Requirements, Amendments, Impact, and Cost of Implementation of the Safe Drinking Water Act - Research Paper Example

? Requirements, Amendments, Impact, and Cost of Implementation of the Safe Drinking Water Act Introduction Water is a vital compound. It fuels not only human beings but also industrial companies. Such component is essential to sustain life. Water is use for drinking, cooking, washing, and the like. But the quality of water to be used from one activity to another differs. For instance, in drinking and cooking it must be of first class quality compared to the water consumed by the industries in manufacturing their produce (Hrudey and Hrudey, 2004). In the past, when industrialization is not in its full boost, the water supplied to individuals is mostly potable. This is because the natural water reservoirs in the most of the countries are not yet explored which preserves its freshness and cleanliness. However, as people seek for advancement, our natural resources including our water resources, are being exploited to the point that they are contaminated with harmful substances. Contamination of water supply triggers waterborne diseases (WHO, 2004). In this regard, more and more people are now concerned with the quality of water for future use, and whether there would be enough supply of potable water for the next generations. (Hrudey and Hrudey, 2004), Such awareness pushed different countries, as well as the World Health Organization, to create a law to protect and guide people in preserving and promoting safe drinking water (WHO, 2004). Safe drinking water has numerous uses. It is not just for drinking and cooking but also consumed for other domestic and personal activities, such as bathing. In the field of medicine, it is proven that water has many health benefits. Regular intake of such may prevent diseases like hypertension. That is why, most of the countries all over the world set guidelines intended to ensure the supply of safe drinking water amidst the contamination due to industrialization (WHO, 2004). In the United States, the concern on having safe and accessible drinking water pushed legislators to pass a law regarding the said matter which is commonly known as the Safe Drinking Water Act (SDWA) (www.epa.gov, 2011). The SDWA is a main federal law which ensures the quality and safety of American water supply from its natural reservoirs such as lakes, rivers, streams and the like. It provides standards for guaranteeing the supply of potable water. (www.epa.gov, 2011). In this paper, SDWA will be further elaborated on, from the making up to the promulgation and amendments. The significant amendments and requirements set by the law will also be discussed (www.epa.gov, 2011). Safe Drinking Water Act The Evolution of the Safe Drinking Water Act The earliest promulgated standard on the quality of drinking water dates back to 1914. Its objective is to prevent the transmission of communicable diseases in water supplies on interstate carriers. Though most of the states adopted the said standards, they are not strictly complied with. The guidelines were limited only to the contamination due to the bacteria and its count (Knotts, 1999). In 1925, an updated standard on the quality of the drinking water was released. The innovation is not anymore limited in providing the ideal bacteriological count in the water reservoirs. They also set limits for physical and chemical levels for lead, copper, zinc and excessive soluble materials (Devlin, 2011). Amendments from time to time were made in order to respond to the need to supply safe drinking water. In 1942, 1946, and in 1962, revisions spelled out guidelines for bacteriological sampling and permissible concentrations of arsenic, fluoride, selenium and copper (Devlin, 2011). Due to the increasing growth in population and economy, the demand for water increased. This triggered the people to procure water from contaminated sources. In a community study, it was found out that 41 percent of the 969 water systems that were surveyed did not comply with the standard set to ensure the quality of drinking water. This alarming result concluded that most of the Americans were drinking substandard water (Knotts, 1999). Due to the massive outbreaks in the United States, the Congress conducted several hearings in the early 1970s to address the growing concerns on safe drinking water. These hearing were not successful until four years after when they were able to enact SDWA (Devlin, 2011). In 1974, American legislators gave birth to an act which brought changes for its drinking water. It is now called the Safe Drinking Water Act, Title XIV of the Public Health Service Act. SDWA ensures that the water systems in the said country is regulated and monitored to meet a specific quality. SDWA authorizes the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) to set standards for any contaminant in the water system that might have an adverse effect to public health. (Knotts, 1999). The law was amended in 1986 and 1996 to ensure further protection and supervision in the supply of safe drinking water (Knotts, 1999). Objectives of the Safe Drinking Water Act The primary objective of the SDWA is to protect public health by establishing limits for contaminants that might adversely affect the health of the people. It is also enacted to ensure that the ground and surface water is free from contamination (Knotts, 1999). The objectives are being carried out by EPA as they set limits and guidelines in treating public