EPA Has Implemented All of GAO’s 2011 Recommendations to Improve the UCMR Program

In UCMR3, EPA implemented our recommendations to (1) monitor for 30  contaminants; (2) monitor for most or all contaminants using the  program’s more robust monitoring approach; and (3) select minimum  reporting levels (MRL) that are sufficiently sensitive to detect the  presence of contaminants in public water systems at levels of public  health concern as follows:  Monitor for 30 contaminants. Use more robust monitoring approach. In particular, several experts we  surveyed and studies on contaminant occurrence indicated that the  UCMR3 standard monitoring frequency may result in inaccurate  estimates of the occurrence of sporadically occurring microbes (e.g.,  viruses) and seasonally applied pesticides. Under UCMR3, EPA varies the monitoring frequency for systems  based on a system’s size and water supply (e.g., surface water or  groundwater), but it does not vary it based on the type of contaminant  likely to be found. The selection  process was also limited by a statutory cap of 30 contaminants, which  restricted EPA’s ability to collect data on additional contaminants that  could have been monitored for very little additional cost. 1). Officials told us that a contaminant does not have to meet all of the  selection factors to be chosen; however, three are very important to  consider as follows:
Analytical method availability. According to EPA documents and officials, EPA used a prioritization  process to select potential UCMR3 contaminants. 2). 3). Many of the analytical methods  that EPA is using for UCMR3 are able to test a single sample of drinking  water for more than one contaminant at a time. However, because of the SDWA  limit of 30 contaminants, EPA cannot always take advantage of this  efficiency and is unable to gain economies of scale by monitoring for  additional contaminants using monitoring that is already under way. Health effects information. UCMR Data Support Regulatory Determinations, but Time Lag Results in Delays and Reliance on Older Data

EPA uses the UCMR data to support regulatory determinations but faces  a time lag when doing so. It is currently using UCMR1 and  UCMR2 data to inform its regulatory determinations for the CCL3  contaminants, which EPA expects to issue in 2015. Time Lag Typically Delays Regulatory Determinations for Contaminants by a Full 5-Year Cycle

A time lag between the statutory deadline for regulatory determinations  and the UCMR data’s availability typically delays regulatory  determinations on given contaminants until the following cycle. However, in practice, the 2-year window  SDWA set from the time EPA publishes the UCMR list to when it makes  regulatory determinations has not provided enough time for the agency to  monitor the contaminants and incorporate the UCMR data into the  determinations. Consequently, UCMR data are not available for EPA to  make regulatory determinations for contaminants during the cycle in  which they are monitored; rather, UCMR data for contaminants in one  cycle typically are not used until the next cycle or later (see fig. The UCMR3 monitoring, data  collection, and analysis overlap with the time frame during which EPA will  be making its regulatory determinations for contaminants on CCL3. EPA officials told us that most of the UCMR3 data will be used to support  regulatory determinations for the CCL4 contaminants, which are expected  to be issued in 2020. The larger sample size should allow EPA to make better  estimates of exposure to drinking water contaminants. Matters for Congressional Consideration

To take advantage of opportunities to collect UCMR data on additional  unregulated contaminants, Congress should consider amending  SDWA to give EPA the flexibility to select more than 30 contaminants  for monitoring under the UCMR program if high-priority contaminants,  such as those on the CCL or contaminants of emerging concern, can  be included at minimal cost, with minimal additional burden on public  water systems, and while using analytical methods that EPA is  already employing. To optimize the ability of the UCMR data to support regulatory  determinations, Congress should consider adjusting the statutory time  frames for the UCMR and regulatory determinations cycles so that  EPA can use the UCMR data to support regulatory determinations in  the same cycle. Agency Comments

We provided EPA with a draft of this report for its review and comment. Appendix I: Objectives, Scope, and Methodology

This report addressed the following objectives (1) evaluate the extent to  which the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) implemented the  recommendations GAO made in 2011 to improve the Unregulated  Contaminant Monitoring Rule (UCMR) program and any opportunities that  may exist to strengthen it further; (2) identify the factors EPA considered  when it selected the contaminants for monitoring under UCMR3 and the  limitations, if any, that EPA faced in selecting the contaminants; and (3)  examine the extent to which UCMR data support EPA’s regulatory  determinations. EPA has implemented this provision as the  Contaminant Candidate List. EPA is currently in its third round of the UCMR program (UCMR-3). 10. 12. 30. Safe Drinking Water Act: EPA Should Improve Implementation of  Requirements on Whether to Regulate Additional Contaminants.
Why GAO Did This Study

