Courier-Journal, Louisville, Kentucky, Oct. 9, 1987
Copyright © 1987. The Courier-Journal. Reprinted with permission.
By Scott Thurm
Staff Writer
TAYLOR MILL, Ky. – The water in the glass vial looks clear. Quick tests show that it meets state standards for small particles, acidity and chlorine.
But that doesn't make it safe to drink. For the clear water could hide any number of toxic chemicals.
Until now, many may have escaped detection. But this week, the clear vial – obtained from a tap at the Kenton County Water District No. 1 plant here – became part of the most intensive effort ever in Kentucky to identify invisible poisons.
During the next month, the water will be tested for 83 chemicals, from arsenic to zinc. That's almost four times as many contaminants as have been sought in water in the past.
And if any of those contaminants turn up repeatedly in Kenton County's water at what are considered unsafe levels, the utility will be forced to add sophisticated new treatment equipment.
This testing process will be repeated in about 200 water districts across the state in the next few weeks.
The expanded tests were required by Congress last year as part of changes in the 13-year-old Safe Drinking Water Act. They are intended to offer Americans the strongest protection yet against waterborne illness and disease.
But that protection will not be cheap. The tests and repairs will cost the nation's water suppliers more than $40 million a year, according to estimates by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency.
The strain will be greatest for smaller water systems, which have fewer customers to share the costs of testing and new equipment. Rate increases are likely, water company officials say: the EPA estimates that removing just eight chemicals from public-water supplies will add $41 a year to the water bills of small-system users.
Kentuckians may get a break on those increases because state government has agreed to conduct – and pay for – the first round of tests. But Indiana water suppliers will not be so lucky.
And eventually, government officials and outside experts say the testing and treatment costs will force many small water suppliers out of the water-treatment business, pushing them to merge with other systems or buy treated water from larger suppliers.
"As more contaminants have to be tested for, the price of water is going to go up," said Gary Larimore, executive director of the Kentucky Rural Water Association, which represents 213 of the state's smaller water suppliers.
Larimore asks two questions for which he says he does not know the answers: "Is it necessary? Are we overreacting?"
Supporters of the drinking-water amendments would say yes and no.
More than 85,000 people have become sick in the past decade after drinking bacteria-contaminated water, and more than 700 chemicals have been found in the nation's groundwater. But as of last year, the EPA had set standards and required testing for only 22 contaminants: some requirements applied only to larger systems.
"For years and years, we acted as (though) if we added enough chlorine to water, everything is going to be fine," said Jay McCoy, whose Madisonville-based engineering and consulting firm conducts tests for many of the state's water companies. "Now we know that's not so."
The response was a law laden with requirements and deadlines. By 1991, the EPA must limit allowable concentrations of 108 chemicals in drinking water. Next January, water systems will begin quarterly testing for 83 contaminants, only some of which appear on the EPA list as well. And filtration and disinfection requirements have been extended to even the smallest systems.
In many cases, the result has been confusion. Garry Rowe, superintendent of the Salyersville water plant in Eastern Kentucky, acknowledged that he had heard little about the testing requirements before receiving a package from state officials last week.
"It's kind of new to me," Rowe said. "There are a bunch of them (chemicals) on there."
Larimore, of the rural-water association, said the group has sponsored several meetings to spread the word about the new law. But, he said of the association's members, "They just really don't know what's coming down."
Most will have time to learn because the testing requirements will be phased in. Only the largest suppliers must begin the massive sampling program in January.
Because the state is paying for the first round of tests, Kentucky is moving ahead of the federal schedule. State officials began gathering samples from 200 water suppliers this week, shipping the glass vials to Frankfort in refrigerated packages for sophisticated analysis at the state lab.
These suppliers – all of those in the state with 3,300 or more customers – will be tested three more times in the next year. Based on the results, they will have to repeat the tests as often as once every three months or as rarely as once every five years.
They could also be required to add costly treatment systems. But representatives of the state's largest water companies said in recent interviews that they expect to meet all of the new standards.
Some, like the Louisville Water Co. and the Kentucky American Water Co., which serves most of Fayette County and parts of five others, have their own laboratories and have been spot-testing for some of the newly covered chemicals.
"We don't see that it (the law) is going to pose us any problem," said Jerry Ford, manager of administrative services for the Louisville Water Co.
The tests will cost the state about $170,000, said John Smither, who runs the state's drinking-water program. Officials plan to repeat the process with groups of smaller water companies in each of the next two years, eventually reaching all 650 suppliers covered by the regulations.
In general, officials and industry observers expect more problems with the smaller systems, which tend to have less reliable water sources, less sophisticated treatment plants and less experienced operators.
"It's going to hurt a lot of these small towns," said Arnold Helton, superintendent of the water works in West Liberty.
Nationally, the EPA estimates that only about 2 percent of small water suppliers will be forced to add expensive treatment systems. But McCoy, whose firm tests water systems in six states, expects that figure to be higher in Eastern Kentucky, where there are numerous small water systems.
And he expects the costs to force some systems out of the water-treatment business. "There will be an exponential decrease in the number of water systems over the next 10 years," McCoy said. "You'll see a lot more of the Kentucky American (regional) concepts."
Richard Shogren, of the consulting firm Camp Dresser & McKee and a former director of the state Division of Water, said the trend will improve water quality. "The long-term effect of having a lot of these smaller systems merge or buy water from larger water systems will be good for health in rural areas."
Issue: Providing safe drinking water must not pose an economic hardship on a small community.
How would you make sure that the people drinking water in a small community receive safe water without severe economic hardship?
The U.S. Congress has included provisions in the federal Safe Drinking Water Act to give small communities more time to come into compliance with the law. It is now possible to obtain waivers, variances, or exemptions from the state agency administering the federal safe drinking water program.
But, as you can well imagine, because of the threat to public health when systems are out of compliance, these waivers, variances, and exemptions include special restrictions and conditions. These may include:
Some small system provisions have been established to provide relief from requirements that are placed on large systems. Appropriate technologies for small systems are being studied by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency and by other research institutions through federal grants. In some cases, small systems may be granted indefinite renewals.
The Ohio Environmental Protection Agency has developed protocols for acceptance of cost-saving innovative drinking water treatment technologies and participates in federally sponsored research programs.