Future organic monitoring requirements for any given system will
reflect the new source vulnerability assessment when DOH sets baseline
chemical monitoring requirements for any source.
Waterworks Standards Under Development
The DOH Waterworks Standards are intended to provide
criteria for the engineering profession in the design and construction
of public water systems. Revising the design standards is fundamental
to reducing some of DOH's traditional review functions (as outlined in
a separate article on page 4). The standards may also be used to
define the "standards of care" for the minimum expectations
of professional engineers and evaluations of engineering competency.
The Waterworks Standards are intended to be highly technical
in nature. The initial draft of the Waterworks Standards was
reviewed in September and October by engineering professionals,
organizations, and associations representing the regulated community
and consultants involved with waterworks projects. DOH staff are
currently revising the standards based on the comments received during
this initial review. A final draft is expected to be available this
spring. DOH intends to hold workshops across the state to highlight
changes to previous engineering design criteria, and obtain input on
policy related issues including proposals for future revisions to DOH
rules.
The target date for finalizing the Waterworks Standards is
dependent upon the extent of proposed rule revisions, but is expected
by mid-summer/early fall, 1996. Until the Waterworks Standards
are adopted, existing WAC and Sizing Guidelines should be
followed. For more information on the Waterworks Standards,
call (360) 753-5995.
Lead/Copper Monitoring in 1996
In 1996 DOH will be stepping up the compliance program for
lead/copper monitoring. Over the past three years DOH has focused on
public water systems with populations over 500. Beginning 1996, the
program will emphasize compliance for systems with a population
between 250 and 500. Systems that have not yet conducted their
monitoring are out of compliance with federal and state rules. Systems
will soon be notified of their specific monitoring requirements.
Conservation-Oriented Water Rates
DOH has recently published a technical assistance document entitled
"Overview of Conservation-Oriented Rate Structures for Public
Water Systems." This document was prepared to comply with the
"Wild Salmonid Bill" from the 1993 legislative session.
The document was prepared with assistance of a rate study
committee, consisting of water utility and state agency
representatives. It includes an overview of conservation-oriented rate
structures and potential impacts to customers and water utilities from
implementation of such rates, an overview of rate setting practices,
an overview of factors to consider when selecting a conservation rate
structure, case studies where conservation rates have been
implemented, and references to additional pertinent literature.
DOH transmitted a report to the Legislature on conservation rates,
as required by the Legislature. The report provides an overview of
rates currently utilized in Washington, and discusses the constraints
facing systems when considering implementation of such rates.
For a copy of this document call Publications at (360) 664-2441. If
you have other questions contact Erik Fairchild at (360) 586-5207.
A Letter From The Director
The Division of Drinking Water has for years had an informal Water
Supply Advisory Committee (WSAC). That Committee, consisting
principally of representatives of organizations affected by the
activities of the Division, has periodically provided advice and
counsel on major program decisions.
With the enactment of E2SSB 5448 during the 1995 session, the
Legislature formalized the requirement that the program have a water
supply advisory committee to provide advice to the program on the
organization, functions, service delivery methods, and funding. The
Legislature specified that the membership of the WSAC represent a
broad range of interests in the regulation of water supplies,
including water utilities of all sizes, local governments, business
groups, special purpose districts, local health jurisdictions, other
state and federal agencies, financial institutions, environmental
organizations, the Legislature, and other groups substantially
affected by the Department's role in implementing state and federal
requirements for public water systems.
The legislature also specifically directed that the WSAC
participate in the preparation of a report to the legislature by
November, 1996, focused on three key issues:
- The adequacy and necessity of the current and prospective
funding for the Program;
- The extent to which the program has progressed toward achieving
the objectives of the state's Public Health Improvement Plan; and
- An assessment of changes necessitated by modifications to the
federal Safe Drinking Water Act (SDWA).
