Document b5mB2pDKVg13KormRyvLXk9Qk

EPA/Industry Meeting Summary Washington. D. C.August 16. 1993 Representatives of the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and the PVC Industry met at EPA headquarters in Washington, D. C., to discuss the Kansas vinyl chloride monomer issue. In attendance were: Peter Cook Steve Clark Peter Shanagan Dr. Ken Smith Ron McCreedy Dave Eckstein Deputy Director/Groundwater and Drinking Water Deputy Director/Drinking Water Standards Small Systems Coordinator Vice President/Conformity Assessment Technical Committee Chairman Deputy Executive Director EPA EPA _ EPA NSF Vinyl Institute Uni-Bell Chronological Review of Work-to-Date: Dave Eckstein reported on key points to date including the Industry's decision to contract with NSF to perform testing and provide initial liaison with governmental agencies. NSF Data Presentation Dr. Ken Smith summarized sampling and testing done on pipe and water from Doniphan Rural Water District #5. The data leads NSF to the following conclusions: 1) The pre-VCM certification pipe is the source of the VCM in the water. 2) Post-VCM certification pipes are not contributing VCM to the water. 3) No other source of VCM appears to exist. Remediation Alternatives: Ron McCreedy and Dave Eckstein reported on work accomplished and work planned in the different remediation categories for comment by EPA as to the appropriateness. Chemical treatment has been concluded to hold no merit as a remediation alternative. Point of entry devices were discussed with EPA agreeing that they would like to see further work on GAC and ion exchange filtration medias. Further, investigation of bubbling aerators and UV techniques was desirable. Peter Cook offered that precedent is available for use of point of entry devices (GAC) in Florida for man induced chemical contamination. He feels Industry should show an investigation of all viable alternatives. Dave Eckstein previewed work to be contracted with Dr. A1 Berens by Industry to provide a predictive model for use in purge and or partial new pipe remediation alternatives. EPA again expressed their desire for such a tool. R&S 143614 Scope and Sampling Protocol: Dave Eckstein reported that no national data base on rural water systems exists within FmHA. The middle U. S. states are suspect and further detail will come locally. Specific research in Texas was presented. Peter Cook offered that EPA wants to see Industry scope the rural systems in the mid-U. S. as a whole. From that a scientifically and statistically correct sampling program should be proposed. Mr. Cook felt strongly that Industry should finance the sampling program as in their best interest. No other funding alternative was discussed. If this sampling results in rare cases, the EPA will issue a low level public notice explaining the rare instance and the criteria of concern (e.g. pre-1977 pipe, small diameter, long dead-ends, etc.). If the sampling results in greater frequency, a higher response from EPA, and Industry in EPA's opinion, will be in order. Timetable: Industry committed to a first of October final report on remediations alternatives. The predictive model will also be presented at that time (caveated only by our ability to secure flow data from the currently flooded Doniphan #5). Industry will also report on overall scope and present a sampling proposal with cost estimate for consideration. Respectfully submined. Deputy Executive Director R&S 143615