Document ID: EPA-HQ-OW-2003-0054-0001
Agency: epa
Document Type: Supporting & Related Material
Title: 
Posted Date: 2003-03-21T05:00Z

Information
Collection
Request
Supporting
Document
For
The
Community
Water
System
Survey
August
14,
2000
i
TABLE
OF
CONTENTS
Section
Page
TABLE
OF
CONTENTS
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
i
LIST
OF
TABLES
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
iv
PART
A
OF
THE
SUPPORTING
STATEMENT
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
1
A.
1
IDENTIFICATION
OF
THE
INFORMATION
COLLECTION
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
1
A.
1.
a
Title
of
the
Information
Collection
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
1
A.
1.
b
Short
Characterization
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
1
A.
2
NEED
FOR
AND
USE
OF
THE
COLLECTION
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
1
A.
2.
a
Need/
Authority
for
the
Collection
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
1
A.
2.
b
Use/
Users
of
the
Data
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
3
A.
3.
NONDUPLICATION,
CONSULTATIONS,
AND
OTHER
COLLECTION
CRITERIA
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
4
A.
3.
a.
Nonduplication
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
4
A.
3.
b.
Public
Notice
Required
Prior
to
ICR
Submission
to
OMB
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
5
A.
3.
c.
Consultations
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
5
A.
3.
d.
Effects
of
Less
Frequent
Collection
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
6
A.
3.
e.
General
Guidelines
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
6
A.
3.
f.
Confidentiality
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
7
A.
3.
g.
Sensitive
Questions
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
7
A.
4.
THE
RESPONDENTS
AND
THE
INFORMATION
REQUESTED
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
8
A.
4.
a.
Respondents/
SIC
Codes
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
8
A.
4.
b.
Information
Requested
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
8
A.
4.
b.
1.
Data
Items
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
9
A.
4.
b.
2.
Respondent
Activities
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
14
A.
5.
THE
INFORMATION
COLLECTED
B
AGENCY
ACTIVITIES,
COLLECTION
METHODOLOGY,
AND
INFORMATION
MANAGEMENT
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
14
A.
5.
a.
Agency
Activities
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
14
A.
5.
b
Collection
Methodology
and
Management
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
15
A.
5.
c.
Small
Entity
Flexibility
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
19
A.
5.
d.
Collection
Schedule
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
19
A.
6
ESTIMATING
THE
BURDEN
AND
COST
OF
THE
COLLECTION
.
.
.
.
.
.
19
A.
6.
a.
Estimating
Respondent
Burden
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
19
A.
6.
b.
Estimating
Respondent
Costs
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
21
A.
6.
c.
Estimating
Agency
Burden
and
Costs
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
21
A.
6.
d.
Estimating
the
Respondent
Universe
and
Total
Burden
Cost
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
22
A.
6.
e.
Bottom
Line
Burden
Hours
and
Cost
Tables
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
23
A.
6.
f.
Reasons
for
Change
in
Burden
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
24
A.
6.
g.
Burden
Statement
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
24
ii
PART
B
OF
THE
SUPPORTING
STATEMENT
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
25
B.
1.
SURVEY
OBJECTIVES,
KEY
VARIABLES,
AND
OTHER
PRELIMINARIES
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
25
B.
1.
a.
Survey
Objectives
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
25
B.
1.
b.
Key
Variables
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
26
B.
1.
c.
Statistical
Approach
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
26
B.
1.
d.
Feasibility
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
27
B.
2
SURVEY
DESIGN
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
28
B.
2.
a.
Target
Population
and
Coverage
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
28
B.
2.
b.
Sample
Design
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
28
B.
2.
b.
1.
Sample
Frame
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
28
B.
2.
b.
2.
Sample
Size
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
30
B.
2.
b.
3.
Stratification
Variables
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
30
B.
2.
b.
4.
Sampling
Method
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
32
B.
2.
b.
5.
Multi­
Stage
Sampling
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
32
B.
2.
c.
Precision
Requirements
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
33
B.
2.
c.
1.
Precision
Targets
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
33
B.
2.
c.
2.
Nonsampling
Error
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
33
B.
2.
d.
Questionnaire
Design
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
34
B.
3.
PRETESTS
AND
PILOT
TESTS
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
35
B.
3.
a.
Pretests
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
35
B.
3.
b.
Pilot
Study
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
35
B.
4.
COLLECTION
METHODS
AND
FOLLOW­
UP
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
35
B.
4.
a.
Collection
Methods
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
35
B.
4.
b.
Survey
Response
and
Follow­
Up
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
35
B.
5.
ANALYZING
AND
REPORTING
SURVEY
RESULTS
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
36
B.
5.
a.
Data
Preparation
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
36
B.
5.
b.
Analysis
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
36
B.
5.
c.
Reporting
Results
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
36
Appendix
A
Relevant
Sections
of
Statutes
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
39
Appendix
B
Federal
Register
Notice
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
53
Appendix
C
2000
Community
Water
Systems
Questionnaires
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
57
iii
LIST
OF
TABLES
Table
Page
Table
A­
1.
Number
of
Water
Systems
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
8
Table
A­
2.
Preliminary
Burden
and
Cost
Estimate
for
Respondents
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
21
Table
A­
3.
Preliminary
Burden
and
Cost
Estimate
for
the
States
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
21
Table
A­
4.
Agency
Burden
Cost
Estimates
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
23
Table
A­
5.
Summary
of
Burden
and
Cost
Estimates
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
24
Table
B­
1.
Frame
and
Sample
Sizes
by
Strata
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
31
iv
1
PART
A
OF
THE
SUPPORTING
STATEMENT
A.
1
IDENTIFICATION
OF
THE
INFORMATION
COLLECTION
A.
1.
a
Title
of
the
Information
Collection
The
Community
Water
System
Survey.

A.
1.
b
Short
Characterization
In
compliance
with
Executive
Order
12866,
the
Regulatory
Flexibility
Act,
and
the
Safe
Drinking
Water
Act
(
SDWA),
the
U.
S.
Environmental
Protection
Agency's
Office
of
Ground
Water
and
Drinking
Water
(
OGWDW),
Standards
and
Risk
Management
Division
(
SRMD)
conducts
periodic
surveys
of
the
financial
and
operating
characteristics
of
community
water
systems.
This
information
is
essential
to
support
economic
analyses
of
the
costs
and
benefits
of
new
regulations
and
changes
to
existing
regulations
on
consumers,
the
water
supply
industry,
and
the
nation.
The
information
also
will
be
used
to
measure
the
financial
burden
of
EPA's
regulations
on
consumers
and
the
industry.
Furthermore,
data
from
the
survey
will
help
EPA
identify,
evaluate
and
develop
guidance
on
Best
Management
Practices
used
in
water
treatment
and
distribution
systems.

EPA
will
collect
basic
information
on
the
infrastructure,
organization
and
financial
characteristics
of
community
water
suppliers
by
a
variety
of
survey
methods,
depending
on
the
size
of
the
system.
We
estimate
that
the
survey
will
provide
data
from
1,442
respondents,
requiring
2,078
hours
to
complete
at
a
total
cost
to
those
respondents
of
$
54,410.

