Meeting Current & Future Drinking Water Regulations

1. Meeting Current & Future Drinking Water Regulations By: Tyler Richter and Wyatt Smith

2. Outline • History of safe drinking water regulations • Impact of SDWA regulations

3. The “First” Drinking Water Regulation • 2000 BC Sanskrit source... “…it is directed to heat foul water by boiling and exposing to sunlight and by dipping seven times into a piece of hot copper, then to filter and cool in an earthen vessel.”

4. History of U.S. Drinking Water Regulations • 1914—coliform bacteria limit • 1925--addition of limits for inorganic and physical constituents • 1942 & 1946--revised standards for a variety of parameters

5. History of Drinking Water Regulations-cont. • 1962 - U.S. Public Health Service • 1974 - Safe Drinking Water Act • 1975 - Interim Primary Drinking Water Regulations • 1986 - Amendments to SDWA • 1996 - More Amendments to SDWA

6. More on SDWA History • Limited federal role prior to 1974 through US Public Health Service • 1974 Safe Drinking Water Act • EPA regulates 23 contaminants from 1974-1986 • 1986 Safe Drinking Water Act • Prescriptive regulatory schedule • 83 contaminants to be regulated in three years • Additional 25 contaminants every three years • EPA had difficulties in meeting these schedules • MCL (Maximum Contaminant Level )-based regulations

7. 1996 SDWA Amendments

8. Highlights of the 1996 SDWA • State programs • DWSRF (Drinking Water State Revolving Fund ), capacity development, operator certification • Consumer awareness • public notification, annual compliance report • Priority regulations (w/ deadlines) • Coming to a head immediately

9. 1996 SDWA Regulations • Because of the lack of available analytical techniques, regulations became more treatment-technique oriented. • A much greater number of PWSs will be impacted by these complex new regulations

10. Example of SDWA Complexity – Stage 2 D/DBP THM/HAA5 • MCL determined by Locational System Running Annual Average (LRAA) • Phase 1: After 3 years (2005), all systems must comply with 120/100 LLRA • Phase 2: After 6 years (2008), all large and medium systems comply with 80/60 LRAA • Small Systems: 80/60 LLRA after 7.5 years or after 8.5 years if cryptosporidium monitoring was required

11. Or this with the LT2ESWTR • Monitoring for Bin Classification • Decisions on how to protect all surface water systems from cryptosporidium are made on a system specific basis • LT2ESWTR (Long- Term 2 Enhanced Surface Water Treatment Rule )incorporates system specific treatment requirements based on “microbial framework” approach • Place systems into “BINS” based on results of source water cryptosporidium monitoring • Systems have 2 yrs following Bin Classification to meet Treatment Req.

12. Cost of Compliance--U.S.Water Utilities

13. 2001 National Consumer Water Quality Survey • 86% have concerns about their water • 51% worry about possible health contaminants • 49% said federal WQ laws not strict enough (up to 40% in 1999). 4% feel they are. • 47% of 18-24 yr olds don’t think their water is as safe as it should be. • Only 17% received/read their CCR’s. • Primary source of information is the media 47%. • 41% currently use home water treatment device (up from 38% in 1999 and 32% in 1997) 2001 National Consumer Water Quality Survey of 1,021 adults ( Opinion Research Corporation International (Feb 2001).

14. Source: 2001 National Consumer Water Quality Survey

15. Treatment • More accurate (and complex) treatment methods-such as • postfiltration GAC absorbers • ion exchange • reverse osmosis • coagulation-assisted microfiltration • activated alumina

16. Bibliography • http://www.epa.gov/safewater/sdwa/laws_statutes.html • http://www.cdph.ca.gov/CERTLIC/DRINKINGWATER/Pages/DWPfunding.aspx