АҚШ-тың Таза Су туралы Федералдық Заңы

Principal federal law in the United States intended to ensure safe drinking water for the public

The Safe Drinking Water Act (SDWA) is the principal federal law in the United States intended to ensure safe drinking water for the public. Pursuant to the act, the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is required to set standards for drinking water quality and oversee all states, localities, and water suppliers that implement the standards. The SDWA applies to every public water system (PWS) in the United States. There are currently over 148,000 public water systems providing water to almost all Americans at some time in their lives. The Act does not cover private wells (in 2020, 13% of US households were served by private wells). The SDWA does not apply to bottled water. Bottled water is regulated by the Food and Drug Administration (FDA), under the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act.

The SDWA requires EPA to establish National Primary Drinking Water Regulations (NPDWRs) for contaminants that may cause adverse public health effects. The regulations include both mandatory requirements (Maximum Contaminant Levels, or MCLs; and Treatment Techniques) and nonenforceable health goals (Maximum Contaminant Level Goals, or MCLGs) for each included contaminant. As of 2019 EPA has issued 88 standards for microorganisms, chemicals and radionuclides. MCLs have additional significance because they can be used under the Superfund law as "Applicable or Relevant and Appropriate Requirements" in cleanups of contaminated sites on the National Priorities List. For some contaminants, EPA establishes a Treatment Technique (TT) instead of an MCL. TTs are enforceable procedures that drinking water systems must follow in treating their water for a contaminant. The most recent amendment is the Long Term 2 Enhanced Surface Water Treatment Rule, promulgated in 2006, requiring public water systems to employ a Treatment Technique to control Cryptosporidium and other pathogens.

EPA has issued standards for chlorine, monochloramine and chlorine dioxide. EPA issued an initial lead and copper regulation in 1991. The regulation specifies a Treatment Technique rather than an MCL. Congress tightened the definition of "lead free" plumbing in a 2011 amendment to the Act. EPA published a final rule implementing the amendment on September 1, 2020. In response to the Flint, Michigan water crisis, EPA published revisions to the Lead and Copper Rule on January 15, 2021 addressing testing, pipe replacement and related issues. The rule mandates additional requirements for sampling tap water, corrosion control, public outreach and testing water in schools. The rule continues the requirement for replacement of lead service lines when the "action level" for lead is exceeded, but requires that a utility replace at least 3 percent of its lines annually, compared to 7 percent under the prior regulation. Several citizen and environmental groups immediately filed lawsuits challenging the rule. On March 12, 2021 EPA delayed the effective date of the rule to June 17, 2021.

EPA has issued standards for 53 organic compounds, including benzene, dioxin (2,3,7,8 TCDD), PCBs, styrene, toluene, vinyl chloride and several pesticides.

Secondary drinking water standards are non regulatory guidelines for aesthetic characteristics, including taste, color, and odor.

The SDWA allows states to set standards which are more stringent than the federal standards, and to issue standards for contaminants that EPA has not regulated. Several states have issued their own standards for a few contaminants, including fluoride, perchlorate and perfluorinated alkylated substances (PFAS).

The Natural Resources Defense Council (NRDC) filed a lawsuit in 2016 to accelerate EPA's regulatory process on perchlorate. Following a consent decree issued by a federal district court in New York, EPA published a proposed rule on June 26, 2019, with a proposed MCL of 0.056 mg/L. On June 18, 2020 EPA announced that it was withdrawing its 2019 proposal and its 2011 regulatory determination, stating that it had taken "proactive steps" with state and local governments to address perchlorate contamination. In September 2020 NRDC filed suit against EPA for its failure to regulate perchlorate, and stated that 26 million people may be affected by perchlorate in their drinking water.

In March 2020 EPA announced its proposed regulatory determinations for two PFAS in drinking water. In a Federal Register notice published as a follow up to CCL4, the agency requested public comment on regulating perfluorooctanoic acid (PFOA) and perfluorooctanesulfonic acid (PFOS). In March 2021 EPA announced that it would develop regulations for PFOA and PFOS. A PWS must notify its customers when it violates drinking water regulations or is providing drinking water that may pose a health risk. Such notifications are provided either immediately, as soon as possible (but within 30 days of the violation) or annually, depending on the health risk associated with the violation. Community water systems—those systems that serve the same people throughout the year—must provide an annual "Consumer Confidence Report" to customers. The report identifies contaminants, if any, in the drinking water and explains the potential health impacts. The Public Water System Supervision Program comprises "primacy" agencies, which are either state government agencies, Indian tribes, or EPA regional offices. All state and territories, except Wyoming and the District of Columbia, have received primacy approval from EPA, to supervise the PWS in their respective jurisdictions.