We are moving full speed ahead to carry out this direction from the
legislature. We have appointed 29 members to the new Committee, some
of whom were members of the previous group, some of whom were on the
Drinking Water 2000 Task Force, and some of whom are new.
The full Committee met on November 2 and December 5. Judy Turpin,
the representative of the Washington Environmental Council, was chosen
as Chair; John Kounts of the Public Utilities Districts Association
was chosen as Vice Chair. Three subcommittees have been formed: (1)
the Water Quality, Supply, and Planning Subcommittee, chaired by Diana
Gale of Seattle City Water; (2) the Governance and Funding
Subcommittee, chaired by Lou Dooley of the Southwest Washington Health
District; and (3) the Program Services Subcommittee, chaired by Jones
Atterberry of the Association of Realtors and Skagit Public Utility
District.
The Committee has identified a broad range of questions to be
answered under each of the key issues to be addressed in the
legislative report. Some of them include the role of the Division of
Drinking Water in the state's management and allocation of water
resources; the division of responsibilities between state and local
health jurisdictions; the ability of water systems and the program to
take advantage of greater flexibility being proposed under a revised
SDWA; the continued reliance by the program on certain types of
funding, such as fees, in the absence of any state General Fund
support; the proper prioritization of program functions, focused on
populations at risk from inadequate or unsafe water supplies;
alternative delivery of program services through third parties or the
utilities themselves; and the ongoing problems associated with
inadequate small water systems.
I would summarize the issues in the following three questions: What
should the state's program for regulating water supplies look like?;
Who should do what?, and How should it be paid for?
The Committee has agreed to an ambitious timetable for deliberating
on these matters and trying to develop proposed answers or alternative
approaches. The current schedule calls for a set of tentative
proposals by May, which may be developed into budgetary or legislative
items that the Department will pursue as agency initiatives. Further
refinement will occur through October, when the report to the
Legislature will be finalized.
This is an exciting challenge to our Division and to the members of
the WSAC. I continue to be grateful to people who are willing to
provide their time, energy, and talents to helping us develop a
statewide program that is effective, efficient, and serves the needs
of the people of the state of Washington. As the year goes by, I hope
to provide you with updates in the Water Tap on the progress of this
group. Please feel free to contact me if you would like more
information on the WSAC's work, or how you may be able to provide your
own input into their activities.
Sincerely,
B. David Clark, Director
Restructuring the Engineering Review
and Approval Process
DOH is examining ways to expedite reviews of engineering documents.
The current process used for engineering project approvals was
evaluated last spring by agency staff and external consultants and
utilities.
A major recommendation of this study was to accept registered
engineer certification that distribution related projects had been
designed in accordance with proper engineering principles and
practices and then approving such "certifications" with
minimal DOH review. It was recognized however, that the development of
more detailed state design standards would be needed. The
"self-certification" approach is currently proposed for
implementation following finalization of these standards.
Another alternative review and approval process for distribution
related projects, recently instituted by DOH, does not depend on
finalization of the Waterworks Standards. It is an option
available to a water system that: (1) has a current-DOH approved water
system plan; (2) has identified the project in the plan; and (3) has a
professional engineer on staff, or under retainer, to review and
approve construction documents. Satisfying these criteria will allow
utility self-review of distribution related projects. Such projects
would be treated in a manner similar to that for distribution mains
under WAC 246-290-110(2) and -120(2). Any water system interested in
this option should contact a DOH regional office for current policy
provisions.
Department Changes Fees for Service
Effective November 4, 1995, DOH finalized changes to water system
project review and approval fees (WAC 246-290-990). The revisions
allow for recovery of actual costs of reviewing and approving
documents and performing other fee-for-service activities. Increases
comply with Initiative 601 limits.
Several new fee categories were added. These include review and
approval of Satellite Management Agency (SMA) Plans, conservation and
wellhead protection documents, and special reports or plans such as
corrosion control or tracer studies. New fees for monitoring waivers
were also established.
