe Drinking Water Act, as
amended (42 U.S.C. 300f et seq.).
"Meeting of the National Drinking Water
Advisory Council Notice of Public Meeting"
October 29, 2002 (67 FR 65980)
EPA announced a meeting for November 20-21,
2002, of the National Drinking Water Advisory
Council, established under the Safe Drinking Water
Act, as amended (42 U.S.C. 3300f et seq.). Topics
include, but are not limited to: updates on the
Ground Water and Radon rules; status reports from
the NDWAC's working groups on Affordability and
the Contaminant Candidate List; source water
protection initiatives; and progress in implementing
the Public Health Security and Bioterrorism
Preparedness Response Act of 2002.
"Unregulated Contaminant Monitoring
Regulation; Approval of Analytical Method for
Aeromonas; National Primary and Secondary
Drinking Water Regulations: Approval of
Analytical Methods for Chemical and
Microbiological Contaminants"
November 13, 2002 (67 FR 68911)
EPA announced minor corrections to the
rulemaking issued on Tuesday, November 29, 2001
(67 FR 65888).
"Meeting of the Drinking Water Contaminant
Candidate List Classification Process Work
Group of the National Drinking Water Advisory
Council"
November 26, 2002 (67 FR 70729)
EPA announced a meeting of the Drinking Water
Contaminant Candidate List (CCL) Classification
Process Work Group of the National Drinking Water
Advisory Council (NDWAC), established under the
Safe Drinking Water Act. The next two meetings of
the NDWAC CCL Work Group will be held on the
following dates: December 16-17, 2002 and
February 5-6, 2003.
"Notice of Data Availability; National Primary and
Secondary Drinking Water Regulations:
Approval of Analytical Methods for Chemical
and Microbiological Contaminants; Additional
Information on the Colitag Method"
December 2, 2002 (67 FR 71520)
On March 7, 2002, EPA published "Unregulated
Contaminant Monitoring Regulation: Approval of
Analytical Method for Aeromonas; National Primary
and Secondary Drinking Water Regulations:
Approval of Analytical Methods for Chemical and
Microbiological Contaminants; Proposed Rule."
After the close of the public comment period on the
March 7 proposed rule, EPA received additional
information from CPI International, developers of
ColitagTM, relevant to the performance of the
method. Wth this notice, EPA is inviting comments
on this additional information and must receive such
comments, in writing, by January 2, 2003.
Safe Drinking Water Hotline
-24-
-------
Annual Report
"Announcement of a Meeting of the Microbial
and Disinfections Byproducts Advisory
Committee"
December 2, 2002 (67 FR 71548)
EPA announced a meeting of the Microbial and
Disinfection Byproducts Advisory Committee
established under the Safe Drinking Water Act, as
amended (42 U.S.C. 300f et seq.). The purpose of
this meeting is to provide an update to the
Committee on the status of the Long Term 2
Enhanced Surface Water Treatment Rule and the
Stage 2 Disinfectants and Disinfection Byproducts
Rule. The meeting will be held on December 13,
2002.
"Meeting of the National Drinking Water
Advisory Council"
December 2, 2002 (67 FR 71549)
EPA announced a conference call meeting of the
National Drinking Water Advisory Council,
established under the Safe Drinking Water Act, as
amended (42 U.S.C. 300f et seq.). The Council will
discuss underground injection control with respect to
the practice of hydraulic fracturing for coal-bed
methane production. The meeting will be held on
December 12, 2002.
"National Primary Drinking Water Regulations:
Minor Revisions to Public Notification Rule,
Consumer Confidence Report Rule and
Primacy Rule"
December 9, 2002 (67 FR 73011)
EPA announced minor corrections to the
rulemaking issued on Wednesday, November 27,
2002 (67 FR 70850). The corrections occur in
document 02-30117, beginning on page 70850.
"Notice of Intent To Grant an Exemption for the
Injection of Certain Hazardous Wastes to
Environmental Disposal Systems, Inc. for Two
Injection Wells Located at 28470 Citrin Drive,
Romulus, Ml"
December 20, 2002 (67 FR 77981)
EPA proposed to grant an exemption from the ban
on disposal of hazardous wastes through injection
wells to Environmental Disposal Systems Inc. (EDS)
of Birmingham, Michigan. If the exemption is
granted, EDS may inject all Resource Conservation
and Recovery Act regulated hazardous wastes
through waste disposal wells 1-12 and 2-12. EPA
requests public comments on this proposed
decision. Comments will be accepted until January
22, 2003.