water supply, excluding private wells, and determining based on researches the harmful substances that pollute its water sources (Devlin, 2011). The act also ensures protection on the country’s environment by providing stringent and adequate measures to safeguard the county’s natural resources from being polluted (Callan and Thomas, 2009) Implementation On the first Safe Drinking Water Act in 1974, the policies being implemented are not clear cut standards to promote implementation of what is provided for under the law. The compliance to this law is rather suggestive than mandatory. This is the reason why from time to time the said act underwent major changes, which provides for stricter compliance with the guidelines set by the law (www.epa.gov, 2011). In implementing the Safe Drinking Water Act, hurdles and challenges come along its way because of the complex nature of the regulated community because it did not set up a national permit program for water systems. In this regard, policies must be pliant depending on the water system in their state. EPA is also experiencing problems in evaluating the records of inspection conducted by each state, because such were not placed in a single agency (www.epa.gov, 2011). Also in enforcing the SDWA, EPA’s authority in that matter is limited only to civil judicial action and issuance of administrative orders to compel compliance with the said law. But on the aspect of determining whether there is a threat and imminent danger to the public health, the law granted the EPA broad powers to take action, after they received information regarding the problem and that the State was not able to address such (Carter, 2006). Though there are difficulties, the system of granting permits among different water systems across the country are easier, as long as such complied with the health standards promulgated by the SDWA (Fletcher, 2008). Programs Implemented in the Safe Drinking Water Act The Safe Drinking Water Act provides several programs in order to achieve their objective – to serve a quality of water which safe to drink and to sustain its availability for the future (Devlin, 2011). Public Water System Supervision One of its programs of the SDWA is the Public Water System Supervision. Under this program, the EPA is regulating piped water systems especially those being consumed by humans. Reporting and monitoring requirements of water samples are also included in the said program (Devlin, 2011). There are 186,000 public water systems that are being supervised by the EPA in the United States. In order to manage these numbers, they are subdivided into three categories which are: community water systems, non-community water systems, and non transient non community water systems (Devlin, 2011). Underground Injection Control Program The next program under the Safe Drinking Water Act is the Underground Injection Control program. Such is designed in order to protect the underwater sources. This regulates underground injections, which is a way of disposing both hazardous and non hazardous substances into the water sources. The program regulates 400,000 injection wells in the United States. The objective of such program is to prevent the injection of contaminants to the drinking water that might bring adverse health effect to human beings (Devlin, 2011). Underground injection is permitted only when such is authorized by the EPA. The granting of the permits to conduct underground injection is being regulated by the EPA. In allowing underground injection, certain rules must be observe in the inspection, monitoring, construction and operation. (Devlin, 2011). Wellhead Protection Program The States are also required to comply with the SDWA by enforcing the wellhead protection program. In this task, each state is required to identify and protect wellhead protection area, which are the surface and subsurface areas surrounding water well, in order to protect such from contaminants (Tiemann, 2010). Also under this program, the states are required to pinpoint all the potential contaminants in the said area. With that in mind, the states, as regards this requirement, should be able to develop projects keep the water systems within that area free from any hazardous substances (Tiemann, 2010). Comprehensive State Ground Water Protection Programs The programs seeks the integration of different laws which safeguard the groundwater, including the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act, the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation and Liability Act, the Safe Drinking Water Act, the laws regulating pesticides and toxic substances, and the nonpoint source management programs under the Clean Water Act (Tiemann, 2010). This program compared to all others is a voluntary act. It is composed of establishing goals and priorities in grounded on the characterization and identification of contaminants in the groundwater (waterandhealth.org, 2011). Amendments to the Safe Drinking Water Act In order to meet the present and future needs of its citizens, constant amendments in laws are made. The Safe Drinking Water Act was originally promulgated in 1974. Due to the constant development and studies being conducted by government on safe drinking water, SDWA underwent two major amendments, one in 1986 and the other in 1996. The latter amendment is still being followed by the United States of America up to now. These amendments brought vital changes in the drinking water of the country as well as protection and information to