Document rpEBJBKEB5NO4NB2QO147M2D0

Board of Directors International Affairs Committee / ---------- -- r../f k. F. Welch, Vice President 3jE^ U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) - National Revised Primary Drinking Water Regulations - REF:' (1) JFW correspondence, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) Advance Notice of Proposed Rulemaking on Asbestos in Drinking Water, February 25, 1983 ACTION REQUIRED: Review for information Background The Safe Drinking Water Act (SDWA) directs EPA to review the National Interim Primary Drinking Water Regulations and issue National Revised Primary Drinking Water Regulations for contaminants in drinking water. This is the third phase in the evolution of EPA drinking water regulations. During this process (1977, 1980, 1982) the National Academy of Sciences (NAS) was engaged by EPA to assess health effects of various contaminants in drinking water and to propose "recommended maximum contaminant levels (RMCLs)" where "no known or anticipated effects on health of persons" would result. While NAS conducted the toxicological assessments, it declined to develop proposed RMCLs, stating this was a regulatory, rather than a scientific, function. Thus, EPA will use NAS studies and other scientific information to develop and publish RMCLs and "maximum contaminant levels" (MCLs) for substances meriting regulation. Current Status On October 5, 1983, EPA published an advance notice of proposed rulemaking (ANPRM) of its intentions to propose National Revised Primary Drinking Water Regulations (enclosed). The questions raised in the ANPRM are: 1. Which contaminants should be regulated? 2. What levels for RMCLs and MCLs would be appropriate? 3. What monitoring and reporting requirements would be appropriate? In the context of the above issues, the ANPRM requests comments on asbestos in drinking water. The agency's remarks on asbestos are presented on pages 45515 and 45516 of the enclosure. Attention is also directed to page 45517, specifically the section entitled "Corrosion." AACPP Action Plan AACPP Strategic Operational Plan SOP-01-03 refers. Staff will meet with Kirkland & Ellis on October 14, 1983 to identify information needs and develop a work plan for preparing industry comments to the ANPRM. If you have any questions, please do not hesitate to call. CAPCO JEN 0031830 JFW/ajb Enclosure cc: A. Kahn, Esq. Special Counsel (all states) AIA/NA AIA copies to: Board of Directors L. Ambler L. Cejudo J. M. Couture L. Taylor A. Verploegh 0172101401 Chrono International Affairs Committee R. Dorner E. van der Rest A. Junes L. Giannitrapani G. Zaviezo J. Schmuas C. Barton F. Mansour M. Delcourt J. Cuvelier R. G. Cairns J. G. Cartuyvels H. Hudson R. Hobbs P. Hart A. Saoulis R. Jalan V. Pattabhi S. Al-Tarkait C. Snidvongs B. Giboin M. A. Elola L. Dolbeau i- CAPCO JEN 0031831 CAPCO JEN 0031832 <155o- Federal Register / Vol. 48, No. 194 / Wednesday, October 5,1984 / Proposed Rules environmental protection , be available For review during normal ` judgment, "no known or anticipated - AGENCY . ; business hours at the EPA, Room 55EB, adverse effects on the health of persons 401M Street, SW., Washington, D.C. occur and which allows an adequate National Revised Primary Drinking 20460. It is requested that anyone ", :'. margin of safety". Section 1412(b)(1)(B). . Water Regulations " - planning to attend the public meeting % /. Congressional guidance on RMCLs for (especially those who plan to make 1 carcinogens was contained in House . 40 CFR Part 141 , . ' .-j' statements) register in advance by " ,r ..Report 93-1185: ' (WH-FRL2418-1) ' "calling or writing Ms. Arnetta Davis at ? . 202/382-7575, EPA, WH-550,401M ? * * * The Administrator must consider the. . .. "possible impact of synergistic effects, long---" agency: Environmental Protection ',. ; SW., Washington, D.C. 20460. Persons (term and multi-stage exposures, and the .......... V . Agency (EPA). ,:/" ">'X V . ' l planning to make statements at the.-,.'-Y';:;; ; existence of more susceptible groups in the action: Advance notice of proposed '. rulemaking (ANPRM).'.'" - meeting are encouraged to submit"; ' population. Finally, the recommended ".. j ", ^written copies of their remarks at the V/" maximum level must be set to prevent the; u:" time of the meeting. -. occurrence of any known or anticipated .. : summary: EPA is today publishing this '-V The public technical workshops will V ; adverse effect. It must include an adequate '_-; advance notice of its intention to - ;" 'provide a forum for a full discussion of propose National Revised Primary . 'issues and a complete exchange of Drinking Water Regulations (NPDWR). information and data. Registration for'"f. for organic, inorganic, microbial and the workshops and addilional ' ;.'.-';.'';',;;;.'';: margin of safety, unless there is no safe .. ' 'U ."O', -threshold for a contaminant. In such a case,';. ", ' the recommended maximum contaminant "f"'- ' level should be set at zero level. ' ..v/1. ';. radionuclide contaminants in drinking '. information can be obtained by ' ` .The primary"drinking water water.-The Safe Drinking Water Act (42 ' contacting AWWA Research regulations must alsqset MCLs; MCLsc USC 300f cl seq.) (SDWA), following the . Foundation. 666B West Quincy Ave.,-. fire the'enfoYceablestandards. MCLs issuance of National Interim Primary . : - Denver, Colorado 80235, which 13 the'-.|. must be set as cose to RMCLs as is . ' Drinking Water Regulations (i.ei, Interim grantee conducting the workshops for'-v*' ..feasible. Feasible means' `.'with the use.. Regulations) directs EPA to issue- EPA.: \ of the best technology, treatment ", revised regulations.'The foundation of for further'information contact:';-'';" .techniques and other means, which the ",. '.../ the NPDWR will be a comprehensive . Joseph "A; Cotruvo, Ph.D., Director, 'Administrator finds are generally reassessment of the Interim Regulations - Criteria and Standards Division, Office" available (taking costs into directed toward identifying chemicals in of Drinking Water (WH-550). . consideration)". Section 1412(b)(3). . drinking water for which national . ; ` Environmental Protection Agency, 401M In addition, the SDWA specifies that " drinking water regulations would be" ... Street, SW.,'Washington, D.C. 2O460, . " primary drinking water regulations - warranted. Detailed assessments will be telephone (202) 382-7575. ; .1:".- ' contain criteria and procedures to made of the experiences since SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:" ' application of the Interim Regulations, occurrence frequency and human exposure potential, human health I. Statutory Requirements II. Regulatory Framework ; HI. NPDWR: Approaches Under , concerns and basic toxicology, water.-,';, . Consideration .. "assure"a supply of water that complies with the MCLs. Section 1401(1)(D) 42 U.S.C. 3COf(l)(D). Secfion 1445(a) authorizes EPA to require by regulation any public water supplier to keep - . - treatment technologies and costs, ... -J. IV. NPDWR: Regulatory Assessments " records, make reports, conduct ' analytical chemistry and monitoring V. NPDWR: Specific Considerations "" " ' ' monitoring and provide such other ' methods and implementation options VI. References . information as may be required to assist that would optimize public health - ' : . VII. Request for Comments '- , in determining compliance with the . protection without unnecessary .......... I. Statutory Requirements SDWA, in evaluating health risks of economic burdens on the States and . communities. ' ' r ' ' EPA is issuing this ANPRM as an ... .. invitation for the public to comment on all of the technical and regulatory issues ' .-.The Safe Drinking Water Act [42 U.S.C..300f, cl seq.) ("SDWA" or "the' Act") requires the EPA to publish, primary drinking water regulations .. that are being examined and requests , any information that will assist in the development of the NPDWR. . which:'. - . . .. 1. Apply to public water systems, . - 2. "Specify(s) contaminants which in the judgment of the Administrator, may . ' unregulated contaminants, or in advising the public of such health risks. . . The SDWA also requires that the revised primary drinking water ' regulations be reviewed every three years and amended whenever changes in technology, treatment techniques or ' 'other factors permit greater health " .'" . .' ' ..' . DATES:-Written comments should be have any adverse effect on the health of protection. .. . ' / V.;. submitted by January-3,-1983."A public? persons" [Section 1401(1), 42 U.S.C.- The SDWA provides for the issuance "T mec.ting.will be held on December 13; '' 300g-l], and - _ of variances to give legal protection to * 1983. beginning at 9:00 a.m. in Room 3. Specify for each contaminant either systems that are unable to comply with 3906. EPA, 401M St. SW., Washington, (a) maximum contaminant levels (MCLs) the regulations, despite the application D.C. Public technical workshops will be or (b) treatment techniques. of treatment technologies, because of held in the following locations: - A treatment technique requrement poor source quality. If a system will not . f' Philadelphia, Pennsylvania--September ' would only be set if "it is not 21-23.1983 ' ' economically or technologically St. Louis. Missouri--October 4-6,1983 feasible" to ascertain the level of a Reno, Nevada--November 1-3,1983 contaminant in drinking water. Orlando. Florida--November 28-30,1983 In the revised primary drinking water be able to comply with an MCL after ... installation and/or use of the "best . . technology, treatment techniques, or , other means which the Administrator finds to be generally available," taking ,, - addresses: Send written comments to regulations, "recommended maximum costs into consideration, the system may Comment Cleik, Criteria and Standards contaminant levels" (RMCLs) must also apply for a variance. Section Division, Office of Drinking Water he specified. RMCLs ore non- 1415(a)(1)(A). 42 U.S.C.3003-4(a)(l)(A). . (WH-550). Environmental Protection enforceoble health goals for public A variance, if granted, would insulate Agency. 401 M Street, SW., Washington, water systems. RMCLs are to be set at a the system not in compliance from D.C. 20400. A copy of all comments will level at which, in the Administrator's enforcement actions for exceeding the -id?'/ Y:) . i' ? CAPCO JEN 0031833 Federal Register / Vol. 48, No. 194 / Wednesday,- October 5, 1983 / Proposed Rules 45503. MCL. The system, however, would be . microbiological, inorganic, organic, and . In genefal'the approach for'ali four required in connection with a variance . radio-nuclide contaminants. At the phases will be similar.- to install and/or use "generally direction of the Congress. EPA based the -Initially an ANPRM will be available" treatment methods that Interim Regulations in large part on the published followed by a comment period would reduce the levels of a particular 1982 U.S. Public Health Service (PHS) and a public meeting. Public technical contaminant. Thus, the treatment . Standards for drinking water which in workshops will also be held. The . `method should be in-place to ... .... turn were derived from previous workshops provide an opportunity for ' .- demonstrate that non-compliance is..-.. standards dating as far back as 1915 for . EPA to present the issues that must ba - attributable to poorsource water the microbiological standards and the- - addressed in development of the -; quality, thereby entitling the system to a 1940's for the MCLs for some of the .. v regulations and to receive information.- variance. However, this finding may be ... inorganic chemicals. .on scientific and technical matters as . ...." - made prior'to the methods actually ... - As the second step. Section 1412(e) of :;.- well us receive comments on regulatory ` being operational.-The important fact is .. the SDWA directed EPA to arrange for.-v;..approaches. . -.I-:..- ..~ that the "available and effective'' ... the National Academy of Sciences'. ".: ; " RMCLs will then be proposed' .v-V:'.'-V "methods be installed in order to reduce ... (NAS) to conduct a study to assess the - followed by a public comment period!-;"- . contaminant levels." In addition." health effects of contaminants in and a public hearing(s). . pursuant to Section 1414(c)(2), 42 U.S.C. ", drinking water and to"provide proposed -'RMCLs will then be promulgated .. 300g-3(c){2) and 300g-4(a)(l)(A)._any V,..\ RMCLs at levels at which there were system that receives a variance will be:' -. "no known or anticipated effects on the put on a compliance schedule and .must health of persons * * *"TheNAS and proposals published for MCLs,' monitoring and reporting, and other : requirements followed by a public . . . give notice of the variance to its ..I" submitted its initial report. Drinking comment period and a public hearing(s). consumers. .Water and Health, to EPA in 1977 which Technologies will be identified that In addition to the primary regulation's," .was published in the Federal Register - ' were used as the basis of determining" the SDWA requires EPA to set . Secondary Drinking Water Regulations' which are to protect the public welfare. ` ' for public comment: additional reports - .-' were submitted in 1980 and-1982. While:? : Congress envisioned that NAS-would-j'y the MCLs: in addition, generally., available treatment technologies (GAT). will be identified for use in the issuance The secondary regulations may apply" to provide proposed RMCLs in the report;.';}: of variances.- . any contaminant in drinking water tha " may adversely affect the odor 6r` " appearance of the"water. Section 1401(2) . 