EPA's UCMR program collects data on unregulated contaminants in the nation's drinking water. EPA uses these data and other information to make regulatory determinations-- decisions on whether to regulate additional drinking water contaminants. It is currently in its third data collection cycle, UCMR3.
GAO was asked to examine the UCMR program. This report examines: (1) the extent to which EPA implemented GAO's prior recommendations to improve the program and opportunities, if any, to strengthen it further; (2) the factors EPA considered when it selected the UCMR3 contaminants and the limitations, if any, it faced in selecting them; and (3) the extent to which UCMR data support regulatory determinations.
GAO reviewed EPA documents, surveyed 48 subject matter experts, assessed the UCMR program against statutory requirements and other standards, and interviewed EPA officials.

What GAO Found

The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) has implemented all of the recommendations GAO made in its May 2011 report to improve the Unregulated Contaminant Monitoring Rule (UCMR) program. In that report, GAO recommended that EPA (1) monitor for the full 30 contaminants allowed by statute, (2) monitor for most or all contaminants using a more robust monitoring approach, and (3) select sufficiently sensitive minimum reporting levels (MRL) for monitoring contaminants. EPA now requires public water systems to monitor for 30 contaminants in the UCMR3 program, using its most robust monitoring approach for a majority of these contaminants, and setting MRLs as low as can be reliably measured, according to EPA. The Safe Drinking Water Act (SDWA) requires EPA to vary the monitoring frequency based on the type of contaminant likely to be found, but EPA used a standard monitoring frequency for all contaminants. This may result in inaccurate estimates of the occurrence of sporadically occurring microbes (e.g., viruses) or pesticides, according to experts GAO surveyed and studies it reviewed. In such cases, the monitoring data may not provide reliable estimates of contaminant occurrence.
EPA used 10 factors to select the 30 contaminants for UCMR3, but its selection process faced some limitations. Officials told GAO that the contaminants did not have to meet all 10 of the selection factors to be chosen, but 3 were very important (1) the availability of an analytical method to detect contaminants, (2) the reliability of health effects information on the contaminants, and (3) the need for data to support regulatory determinations for priority contaminants. However, EPA is limited by a statutory cap of 30 contaminants every 5 years, which restricts its ability to collect data on additional contaminants that could have been monitored for little additional cost. SDWA's legislative history reflected concerns with the ability of public water systems to absorb such costs, but many of the analytical methods EPA is using for UCMR3 are able to test a single sample of drinking water for more than one contaminant at a time. However, because of the limit of 30, EPA cannot always take advantage of this efficiency and is unable to gain economies of scale using monitoring that is already under way.
EPA uses UCMR data to support regulatory determinations but faces a time lag when doing so. EPA has used UCMR data to support 10 out of 12 regulatory determinations it has made since 2008 and is currently using UCMR data to inform the determinations expected in 2015. However, a time lag between the statutory deadline for making regulatory determinations and when UCMR data are available delays determinations on given contaminants until the following cycle. The 2-year time frame SDWA originally established from the time EPA publishes the UCMR list to when it makes regulatory determinations has not provided enough time for the agency to incorporate the UCMR data into the determinations. The UCMR3 monitoring, data collection, and analysis overlap with the time when EPA will be making its regulatory determinations for contaminants from its most recent Contaminant Candidate List. Consequently, UCMR data are not available to support regulatory determinations for contaminants during the cycle in which they are monitored; rather, UCMR data typically are not used until the next cycle. EPA officials told GAO that most of the UCMR3 data, which are being collected from 2013 to 2015, will be used to support the regulatory determinations it expects to issue in 2020 instead of 2015.

What GAO Recommends

Congress should consider amending the Safe Drinking Water Act to allow EPA to monitor for more than 30 contaminants under certain circumstances, and to adjust statutory time frames so UCMR data can inform regulatory determinations in the same cycle. GAO, among other things, recommends that EPA vary the monitoring frequency based on contaminant type. In commenting on a draft of this report, EPA generally agreed with GAO’s findings, conclusions, and recommendations.