Changes to Chapters and of the Florida Administrative Code

Transcription

1

2 The Floridan K e n y o n C. C a r t e r, P. E. Editor-In-Chief Catherine M. Murray, P.E. Production Manager T h e F l o r i d a n is published periodically by the Florida Department of Environmental Protection, Division of Water Resource Management, Drinking Water Section. The Floridan Tallahassee Office Call (850) FAX (850) or Write 2600 Blair Stone Road MS 3520 Tallahassee, Florida The purpose of this publication is to present issues and explore events of interest to owners and o p e r a t o r s o f p u b l i c water systems, drinking water managers, and policy makers around the state. Virginia Harmon FDEP Drinking Water Section Tallahassee Office Copyright Statement Material in The Floridan may be copyrighted either by the i n d i v i d u a l a u t h o r ( s ) o r The Floridan. Cover Photo Compliments of the Florida Parks Service: Changes to Chapters and of the Florida Administrative Code by Virginia Harmon Chapters , F.A.C., Drinking Water and Domestic Wastewater Treatment Plant Operators, and , F.A.C., Classification and Staffing of Water or Domestic Wastewater Treatment Plants and Water Distribution Systems, were amended in October This article is an introduction to the drinking water-related aspects of Chapter plus sections , Duties of Operators, and , Technical Manuals. This article does not cover any wastewater treatment plant staffing requirements in these rules. For copies of Chapter or Chapter , please visit or contact the DEP Drinking Water Program headquarters office. Please contact your local Department office or the DEP Drinking Water Program headquarters office with questions on Chapter The DEP Operator Certification Program is the appropriate point of contact for questions relating to Chapter , such as licensure requirements, examination administration, and course approval. Their website is and their general phone number is (850) Chapter now contains definitions, including lead/chief operator, on-site, automatic control system, electronic surveillance system, electronic control system, and water distribution system (WDS), none of which appeared in the 2002 and 2001 versions of Chapters and , respectively. When referring to operating, staffing, visiting, or checking a water treatment plant, on-site means at the plant. When referring to operating or staffing a water distribution system, on-site means at the location of the distribution system pipe, pumps, or tanks where operation or maintenance activities that may affect water quality or quantity are taking place. Water distribution system is defined as those components of a regulated public water system used in conveying water for human consumption from the water treatment plant to the consumer s property, including pipes, tanks, pumps, and other constructed conveyances. The operator staffing requirements in Section apply to all PWSs except transient noncommunity water systems using groundwater as a source of supply and serving only businesses other than public food service Page 2