42 U.S.C. 300g-l(c). Secondary -."' maximum contaminant levels (SMCLs) " and monitoring requirements have been ' established (40 CFR Part 143, 44 FR ' 42195. July 19.1979).: In addition to the regulatory mandates, the SDWA provides '" -- " ` authorities for ensuring the safety of the nation's drinking water'in a non- regulatory context. Section 1442(a)(2)(B) authorizes EPA to provide technical assistance to States and publicly owned ' water systems in response to and alleviation of any emergency situation which the Administrator determines to be a substantial danger to public health.. In the absence of appropriate State or the NAS stated essentially that it would? The MCLs. monitoring and " . do toxicological assessments of-' '"- '; reporting, and other requirements " -V! "' contaminants indrinking-water but: ':'"V/ including GAT will then be promulgated." developing proposed RMCLs was not an-i . An ANPRM for Phase I (volatile ." . ... NAS responsibility but. an HPA"li;.iV:..":7;. synthetic organic chemicals) was issued regulatory-function. In the words of the on March 4.1932 (47 FR 9350). and a . " Academy, "determining safe levels to " ` public meeting was held in Washington, .protect the health of persons' drinking D.C., on April 28,1982. In addition, four water containing contaminants requires public technical workshops were consideration of other faptois in conducted across the country on volatile addition to the harmful properties of the synthetic organic chemicals (VOCs) in contaminants" (John S. Coleman. drinking water. . Executive Officer, NAS, Feb. 20,1975). Today's ANPRM addresses Phases II The 1977 and subsequent NAS reports and HI and initiates the regulatory have provided EPA with toxicological assessment of the Interim Regulations. assessments of contaminants in drinking The proposed revised regulations for - water. Using'this information arid data'"-',, radionuclides (Phase III) will follow the from other scientific sources, EPA will 7 Phase II proposal by approximately one ` develop and" publish RMCLs for some of: year. In addition, within Phase II, ` local action. Section 1431 authorizes - these substances." regulations for fluoride will be proposed .' EPA to take such-actions as the.-.. - As the third step. Section 1412(b)(1)(B) separately in response to a petition filed . Administrator deems necessarv.to tv.;"' and 1412(b)(2) provided that EPA mustv:.':;` by the State of South Carolina (see 46 .: protect public health from a propose andp'romulgate RMCLs'and ; J'l FR 58345, December 1,1981). contaminant that may present an . - National Revised Primary Drinking While this ANPRM initiates the " imminent and substantial endangerment Water Regulations (NPDVVR) that would' formal rulemaking process for ' v to the health of persons. ... : .include MCLs and monitoring"and V development of Phase 11 and HI of the reporting requirements for thoSe " - 'V NPDWR, data collection and -" II. Regulatory Framework contaminants that may have an adverse' developmental activites have been on The issuance of Revised Primary effect on human health". going for the past several years. As part Diinking Water Regulations is the third step in the evolution of the primary drinking water regulations mandated by the SDWA. Regulatory Development Approach Development of the NPDWR will be ` accomplished in four phases: of these efforts, two public workshops have been conducted; a public workshop on the microbiological standards, was held on December 4-6, In the first step, the National Interim Phase I Volatile Synthetic Organic 1981, and a workshop on the Primary Drinking Water Regulations Chemicals. radionuclide standards was held on were promulgated on December 24,1975, Phase II Synthetic Organic May-24-26,19S3. In addition, four public with an effective date of June 24,1977. Che'micals, Inorganic Chemicals and workshops will be conducted at several Amendments were issued in 1976.1979 Microbiological Contanimnnts . locations across the country during the and 1960. Maximum contaminant levels - Phase HI Radionuclides comment period for this ANPRM. " (MCLs) and monitoring and reporting Phase IV Disinfectant By-Products Phase IV of the NPDWR will address requirements were set for numerous including Trihalomeihanes trihalomeihanes (THMs) and other I" CAPCO JEN 0031834 45504- Federal Register / Vol.'. 48,'No. 194 / Wednesday, October 5, 1983 / Proposed Rules: disinfection-related contaminant issues, ^This analysis would also be available 163.000 non-community systems. Most of since regulations for these substances for public comment. ' these systems are small and use ground have been in effect only since 1979 and The development process described - water as their source; 90 percent of the this has not yet provided sufficient time above is intended to provide the . . systems serve 10 percent of the for a re-evaluation and revision to be . - greatest opportunity for all interested population. Approximately two-thirds feasible. It is expected that by 1985 ' parties including States, communities, (i.e., over 38,000 systems) of all' additional data on implementation with health and science experts, public.'' - community systems serve fewer than -1' the THM regulations and other research- . interest groups, water engineering and .., 500 people. " - " experience will be available including :. treatment officials and citizens to Status ofDrinking Water'Qualiiy. . -Mi new data on the nature and toxicology " participate and advise EPA on the."'jVv:'.. Despite improvements in disinfection :'y of alternate disinfectants and their by- * ' proper direction lobe taken. . ', and other types ofwater treatment, :\.:~ products; at that timeEPA-will review--'; ? mrHPDWR: ApprbachesUnde?.-.-V' >outbreaks of waterborne disease still' those regulations and determine , " ' ;'-.'Consideration:~'.'"*~'.'*7;t"h'T; J/'v'Trj-v.' occur, particularly in smaller ''! appropriate revisions. /V. ............ During the development of.the . ' NPDWR, existing draft Health ;i v Advisories (HAs) will be'revised if , necessary and additional advisories will, be prepared and issued on other ''; :- subtances for which no regulations ' currently exist. Health Advisories provide scientific guidance on the health effects of chemicals detected in drinking water supplies and are' developed following the state-of-the-art concepts' in toxicology; HAs receive scientific peer _. review as well as consideration by .. EPA's Science Advisory Board.as ;'. " neededTThe HAs specify non- ... carcinogenic risk for transient exposures and suggest a level of a contaminant in drinking water at which adverse health effects would not be anticipated. A margin of safety is factored in so as to protect the more sensitive members of the general population. For . contaminants considered to be .. suspected carcinogens, the carcinogenic risk rates are also provided with no - specific level recommended. The Health Advisory Program was developed by , KPA's Office of Drinking Water in response to the growing concern over the chemical contamination of drinking water supplies across the country. As chemicals are discovered in drinking water, decisions must be made by federal. State and community officials '. as to the suitability of such - - - contaminated water for human consumption. HAs are offered a3 advice to assist those dealing with specific contamination situations. ... -communities. From 1971-60, there were.'': Development of the NPDWR.will 315 reported outbreaks of waterborne / involve a comprehensive assessment of - . disease involving almost 78,000 cases; 50 contaminants in drinking water. ' .outbreaks and 20,000 cases occurred in.' including re-examination of the' '1980 alone.-At least two deaths were requirements and implementation involved. Major causes of outbreaks in! '] experiences of the Interim Regulations..^.- . community water systems were .; Under the requirements and definitions* .. contamination of the distribution system' ofthe.SDWA, .the basic questions being. > and treatment deficiencies, such as , considered in.the efforts include:'; For which contaminants should -inadequate filtration and interruption . disinfection. Specificcauses of other of ' regulations be set? -. ' :i. What levels for the RMCLs and outbreaks could not be determined. In .-. ' non-community water systems, V 'rnMaowaatteerrecnx-vveeaCqR*Iccpdaaaantu_LueeeetiitaiWllmsrsmsrraraarneis,peedwbbeeamhiponntdniinalonoallycceiiittttustttseeteineyyateolemedt.hnnsnesosoac-atdoxf,btnhifwiasoctnnvenmdaelooabiotntnsahphonouellusuaopeeetnreliacadligpsravyinnhfmtbeierlotoebgtogilharcesieqrdpnmaiar,aunareeaaoianilaregaftanpp.dnafmnse.tsetpe-edstcrdcecirra?eoeotaftiotssrhpnnhptool,ioosletroedmhtfidrhan.crctesitieaontn.e,ils.go.?kt'.-.thins.ne...-*o.g.,...,,f.'.;-.:^;1-: wirdrmcfaddnceeoaiieloaissssacMrtsfeeonhdpoiejDcoaataeoorsabiidssreq.snnuimeeestneuystycssaicaiota,n,boristan.uebaaeleuee'rssteraettiedebhoCcft(omrianerunosoe"erusoienoofqnamsutdntc.uffker.aerctoigo.isferlufcofsrlle,epiyoprttcr(dirwouCoioruewnornntuDnltwtotibedet)tciCbehaadberwwr)srbtee,teutaoraloiwaryerspnftebketahrtthpoiseihtroidemocrpeuanenhroCsgnetneoerekrdnettedfidea.tnfaoyebta'.etiprlnne--r,s.'sdgV. ~-!.. implementation of the Interim Regulations ar.d, based upon this . . experience, several adjustments for the NPDWR are under consideration. The the etiology of these occurrences. In , Colorado, a current pilot effort to . improve the-outbreak reporting system indicated that perhaps only about one- implementation experience can. generally be classified into the following: - ' Findings regarding quality of . . drinking water; ' . ! fifth of the actual outbreaks were being recognized and reported. As recognition- of waterborne illness has improved, the : trend in the reported, although not. necessarily the actual number, - - . '; ' Compliance problems with Interim . " outbreaks and cases has increased. Regulations: . .' " ; Monitoring for inorganic chemicals - . Apparent inefficiencies in some has shown that 1500-3000 systems have aspects of the monitoring requirements levels above the MCLs for certain of the under the Interim Regulations. ' ;. . - contaminants. These inorganics nre -. mostly a problem in ground waters and Pursuant to Executive Order 12291 (SB1 Interim Regulations Implementation . removal of inorganic chemicals can be FR13193, February 19,1931), EPA will Experience ' difficult ar.d relatively expensive cn a prepare a regulatory impact analysis- ; The Interim Regulations include MCLs per capital basis for small public water (RIA) prior to proposal if the Agency 2 determines that the NPDWR are --- and monitoring and reporting systems. Problems continue primarily requirements for ten organic compounds with compliance with the MCLs for considered "major rules". (i.e., six pesticides end total arsenic, barium, lead (from pipe or In addition, pursuant to the trihalomethanes), ten inorganic ' ' solder corrosion), fluoride and to an - Regulatory Flexibility Act, an analysis compounds, microbial contaminants increasing dpgree, nitrate. of the impacts on small entities will be (coliforms and turbidity), und ... In addition to tbe traditional" .. conducted prior to proposal orNPDWR - radionuclides. Monitoring and reporting contaminnnts ofmineral origin, the if the Agency determines such requirements are also included for presence of synthetic organic chemicals regulations are likely to have a sodium and corrosivity. of industrial orgin (including pesticides) significant economic impact on a The regulations apply to some 60.000 . has been delected with increasing substantial number of small entities. community water supply systems and frequency. -------- 'n'lv in ground water :K i j I < *1 .1 i .\ [ i } CAPCO JEN 0031835 Federal Register / Vol. 48, No. 194 / Wednesday, October 5, 1983 / Proposed Rules . 45505 sources. Some surface waters are being Compliance with the Interim - systems) within their boundaries. States contaminated with industrial and ' ' - .Regulations has been a problem mostly have reported that certain of these municipal wastes although in many " for small systems. For example: inorganic compounds have not been cases, application of pollution controls The microbiological requirements detected at singificant levels in the has apparently improved surface water were not met by many of the smaller drinking water in many systems and the' quality in recent years. While the six .' systems (serving less than 3,300 people) probability of future contamination is pesticides in the Interim Regulations in 1982; the data show that 10 percent of (very slight. Monitoring has shown that' ' have seldom been found in drinking ' . ' the systems violated the MCL and over little change in concentrations occurs / water supplies, contamination of surface' '25 percent violated the monitoring over time for certain contaminants, water by;other pesticides'during runoff . 'requirements.' primarily ground water contaminants. In .- can be a significant problem in certain Of the large systems (serving' over . addition, some contaminants such as the areas; this has been shown by recent... . ' 100,000 people), 4 percent exceeded an" ;. six pesticides in the Interim Refutations ' ' studies in Ohio' in which finished/,' 1c . MCL, and 3.7 percent failed to monitor.,-; have been found only rarely since v. r"/ . drinking water levqls of locally used'.' '/ '' adequately.' .' : '.'.'j . compliance monitoring requirements / -/ agricultural pesticides paralleled '..f!;". " '"Although most small water systems'.'// went into effect. . /c/.-'i/v/-;/ seasonal use.' ` ` 'deliver good quality water, when a ; These are areas which appear to" y: Radionuclide contamination in ; ' problem does occur, a small community warrant significant modification in- ,T i \ drinking water can be due to natural or' .'is generally least able to.cope with it. /.[''. development of the NPDWR in order . . man-made radioactivity. Monitoring for .. The cost of treatment is sometimes -that public'water system and State' man-made radioactivity currently ; . ' beyond the economic capability of the" resources will be used more efficiently applies only to surface water supplies small system/and the skilled manpower .to be more reflective oflocal or regional. serving populations larger than 100,000. There have been no violations reported of the MCL for man-made'radioactivity. ' necessary to operate treatment facilities'. is even more difficult .to obtain.. - ',/ / ' For those systems not in compliance .. conditiont, s.' t * ....................... ... ... . 