Independent Record, Helena, Montana, Mar. 19, 1988
By Tom Cook
IR State Bureau
New proposed federal drinking water standards would eventually cost Montana ratepayers hundreds of thousands of dollars and probably not result in any safer tap water than they receive now, Lyle Meeks, chairman of the Montana Water Works Association, said Friday.
"We need to take a little stronger look at the true risks of what they want us to test for before we spend millions and millions of dollars on things that might turn out not to have been needed in the first place," Meeks said.
Speaking at the end of his association's two-day convention in Helena, Meeks said there was unanimous support from officials of the 2,300 public water systems in the state to urge the Environmental Protection Agency to reconsider proposed rule changes to increase the frequency and types of testing.
The new rules, which are intended to implement the 1986 Safe Drinking Water Act, would require testing of 59 new coliform bacteria this year, 40 more the following year and 34 the year after that, Meeks said.
It would cost about $120,000 this year just to perform increased testing required in the act for the state's 10 largest cities, he said.
It would be somewhat cheaper to sample smaller systems, but they might have more difficulty absorbing the increased cost, he said.
Ken Johnston, a past president of the organization and retired state Water Quality Bureau worker, said states should be given more authority to sample for things of concern in their area rather than allowing the federal government "to blanket us all."
"We don't feel we should be tagged with the same regulations that those who live by the Love Canal are given," he said. "All of us are for clean water, but this is unrealistic."
Meeks said the new requirements are based on tests of small animals "given very, very, very large doses," that have questionable application to humans.
"We're just saying they should take a little stronger look at the true risks before we spend a lot of money," he said.
Based on what they know now, Meeks also said about 10 new water treatment plants probably would have to be built in the state soon to meet the new standards at a cost of about $1 million a piece.
Rep. Ron Marlenee, R-Mont., has called on EPA to hold hearings in Montana and other more rural states before implementing the new rules.
"I have been deluged with letters and phone calls from schools and small communities who simply do not have the technical and professional resources to operate and maintain the more complicated water treatment techniques that will likely result," Marlenee said in a prepared statement.
Issue: How safe does drinking water have to be?
How would you make sure that the people drinking water in your community receive safe water at a reasonable cost?
The U.S. Congress became concerned about the cost of implementing the Safe Drinking Water Act and made some important changes to the law in 1996. They moved from a one-size-fits-all approach that had been used in the past. Congress instructed the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency to use science-based flexibility and prioritize their efforts to protect the public health. The resulting new risk-based approach includes regulating contaminants that:
For all future drinking water standards:
Because of the expense and the highly technical nature of the drinking water standards adoption process, Ohio relies on the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency for the development of standards. The Ohio Environmental Protection Agency does provide input and comments on proposed federal standards and encourages others to do so.
The Ohio Environmental Protection Agency has adopted a waiver program for monitoring of chemicals that are not used, stored, or transported in the vicinity of a community water source.