Regulatory Status of Emerging Contaminants · Regulatory Status of Emerging Contaminants 4 • The...
Transcript of Regulatory Status of Emerging Contaminants · Regulatory Status of Emerging Contaminants 4 • The...
Regulatory Status ofEmerging Contaminants
2Regulatory Status of Emerging Contaminants
Total Regulated Contaminants, 1976 - Current
3Regulatory Status of Emerging Contaminants
Water and WastewaterRegulation
Water and WastewaterRegulation
Commercial RegulationCommercial RegulationEPAEPA
FDAFDA
EPAEPA
EPAEPA
EPAEPA
EPA & FDAEPA & FDA
Avenues for Federal Regulation
4Regulatory Status of Emerging Contaminants
• The contaminant may have an adverse effect on humanhealth;
• The contaminant is known to occur or there issubstantial likelihood that the contaminant will occur inpublic water systems with a frequency and high enoughconcentration to be of public health concern;
• In the sole judgment of the Administrator, a regulationof such contaminant presents a meaningful opportunityfor health risk reduction for persons served by publicwater systems.
Safe Drinking Water Act:Criteria for Selecting New Regulations
5Regulatory Status of Emerging Contaminants
CCL UCMRRegulatory
Determination
NoDetermination
“Other” Inputs
6Regulatory Status of Emerging Contaminants
EPA CCL Process
7Regulatory Status of Emerging Contaminants
EPA CCL Process
~7,500 Contaminants
8Regulatory Status of Emerging Contaminants
EPA CCL Process
~7,500 Contaminants
561 Contaminants
9Regulatory Status of Emerging Contaminants
EPA CCL Process
~7,500 Contaminants
561 Contaminants
Draft CCL3:93 Chem + 11 Microb.Contaminants
(1 Pharmaceutical; nosteroids)
10Regulatory Status of Emerging Contaminants
EPA CCL Process + Politics
~7,500 Contaminants
561 Contaminants
Final CCL3:106 Chem + 10 Microb.Contaminants
(12 Pharmaceuticals; 9Steroids)
11Regulatory Status of Emerging Contaminants
• Perchlorate
• Chlorate
• Chromium (VI)
• VOCs
• Nitrosamines/NDMA
• Perfluorinated Chemicals
Where Does the EPA Currently Stand?
12Regulatory Status of Emerging Contaminants
EPA is moving towards regulating contaminants by group
Advantage:
– “Treatment Technique” credit could theoretically beprovided for “log removal” for certain groups
Disadvantage:
– Could over- or under-represent (regulate) certain highpriority / high toxicity compounds (?)
Groups that appear most likely for potential regulation:
– Volatile Organic Compounds (VOCs)
– Nitrosamines
– Perfluorinated compounds
Proposed or Potential Regulations (orContaminants of Concern)
13Regulatory Status of Emerging Contaminants
• Algal Toxins
• Emerging DBPs
• Other contaminants like MCHM (West Virginia)?
– Not likely
• Pharmaceuticals and Personal Care Products?
– Not likely
“Crystal Ball” Future Contaminants
14Regulatory Status of Emerging Contaminants
The DBP Iceberg
14
HalogenatedCompounds
Non-halogenatedCompounds
ICR Compounds
50 MWDSC DBPs
~700 Known DBPs
THMs, THAAs
DHAAs
Courtesy of Dave Reckhow, UMass Amherst
15Regulatory Status of Emerging Contaminants
• Much debate in scientific community about the toxicityand public health relevance of emerging DBPs– Concern about chloramine-related DBPs vs. chlorine-related
DBPs
• Ideas have been floated at conferences:– Find and apply a better surrogate than THMs and HAAs?
– Total Organic Halide (TOX) instead of THMs and HAAs?
– Regulate more toxic DBPs (iodo- and bromo- compounds)?
– Force GAC across all treatment plants as a TT?
• STAGE 3 DBP RULE—currently on the table fordiscussion at EPA…
Emerging Disinfection Byproducts
16Regulatory Status of Emerging Contaminants
2014 2015 2016 2017 2018
Reg Det 3 Final(<12/2015)1
Proposed Rule(s)(<12/2017)1
2019
Final Rule(s)(<1/2018)1
Final FluorideRecommendation,
HHS
RTCR Effective(4/2016)
ClO4-
Proposal(2014-15?)
ClO4-
Final(2017?)
Reg Det 3Proposal
Note (2): As yet unassigned (acrylamide, epichlorohydrin, total chromium / Cr-6)
CarcinogenicVOCs Proposal
(2015-16?)
CarcinogenicVOCs Final(2017-18?)
Six-Year 3(2016)
Six-Year 3Proposal
(2016)
Note (1): EPA can propose a rule at the same time as it makes a determination to regulate. This would truncate the rule timeline forany given contaminant by 2 years.
Round 2 LT2ESWTR Monitoring(10/2014 – 10/2017)
LT-LCRFinal
(Winter2017)
UCMR3 Monitoring(1/2013 – 12/2015)
CCL4Proposal(2014?)
LT-LCRProposal(2015 –2016?)
New RuleCompliance
2022 andBeyond
17Regulatory Status of Emerging Contaminants
• Their plate is very full!
• Currently looking at >7-9 year process from proposal topromulgation and enforcement
• UCMR3 data adds 3-5 years to this timeline
• Looking at 10-12 years for long-term changes
• CCL4 Due in 2014/2015
• UCMR4 Due in 2015– Opinion: Algal Toxins, Microbial Contaminants likely
• Carries us through ~ 2025– Additional contaminants beyond 2025 difficult to predict
EPA’s Regulatory Time Line
18Regulatory Status of Emerging Contaminants
History has proven that regulatory burden is primarilyborne by Utilities
– CWA TMDL Program: regulation of point sources prior to regulationof elusive non-point sources
Lack of articulated coordinated agency strategy
The cumulative impact of multi-agency regulation issignificant to municipalities and industries that bear thecost burden of regulation
DPR and IPR may open the way for state regulation ofemerging contaminants
Summary