An underground source of drinking water (USDW) means an aquifer with sufficient quality and quantity of ground water to supply a public water system now or in the future.

The SDWA prohibits any underground injection which endangers drinking water sources. The Ninth Circuit United States Court of Appeals while enforcing this prohibition of "harmful injections into drinking water aquifers" explains that underground injection of even clean water can result in the illegal movement of a fluid containing a contaminant into an USDW:
The SDWA and its implementing regulations are not concerned with whether an injected fluid is itself contaminated. Rather, they are concerned with the result of "injection activity." A permit applicant must show that the proposed activity will not allow "the movement of fluid containing [a] contaminant." Id. Injections of clean water into the ground can cause the movement of contaminants into an aquifer. For example, contaminants may dissolve into clean water as the injected water passes through the soil on its way to an aquifer. <blockquote>Underground fluid injection can have disastrous consequences for drinking water and, in turn, for human health. Injected fluid is hard to trace once it enters the ground, and polluted aquifers are hard to remediate. Congress' cautious "preventive" approach requires permit applicants to show that their injections will not harm underground sources of drinking water. It presumes, until an applicant shows otherwise, that injections will contaminate an USDW. Although this approach may result in forbidding some injections that would not contaminate an USDW, it is a valid exercise of Congress' authority. The UIC permit system is organized into six classes of wells. Class I. Industrial waste (hazardous and non hazardous) and municipal wastewater disposal wells
Class II. Oil and gas related injection wells (except wells solely used for production; see Hydraulic fracturing exemption)
Class III. Solution mining wells
Class IV. Shallow hazardous and radioactive waste injection wells (no longer permitted)
Class V. Wells that inject non hazardous fluids into or above underground sources of drinking water
Class VI. Geologic sequestration wells for carbon dioxide. EPA has granted UIC primacy enforcement authority to 34 states for Class I, II, III, IV and V wells. Seven additional states and two tribes have been granted primacy authority for Class II wells only. EPA manages enforcement of Class VI wells directly. If a state does not take appropriate enforcement action then EPA must issue an order requiring a violator to comply with the requirements, or the agency will initiate a civil enforcement action. The SDWA directly provides for citizen civil actions.

Congress amended the SDWA in 2005 to exclude hydraulic fracturing, an industrial process for recovering oil and natural gas, from coverage under the UIC program, except where diesel fuels are used. This exclusion has been called the "Halliburton Loophole". Halliburton is the world's largest provider of hydraulic fracturing services. The measure was a response to a recommendation from the Energy Task Force, chaired by Vice President Dick Cheney in 2001. (Cheney had been Chairman and CEO of Halliburton from 1995 to 2000.)

The act requires states to establish wellhead protection programs to protect underground sources of drinking water. Wellhead protection programs must specify the duties of agencies, determine the wellhead protection areas, identify sources of contaminants, implement control measures to protect the wellhead protection areas, and a contingency plan for alternative drinking water supplies in the event of contamination. Federal agencies having jurisdiction over potential sources of contaminants must comply with all requirements of the state wellhead protection program.

The "Updated Guidance on Invoking Emergency Authority Under Section 1431 Of The Safe Drinking Water Act" shows that 42 U. S. C. § 300i gives the EPA Administrator broad power to protect public water systems and underground sources of drinking water (USDWs). This guidance encourages more widespread use of the EPA's emergency powers. A citizen can file a petition for judicial review of EPA final actions. A citizen may also file against any violator of the SDWA or against EPA for failure to take action under the SDWA which is not discretionary. EPA emergency administrative orders are also final actions subject to judicial review.

In 2004, EPA tested drinking water quality on commercial aircraft and found that 15 percent of tested aircraft water systems tested positive for total coliform bacteria. EPA published a final regulation for aircraft public water systems in 2009. The regulation requires air carriers operating in the U. S. to conduct coliform sampling, management practices, corrective action, public notification, operator training, and reporting and recordkeeping. An airline with a non complying aircraft must restrict public access to the on board water system for a specified period.

The SDWA requires each state to delineate the boundaries of areas that public water systems use for their sources of drinking water—both surface and underground sources. Within each source area the origins of regulated contaminants are identified in order to determine the susceptibility of the public water systems. This information can help communities understand the risks to their sources of drinking water.

The SDWA includes a whistleblower protection provision. Employees in the US who believe they were fired or suffered another adverse action related to enforcement of this law have 30 days to file a written complaint with the Occupational Safety and Health Administration.