Previous
surveys
of
Community
Water
Systems
were
conducted
in
1976,
1982,
1986,
and
1995.

A.
2
NEED
FOR
AND
USE
OF
THE
COLLECTION
A.
2.
a
Need/
Authority
for
the
Collection
The
legal
authority
for
this
data
collection
is
the
Public
Health
Service
Act
(
Safe
Drinking
Water
Act),
Section
300j­
4(
1)(
A),
33
U.
S.
C.
Section
1316.
Copies
of
the
relevant
sections
of
this
statute,
cited
in
the
order
they
appear
in
this
information
collection
request,
are
in
Appendix
A.

EPA
needs
the
data
to
be
collected
by
this
survey
in
order
to
carry
out
its
program
development
and
management
responsibilities
under
three
sections
of
the
1996
Safe
Drinking
Water
Act
Amendments
which
require
that
EPA
have
financial
information
about
water
systems
when
performing
several
regulatory
functions.
Section
300g­
1(
b)(
3)(
C)
requires
EPA
to
analyze
"
quantifiable
and
nonquantifiable
costs
.
.
.
[
which]
are
likely
to
occur
solely
as
a
result
of
compliance
with
the
maximum
contaminant
level,"
and
"
the
incremental
cost
and
benefits
associated
with
each
alternative
maximum
contaminant
level
considered."
Section
300g­
1(
b)(
4)(
D)
instructs
the
Agency
to
take
"
cost
into
consideration"
when
determining
what
2
constitutes
"
feasible"
technology
for
meeting
prescribed
Maximum
Contaminant
Levels
(
MCLs).
Section
300g­
4(
a)(
1)(
A)
allows
EPA
to
grant
variances
from
National
Primary
Drinking
Water
Regulations
"
on
the
condition
that
the
system
install
the
best
technology,
treatment
techniques,
or
other
means,
which
the
Administrator
finds
are
available
(
taking
costs
into
consideration)."
Section
300g­
4(
e)
makes
special
provision
for
"
Small
System
Variances"
and
notes
that
a
variance
under
this
subsection
may
be
available
only
to
a
system
"
that
cannot
afford
to
comply,
in
accordance
with
affordability
criteria
established
by
the
Administrator
(
or
the
State
in
the
case
of
a
State
that
has
primary
enforcement
responsibility
under
Section
300g­
2)
with
a
national
primary
drinking
water
regulation
,
.
.
."
Section
300g­
4(
e)(
7)
discusses
the
Administrator's
ongoing
responsibility
to
publish
information
that
will
assist
States
in
developing
affordability
criteria.
Section
300g­
5(
a)(
1)
allows
for
a
system
to
receive
an
exemption
from
meeting
an
MCL
upon
a
finding
that
"
.
.
.
due
to
compelling
factors
(
which
may
include
economic
factors),
.
.
.
the
public
water
system
is
unable
to
comply
with
such
contaminant
level
or
treatment
technique
requirement
or
to
implement
measures
to
develop
an
alternative
source
of
supply."

Given
this
statutory
background,
it
clearly
is
not
possible
to
consider
treatment
costs
in
a
vacuum.
Cost
impacts
can
only
be
assessed
when
something
is
known
about
the
operations
and
treatmentin
place
for
community
water
systemsCconditions
that
establish
the
baseline
costs
of
those
bearing
the
burden
of
future
regulations.
Economic
factors
cannot
be
adequately
considered
unless
the
agency
knows
something
about
water
system
economics.
The
issue
of
affordability
requires
additional
information
on
both
costs
and
the
financial
condition
of
community
water
systems.
Further,
the
1996
Amendments
have
added
new
dimensions
to
compliance
that
impose
additional
needs
for
information
on
the
operations
of
the
regulated
systems.
The
information
from
this
survey,
therefore,
is
essential
for
the
Agency
to
meet
its
statutory
obligations.

EPA
also
needs
this
data
collection
in
order
to
meet
its
regulatory
impact
analysis
obligations
under
Executive
Order
12866,
its
obligation
to
assess
and
mitigate
regulatory
impacts
under
the
Regulatory
Flexibility
Act
(
including
the
additional
requirements
of
the
Small
Business
Regulatory
Enforcement
Fairness
Act
of
1996,
SBREFA).
In
addition,
the
Unfunded
Mandates
Reform
Act
(
UMRA)
of
1995
requires
that
agencies
assess
the
impact
of
federal
regulatory
actions
on
State,
local,
and
Tribal
governments.
An
effective
analysis
of
incremental
costs
and
benefits,
as
required
of
Regulatory
Impact
Analyses
(
RIAs)
under
E.
O.
12866,
plus
other
economic
analyses
required
by
SBREFA
and
UMRA
must
begin
with
an
analysis
of
baseline
costs.
This
survey
will
provide
the
Agency
with
baseline
information
relating
to
the
physical
and
financial
characteristics
of
drinking
water
systems.
Such
information
provides
the
opportunity
to
evaluate
the
incremental
costs
of
new
regulations
as
well
as
to
evaluate
the
consequences
of
previous
actions.
For
example,
current
RIAs
are
unable
to
take
into
account
current
information
on
storage
and
distribution
costs
when
trying
to
model
the
likely
responses
of
a
utility
to
new
regulatory
requirements.
The
results
of
this
survey
will
allow
EPA
to
replace
assumptions
with
actual,
statistically
valid,
supporting
data
and
to
introduce
new
factors
relating
to
less
capital
intensive
treatment
alternatives.
3
Identifying
cost­
effective
regulatory
options
and
establishing
the
efficacy
of
subsequent
rules
will
be
immensely
complicated,
if
not
impossible,
without
accurate
baseline
information
to
be
supplied
by
the
survey.

When
implementing
regulations,
there
is
considerable
need
for
EPA
to
provide
additional
guidance
to
State
Public
Water
Supply
Supervision
(
PWSS)
Programs
and
regulated
community
water
systems.
To
better
design
such
guidance,
EPA
needs
to
know
the
operating
and
financial
characteristics
of
these
systems.

Finally,
the
1996
Amendments
to
the
Safe
Drinking
Water
Act
created
new,
preventive
programs
to
help
public
water
systems
provide
safe
drinking
water
to
their
customers.
One
of
the
most
notable
of
these
programs
is
Section
300g­
9,
"
Capacity
Development."
Under
this
Section,
States
must
have
the
"
legal
authority
or
other
means
to
ensure
that
all
new
community
water
systems
Y
demonstrate
technical,
managerial,
and
financial
capacity
with
respect
to
[
National
Primary
Drinking
Water
Regulations]."
States
also
need
to
have
a
"
capacity
development
strategy"
that
will
help
existing
water
systems
acquire
and
maintain
technical,
managerial,
and
financial
capacity.
The
provisions
of
Section
300g­
9
apply
primarily
to
small
water
systems,
and
the
information
on
operating
and
financial
characteristics
of
the
proposed
survey
represent
vital
background
data
for
the
implementation
of
Section
300g­
9.

