Record Display for the EPA National Library CatalogRECORD NUMBER: 10 OF 34
|Main Title||EPA protocol for the second review of existing national primary drinking water regulations (updated).|
|CORP Author||Environmental Protection Agency, Washington, DC. Office of Water.|
|Publisher||United States Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Water,|
|Report Number||EPA 815-B-09-002|
|Subjects||Drinking water--Government policy--United States ; Drinking water--Standards--United States|
|Additional Subjects||Drinking water ; Chemical contamination ; Protocols ; Requirements ; Regulations ; Contaminants ; Quality assurance ; Health effects|
|Collation||35 unnumbered pages : charts ; 28 cm|
The 1996 Safe Drinking Water Act (SDWA) Amendments require the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA or the Agency) to review and revise National Primary Drinking Water Regulations (NPDWRs) at least once every six years as appropriate to maintain or improve human health protection. EPA completed and published the results of its first Six-Year Review (Six-Year Review 1) July 18, 2003 (68 FR 42908) after developing a systematic approach, or protocol, for the review of NPDWRs. As described in this document, EPA has applied the same protocol with minor refinements (revised protocol) to its second Six-Year Review of NPDWRs (Six-Year Review 2). In Six-Year Review 2, EPA addressed the following: (1) Maximum Contaminant Level Goals (MCLGs; the health goal) for some contaminants new health effects assessments completed since the MCLG was promulgated or last revised include revised reference doses (RfD) and/or cancer classification. (2) Maximum Contaminant Levels (MCLs; the enforceable standard) for some contaminants, the MCL is equal to the MCLG, and the health effects assessment indicates potential to revise the MCLG. Improvements in analytical or treatment feasibility may also indicate feasibility to set the MCL closer to the MCLG. (3) Treatment Technique (TT; sometimes established in lieu of an MCL) new information on health effects, analytical feasibility, or treatment feasibility may suggests a possibility to revise TT. (4) Other Treatment Technology (NPDWRs contain Best Available Technologies, or BATs, capable of achieving MCLs) Changes to BAT recommendations may be appropriate for revised MCLs. (5) Other Regulatory Requirements (Monitoring) Other regulatory revisions may be appropriate if information suggest that changes in monitoring standards (e.g., frequency) could reduce health risks or costs while maintaining or improving the level of public health protection.
Cover title. "October 2009"--Page 2 of cover. "EPA-OGWDW." "EPA 815-B-09-002"--Page 2 of cover. Format not distributed to depository libraries. Includes bibliographical references.