"EPA Science Advisory Board Executive
Committee; Notification of Public Advisory
Committee Meeting"
December 26, 2002 (67 FR 78801)
EPA announced that the Executive Committee of
the U.S. EPA Science Advisory Board will meet on
Tuesday, January 14, 2003 and Wednesday,
January 15, 2003. One purpose of the meeting
includes taking action on the Drinking Water
Committee report titled, "Long Term Enhanced
Surface Water Treatment Rule Proposal and Stage
II Disinfection/Disinfectant By-Product (DBP) Rule
Proposal: An SAB Report."
"Extension of Comment Period for 'Notice of
Data Availability; National Primary and
Secondary Drinking Water Regulations:
Approval of Analytical Methods for Chemical
and Microbiological Contaminants; Additional
Information on the Colitag Method'"
December 31, 2002 (67 FR 79898)
EPA announced that it extended the public
comment period for the December 2, 2002 Notice of
Data Availability concerning approval of the Colitag
Method (67 FR 71520). EPA now must receive
public comment, in writing, by January 17, 2003.
"EPA Public Meeting-Closing the Gap:
Innovative Responses for Sustainable Water
Infrastructure; Notice of Public Meeting"
January 9, 2003 (68 FR 1182)
EPA announced a meeting to discuss water and
wastewater infrastructure in the United States. The
purpose of the meeting is to bring together
stakeholders, including those from business,
government, and academia, to exchange information
and views on management and sustainable
financing of the nation's water and wastewater
infrastructure. The meeting will be on January 31,
2003.
"Meetings of the Drinking Water Contaminant
Candidate List Classification Process Work
Group of The National Drinking Water Advisory
Council"
March 12, 2003 (68 FR 11836)
EPA announced the forthcoming meetings of the
Drinking Water Contaminant Candidate List (CCL)
Classification Process Work Group of the National
Drinking Water Advisory Council (NDWAC). The
dates for the NDWAC CCL Work Group meetings for
the remaining year of 2003 will be as follows: March
27-28, 2003; May 12-13, 2003; July 16-17, 2003;
September 17-18, 2003; and November 13-14,
2003.
Safe Drinking Water Hotline
-25-
-------
Annual Report
"Announcement of a Public Stakeholder Meeting
on Drinking Water Distribution Systems"
April 8, 2003 (68 FR 17041)
EPA announced a public meeting to discuss the
finished water quality in distribution systems. The
purpose of this meeting is to provide information to
stakeholders and the public. The stakeholder
meeting will be held on May 16, 2003.
"Meeting of the National Drinking Water
Advisory Council; Notice of Public Meeting"
April 9, 2003 (68 FR 17365)
EPA announced a meeting of the National Drinking
Water Advisory Council (NDWAC), established
under the Safe Drinking Water Act, as amended.
The Council will hear presentations and have
discussions on topics important to EPA's national
drinking water program, including, but not limited to:
status reports from the NDWAC's work groups on
Affordability and the Contaminant Candidate List,
and updates on regulatory activity, source water
protection initiatives, and the development of EPA's
new strategic plan. The meeting will be held on May
14, 2003.
"Arsenic Treatment Demonstrations"
April 18, 2003 (68 FR 19208)
EPA announced that it plans to conduct the second
phase of a demonstration program on the treatment
of arsenic in drinking water. EPA intends to identify
and evaluate the ability of commercially available
technologies and engineering or other approaches
to cost effectively meet the new standard in small
water systems. Through this notice, EPA is inviting
the public at large, governmental and regulatory
agencies, public health agencies, and drinking water
utilities to identify small water utilities that may be
interested in hosting a demonstration at their facility.
Such utilities should be those that will require
treatment to comply with the new arsenic standard.
Requested information must be submitted by July
15, 2003.