3 establishments. Subsections (1) and (2) state that suppliers of water shall employ only persons appropriately licensed under Chapter to be on-site and in charge of the operation, supervision, or maintenance of a water treatment plant (WTP) during any part of any day and to fulfill the time and visit requirements for each plant. Starting May 1, 2011, suppliers of water shall employ only persons appropriately licensed under Chapter to be on-site and in charge of any WDS operation or maintenance activity that may affect water quality or quantity and that is listed in footnote 1 to the WDS staffing tables in (2)(f) and to staff the WDS per these staffing tables. The flow values in the WTP staffing tables in (2)(e) are the permitted maximum-day operating capacities of the WTP. The treatment process descriptions for each WTP category have changed; this may result in changes to the categories of some plants. As per the 2001 rules, the most advanced treatment process is still used to assign the WTP category. For instance, if a plant has activated carbon processes and reverse osmosis, the category would be (II) corresponding to the reverse osmosis, not (III) corresponding to activated carbon processes. In addition, all treatment processes must be considered in assigning the category, regardless of whether they are being used to help meet water quality standards. For instance, ion exchange to remove a contaminant not regulated by primary or secondary standards is a Category IV treatment process. The older rules did not provide visit times for some WTPs in Categories III, IV, and V where the required staffing consists of visits only. The new revisions have added total weekly visit time requirements. There are no requirements concerning the time of each individual visit. For instance, a requirement of 2 visits per week for a total of 0.6 hour/week (36 minutes/week) could be met by one visit of 0.1 hour and one visit of 0.5 hour, by one visit of 0.2 hour and one visit of 0.4 hour, or any combination totaling 0.6 hour/week. Parallel to the category/class of a WTP is the category/level of a WDS. The WDS category is based on the class of WTP to which the WDS is connected, and the level is based on the population served by the WDS. A Category I WDS is connected to a Class A, B, or C WTP. A Category II WDS is connected to a Class D WTP. Beginning May 1, 2011, each WDS must be served by an appropriately licensed lead/chief operator (who is in charge of the WDS). The requirements in (2)(f) for on-site supervision of the appropriate WDS O&M tasks can be met by the lead/chief operator and/or other operators. The WTP operator licensure or WDS operator licensure that is required for the lead/chief operator, and for the operator on-site and in charge, for each Category and Level of WDS is listed in (2)(f). Highlights of the recent changes to the classification and staffing requirements in are the following: Beginning May 1, 2011, an operator meeting the lead/chief operator level for the WDS shall be available during all periods of WDS operation (that is, available 24/7). The definition of available is unchanged from the 2001 rules and means able to be contacted as needed to initiate the appropriate action in a timely manner. Requirements have been added for what is included in a daily check. In cases where plants and WDSs are all under the same ownership, a Class D operator may be the lead/ chief operator of as many as five domestic wastewater treatment plants, as many as five water treatment plants and distribution systems, or any combination of domestic wastewater treatment plants plus water treatment plants and distribution systems totaling five. Reduced staffing is available for WTPs under an electronic surveillance, automatic control, and/or electronic control system; for Category V plants connected to the same WDS; and for WTPs producing less than the permitted capacity of the plant. At Class A, B, or C WTPs, a Class C or higher operator shall be on-site and in charge of each required shift for periods of required staffing time when the lead/chief operator is not on-site. Page 3

4 The WTP staffing requirements specified in the staffing tables in (2)(e) are minimum requirements. The Department shall require increased staffing in cases where additional staffing is necessary to ensure that a facility will comply with permit requirements or where there is a history of repeated non-compliance with permit requirements or applicable rule requirements. The Department shall provide written notice, writing with specificity about the reasons that justify the Department s actions. Within fourteen days of receipt of notification, the supplier of water may petition for an administrative hearing. Required visits by the lead/chief operators of Class C and D WTPs have been added. Upon written request by the supplier of water, the Department shall approve alternative staffing schedules by plants that have greater water production on weekends than on weekdays. For instance, a 6.0 MGD Category IV Class C plant is required by (2)(e)4. to staff the plant 6 hours/day during the week and to visit the plant each weekend day. If this plant produces more water on weekends than on weekdays, it will be allowed to have 6 hours/day of staffing on weekends, 6 hours/day of staffing during 3 weekdays, and visits on 2 weekdays. The total number of days per week that are staffed shall not be reduced, and the total number of days per week that have visits shall not be reduced. A licensed WTP operator may serve as both as the lead/chief operator of a WTP and as the lead/chief operator of the WDS connected to that plant at the same time. A licensed WTP operator may serve as both the operator of a WTP and as the operator of the WDS connected to that plant at the same time. The list of reports in (2) that WTP operators shall submit to the supplier of water has been clarified. WTP and WDS operators shall notify the supplier of water as soon as possible after discovery of any of the circumstances described in (10). Operators shall also report these circumstances to the State Warning Point (SWP), the Department or ACHD, and water customers in accordance with (10) unless the supplier of water has written procedures designating and directing other knowledgeable staff to report on behalf of the water supplier to the SWP, the Department or ACHD, and water customers in accordance with (10). Criteria for Department approval of electronic O&M logs have been added. Requirements for WDS O&M logs have been added. Drinking water operator and water distribution system operator manuals have been added, and some references have been changed to the latest editions. Drinking Water Pamphlet Just Updated!! Information for the Consumer answers questions frequently posed by the consumer, such as: Is my water safe to drink? Is bottled water better than tap water? What is my water utility doing about terrorism? Download the updated pamphlet at: Page 4

