EPA Research Working Group November 28-29, 2000 Meeting Summary

The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency's (EPA) Office of Ground Water and Drinking Water (OGWDW) and Office of Research and Development (ORD) held the first meeting of the National Drinking Water Advisory Council (NDWAC) Research Working Group on November 28-29, 2000 in Washington, DC.⁽¹⁾ Immediately after introductions, facilitator Abby Arnold, RESOLVE, first reviewed and obtained buy in on the draft agenda. The Work Group agreed that the purpose of the meeting was to:

The final meeting agenda can be found as Attachment A. A list of all in attendance is included as Attachment B.

Charlene Shaw, Designated Federal Official to the NDWAC, briefed Working Group members on the history and procedures of the NDWAC. Ms. Shaw stated that this Advisory Committee advises, consults with, and makes recommendations on a continuing basis to, the Administrator, on matters related to the activities, function, and policies of the Agency under the Safe Drinking Water Act. As a unit of the NDWAC, any recommendations developed by the Working Group are made for purposes of advising the NDWAC, which then may choose to forward such recommendations on to the EPA Administrator, either as received or modified in some manner. Ms. Shaw explained that the Working Group was established to provide advice to the NDWAC as it develops recommendations for EPA on a Comprehensive Drinking Water Research Strategy (as required under the Safe Drinking Water Act (SDWA) that considers the broad range of research needed to support the Agency's drinking water regulatory activities. The Working Group will provide the NDWAC with recommendations for EPA on identifying, evaluating and prioritizing drinking water research needs over the next 5-10 years to ensure that EPA has the science it needs to make sound regulatory decisions.

Tim Oppelt, Director of the EPA > National Risk Management Research Laboratory welcomed the Working Group and reiterated that drinking water research is a top priority for the Agency. He noted that there is a long tradition of cooperative research in drinking water and that the member's advice on EPA's science program was critical. Mr. Oppelt asked the Working Group (through NDWAC) to provide advice to EPA on research priorities across the drinking water program.

Fred Hauchman, National Research Program Director at EPA's National Health and Environmental Effects Research Laboratory, then clarified that ,the Working Group is charged with two major activities:

Dr. Hauchman explained that the Working Group will analyze research needs and priorities in the areas of health effects, exposure assessment, risk assessment and risk management (i.e., control technology) for the various components of the Comprehensive Drinking Water Research Strategy. This will be accomplished by reviewing existing EPA research plans, documents or other published literature covering the various topic areas in the Strategy. These areas include, but may not be limited to:

In addition, EPA envisions that future Working Groups (or this same group with a revised charter) will: (1) provide continuing advice to the Agency on drinking water research needs, priorities and estimated resource requirements; and (2) evaluate the progress that EPA has made in addressing the priority research needs identified in the Comprehensive Drinking Water Research Strategy.

Dr. Hauchman recognized the depth and breadth of expertise on the Working Group. He noted that individuals were selected for membership on the Working Group based on the expertise and experience needed to provide balanced advice to the NDWAC, and hence to EPA, on issues related to specific SDWA requirements: health effects (chemical contaminants, microbial pathogens, radiological contaminants), epidemiology, risk assessment, analytical methods, treatment technologies, occurrence, exposure analysis, engineering, chemistry, hydrology, geology, water system management (filtered/unfiltered and surface/groundwater systems). At least one member of the Working Group, who is also a member of the NDWAC itself, will facilitate the flow of information between the Working Group and NDWAC.

Dr. Hauchman indicated that the Working Group is scheduled to meet up to four times (in Washington DC) and to hold several conference calls between November 2000 and November 2001.

As a starting point in its deliberations, EPA asked the Working Group to evaluate the Agency's proposed risk assessment-based framework for the Comprehensive Drinking Water Research Strategy. The Working Group was also asked to begin the review of EPA's assessment of research needs and priorities for several of the topic areas in the Strategy, listed above.

Ephraim King, Director of OGWDW's Standards and Risk Management Division (SRMD)⁽²⁾, thanked Working Group members for participating and presented the regulatory context for Agency-sponsored research on drinking water contaminants and issues related to the regulatory requirements. (See Attachment C.) Mr. King reported on EPA's regulatory schedule for over a dozen rules and reports required by the SDWA. Such topics include arsenic, microbes, disinfectant by-products, sensitive subpopulations, and unregulated contaminants. Mr. King elaborated on the standard-setting requirements under SDWA. He reminded the group that EPA's standards require that in order to publish drinking water regulations for a contaminant, the following criteria must be met:

EPA's research program supports the development of data and methods to identify, assess, and control these contaminants of concern. Mr. King emphasized the importance of the efforts to be undertaken by the Working Group in assisting the Agency in its development of a comprehensive, multi-year research strategy.

Dr. Hauchman then provided an overview of EPA/ORD's organization and the process it uses in planning research: identify research needs, prioritize available funding for research projects, and collaborate with others in implementing the research plan. (See Attachment D.) He noted that EPA's laboratories and research centers are aligned so that the focus of each is on a various aspects of the risk assessment/ risk management paradigm, i.e., health effects, exposure and risk assessment, and control technology). He explained that ORD supports the research needs of the Office of Water in addition to those of the other regulatory offices at EPA. Dr. Hauchman also pointed out that while EPA's overall research budget had remained flat over the last decade, funding for drinking water research had more than doubled. This, he explained, was due to a shift in funding priorities within the Agency's research program.

Building on his previous presentation, Dr. Hauchman introduced the draft Comprehensive Drinking Water Research Strategy for the consideration of the Working Group. (See Attachments E.1. and E.2.) He identified the Strategy as a tool for establishing strategic directions and priorities (both short- and long-term) for EPA's drinking water program over the next 5 to 10 years. Dr. Hauchman also highlighted the role of the Strategy, in terms of coordination with other research entities and stakeholders. EPA seeks a Strategy that will both allow for prioritizing between and within various research topic areas. Dr. Hauchman explained that this Strategy must be robust to support both current and future rules. EPA feels that clear and understandable criteria for prioritizing research must be the underpinnings of such a strategy.

A wide variety of topic areas will be included in the Strategy. They will include those that are rule-based (i.e., supporting both regulated and unregulated chemical and pathogenic contaminants) and those that are emerging and cross-cutting issues (e.g., sensitive subpopulations, water reuse). The Strategy is organized along the risk paradigm as is much of the current thinking in the regulatory realm. (See Figure 1.) Dr. Hauchman introduced each of the ten key scientific questions based on the risk paradigm which EPA proposes to use to identify research needs associated with specific topic areas. (See Figure 2.) Dr. Hauchman explained that the framework provides the foundation of the research strategy and applies 10 questions to each research topic area.

Overall, the Working Group praised the draft Strategy as a good start, however members made suggestions for additional considerations. A good portion of the day was dedicated to discussing the questions. The member's comments on the questions are included in the Flip Chart Notes, provided as Attachment F. A summary of discussion highlights is provided below.

The Working Group felt that, to a certain extent, the development of the Strategy and the assessment of research needs and priorities of the topic areas depends on the ultimate target of the research. They also agreed that criteria would need to be developed to help set priorities within and among issue areas.

Other members questioned whether research priorities should be restrained by the current regulatory framework under the 1996 SDWA Amendments, suggesting that part of the mission of this group should be to look beyond the current regulatory framework and try to anticipate kinds of research that would be needed in a future drinking water delivery system that differs from today's.

Others noted that more work is needed to coordinate all research conducted by the drinking water research community. Possible steps include first determining the research needs, and then identifying what each agency or organization could contribute to this research.

With this discussion as a backdrop, the Working Group agreed to address the topics posed by EPA. In its deliberations, the Working Group identified the following items to be included in the agenda for future meetings:

The Working Group considered a draft set of Operational Protocols, including a statement of the mission of the Working Group. Members asked clarifying questions regarding the designation of alternates and decision making on final work products, requiring minor revisions to the draft. A revised draft of the operating protocols for approval of the Working Group at its next meeting is attached to this summary as Attachment G.