Some fee amounts decreased. Reduced fees now exist for project
submittals that meet specific criteria and do not require a detailed
evaluation by DOH.
For a copy of the fee schedule, call 1 - 800 - 521-0323.
Water Works Operator Certification
Operation Advisory Committee
In an effort to reduce costs to the state, the 1995 Legislature
abolished the Water and Wastewater Operator Certification Board of
Examiners effective July 1, 1995. However, the Legislature allowed DOH
to form an advisory committee for advice and technical assistance on
the examination and certification of water system operators.
DOH believes that communication among certified operators, public
water systems, consumers, and affected agencies is essential. DOH has
formed the Water Works Operator Certification Advisory Committee,
which will provide the opportunity for continuing the dialogue and
sharing information on certification issues.
DOH has drafted, for the Committee's review and approval, a Water
Works Operator Certification Advisory Committee Handbook. This
Handbook describes the purpose, membership, responsibilities, member
qualifications, meetings, etc. of the Committee. The Committee will
hold its first meeting in January, 1996. For further information
contact Cheryl Bergener, Program Manager, Water Works Operator
Certification Program (360) 753-7433.
Regulatory Reform
During the 1994 and 1995 sessions, the Legislature enacted a number
of new requirements to make state agency activities less burdensome on
the people and businesses regulated by state agencies. DOH has begun
implementing these new legislative directives--collectively referred
to as "regulatory reform". One objective of regulatory
reform is to focus state regulatory agencies more on helping achieve
voluntary compliance with state requirements. As part of the efforts
DOH is taking a number of steps. These include:
- Revision of its Waterworks Design Standards to reduce or
eliminate detailed review by Drinking Water staff of projects
designed by state-certified engineers.
- Development of a technical assistance inventory that identifies
technical assistance resources available both at DOH and from
other entities.
- Review of existing rules and regulations to identify those that
may be eliminated under a new "expedited repeal"
process.
- Allocating more staff time to development of additional training
to water system owners and operators, with a focus on small
systems.
- Development of agreements with other state agencies (i.e., the
Utilities and Transportation Commission (UTC) and local health
departments) to clarify roles and eliminate overlapping areas of
responsibility.
- Increase staff time spent on routine visits to public water
systems.
- Reassessing program functions and funding as part of the
activities of the W SAC.
More changes to the Drinking Water Program are likely in the future
as regulatory reform continues to evolve. The Water Tap will continue
to provide you with updated information on changes, particularly as
they affect water system operators.
Safe Drinking Water Act Reauthorization
Congress is once again considering legislation that would
reauthorize and revise the provisions of the federal SDWA.
A major revision to the SDWA--Senate Bill 1316--passed the Senate
on November 29 by a 99-0 vote. It will now move to the House of
Representatives for consideration.
The bill makes major changes in the way in which the Environmental
Protection Agency (EPA) will administer federal drinking water
standards. Future rules would generally require the EPA to evaluate
health risks, costs of implementation, and small system impacts before
adopting a rule. EPA would also review existing monitoring
requirements for some contaminants, and authorize water quality
treatment technologies appropriate to all system sizes.
Under this bill, state agencies administering the SDWA--such as
DOH--would be given much more flexibility in tailoring monitoring and
treatment requirements to systems within their states.
The bill would also create the Drinking Water State Revolving Fund
(SRF), which would provide low-interest and no-interest loans to water
systems for capital facilities, source protection activities, and some
technical assistance. Disadvantaged communities would be able, in some
circumstances, to have their loans forgiven. Legislation enacted by
the Washington State Legislature in 1995 has already authorized DOH,
in conjunction with the Public Works Trust Fund, to setup and
administer this financial assistance program once it is created by
Congress.
For additional details on the provisions of this bill, contact your
local congressional office representative.