5 Short-Term Revisions to the Lead and Copper Rule by Catherine Murray The U.S. EPA published the final Short-Term Revisions to the Lead and Copper Rule (LCR) on October 10, 2007, in the Federal Register. These revisions result from a national review of the LCR following Washington DC s recent experience with elevated levels of lead. EPA s national review included reviews of monitoring data and individual state implementation of the rule and several workshops. The review identified a number of areas where EPA felt the rule, and protection of public health, could be strengthened. Specifically, the short-term revisions address the following seven areas: Minimum number of samples required Definitions for compliance and monitoring periods Reduced monitoring criteria Advanced notification and approval of long-term treatment changes Consumer notice of lead tap water monitoring results Public education requirements Reevaluation of lead service lines The major provisions to the LCR are not changed by these revisions. The revised rule is available at starting on page of the October 10, 2007, edition of the Federal Register. Draft EPA regulatory guidance and a redline/strikethrough version of the revised rule is available at lcrmr/compliancehelp_draftguidance.html. Compliance with the Revised Rule The Department will begin implementing the requirements of the short-term revisions once it has adopted the new rule. Under 40 CFR , the Department is required to promulgate state regulations within two years after promulgation of federal regulations, or October 10, 2009, for the short-term revisions. The Department has begun preliminary procedures necessary to adopt the revised federal rule. Notices and public meetings announcements will be published in the Florida Administrative Weekly, or you may contact your district office or approved county health department for rule adoption updates. Minimum Number of Samples Required The revisions clarify that sites, as used to refer to the number of tap samples collected, mean taps that can be used for human consumption. That is, taps that would pose the highest risk for exposure to lead, as opposed to taps that are not typically used for human consumption (e.g., hose bibs or taps at utility sinks). The short-term revisions also clarify that when a water system has fewer than five taps, the water system must sample all taps at least once and then take repeat samples on different days until a total of five samples are obtained. A provision has been added to the federal rule, however, that gives states the discretion to allow water systems that have fewer than five taps that can be used for human consumption to collect one sample per tap. Under this alternate sampling schedule, the sample with the highest test result will be compared to the action level (AL) to determine compliance. To qualify for this provision, the water system must seek and obtain in writing the state s approval. Page 5

6 Definitions for Compliance and Monitoring Periods The revisions clarify when compliance periods a three-year year period within a nine-year compliance cycle and monitoring periods the specific time period during which a water system must perform the required monitoring (e.g., June - Sept.) begin and end. These clarifications help define the timing of actions including: requirements following an AL exceedance; the timing of reduced tap, water quality parameter (WQP), and source monitoring activities; and reporting requirements. The revisions also more clearly specify that systems on reduced triennial monitoring, or that have a small system 9-year waiver, must monitor every three, or nine, calendar years. That is, a system on triennial monitoring could not monitor during Year 1 of a 3-year compliance period and then Year 2 of the next. This set of revisions also clears up confusion over when a system is determined to have exceeded an AL and corresponding deadlines for follow-up corrosion control treatment, public education, source water testing, and lead service line replacement. Under the revisions, a system is deemed to have exceeded an AL as of the date the monitoring period in which the exceedance occurred ends (e.g., Sept. 30). The revisions clarify the monitoring period start dates of systems moving to reduced annual and triennial lead and copper tap monitoring, WQP, and source water monitoring. The revisions also specify the monitoring period start dates of systems returning to standard monitoring from reduced. Finally, this set of revisions more clearly defines reporting requirement deadlines including the requirement that systems must submit tap and WQP data within 10 days of the end of the monitoring period (i.e., within 10 days of the last day that samples can be taken). For example, a system on triennial monitoring that monitors during Year 2 must submit their data within 10 days of the end of the 4-month monitoring period in Year 2. Reduced Monitoring Criteria Because compliance with WQPs alone may not may not always indicate that corrosion control is effective, the LCR is no longer allowing systems that exceed the lead AL to initiate or remain on a reduced lead and copper monitoring schedule based solely on the results of their WQP monitoring. The rule previously allowed systems that met their OWQPs for two consecutive 6-month monitoring periods to move to reduced annual monitoring and systems that met their OWQPs for 3 consecutive years to move to triennial monitoring, with Department approval. The old rule also allowed systems on reduced monitoring that exceeded the lead action level to remain on reduced monitoring. The revisions include changes to section (d)(4) that require a system to meet both the lead AL and OWQPs in order to remain on reduced monitoring or before moving to reduced monitoring. Advanced Notification and Approval of Long-Term Treatment Changes or Addition of a New Source To minimize any potential impacts on optimal corrosion control, the revised rule requires systems to provide advanced notification of any long-term change in treatment or addition of a new source and receive approval from the state before implementing the change. The previous rule required systems to notify the state within 60 days of making a change in treatment or adding a new source. The revised rule allows as much time as needed for water systems and the state to consult before making these changes. EPA lists Simultaneous Compliance Guidance Manual for the Long Term 2 and Stage 2 DBP Rules (EPA 815-R , March 2007) as an aid in identifying situations where optimal corrosion control can be affected by long-term changes in treatment or source water. Examples of long-term treatment changes may be found in section (a)(3). Consumer Notice of Lead Tap Water Monitoring Results The revisions amend the public education requirements by adding a new notification requirement to section (d) that requires water systems to provide consumers who occupy homes or buildings that are part of a utility s monitoring program with the testing results when their drinking water is tested for lead. Specifically, systems must provide written notification to household occupants within 30 days after the water system learns the results for samples collected from that household and post or otherwise notify occupants of non-residential buildings of the Page 6

