REGULATORY FOCUS Safe Drinking Water Act amendments of 1984
Richard M . Dowd
As the 98th Congress adjourned, the House and Senate were acting on two different sets of amendments to the Safe Drinking Water Act of 1974 (SDWA). The House passed H.R. 5959, authorizing $216.3 million annually for fiscal years 1986-89 for drinking water and groundwater protection programs. This amount is a substantial increase over the FY 1984 appropriation of $79 million. The new authorization includes $85 million for federal grants to states to prepare and administer groundwater protection plans aimed at those aquifers that are the only water supplies available to their communities. The Senate bill (S. 2649) was reported out of committee and is still pending floor action. S. 2649 is similar to the House bill except that it substitutes a $15-million state demonstration program for the plans to protect certain aquifers. When the SDWA was first enacted, little was known about the actual number and condition of water supplies in the U.S. Only a few public water systems had undertaken the monitoring needed to detect the presence of many contaminants. The act initially directed EPA to establish national drinking water standards to protect public health. It also established requirements for protection of groundwater supplies from contamination by underground injection of fluids. 340A
Environ. Sci. Technol., Vol. 18, No. 11, 1984
A recent report by the Office of Technology Assessment indicates a 29% contamination rate for groundwater-supplied drinking water in the 954 U.S. cities with populations over 10,000. EPA reports that 45% of these water systems contain organic chemicals. EPA is required to establish maximum contaminant limitations (MCLs)—based on treatment techniques—and national primary drinking water regulations for those contaminants that may have adverse health effects. The agency promulgated interim drinking water regulations in 1975, based on U.S. Public Health Service guidelines issued in 1962. EPA subsequently revised standards for two contaminants, trihalomethanes and radionuclides. To date, the agency has established about 20 MCLs. In addition, there are now nine health-based recommended maximum contaminant levels (RMCLs) in the public comment stage, and another 40% are listed for regulatory action (roughly three-quarters of these are previously nonregulated substances). Both bills change the SDWA terminology for standards. RMCLs will be called Maximum Contaminant Level Goals (MCLGs). This is intended to clarify the distinction between healthbased goals and technology-based MCLs. MCLs must be as close to the MCLGs as feasible. The House committee report defines feasible as " . . . the use of technology, treatment techniques or other means which the Administrator determines to be the best available (taking cost into consideration)." The House bill determines that the use of granular activated carbon (GAC) is feasible and it requires EPA to use GAC as part of the definition of best available technology when MCLs for synthetic organic chemicals are estab-
lished. Although EPA decided in 1978 not to require GAC because of the expense involved, the agency now believes that GAC will be needed in the future to control many of the synthetic organic contaminants under consideration for regulation. As under existing law, each bill allows EPA to require the use of certain treatment techniques in lieu of an MCL, if the level cannot be measured accurately enough in drinking water to establish an MCLG. The House bill, however, deletes the requirement that technology be generally available before it is determined feasible. New regulatory deadlines Within 18 months of the enactment of SDWA, EPA is required to review 14 organic contaminants listed in its March 1982 notice (Fed. Regist., 47, 9352). Within 36 months, EPA must address the more than 60 organic, inorganic, microbial, and radionuclide contaminants listed in its October 1983 notice (Fed. Regist., 48, 45502). By Jan. 1, 1988, and at annual intervals thereafter, EPA must publish a list of priority contaminants for regulation. Both bills require water systems to monitor for unregulated contaminants. Systems with 150 or more service connections must monitor once every five years. The new legislation also requires filtration or disinfection of public water supplies, although variances are available to systems that can demonstrate that these practices will not be necessary to protect against health risks. EPA will now have the authority to issue administrative orders to force water systems to comply with the new law, instead of having to go to court to seek correction for some violations. Richard M. Dowd, PhD, is a Washington, D. C., consultant to Environmental Research and Technology, Inc.
© 1984 American Chemical Society 0013-936X/84/0916-0340A$01.50/0
