This comment letter response contains two parts:

(1) The original submittal from the commenter.

(2) A data base printout of EPA’s response to each point raised by the commenter.

Notes about the response letters:

• The response letters were generated by a data base used to track the content of all public

comment submittals and ensure that the Agency responds to each. Each comment letter

was assigned a Letter ID that corresponds to the last four digits of the docket number of the

original comment (as posted on www.regulations.gov).

• Each response letter includes: comment text; an EPA

‐ assigned comment code; and an

individual response. These are described and explained below.

• The data base contains Comment text from the letters submitted by commenters.

Many hard copy letters were scanned into electronic format for inclusion in the data

base. As a result, there may be some typographical errors attributable to optical

character recognition issues. However, all original submittals were reviewed in the

process of drafting responses to ensure that the comment content was understood and

appropriately addressed.

• The content of each comment letter was divided into topic areas and assigned a unique

Comment ID. Additionally, one or more Comment Codes (i.e., unique topic area ID) was

assigned to each discrete point raised by a commenter. This information was added to

the data base. To inform final rulemaking decisions, all comments and information

received on a given topic were reviewed by technical experts in each rule area (e.g., on

construction requirements).

• Following decisions on the final rule requirements, Individual responses were drafted

by topic area to ensure completeness and consistency of the responses with the final

rule and other responses to similar comments. Each discrete point made by a

commenter was given a unique response.

• Upon completion of comment responses, all information was entered into the data base.

Each letter response is a compilation of each comment and its individual response,

compiled in the order of the original comment letter. As a result of this process, there is

repetition in the response text. The Agency believes this approach ensures completeness

and attention to each comment letter that was submitted.

• All comments in a topic area were reviewed, evaluated, and responded to concurrently.

Responses on each topic area are compiled and are also available in the rulemaking docket.file:///C|/Users/Kristy/Desktop/KristyMaterials/CommentsToPDF/EPA-HQ-OW-2008-0390-0195.txt [11/18/2010 10:30:40 PM] Document ID: EPA-HQ-OW-2008-0390-0195

Last Name: Anonymous6

First Name:

Title:

Organization:

City:

State:

Zip Code:

Phone Number:

Fax Number:

Country Code:

Email Address:

Current Category Code: 260

Comment:

we just had a big scandal in nj where the lab that tests the water was lying on est

results. how does the public protect itself from that. it is clear that some system

needs to be set up to check the labs which need watching since they obviousy

are turning in fake water health reports.Letter ID: 0195

Commenter: Anonymous6

Letter ID: 0195 Comment ID: 23919 Letter Lines: 16 to 19

Comment Code: 1000 1. General and Administrative Comments

Comment: we just had a big scandal in nj where the lab that tests the water was lying on est

results. how does the public protect itself fr om that. it is clear that some system

needs to be set up to check the labs wh ich need watching since they obviousy

are turning in fake water health reports.

Individual Response: EPA clarifies that the re gulation of drinking water laboratories is outside

the scope of the GS rulemaking. Rather, the pu rpose of the GS regul ation is to ensure

consistency in permitting underground injection of CO2 at GS operations across the United

States and provide requirement s to prevent endangerment of USDWs in anticipation of the

eventual use of GS to reduce CO2 emissions.

1