7 results of lead testing. The consumer notification must also: contain an explanation of lead health effects, list steps consumers can take to reduce lead drinking water exposure, provide utility contact information, and include the lead maximum contaminant level goal (MCLG) and lead AL. The revisions also contain a reporting requirement for systems to certify that they have completed this new consumer notification requirement. An alternative mechanism of consumer notification for NTNCWSs is contained in section (d)(4). Public Education Requirements The revisions include significant changes to the message content, delivery, and timing of public education requirements in section as well as the Consumer Confidence Report (CCR) requirements in section (d)(1) and (2). Under the revisions, CWSs must include an informational statement about lead in their CCRs regardless of whether any lead was detected. EPA has changed the message content of the public education materials by shortening and simplifying the mandatory language - an opening statement, health effects language, and sources of further information. The revisions also require systems to include additional information, which they have the flexibility to tailor to fit their community and situation. This additional information includes sources of lead, steps consumers can take to reduce their lead exposure, any known reasons for elevated lead levels, steps that the water system is taking to reduce lead levels, how consumers can get their water tested, and the difference between low-lead and lead-free materials. At the state s discretion, water systems may be required to submit the public education materials to the state for review and approval prior to delivery to consumers. Revised public education delivery requirements include: Delivery of education materials to a specific list of organizations serving at-risk populations including schools, hospitals and clinics, and local welfare agencies. Delivery of education materials to additional organizations serving at-risk populations, such as childcare centers, preschools, and OB-GYNs and midwives. Contacting local health agencies for assistance in delivery of education materials to at-risk populations. Delivery of education materials to organizations (inside or outside the system s service area) provided by the local health agency that serve the target population. Dissemination of revised materials to bill-paying customers. Two annual press releases. Posting information on the system s website. Conducting additional outreach activities, such as PSAs, paid ads, public area informational displays, s to customers, etc. (see section (b)(2)(iv) for the complete list) Consideration of large populations of non-english speaking customers. The revised rule also limits certain aspects of the public education program for small systems. Delivery of public education materials by NTNCWSs and special CWSs (e.g., prisons and hospitals) has not been materially changed by the short-term revisions. The revisions also clarify the timing requirements by requiring that systems conduct public education within 60 days after the end of the monitoring period in which a lead AL exceedance occurred. Reevaluation of Lead Service Lines Deemed Replaced Through Testing The revisions require water systems to reevaluate lead service lines classified as replaced through testing if they resume a lead service line replacement program. This will apply to systems that have initiated a lead service line replacement program, discontinued the program, and subsequently resumed the program. When resuming the program, the system must reconsider for replacement any lead service lines previously deemed replaced through the testing during the initial program. The system must then recalculate the number of lines that must be replaced per year (see section ). The revisions also add a provision that allows for an alternative time schedule for systems that have completed a 15-year replacement program before re-exceeding the lead AL. Page 7

