The Environmental Protection Agency is planning to revise requirements for monitoring currently unregulated drinking water contaminants by public drinking water systems. The proposed rule was published in the Federal Register on April 30 and is open for comment until June 14, 1999.
The Safe Drinking Water Act (SDWA) as amended in 1996 required EPA to make major changes to the Unregulated Contaminant Monitoring (UCM) Program conducted at public water systems (PWS).
Changes proposed by EPA include:
No more than 30 contaminants may be required by EPA for monitoring, as opposed to the current list of 48 contaminants.
Changes proposed by EPA include:
Revisions to the unregulated contaminant monitoring list every 5 years.
Changes proposed by EPA include:
A petition process by governors of 7 or more states to add contaminants to the list, as long as these contaminants do not displace those of greater health risk.
Changes proposed by EPA include:
Requiring only a representative sample of systems serving 10,000 or fewer persons to monitor.
Changes proposed by EPA include:
Developing state monitoring plans for systems serving 10,000 or fewer persons with EPA paying for the reasonable testing costs of these systems. This translates to an annual reduction of approximately $1 million less to the regulated community. Water systems serving 10,000 or fewer persons and states would benefit the most from these changes, although costs would rise for large systems.
Changes proposed by EPA include:
Systems that would be required to monitor under the proposed rule include all 2,774 large community water systems serving more than 10,000 people. Only a representative sample of approximately 800 small systems (out of 65,600 small community and nontransient noncommunity water systems serving 10,000 or fewer persons) would be asked to monitor.
Changes proposed by EPA include:
The small systems selected for the program would be considered a "national representative sample." Selection of the systems would be statistically derived, population weighted, and stratified based on water source type and size of system. EPA plans to pay for testing and laboratory analysis required by the program.
Changes proposed by EPA include:
Also identified in the representative sample would be "index sites" and systems to monitor for the List 2 contaminants. The use of index sites provides representative data on the range of operating conditions faced by small systems without requiring every small system monitored to provide this level of detailed information.
Changes proposed by EPA include:
The contaminants identified for the unregulated contaminant monitoring list evolved from those needing additional occurrence information on the Contaminant Candidate List (CCL). The SDWA required EPA to publish a CCL, a list of contaminants that may require regulation based on their known or anticipated occurrence in public drinking water systems. This list was published March 1998.
Changes proposed by EPA include:
Although 34 contaminants are on the occurrence needs column of the CCL, EPA may only require up to 30 contaminants. Two of the 34 contaminants on the CCL were initially believed to be of limited regional occurrence, perchlorate and RDX (hexahydro-1,3,5-trinitro-1,3,5-triazine), and not included in the monitoring lists. The remaining 32 are divided into three lists based on extent of information needed and whether an analytical method exists for the contaminants.
Changes proposed by EPA include:
Systems would be required to monitor 11 contaminants, known as List 1, beginning on the anticipated effective date of the regulation (approximately January 2001). The other contaminants on Lists 2 and 3 may be monitored only after analytical methods have been published for public comment. Before monitoring for contaminants on Lists 2 or 3 would occur, EPA would publish revisions to the regulation in the Federal Register, specifying analytical methods and monitoring locations and dates.
List 1 - Assessment Monitoring
Organic Chemical Contaminants 2,4-dinitrotoluene 2,6-dinitrotoluene DCPA mono acid DCPA di acid, 4,4-DDE, EPTC, Molinate, MTBE, Nitrobenzene, Terbacil, Microbiological Contaminant, Aeromonas hydrophila.
List 2 - Screening Survey: Organic Chemical Contaminants
Acetochlor, Diuron, Linuron, Prometon, 2,4,6-trichlorophenol, 2,4-dichlorophenol, 2,4-dinitrophenol, 2-methyl-1-phenol, Alachlor ESA, 1,2-diphenylhydrazine, Diazinon, Disulfoton, Fonofos, Terbufos.
List 3 - Pre-Screen Testing:
Microbiological Contaminants, Cyanobacteria (blue-green algae, other freshwater algae and their toxins), Echoviruses, Coxsackieviruses, Helicobacter pylori, Microsporidia, Caliciviruses, Adenoviruses.
Monitoring Schedule
The proposed schedule for monitoring depends on the water source and likelihood of finding the contaminant. Therefore, EPA is proposing for chemical contaminants that surface water systems monitor every three months over one 12-month period for the five year monitoring cycle. Ground water systems would monitor two times six months apart.
Monitoring Schedule
EPA also proposes that one of the monitoring times, regardless of water source, be at a time when the system is most vulnerable to the contaminants. EPA has selected a default vulnerable period of May 1 to July 31, but states may specify an alternative period. For microbiological contaminants, EPA is proposing that both surface water and ground water systems monitor two times, once in a vulnerable period and again six months later over one twelve-month period for the five year monitoring cycle.
Monitoring Schedule
Since unregulated contaminant monitoring will be used to determine contaminant exposure to humans, the location of monitoring reflects this factor. For organic contaminants on the monitoring list, the sampling location would be the entry point to distribution systems after treatment. For microbiological contaminants, EPA is proposing sampling at the first tap used for total coliform sampling, representing general exposure, and at the location of the longest residence time near the end of the distribution system, reflecting potential reduced disinfection effects, since these contaminants may have acute health effects.
Monitoring Schedule
EPA has prepared eight guidance and technical documents that explain various aspects of the proposal. They are:
Monitoring Schedule
Analytical Methods and Quality Control, Owners/Operators Guidance for Systems Serving 10,000 or Fewer People, National Representative Sample for Public Water Systems: Statistical Design and State Monitoring Plans, State Reporting, Information Collection Request, Burden and Cost Calculations, Integrated Guidance, Contaminant Selection, Methods, and Sampling.
Grant Program Targets Wetlands, Streamsides
The National Association of Counties, the National Association of Service and Conservation Corps, the National Fish and Wildlife Foundation and the Wildlife Habitat Council have awarded $395,000 to about 40 community-led conservation projects throughout the country.
Grant Program Targets Wetlands, Streamsides
The Five Star Restoration Grant Program will provide grants between $5,000 and $13,500 to community-based partnerships that involve local government and tribal agencies, conservation organizations, youth corps, local businesses and schools to support wetland and streamside restoration projects.
Grant Program Targets Wetlands, Streamsides
"These grants make an important contribution to the Clinton Administrations Clean Water Action Plan, under which were finishing the job of cleaning up Americas waterways," said U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) Administrator Carol M. Browner.
Grant Program Targets Wetlands, Streamsides
"Five Star Restoration" projects must involve at least five different partners, such as environmental, educational, youth, business and philanthropic organizations, other community groups, elected officials, and government agencies. The projects were selected from a pool of more than 300 applications.