those served by public water systems (Knotts, 1999). These deviations of the law were able to correct the problems which it encountered during its original passage. Such changes help the country as a whole to foresee what will be the pressing issues that the drinking water in the United States will face in the future. It also gives assurance to the public that there will be sustainable availability of the safe drinking water (Carter, 2006). The Amendments of the SDWA can be characterized into four themes, to wit: 1. New and stronger approaches to prevent water contamination, specifically the country’s drinking water; 2. The broadening of the people’s right to know; 3. Its regulatory improvements; and 4. Procurement of funds (senate.gov, 2002) New and Stronger Approaches to Prevent Water Contamination The 1996 amendments of the law were able to establish the source water protection and enhanced water system management as a key to prevent water contamination problems. Such change evolved the said law into not just a guideline for having safe drinking water, but as an environmental statute. In this regard, States will be united in order to address the pressing issues on contamination in the water supply by creating prevention programs and also to improve the water systems operation (Carter, 2006). This innovation in the said law is to further bolster its enforcement by providing improvements that will combat the problems in the course of implementing the law in the long run. (Carter, 2006). Several programs under this approach are made in order to safeguard further the human beings from the impending threat in their health due to contaminated water. Some of these are: 1) Protection of the source water: Source water is being protected by the Safe Drinking Water Act. In the advent of the amendments made, the EPA mandates the submission of status report of source water. The report includes determination of source water areas and whether such are exposed to harmful contaminants. Also, in order to extract data needed for continuous study of water contaminants, assessments through surveys are made (Carter, 2006). The information gathered from conducting the said survey will be used to further bolster the objectives of the SDWA to protect source water (epa.gov, 2011) 2) Capacity Development: Enhancement of water systems to deliver safe drinking water is one of the additions in the 1996 Safe Drinking Water Act. The EPA assessed the different business aspects of water suppliers all over the country to know whether a water supplier has a capacity to transport adequate water which is not harmful to public health (Carter, 2006). In this regard, the EPA and with the support of state agencies, assist water suppliers to procure sufficient technology which is suitable for processing and delivering potable drinking water (Fletcher, 2008). 3) Certification: prior to the operation to transport clean and safe water to its consumer, water suppliers must first obtain certification from the state agencies. These government entities are authorized by 1996 SDWA to issue certification to ensure that the operators have the capacity, knowledge, technology in performing their functions (Fletcher, 2008). However, such issuance power must be limited by the guidelines set by EPA, and such must be within the ambit of its goal which is to protect the public from harmful effects of drinking contaminated water (epa.gov, 2011) Right to be Informed The constitutional right of being informed is enforced in the 1986 amendment of the Safe drinking water act. The objective of empowering such right is to close the gaps between the EPA, water suppliers and the consumers. In this way, the consumers will be involved in pushing compliance with the water standards as well as to establish awareness among themselves about the pressing issues in the country’s drinking water, the contaminants and the measures taken by the administrative agencies. (www.epa.gov, 2011) The amendments provide that the records or data collected can be accessed easily by the people. This change boosts the interaction between the state and the people as they will be aware of the status of the implementation of the SDWA. It is founded on the idea that the involvement of the public will help to address the issues and threats in the water systems (epa.gov, 2011). For the furtherance of the interaction between the states and its consumers, the EPA effectively upon passing of the 1996 amendments created programs that will enable the public to access freely and easily the reports on the status of their drinking waters. These are: 1) Consumer Control Reports: The EPA requires that all community water system shall provide customers with an annual report indicating the information about its system, the level of ground water, as well as the contaminants. These reports may be mailed directly to the households or when there are numerous consumers, the Governor may allow the publishing of the report in a newspaper of general circulation (Fletcher, 2008). 