8 C o u n t y S p o t l i g h t S a r a s o t a C o u n t y D O H B y R a y m o n d A. B u r r o u g h s Through an agreement with the Florida Department of Environmental Protection, the Florida Department of Health (DOH) is responsible for the implementation of the Safe Drinking Water Act (SDWA) program within nine of the largest counties in Florida (Broward, Hillsborough, Lee, Manatee, Miami-Dade, Palm Beach, Polk, Sarasota, and Volusia). In these nine counties, the DOH Public Drinking Water Systems Program is responsible for the construction and operation of all public water systems that provide piped water to 15 or more services connections, or serve 25 or more people for 60 days or more per year. The Floridan will shine its spotlight on each of these counties in future issues beginning with Sarasota. About the program: The Sarasota County Public Drinking Water Program currently regulates 153 Public Water Systems, large and small, enjoying close relationships with our operators and system owners to ensure the implementation of the Florida Safe Drinking Water Act. In 2000, we received the Davis Award for our innovation, dedication and commitment to excellence and productivity for the State Government and the lives of Florida Citizens. We take great pride ensuring that we have the best and the safest drinking water in our county for both residents and tourists and are proud to be a part of the Public Drinking Water Program. Meet the professionals: Brian Dietz Keri Byrne Edie Reilly Marc Swartz Robin Mabrey Come Visit or Write Sarasota DOH 1301 Cattlemen Rd. Building A Sarasota, FL Brian Dietz, Professional Engineer II, reviews, modifies and approves Construction Permits for the Public Water Section for both Sarasota and Manatee Counties. Keri Byrne is a Word Processing Specialist for the well section and is the backup specialist for the Public Water Section. She inputs compliance data and keeps the well section running smoothly. Edie Reilly is an Environmental Specialist and is responsible for permitting inspections for the Private Wells Section and also is responsible for 20 Public Water System compliance inspections. She has worked for the Sarasota County Health Department for 16 years. Page 8

9 Marc Swartz, Engineer III, is the Public Water Section Supervisor. He has been with the Sarasota County Health Department for over 17 years. Robin Mabrey, Sr. Word Processing Systems Operator, has been with the Public Drinking Water Section since 1993 and with the State of Florida for 26 years. She does all of the data entry for Sarasota County including bacteriological samples, Chems, MOR s and enforcement actions. She sends out all of the enforcement letters and takes care of compliance. She is also in charge of PA and getting all of the permits out to the owners, utilities and engineers, along with certifications. She also arranges travel for the PWSs for training and meetings with DEP and DOH. Mike Tuell, Environmental Specialist, works in the South Sarasota County office and is responsible for Compliance Inspections for 64 Public Water Systems. Mike is also responsible for the Well Surveillance Program for Sarasota County. Judy Drake is a Biological Scientist who functions as the Technical Director and major analyst for the Environmental Health Services laboratory. The laboratory is certified in microbiology, and handles samples for Main Clearances, complaints, and compliance. The lab also supports regulatory programs for DOH monitored water systems and swimming pools. In addition, Ms. Drake runs wet chemical analysis for in-house research projects, water investigations, and private well owners. Ray Burroughs is an Environmental Specialist II and responsible for compliance inspections of 30 Public Water Systems in Sarasota County including reviews and database entry of bacteriological and chemical analytical results. Also, Ray is responsible for consumer confidence report reviews, Stage 1 DBP and Cross Connection Control Implementation and main clearances. Additional duties include managing the SuperAct Program for Sarasota County, including research, sampling, GPS coordination and GIS mapping services. He is currently a member of the Sarasota County Search and Rescue Team. Ray has been in the Environmental Health field for 22 years including Military and Civilian service. Rich Cantin is an Environmental Specialist responsible for compliance inspections of 40 Public Water Systems in Sarasota Co. including reviews of bacteriological and chemical analytical results. Other areas of compliance oversight include CCR reviews, Stage 1 DBP, Cross Connection Control Implementation and Lead/Copper rule. He performs sanitary surveys including the annual one for the County s only surface water system, as well as participating with DEP staff in the EPA Region 4 Area Wide Optimization Program. Occasionally he runs the microbiology lab as a back up for the microbiologist. He collects bacteriological samples required for new water lines as per DEP permits. He reviews county projects for compliance with Land Development Regs for the Health Dept. Mike Tuell Judy Drake Ray Burroughs Rich Cantin Steve Fisher For Assistance or Additional Information Please Call (941) Steve Fisher, Environmental Specialist II, has been with this program since In this position, besides inspecting water systems, he is responsible for the permitting and inspections of all public drinking water wells for both DEP and DOH within Sarasota County. He has been in water-related industry for almost thirty years and is a current Florida Licensed Well Contractor. Page 9