'Approaches Under Consideration The regulations for radium apply to all . with various MCLs, in particular some of As outlined above, several problems public water systems and monitoring the MCLs for inorganic chemicals, the with the Interim Regulations and their has shown that approximately 500 - ; problems are generally because of the ' . implementation need to be addressed in . public water supplies exceed the MCL.., costs and feasibility of installing and . the developmental efforts leading to the for radium (a natural contaminant]. . : operating treatment facilities. However, NPDWR-.The regulatory approaches Uranium and radon, though not included _ in current regulations, occur.with r. ... this compliance problem goes beyond . currently under consideration to address the question of costs and includes the- ;. these problems are discussed below. . comparable frequency. : ;//;; While contamination of source waters has traditionally been the primary, concern, attention must also be given to issue of potential health effects '. especially for naturally occurring (particularly in ground water supplies) contaminants like radium, selenium, ',,. barium, and fluoride. Some of these ' Compliance by (Small) Systems ' . The NPDWR would identify technologies representative of generally. ` available treatments described in the the impact of treatment and distribution systems, many of which ate small, SDWA. The approach would ba similar on the quality of water delivered to the consumer. For example, chlorine used in remain unconvinced that the net benefits of contaminant reduction are -to. that promulgated for the . trihalomethane regulations (40 CFR Part water.treatment generates : . worth their costs. ; 142,48 FR 8406, February 28,1S33). trihalomethanes and other organic chemicals; other treatment chemicals may contribute traces of contaminants ` from impurities or residues. The ,, materials used to construct and preserve'/ the conduits andstorage facilities for > drinking water as well as plumbing in'-CS' the home can.also contribute' -;:4' contaminants such as metals and -41; Monitoring Experience. The SDWA assigns to EPA the responsibility for . developing national primary drinking water regulations which contain the minimum national requirements for the r assurance of safe drinking water.'States which have primary enforcement responsibility must ndopt regulations which are no less stringent than the These would assist States in issuing variances. . ... Variances may be granted when a system, "because of characteristics of ' the raw water sources which are reasonably available to the systems, 1." cannot meet the requirements * * 7; . despite application of the best technology, treatment techniques, or . organicresidues.from surface'coatings.'- - national regulations. State regulations other means, which the Administrator ." Eacterial growths in distribution - may contain more detailed monitoring - finds are generally available (taking systems are a^familiar characteristic requirements or more specific criteria costs into consideration)." (Section especially of older systems or where - ' and procedures than do the national 1415(a)(1)(A)). Variances do not have a" * water is inadequately treated. - regulations. . fixed date in the law for the system to Compliance Problems With the The Interim Regulations require come into compliance but the.system Interim Regulations. During fiscal year monitoring to assess compliance with must be put on a compliance schedule. . 1932. over 70,000 violations of the the MCLs at set frequencies for certain Generally available technology (GAT) - Interim Regulations were recorded by contaminants; for example, monitoring would be defined for each regulated 20.0C0 of the community water systems. for inorganic compounds must be . contaminant, taking costs into Most of these violations were for conducted at least once per year or once . consideration and possibly categorizing monitoring and reporting (84%) but it is per three years for supplies using by system characteristics such as size or - estimated that over 9,000 systems . surface or ground water sources, water source. States would evaluate require improved facilities to meet respectively. While monitoring once a each case on a site-specific basis to drinking water standards. Compliance year or every three years does not seem determine if the identified GAT was records for non-community systems to be overly demanding, this can be a appropriate and effective for that were incomplete but do indicate that burden upon small system, and upon system. In addition to central treatment monitoring is generally not being those States that conduct monitoring for alternatives, use of bottled water and conducted on schedule. certain of the systems (e.g., small point-of-use treatment devices are being CAPCO JEN 0031836 45506 Federal Register / Vol. 48, No. 194- / Wednesday. October .5, 1983 / Proposed Rules considered as means of reaching . record. Contaminants such as natural ' with peer review by leading compliance with the NPDWR.. ... radionuclides, certain pesticides and .toxicologists, . In addition to identification of GAT ' ' some inorganics such as barium may and the associated costs of contaminant well be predictable; thus, repeated ; _ ' ' , IV. NPDVVR: Regulatory Assessments reduction, EPA will provide for public monitoring according to the present... .- comment comprehensive health criteria . ' formula may use resources for.non- ..... This section provides background documents for each of the.contaminants to be included in the NPDWR. These documents will.contain detailed. .. productive monitoring, once compliance ' status has been determined and source - conditions are stablized. information on the issues and , : . alternatives that must be considered in determining the appropriate levels for / r assessments of all available information Cases such as these appear to warrant .RMCLs and MCLs and the specific . ' i- . and will fulfill the mandates of ...." conferring the maximum discretion with moniforing/reporting requirements.';-T evaluating the risks of contaminants in'. States so that activities can betailored Public "comments and information are`.'-',:\'- drinking water and the design.of the.: to regional conditions. Thus, although an' - requested that will assist EPA in making; [ regulatory framework for them."! .v^`..l'.'-'l;,' MCL identical to Category I would be-".: / these determinations./.; <Th,r-ee Tiered Approach7 >> j * ( i,' "| , /'developed by EPA, and compliance.withJ . the MCL would be required in all cases, , TnMCLsJ ffjf A three tiered approach has been-".- ' States could be provided flexibility.in developed for determining whether and " establishing monitoring requirements",' V; in what manner to regulate specific-.-'./':;- .within stated criteria.} "::! RMCLs are tq.be set at lev.eis'at.` - . which: ...... .. v ....:.,-L. .". contaminants. Thfs approach was'"" ``l:S In addition, some contaminants such-/ No known'or anticipated adverse'effects on - discussed in the public meetings on the ;. ` as nitrate may be of concern to a' ` /. ' . the Health of persons occur and which allow - : - Safe Drinking Water Act in February-. '" .definable portion of the population, e.g.,' . an adequate margin of safety.--''' - - 1982 and by the National Drinking ' - young children below a certain age. It / .Water Advisory Council in March-1982 may be,possible to provide flexibility to For those toxic compounds for which '. \ . and was widely supported. . States in applying a standard when the.... there may be no threshold (e.g., ' '- -. Drinking water contaminants would V .' high risk population is not exposed. ' ; carcinogens), the House Report 93-1135./ ' be divided into three categories for- / [Category lit Contaminantsj regulatory purposes: ' ~ _suggested thatjhe '.'no effect".level should be zero. / ` Category I.--Those which occur with . Over the past few years, particularly - RMCLs: ScientificApproaches. When'' sufficient frequency and which are of : in connnection with contamination of /. appropriate data are available from sufficient concern to warrant national ' ground waters by organic solvents and human epidemiology or animal studies,' regulation (MCLs) and consistent .' pesticides,' there has been a need for . determination of the "no" effect" level for / monitoring and reporting. ; , rapid determination of "safe" or '' '":'r RMCL purposes for toxic agents not . ; Category II:--Those which are of "acceptable" levels of these - -1; considered to have carcinogenic ' : sufficient concern to warrant national contaminants in drinking water for short potential is a relatively well-accepted ' regulation (MCLs) but which occur at ' periods of consumption. Advice is often procedure. In classical toxicology, "no. : ,;-nited frequency, justifying flexible ,' .' needed in a very short time to determine - effect" levels for chronic or lifetime .- .- '-mal minimum monitoring whether immediate control is necessary. periods of exposure are referred to ' ' jiiirements to be applied by State "In many cases the need has been met by commonly as ADIs or Acceptable Daily authorities. - issuing Health Advisories which provide , Intakes. These ADIs are defined as. - ' Category ///.--Those which"would'not- information on the health effects of exposure levels which would be without warrant development of a regulation butV unregulated contaminants so that users risk to humans when received daily over for which non-regulatory health......;V of the water in question can be assisted ' a lifetime. For non-carcinogonic end guidance could be provided to States or in determining what action to take. - points of toxicity, it is assumed that an ' * water systems, - - Health Advisories are developed for1 organism can tolerate and detoxify some Category I Contaminants . Certain, contaminants such as scoliforms, turbidity and some inorganic and organic chemicals are widely -. -v.. detected in drinking water supplies and pose serious health risks when MCLs . * are exceeded. Without consistent or . frequent oversight, these MCLs have a high potential for being exceeded. Such various lengths of exposure, from one '. day to longer term (up to one to two amount of a toxic agent without ill effect up to a certain dose or threshold. A - - years), depending on the availability of threshold is defined as that dose of a -:-1;. date. . '. . . While some of the contaminants for' which Health Advisories have been' . prepared may occur with sufficient. frequency and at high enough : concentrations to be considered for ' -. NPDWR, there undoubtedly will be a given substance which is required to elicit a'measurable biologic response.- .1 . As the threshold is exceeded, the extent of the response will be a function of the dose applied and the length'of time exposed. .. - contaminants warrant national large number of contaminants which do The intent of a toxicological analysis regulations with fixed minimum not merit that level of regulation. In performed as part of the regulatory requirements, including regular these latter cases, EPA would not development process is to identify the " monitoring requirements. States would . establish NPDWRs but provide non- highest no-observed-adverse-effect-level be required to adopt and apply those regulatory advisories when requested (NOAEL) based upon assessment of regulations as written; States could by a State or public water system. These human or animal data (usually from produce more stringent requirements as advisories would be produced through a animal experiments). To determine the needed. process that would integrate activities in ADI or RMCL "no effect" level, the Category II Contaminants the various EPA program offices including the Office of Drinking Water NOAEL is divided by appropriate "uncertainty" or "safety" factors. This The occurrence of many drinking and the Office of Pesticide Programs. process accommodates for the water contaminants is sometimes Development of the advisories would extrapolation of animal data to the predictable based upon geological include intensive scientific and technical human, for the existence of weak or ' conditions, source type, and historical evaluation of available data coupled insufficient data and for differences in CAPCO JEN 0031837 Federal Register / Vol. 48, No: 194 / Wednesday, October 5, 1S83 / Proposed Rules' 45507 human sensitivity to toxic agents, among ingestion in'humansrah uncertainty"''^ .'.animal data: Additional factors also other factors. General guidelines were.. factor of 100 is used if there"exist.valid f may be used if the circumstance dictate provided-by the NAS Safe Drinking; 7 experimental results on long-term it. Water pommit.tee which state that an;i? .feeding studies on experimental: The process by which an ADI or ' ' uncertainty factor of 10 is used if there- '"animals; and an uncertainty factor of."'.?, RMCL "no effect" level for humans is V exist valid experimental jesults..via-J . ;i000 is.-used.if there exist.inadequate^;>; established is illustrated in Figure 1../ ", ."a.i'.f'rr.!v . ' .......` - ,r .... ; ...... - . . '- I"!?--:-" : .it .`rS~. .: Lvvmkrfis'i,-;.' r . -'..--.--r.y sr.~. nil" . ::V: n irihnVtij Response ^'1 u~. Sr,"r,o:.';;:.v: .tti;/.:.'',.. r.': i.'-H*. un6er^6ainty;..^^- a. -factor r: re -'i ' cV . s.t: . ,isx:;s:i '.. \ ' ' i v hi: vith ,i'; ----\fS s' . D2 DX . #-/T .c.st;. V..:w y. . -v, :: - f - k .y'-fvvV'/ 'B; ` "I .. . dojc.t'. 'C.. - i. :; ,. '.' ; y.: evyifi r;T_ i/".:' "r'-.'i::. zi 'It"i- =.;:i-y-T'i; . ' : C'/ar - .1 .."j.". , / : C..;. D' (ADI)' .. v' 'Dose ' '. ; " ' v- -- ...; , A:NOAEL (experimentally -..--.derived) ' ' '.rV . '.-V; . xyVr-.. :; ' ;. - : . B:'--'.'.'NOAEL (theoretically . .:V:-ivPOSsil?le) , , i :* .*. i . C; '-.ADI .or RMCL "np effect'- tui: .. .....--''levelj. 1 ::-.s ` .1 .-.''i:.::-:-.^D:i'.'i.Presumed threshold for.. *>*v . *! ..t . .;:';:-.any .effect (not adverse)' i; .- -1' :.J -Iv ' : :y Di: ''Another'possible presumed .. ; . .threshold for any effect .(not-.adverse) .... D2t Non-threshold end point of toxicity II CAPCO JEN 0031838 45508 Federal Register / Vol. 48, .No. 194 /'Wednesday, October'5. 1983 / Prpposed Rules " Figure 1 shows the lower end of.a . as evidence which provides indirect finds are generally available (taking typical, sigmoid-shaped dose-response support (e.g.. mutagenicity and other , costs into consideration)." ' curve as might be generated ' ' - short-term test results). This process is _. Thus..MCLs are based upon a' :i-'i'.'ffV experimentally for a non-carcinogenic difficult since the production of cancer balancing of numerous factors including:./ end-point of toxicity believed to have a is a multistage event, determined by a. Potential health risk's!" threshold. The solid line represents the.