"Underground Injection Control Program-
Revision of Underground Injection Control
Requirements for Class I Municipal Wells in
Florida; Notice of Data Availability"
May 5, 2003 (68 FR 23666)
On July 7, 2000, EPA proposed revisions to the
Underground Injection Control (UIC) regulations that
would allow for continued wastewater injection by
existing Class I municipal wells that have caused or
may cause the movement of fluid into or between
underground sources of drinking water in specific
areas of South Florida. Also in 2000, in a separate
but related initiative, Congress directed EPA to
conduct a relative risk assessment of four
management options for treated municipal
wastewater in South Florida: deep well injection
(Class I municipal), ocean disposal, surface
discharge, and aquifer recharge. A separate
document in today's Federal Register announced
the availability and summarizes the findings of this
relative risk assessment required by Congress. In
this notice of data availability, EPA solicited public
comment on how information on Class I municipal
well injection in the relative risk assessment should
inform the Agency's action on the July 7, 2000,
proposed rule.
"Underground Injection Control Program-
Relative Risk Assessment of Management
Options for Treated Wastewater in South
Florida; Notice of Availability"
May 5, 2003 (68 FR 23673)
This notice announced the availability of the
relative risk assessment report regarding
management options for treated wastewaters in
South Florida, required by Congress. EPA will
consider the information collected on Class I
municipal well injection contained in this relative risk
assessment in making a final determination on the
July 7, 2000, proposed rule.
"Microbial and Disinfectants/Disinfection
Byproducts Advisory Committee; Notice of
Charter Renewal"
May 5, 2003 (68 FR 23715)
This notice announced that the Charter for EPA's
Microbial and Disinfectants/Disinfection Byproducts
Advisory Committee (MDBPAC) was renewed on
March 7, 2003, for an additional two-year period, in
accordance with the provisions of the Federal
Advisory Committee Act (FACA), 5 U.S.C. App. 2,
Section 9(c). EPA has determined that continuation
of the MDBPAC is necessary and that it is in the
public interest to enable the Agency to perform its
duties under the Safe Drinking Water Act.
"Meeting of the National Drinking Water
Advisory Council (NDWAC)"
June 5, 2003 (68 FR 33691)
EPA announced a conference call meeting of the
National Drinking Water Advisory Council
established under the Safe Drinking Water Act, as
amended (42 U.S.C. 300f et seq.). The Council will
discuss follow-up actions relating to a report
presented at the May 2003 meeting by NDWAC's
Work Group on Affordability. The Council meeting
will be held on June 20, 2003.
Safe Drinking Water Hotline
-26-
-------
Annual Report
"Underground Injection Control Program-
Revision of Underground Injection Control
Requirements for Class I Municipal Wells in
Florida; Notice of Meeting"
June 6, 2003 (68 FR 33902)
On May 5, 2003, the Environmental Protection
Agency published two notices in the Federal
Register. The first announced the Notice of
Availability of EPA's "Relative Risk Assessment of
Management Options for Treated Wastewater in
South Florida" (68 FR 23673). The second notice
announced the Notice of Data Availability (NODA)
(68 FR 23666) which summarizes information from
the relative risk assessment and solicits public
comment on how the deep well injection findings
should inform the final determination on the July 7,
2000 proposed rule, Revision to the Federal
Underground injection Control (UIC) requirements
for Class I Municipal Wells in Florida (65 FR 42234).
This notice announced two public meetings about
the NODA. The meeting dates are June 24, 2003
and June 25, 2003.
"Meeting of the National Drinking Water
Advisory Council (NDWAC)"
July 1,2003 (68 FR 39086)
EPA announced the forthcoming conference call
meeting of the National Drinking Water Advisory
Council (Council), established under the Safe
Drinking Water Act, as amended (42 U.S.C. 300f et
seq.). The Council will discuss follow-up actions
relating to a report presented at the May 2003
meeting by NDWAC's Work Group on Affordability.
This is a follow-up conference call to the conference
call held on June 20, 2003. The Council meeting will
be held on July 10, 2003.
"Announcement of Regulatory Determinations
for Priority Contaminants on the Drinking Water
Contaminant Candidate List"
July 18, 2003 (68 FR 42898)
EPA announced that no regulatory action is
appropriate, at this time, for the nine contaminant
candidate list (CCL) contaminants published in the
June 2002 preliminary regulatory determination
notice (67 FR 38222). The announcement
describes the statutory requirements for the CCL,
the analysis EPA used to make the regulatory
determinations, a summary of relevant public
comments with the Agency's responses, a summary
of the nine CCL contaminants, and the Agency's
findings for each contaminant.