10 Ask Edgar (D. Edgar Possum) The State Employee Dear Edgar, I ve heard that there s a new CCR requirement for lead. Do I need to include it in this year s CCR? Taking the Lead on Lead, As part of the recently finalized Short- Term Revisions to the Lead and Copper Rule, a change to the Consumer Confidence Report s informational lead statement was made in 40 CFR 154. The revisions require an informational lead statement to be included in the CCR regardless of whether any lead was detected by the system. You will have the option of writing your own informational lead statement, in consultation with the Department or your ACHD, or including the following statement: If present, elevated levels of lead can cause serious health problems, especially for pregnant women and young children. Lead in drinking water is primarily from materials and components associated with service lines and home plumbing. [NAME OF UTILITY] is responsible for providing high quality drinking water, but cannot control the variety of materials used in plumbing components. When your water has been sitting for several hours, you can minimize the potential for lead exposure by flushing your tap for 30 seconds to 2 minutes before using water for drinking or cooking. If you are concerned about lead in your water, you may wish to have your water tested. Information on lead in drinking water, testing methods, and steps you can take to minimize exposure is available from the Safe Drinking Water Hotline or at This year s CCR is not required to contain the new informational lead statement or follow the new inclusion requirement (under the current requirement, only those systems that detect lead above the action level in more than 5% of sampling sites and up to and including 10% of the sampling sites must include an informational lead statement). While not required, it is acceptable if this year s CCR does follow the new requirement consult with your district office or ACHD. Next year s CCR templates will contain the new informational statement language and follow the new inclusion requirement. The revised CCR lead requirements in no way affect the CCR requirements of systems that exceed the lead or copper action level. Edgar Page 10 Dear Edgar, Must all community water systems have a written flushing program? Flushy, Public water systems are not required to have a written flushing program if they flush their dead-end water mains at least quarterly. A written flushing program is required only if the water supplier wishes to flush dead-end water mains less frequently than quarterly. Such a written program should document why less frequent flushing of dead-end water mains is appropriate. In either case, public water systems must maintain records of flushing per Rule (12)(c). Edgar Dear Edgar, Is an original signature required on MORs submitted to the Department? Friend of the Pen, A faxed or ed Monthly Operation Report is acceptable; however, the PWS must retain a copy of the MOR with the original signature and have these available for the DEP inspector. MORs submitted by US Postal Service are required to have the original signature. Edgar

