Federal Tap Water Programs

Reduce Drinking Water Pollution??

Federal Tap Water Programs failing. Scientists and policymakers have long known that pollution to drinking water sources can be reduced through two key means:

1. Preventing (or reducing) the release in the first place

2. Maintaining a buffer of protected lands around the water source that can, in essence, reduce or slow down the pollutant load. Neither has been done effectively.

Federal Funding Of Tap Water Programs

A recent review of federal funding programs conducted by the American Water Works Association and The Trust for Public Lands shows that taxpayer funds allocated to states and water utilities do not go toward pollution prevention and source water protection,

This study found that in 2003 the government provided states with $6 billion under the Clean Water Act State Revolving Fund; only 5 percent went toward mitigating the non-point source pollution like agricultural and urban runoff that accounts for 60 percent of the total contaminant load to rivers and streams.

The remainder went to infrastructure improvements at wastewater treatment plants, many of which benefitted water quality but others of which subsidized expansions necessitated by growth and sprawl.

In 2003 under the Clean Water Act Non-Point Source Program states received $237.5 million; only 17 percent went toward controlling non-point source pollution.

And in 2003 states received $14 billion under the Drinking Water State Revolving Fund, but in the six-year history of the fund (as of 2003) just $2.7 million had gone toward land protection, conserving just 2,000 acres altogether (TPL and AWWA 2004).

While the merits of some competing projects could be argued, the skew in funding is so decidedly shifted away from pollution prevention and source water protection, that no one can argue the vital need for additional support for these programs that so directly improve and protect water quality.

Tap Water Programs Standard-Setting Process

Gaps in federal standard-setting process. Every year water suppliers are required by law to submit a report to their customers detailing tap water testing results.

In nearly every case, utilities are able to tell customers that the water meets or exceeds every standard in federal law, a laudable accomplishment considering the quality of the raw (untreated) water in many cases.

But because of significant gaps in the standard-setting process, "meeting federal standards" doesn't necessarily mean the water is perfectly safe to drink.

Safe Drinking Water Act

Under the Safe Drinking Water Act, EPA sets standards not only based on health considerations, but also based on cost; the Agency is required to prove that the cost of removing a contaminant does not exceed the benefits.

Because of this provision, EPA has set legal limits for 40 percent of regulated contaminants at levels higher than the Agency's own recommended health-based limits.

In setting new limits for chemical disinfection by-products in tap water, EPA assumed that each life saved from pollution reductions (in this case, from bladder cancer) is worth an average of $5.6 million, a price tag that was then balanced against the costs of treatment plant upgrades.

The final standard was set based on the balance of this equation (FR 1998). The price assigned to a human life has changed several times over the Agency's history, and in the end dictates whether or not legal limits for contaminants in tap water are set at levels that protect human health.

Buy Safe RV Drinking Water Products Online

BUY Safe RV Drinking Water Products Online by clicking a product link or going directly to the RV Water Solutions Products Section.

You can be assured that you will be choosing from one of the best selections of RV Water Products online at the best price.