Restructuring Case Histories
DOH conducted an interview with Cas Hancock, one of the
ex-commissioners from the Blue Spruce Water District #W10 located in
Snohomish County concerning the district's examination and ultimate
implementation of a restructuring action with Snohomish County Public
Utility District (PUD) #1. The following notes provide some of the
highlights of the interview.
BACKGROUND: Blue Spruce Grove Community Club, Inc., began
as a strictly recreational "camping" area with a
distribution system designed to serve a total of 342
"standby" water connections. In 1985, with 76 permanent
homes then connected to the system, two children in the neighborhood
showed signs of giardiasis infection, not uncommon for untreated
surface water systems. Resulting enforcement action included an order
to provide filtration, chlorination and upgrade storage facilities.
After the district had been formed out of the Community Club,
project plans were approved and system improvements were made. October
1987 saw the completion of the $385,000 upgrade project, with funding
furnished by FmHA. The EPA Departmental Order was lifted. Growth of
permanent residential connections continued.
THE PROPOSAL: In 1993, the PUD contacted the district,
inquiring about interest in connecting to a Granite Falls area
regional pipeline. The immediate reaction of the PUD Board of
Commissioners was negative. With continued growth of users on the
district system the system recognizes the need to make improvements to
remain in compliance. The cost estimate for the needed improvements
was $1.1 million.
The Board of Commissioners of Blue Spruce decided to re-open talks
about the regional pipeline. Due to the PUD's policy of restricting
wholesale of water to municipals solely, Blue Spruce was faced with a
decision whether to remain in the business and upgrade the existing
system at a cost of $1.1 million, or become retail customers of the
PUD.
THE DECISION: The Board of Commissioners at Blue Spruce
agonized over whether to relinquish its "power" and whether
its customers would be happy with PUD water. Inflation increased the
original estimate for upgrade. The PUD provided cost estimate of
$500,000, with the PUD assuming the existing long-term debt of the
district, and no "out-of-pocket" expenses to our customers.
After walking through the financial responsibilities and alternatives,
and having public information sessions, the Board of Commissioners
made the decision. On April 1, 1995, the PUD assumed ownership of the
Blue Spruce Water District distribution system, with 240 permanent
connections.
With the transfer, the Commissioners saw middle of the night
emergency phone calls at an end, as were the tiresome readings of new
regulations, responses to tedious numbers of official letters and
monthly board meetings and the enormous responsibility of ensuring
public health. The loss of power and position was minimal. Welcome to
the return of a reasonably normal life.
Interested in restructuring? Contact Peter Beaton at (360) 664 -
9698 to learn about the Department's Restructuring Program.
Legislature Passes E2SSB 5448
During 1995 the Legislature enacted an agency request bill, E2SSB
5448, which grew out of two recommendations by the Drinking Water 2000
Task Force. This bill has significant implications for water
utilities, local governments and DOH.
The three major areas impacted by this bill are Public Water System
Coordination Act (PWSCA), Satellite Management and operator
certification.
Changes to the PWSCA bring it up to date with our experiences in
the 21 areas where it has been used, since 1977. These include changes
in the utility service appeals process which directs processing to
local government; development of "timely and reasonable"
criteria; modifications to when a coordinated water system plan (CWSP)
can be updated; revisions to CWSP committee procedures; addition of a
Satellite Management element; and creation of a new
"abbreviated" CWSP's.
With these changes, Satellite Management by a DOH-approved SMA is
now mandatory for all new systems, where available. When unavailable,
new systems still must pass financial viability criteria before they
can be developed and must be conditioned upon future SMA if it becomes
available and the system is out of compliance. A new list of
DOH-approved SMA will be available by January. Only SMA's passing
current DOH standards will be on this list.
Operator certification requirements have been expanded for Group A
systems with less than 100 services where water quality problems
exist. Additionally, certified operators may now serve more than one
system. This will help support the SMA concept.
Other items addressed by E2SSB 5448:
- DOH is required to create a water supply advisory committee to
help provide direction to the program and to develop a report to
the Legislature including recommendations of program improvements.