11 Dear Edgar, I m confused about rad sampling. Which rads exactly am I required to sample for? Mad about Rads, The Radionuclide Rule, , F.A.C., allows systems to sample at each entry point to the distribution system for only Gross Alpha and Radium-228 in most instances. If your Gross Alpha result is less than or equal to 5 pci/l and the Gross Alpha result plus the Radium-228 result is less than or equal to 5 pci/l, the Gross Alpha sample result may be substituted for the Radium-226 sample required under the rule. If your Gross Alpha result is less than or equal to 15 pci/l, the Gross Alpha sample result may also be substituted for the Uranium sample required under the rule. However, only Gross Alpha including Radon and Uranium (parameter code 4002) may be substituted for Uranium (Gross Alpha excluding Radon and Uranium [parameter code 4000] may not be substituted for Uranium). Edgar serving 3,300 or fewer people. If your system performed initial monitoring, you will monitor for each of the contaminants - Gross Alpha, Uranium, and Combined Radium - again in 3, 6, or 9 years from your initial monitoring year (2008/2009, 2011/2012, or 2014/2015). The date for each contaminant depends on the average of your initial monitoring results for that contaminant. If your system used historical data in lieu of initial monitoring, you would sample this year if your system is large or next year if your system is small. Refer to the previous question, or ask your district or ACHD, about which rads you need to sample for and which you can substitute for. Edgar Dear Edgar, Does the Operator Certification Program recognize GEDs granted to applicants on-line? Am I required to bring proof of legal status with me to the exam? Dear Edgar, Am I required to report water main breaks to the State Warning Point? Those Are the Breaks, This issue is addressed in paragraph 10 of rule , Operation and Maintenance of Public Water Systems, of the Florida Administrative Code. This paragraph states, in part, that the appropriate district office or approved county health department must be contacted regarding water main breaks, interruptions of service, and events necessitating precautionary boil water notices. The State Warning Point must be notified of suspicious incidents and actual or suspected acts of sabotage or security breaches involving public water systems. So, to answer your question, you are not required to report a water main break to the SWP unless the incident is suspicious in any way. In any event, you are required to speak with your district office or ACHD about a main break. Edgar Dear Edgar, When does routine monitoring begin for rads? Seeing Rad, Routine monitoring for radionuclides began this year. The four quarters of initial monitoring were carried in 2005 for CWSs serving more than 3,300 people and 2006 for CWSs Test Taker, No, the Operator Certification Program does not recognize GEDs obtained on-line, you must earn your GED the old-fashioned way. To answer your other question, no, the program does not check the status of applicants or require proof of citizenship or proof of legal resident status to sit for an exam or obtain a license as a water, wastewater, or water distribution system operator. Edgar Page 11

12 Florida s Drought Action Plan Since late 2006, a severe drought has been affecting parts of Florida. Water users and natural systems both are threatened from this prolonged period of below average precipitation. In order to address the ongoing drought conditions and to better facilitate adequate response to this and future droughts, the Florida Division of Emergency Management (DEM), the Florida Department of Environmental Protection (DEP), the Florida Department of Agriculture and Consumer Services (DACS), and the South Florida Water Management District (SFWMD) developed Florida s Drought Action Plan in 2007 to guide agencies actions. From the Introduction to Florida s Drought Action Plan: The Florida Water Resources Act (Chapter 373, F.S.) is the state s fundamental framework for addressing water supply problems, including water shortages. Repeated experiences with drought have led to a mature system of water management district, state, and local actions to address the effects of drought. In particular, the drought resulted in many improvements in the state s water management and drought response system as described in the attachments to this plan. State, regional, and local organizations are now in the midst of efforts to minimize the damaging effects of the drought to the extent possible. The response to the current drought should build upon the current water management structure to improve its effectiveness, rather than create a duplicative new drought response system. This Drought Action Plan is not intended as a substitute for the specific operational drought response plans of the Division of Emergency Management or the water management districts. Rather, the purposes of this Action Plan are to improve coordination and communication among key participating agencies, facilitate outreach to concerned parties, and express the basic shortand mid-term action steps now thought necessary to address the drought. If the drought continues and intensifies, this Action Plan may be revised and updated to reflect new needs. This Drought Action Plan provides background on the recent history of drought management in the state, summarizes the current drought being experienced in Florida, describes the current institutional structure for addressing water shortages, and sets out specific Action Steps to respond to the current drought. Additional information may be found in a series of Attachments: Attachment 1: Water Use, Droughts, and Alternative Water Supplies Attachment 2: Joint Statement of Commitment on Water Conservation in Public Water Supply; Conserve Florida Program Page 12