A.
2.
b
Use/
Users
of
the
Data
The
Office
of
Ground
Water
and
Drinking
Water
(
OGWDW),
and
particularly
the
Standards
and
Risk
Management
Division
(
SRMD)
is
the
primary
user
of
the
data.
The
Office
uses
the
data
in
meeting
its
program
management
responsibilities
under
the
Safe
Drinking
Water
Act
Amendments
of
1996.
This
includes
taking
costs
and
economic
factors
into
consideration
where
required
by
statute
(
as
indicated
above)
and
in
meeting
the
agency's
responsibilities
under
Executive
Order
12866,
the
Regulatory
Flexibility
Act,
SBREFA,
and
UMRA,
as
noted
above.
Specifically,
staff
from
SRMD
will
use
the
data
in
analyses
and
models
which
are
used
to
support
calculations
of
the
national
costs
and
benefits
associated
with
proposed
drinking
water
regulatory
alternatives.

The
Implementation
and
Assistance
Division
(
IAD)
of
OGWDW
is
responsible
for
working
with
States
and
regulated
water
systems
to
implement
all
regulations.
To
achieve
their
mission,
staff
in
IAD
need
information
on
the
operating
and
financial
characteristics
of
water
systems.
IAD
also
is
responsible
for
implementation
of
Section
300g­
9,
"
Capacity
Development."
As
indicated
above,
the
information
on
financial
and
operating
characteristics
of
small
systems
that
will
be
a
product
of
this
survey
represent
essential
inputs
to
the
ongoing
work
in
Capacity
Development.

Data
collected
in
previous
surveys
have
been
used
by
other
program
offices
administering
the
Superfund
and
Resource
Conservation
and
Recovery
Act
(
RCRA)
programs.
Other
agency
users
would
include
the
Office
of
Policy
and
the
Office
of
Regional
Operations
and
State/
Local
Relations
in
the
Office
of
the
Administrator.
4
Data
collected
in
previous
surveys
have
also
found
uses
outside
of
the
Agency.
Past
users
have
included
the
Department
of
Agriculture's
Rural
Utilities
Service,
the
Department
of
the
Interior,
the
Department
of
Housing
and
Urban
Development,
the
U.
S.
Army
Corps
of
Engineers,
White
House
task
forces,
the
Federal
Emergency
Management
Agency,
public
interest
groups
and
many
private
companies
and
individuals.

A.
3.
NONDUPLICATION,
CONSULTATIONS,
AND
OTHER
COLLECTION
CRITERIA
The
following
sections
verify
and
affirm
that
this
information
collection
satisfies
OMB's
collection
guidelines,
has
public
support,
and
does
not
duplicate
another
collection.

A.
3.
a.
Nonduplication
EPA
has
searched
the
Federal
Information
Locator
System
(
FILS)
in
an
effort
to
ensure
nonduplication
of
the
data
collection
efforts.
To
the
best
of
the
Agency's
knowledge,
financial
and
operating
information
of
the
type
needed
are
not
available
from
any
sources
other
than
the
1995
Community
Water
Supply
Survey.
Since
this
survey
is
now
nearly
five
years
old
and
suffers
from
certain
data
quality
problems,
EPA
has
diminishing
confidence
in
its
reliability.
Also,
since
1995,
dramatic
changes
have
occurred
in
the
water
industry
and
its
regulatory
environment.
Specifically,
the
Safe
Drinking
Water
Act
was
reauthorized
in
1996,
the
first
time
in
a
decade.
As
a
consequence,
EPA
has
promulgated
a
significant
number
of
new
rules
that
may
have
resulted
in
significant
changes
to
the
operating
and
financial
characteristics
of
community
water
systems.

One
indicator
of
the
weakness
of
the
existing
CWSS
database
is
that
OGWDW
engineers
routinely
seek
other
sources
of
data
when
working
on
regulatory
development
activities.
While
this
results
primarily
from
the
new
analytic
requirements
of
the
1996
amendments,
SBREFA
etc.,
the
age
of
the
CWSS
data
also
is
a
factor.
One
source
that
is
used
rather
widely
is
WATER
STATS,
results
from
a
1998
survey
conducted
by
the
American
Water
Works
Association.

While
WATER
STATS
is
useful
for
a
few
questions,
it
also
has
its
weaknesses.
One
of
the
most
significant
weaknesses
is
that
there
are
very
few
small
system
respondents.
Indeed,
EPA
users
of
WATER
STATS
tend
to
use
it
only
for
requirements
that
will
apply
to
medium
and
large
systems.
In
other
words
for
data
on
small
systemsCthe
subject
of
many
RFA
analysesCWATER
STATS
cannot
help.
Second,
WATER
STATS
is
not,
nor
does
it
purport
to
be,
a
statistical
survey.
Therefore,
its
data
cannot
be
used
to
reliably
characterize
the
entire
regulated
industry.

Existing
studies
by
other
agencies
also
do
not
meet
EPA's
needs.
While
the
Census
of
Governments
and
Survey
of
Governments
contain
considerable
information
on
CWSs
owned
and
operated
by
counties,
municipalities,
and
special
districts,
their
scope
does
not
extend
to
privatelyowned
and
ancillary
systems.
Since
most
small
systems
are
privately
owned
(
and,
for
reasons
stated
previously,
small
systems
are
of
major
interest
to
the
Agency),
the
systems
covered
in
5
Census
studies
are
of
limited
usefulness
to
EPA.
Census
studies
also
typically
lack
details
on
operating
characteristics.

Information
about
the
financial
condition
of
some
CWSs
is
provided
by
financial
rating
services,
such
as
Dun
and
Bradstreet.
Like
the
Census,
the
rating
services
are
limited
only
to
financial
information
and
do
not
provide
data
on
operating
characteristics
of
importance
to
EPA.
In
addition,
systems
evaluated
by
such
services
are
not
a
statistical
sample.
Rather,
it
represents
the
active,
well­
managed
systems
that
could
realistically
seek
private­
sector
financing.
Omitted
from
such
reports
would
be
the
weaker
systems
that
would
likely
be
the
object
of
any
Federal
or
State
assistance.

Finally,
EPA
maintains
the
Safe
Drinking
Water
Information
System
(
SDWIS)
that
contains
information
on
the
operating
characteristics
and
compliance
records
of
all
public
water
suppliers.
However,
SDWIS
contains
no
financial
information
and
thus
does
not
meet
the
majority
of
Agency
objectives
in
conducting
this
survey.
It
will,
however,
be
possible
to
perform
regression
analyses
with
SDWIS
compliance
data
and
the
survey's
financial
and
operating
data,
to
explore
possible
causes
of
non­
compliance.

A.
3.
b.
Public
Notice
Required
Prior
to
ICR
Submission
to
OMB
The
announcement
of
the
public
comment
period
for
the
proposed
ICR
was
placed
in
the
Federal
Register
Tuesday,
February
15,
2000.
A
copy
of
the
announcement
is
in
Appendix
B.
No
comments
were
received.

A.
3.
c.
Consultations
In
the
development
of
the
survey
questionnaire,
OGWDW
consulted
with
Pepi
Lacayo
in
EPA's
Environmental
Information
Office
regarding
the
sampling
plan.
Lynn
Johnson
of
the
Environmental
Information
Office
reviewed
the
burden
analysis.