2) Other information to improve consumer information: Public water systems are also empowered to notify its consumers if there are violations of a national drinking water standard that might have an adverse effect on the human health (epa.gov, 2011). The reports on the strategy on the implementation of the SDWA must also be made available to the public. In this report, the effectiveness progress and cost of the development of the implementation of the SDWA shall be discussed. Furthermore, the public shall be given an opportunity to comment in the annual priority list of projects eligible for SRF assistance that states will publish as a part of their SRF intended use plans (Carter, 2006). Improvements in EPA’s Regulation A part of the law making process are changes and improvements. These depend on the nature of the circumstances that a nation is currently facing. The law on safe drinking water evolves as time progresses, in order to meet impending issues with regard to the matter (www.epa.gov, 2011). The discovery of the science based flexibilities under the 1986 amendment on the Safe Drinking Water Act, proved that it could help to protect the public from the impending dangers caused by the contaminants in the water sources. This regulation further improves the identification and monitoring of the level of the foreign substances in the drinking water. (epa.gov, 2011) In this case, several changes were made in order to boost the regulation power of the EPA, such as: 1) Selection of new contaminants: The EPA became pliant upon the passage of the amendment on the SDWA. This includes regulation of the water-based contaminants. Before only those identified substances are being closely monitored by the EPA. Today, with the help of its community partners, had enforced the identification and regulation of new water pollutants. Also, in line with the amendment, EPA has set standards to determine what substances are to be put under its regulation. The standards are as follows: those that might adversely affect the human health; and that the regulation decreases health risks among human being (Carter, 2006). 2) Information on occurrence of contaminants: To bolster the right to be informed by the public, the amendments on the Safe drinking water act empowered the states to develop their own monitoring strategy which will be published for the benefit of the public. The monitoring strategy shall compare the levels of contamination from one area to another. This is to prevent disease outbreaks due to water contaminants (epa.gov, 2011). The published information shall contain a list of at least 30 monitored substances, which will be determined by EPA whether such is a contaminant or not. (Carter, 2006). 3) Cost benefit analysis: In accordance with the amendments made in the said law, EPA shall conduct a cost-benefit analysis which shall determine whether the costs in implementing the programs for proving safe drinking water is equal to the benefits redounded to the public (epa.gov, 2011). 4) Technology: Technology is easier to procure when the company has ample resources. This is especially true with the large scale water suppliers. however, due to an increase of small scale water suppliers, EPA became weary that they might supply substandard water because most of these do not have the required technology to process and deliver safe drinking water. In this regard, the amendments require EPA to help small suppliers to obtain an adequate technology to supply safe drinking water to its consumer. This is to ensure that these suppliers will be able to comply with the standards set by EPA as well as to achieve the objections enshrined by the law (epa.gov, 2011). 5) Time Frames: Guidelines set by the said act should be acted within a reasonable time, as determined by the EPA. This requires all suppliers to comply with the rules set by the governing authority within the given time. However, in cases where a supplier needs time for capital improvements, an extension may be granted to such which shall not exceed two years (epa.gov, 2011) 6) Reforms in monitoring contaminants: The states may, as granted by this act, formulate temporary solutions in order to prevent the increase of population of the contaminants in source or ground water (epa.gov, 2011). These reform aims to achieve two things: involvement of the states in the implementation of SDWA and to assure that the rules enforced by them has scientific basis (epa.gov, 2011). 7) Enforcement: In order to impose the standards set by EPA, the amendments provide each state the power to issue administrative orders as well as to penalize, through a fine, the violators of the said law. The harsh penalty provided for under the amendments is to ensure that rules are strictly complied with (epa.gov, 2011) 8) Studies in specific substances: EPA is mandated by law to conduct further studies on specific pollutants present in the water system. These contaminants, like arsenic, has adverse effects to the public health even though there are just exposed at low levels. This is to avoid water-brone diseases by water intake (epa.gov, 2011). The State Revolving Fund The States, in order to enforce compliance and to promote their projects for safe drinking water act, the federal government allowed the former to make use of the State Revolving Fund (SRF). Such fund will be included in the federal budget each year. The SRF may be used in assisting water suppliers for them to deliver safe drinking water, through installation of technologies and upgrading its existing facilities (gao.gov, 2011). The allotment of the SRF shall be based on the survey made by the EPA on the status of implementation of SDWA. The states are entitled to the use of a minimum of one percent of the total fund (gao.gov, 2011). 