-., multiplicity of mechanisms, the nature of .* Performance of available treatment curve as experimentally-determined. . which remain, for the most part, technologies: . .. Point A represents the highest NOAEL ': hypothesized rather than identified. Feasibility and costs of treatment: ' determined during the experiment. Point -. To date, scientists have been unable arid D represents the threshold dose at or above which any effect would be '. to demonstrate experimentally a : rf Analytical methods: levels of `;- threshold of effect for "carcinogens,"~v " precision and accuracy attainable by elicited. The distinction between D and according to the 1977 report of the NAS -qualifiedlaboratories " A is that there may be an effect of the. Vi - Safe Drinking Water Committee./Thisg*.'- ' As part of this analysis,'generally. ' i'c applied dose at D but this effect is of \7- finding leads to the assumption,that-virrrur available treatment (GAT) (as defined in'. such a nature or magnitude-as to not be siricemo'safe exposure ddse.cari.be VJ.iLii' . Section 1412(b)) is identified (see considered adverse; the effect would be " Remonstrated for.carcinogens;-anyj5- <i -i* discussion in Section III) along with 1 , : considered adverse somewhere on; the ", " .exposure represents some finite level of-/ levels of contaminant reduction that can ' curve between Point D and Point'A and risk. Depending upon the potency of'the? . " be achieved; and the associated costs is represented by Point B. Point B may-', specific-carcinogen and the level, such 'a] are determined. The costs of achieving a. be the actual no adverse effect level, if ' :. risk,would bevanishingly.small.at .very" specific level are examined on the basis the experimental procedure which . Vi JowRoses. . . . . of costs to individual-public water .'.'.'. determined Point A were not sufficiently `. ' ^.Hurii'an- epidemiology data are"1;';^ systems as well as aggregated to ' sensitive to measure the precise ' extremely limited.in their ability to_* ' ' determine national cost impacts. The `` response relatable to an ultimate human , identify.carcinogenic risks. Thus,- animal level of contaminant reduction - , risk. . --V" , . . -I-' - experiments are conducted from which considered to be reasonable' or feasible To' derive the human RMCL "no'"/ potential human risk is extrapolated. In. is then translated into the MCL, with effect" level or ADI based upon the the first volume of Drinking Water and due consideration given to other - ' experimentally derived data displayed . Health, the NAS Safe Drinking Water . pertinent factors. in Figure 1, the appropriate margin of . ~ Committee provided principles to serve Public comments are requested on '' safety (i.e.. uncertainty factor) is applied as guidance to EPA when assessing the .- what factors should be considered in the to establish an acceptable level of irreversible effects. . . analyses, including: , ' exposure, depicted as Point C. The ; .. " Principle 1: Effects in animals, ' - What engineering and technical ' .' objective of applying the uncertainty , ' . properly qualified, are applicable to .' feasibility criteria should be used to set factor is to make Point C below the no man. . . GAT? ". -dverse effect level. Point B. Thus, Point . Principle 2: Methods do.not now exist. . - What is a reasonable cost for the 0 would represent the ADI or RMCL "no to establish a threshold for long term consumer? ' ' `- effect" level with a margin of safety. It is effects of toxic agents. -. What other factors should be possible that the actual dose response Principle 3: The exposure of considered as pertinent in determination curve would result in Point Di. in which experimental animals to toxic agents in - of the levels for MCLs? case the ADI or RMCL "no effect" level high doses is a necessary and valid (i.e.. Point C) might not be below the method of discovering possible Monitoring/Reporting . , presumed threshold for any effect. . carcinogenic hazards in man. .. The objective of monitoring is to There is suggestive scientific evidence Principle i: Material should be assure compliance with the MCLs and. available to postulate that thresholds do exist for noncarcinogenic end-points of toxicity. In the absence of irrefutable evidence, however, it remains theoretically possible that one or more `noncarcinogenic end-points may not have a demonstrable threshold. The . dose-response curve for this case is depicted as the dashed line from Point A assessed in terms of human risk, rather .than "safe" or "unsafe". Many of the substances treated in this ANPRM are not considered to be carcinogens. The issue of RMCLs and MCLs for carcinogens was discussed in the ANPRM for VOCs (47 FR 9350) and will be discussed at length in the . forthcoming proposed RMCLs for VOCs. of course, to indicate the quality of the drinking water. Monitoring requirements will vary depending upon which ' contaminants and into which Category - (i.e., of the three tiered approach discussed previously) the contaminants ; have been placed. The primary - considerations include: Frequency of sampling: ." . to the origin or Dj.D. represents the Public comments are requested on the Number of samples: :' threshold dose and the RMCL "no , ' establishment of RMCLs including the Locations of samples: in the effect" level in this case would thus be' .. methodology for assessing non distribution system, at the plant, or each zero. carcinogenic toxic effects and the use of well: Determination of RMCL "no effect".' -.-a the ADI as the RMCL. In addition, public - ' Availability of reliable analytical levels for substances which may possess ' comments are requested on the method methods: carcinogenic potential is a two-phase . -/ to be used to determine the level that Precision/accuracy of analytical process. In the first phase, the' . should be set for RMCLs for methods: toxicological data base for non carcinogens.- Availability of qualified carcinogenic end-points of toxicity is evaluated in the same manner as MCLs? laboratories: . Costs of monitoring: and. described above for "noncarcinogens". Section 1412(b)(3) requires that MCLs Distinctions between surface and - In the second phase, assessment is be set "as close to" the RMCL3 "as is ground water sources. made of the evidence which measures feasible". Feasible means "with the use Public comment is requested on the directly the carcinogenic potential (e.g., of the best technology, treatment and above factors and how they would long-term bioassays in rodents) as well other means, which the Administrator apply to the contaminants under 1- CAPCO JEN 0031839 Federal Register / -Vol. 48, No. 194 / Wednesday, Oct'- er 5, 1983 / Proposed Rules 45509 consideration. In addition assistance is systems serving 25 to 1,000 persons. outbreaks of giardiasis with about 20,000' requested on factors that should be used Turbidity monitoring is required daily reported cases. ` in determining reduced (or increased) : for systems using surface water ' At the present time, there is no simple monitoring requirements, such as quality supplies... . . : and reliable method for assaying ;. of the water supply based upon Although coliform3 are not usually sampling or a sanitary survey, proximity .. pathogenic, their presence in water to hazardous waste sites, or proximity to implies that human microbial pathogens potential contamination sources such as, . may be present. The concept ofcoliform upstream industrial pollutant discharges\ .- measurements as a practical indicator of `or pesticide usage. . , '..... microbiological quality is universally .. Public comment is also requested oh; i accepted, but there have been numerous' appropriate reporting requirements for.Yp p other parameters suggested as means for .public water systems such that ;r judging the microbiological'quality of `. ' efficient procedure is followed fqr -^.^Jg: ..drinking water. While the coliform ` determining compliance while ;.:measureiiient still appears'to be the '' minimizing paperwork. Current : preferred parameter, as confirmed by ` " .requirements are (l).to report any recent symposia and workshops, there positive samples above MCLs (after.i^.S; - appears to be a need to reconsider and appropriate check or follow-up - .update the regulatory framework: The sampling) within 48 hours and (2) toT':';' ; current regulations for microbiological' report routine monitoring data either (a) .contaminants are admittedly '. ' 10 days following the month in which .. ' complicated; there are two analytical " ' the result is received or (b) within the ; ' procedures, the sampling frequency is " first 10 days following.the end of a monitoring period;.^..".V..^ __ ; . variable, the volume of sample to be' '-.examined is variable, and thereare Giardia cysts in water samples. - ' Microscopic methods for detection and " enumeration are tedious and require . ;' skill and patience on the part of the .'. - examiner. - Giardia cysts are relatively resistant -, to chloride, but preliminary evidence' J indicates that cysts can be killed at-.'. warmer temperatures (e.g., 20* C) with `' 1.5 mg/l chlorine for 10 minutes. j;V.. Filtration, whether through V'. "'i':?". diatomaceous earth or granular medial has been show lobe effective for.; removing cysts of Giardia and.an'other. pathogenic protozoan. Entamoeba.; fi. ' histolytica. ' ' '.; Viruses have been implicated in . ; numeropus outbreaks of.waterbome . disease. Between 1978 and 1981,12 waterborne outbreaks involving about ' 5,000 cases were attributed to viruses. jy^NPDWkrSpedhft Consideration? ~ Y MCLs for single samples and for " Undoubtedly, the reported number of' monthly averages; in addition the'-. .outbreaks is substantially lower than Disciisse'd below arespecific "iQ.'S/ ." . concept of "check" samples is frequently actual numbers. Moreover, in about half contaminants which are being.;-r;ir:?;Sj' ' misunderstood, in large parfbecause the the outbreaks of waterborne disease, the considered for inclusion in'the NPDWR!. ' term "check samples" is not an accurate causative agent has not been found. For each contaminant EPA is assessing description of the samples or their There is growing suspicion that most of the current MCL and monitoring ` ' 1; ' purpose. EPA's goal for the NPDVVR is these are due to viruses. These requirements and requesting assistance ~ to streamline, to the extent feasible,, the organisms are generally more resistant . indetermining'answers to the following:_ complex aspects of existing to disinfection than coliforms, and thus ' . . For which contaminants are RMCLs' microbiological regulations and to may be present in drinking waters and MCLs appropriate under the SDWA assure that meeting the regulations will meeting current regulations. Because of requirements? In addition to those assure safe drinking water. In addition these factors, viruses are being discussed below, which additional to coliforms and turbidity,' consideration considered for inclusion in the NPDWR.' substances should be considered? . ' is being given to the following drinking * What additional data are available water microbiology issues in the Some of the information needed to develop RMCLs and MCLs for Giardia to support the determination of appropriate RMCLs and MCLs? * ' Given the toxicology and occurrence characteristics, what monitoring and reporting requirements NPDVVR in light of recommendations from the Drinking Water Microbiology Workshop. ` Giardia lamblia would be appropriate in each case?. . Viruses ................... " . Standard plate count Microbiology and Turbidity . .. " . Legionella .. . The microbiological aspect of drinking ' Filtration treatment for surface water water quality has been the subject of , - Disinfection requirement ` ' : standards since 1914. The Interim ' Regulations, as do most of the earlier ' standards, rely on the measurement of total coliforms and turbidity as .-"' indicators of fecal pollution and water ' treatment efficiency, respectively! Specific MCL requirements of the ' ' As noted above, development of NPDWR will not only inyolve addressing current requirements in the Interim Regulations but will also evaluate new controls for such contaminants as Giardia lamblia and and-or viruses would include dose- response data, which are currently limited, and suitable recovery and assay methods. Alternatives under consideration include: 1. Because analytical methods do not appear to be "economically or ; technically feasible" (Section ` 1401(l)(c)(ii)) and because conventional drinking water treatment technologies are effective in removing Giardia and/or viruses, one option would be to . establish a treatment technique * . . requirement consisting of filtration and disinfection for surface water systems. 2. On the other hand, perhaps a hybrid Interim Regulations, simply stated, are ... viruses. Giardia lamblia is a protozoan the following: which is a human intestinal parasite and approach could be considered where ' RMCLs and MCLs and a treatment is the cause of giardiasis,' a disease technique requirement would be set; Total eei.Uym%---- 1 per 100 ml monthly which can be mild or extremely States would than be able to allow 4 par 100 ni wtvjle wrrjS*. debilitating. Giardia infections can be Turbidity___________ t TwbK>ty U~t (TU) (op to 5 TU). acquired by ingesting viable cysts from installation and operation of appropriate technologies in lieu of expensive food or water. Several outbreaks of monitoring that would be associated Monitoring requirements for coliforms, giardiasis have been traced to municipal with MCL compliance requirements. depending upon the siie of system, water supplies, and humans und both Legionella is being considered for range from 500 samples per month for wild and domestic animals have been inclusion in the NPDVVR. This bacteria systems serving more than 4.7 million implicated as hosts. Between 1972 and is responsible for causing Legionnaires persons to one sample per month for 1980 there were 38 reported waterborne Disease and Pontiac Fever and many - ' Il CAPCO JEN 0031840 Federal Register / Vol. 48, No. 194 / Wednesday, October 5, 1933 / Proposed Rules 45509 consideration. In addition assistance is systems serving 25 to 1,000 persons. outbreaks'of giardiasis with about 20,000' requested on factors that should be used Turbidity monitoring is required daily reported cases. in determining reduced (or increased) ...: for systems using surface water ' At the present time, there is no simple monitoring requirements, such as quality supplies..