"National Primary Drinking Water Regulations;
Announcement of Completion of EPA's Review
of Existing Drinking Water Standards"
July 18, 2003 (68 FR 42908)
EPA announced that it has completed its review of
69 National Primary Drinking Water Regulations
(NPDWRs) that were established prior to 1997,
including 68 chemical NPDWRs and the Total
Coliform Rule (TCR). Based on the Agency's
preliminary review, as well as the public comments
received and other new information, EPA believes
that it is appropriate to revise the TCR. The Agency
also believes that it is not appropriate to revise the
68 chemical NPDWRs at this time.
"National Drinking Water Advisory Council;
Request for Nominations"
July 25, 2003 (68 FR 44078)
EPA invited all interested persons to nominate
qualified individuals to serve a three-year term as
members of the National Drinking Water Advisory
Council (Council). This Council was established by
the Safe Drinking Water Act (SDWA) to provide
practical and independent advice, consultation, and
recommendations to the Agency on the activities,
functions, and policies related to the implementation
of the SDWA. On December 15th of each year, five
members complete their appointment. This notice
solicits names to fill the five vacancies, with
appointed terms ending on December 15, 2006. All
nominations must be received by October 15, 2003.
"Applicability of the Safe Drinking Water Act to
Submetered Properties"
August 28, 2003 (68 FR 51777)
EPA published a draft revised policy regarding
regulatory requirements under the Safe Drinking
Water Act (SDWA) of submetered properties. Under
SDWA Section 1411, the NPDWRs apply to PWSs
that have their own water source, treat, or "sell"
water. As a way to promote full cost and
conservation pricing to achieve water conservation,
the EPA now proposes to change its interpretation of
Section 1411 as it applies to a limited aspect of
submetering and direct billing of residential tenants.
Comments must be submitted on or before October
27, 2003.
"Stakeholder Meeting Concerning Development
of 'Revisions to the Unregulated Contaminant
Monitoring Regulation for Public Water
Systems'; Notice of Public Meeting"
September 11, 2003 (68 FR 53607)
EPA announced a public stakeholder meeting to
present information to stakeholders concerning the
Safe Drinking Water Hotline
-27-
-------
Annual Report
status of the Agency's efforts in the areas of analyte
selection, analytical methods, sampling design,
determination of minimum reporting levels, and other
possible revisions to the current unregulated
contaminant monitoring regulation. The meeting will
be held on October 29, 2003 in Arlington, VA.
"Stakeholder Meetings Concerning the Long-
Term 2 Enhanced Surface Water Treatment
Rule and Stage 2 Disinfectants and Disinfection
Byproducts Rule Proposals; Notice of Public
Meetings"
September 22, 2003 (68 FR 55023)
EPA announced two public stakeholder meetings
on the following proposed drinking water regulations:
The Long-Term 2 Enhanced Surface Water
Treatment Rule (68 FR 47639; August 11, 2003)
and the Stage 2 Disinfectants and Disinfection
Byproducts Rule (68 FR 49547; August 18, 2003).
The purpose of these meetings is to provide
information that will assist stakeholders in evaluating
the proposals, which are currently open for public
comment. The first meeting will be held on October
9, 2003. The second meeting will be held on
October 16, 2003.
"Meeting of the National Drinking Water
Advisory Council; Notice of Public Meeting"
September 30, 2003 (68 FR 56292)
EPA announced a meeting of the National Drinking
Water Advisory Council (NDWAC), established
under the Safe Drinking Water Act. The Council will
hear presentations and have discussions on topics
important to EPA's national drinking water program,
including, but not limited to: an overview of EPA
research activities; status reports from NDWAC's
work groups on Affordability and the Contaminant
Candidate List; an update on security, regulatory,
and implementation activities; and an update on
drinking water data quality. The Council meeting will
be held on November 19 and 20, 2003.
