Safe Drinking Water Act Committee

Safe Drinking Water Act Committee

CA-NV AWWA

Safe Drinking Water Act Committee

2011 Spring Conference Meeting Agenda

Monday

March 28, 2010

9:30 to 11:00 AM

Long Beach, CA

  1. Introduction
  2. Federal Regulations Update
  3. Drinking Water Strategy
  4. Perchlorate
  5. Hexavalent Chromium
  6. UCMR3
  7. Fluoride
  8. State Regulations Update
  9. NV –
  10. CDPH
  11. OEHHA PHG(s) – Hexavalent Chromium, Perchlorate, etc.
  1. Technical Program for the Fall Conference in Sacramento
  2. Federal Regulations Update
  3. NV State Regulations Update
  4. AWWA Governmental Affairs
  5. Stage II DBP Compliance
  6. ?
  7. ?
  8. Open Discussion

An Update on EPA's New Approach to Protecting Drinking Water and Public Health

Goal 1. Address contaminants as groups rather than one at a time so that enhancement of drinking water protection can be achieved cost-effectively.

Throughout the summer of 2010, EPA listened and shared information with stakeholders as part of a national conversation to identify what factors were important for grouping contaminants and which contaminant groups might be important to address. After carefully considering input from our stakeholders, EPA has decided to address carcinogenic volatile organic compounds (VOCs) as a group. To do this, the Agency plans to include several additional regulated and unregulated VOCs as part of our effort to revise the regulations for trichloroethylene (TCE) and tetrachloroethylene (PCE). Addressing carcinogenic VOCs as a group will help reduce exposure to these contaminants. In the near-term, EPA also will evaluate how best to address nitrosamine disinfection byproducts since data from the second Unregulated Contaminant Monitoring Rule indicate that these compounds are being found in public water systems. In the long-term, the various offices within EPA we will continue to work together to evaluate and fill the data gaps for other groups of interest for drinking water.

Final Regulatory Determination for Perchlorate in Drinking Water

EPA has decided to regulate perchlorate under the Safe Drinking Water Act (SDWA). The science that has lead to this decision has been peer reviewed by independent scientists and public health experts including the National Academy of Sciences. This decision reverses a 2008 preliminary determination, and considers input from almost 39,000 public commenters on multiple public notices (May 2007, October 2008, and August 2009) related to perchlorate. This action notifies interested parties of EPA’s decision to regulate perchlorate, but does not in itself impose any requirements on public water systems (PWSs). However, this action initiates a process to develop and establish a national primary drinking water regulation (NPDWR). Once the NPDWR is finalized, certain PWSs will be required to take action to comply with the regulation in accordance with the schedule specified in the regulation.

Hexavalent Chromium

EPA began a rigorous and comprehensive review of chromium-6 health effects following the release of the toxicity studies by the National Toxicology Program in 2008. In September, 2010, EPA released a draft of the scientific assessment (Toxicological Review of Hexavalent Chromium) for public comment and external peer review. When this human health assessment is finalized in 2011, EPA will carefully review the conclusions and consider all relevant information to determine if a new standard needs to be set.

On December 22, 2010, Administrator Jackson announced the following actions on Chromium-6:

  1. EPA will work with state and local officials to better determine how wide-spread and prevalent this contaminant is.
  2. EPA will soon issue guidance to all water systems on how to test for and sample drinking water specifically for chromium-6. This guidance will provide EPA-approved methods and other technical information.
  3. EPA will also offer technical expertise and assistance to communities cited in the recent Environmental Working Group study with the highest levels of chromium. Agency will work with water system operators and engineers to ensure the latest testing and monitoring methods are being utilized.
  4. Once EPA’s chromium-6 risk assessment is finalized, EPA will work quickly to determine if new standards need to be set. Based on the current draft assessment, which has yet to undergo scientific peer review, it is likely that EPA will tighten drinking water standards to address the health risks posed by chromium-6.

UCMR3 (Comment due May 2, 2011)

The UCMR design allows for monitoring of contaminants under any/all of the following three tiers.

  • Assessment Monitoring relies on common analytical method technologies used by drinking water laboratories. For UCMR 3, all PWSs serving more than 10,000 people and 800 representative PWSs serving 10,000 or fewer people would monitor for 28 "List 1" contaminants during a 12-month period from January 2013 through December 2015.
  • Screening Survey was required for UCMR 1 and UCMR 2; however, no such monitoring is proposed for UCMR 3.
  • Pre-Screen Testing relies on newer method technologies not as commonly used by drinking water laboratories. As proposed for UCMR 3, EPA would select 800 representative PWSs serving 1,000 or fewer people. Of particular concern are PWSs in areas with karst or fractured bedrock, as well as in non-community water systems. These PWSs would monitor for two "List 3" viruses twice during their designated 12-month period from January 2013 through December 2015.

Additionally, EPA coordinates a Laboratory Approval Program for the selected contaminants. The Laboratory Approval Program would require laboratories have EPA approval to analyze samples for UCMR 3.

Fluoride

The Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) seeks public comment on proposed new guidance which will update and replace the 1962 U.S. Public Health Service Drinking Water Standards related to recommendations for fluoride concentrations in drinking water. The U.S. Public Health Service recommendations for optimal fluoride concentrations were based on ambient air temperature of geographic areas and ranged from 0.7 – 1.2 mg/L.

HHS proposes that community water systems adjust the amount of fluoride to 0.7 mg/L to achieve an optimal fluoride level. For the purpose of this guidance, the optimal concentration of fluoride in drinking water is that concentration that provides the best balance of protection from dental caries while limiting the risk of dental fluorosis. Community water fluoridation is the adjusting and monitoring of fluoride in drinking water to reach the optimal concentration (Truman BI, et al, 2002).

This updated guidance is intended to apply to community water systems that are currently fluoridating or will initiate fluoridation.[1] This guidance is based on several considerations that include:

  • Scientific evidence related to effectiveness of water fluoridation on caries prevention and control across all age groups
  • Fluoride in drinking water as one of several available fluoride sources
  • Trends in the prevalence and severity of dental fluorosis
  • Current evidence on fluid intake in children across various ambient air temperatures.