- A drinking water assistance account, is created to allow the
state to take advantage of federal funds that may be forthcoming
when the SDWA is reauthorized.
- Local governments may create their own local operating permit
programs as of July 1995. (Note: if a local program is created,
systems governed under that local program will no longer be
subject to DOH Operating Permit Program).
- The method for calculating penalties is clarified, and monies
collected from these penalties are placed into an account to
provide training and technical assistance to purveyors.
- It expands possible referrals of water systems by DOH to the UTC,
to conduct audits of non-compliant systems.
It is now unlawful and a misdemeanor to connect to a water system
or a sewer district without the system's permission.
DOH will be relying on a number of advisory groups to help develop
guidance on how to implement this legislation. For more information
contact Richard Siffert, Planning Program Manager at (360) 753-4299.
The EPA National Needs Survey
EPA has nearly completed the first national needs survey of
drinking water system financial needs.
The survey, begun in 1994, has two major objectives: (1) for the
first time, develop a national estimate of the capital needs for water
systems subject to federal standards under the SDWA, and (2) provide a
basis for a new federal funding program to help systems finance these
infrastructure costs.
The EPA expects to provide Congress with a report in February,
1996, describing state-by-state needs. Congress is expected to use
that report as the basis for making state allocations for the proposed
Drinking Water SRF. The SRF is part of the pending reauthorization of
the SDWA.
Many Washington water systems have participated in the survey. All
ten "large" systems in the state, serving 50,000 or more
customers, completed and returned to DOH detailed questionnaires on
their projected costs out to the year 2014. In addition, 61
"medium" systems in the state--serving between 3,300 and
50,000 customers--were chosen at random to complete similar surveys,
which EPA will use to develop national cost estimates for systems of
that size. Finally, 18 small systems--with under 3,300
customers--agreed to be visited by EPA surveyors and complete
questionnaires tailored toward small system needs.
EPA expects to conduct similar surveys every four years,
alternating with similar surveys conducted by EPA on wastewater needs.
The report should be available from EPA in March, 1996.
The Department of Health wishes to extends its gratitude and thanks
to those who participated in this major undertaking.
Dear Dr. Drip
Oh magnificent and all-knowing one, I have a question about a
drinking water problem and need an answer without having to pay for a
long distance call without getting caught in the notorious
bureaucratic run-around. I need your help to answer a drinking water
question.
Signed:
In Need Of Help
Dear In Need:
Boy! Does the Dripster have good news for you. The Ol' Doctor is
pleased to inform you that the Drinking Water Program now has a
toll-free phone line.
The Drinking Water Program will have a professional staff person
answer your call and provide a direct response. Please be patient, if
your question cannot be addressed immediately, the answer may need to
come from someone else in the Program. Feel FREE to use it
whenever you have a concern, need general information, or have
questions about the regulatory program. The toll-free line will be
staffed from 8 a.m. to 5 p.m. Monday through Friday. You can also call
on holidays or weekends and leave a voice-mail message. For answers
call 1 - 800 - 521-0323.
The following individuals have contributed to the production of
this issue of The Water Tap: Peter Beaton, Cheryl Bergener,
Erik Fairchild, Jim Hudson, Chris McCord, Dave Monthie, Lisa Raysby,
Ginny Stern, Carolyn Terry, and Darlene Treece, Editor.
A special thanks to Kathleen "Cas" Hancock of Evergreen
Rural Water of Washington for her contribution in the Restructuring
Case Histories article.
The Water Tap is published by the Department of Health,
Division of Drinking Water to provide information on subjects of
interest to water system owners, water works operators and others
interested in drinking water. Comments and questions are welcome.
Please write: Editor, The Water Tap, Department of Health,
Division of Drinking Water, P.O. Box 47822, Olympia, WA 98504-7822.
You may also send Email comments, suggestions or queries about The
Water Tap to the Washington State
Drinking Water Program.