OGWDW
requested
comments
from
several
independent
reviewers.
OGWDW
consulted
with
Jeanne
Bailey
in
the
office
of
Regulatory
Affairs
at
the
American
Water
Works
Association
in
Washington,
DC.
Drafts
of
the
questionnaire
were
reviewed
by
Diane
Moles,
from
the
Iowa
Department
of
Natural
Resources,
in
Des
Moines,
IA,
and
James
K.
Cleland
of
the
Drinking
Water
and
Radiological
Protection
Division
of
the
Michigan
DEQ
in
Lansing,
MI.
OGWDW
also
consulted
with
Robert
W.
Mann
of
the
Water
Supply
Engineering
Bureau
of
the
State
of
New
Hampshire's
Department
of
Environmental
Services.

OGWDW
received
feedback
from
several
community
water
suppliers.
As
part
of
the
pre­
test
of
the
questionnaire
(
discussed
in
section
3.
a
of
part
B),
OGWDW
convened
a
focus
group
meeting
of
7
water
systems.
Participants
in
the
focus
group
included:
6
Community
Water
Supplier
CWS
Representative
Acton
Water
Supply
James
Deming
City
Of
Cambridge
Ed
Dowling
City
Of
Gloucester
Christine
Millhouse
Dover
Water
Department
Doug
Steele
Fitchburg
Water
Department
Judith
Judge
Pennichuck
Water
Works
Bernie
Rousseau
Town
Of
Needham
Carroll
Alwin
The
focus
group
reviewed
the
data
collection
instrument,
provided
feedback
on
its
design,
and
helped
OGWDW
gauge
the
level
of
effort
required
to
fill
out
the
questionnaire.

A.
3.
d.
Effects
of
Less
Frequent
Collection
The
information
in
this
survey
has
not
been
requested
since
1995.
As
mentioned
above,
some
of
the
information
from
the
1995
survey
suffers
from
problems
relating
to
both
its
timeliness
and
the
quality
and
precision
of
the
data
that
have
limited
its
utility.

To
the
extent
that
the
Agency
lacks
accurate,
up­
to­
date
information
on
the
operating
characteristics
of
community
water
systems,
the
regulatory
development
process
suffers.
Regulations
currently
in
process,
particularly
those
related
to
disinfection
and
disinfectant
byproducts
require
a
detailed
understanding
of
system
sources,
flows,
and
residence
time
in
various
parts
of
the
system.
Lack
of
accurate
information
could
lead
to
regulations
that
are
inconsistent
with
the
operational
realities
of
the
systems
being
regulated.
Information
from
this
survey
is
essential
for
realistic
policy
formulation.

The
information
on
financial
characteristics
of
CWSs
is
needed
to
meet
the
analytical
requirements
of
Executive
Order
12866
and
the
Regulatory
Flexibility
Act.
Old
or
inaccurate
financial
data
could
contribute
to
overly
burdensome
or
inadequately
protective
rulemaking.

A.
3.
e.
General
Guidelines
This
information
collection
complies
with
the
guidelines
in
the
Paperwork
Reduction
Act.
Specifically,
the
collection
does
not
require
water
systems
to:

$
Submit
regular
reports
to
EPA
$
Retain
any
records
for
more
than
three
years
$
Prepare
a
written
response
to
the
questionnaire
7
$
Maintain
or
provide
information
in
a
format
other
than
that
in
which
it
is
customarily
maintained
$
Submit
any
information
that
they
may
consider
to
be
confidential
$
Submit
more
than
one
original
document
This
information
collection:

$
Is
a
statistical
survey
designed
to
produce
data
that
can
be
generalized
to
the
universe
of
the
study
(
See
Part
B.
2)

$
Does
not
provide
remuneration
to
participants
$
Will
transcribe
information
collected
into
an
automated
form
$
Is
designed
particularly
with
small
entities
in
mind
(
See
Part
A.
4.
c)

$
Does
not
concern
grants
or
grantees
$
Is
voluntary
A.
3.
f.
Confidentiality
This
information
collection
does
not
require
the
respondent
to
disclose
any
confidential
or
sensitive
information.
There
were
no
claims
of
confidentiality
and
no
complaints
that
the
questions
were
sensitive
in
the
1986
CWSS.
There
were
a
few
concerns
expressed
during
the
1995
survey
by
an
investor­
owned
utility
that
did
not
want
to
provide
certain
types
of
financial
data.
Respondents,
however,
are
not
obliged
to
answer
these
strictly
voluntary
surveys
if
the
concern
should
arise,
and
the
1995
issue
was
resolved
by
treating
the
missing
data
as
item
nonresponse
Furthermore,
the
current
questionnaire
requests
less
detailed
financial
information
than
previous
community
water
system
surveys.

A.
3.
g.
Sensitive
Questions
The
questionnaires
do
not
ask
any
"
sensitive"
questions
pertaining
to
sexual
attitudes/
behavior
or
religious
beliefs.
8
A.
4.
THE
RESPONDENTS
AND
THE
INFORMATION
REQUESTED
A.
4.
a.
Respondents/
SIC
Codes
Respondents
to
this
survey
will
be
drawn
from
a
national
sample
of
community
water
systems.
A
community
water
system
(
CWS)
is
one
that
serves
at
least
15
connections
or
at
least
25
yearround
residents
(
40
CFR
141.2).
The
Standard
Industrial
Classification
(
SIC)
Code
for
investorowned
water
systems
is
4941,
and
for
publicly­
owned
water
systems
is
9511.
Some
community
water
suppliers
do
not
supply
water
as
their
primary
business.
These
businesses,
such
as
mobile
home
parks
(
SIC
6515),
apartment
buildings
(
SIC
6513),
condominium
and
homeowner
associations
(
SIC
8641),
and
nursing
homes
(
SIC
805)
sometimes
meet
the
definition
of
CWS
and
thus
may
also
be
sampled.

As
shown
by
Table
1­
1
below,
community
water
suppliers
represent
only
a
small
portion
of
all
public
water
systems.
Also
included
as
public
water
systems
are
Nontransient
Noncommunity
Water
Systems
(
NTNCWSs),
serving
at
least
25
of
the
same
people
at
least
six
months
per
year
(
such
as
schools,
factories,
and
hospitals),
and
Transient
Noncommunity
Water
Systems
(
TNCWSs),
serving
non­
residential
areas
(
such
as
campgrounds,
motels
and
gas
stations).

Table
A­
1.
Number
of
Water
Systems
Type
of
Water
Systems
Number
of
Water
Systems
CWS
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
53,540
NTNCWS
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
19,691
TNCWS
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
94,000
Because
NTNCWSs
and
TNCWSs
are
exceptionally
diverse
and
do
not
lend
themselves
to
statistical
analyses,
the
Agency
has
decided
to
exclude
these
systems
from
the
survey.
Since
virtually
all
of
the
NTNCWSs
and
TNCWSs
are
small
entities,
this
decision
will
also
reduce
the
data
collection
burden
on
small
entities.