-. . . . ; and reliable method for assaying ... of the water supply based upon Although coliforms are not usually Giardia cysts in water samples. - ' ' sampling or a sanitary survey, proximity _ pathogenic, their presence in water Microscopic methods for detectionand to hazardous waste sites, or proximity to . implies that human microbial pathogens enumeration are tedious and require , potential contamination sources such as may be present. The concept ofcoliform skill and patience on the part of the upstream industrial pollutant discharges .-, measurements as a practical indicator of . examiner. " '-ik '-. 'or pesticide usage.. "'.....jf/jstSvr.'t.microbiological quality is universally Giardia cysts are relatively resistant' . Public comment is also requested on':.'. /^.accepted, but there have been numerous'' to chloride, but preliminary evidence'-!- appropriate reporting requirements for.yji other parameters suggested as means for indicates that cysts can be killed at public water.systems such that an;!^Xii&' judging the microbiological quality of'. warmer temperatures (e.g., 20" C) with-'' efficient procedure i3 followed for ..(?']ydrinking water. While the coliform 1.5 mg/l chlorine for 10 minutes, AAA', determining'.compliance while - measurement still appears"to be the" ' Filtration, whether through - /- minimizing paperwork. Current i-iililiS:-: preferred parameter, as confirmed by diatomaceous earth or granular media, \ .requirements are (1) to report any ' jr.';. . recent symposia and workshops, there has been show to be effective for.; - positive samples above MCLs (aiter.^.l'.'^V.jappears to be a need to reconsider and removing cyst3 of Giardia and another, appropriate check or follow-up. .update the regulatory framework. The pathogenic protozoan, Entamoeba.; : sampling) within 48 hours and (2) to- :. current regulations for microbiological ' histolytica. - " '... : V" report routine monitoring data either (a) .contaminants, are admittedly '" 10 days following the month in which complicated; there are two analytical the result is received or (b) within the procedures, the sampling frequency is first 10 days following.the end of a ; ! variable, the volume of sample to be' monitoring period^;..; 1:... ' -examined is variable, and there are .- Viruses have been implicav- ' '!i . numeropus outbreaks of.wa: ; me"' disease.Between 1978and 1:. .2 :' waterborne outbreaks involving about ' 5,000 cases were attributed to viruses.- ' ;V^NPDiiyRrSpedfic.Considerations ~ r.MCLs for single samples and for..; ' monthly"averages; in addition the ' Disdisse'd below are speci5c.7,';S!9;^ V:' concept of "check" samples is' frequently contaminants which are.beihg ' misunderstood, irf large partbecause the considered,forinclusioninthe.NPDWK..' term "check samples" is not an accurate For each contaminant EPA is assessing-..' description of the samples or their the current MCL and monitoring purpose. EPA's goal for the NPDWR is requirements and requesting assistahcV" ' to streamline, to the extent feasible,, the in'determinirig'answers to the following: complex aspects of existing ' . For which contaminants are RMCLs' microbiological regulations and to and MCLs appropriate under the SDWA assure that meeting the regulations will requirements? In addition to those assure safe drinking water. In addition discussed below, which additional . to coliforms and turbidity,'consideration substances should be considered? ; is being given to the following drinking What additional data are available water microbiology issues in the to support the determination of .' ' NPDWR in light of recommendations appropriate RMCLs and MCLs? ' Given the toxicology and . occurrence characteristics, what from the Drinking Water Microbiology Workshop. ' monitoring and reporting requirements Giardia lemblia would be appropriate in each case?. . Viruses .....V . Microbiology arid Turbidity A? Standard plate count . Legionella The microbiological aspect of drinking ' Filtration treatment for surface water water quality has been the subject of standards since 1914. The Interim Regulations, as do most of the earlier standards, rely on the measurement of total coliforms and turbidity as .-' '' indicators of fecal pollution and water ' treatment efficiency, respectively! Specific MCL requirements of the Interim Regulations, simply stated, are .. the following: .. Disinfection requirement ' 'As noted above, development of NPDWR will not only inyolve addressing current requirements in the Interim Regulations but will also evaluate new controls for such contaminants as Giardia lemblia and viruses. Giardia lamblia is a protozoan which is a human intestinal parasite and is the cause of giardiasis,' a disease Undoubtedly, the reported number of ' '- .outbreaks is substantially lower than ' - actual numbers. Moreover, in aboul h'alf the outbreaks of waterborne disease, the causative agent has not been found.- There is growing suspicion that most of these are due to viruses. These organisms are generally more resistant to disinfection than coliforms, and thus -' may be present in drinking waters meeting current regulations. Because of these factors, viruses are being - considered for inclusion in the NPDWR.' Some of the information needed to develop RMCLs and MCLs for Giardia and-or viruses would include dose- response data, which are currently limited, and suitable recovery and assay methods. Alternatives under consideration include: ' ... 1. Because analytical methods do not appear to be "economically or . technically feasible" (Section 1401(l)(c)(ii)) and because conventional drinking water treatment technologies are effective in removing Giardia and/or viruses, one option would be to .;... - . establish a treatment technique . " - requirement consisting of filtration and disinfection for surface water systems. 2. On the other hand, perhaps a hybrid approach could be considered where ' RMCLs and MCLs and a treatment ' technique requirement would be set; . . Tola) ccJdcxms____ -- 1 pe* 100 ml monthly which can be mild or extremely States would than be able to allow 4 tOO ri S4crpt*. debilitating. Giardia infections can be Tmb'<dity-- M......1 Tufbtdry Urit (TU) (op to 5 711). acquired by ingesting viable cysts from installation and operation of appropriate technologies in lieu of expensive food or water. Several outbreaks of monitoring that would be associated Monitoring requirements for coliforms, giardiasis have been traced to municipal with MCL compliance requirements. depending upon the size of system, water supplies, and humans and both Legionella is being considered for range from SCO samples per month for wild and domestic animals have been inclusion in the NPDWR. This bacteria - systems serving more than 4.7 million implicated a3 hosts. Between 1972 and is responsible for causing Legionnaires persons to one sample per month for 1980 there were 38 reported waterborne Disease and Pontiac Fever and many - I` CAPCO JEN 0031841 Federal Register / Vol. 48, No. 194 / Wednesday, October 5, "1S83 / Proposed Rules 45511 of the currently existing population- indiscriminantly, but based on the corrosion: The above inorganic frequency relationship; (2) five samples/ specific situation. Some participants ' chemicals, and their associated month and use of the total length of recommended a 30-hour maximum limit monitoring requirements of one p'er year pipes in the distribution system os a on unrefrigerated samples and 54 hours for surface"water supplies and once per basis for frequency of sampling. The . onrefrigeratedor.es. ' " three years for ground water supplies, minimum number of camples for the , largest category of systems should,. remain500/month. ' Some participants suggested that coliforms be defined as any rod-shaped, gram-negative, facultative anaerobe - ' are being reviewed by EPA for possible inclusion; with or without modifications, in the NPDWR.. Additional inorganic' : / SPC levels should be monitored at v which ferments lactose in 48 hours at chemicals are also being considered as '-. 'the same frequency as coliforms, at least 35*C. This would include the "genus ' listed below. Inclusion in"the list does/'/* initially until a data base is established. " Aeromonas.': \ .. hot necessarily mean that regulations //; : / Monitoring for turbidity should be ..." / ' Source Water, Treatment and ." / " ; will be developed; other inorganics may/ increased to one each eight hours unless''/Distribution System Requirements. On-/", also be included.iri the regulations///-/:' "continuous monitoring is provided. The ... the Bubject of treatment guidelines and - determinedto be'appropriateV"7 average of the three analyses should be . ". requirements, the following conclusions reported as the daily value" or, with '. ' ' emerged.' / - - T- Aluminum. ` AnUmony " Sodium*" * v Nickel .\ continuous monitoring, the average of ;. The issue of establishing a water. Molybdenum r . Zinc . ;' - ..." the graphical record should be used... ... V ' quality index; relating raw water quality Asbestos . Thallium Some monitoring for specific 1 ` . and treatment requirements, was. . . .; ' pathogens which are not directly related .`discussed. It was felt that sufficient data", -'Sulfate*".".-Beiyllium. ...... Copper".'; " -///'/'.CyanidB.'" .7 '.. ,, . Vanadium ' ' /. '* ' " - ` to fecal indicator counts in finished on a variety of parameters "do not exist water were also recommended. See the ' to allow establishment of such an index. "Proceedings" document for more detail. . Instead, minimum treatment. on these recommendation. ' " . V. ". ; requirements for water.supply sources .The existing sampling regulations " were recommended." The National Academy of Sciences .. ha3 reviewed the existing regulations and has made recommendations regarding the adequacy of the for non-community water systems. "Minimumtreatment.forground ' regulations including' suggestions on . ' (NCWS) ( 141.21 (cj) are adequate for ' water sources should be disinfection". " " 'possible additions or deletions. The small systems. It was recommended that All surface water sources should be frequency and levels of occurrence of NCWS serving more than 500 persons. pretreated by such processes as these inorganics in drinking water often per day be required to sample at the coagulation, sedimentation and filtration vary regionally across the country; in;,.._ same frequency as community water ' or their equivalent prior to disinfection,-. some locations certain contaminants are" systems of similar size. * " ' '. unless it can be shown on the basis of a found at levels of.c'oncem but in other..:. All systems using surface water, sanitary survey that such treatment is - .locations, the contaminants have seldom except small systems, should provide not necessary. One reason for this is for been fount!. While many of the continuous monitoring of disinfectant - control of Giardia cysts. inorganics are natural contaminants cf residual at an entry point to the ' ." Some participants felt that - ground waters, some inorganics may distribution system. Systems serving minimum treatment requirements for - ; occur in drinking water as a result of more than 10,000 persons should monitor small systems should be evaluated on a uncontrolled hazardous waste sites and disinfectant residual in the distribution case-by-case basis but this assumed a thus, future contamination of water system at the same frequency as/ ' history of compliance and that increased supplies may result if sources are not bacteriological sampling (suggested as ". monitoring end use of SPC will be done. contained. Numerous inorganic guidance). ...... All new finished water reservoirs compounds, such as lead, cadmium, and Analytical Methods and Sample should be required to have a cover. Non chromium, have been found, many times Handling- The following " mandatory policy should be developed at relatively high levels, in leachates recommendations were made relative to- for covering existing finished water and runoff from hazardous waste sites. analytical methods and sampling: reservoirs. . These pose a potential threat to surface Participants concluded that the Comments are solicited on all of the water quality but primarily to ground fermentation tube (FT) and membrane above recommendations produced by water quality. Because of the slow filtration (MF) procedures are - : the Microbiological Standards movement and lack of self-cleansing appr&priate for the enumeration of total -. Workshop.'*- characteristics of ground water, once coliforms; participants recognized that significant underestimates of coliform ^Inorganic Chemicals! . .. . contaminated, the ground waters will . remain so for long periods of time. Other number occur with both procedures, and . The Interim Regulations contain MCLs' such sources include contamination of suggested specific requirements be...... for the following inorganic chemicals: ground water with nitrate as a result of included in the NPDWR to attempt to: ~ application of fertilizer on croplands. minimize this problem. See the, * "Proceeding" for more details. . For SPC analysis, any of the procedures listed in Standard Methods or equivalent, using 48-hour incubation at 35"C, are acceptable. It was recommended that the .'current 30-hour maximum sample transport time be retained with some modifications. The regulation should specify that samples shall be analyzed as soon a3 possible, but no later than 30 hours after collection. Later samples should not be discarded ConUnvnjnt MCL. mg/I 0.05. Monitoring and reporting requirements were also included In the Interim Regulations for sodium and ' '.! Issues involving these contaminants , include the frequency of occurrence, ' carcinogenicity, relative toxicity of different valence states, relative toxicity of inorganic vs. organic forms, adverse health effects vs. beneficial health effects or nutritional requirements, synergistic or antagonistic effects and . the availability and cost of treatment. , Comments are requested on each of these issues as they relate to each ' inorganic chemical as well as on specific issues raised in the discussions below of each compound. Commenters are also It CAPCO JEN 0031842 45512 }Federal Register / Vol. 40, No: 194 .Wednesday/ October 5, 1983 / Proposed Rules requested to provide comments on the need for and levels for RMCLs and and if RMCLs and MCLs should be set' for separate valence states.. was hot taken into account. '` ''' ' Carcinogenci, mutagenic and teratogenic i MCL3 for each contaminant, the health Barium: Barium is a natural mineral " potential was not considered. Research risk of exposure, effective treatment ' and deposits appear, to be concentrated is currently in progress to determine'the methods and costs,- and available . :;; in the midwest. Virtually all cases on. ' effects of cadmium on the reproductive, monitoring techniques... . , . .non-compliance with the Interim Regulations have resulted from barium -' Inorganic Chemicals in theInterim- : in ground water sources..: ;: Regulations- ' ':jy.r.