2) Prevention Programs and Projects: One of the features of SDWA is the authorization given to the states to use SRF funds for the new prevention programs. The objective of these programs are to promote the beneficial effects of safe drinking water and to prevent the increase of water contaminants in the ground and source water. (gao.gov, 2011). Impact to Public Health and the Environment and Cost of Implementation of the Safe Drinking Water Act On Public Health As a fact, our body is composed of 70 percent of water. The muscles, blood and lungs, including our body temperature needs water. This is the reason why water intake is vital to our health. However, is it enough to drink just water or to take clean and safe water? Around the world, the principal risk to human health is associated with the intake of contaminated water. The risk of acquiring diseases from contaminated water increases with the level of harmful microorganisms, such as cholera, typhoid fever, dysentery, and the like. Such diseases killed plenty of U.S. residents. Studies indicate that the quality of drinking water is directly associated with public health (Gray, 2008). Drinking water must be suitable for human consumption. In this regard, the enactment of laws and guidelines on the quality of water supply is effective in implementing long term remedial actions (waterandhealth.org, 2011). With the enactment of SDWA, water systems are mandated to release safe and adequate drinking water in order to protect the citizens from having water related diseases. The treatment and distribution is now being monitored by the different state agencies in order to ensure that the level of contaminants is within the standard provided by the said law (WHO, 1997). The SDWA is not just focused in monitoring large scale water suppliers but also small water suppliers. The EPA helps small water suppliers to get adequate technology in order to produce water which is within the quality set by the standards (WHO, 1997). Also being closely watched are natural water sources. These include surface and ground water. The origin of our water supply before it being treated for the people’s consumption, are from the ground and surface water. Supervision is carried out at this stage in order to lessen the contaminants in the storage and distribution stage (epa.gov, 2011). Detection of waterborne disease outbreaks is primarily lodged with the local, state and territorial public health departments. In this regard, the EPA in partnership with state agencies, further enforce the implementation of the guidelines set by the SDWA (Gray, 2008). The standard to prevent contamination includes treatment of water with the use of chlorine. These substances do not produce adverse effects to public health provided that the amount used does not exceed the limits provided by scientific studies. Disinfection using chlorine enables the country’s water supply to be adequate for drinking and for personal use, like taking a bath (De Zuane, 1997). On Environment As we live in an interconnected world where most of the things are somewhat related to each other, we can say that water and environment has a link between them. Primarily, drinking clean and safe water only affect human’s health, however the implication of having adequate supply of safe drinking water also has an impact to the environment (Callan and Thomas, 2009). The goal of the SDWA is to protect the public from harmful pollutants that reside in the country’s water supply. The quality of water must be suitable for human consumption. Moreover, this level of water must be safe enough to support aquatic life. A significant amendment in the said law that affects the environment is the “lead ban”. This provision precludes installation and use of lead pipes. Since lead contains harmful substances that endanger the life of not just the humans but also the marine species (Callan and Thomas, 2009). The EPA has regulated several drinking water contaminants. However, the law is not just focused on the protecting the public from harmful diseases but also addressing environmental concerns of the country (Gray, 2008). Water absorbs natural and man-made substances. Most contaminants are from the chemicals being used in manufacturing, agriculture, mining, and the like. These harmful substances are being eroded through our natural water sources, chemicals used are being integrated in our water supply. In this regard, these compounds found its way to the country’s drinking water (De Zuane, 1997). The most popular example of such chemicals are pesticides. Pesticides which are beyond the acceptable level might bring contamination in our drinking water. The government in order to address the contamination, implemented SDWA to enforce other laws to protect our drinking water. The amendments now cover the regulations of other substances that might be present in the water supply (npic.orst.edu, 2011). The act also gives emphasis to the treatment of wastewater. Wastewater treatment in general, is a process of removing the contaminants from wastewater. EPA has a duty to issue permits to all wastewater discharges and treatment facilities. This is an act of regulation on the part of EPA to establish discharge limits. This measure is in order to protect the environment (Callan and Thomas, 2009) Cost of Implementation Setting up the guidelines and implementation of the goals posed by the Safe Drinking Water Act entails costs. Each cost must be at least equal to the actual benefits that these standards want to meet. In this case, the government, specifically the EPA , as the primary administrative agency that is empowered to monitor the planning and monitoring of the said law, and likewise has the duty to conduct a cost-benefit