A.
4.
b.
Information
Requested
The
information
that
respondents
are
asked
to
provide
for
this
survey
is
generally
maintained
and
reported
as
a
function
of
the
management
and
operation
of
the
water
system.
For
example,
as
part
of
State
oversight
of
the
drinking
water
program,
systems
generally
are
required
to
provide
basic
data
on
operations
in
order
to
obtain
or
renew
construction
and
operating
permits.
Systems,
therefore,
have
a
description
of
the
physical
plant
and
daily
operating
procedures,
including
information
on
source,
treatment,
production,
and
distribution.
Treatment
information
also
may
be
required
by
State
or
Federal
regulatory
personnel
to
demonstrate
a
system's
compliance
with
9
regulatory
requirements.
Finally,
information
on
revenues,
expenses,
and
debt
are
basic
accounting
information
that
reasonably
could
be
expected
of
any
business.
Also,
because
many
community
water
systems
are
regulated
by
State
public
utility
commissions,
they
are
required
to
provide
financial
information
in
the
form
of
annual
financial
reports
describing
all
revenues,
expenses,
assets
and
liabilities.

A.
4.
b.
1.
Data
Items
This
section
provides
justification
for
each
of
the
data
items
requested
in
this
survey.
Separate
questionnaires
were
designed
for
small,
medium,
and
large
systems
(
serving
25
B
500,000
customers),
and
very
large
systems
(
serving
over
500,000
customers).
Although
there
are
few
very
large
systems,
they
supply
water
to
the
majority
of
customers
and
bear
most
of
the
potential
burden
associated
with
regulations.
Therefore,
the
questionnaire
for
very
large
systems
requests
some
information
regarding
production
and
treatment
not
asked
of
smaller
systems.
Copies
of
the
questionnaires
are
in
Appendix
C.

Question
1
asks
for
information
on
potential
contacts
in
the
community
water
systems
who
might
be
able
to
answer
questions
that
might
arise
during
the
survey.
Such
information
is
an
integral
part
of
our
data
collection
methodology
(
described
below)
that
is
designed
to
reduce
burden
on
potential
respondents.
We
have
asked
for
a
telephone
number,
fax
number,
and
e­
mail
address
to
add
flexibility
to
our
communications
process.

Question
2
requests
information
on
the
reporting
period
for
which
data
are
being
provided.
This
is
necessary
in
order
to
ensure
that
cross­
system
analyses
are
not
biased
by
data
from
different
time
periods.
During
data
analysis,
financial
information
will
all
be
converted
to
July
2000
dollars
for
all
systems.

Part
I:
Operating
Characteristics
Questions
3,
4,
and
5
ask
systems
to
classify
the
ownership
of
the
system.
This
information
will
allow
EPA
to
(
1)
confirm
the
ownership
information
in
SDWIS,
(
2)
distinguish
ancillary
systems
from
other
private
systems,
and
(
3)
evaluate
the
operating
and
financial
data
provided
in
subsequent
sections
of
the
survey.
Because
many
small
water
systems
provide
water
as
an
ancillary
but
necessary
part
of
another
business,
this
information
is
essential
to
analyze
the
impact
of
rules
and
regulations
on
small
systems.

Information
about
the
operating
characteristics
of
water
systems
is
needed
to
assist
EPA's
Office
of
Ground
Water
and
Drinking
Water
in
fulfilling
statutory
requirements
under
SDWA
and
the
Regulatory
Flexibility
Act,
as
well
as
requirements
of
Executive
Order
12866.
Information
on
operating
characteristics
of
water
systems
is
a
key
component
for
designing,
assessing
the
impacts
of,
and
implementing
Agency
programs.
Because
of
the
diversity
in
the
water
supply
industry,
information
on
system
operating
characteristics
gives
EPA
a
basis
for
developing
more
accurate
assessments
of
the
feasibility
of
treatment
alternatives,
and
the
costs
and
benefits
of
federal
10
regulatory
efforts
on
the
regulated
utilities
and
impacted
consumers.
This
information
also
enables
the
Agency
to
assess
the
differential
impact
of
regulations
across
different
types
of
systems.
This
information
is
needed
to
meet
the
standard­
setting
requirements
of
Section
104
of
the
1996
SDWA
Amendments.
The
information
also
is
useful
in
developing
and
targeting
technical
assistance
programs,
and
in
assisting
the
Agency
in
identifying
the
types
of
systems
that
would
benefit
from
technical
training
and
guidance.

Operating
information
acquired
through
this
survey
also
will
be
used
to
verify
data
in
SDWIS
and
to
analyze
sources
of
non­
compliance
by
comparing
data
collected
with
information
in
SDWIS.

In
contrast
with
earlier
surveys,
this
questionnaire
seeks
to
obtain
comprehensive
information
on
all
sources,
all
treatment,
all
production,
and
all
entry
points
to
the
distribution
system.
The
need
for
this
comprehensive
approach
arose
for
two
reasons.
First,
it
became
clear
from
analyses
of
earlier
surveys,
that
the
Agency's
failure
to
get
such
comprehensive
pictures
of
operations
made
it
very
difficult
for
the
Agency
to
assess
the
impacts
of
alternative
regulatory
approaches.
Second,
the
growing
importance
of
the
risk­
risk
tradeoff
between
disinfection
and
disinfectant
by­
products
requires
that
the
Agency
have
a
more
detailed
understanding
of
the
entire
production
process.
For
example,
the
Agency
needs
to
know
when
disinfection
is
introduced,
or
what
is
the
retention
time
of
treated
water
in
various
parts
of
the
system.

For
very
large
systems,
information
about
treatment
facility
design
will
provide
EPA
with
the
data
to
more
accurately
describe
the
physical
configuration
of
water
systems
according
to
the
site
plan,
treatment
flow
charts,
production
capacity,
and
entry
point
locations.
The
ability
to
map
well
and
surface
source
locations
to
other
data
sources
provides
EPA
with
the
capability
to
develop
estimates
of
the
number
of
systems
and
water
sources
at
risk
to
contamination.
This
information
is
important
in
evaluating
alternative
treatment
technologies,
preparing
cost
analyses,
occurrence
analyses,
RIAs,
affordability
determinations,
and
technical
guidance.

Information
from
previous
surveys
has
proven
to
be
inadequate
for
current
rules.
During
a
series
of
meetings
held
during
the
design
phase
of
this
survey,
it
became
clear
that
an
understanding
of
the
treatment
in
place
required
a
comprehensive
approach
that
provided
information
on
all
sources
and
linked
the
flows
from
all
sources
to
all
treatment
plants.

The
information
requested
in
Question
6
is
total
production
flows
and
their
distribution
to
different
customer
types.
This
information
is
critical
for
understanding
the
cost
impacts
of
regulations
on
household
consumers
and
other
water
system
customers.

Question
7
on
water
sources
is
critical
because
of
the
different
regulatory
programs
and
options
that
may
apply
only
to
water
of
a
specific
source
type.
For
example,
many
of
the
current
rules
on
microbials
were
designed
specifically
for
systems
whose
source
water
came
from
surface
water
sources.
Also,
very
large
water
systems
typically
have
mixed
water
sources.
The
data
will
support
Agency
occurrence
analyses,
since
vulnerability
to
certain
contaminants
is
related
to
the
type
of
water
source.
Along
with
question
6,
this
question
also
is
critical
to
determine
which
11
systems
are
purchasing
and
wholesaling
water.
These
data
will
be
used
in
the
cost
analyses
which
support
regulation
development.

