Transcript National Drinking Water Program: What’s on the Horizon

Drinking Water Program Activities
AMWA 2008 Water Policy Conference
Cynthia Dougherty, Director
USEPA Office of Ground Water
and Drinking Water
The Road to Safer Drinking Water
Identify
Appropriate
Fed/State/Local
Management
Actions
Improvements
in PWS
Source/Treated
Water Quality &
Resiliency
Long-term
Positive Outcomes
e.g. reduced
illness
Improve Science & Information
Prevent & Reduce Risk
Improve Operations & Maintenance
Measure & Communicate
Identify Appropriate Management
Actions

Improve Science and Information



Carrying out activities to assess existing regulations
and identify future contaminants for regulation





UCMR2 monitoring begins this summer
Analyzing Community Water System and Drinking Water
Infrastructure Needs Surveys data for 2009 release of
reports
Reg Det 2 final determinations in summer
Aircraft Drinking Water Rule proposal this spring
CCL3 and Six Year Review in progress
TCR FACA considering future rule revisions
Carrying out effort to protect ground water from
underground injection of carbon dioxide
Focus on Contaminant Candidate
List 3

Draft CCL 3 published on February 21, 2008



Identifies contaminants that:



May require regulation
Require additional research/data collection
Seeking comment on the draft list and process



Implemented NAS & NDWAC recommended process,
represents a more comprehensive, data driven,
reproducible process
93 chemical contaminants, 11 microbial contaminants
Public comment period closes May 21, 2008
SAB consultation during public comment -- April 2008
Review comments and finalize in 2009
Focus on Six Year Review




EPA required to review and, as appropriate,
revise existing NPDWRs every six years
In 2003, EPA completed 1st Six Year Review;
reviewed 69 NPDWRs and made decision to
revise Total Coliform Rule
Currently, performing 2nd Six Year Review
Expect to publish preliminary review results by
summer 2009
Key Elements of Review Protocol
Review Element
Purpose of Review Element
Health Effects
•
Identify potential changes that could impact the Maximum
Contaminant Level Goal (MCLG).
Analytical
Methods
•
Treatment
Technology
•
Occurrence
•
Other Regulatory
Revisions
•
Identify potential changes in “analytical feasibility” - analytes
where the Maximum Contaminant Level (MCL) is set at feasible
level of measurement or where a non-zero MCLG may decrease.
Identify treatment feasibility for contaminants with potentially
lower MCLG/MCL.
• Identify whether potential changes for Treatment Technique
(TT) contaminants.
Identify extent of occurrence/exposure for at current MCL and
other potential MCLs.
Identify non-MCLG/MCL or non-TT types of changes that are
contaminant-specific and not being addressed through alternative
mechanisms. Typically implementation-related issues.
Highlight on a few Six Year Review
Factors
For contaminants where no new health
assessments have been completed, performing
literature searches for other toxicological endpoints
and/or developmental & reproductive end points.
PWS occurrence data critical to develop estimates
of national occurrence
•
•
•
•
45 states plus several tribes,
territories and DC provided
occurrence data in response to
the April 2007 ICR request
Working with state coregulators to identify key
implementation issues
Yes
No
Focus on TCR Revisions
Federal Advisory Committee


Total Coliform Rule/Distribution Systems Advisory
Committee (TCRDSAC) established in July 2007
Purpose:



16 members representing broad range of
stakeholder interests


recommend revisions to the TCR and advice on
distribution systems issues
consider information needs to better assess public
health risks from distribution systems
AMWA rep - David Visintainer – St. Louis, MO {Erica
Brown is alternate}
Affiliated Technical Work Group to assist with the
advisory committee on technical issues
TCRDSAC - TCR Issues






Should the Rule construct change from
monitoring-MCL-PN for total coliforms to
monitoring-investigation-corrective action?
What is an appropriate TC trigger for
corrective actions?
What sampling frequency should be required?
Different for small systems?
Should reductions in monitoring frequency be
allowed if specific criteria are met?
How should investigations and corrective
actions be characterized?
How should violations be communicated?
TCRDSAC – DS Issues

In accordance with the recommendations in the
2001 M-DBP Agreement in Principle and the
2003 Six Year Review, the TCRDSAC Technical
Work Group is evaluating the research and
information collection needed to inform
regulatory decisions on:







Cross connections and backflow
Storage
New and repaired water mains
Intrusion
Biofilm
Nitrification
Contaminant accumulation
TCR Next Steps
TCRDSAC
 6 meetings held through February
 4 additional meetings planned before
anticipated Agreement in Principle in late
summer
TCR revisions
 Proposed rule scheduled for publication in 2010
 EPA plans to work with AwwaRF, states, water
systems, CDC to develop a plan for research
and information collection
Focus on Geologic Sequestration –
Background
o Carbon Dioxide
Capture and Storage
(CCS) is a major
component of US
climate policy
 US storage capacity
for geologic
sequestration (GS) is
significant
 SDWA requires EPA
to protect
underground
sources of drinking
water from injection
Carbon
Capture and
Storage
CO2 Capture
and
Transport
Geologic
Sequestration
UIC Program
Scope
Developing a GS Rule
o
o
o
o
o
Convened 7 technical workshops held since 2005
Released guidance for permitting wells in March
2007
Held 2 stakeholder workshops in 12/07 & 2/08
Expect to propose rule in July 2008
Proposal will address requirements related to:
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
Geologic Siting Criteria
Area Of Review
Well Construction Standards
Mechanical Integrity Testing
Operation and Monitoring Requirements
Well Closure and Post-Closure Care,
Financial Responsibility, and Monitoring
Public Participation and Communication
Improve Water Quality &
Utility Resiliency

Improve Operations and Maintenance




Training and early implementation support for
new rules – LT2, Stage 2, GWR
Advancing sustainable infrastructure (e.g.,
better mgt, full-cost pricing, water efficiency)
Building resiliency of PWSs to prepare,
respond, and recover from adverse incidents
(natural or man-made)
Other Focus Areas

Water Efficiency, Operator Retention,
Consecutive Systems, Partnering for SWP
Focus on Water Efficiency



WaterSense program is focused on end users
Expanding focus to supply side - water systems
Minimizing leakage has many benefits for water
systems and their customers, including:







Improved operational efficiency
Lowered water system operational costs
Reduced potential for contamination
Extended life of facilities
Reduced potential property damage and water
system liability
Reduced water outage events
Improved public relations
16
Focus on Water Efficiency –
2008 tasks
Identify existing policies and best practices
 Partner with ASDWA to Identify State Water
Efficiency Policies



Water Loss Mitigation Tools Document



Collect and disseminate state programs, policies and
activities to promote water efficiency at utilities
Collect and compile information on effectiveness and key
considerations for tools and techniques to conduct water
audits and to identify and repair leaks
Summarize information to allow utilities to identify effective
water loss mitigation tools most appropriate based on their
system’s characteristics
Raise awareness via web casts and dedicated web
page

Include general water loss mitigation info, available
research, links to state programs and utility organization
resources
17
Demonstrate and Communicate
Long-Term Outcomes

Measure and Communicate





Risk communication on drinking water issues
Beginning development of next EPA Strategic
Plan
Collaborating with CDC to improve waterborne
disease surveillance and reporting
Collaborating with ORD on projects to assess
disease reduction
Performance measures to assess risk
reduction attributable to new regulations
Focus on Performance Measures

Initially 2 parallel efforts





EPA working on improving measures to respond to OMB
NDWAC working on effort to identify measures to use in
Strategic Plan
EPA asked to work with NDWAC to identify a
recommended approach for moving forward
November 2007 – NDWAC recommended moving
forward to develop measures looking at Stage 2
DBP Rule and LT2 Rule using approaches based on
the rule models and analyses
Next Steps



Developing paper to describe approach
Submitting to Science Advisory Board this spring for
review
Goal is to have measures in place for next Strategic Plan
Focus on Performance Measures

Avoided bladder cancer cases attributable to the
national reduction of average concentration of
TTHMs observed resulting from the implementation
of the Stage 1 and Stage 2 Disinfectant and
Disinfection Byproduct (DBP) Rules, considering:





bladder cancer risk attributable to drinking water
population weighted national TTHM average,
relationship between TTHM reduction and bladder
cancer incidents attributable to drinking water
cessation lag (the time delay between reduction in
exposure and realization of predicted health benefits).
NDWAC recommended EPA utilize a twenty year
time horizon to estimate the total annual health
benefits recognized by reductions in the national
average TTHM concentrations achieved by 2014.
Focus on Performance Measures

Annual cases avoided nationally of endemic
Cryptosporidiosis illnesses attributable to
implementation of the Long Term 2 Enhanced
Surface Water Treatment Rule considering:




source water Cryptosporidium occurrence
changes in treatment resulting from LT2 rule
provisions,
disease reduction associated with the reduction in
exposure to Cryptosporidium
NDWAC recommended that EPA acknowledge
and discuss other activities of water systems
and drinking water programs that are
contributing to the reduction in microbial
contamination in finished water.
Remember our goal….
America’s
drinking water is
safe, affordable,
and secure
everywhere,
every day, and
Americans know it