The URL can be used to link to this page

Browse Search

Home My WebLink About750610.tiff '7 COOPERATIVE EXTENSION colorado state university SERVICE Regional Extension Office Court House Building Count Courthouse Burlington,Colorado 90807 County Telephone 1303]349320ee7245 Burlington, Colorado 80807 May 9,//1975 PROM: Dwayne E. Konrad, *melon Irrigation Engiaiegr Burlington C TO: Selected Ext on Agents and County Extension Directors - James Read, Stanley Boyce, Dale Pfau, Robert Croissant, Chester Fithian, Clyde Richardson SUBJECT: Small Municipalities and The Safe Drinking Water Act. Each of you should have gotten a CRD packet from Kan Oakleaf concerning the proposed Safe Drinking Water Act standards. Time is real short (May 16) but the towns have a chance to comment on these standards. Ken's letter suggested you contact Bob Miller et CSU. With time so short, towns will need to comment directly to the EPA. Four advisory member's addressee and the EPA clerk address are listed below for that purpose. The comment letter should probably go to one advisor and the EPA, for best effect. For those people that can't make the May 16 deadline or those that wish to emphasise their feared predicament with the standards, mainly for NO3 and fluoride, they or their leaders could still make their feelings knowvto their congressmen. These people have access to federal EPA people. Towns that can't meet these standards could find themselves in a real bind. Water Supply Division (W8-450) Environmental Protection Agency Washington, D.C. 20460 Attn: Comsat* Clerk, Interim Drinking Water Standards Betty Abbott Henry J. Grasser Omaha City Council Director, Water Utility Dept. Interim City Nall City of Dallas 108 South 18th Street 210 City Hail Omaha, Nebraska 68102 Dallas, Texas 75201 Jack T. Garrett John Whillock Hernandez, Jr., Ph. D. Manager, Pollution Abatement and Professor of Civil Engineering Industrial Hygiene, Medical Dept. New Mexico State University Monsanto Company P. 0. Box 3196 800 North Lindberg Boulevard Las Cruces, New Mexico 88003 St. Louie, Missouri 63166 750610 COLORADO STATE UNIVERSITY AND U. S. DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE COOPERATING MEMO May 5, 1975 To: CRD Contact Agents County Directors Area Directors Regional Administrators District Directors From: Robert Hiller, Research Associate, Agricultural Engineering Re: Safe Water Drinking Act and Proposed Primary Standards You should be in receipt of two CRD Information sheets concerning the Safe Water Drinking Act and the proposed primary standards under the Act. Public comments may be made to EPA before May 16, 1975 at the address indicated in the CRD Info sheet. Based on an analysis of the proposed primary standards by Don Miles, Extension Irrigation Engineer, the following communities should be contacted concerning the applicability of the proposed standards: 1 . Those which may exceed the nitrate limits are Brighton, Gilcrest, Nunn and Seibert. Others which may exceed the nitrate limits are Fowler, Akron, Arriba, Flagler, Holyoke, Stratton, Ault, Eaton, Fort Lupton, LaSalle, Pierce, Wellington and others with similar types of water supplies including rural water systems. 2. Fluoride limits may be exceeded by Cheraw, Cripple Creek, Manitou Springs, Olney Springs, Ordway, Pritchett, Alamosa, Dacona, Keensburg, Larkspur and Strasburg. Others which may exceed the limits are Calhan, Eads, East Lake, Fountain, Swink, Wiley and a number of small municipal and rural systems throughout eastern Colorado. As of yet no enforcement policy has been set by EPA. It is likely that larger systems will be required to comply first. It is possible that smaller systems may receive exemptions which would postpone the need for immediate compliance with the act. It is likely that the enforcement and administration policy of EPA will be directed, at least in part, by the public comments received by EPA. If you have any questions please direct them to: Robert Hiller Department of Agricultural Engineering Colorado State University Fort Collins, CO 80523 491-6172 CRD• commune, lE3OURCE DEEVELOPmEni 1 r ,,, . :. :, , , ,:„ COLORADO EXTENSION SERVICE ■ COLORADO STATE UNIVERSITY ■ FORT COLLINS, COLORADO 80523 No. 11 May, 1975 SAFE DRINKING WATER ACT (P.L. 93-523) OUTLINE OF MAJOR PROVISIONS The following analysis of the Safe Drinking Water Act, prepared by the Environmental Protection Agency, is provided for your information. The objective of the legislation is to provide for the safety of drinking water supplies throughout the United States through the establishment and enforcement of national drinking water standards. It was enacted December 17, 1974. The Federal Government (EPA) will have the primary responsibility of establishing the national standards and States will have the primary responsi- bility for their enforcement and otherwise supervising the public water supply systems and sources of drinking water. A public water system is defined as a system which provides piped water for human consumption if it has at least fifteen service connections or regularly serves at least twenty-five people. The act does not apply to a public water system: 1 . which consists only of distribution and storage facilities and does not have any collection or treatment facilities; 2. which obtains all of its water from, but is not owned or operated by, a public water system to which such regulations apply; 3. which does not sell water to any person; and 4. which is not a carrier which conveys passengers in interstate commerce. Interim primary regulations were promulgated in March, 1975 by EPA to be effective December 1976. Revised primary regulations would be promulgated after a study of health effects on contaminants in drinking water by the National Academy of Sciences is submitted to Congress (not later than December, 1976) and made effective 18 months later, or a total of no more than 4 years and 3 months after enactment. These standards would be designed to protect the public health to the extent feasible through the best treatment methods generally available taking cost into consideration. These standards would be designed to protect the public health to the extent feasible through the best treatment methods generally available taking cost into consideration. They would include maximum contaminant levels; treatment techniques; and general criteria for operation, maintenance, siting, and intake water quality. Colorado State University and U.S.Department of Agriculture Cooperating i 2 Secondary regulations pertaining to odor and appearances of drinking water are to be issued by EPA in December, 