In particular, the 1996 amendments required that EPA complete the development of most of the regulations that were in process at the time of reauthorization. The states are now required to develop statewide source water assessment programs that identify sources of public drinking water and show how the states will determine the sources’ vulnerability to contamination. EPA issued its final regulations on consumer confidence reports on August 19, 1998, and water systems are required to issue their first reports in October 1999. The states were required to (1) prepare, periodically update, and submit to the EPA Administrator a list of water systems with histories of significant noncompliance; (2) have the legal authorities and other means to ensure that new water systems have the technical, financial, and managerial capability to comply with drinking water regulations; (3) develop and implement a strategy for capacity development to assist existing systems in acquiring and maintaining capacity; (4) report to the EPA Administrator and the states’ governors on the success of their capacity development programs; and (5) certify the operators of community and nontransient noncommunity public water systems. Both EPA and the states have made considerable progress in launching the Drinking Water State Revolving Fund program. The 1996 amendments took important steps to address this problem; they substantially increased program grants for the states and provided access to revolving loan fund money to pay for program administration. Yet the statute also increased EPA’s and the states’ responsibilities in new ways. The net effect of these changes on the capacity of EPA and the states to implement the drinking water program has yet to be determined. Impact on the States’ Capacity

EPA and state officials agree that the 1996 amendments have gone a long way toward putting the drinking water program on a sounder footing. Observations

EPA and the states have made progress in meeting the initial requirements of the Safe Drinking Water Act Amendments of 1996. For their part, the states have made important strides in addressing one of their most important initial objectives—setting up their drinking water revolving funds—and are working to meet other initial requirements to prepare needed strategies and programs. Yet as noteworthy as these initial efforts have been, the most difficult challenge deals with the longer-term question of implementation—implementation of the new contaminant standards (including monitoring water systems’ compliance with the standards), the new requirements to augment consumer awareness, the provisions to ensure the viability of thousands of smaller water systems, and the numerous other requirements associated with this complex statute. Meeting these longer-term challenges will call for a sustained effort by EPA, the states, and the nation’s public water systems and will warrant continuous oversight by the Congress.
Why GAO Did This Study

Pursuant to a congressional request, GAO provided information on the: (1) status of efforts and progress made by the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and the states in addressing the Safe Drinking Water Act Amendments of 1996; and (2) future challenges facing EPA and the states in their efforts to do so.

What GAO Found

GAO noted that: (1) EPA and the states have made progress in meeting the initial requirements of the Safe Drinking Water Act Amendments of 1996; (2) EPA has met all of its statutory requirements to develop regulations and guidelines; (3) the states have made important strides in setting up their drinking water revolving funds and are working to meet other initial requirements to prepare needed strategies and programs; (4) yet, the most difficult challenge deals with the longer-term question of implementation-- implementation of the new contaminant standards (including monitoring water systems' compliance with the standards), the provisions to ensure the viability of thousands of smaller water systems, and the numerous other requirements associated with this complex statute; (5) meeting these longer-term challenges will call for a sustained effort by EPA, the states, and the nation's public water systems and will warrant continuous oversight by Congress; (6) EPA is working to meet the amendments' requirements to complete many contaminant standards that were in process at the time of reauthorization, including standards for arsenic and radon; (7) the states are presently working to develop statewide source water assessment programs that identify sources of public drinking water and show how a state will determine the vulnerability of the sources to contamination; (8) EPA issued regulations on August 19, 1998, that call on public water systems to issue annual consumer confidence reports; (9) the states have made progress in implementing the capacity development requirements for new systems and in reporting on existing systems with a history of noncompliance; (10) both EPA and the states have made progress in launching the Drinking Water State Revolving Fund program; (11) the 1996 amendments took important steps to address serious resource shortages affecting EPA's and the states' capacity to meet basic program needs--steps that EPA and state officials agree have helped to put the program on a sounder footing; (12) the statute substantially increased the state program grants and provided the states with access to money from the revolving fund for program administration; and (13) the net effect of these changes on their capacity to implement the drinking water program has yet to be determined.