13 Attachment 3: Connecting Water Supply and Growth Attachment 4: Committee on Landscape Irrigation and Florida-Friendly Design Attachment 5: Summary of Recommendations of the April 2002 Water Conservation Initiative Goals of the Drought Action Plan 1. Monitor: Collect and analyze drought-related information in a timely and systematic manner. 2. Assess: Assess impacts of the drought on water users and the environment. 3. Coordinate: Coordinate the drought response plans of relevant agencies and organizations. 4. Communicate: Communicate accurate information to decision makers and other interested parties. 5. Act: Take coordinated actions to reduce the adverse effects of the drought and assess the effectiveness of mitigation actions being taken. 6. Prepare: Develop actions to reduce Florida s vulnerabilities to the next drought. Florida s current drought conditions can be viewed at: The Complete Drought Action Plan is available for viewing or download at: Florida s Drought Action Plan was prepared by: Florida Department of Environmental Protection Florida Division of Emergency Management Florida Department of Agriculture and Consumer Services South Florida Water Management District Page 13

14 Summary of 2007 State Warning Point Drinking Water Facilities Incidents* Incident Severity Levels Level 1: A Public Drinking Water System reports a minor act of vandalism, trespassing or accidental damage to the facility with no probable degradation to water quality, system pressure, or water production. Level 2: A Public Drinking Water System reports a suspected intentional incident involving physical or electronic access to treatment facilities or its water sources, control systems, distribution systems or security equipment where there is potential for degradation to water quality, system pressure or water production. Level 3: A Public Drinking Water System reports an intentional incident known to cause significant damage to water facility assets or impact water quality, system pressure or water production. A PWS ID number was not provided to the SWP operator in 39% of reported Drinking Water Facilities Incidents. If you don t know your PWS ID number, contact your district office or approved county health department. Keep your number by the phone, if there s an emergency at your facility or you need to call the SWP, you ll be glad it s handy. * Fourteen additional incidents occurred at drinking water facilities but were classified by the State Warning Point as Aircraft, General, Hazardous Materials, Security-Nonspecific, or Wastewater type incidents rather than as Drinking Water Facilities Incidents. Page 14

15 Pharmaceuticals in Water by Catherine Murray Microconstituents or pharmaceuticals and personal care products (PPCPs) as potential environmental pollutants have been highlighted in recent news coverage. Trace amounts of PPCPs have been found in the environment in some of the nation s water bodies and drinking water. PPCPs include a wide variety of products such as prescription and over-the-counter medications, veterinary drugs, cosmetics, sunscreen lotion, and fragrances. PPCPs enter the environment via the sewer system when they are excreted from the body and washed away during bathing and when unused and expired medications are disposed of in home sinks and toilets. They also enter the environment through the practice of agribusiness, through veterinary drug use, and in wastes from pharmaceutical manufacturers and hospitals. PPCPs are of concern for a number of reasons: water and wastewater treatment plants have not been designed to remove the wide variety of chemicals that comprise PPCPs from drinking water and domestic wastewater, the long-term effects of low doses of these chemicals on human health are unknown, and there does appear to be a risk from some of the contaminants on aquatic organisms. EPA has conducted and continues to conduct research into PPCPs as potential environmental pollutants. EPA has indicated that, currently, no evidence of human health effects from PPCPs in the environment has been found. On-going EPA research on PPCPs can be viewed at While EPA currently does not regulate and has no standards for PPCPs in drinking water, EPA s proposed consumer candidate list (CCL3) does include a pharmaceutical nitroglycerin, which is used in the treatment of angina. (Under the Safe Drinking Water Act, every 5 years EPA is required to develop a list of unregulated contaminants that may require national drinking water regulation in the future; the CCL allows EPA to prioritize research and data collection efforts.) Additionally, the U.S. Senate is expected to hold hearings in early April into the discovery of trace amounts of pharmaceuticals in water supplies. For more information on PPCPs, visit EPA s PPCP website at: For information on the proper disposal of unwanted medication, visit DEP s website at: medications/default.htm. Download or view DEP s January 2007 fact sheet on microconstituents at: internetdev/waste/quick_topics/publications/shw/meds/wrmmicroconstituentsfactsheetfinal pdf. Page 15

16 The Floridan 2600 Blair Stone Road MS3520 Tallahassee, Fl Return Service Requested Photo The Bean by Terri Carter, FELSI Photo courtesy of Catherine Murray For a free subscription to The Floridan newsletter please visit our web site at: