|
 |
|
Recommendations
From A Conference Call Meeting Held On June 16, 1997
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
ATLANTA, GEORGIA
The National Drinking Water Advisory Council met by conference call at
5:00 p.m. on Monday, June 16, 1997, in Atlanta, Georgia. Because some
of the Council members were in Atlanta to attend the Annual Conference
of the American Water Works Association, the following members were present
in the room: Chair, L.D. McMullen, Walter Bishop, John Scheltens and Thomas
Yohe. The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) was represented by Charlene
Shaw, Designated Federal Officer for the Council, Cynthia Dougherty, Director,
Office of Ground Water and Drinking Water (OGWDW) and William Diamond,
Director, Standards and Risk Management Division (SRMD), OGWDW. By phone,
the following members participated: Maurice Arel, Patrick Banegas, Diane
Kiesling, Nina McClelland, Diana Neidle, Susan Seacrest, James Tripp,
William VanDeValk and Paul Nannis (Mr. Nannis has not yet been officially
sworn in as a member of the Council and did not participate during the
voting process). Mr. James Cleland, Council member, was absent from the
call. Also on the phone were Robert Blanco, Director, Implementation and
Assistance Division (IAD), OGWDW, Jeanne Campbell, SRMD, OGWDW, Roy Simon,
Beth Hall and Robert Barles, IAD, OGWDW. Public present in the room: Fred
Pontius, American Water Works Association, Vanessa Leiby, Association
of State Drinking Water Administrators, and Patricia Ware, BNA (Environment
Reporter).
The Council was asked to comment on two Agency issues: (1) Proposed Federal
Register Notice on Analytical Methods for Regulated Drinking
Water Contaminants, and (2) Draft Source Water Protection Guidance.
The following recommendations were voted on and are offered to EPA:
Analytical Methods
After a discussion in which the Council heard that the Science Advisory
Board was also being briefed on this particular document, the following
recommendation was made:
Recommendation #1
The Council appreciates EPA bringing this to its attention, but has
no comments at this time.
Draft Source Water Protection Guidance
The Council was given a report from the Source Water Protection Working
Group by Council members sitting on that group, L.D. McMullen and Jim
Tripp. Following a discussion by the Council on the Working Group's Report,
the Council voted and passed these recommendations for use by the Agency:
Recommendation #2:
The Council recommends that States, to the maximum extent possible,
ensure broad representation on advisory groups with flexibility to identify
an appropriate mix of Stakeholder types. It is further recommended that
the guidance include language noting that set aside funds may be used
for advisory committee travel and other expenses be included.
Recommendation #3:
The Council recommends that States be expected to develop plans for
how they will manage and complete the assessment process in which they
will discuss development of an iterative process among states and water
systems, through public participation, to determine the appropriate
delineation and assessment for various water systems.
Recommendation #4:
The Council recommends that, at the discretion of the States, the names
and addresses of "significant potential sources" which are point sources
and in compliance with existing laws, should be released.
Recommendation #5:
The Council recommends that publishing the name and address of a source
not in compliance with existing laws is appropriate and recommends that
non-point sources should be described by class and geographic area where
the non-point sources are located and that these geographic areas be
described or displayed on maps for the public.
Recommendation #6:
The Council recommends that information released generally should be
on the results of an assessment, as opposed to the inventory.
Recommendation #7:
The Council recommends that EPA "require" what is mandated by the statute
and "recommend" enhancements to those requirements.
Recommendation #8:
The Council forwards to EPA the recommendation from the Working Group
that they stay in place after the guidance is finalized. In terms of
future work, the group identified three additional areas they felt needed
input: accountability issues, measures of success and development of
an implementation guide. The Council agrees with their recommendation.
|