Question
8
provides
information
necessary
for
understanding
whether
public
water
supplies
are
operating
at
or
near
design
capacity.
Information
provided
in
response
to
this
question
can
influence
the
feasibility
of
certain
regulatory
options.

Questions
9
and
10
seek
information
on
the
number
of,
and
flow
characteristics
of,
individual
intakes
and
treatment
plants
at
a
utility.
EPA
has
found
it
difficult
to
reliably
characterize
the
impacts
of
regulations
without
a
clear
understanding
of
this
intake­
specific
and
plant­
level
information.
Indeed,
the
Agency
has
been
hindered
in
past
regulatory
development
efforts
by
having
only
aggregate
utility­
level
data.
Average
flow,
peak
daily
production,
design
flow,
and,
in
the
case
of
very
large
ground
water
systems,
well
depth
will
help
complete
a
characterization
of
the
system
by
identifying
the
number
of
intakes
and
wells
and
each
intake
and
well's
contribution
to
the
total
system
volume.
These
data
will
allow
the
Agency
to
understand
the
size
of
the
system
in
order
to
evaluate
rate
structures
and
identify
relationships
between
cost
and
volume
of
water.

Similarly,
Questions
11
and
12
provide
critical
plant­
level
information
necessary
for
reliably
characterizing
the
feasibility
of
treatment
alternatives.
The
information
from
these
questions
will
enable
the
Agency
to
estimate
the
range
of
costs
and
contaminant
removal
potential
of
those
alternatives
in
relation
to
the
flows
that
would
be
treated
at
the
individual
plant
level
within
utilities
having
multiple
plants.

Very
large
systems
will
be
asked
to
provide
additional
details
regarding
treatment.
Question
13A
and
B
of
the
very
large
system
questionnaire
requests
that
systems
provide
raw
water
and
posttreatment
concentrations
for
the
following
contaminants:
Arsenic,
Radon,
Methyl­
t­
butyl
ether
(
MTBE),
Atrazine,
Metolachlor,
Boron,
2,4­
D,
Glyphosate,
and
Simazine.
The
Agency
realizes
that
the
water
systems
may
not
have
concentration
data
for
all
entry
points;
therefore,
the
questions
request
available
data.
The
Agency
will
use
these
data
to
assist
in
performing
occurrence
analyses,
treatment
evaluations,
and
affordability
determinations
used
for
regulation
development.
This
type
of
in­
depth
analysis
is
feasible
for
very
large
systems
because
of
their
small
number;
at
the
same
time,
it
is
important
because
these
systems
supply
much
of
the
nation's
drinking
water.

Many
of
the
possible
alternative
sources
of
data
for
contaminants,
such
as
the
National
Drinking
Water
Contaminant
Occurrence
Database
(
NCOD)
and
SDWIS,
do
not
contain
complete
data
on
regulated
or
other
contaminants
of
concern.
For
example,
SDWIS
only
contains
occurrence
data
for
public
water
systems
with
MCL
violations.
Also,
public
water
systems
are
not
required
to
submit
contaminant
occurrence
data
to
the
NCOD.
As
a
result
the,
databases
currently
used
may
have
substantial
gaps
in
occurrence
data;
therefore,
Question
13
is
the
only
source
of
these
data
that
will
allow
the
Agency
to
perform
accurate
analyses
for
regulation
development.
12
These
compounds
were
selected
because
of
their
importance
to
the
agency
due
to
their
effects
on
public
health.
Five
of
the
contaminants
­
arsenic,
atrazine,
2,4­
D,
glyphosate,
and
simazine
­
are
currently
regulated.
The
SDWA
Amendments
of
1996
require
the
Agency
to
review
regulated
contaminants
every
six
years
to
determine
if
further
regulatory
action
is
needed.
If
further
regulatory
action
is
warranted,
health
assessments,
occurrence
analyses,
and
affordability
determinations
will
have
to
be
evaluated.
All
of
these
regulated
contaminants,
with
the
exception
of
arsenic,
will
need
to
be
conducted.
Arsenic
is
under
its
own
review
schedule
and
SDWA
requires
that
regulations
be
promulgated
by
January
2001.
Radon
is
also
under
its
own
review
schedule
and
SDWA
requires
that
regulations
be
promulgate
by
August
2000.

Three
of
the
contaminants
­
MTBE,
metolachlor,
and
boron
­
are
on
the
Contaminant
Candidate
List
(
CCL).
Boron
and
metolachlor
are
listed
in
the
regulatory
determination
priority
category
on
the
CCL,
and
MTBE
is
listed
on
the
CCL
as
an
occurrence
priority.
MTBE
also
is
listed
in
the
Unregulated
Contaminant
Monitoring
rule.
These
contaminants
are
of
concern
because
additional
occurrence
and
concentration
data
will
assist
with
regulatory
determinations.

Question
14
addresses
residuals
management,
an
increasingly
important
part
of
the
cost
of
regulations.
Each
RIA
must
address
the
cost
of
residuals
management,
and
the
Agency
currently
does
not
have
an
adequate
baseline
on
types
of
residuals
management
being
used.

Question
15
addresses
the
question
of
the
level
of
process
monitoring
and
process
control
in
the
treatment
plant,
either
through
SCADA
or
through
the
presence
of
on­
site
treatment
plant
operators.
This
becomes
an
important
issue
for
those
regulatory
alternatives
that
might
require
24­
hour
process
monitoring
and
control.
If
a
small
percentage
of
systems
have
this
level
of
monitoring
and
control,
a
regulatory
option
must
consider
the
cost
to
be
borne
by
systems
in
order
to
ensure
full­
time
oversight.

Question
16
is
the
survey's
only
question
on
storage.
The
focus
of
the
question
is
on
the
volume
of
treated
storage
in
the
system.
This
information
is
vital
to
an
analysis
of
regulatory
options
in
the
MDBP
cluster
of
rules.
The
locus
of
disinfection
and
the
likely
contact
time
with
the
disinfectant
are
determinants
of
the
potential
risk
posed
by
disinfectant
by­
products.

Question
17
addresses
the
question
of
the
cost
associated
with
replacement
of
aging
distribution
system
infrastructure.
Critics
of
proposed
regulations
have
argued
that
community
water
systems
face
significant
long­
term
costs
associated
with
distribution
system
replacement.
The
Agency
will
use
this
information
to
develop
its
own
assessment
of
the
size
of
this
future
cost.

Question
18
gathers
information
on
the
customer
base
of
the
water
system,
including
information
on
seasonal
populations
or
events
that
might
affect
production.
This
information
is
used
in
conjunction
with
the
information
requested
in
Question
6
to
understand
the
benefits
and
per
capita
cost
impacts
of
regulatory
alternatives.
13
Question
19
is
a
request
for
information
about
the
service
area
of
the
system.
In
past
surveys,
this
was
approximated
by
information
on
zip
codes
of
customers.
Zip
codes,
however,
cannot
be
efficiently
cross­
linked
to
census
tracts.
Asking
for
a
drawing
of
the
service
area
will
enable
us
to
know
which
census
tracts
are
in
the
service
area.
This
question
is
important
to
an
assessment
of
consumer
affordability
of
costs
associated
with
rules.
EPA
analysts
will
be
able
to
link
information
from
the
Census
of
Population
directly
to
the
CWSS
database.
We
then
will
be
able
to
draw
conclusions
about
the
socio­
economic
characteristics
of
the
populations
served
by
a
random
sample
of
CWSs.