Throughout the meeting participants worked with EPA to reach clarity on the role and goals of the Working Group. After considerable discussion the Working Group members agreed they would provide feedback to EPA on the structure and content of the draft Strategy and work with EPA to identify improvements. In this respect, guided by specific research issues identified in the SDWA (See Attachment H) the Working Group will seek to work with EPA to develop a consensus comprehensive strategy product for recommendation to the NDWAC. Members will also assist EPA by providing recommendations about priorities among and within topic areas by lending their varied expertise in applying the recommended Strategy to the topic areas. In addition, members will consider how EPA might make these difficult choices to prioritize research in the context of limited available resources.

In response to the discussion, Dr. Hauchman suggested that he organize the Research Strategy differently than in the current outline. He might, for example, provide separate 'strategies" by issue area.

As a last business item, the Working Group developed the following list of tasks and noted who is responsible for completing the tasks, by when.

It was agreed that small sub-groups will work in the interim period between this meeting and the first conference call of the Working Group to revise specific components of the proposed draft framework for regulatory determination based on the discussions summarized above. The following sub-groups were identified:

Day 2: U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
Washington Information Center (WIC), Room 3 North
401 M St., SW
Washington, D.C. 20460

Tuesday, November 28, 2000

8:30 - 9:00

Welcome and Introductions Abby Arnold, Ephraim King (OW), Tim Oppelt (ORD)

Roundtable introductions
Review purpose of meeting
Review and adopt agenda

9:00 - 9:30

Orientation to NDWAC Research Working Group Charlene Shaw, Fred Hauchman

Purpose and goals of the Working Group Heather Givens
What product does EPA seek

9:30-10:15

Regulatory and Research Context for Consideration of Working Group Recommendations-
presentation and questions

Policy deadlines EPA faces, regulatory structure/schedule Ephraim King (OW)
Background on EPA's research budget for drinking water Fred Hauchman

10:15-10:30

BREAK

10:30-11:00

Overview of Comprehensive Drinking Water Research Strategy - Fred Hauchman
presentation and discussion

11:00-12:00

Comprehensive Strategy: Use of a Scientific Framework to Identify and Fred Hauchman
Prioritize Research Needs - presentation and discussion

Overview of components of the framework and how the framework is used

Criteria and process for prioritizing research

Wednesday, November 29, 2000 (Note, meeting room on this day is at EPA)

12:00-1:00	LUNCH (on your own)
1:00-3:30	Comprehensive Strategy: Use of a Scientific Framework (continued) Questions for the Working Group: 1. Is this an appropriate approach to developing a strategy? 2. Are the right issues and topics addressed?
3:30-3:45	BREAK
3:45-4:45	Return to Organizational Issues for Research Working Group Abby Arnold Review purpose of Research Working Group Review and discuss draft groundrules Review options for how to organize the Working Group to maximize participation by all members Review and discuss Working Group Schedule
4:45-5:15	PUBLIC COMMENT
5:15	ADJOURN
8:30-9:00	Reflections on First Day Discussions and Review of Agenda for Second Day
9:00-12:00 (including break)	Review and Discuss Comprehensive Strategy by Topic 9:00-10:00 Disinfection By Products Heather Givens, Fred Hauchman 10:00-11:00 Microbes (related to M/DBP rules) Heather Givens, Fred Hauchman 11:00-12:00 Arsenic Heather Givens, Fred Hauchman
12:00-1:00	LUNCH (on your own) 1:00-2:00 Unregulated Contaminants (CCL Overview) Fred Hauchman
2:00-3:00	Planning for Future Meetings, Conference Calls Abby Arnold Identify agenda items Identify interim tasks (who will do what by when?) How do we want to organize ourselves Identify information needs Identify preferred communication mechanisms (use of the Web) Identify who will do what and any interim milestones
3:00-3:30	PUBLIC COMMENT
3:30-4:00	Closing and Wrap up
4:00	ADJOURN

National Drinking Water Advisory Council
Research Working Group

-- Meeting --

November 28-29, 2000
Office of RESOLVE, Inc. & EPA Washington Information Center
Washington, D.C.

Participants and Observers
Working Group Participants
Carol	Ashe	Camp, Dresser, & McKee	Cambridge	MA
Arthur	Ashendorff	New York City Dept. of Environmental Protection	New York	NY
Temple	Ballard	Degremont North America	Richmond	VA
William	Bellamy	CH2M Hill	Englewood	CO
Anthony	Bennett	Texas Natural Resources Conservation Commission	Austin	TX
Mark	Beuhler	Metropolitan Water District of Southern California	Los Angeles	CA
Frank	Bove	Agency for toxic Substances and Disease Registry	Atlanta	GA
Jen	Clancy	Calncy Environmental Consultants	St. Albans	VT
Richard	Danielson	BioVir Laboratories	Benicia	CA
Micheal	Facazio	U.S. Geological Survey	Reston	VA
Marcie	Francis	Chlorine Chemistry Council	Arlington	VA
Fred	Hauchman	U.S. EPA - ORD	RTP	NC
Robert	Hultquist	California Department of Health Services	Sacramento	CA
Mark	LeChevaillier	American Water Works Service Co., Inc.	Voorhees	NJ
Deborah	Levy	Centers for Disease Control	Chamblee	GA
Karl	Linden	Duke University	Durham	GA
Robert	Masters	National Ground Water Association	Westerville	OH
Ronald	Melnick	National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences	RTP	NC
Rosemary	Menard	City of Portland Bureau of Water Works	Portland	OR
Alexa	Obolensky	Philadelphia Water Department	Philadelphia	PA
Erik	Olson	Natural Resources Defense Council	Washington	DC
Heather	Shank-Givens	U.S. EPA - OGWDW	Washington	DC
Peter	Thornton	Valusia County Health Department	DeLand	FL
Thomas	Yohe	Philadelphia Suburban Water Company	Bryn Mawr	PA
Ronald	Zegers	Southern Nevada Water System	Boulder City	NV
Lauren	Zeise	California Environmental Protection Agency	Oakland	CA
Rae	Zimmerman	New York University	New York	NY
Note: Italics indicate individual participating by telephone.
Observers and EPA Resource Support
Bob	Allen	American Water Works Association Research Fdn.	Denver	CO
John	Arnett	Copper and Brass Fabricators Council	Washington	DC
Jeanne	Bailey	American Water Works Association	Washington	DC
John	Balbey	George Washington University	Washington	DC
Keith	Christman	Chlorine Chemistry Council	Arlington	VA
Matt	Corson	Assn. of State Drinking Water Administrators	Washington	DC
Clyde	Dempsey	U.S. EPA	Cincinnati	OH
Betsy	Henry	U.S. EPA - OGWDW	Washington	DC
Barbara	Klieforth	U.S. EPA - ORD/OSP	Washington	DC
Paula	Mason	U.S. EPA - OGWDW Designated Federal Official to the Working Group	Washington	DC
John	Miller	U.S. EPA - ORD/OSP	Washington	DC
Tom	Miller	U.S. EPA - Office of the Science Advisory Board	Washington	DC
Bruce	Mintz	U.S. EPA	RTP	NC
Jeff	Mosher	Assn. of Metropolitan Water Agencies	Washington	DC
Cynthia	Nolt-Helms	U.S. EPA - ORD/NCER	Washington	DC
Chuck	Noss	Water Environment Research Foundation	Alexandria	VA
Robin	Oshira	U.S. EPA - OW/waterscience/HECD	Washington	DC
James	Owens	U.S. EPA	Cincinnati	OH
Lynn	Papa	U.S. EPA - ORD/NCER	Cincinnati	OH
Merav	Pick	Inside Washington Publishers	Arlington	VA
Lisa	Ragain	George Washington University	Washington	DC
Alan	Roberson	American Water Works Association	Washington	DC
Charlene	Shaw	U.S. EPA - OGWDW	Washington	DC
Pat	Ware	BNA	Washington	DC
Facilitation Team
Abby	Arnold	RESOLVE, Inc.	Washington	DC
Jeff	Citrin	RESOLVE, Inc.	Washington	DC

National Drinking Water Advisory Committee
Working Group on Drinking Water Research

Draft Operational Protocols - 11/20/00

Agreed with subject to approval of members not present.

1. MISSION

The purpose of the National Drinking Water Advisory Committee (NDWAC) Working Group on Drinking Water Research is to provide advice to the NDWAC as it develops recommendations for the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) on a Comprehensive Drinking Water Research Strategy (as required under the Safe Drinking Water Act) that considers the broad range of research needed to support the Agency's drinking water regulatory activities. The Working Group will advise the NDWAC in assisting EPA in identifying, evaluating and prioritizing drinking water research needs over the next 5-10 years to ensure that EPA has the science it needs to make sound regulatory decisions. Consequently, this Working Group will be charged with two major activities: (1) consider the research needs associated with a broad range of issues, including but not limited to those covered by the existing M/DBP and Arsenic Research Plans and the CCL Research Plan that is under development; and (2) provide advice to NDWAC on how the Agency might prioritize research in the context of both long term and annual budget allocation demands, based on consideration of comprehensive drinking water research needs.

2. PARTICIPANTS

Representation. Working Group individuals were selected based on the expertise and experience needed to provide balanced advice to the NDWAC and hence to EPA on issues related to specific SDWA requirements: health effects (chemical contaminants, microbial pathogens, radiological contaminants), epidemiology, risk assessment, analytical methods, treatment technologies, occurrence, exposure analysis, engineering, chemistry, hydrology, geology, water system management (filtered/unfiltered and surface/groundwater systems). At least one member of the NDWAC will be a member of the Working Group in order to facilitate the flow of information between the Working Group and NDWAC.
Alternates. Working Group members are expected to participate in all meetings or conference calls to the greatest extent possible. In the event that this is impossible, any Working Group member may designate one alternate, subject to approval by the NDWAC, to participate in his or her place. The alternate must be a peer of the member, and must have similar expertise and perspective, and or the ability to fully represent the member. Only the Working Group member or his or her designated alternate may participate in Working Group meetings. If neither the member nor his or her designated alternate can attend, there will be no representative at the table for that particular seat. In an emergency, a representative Association member may sit in on behalf of a member (the Designated Federal Official (DFO) should be notified as soon as possible), but this will be allowed only once throughout the duration of the Working Group. Alternates can not vote.

3. DECISION MAKING

Consensus. The Working Group will operate by consensus. Consensus is defined as "all can live with the recommendation." Working Group decisions will be made only with the concurrence of all members present at a given meeting, except for agreement on any final products delivered to the NDWAC which will require consensus of all members. If consensus cannot be reached a minority report will be submitted to the NDWAC as part of the product delivered to the NDWAC.
Agreement and Product(s). Agreement of the Working Group on any written document or other product(s) of the Working Group intended for delivery to the NDWAC will be considered products of the Working Group. Pre-consensus draft materials should not be considered nor characterized as products of the Working Group.

4. PROCEDURES

FACA. The Working Group is established by the NDWAC, a Federal Advisory Committee established under, and complying with the requirements of the Federal Advisory Committee Act (FACA).
Notice of Open Meetings. Consistent with FACA requirements, meetings of the NDWAC Working Group will be announced in the Federal Register prior to each meeting (at least 15 days) and will be open to the public.
Meeting Summaries. Draft summaries of the Working Group meetings will be developed by the facilitator for approval by Working Group members. Meeting summaries will be made available to the public only after approval by the Working Group members.
Agendas. Meeting agendas will be drafted by the facilitator in consultation with the NDWAC Working Group Members. Agenda items will be identified at each meeting for the subsequent meeting. A draft agenda will be distributed in advance of each meeting for review by Working Group members. It will be reviewed at the beginning of each meeting and will be refined, if necessary, and approved.
Relationship to NDWAC. This Working Group has been formed to address specific issues (see mission statement) and to make recommendations to the NDWAC (not directly to EPA). The Working Group is not authorized to make decisions for the NDWAC. All NDWAC members will be notified of the date and time of Working Group meetings, and will be provided with agendas and written summaries for all Working Group meetings/conference calls.
NDWAC Receipt of Working Group Products. The recommendations or other products of the Working Group must be made to the full NDWAC at one of its scheduled meetings. The NDWAC will consider the recommendations and may either pass them on to EPA unchanged, or may amend them to reflect their own recommendations, or may, after discussion, choose not to forward them at all.
Facilitator. A neutral facilitator will facilitate the Working Group meetings and work with Working Group members to ensure that the process runs smoothly. The facilitator serves at the will of the Working Group, NDWAC and EPA and may be dismissed or replaced by another as determined by the Working Group, NDWAC and EPA. The role of the facilitator typically includes: developing draft agendas, focusing meeting discussions, working to resolve any impasses that may arise, preparing meeting summaries, working with Working Group members to support between-meeting activities, working with the EPA staff in locating and circulating background materials and documents the Working Group needs or develops, and other appropriate functions.
Electronic Communication. Electronic communication mechanisms will be utilized to the greatest extent possible for the sharing of information outside of Working Group meetings, including distribution of meeting agendas and summaries. For any Working Group member who is unable to participate in electronic communication, others means of communication will be utilized (fax and hard copy mail). The purpose of electronic communications is to reduce paperwork, delay and expense of mailing or faxing.
Attendance at Meetings. All Working Group members are expected to make a good faith effort to attend Working Group meetings and participate in conference calls.
Caucus. Any subset of Working Group members may confer privately during or after a Work Group meeting as needed. The facilitator may also confer privately with Work Group members during or after meetings.
Observers. Observers are any Non-Working Group attendees at meetings. Only the Working Group members (or their designated alternate) will be seated at the table and participate in discussions unless the facilitator acknowledges an observer.
Public Comment. Meeting agendas will set aside time for the specific purpose of taking public comment. Observers will be asked to indicate their interest in making public comment ahead of time on a sign-up sheet provided at each meeting for this purpose.
Changes to Procedural Protocols. These Procedural Protocols may be revised with the consensus of the Working Group and with approval by the NDWAC and the Designated Federal Officer.

5. SAFEGUARDS FOR THE PARTIES

Good Faith. All parties agree to act in good faith in all aspects of the Working Group deliberations. In order to encourage the free and open exchange of ideas, views and information prior to decisionmaking, Members agree not to use specific offers, positions or statements made by another member during non-public discussions for any other purpose not previously agreed to in writing by the Members involved. It is the hope that other attendees at Working Group meetings also voluntarily comply with this provision. Personal attacks and prejudiced statements will not be tolerated.
Right to Withdraw. Any party may withdraw from the Working Group at any time without prejudice. However, it is requested that the member wishing to withdraw communicate the reasons for withdrawal.
Others' Positions. Members agree not to characterize the position of any other party in public statements or in discussions with the media (even if that party withdraws from the Working Group). To the extent feasible, members will refer others to approved meeting summaries for information about the Working Group's discussions.
Interactions with the Press. Recognizing that the way in which Working Group discussions or the statements or positions of Working Group members are publicly characterized may affect the optimal functioning of the Working Group, wherever possible Working Group members (and their alternates) will refer inquiries from the press regarding the overall process of the Working Group and its deliberations to the facilitator(s) or to Approved meeting summaries. If a Working Group member does engage in discussion with the press, they will refrain from characterizing the views of, or attributing comments to, other Working Group members.

6. SCHEDULE

The Working Group is expected to meet up to four times (in Washington DC) and to hold several conference calls between November 2000 and November 2001.

		Safewater Home \| About Our Office \| Publications \| Links \| Office of Water \| En Español \| Questions and Answers


		EPA Home \| Privacy and Security Notice \| Contact Us