analysis (www.epa.gov, 2011). Generally, consumers pay less in using water utility. On the average, tap water costs are more or less $2 per 1000 gallons. But does the cost for consuming the safe drinking water is somewhat equal with the treatment and technology used in supplying such quality of water? The drinking water program is being funded by the federal government, state general revenue funds, state fee programs, and other sources of state funding. The federal government has implemented programs to support the construction and maintenance of drinking water systems. Its largest program is the Drinking Water State Revolving Loan Fund was created by the 1996 amendments of the SDWA. It provides loans for drinking water systems to install, improve, or maintain treatment facilities. The first grants from the said loan totaled $1.275 billion. On the other hand, states may “set aside” from their budget a specific percentage in order to contribute to the implementation of the SDWA. Each state has discretion what set-asides to. State set-asides comprised $243 million out of a total $1.255 billion provided to states from the fiscal year 1997 appropriation (Carter, 2006). Conclusion Access to safe drinking water is essential to health, which is a primary right of human beings. It is also important to the development of a country, may it be in national or local levels It is not just beneficial to the human beings but also to the species in the country’s marine bodies. (Gray, 2008). Safe drinking water is beneficial to any country. Having safe and adequate drinking water in the era where industrialization is at its peak is very important to sustain life. Water is an essential ingredient to life. That is why SDWA is ideal in addressing problems concerning water contaminants. The SDWA is a catch-all law which is focused on preventing adverse health effects due to contaminated water, and also covers environmental concerns. The amendments this act underwent are one of the ways to improve not just the law itself but also the services provided by the water suppliers to the consumers. It also provided for strict compliance with the water suppliers. On the other hand, the expanded powers of the EPA, through the amendments, helped the planning and implementation of the law. Regulatory functions designated to the EPA further bolster compliance to the law. It supervises the activities of the small and large scale water supplier in order to know whether the said act is being fully implemented. The standards for meeting the goals of this act are achievable with the help of the federal government as well as state agencies. The amendments in the said law further increased consumer awareness on the level of contaminants in drinking water because the reports of monitoring can be easily be accessed by residents. Assessing all factors, this paper concludes that the SDWA is a viable solution to combat water borne diseases and to sustain adequate supply of safe water in the country. All in all, the law on safe drinking water is an attestation that having safe and clean water supplies to our homes is achievable even in the middle of industrialization, if the people involved will work hand in hand by following the guidelines set by the legislature. In that case, future generations can be assured that there is an enough supply of safe drinking water. References Callan, S. and Thomas, J. (2009). Environmental economics & management: theory, policy, and applications. Cengage Learning Carter, T. (2006). Safe drinking water act and its interpretation. Nova Publishers. De Zuane, J. (1997). Handbook of drinking water quality. John Wiley and Sons. Delvin, B. (2011). Protecting drinking water quality through the Clean Water Act and Safe Drinking Water Act. US Environmental Protection Agency. Environmental Protection Agency (2008). Environmental laws: Summaries of major statutes administered by the Environmental Protection Agency. Nova Publishers. Environmental Protection Agency. (2011). Safe Drinking Water Act. Retrieved on October 2, 2011 from http://water.epa.gov/lawsregs/rulesregs/sdwa/ Gray, N.F. (2008). Drinking water quality: Problems and solutions. Cambridge University Press. Hrudey, S. and Hruday, E. (2004). Safe drinking water: Lessons from recent outbreaks in affluent nations. IWA Publishing. Knotts, J. 1999. A brief history of drinking water regulation. On Tap, 8(4), 1-23. Organizacion Mundial de la Salud (1997). Guidelines for drinking-water quality: Surveillance and control of community supplies, 3. World Health Organization. Tiemann, M. (2010). Safe Drinking Water Act (SDWA): A summary of the act and its major requirements. Congressional Research Service. U.S. Government Accountability Office. (2011). Safe Drinking Water Act : EPA Should improve implementation of requirements on whether to regulate additional contaminants. Retrieved on October 2, 2011 from http://www.gao.gov/highlights/d11254high.pdf United States Senate. (2002). Title XIV of the Public Health Service Act Safety of Public Water Systems (Safe Drinking Act). Retrieved on October 2, 2011 from http://epw.senate.gov/sdwa.pdf World Health Organization. (2004). Guidelines for drinking-water quality. Retrieved on October 2, 2011 from http://www.who.int/water_sanitation_health/dwq/GDWQ2004web.pdf World Health Organization. (2006). Guidelines for drinking-water quality: First addendum to third edition. Volume 1. Retrieved on October 2, 2011 from http://www.who.int/water_sanitation_health/dwq/gdwq0506.pdf Read More