Questions
20
through
23
are
new
in
this
survey.
They
relate
to
the
issue
of
cross­
connection
control
and
backflow
prevention.
OGWDW
is
considering
whether
to
issue
national
regulations
in
this
area
that
traditionally
has
been
left
to
States,
local
governments,
and
water
systems.
These
questions
will
provide
information
on
the
status
of
cross­
connection
control
programs
for
a
national
probability
sample
of
systems,
thereby
creating
information
on
the
"
baseline"
in
this
area
of
interest.

Part
II
Financial
Characteristics
An
essential
question
in
any
regulatory
impact
analysis
is
whether
the
regulated
community
can
afford
to
implement
proposed
regulations.
This
question
requires
an
analysis
of
the
financial
impacts
of
the
regulation
on
both
the
water
system
and
its
consumers.
The
financial
questions
ask
basic
information
that
is
essential
to
this
analysis.

Questions
24,
25,
and
28
ask
for
revenues
and
expenses,
the
essential
elements
from
any
operating
statement
that
would
enable
the
Agency
to
assess
the
financial
condition
of
the
system.
This
basic
information
has
been
collected
in
all
previous
versions
of
the
CWSS,
and
these
data
form
an
important
part
of
the
financial
baseline
for
RIAs.

Question
26
asks
for
the
cost
of
water
per
household.
The
RIA
must
assess
how
the
capital
and
operating
costs
of
any
proposed
regulation
would
impact
the
consumer.
Knowing
the
baseline
for
a
sample
of
systems
will
create
the
new
baseline
for
future
analyses.
Question
27
asks
whether
there
are
forms
of
rate
relief
for
customers
with
low
or
fixed
incomes.

Question
29
gathers
information
on
capital
investments
and
the
source
of
funds
for
such
investments.
Part
of
the
RIA
process
involves
estimation
of
the
cost
of
capital
for
new
investment
required
by
regulations.
These
questions
provide
the
baseline
information
that
can
be
used
to
estimate
the
cost
of
capital.

A.
4.
b.
2.
Respondent
Activities
Respondent
activities
will
vary
by
system
size.
For
small
systems
(
serving
populations
of
fewer
than
3,300),
our
data
collection
approach
involves
a
site
visit
by
an
experienced
water
system
engineer.
The
site
visit
staff
will
make
a
physical
inspection
of
the
physical
plant
in
the
system
and
14
answer
the
questions
about
production,
treatment,
storage,
and
distribution.
The
respondent
then
will
be
asked
to
answer
questions
20
through
23
(
cross­
connection
control).
The
respondent
also
will
be
asked
to
provide
the
information
necessary
to
answer
the
financial
questions.
For
example,
if
the
respondent
has
a
financial
statement,
that
should
be
sufficient
for
most
of
the
questions.
For
those
questions
where
there
is
no
available
data,
respondents
will
be
asked
to
provide
estimates.

Systems
serving
populations
over
3,300
will
be
asked
to
fill
out
the
questionnaire.
Systems
may
respond
to
questions
by
attaching
schematics,
diagrams,
or
reports
when
possible.
Systems
also
will
be
asked
to
submit
a
diagram
of
the
system,
showing
flows
from
source
to
distribution
system.
This
is
similar
to
the
diagram
on
page
4
of
the
draft
questionnaire.
They
also
will
be
asked
to
provide
flow
charts
of
their
treatment
facilities.
Very
large
systems
will
be
asked
to
submit
site
plans
of
their
treatment
facilities
as
well.
Finally,
we
will
request
the
system's
most
recent
financial
statement.
Based
on
our
experience,
most
medium,
large,
and
very
large
systems
have
financial
statements
prepared
by
professionals.
The
larger
the
system,
the
more
likely
that
these
statements
have
also
been
audited.

A.
5.
THE
INFORMATION
COLLECTED
B
AGENCY
ACTIVITIES,
COLLECTION
METHODOLOGY,
AND
INFORMATION
MANAGEMENT
The
following
sections
describe
Agency
activities
related
to
analyzing,
maintaining,
and
distributing
the
information
collected.
The
primary
activities
associated
with
this
collection
will
be
performed
by
a
contractor
hired
by
the
Agency
to
develop
the
collection
methodology
and
to
collect
and
analyze
the
data.

A.
5.
a.
Agency
Activities
The
US
EPA
will
be
involved
in
the
following
activities:

$
providing
guidance
on
questionnaire
design
and
information
collection;

$
reviewing
requests
for
confidentiality
and
providing
appropriate
protections;

$
answering
questions
from
respondents
regarding
the
purpose
and
use
of
the
information
gathered;

$
distributing
the
information;
and
$
conducting
additional
analyses
of
the
data,
as
needed.

Upon
completion
of
the
collection,
review,
and
initial
analysis
of
the
survey
data,
a
database
will
be
developed
to
sort
the
raw
data
for
easy
access
and
subsequent
analysis
by
EPA
personnel.
The
Agency
will
receive
an
electronic
copy
of
this
database.
In
addition,
the
Agency
will
receive
a
15
summary
report
providing
descriptive
information
on
various
financial
and
operational
characteristics
of
water
systems
resulting
from
this
survey.

Additional
Agency
activities
resulting
from
this
collection
are
assumed
to
be
part
of
the
overall
activities
in
support
of
the
OGWDW
ICR
regulatory
development
program
pursuant
to
the
SDWA.
Burdens
associated
with
specific
regulations
and
the
Public
Water
System
Supervision
(
PWSS)
Program
are
estimated
separately
in
other
ICRs.

A.
5.
b
Collection
Methodology
and
Management
The
collection
methodology
proposed
by
the
Agency
will
vary
by
system
size.
For
the
smallest
systems
(
those
serving
populations
of
3,300
or
less),
we
propose
to
have
all
information
collected
by
senior
engineers
employed
by
the
contractor.
These
engineers
will
make
on­
site
visits
to
all
systems
in
this
size
category.
The
collection
methodology
is
identical
to
that
which
has
been
used
successfully
in
the
1995
and
1999
Drinking
Water
Infrastructure
Needs
Survey.
In
both
surveys,
the
quality
of
information
collected
was
high,
and
response
rates
exceeded
99
percent.
For
more
information
on
the
application
of
this
methodology
to
the
Needs
Surveys,
see
"
Information
Collection
Request
for
the
1999
Drinking
Water
Infrastructure
Needs
Survey,"
July
28,
1998.

As
far
as
the
types
of
data
collected,
the
only
difference
between
the
CWSS
and
the
Needs
Surveys
is
that
the
CWSS
asks
for
the
collection
of
some
financial
information,
while
the
Needs
Surveys
focused
exclusively
on
infrastructure.
(
From
the
standpoint
of
purpose
however,
the
two
surveys
are
very
different.
The
drinking
water
infrastructure
needs
survey
seeks
estimates
of
future
capital
needs.
The
CWSS
seeks
data
on
current
operating
and
financial
characteristics.)
To
ensure
the
quality
of
data
collection,
the
engineers
proposed
for
the
field
data
collection
will
be
trained
in
basic
accounting
principles
and
procedures
to
be
used
in
the
collection
of
financial
data.