Safe Drinking Water Hotline
-28-
-------
Annual Report
Hotline Statistics
K rvdqh#/ vdwlvwlf v#
Annual Summary of Hotline Service
Customer Profiles
Total number of calls answered
Total number of emails received
21,602
3,304
Customer
Calls
Emails
Average wait time (in seconds)
31
Analytical Laboratories
225
42
Percent of calls satisfied immediately
99.9%
Citizen - Private Well
2,907
432
Percent of all calls answered in < 1 min
84.6%
Citizen - PWS
12,610
1,214
Percent of callbacks answered in 5 days
100%
Consultants/lndustry/Trade (DW)
1,056
203
Percent of emails answered in 5 days
100%
Consultants/lndustry/Trade (Other)
1,122
307
Number of times callers listened to recorded
Environmental Groups
32
21
message about local DW quality
11,122
EPA
257
20
Number of times callers listened to recorded
Other Federal Agency
99
69
message about arsenic rule
403
Government, Local
164
77
Government, State
546
123
Government, Tribal
13
7
Comparison to Previous Year
Spanish Speaking
56
5
International
55
236
Calls
Emails
Media
70
4
FY03 21,602
3,304
Medical Professional
70
16
FY02 25,311
3,738
Public Water System
1,431
161
Schools/University
422
363
Other
467
4
Top Ten Referrals
TOTALS
21,602
3,304
Inquiry Referred to:
Number of
Percent of
Monthly Call Data
Referrals
Total*
Referrals
Total Calls
Average Wait Time
1. State Lab Certification
2,838
16
Answered
mm:sec
2. Local Water System
2,470
14
October 2002
2,000
00:18
3. EPA Internet
2,448
14
November 2002
1,455
00:31
4. State PWSS
1,914
11
December 2002
1,374
00:23
5. NSF/WQA/UL
1,623
9
January 2003
1,531
00:22
6. AGWT/WSC
951
5
February 2003
1,516
00:31
7. Local Public Health
899
5
March 2003
1,695
00:37
8. Other Hotlines
732
4
April 2003
1,705
00:33
9. EPA Regions
610
3
May 2003
1,962
00:28
10. Other
609
3
June 2003
2,930
00:37
*18,121 total referrals to other
resources, agencies, and
July 2003
2,539
00:36
organizations were provided by the Hotline in FY 2003.
August 2003
1,558
00:36
September 2003
1,337
00:43
Total
21,602
00:31
Safe Drinking Water Hotline
-29-
-------
Annual Report
Topic Categories
Category
Calls
Emails
Microbials/Disinfection Byproducts
Chlorine
200
43
Coliforms
836
63
Cryptosporidium
746
16
Disinfection/Disinfection
Byproducts (Other)
303
41
Disinfection - Home Water
219
24
Other Microbials
205
19
Storage - Home Water
86
10
Surface Water Treatment (SWTR,
ESWTR, LT1FBR)
702
108
Trihalomethane (THM)
198
35
Inorganic Chemicals (IOC)/Synthetic
Organic Chemicals (SOC)
Arsenic
359
63
Fluoride
173
44
Methyl-ferfe/y-butyl-ether (MTBE)
89
13
Perchlorate
77
39
Phase I, II &V
413
57
Sodium Monitoring
47
11
Sulfate
22
2
Lead and Copper
Copper
166
18
Lead
1,369
68
Lead Contamination Control Act
(LCCA)/Lead Ban
72
8
Radionuclides
Radionuclides (Other)
321
60
Radionuclides (Radon)
634
41
Secondary DW Regulations
Secondary DW Regulations
416
79
SDWA Background/Overview
Definitions & Applicability
207
62
MCL List
620
88
Other Background
750
349
SDWA 238 20
Hotline Statistics
Category
Calls
Emails
Water on Tap
106
31
Other DW Regulations
Analytical Methods (DW)
232
129
Contaminant Candidate List1
Drinking Water Priority List
36
8
Consumer Confidence Report (DW)
2,497
109
DW Primacy (PWS)
8
2
Operator (PWS) Certification
35
14
Other Drinking Water Security
293
104
Public Notification (PWS)
823
37
Security Planning Grants
108
44
State Revolving Fund (DW)
39
32
Unregulated Contaminant
Monitoring Rule (UCMR)
569
22
Other Drinking Water
Additives Program
53
34
Bottled Water
593
76
Complaints about PWS
657
119
Compliance & Enforcement
(PWS)
229
47
Home Water Treatment Units
1,300
148
Infrastructure/Cap. Development
68
43
Local DW Quality
2,659
320
Tap Water Testing
2,994
199
Treatment/BATs (DW)
159
103
Drinking Water Source Protection
Ground Water Rule
49
9
Sole Source Aquifer
8
5
Source Water/Wellhead Protect.
308
123
UIC Program
127
30
Out of Purview
Household Wells
1,429
272
Non-Environmental
585
113
Non-EPA Environmental
786
332
Other EPA (Programs)
954
293
TOTALS
27,172
4,179
Safe Drinking Water Hotline
-30-
------- |