---.- Barium in drinking water was. ".'i'.''. Arsenic. Although, arsenic compounds included in the.U.S.PHS stardards'sihee. nervous and cardiovascular systems. The critical concentration of cadmium in-, the renul cortex necessary for the-..'. 1 .................. developmentofproteinuria needs to be reinvestigated-.'. " 'r}/. ;i may occasionally contaminute.water. r; 1948. The MCL for barium of L mg/1 was-. The most-effective treatment methods- ..I' sources as the resullof industrial /i s-; based'on projected effects bn the.-'.',.-.-... . forcadmium'removal include lime and ;.s : discharges or pesticide,use,.the peripheral nervous and cardiovascular--' / excess lime softening, when cadmium is /' occurrence orarsenfdfn drinking water ;\- systems. The derivation- of the MCL.'wasi /., present as a contaminant in the water is usually the resultlof ground waters from inhalation data..An assumptionr ' source. Cadmium levels resulting from ' '. . being drawn from mineral formations'.: ".' was made regarding the absorption of.:;.'.; ' corrosion can bareduced by".': containing natural arsenic ores. The-- barium into the blood stream.from the--'..-' '. implementation of an. effective corrosion .... areas affected.include the southwest,'""'-"./ gastrointestinal tract.'which is',1.; n.rv.ip -.'control program,, including pH,/:/;', '. northwest, northeast, and Alaska. 'I y reasonable for children buL'conservative -,. "adjustmentt'calcium carbonate. ";>1' .'i1-!" '. ./ Arsenic occurs in both trivalent and" for adults;The possible role of barium in-" stabilization or'addjtion.bE'corrosioh"'/ ; pentavalent states, as. well as in organic - drinking water in cardiovascular.disease- inhibitors.''.' ." ' .- forms. Trivalent compounds are more ' , toxic than penta'velent compounds. The/ pentavalent state appears'to . ."> ' predominate in foods,.particularly'".-'/, v includinghypertensiorris a matter of; -'controversy and conjecture.-Several aspects of barium toxicity are currently'/ being investigated, including, the' 'v:-/v' Cadmi'um.in drinkfngwatechas been. . included in'the U.S..PHS standards since.- ' 1962. Thecurreht drinking water1 " .' .7 -.standard is 0.010 mg/LThaWHO . ' .- ; seafood.: " `V.' . Arsenic has been considered by. '." gastrointestinatabsorption rate3'ahd'.-: _ health effects-following-ingestion:;:'-'-15-'..', guideline level for cadmium' is 0^005 mg/. /' certain researchers to be an etiological. fuctoc'in epidemiod' carcinoma of the . ... skin and lungs and precancerqus dermal;, keratoses. At this time, there is not an. . acceptable animal model' demonstrating. carcinogenic pofentfal of arsenic. Recent; findings indicate that-acsenic may be a. promotor of carcinogenesis rather than ,, an initiator. Also, the carcinogenic risk" may be a- function of nutritional factors."' No nutritional requirement for arsenic has' been firmly established; however . someauthoritiesconsider that trace .'' amounts of arsenic are "nutritionally, desirable". ' "... Prelimina'ry experimental findings have revealed that chronic;low-level barium f ingestion produces increased blood- pressure and EKG abnormalities in rats.' The: WHO has.not established a : recommended-guideline level foe... barium-- / / Most treatmentmethods.- used' for water softening:areeffectfve.for barium.. removal.These-methods include:lime: softening.and ion exchangeusingeither. natural greensand oc synthetic resins- , Reverse-osmosis is. also extremely .-. - effective for barium removal. ' .: The derivation of an MCLfor the'- ' NPDWR willentaif consideration of.. many factors, including, the.additive or '/ synergistic effects'of.cadmium and other trace metalslindrinking water. Public . . comments are: requested on: (1J the role. / of cadmium in reproductive, nervous, . and cardiovascular dysfunctions; (2) the-; potential carcinogenic effects; (3)- the importance, of cadmium-from other routesof exposure relative to drinking ... water and (4). monitoring requirements for corrosion-related'cadmium-in-... ... .... ; Recent estimates of gastrointestinal drinking water. . ;- - absorption Fates and- the results of ' > - Chromium. The occurrence of excess " '; .1 >. / 1 t \ I Ion exchange treatment using anion' experimental and.epidemiological chromium in drinking wateris relatively exchange resins,`activated alumina. V- studies.indicatethat the MCL for barium- infrequent and the result of .. - ;. bone char and reverse osmosis can . '. - in the Interim Regulations needs to-be contamination of water sources or use of: remove both trivalenfand pentavalenr revised. The NAS-SafeDrinking Water- chromates-as corrosion inhibitors. . .. arsenic encountered in drinking, water. ' Committee recommended that4.7 mg/h The MCL fortotal chromium (trivalent. sources. Lime softening iseffective for. - .. provided an adequate margin of safety- - and hexavalent} was based on the : . removingpentavalent arsenic but less ! .' based upon adult intake and exposure-' - toxicity of hexavalent chromium.. < .1 effective for removing, trivalent'arsenic.; ! parameters, but did not consider the " T Trivalent chromiu.-n.is relatively non- . Activated alumina absorption has been.-/ higher uptake efficiency and'water' - ' toxic only very slightly soluble in water .. shown to be effective for arsenic . consumption- rate-oE children: Public: -' and is considered essential in man and -- ' removal from ground water sources. .'.7 comment is requested on . "i:* animals for efficient lipid, glucose and . . Arsenic in drinking water has been * gastrointestinatabsorption rates and. . ' . protein metabolism. An MCLfor -.. included in the U.S. PHS standards since cardiovascular effects of barium. chromium expressed only in terms of the 1942. The current MCL for arsenic of 0.05 Cadmium. The presence of cadmium ' hexavalent form is complicated by the nig/1 was derived from toxicity . ` , in drinking water is normally the result . likely conversion of trivalent to considerations other than of corrosion of galvanized pipes and hexavalent chromium in drinking water - carcinogenicity. The World Health ' ' fittings. Also, cadmium-may sources under oxidizing conditions, such Organization (WHO) guideline level for occasionally be present as the result of as during chlorination. arsenic is also 0.05 mg/1. contamination of the water sources. Hexavalent chromium, exerts adverse At this time, it is not possible to There are very few instances where effects on the renal, hepatic and speculate whether the existing MCL for water systems have exceeded the gastrointestinal systems and the skin. arsenic should be altered from-that in current MCL for cadmium.. Carcinogenic and mutagenic potential of the Interim Regulations. Public comment The MCL for cadmium was based on this form of chromium has been shown. is requested upon the basis for the the intake necessary to pioduce- . Trivalent chromium can be effectively ' UMCL: carcinogenicity vs. other effects, proteinuria: while a significant source of.- removed from drinking water by nutritional requirements vs. health risk: intake could becigarette smoking, this conventional coagulation techniques. /\ I1 CAPCO JEN 0031843 'Federal Register /'Vol. 48. No. 194 / Wednesday. October 5, 1983 / Proposed Rules 45515 ailments has not been correlated with thus are generally found only in Dietary molybdenum affects copper aluminum ingestion, but the apparent . individuals working in the antimony metabolism-in many species. Data are accumulation of aluminum in the brains industrie3.'Most cardiovascular available which suggest that copper - . and skeletons of dialysis patients has abnormalities (cardiac arrhythmias) depletion may result from molybdenum become a cause for concern. ` . : have been attributed to the consumption, exposure of.as low as 80 fig/1 in-drinking Since alumimum in drinking water ... of pharmaceutical preparations water. In India, molybdenum has been .. frequently results from water treatment : /', containing antimony. The latter are '' . implicated in the formation of a recently ' with alum, the concentration of residual.'. parasticides used to treat . / '.-c-.')..-..,.-- .. identified bone-crippling disease. Genu aluminum could be minimized by i.-. _ schistosomiasis, bilharziasis-a'nd... .' .. valgum (knock-kneed syndrome). The ...c; providing contols on the treatment . leishmaniasis. However, patients .with NAS has estimated the average dietary ; process. Should severe.restrictions be.; ! -. pre-existing cardiac and pulmonary . , molybdenum intake to be between 100 ;- warrented. alternative coagulants could-."'. conditions might Find their ailments-' - :. and 4600 fig/day. At the same time, the be required. Activated alumina, which.-V'- exacerbated by exposure to waterborne -, NAS cautions that molybdenum should also contributes some aluminum to'-.. vjit " antimony and thus become a group at---- , not habitually exceed 500 fig/day. '' drinking water, ia.used to remove a' risk. Additional research is needed on-. -. ] Persons consuming a diet at the high' end ' number of contaminants from drinking": the health effects of antimony derived of the' range could possibly be at risk : water. Cation exchange should'be. from drinking water. , '. ; '.1::-. from molybdenum in drinking water. I -j effective for removing aluminum from 1 -Antimony exists in natural waters .'Molybdenum is not removed to any ; ; water, whether the'aluminum is' from:.' :. with valences of three and five, as well' -, . great extent.during conventional waterv j .' natural sources or from water treatment. '' as in two organic forms, methylstibnic treatment processes. Molybdenum as : In Drinking Water andHealth, Vol. ;V. and dimethylstibnic acids. Removal .. .. . molybdate could-be removed by anion - IV, the NAS calculated a 7-day Health . treatment for the inorganic forms . exchange, and reverse osmosis'should .. -. Advisory of 5 mg/I but did not calculate V includes ion exchange and reverse " be effective for either the cationic or . any values for chronic exposure. The osmosis, while activated carbon should . anionic forms of molydenum.. '' . WHO guideline level for aluminum is 0.2 -: be effective for removal of the organic The NAS recommends'a dietary:- ' ' mg/1 on the basis'of.aesthetic . forms. Antimony(V) is by far the most . molybdenum intake of between 150 and , considerations: Consideration oFany'"-'.' abundant form in river waters.- -' possibleMCL would involve evaluation.', . F.PA's "Ambient Water Quality.'... of relative exposure from drinking water -.- Criteria forAntimony" contains a versus other sources, health effect' . \ criterion of 145 pg/1 for drinking water studies and control evaluations: : sources. The USSR has a limit of 50 jig/l Antimony. There is no current MCil. for antimony.The WHO ha3 not- . for antimony, but the development of an. developed a guideline for antimony.,The MCL has been suggested on the basis of* paucity of information on health effects possible health risks. Antimony. attributable to the consumption of tosembles arsenic both chemically and antimony from drinking water and thtw biologically and symptoms of acute and data on antimony occurrence in drinking' chronic toxicity from antimony closely water do not seem to warrant the . . resemble those induced by arsenic. establishment of primary drinking water The limited available occurrence data regulations for antimony at this time. 500 fig/day for adults. Some " - ' investigators recommend that drinking > water molybdenum levels should not ''\ exceed 50 fig/1, but the need for an MCL .is still under consideration. The WHO- ' '. has not established a guideline level for molybdenum. In general it does not ; appear that the contribution of molybdenum from drinking water is . . ^significant, but high levels have been" ejected in drinking water in some ' . areas. 