1975 but would not be enforceable unless the State determined to enforce them. The States could continue to enforce its laws and regulations with respect to drinking water supplies until the national interim primary regulations became effective and even thereafter at their option. When interim regulations are promulgated (6 months after enactment) and the requirements for the review of State programs are prescribed (within 9 months) , States with regulations equal to the interim regulations and with appropriate administrative and enforcement procedures could qualify for primary enforce- ment responsibility for the new drinking water program. Two years after enactment of the legislation, when the interim regulations became effective, if in a State that has assumed primary responsibility but does not exercise it adequately, or if a State that has not assumed primary responsibility, the Administrator of EPA finds that a system does not comply with any primary regulation he may commence a civil action to require com- pliance. Prior to taking any such action in a State with primary authority he is required to give sixty days notice and provide advice and technical assistance. If sufficient progress were not made within sixty days he could commence the civil action. Public water supply systems would be required to give notice to users of water and the news media for failure to comply with the primary regulations or with a schedule of compliance. Variances and exemptions could be granted in appropriate situations from the drinking water regulations. A variance could be granted because of inability to comply due to the character of the available water source, or because the raw water is of such good quality that a required treatment is unnecessary. Exemptions could be granted of up to seven years (nine years for regional systems) for systems unable to comply due to compelling reasons including economic factors. If State and local authorities fail to act, the Administrator may take action to prevent or abate a contamination of drinking water which poses an imminent hazard to health. If shortages of chlorine or other chemicals necessary to treat drinking water or waste water occur, a case-by-case allocation of needed supplies is authorized. A regulatory program for the protection of underground sources of drinking water is authorized. The program largely parallels the public water supply program. The Administrator would establish requirements to protect underground sources of drinking water within one year. States needing such programs would assume primary responsibility within two years or the Administrator would prescribe a control program for the State. Enforcement would be similar to that for public water supplies. Regulations could not be established which would interfere with oil or natural gas production, unless such regulations would be essential to prevent danger to underground drinking water sources. 3 Comprehensive authority is provided to conduct research and studies on water supply related matters, including health, technological , and economic problems. Specific mandates for several studies are set out including a study of viruses in drinking water, a study of the contamination of drinking water and drinking water sources by carcinogenic chemicals, and a provision for a rural water survey. Aid would be provided to States to improve their drinking water programs through technical assistance, training of personnel and program grant support. A loan guarantee provision to assist small water systems in meeting the regulations which cannot reasonably find financing elsewhere is included. The legislation includes citizen suit provisions similar to those contained in the Federal Water Pollution Control Act, the Clean Air Act, and the Noise Control Act. Provisions for record keeping, inspection, issuance of regulations and judicial review are set out. A 15 member National Drinking Water Advisory Council would be established to advise the Administrator on scientific and other responsibilities under the Act. The Secretary of Health, Education, and Welfare would be required to conform the standards for bottled drinking water to the primary regulations issued under the new legislation, or publish reasons for not doing so. Appropriations totaling $156 million are authorized for fiscal years 1975, 1976, and 1977. A discussion of the proposed interim primary regulations are contained in another CRD Info which is attached to this summary, ella/ S. Kenneth Oakleaf Assistant Director Community Resource Development Community RE1OLRCE DEVaoPMEnt I COLORADO EXTENSION SERVICE ■ COLORADO STATE UNIVERSITY ■ FORT COLLINS, COLORADO 80523 No. 12 May, 1975 Under the Safe Water Drinking Act of 1974 (December 17, 1974) the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) promulgated proposed interim primary regulations in March 1975. Public comment concerning the proposed regulations may be made directly to EPA before May 16, 1975. Based on a review of the proposed standards by Don Miles, Extension Irrigation Engineer, the following comments concerning the proposed standards are presented. The proposed standards set levels for microbiological contaminants, pesticide contaminants, and inorganic chemicals. Maximum contaminant levels in (mg/1 or ppm) of inorganic chemicals other than fluoride are: Arsenic 0.05 Barium 1 ,0 Cadmium 0.01 Chromium 0.05 Cyanide 0.2 Mercury 0,002 Nitrate (as N) 10.0 Selinium 0.01 Silver 0.05 Fluoride levels are more complicated because they are tied to annual average maximum daily air temperatures as follows: Temperature (F°) Limit (mg/1 ) 50.0 to 53,7 2.4 53.8 to 58.3 2.2 58.4 to 63.8 2.0 63.9 to 70.6 1 .8 70.7 to 79.2 1 .6 Colorado State University and U.S. Department of Agriculture Cooperating 2 It is suggested that municipalities, cities, towns, water user associations and other suppliers, especially in Eastern Colorado be notified of these pro- posed standards and be encouraged to check their recent water analysis reports for nitrate and fluoride. Since the proposed regulations will place substantial responsibilities upon small and large water users alike (see attached CRD Info on the Safe Water Drinking Act) many individuals, groups and communities may wish to make their views known directly to EPA. Public comments will be accepted until May 16, 1975. Three written copies of the comments should be sent to: Water Supply Division (WH-450) Environmental Protection Agency Attn: Comments Clerk Interim Primary Drinking Water Standards Washington, DC 20460 S. Kenneth Oakleaf Assistant Director Community Resource Development Hello