Prior to the SDWA there were few national enforceable requirements for drinking water. In 1914 the U. S. Public Health Service (PHS) published a set of drinking water standards, pursuant to existing federal authority to regulate interstate commerce, and in response to the 1893 Interstate Quarantine Act. As such the standards were directly applicable only to interstate common carriers such as railroads. For local drinking water utilities, these standards were basically recommendations and not enforceable requirements. However, many municipal utlities began to voluntarily adopt the standards. Improvements in chemical testing methods in the 1970s, particularly for synthetic organic chemicals, allowed for the detection of smaller concentrations of contaminants. Under state programs, some water works managers mistakenly believed that the major, real threats were behind them and their primary focus was on providing consistent and effective service through aging infrastructure, with major efforts at maintaining the bacteriological quality of drinking water.

The Safe Drinking Water Act was one of several pieces of environmental legislation in the 1970s. Discovery of contamination from organic chemicals in public water systems and the lack of enforceable, national standards persuaded Congress to take action. The 1974 law very clearly defined roles and responsibilities, giving EPA the job of generating scientifically based standards that would be applicable to all water supplies that served 25 or more customers and creating a process for setting new standards. EPA was mandated to contract with the National Academy of Sciences (NAS) for a major study of contaminants in drinking water that might have health significance and to issue revised regulations once the NAS report was completed.

In 1996, Congress amended the Safe Drinking Water Act to emphasize sound science and risk based standard setting, small water supply system flexibility and technical assistance, community empowered source water assessment and protection, public right to know, and water system infrastructure assistance through a multibillion dollar state revolving loan fund. The amendments were signed into law by President Bill Clinton on August 6, 1996. Microbial Contaminants and Disinfection Byproducts. EPA is required to strengthen protection for microbial contaminants, including cryptosporidium, while strengthening control over the byproducts of chemical disinfection. EPA promulgated the Stage 1 Disinfectants and Disinfection Byproducts Rule and the Interim Enhanced Surface Water Treatment Rule to address these risks. Operator Certification. Water system operators must be certified to ensure that systems are operated safely. EPA issued guidelines in 1999 specifying minimum standards for the certification and recertification of the operators of community and non transient, noncommunity water systems. These guidelines apply to state operator certification programs. All states are currently implementing EPA approved operator certification programs. Public Information and Consultation. The SDWA emphasizes that consumers have a right to know what is in their drinking water, where it comes from, how it is treated, and how to help protect it. EPA distributes public information materials on its website and holds public meetings, working with states, tribes, local water systems, and environmental and civic groups, to encourage public involvement. Small Water Systems. Small water systems are given special consideration and resources under SDWA, to make sure they have the managerial, financial, and technical ability to comply with drinking water standards.

Through the Energy Policy Act of 2005, the Safe Drinking Water Act was amended to exclude the underground injection of any fluids or propping agents other than diesel fuels used in hydraulic fracturing operations from being considered as "underground injections" for the purposes of the law.

The Drinking Water Protection Act was enacted on August 7, 2015. It required EPA to submit to Congress a strategic plan for assessing and managing risks associated with algal toxins in drinking water provided by public water systems. EPA submitted the plan to Congress in November 2015. The Grassroots Rural and Small Community Water Systems Assistance Act was signed by President Barack Obama on December 11, 2015. The amendment provides technical assistance to small public water systems, to help them comply with National Primary Drinking Water Regulations.

The SDWA can promote environmental justice by increasing the safety of drinking water in the communities most adversely impacted by water contamination. Communities of color and low income communities are disproportionately impacted by unsafe drinking water and associated health problems in the United States. Specifically, Native American reservations and communities with dense Latino and African American populations are at higher risk of exposure to drinking water contaminants. Contaminants found in the drinking water of such communities include nitrates, coliform, and lead, which have been linked to cancer, reproductive health problems, gastrointestinal illness, and other health problems. One study found that levels of contaminants in the drinking water of two Nebraska Native American reservations were significantly higher than regional contaminant levels. Another study found that Latino residents in Tucson, Arizona, had higher than average levels of contaminants in their drinking water, which were linked to higher rates of cancer and neurological disorders among residents. Also, it is understood that low income residents in the Appalachian region of West Virginia are disproportionately exposed to contaminants in drinking water from coal mining in the region. In addressing the updated priorities associated with the act, EPA states that its first priority is to "promote equity in disadvantaged, small, and environmental justice communities," specifically addressing that disadvantaged communities face disproportionate risks associated with exposure to contaminated drinking water.