1 Asbestos. This substance occurs show that antimony has been found . ; Molybdenum. On the basis of. most often in tap water derived from -. - ' occurrence of molybdenum in 3ome. frequently in drinking water both from natural mineral sources and from the surface sources, and while individual surface waters, and on the basis of the degradation of asbestos-cement water ' samples havebeen reported to contain association of molybdenum intake with pipe in contact with aggressive water. as much as 90 mg/1, most reported . the incidence of gout, the establishment While airborne asbestos is a recognized ' positive.samples contained less than 200 . of the MCL has been suggested. health hazard, the effect of asbestos-'--'A fig/1. The average concentration of Molybdenum is commonly found in ingested from drinking water is unclear/., positive samples of antimony in drinking ground and surface waters. However, The role of asbestos in the etiology of . water is probably in the order of a few ~ unless the water originates from a gastrointestinal cancer has been a - - fig/1. Mining operations and leaching / .. processing or mining source, the ' matter of-scientific controversy.'Many from plumbing systems (tin/antimony, molybdenum concentrations of positive aspects of asbestos have been the solder) are possible sources of drinking samples are generally in the order of a subject of intense investigation, water contamination, although there are '" few jig/l. Isolated cases of high ... . including the health effects of ingestqd. . . only two antimony mining sites in the ' molybdenum drinking water .. . . asbestos and the significance of *' U.S. and tin/antimony solder is not . \' concentrations were reported in the asbestos exposure from asbestos- widely used. The total antimony proximity of open-pit uranium mines. cement pipe. The WHO has not contribution from food and drinking Aqueous effluents from such sources as established a recommended action level water appears to be less than 100 jig per shale oil production and coal . for asbestos. day on the average. ` combustion may also introduce Asbestos in raw water sources can be Three primary health effects are molybdenum to the aquatic- removed by modified conventional associated with exposure to antimony at environment. coagulation and filtering techniques. high doses: pulmonary irritation and it3' Molybdenum is essential in the diet, Filtration alone is ineffective because of consequences, dermatitis, and ' as it is Bn integral part of five enzymes: the small size of the asbestos fibers. cardiovascular abnormalities. Toxicity aldehyde oxidase, sulfite oxidase, When the source of asbestos is the symptoms also include gastrointestinal nitrogenase, nitrate reductase and deterioration of asbestos-cement pipes upset, irritability, sleeplessness, fatigue, xanthine oxidase. However, some in contact with aggressive waters. dizziness and muscular pains. The investigators have reported increased calcium carbonate saturation of the pulmonary and dermal problems are blood and uric acid levels as the result water is effective. Other treatments mostly related to airborne antimony and of increased molybdenum intake. showing promise for inhibiting I ` -t CAPCO JEN 0031844 >55516 Federal Register / Vol. 48,:No..194 / Wednesday, uciooer a, lyaa / woposea deterioration of asbestos-cement pipe' drinking water. While the hazard to - Sodium:Sodium is ubiquitous in '1 include the use of zinc corrosion . health from copper appears to be small ' drinking water and the levels detected '.' inhibitors. pH adjustment and lime' for the general population, there are a vary from 0.2 to 2D0 mg/l or more in stabilization. ... ,, ...... few people who cannot tolerate even ' ; public systems and 0.2 to 622 mg/l in Consideration of an MCLfor asbestos normal amounts of copper in the diet. individual wells, according to the most fibers in drinking water involves factors These people are those suffering from .- recent survey. However, food is the ranging from analytical detection and Wilson's disease, an inherited major source of sodium intake in the; ; counting methods to'establishment of a'i? autosomal recessive trait characterized " vast majority of cases.':.;--.-: ' : .f! dose:response relationship; The.latter-vf^ by a disorder in copper metabolism - The available evidence indicates that ' depends on the outcome ofanimal, \ which can lead to hepatic cirrhosis and ' excessive intake contributes to an age-.'!: feeding studies, .the'most recent of.which? ? to necrosis and sclerosis of the corpus related increase in hypertension in : " have not shown'any.-a'dverse health-^'1'; straitum.-A few people may also have aJ genetically susceptible individuals. The`5; effects from ingestion. An intensive V.-;;.;; . ..deficiency of glucose phosphate ' ; :/** National Academy of Sciences hasv-'-"'''-.! seminar on this subject was conducted dehydrogenase which is believed to j estimated that about 15 percent to 20 . -.f - by EPA in October 1982vThe results ofcause hypersensitivity to copper.v;.. ' percent of the population are'at the risk y the seminar will be-publiShed shortly.,! Since the occurrence of copper in of developing hypertension.' There is. _ i;:' The'epidemiology-data.on-. drinking water is usually a result of also a small segment of the population''.'- Occurrence of gastroiritestinartract cancer among occupa'tionally exposed;1" . corrosion, techniques for reducing the';..-.: corrosivity of the drinking-water are yV'.. '. ', who are on severely'restricted diets for"' various medical reasons and who mus't/w persons.appears.tb be'themost relevant-'^ '. effective in limiting the presence of. limit'their total sodium intake.-'":v;''-"--~.'k: issue relating to risks from ing'esjion^JJjf copper. The EPA SMCL and the WHO."-' Development of an MCL ha3 been-''-1- - iff from drinking water: . , guideline action level for copper are 1.0 ' suggested but since food is the major. ' Sulfate. Sulfate is currently included. ., in the secondary drinking water-.'' regulations because of its'effect on the mg/1 based on taste considerations, but development of primary drinking water < regulations has been suggested based- V source of sodium intake and because of.; the difficulty and cost of removing -'. '. j ' '-.sodium from v/ater, the regulation of the , taste of drinking water. However, '-.':;..-..-:,' - upon health considerations..- ; sodium content of drinking water' ^ sulfate is a common water contaminant, Vanadium. Vanadium occurs in both and in some cases it occurs at : :.v.. ground and surface water.supplies, with-- concentrations high enough to cause ' " the highest concentrations found near laxative effects, particularly in those riot uranium-vanadium mining and milling ' " acclimated to use of high-sulfate waters. operations or near industrial operations. Concentrations as high as 2,000 mg/1 .. The source of vanadium in the latter - ' ' have been found in some public water instances is fossil fuels which frequently systems. . ' ' . .- ' . > have high vanadium contents. Although Sulfate has beensiispected-as a data are limited, the mean concentration contributing factor in the formation of. anadium 'n *aP water samples. various organ or duct calculi, but . /ftb^ppears to be in the range of a few pg/1. s-vidence establishing a relationship."' ^"^Estimates of daily intake of vanadium - appears to be impractical. Some recent ;\ Studies U3ing drinking water sodium as a control variable have suggested slight -V blood pressure increases'in some groups': . related to sodium concentration.' ,;; ' . Sodium is probably the.most difficult . . substance to remove from drinking .' water. Only the most rigorous treatment processes, such as distillation, reverse osmosis and deionization will remove ' sodium. It should be noted that.virtually 'tween the formation of these calculi .1 sulfate concentrations in drinking water is lacking. Sulfate is extremely difficult to remove from drinking water. Anion exchange and reverse osmosis .'. ' are reasonably effective. The WHO has a'guideline level for sulfate at 400 mg/l. from food and water average about 116 fig/day with intake from drinking water from 4 to 7 percent of the intake from food. Air might contribute an additional maximum amount of 9 fig/day. . . ' Chronic respiratory exposure to -' vanadium may decrease cholesterol ' . all other substances present in the water will be removed by these processes, and that reconstitution of the water. .....;. following treatment will be necessary. -' for the water to be acceptable on the ; basis of taste, corrosivity and desirable mineral content. ... r .... -.. based essentially on taste. The ,. - synthesis, uncouple oxidative -' The current primary drinking water ... secondary MCL (SMCL) for sulfate is ' phosphorylation.in liver mitochondria, , regulations contain a monitoring and; . ..- 250mg/l. and decrease urinary excretion of 5- - reporting requirement for sodium. The' Copper. Copper is currently regulated hydroxyindoleacetic acid, with transient dissemination of information on the in the secondary drinking water - - - bilirubinemia and albuminuria. There is--.' sodium content of drinking water should. regulations because of its effect on taste - .' also some evidence that vanadium , . ; enable those who must or wish to limit -j of drinking water. It'is_commonly found; causes the appearance of scattered .= ' '-. .- their sodium intake to adjust their diets - in drinking water from corrosion of allergy-like eczematos skin lesions. -. ' according to their needs. The WHO . j; copperpipes. However, there is no evidence of any recommended action level for sodium is " Copper is an essential nutrient;but ' chronic oral toxicity, probably because 200 mg/l based on taste. Comment is -. there is no evidence of copper ' ' ingested vanadium is poorly absorbed.' ' requested on the evidence relating deficiency in the U.S. population except Vanadium may have nutritional drinking water concentrations and . ' for isolated cases in patients maintained significance, and it appears possible that eleva tion of blood pressure, and the by total parenteral nutrition. Copper is the contribution of vanadium from - - significance of contribution of sodium toxic to monogastric animals when '. ` -' drinking water to the daily intake may from drinking water to the overall " ingested in quantities that are 40 to 135 be beneficial. ' '. ` exposure and the need for the MCL. times greater than their respective The WHO has not established a - . Nickel. Nickel is seldom observed in requirements. Toxic effects from . recommended action level for. : . fresh v/ater. Natural nickel salts tend to elevated drinking water levels have . vanadium. The beneficial aspects of hydrolyze to insoluble hydrolysates in been reported especially for infants. vanadium intake and the absence of water, so any nickel in surface or ground Copper imparts an unpleasant taste to evidence of chronic oral toxicity do not waters would likely be present in small drinking water, which, along with an appear to support the development of - amounts unless the presence of nickel - emetic effect, serves to limit the amount primary drinking water regulations for was due to industrial pollution. The of copper which can be ingested from vanadium. . .- limited available data show that the I" 1 CAPCO JEN 0031845 ,, Federal Register / Vol. 40. No. 194 / 'dnesday, October 5. 1903 '/ Proposed Rules ' 45517- concentration of nickel in tap water , of cadmium and lead. Some segments'of leaching these compounds for piping usually does not exceed 20 pg/l and is . the population of the United States may material's, it is very likely that other likely to be present at average be marginally zinc-deficient. ' compounds of health concern are also concentrations of a few pg/l or less. The Treatment for zinc reduction usually leaching from the pipes. Further, a average oral intake of nickel has been is limited to processes which reduce number of epidemiological studies - 1 reported to be 300 to GOO pg/day. ' corrosivity of water, since the presence, indicate that there may be an increased Inhalation exposure ranges from 2.4 jig/,', of zinc in drinking water is usually the. incidence of cardiovascular disease person/day, and the average intake result of corrosion. \ associated (however, this subject is still from water is probably less than that The SMCL for zinc is 5.0 pg/l and the . . under investigation). ... ... . ... . from air. WHO recommends that zinc be kept. For many chemicals of concern. ` Therefore, based on average food.'-'; Vi `below 5.0 pg/l for aesthetic reasons. -.' corrosion is the major source of drinking water and air concentrations, most Comment is requested on the need for water exposure. For example, lead i3 - - drinking water contributes a very small *5} an MCL for zinc. . proportion of the daily nickel 'intake:.' ' .Nickel salt3, like`the salts of copper arid' ..........--'.'"-'4 iCorrosw/z. i: fi 2inc, exert their toxic-action mainly by - . The Interim Regulations include' ' gastrointestinal irritation and not by - requirements to (1) determine the inherent toxicity! Nickel ha3 lbng been presence of specific materials in A ; thought to be relatively'non-toxic;?';/-"-"'-:, distribution systems and (2) to monitor although nickel exposure has been! r for characteristics of corrosivity of the `. associated with the development of'; water. The water supplier must :- occupationally related cancers of the: determine and report whether the . ' lungs, larnyx and nasal cavity. Contact - following materials of construction are- dermatitis from exposure to nickel is present in the distribution system; .- . well known. Quantities of nickel as-':; .1. Lead used in piping, caulking. minute as 58.7 pg/l have produced - - . interior lining of distribution mains,.. exzema in sensitized, susceptible ; ;'c alloys and home plumbing, . individuals. Dietary nickel can- - 2. Copper used in piping and alloys, .. aggravate nickel dermatitis. Apparently-:- service lines,-and home plumbing.- insoluble nickel compounds pass rather " 3. Galvanized piping, service lines, quickly through the gastrointestinal tract' and home plumbing. . . -V- - and have limited absorption; ; 4. Ferrous piping materials such as Conventional water treatment. -- - ': " cast ironand steel. ' .' '.'.'V- ; ' seldom found in the water source but is commonly found in tap waters that are .corrosive and are delivered through a. distribution system using lead piping material or if lead is used as a . .' ' constitutent of solders used to join non- . lead piping materials. Normal monitoring requirements, intended to - determine the extent of contamination of the source water, are unlikely to characterize the exposure to high levels of lead that are associated with lead piping materials and solders that are. j expected to the distributed unequally' : throughout the distribution system. ` Control of corrosion can be... .' accomplished by a numbar.of measures including pH adjustment, controlled alkalinity, addition of corrosion - ' inhibitors or lime stabilization. ' processes (e.g., use of alum, lime or soda 5.;Asbes`tos cement pipe'?. -. -j. -. : In setting the corrosion monitoring ash) do not appear to be effective for The objective of obtaining this and reporting requirements in the removal of nickel. Ion exchange and * information regarding water quality and Interim Regulations, consideration was reverse osmosis would likely be the presence of specific materials of ` given to setting an MCL for one or more effective. . - - . ." construction was to enable.the primary of the various corrosivity indices, .' - The WHO has not established a" . enforcement agency to determine which including the Aggressive Index (Al), the recommended action level for nickel. water supply system should initiate Ryznar Index (RI) and the Langelier The NAS does not view nickel in - corrosion control measures. Index (U). The indices are not a direct drinking water in terms of current levels ~- -Results of two independent studies' measure of the corrosivity of the water as a cause for concern. In view of the estimate that approximately 16 percent but rather are indicators of the calcium usually low concentations of nickel in of the public water systems in the ' . carbonate stability which may be used drinking water and in view of the United States distribute waters that are to predict whether or not a calcium limited health effects aspects, the - ` highly aggressive (LI<--2.0) (LI: carbonate (CaCOJ layer may be :" establishment of a limit for nickel in Langelier Index), while an additional 52 deposited and maintained on pipe drinking water may not be warranted. percent distribute moderately aggressive surfaces to protect against corrosion. At Zinc. Zinc is currently regulated in the waters (--2.0 <LI <0,0). It is also that time these indices were determined secondary drinking water regulations - known that only a limited number of not to be ideal as a determinant for -based upon taste considerations. Zinc these systems have instituted corrosion corrosive characteristics of drinking occurrence in drinking water is most .. , control measures. -:: . water in all instances. ci- frequently due to the corrosion of Corrosion is a very significant concern The approach being considered for the galvanized iron pipe and fittings. Some- notonly'affecting the aesthetic quality NPDWR is to set specific monitoring . -! very high zinc concentrations have been of the water but having a serious requirements for corrosion by-products,;1 noted when catchment systems made of economic impact and posing health . such as lead and cadmium, that would ; galvanized iron were used to collect rain implication. Corrosion byproducts address the problems of obtaining ...; water for drinking purposes. Zinc is containing materials siich as lead and representative samples to assess water relatively non-toxic and is an essential cadium have been associated with quality. The definition of "compliance". trace element. A wide margin of safety serious risks to the health of consumers with an MCL will be revised to assure , exists between normal intake from the of drinking water. In addition, by that averaging.will not permit portions diet and the amount likely to cause oral products of corrosion commonly include of a water supply tD exceed an MCL on ` toxicity. At drinking water such compounds as zinc, iron and a continuing basis. Specifically. systems concentrations high enough to cause copper for which SMCLs have been set that have known corrosive water or gastrointestinal disturbances, zinc in the NSDWR; occurrence of these which have piping materials that are would impart a strong astringent taste . compounds, as a result of corrosion, susccptiable to corrosion will be and milky appearance to the water. Zinc should be considered indicators of required to take sufficient samples in _ . interacts with other trace metals, and possible deterioration of the distribution their distribution systems so that the has a protective action against toxicity systems. Also, if corrosive waters are . State can be assured that the MCLs for CAPCO JEN 0031846 45518Federal Register / Vol. 48, 'No. 194 / Wednesday, October 5, 1983 / Proposed Rules * 1 J*`**~*^*^"*"~-~~J--nTimnanwH wiwwimniiiiMiMniii ii--iw i --n'>n <ni wniiwni rn ! nwi wii >!!> iifniirim 1 the corrosion by-products will hot ' Atrazine risk over a lifetime. The Carcinogen' exceeded in various parts of die ', - distribution system. Commentsare requested on this approach and on what -; specific monitoring requirements should' be set. Also, any available new - ; Phthalates Acrylamide' Dibromochloropropane (DBCP) 1,2-Dichloropropane ; Pcntachlorophenol '. . -. Pichloram information on the-use-of corrosion -v ;.:J- Dinoseb indices is reque3ted^^'"''"V"o.*'-;V' .\ Atachlor : ' Synthetic Organic Chemicals (SOCs) ' Ethylene'dibromide Epichlorohydrin .. - . Thq Interim Regulations contain MCLs Dibromomethane", for the following organic chemicals:; f Toluene /(Xylene r /"'Contaminant '/ .v leoulabona . RecWonHvOnand*'- . MCU mg/I. *d Limit Assessment Group recently recalculated their excess cancer risk estimates for : ,, lindane. Assuming consumption of 2 liters of water per day, a concentration ', level of 32 ng/1 was estimated to result '! in a one in a million risk over a lifetime. { The NAS felt that there were insufficient data'on which to base5an !: estimate of cancer risk for endrin. For '. ic&peiiuveiy.. ... ..v. It i3 important to note that NAS' ", established the ADI for toxaphene ;V-: Inclusion of specific SOCs on the : before the NCI bioassays in rats and. `"0.003' r l."i.t0.030' above list was based upon the: : -:-.y.. occurrence of the SOC in drinking water mice.were completed. Under the -. conditions of testing, toxaphene was } .- -; 9 4,fi-TP '. : ... Total Tn*uJoratfwws_:. ` i. ,1,0.10-- . * Fot chtoco*cn onty. ' v/ " and the potential health effects of ... ' '' found to be carcinogenic in mice of both -: 0.030. exposure to that SOC. The pesticides -;-'- : sexes (Increased incidence of.; . -.'.h . included in the above list have either - ' hepatocellular carcinoma). The tests5 ; been detected in drinking.water, are results also suggested carginogenicity of : These organic chemical MCLs, with, the exception of trihalomethanes and ' registered for use in or around drinking . toxaphene for the thyroid of rats of both;. water, or are used in such a manner that sexes. _ . ...;:..vv their associated monitoring the potential exists for entering drinking ChlorophenoxyHerbicides. Tne NAS requirements, are being reviewed at this.',', water supplies. Inclusion in the above also derived ADIs for the two -. time for possible inclusion in the 1131 does not necessarily mean that ~ ,1 chlorophenoxy herbicides, 2,4-D and .. ' NPDWR. The total trihalomethane',.:. regulations will be developed for the ' - 2,4,5-TP. These were 0.0125 and 0.00075 -! . (TTHM) regulations have only recently..." SOC but that these are SOCs currently ' mg/kg/day, respectively. The food . 'l-. r.'i' taken aeffeTct,talnidnthnen nonnlluy for na lliimmiiltnerdl *' (bflfellTinIOg mconnCsIi^dAefrOe^d*; nottlhtDeI*r RSOOCf'cs nnnolt llliCs^teOdf additive tolerance level established for'-.f. segment of public water systems; it. ".,!!. may also be considered and included in 2,4-D in water is 0.1 mg/1, identical to would be premature'to consider `',.'' - the NPDWR. Determination of which the MCL for this substance in the.:' revisions at this time. The"entire area of!; - SOCs should be included in the NPDWR Interim Regulations. -v.--:- disinfection by-products and alternative will be based upon an analysis of the . Other Synthetic Organic Chemicals -,..,7/.' disinfectants wilt be considered at a significance of potential human (SOCs) Under Consideration .. 7'7 later date. Experience must be gained ; exposure, associated health effects of .." the full implementation of the . exposure, and other pertinent factors. - OtherPesticides. A number of other . . regulations. Also, further health'' Brief discussions of the pesticides ' ; pesticides are registered by EPA for . ' - ects data are required in order to _' 1 1 included in the Interim Regulations are uses which may result in their presence > evaluate the potential health risks to provided below and are followed by a in drinking water sources. During the . '; these substances. ; ' ' - " discussion of several of the other SOCs registration process under the Federal ' In the U.S., establishment of limits for under consideration.: ", . Insecticide. Fungicide and Rodenticide pesticides in drinking water began with the advisory groups engaged in revising the 1S62 Public Health Service drinking Organic Chemicals in the Interim _. ! Regulations Act (FIFRA), and acceptable residue limit in drinking water is determined for : each of the aquatic use pesticides, but- water standards. Virtually no cases of Chlorinated Hydrocarbon. not for other pesticides. Depending upon ' non-compliance with the currentMCLs :Insecticides. The Interim Regulations the quality of the available data, these have been reported. The USSR's . - ` contain MCLs for endrin, lindane, allowable limits may be of a permanent drinking water standards (1970) listed a methoxychlor and toxaphene. The NAS.- - or temporary nature. Allowable limits number of these pesticides among the in DirJcing Water and Health (1977), ; : for certain of the aquatic use pesticides' approximately 200 organic chemicals for; considered lindane to be an animal are listed below:-'':- which limits were set. - '- carcinogen and endrin to be a suspected ` . . *t.' * A number of other synthetic organic1-'"."'animal carcinogen. The NAS derived a chemicals are being considered for risk estimate for lindane of 5.0 to ' ' " inclusion in the NPDWR including a :. ,13xl0"sper microgram per liter for number of registered pesticides. These - ' lifetime exposure. This corresponds to a Compound FIFRA " darivd " accaptabt* pastcxia Itmt ACM (pr NAS) include: _ . concentration level of 77 to 189 02 ppmM Aldicarb Chlordane Dalapon "&" nanograms per liter (ng/1) at the 1CT* -risk rate.-' - . `; ' -'The EPA Carcingen-Assessment 0.1 ppm 02 ppml,,.L. 0.1 ppm 05 ppm 0 2l5mg/g/ciAy. Dinuat Endolhall ' -' Group derived excess cancer risk ' estimates for exposure to lindane in Twnpoiaty hnA ' . .. Giyphosate Carbofuran 1.1.2-Tridiloroelhane Vydete Simaaine PAHs TCBs ambient water (U.S. EPA. 1980). ' Assuming the ingestion of two liters of ' drinking water/day and B.5 grams/dny of contaminated fish and seafood, a water concentration of 18.8 ng/1 was " estimated to yield a one in one million Otherpeslicides which have been " reported to occur, Qt least occasionally, in drinking water sources include ! chlordane, aldicarb, carbofuran, pcntachlorophenol, dibromochloropropane (DBCP), dinoseb. . 'i I t CAPCO JEN 0031847 Federal Register / Vol. 48, No. 194 / Wednesday, October .. 1983 / Proposed Rules 45521 The analytical methods for detecting VII. Request for Public Comments and quantifying radionuclides. Monitoring requirements for . radionuclides. Public comments and information on all aspects of the issues presented in this ANPRM are requested to assist EPA The treatment for removing in determining the appropriate radionuclides from drinking water, its regulatory approaches and specific cost and general availability. requirements of the NPDWR. Supporting Waste management practices for information is requested for any . removal ofradionuclides from drinking comments provided. For microbiological, .water, . .... inorganic, organic, and radionuclide, Methodology for protecting against contaminants, the following-questions . multiple exposure. ore beingexamined.. ' "`What criteria should be used to , ;V1.References' : ..u-V'.Xl.:' L\ determine which contaminants should The following references are.available be in each category? What contaminants from the addresses listed at the 'should be included in Category I, beginning of this notice. .Category II, and Category III as Assessment of Microbiology and Turbidity . Standards for Drinking Water, EPA, ODW, 1983. ' - National Interim Primary Drinking Water. ' described? , ' * Is waiving certain MCLs when . susceptible populations are not affected an appropriate approach? For which Regulations, Amendment Trihaiometharies. .' contaminants? Coutd this be used as on 48 FR 84C6, February 28.1983. - -V ' criteria for determining which Category Fluoride: Response to Petition from South would be appropriate for certain . Carolina, 46 FR 53345, December 1,1981. ' contaminants? -... . -.* Ronald Reagan. Executive Order 12291,46 FR What level should be established 13193. Feb. 19.1981. ' . , Safe Drinking Water Act Reaulhorization, 47, - FR 670, January 6.1982. "Small Systems Strategy" 45 FR 40222, June 13,1930. `. for each RMCL? --What safety factors should be used in conjunction with chronic toxicity data in RMCLs for non-carcinogens? The following documents are available from the sources indicated: --Is using the ADI an appropriate method for establishing RMCLs for non-carcinogens? National Interim Primary Drinking Water Regulations. NT1S, Accession No. PB 267530. -eg Water and Health. Vols. I. II. III. IV. --By what method should RMCLs be set for carcinogens? What level should be established V. National Academy of Sciences. for each MCL? Washington. D.C. --What criteria should be used to Manual of Treatment Techniques for Meeting . the Interim Primary Drinking Water . Regulations. EPA ORD, MF.RL. Water Supply Research Division, Cincinnati, Ohio identify Generally Available Technology (GAT) under the SDWA? Engineering and technical feasibility 45260. factors? What factors affect Evaluation of the Microbiology Standards for "reasonble" cost determinations? Drinking Water. NTIS, Accession No. PB What is a reasonable cost for the 297119. consumer? --How should system size, water quality and other factors be incorporated in the GAT? Should "non-conventional" solutions such as bottled water and point-of-use treatment devices be considered acceptable means for achieving ' compliance?. , . - What requirements should be set for monitoring for each type of ' - contaminant? . --What frequency of monitoring would " "provide.adequate measurement of" ... water quality within the feasible means of water systems?- ; --Which analytical methods are most reliable and what are the costs involved? --What limits of measurement accuracy and precision should be set for each, analytical method? ' What reporting requirements should be established to provide an efficient means of determining compliance while - minimizing paper work burdens oh public water systems and State programs? A public meeting and four public . workshops will be held for the interested public to comment and provide information and data on the' regulatory approaches and other issues presented here. Dates and locations of the meeting and workshops are provided ' in the Dates section of this notice. ' List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 141 Chemicals, Intergovernmental relations, Radiation protection, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements. Water supply. Dated: September 27,1983. William Rucketshaus, Administrator. [FR noe. 6D-271W Filed ie-4-e3: B'+S am) BiLUKG code esao-so-u ..- :-... i( -1 CAPCO JEN 0031848