For
systems
serving
populations
over
3,300,
the
Agency
is
proposing
the
use
of
a
mail
survey,
with
telephone
follow­
up.
Questionnaires
will
be
mailed
to
a
random
sample
of
water
suppliers,
who
will
be
asked
to
fill
out
the
questionnaire
and
return
it
to
EPA.
To
assist
systems
in
filling
out
the
questionnaire,
each
potential
respondent
will
be
assigned
an
analyst
who
will
work
with
the
system
throughout
the
survey
and
will
be
able
to
answer
all
technical
questions.
Each
potential
respondent
will
be
contacted
by
the
analyst
assigned
to
it
to
confirm
the
receipt
of
the
survey,
explain
the
questionnaire,
and
to
respond
to
the
system's
questions.
Each
system
also
will
receive
at
least
one
additional
follow­
up
phone
call.
Systems
also
may
contact
EPA
contractor
staff
through
a
dedicated
toll­
free
telephone
number.

In
addition
to
filling
out
the
questionnaire,
very
large
systems
will
be
asked
to
provide
the
following
documentation:

$
a
diagram
of
the
system,
showing
flows
from
source
to
distribution;

$
submit
site
plans
and
flow
charts
of
the
treatment
facilities;
and
16
$
a
current
financial
statement.

Medium
and
large
systems
also
may
provide
this
documentation.
The
focus
group
participants
(
listed
in
section
A.
3.
c,
above)
indicated
that,
for
some
questions,
they
would
prefer
to
provide
documentation
that
provides
the
information
requested
rather
than
fill
out
that
part
of
the
questionnaire.
Therefore,
when
a
question
can
be
answered
by
attaching
diagrams,
charts,
or
financial
or
other
reports
that
contain
the
information
requested,
systems
will
be
given
the
option
of
attaching
the
documents
in
lieu
of
filling
out
that
question.
Small
systems
will
be
visited
by
contractor
staff,
who
will
draw
diagrams
and
schematics
as
needed;
small
systems
also
may
provide
additional
documentation
to
respond
to
questions
as
appropriate.

Any
documentation
provided
will
be
used
to
validate
the
information
provided
through
the
questionnaire
and
to
create
in­
depth
profiles.
All
documents
submitted
will
become
an
integral
part
of
the
completed
questionnaire
and
survey
record
for
review
by
EPA
staff.

The
data
collection
method
proposed
for
systems
serving
populations
greater
than
3,300
was
pre­
tested
and
will
be
pilot­
tested
prior
to
its
use.

The
pre­
test
of
the
data
collection
instrument
consisted
of
seven
systems,
of
different
ownership,
sizes
and
water
source
types.
Since
we
have
reliable
information
on
the
general
approach
for
small
systems,
the
pre­
test
of
our
method
focused
on
systems
serving
populations
greater
than
3,300.
Once
the
survey
is
approved
by
EPA
and
OMB,
a
pilot
test
of
up
to
50
representative
systems
will
be
conducted
before
conducting
the
full­
scale
survey.
The
respondents
will
be
a
representative
sample
of
systems.
(
See
Section
B.
2
for
details.)
The
completed
questionnaires
will
be
collected
and
tracked
through
receipt,
data
entry,
and
data
cleaning
steps,
tabulated,
and
returned
to
OGWDW.
OGWDW
will
check
the
data
and
maintain
it
as
a
datafile
for
Agency
analysis.
The
contractor
will
provide
OGWDW
with
a
description
of
the
database
and
how
to
use
it.

Data
quality
will
be
assured
by
implementing
the
following
procedures
throughout
the
collection
and
processing
phases
of
the
survey:

Selection
of
Contractor
Personnel.
The
Cadmus
Group,
Inc.
has
been
responsible
for
several
of
the
largest
surveys
of
public
water
supplies
(
e.
g.,
the
1995
and
1999
Needs
Surveys).
Central
to
EPA's
approach
to
these
surveys
has
been
our
reliance
on
experienced
water
system
professionals
for
data
collection.
Whether
they
are
conducting
on­
site
data
collection
or
telephone
follow­
up,
their
personnel
thoroughly
understand
water
supply.
They
have
worked
in
the
industry
for
many
years.
They
can
speak
the
language,
ask
the
right
questions,
and
properly
interpret
responses.

Training.
This
is
one
of
the
most
important
steps
in
quality
assurance.
It
is
particularly
important
when
we
rely
heavily
on
the
judgment
of
a
large
cadre
of
trained
professionals
working
independently
(
as
will
be
the
case
for
small
systems).
The
factor
which
reduces
17
the
likelihood
of
errors
and
increases
the
identification
of
those
that
do
occur
is
a
welltrained
staff
that
has
a
common
and
thorough
understanding
of
all
aspects
of
the
survey
B
the
questionnaires,
the
data
to
be
collected,
and
the
ultimate
uses
of
these
data.
The
training
will
include
a
detailed
review
of
the
coding
guide.

Quality
Assurance
of
Data
Collection.
The
engineers
and
accountants
working
on
this
project
will
be
supervised
by
a
senior­
level
Data
Collection
Manager.
The
Manager
will
review
the
first
25
questionnaires
submitted
by
each
person
working
on
the
project.
This
will
enable
the
Manager
to
perform
a
quality
assurance
process
to
ensure
that
all
personnel
are
fully
trained
and
using
identical
assumptions
and
procedures.

Furthermore,
the
schematics,
flow
charts,
and
financial
reports
submitted
by
each
system
will
be
used
to
validate
the
systems'
responses
to
the
questionnaire.

Documentation.
As
questionnaires
are
completed
and
submitted
by
contractor
personnel,
these
personnel
will
be
asked
to
submit
documentation
to
support
the
conclusions
in
their
questionnaires.
This
documentation
should
be
sufficient
to
enable
the
Data
Collection
Manager
to
review
the
questionnaire
and
understand
how
the
personnel
reached
their
conclusions.

Receipt
Control.
The
primary
objective
of
the
receipt
control
system
will
be
to
ensure
that
completed
questionnaires
are
logged
in
promptly
and
given
proper
custody.
A
second
objective
is
to
monitor
cumulative
receipts
to
identify
potential
problems
with
the
response
rate
for
which
action
would
be
appropriate.
Data
related
to
the
case
identification
and
its
disposition
code
will
be
given
scan
edit
promptly
so
that
forms
received
can
be
moved
into
the
data
preparation
process
as
rapidly
as
feasible.
Bar
codes
will
be
used
to
expedite
the
process,
minimize
errors
in
respondent
identification
and
avoid
unnecessary
following
after
the
form
is
returned.

Data
Entry.
Verification
will
be
100
percent.
We
feel
that
the
best
approach
to
keying
accuracy
is
careful
design
of
instrument
layout
and
well
trained
personnel.
We
will
use
100
percent
independent
key
verification
to
uncover
inevitable
errors.
The
second
(
more
senior)
key
operator
will
resolve
discrepancies.

Although
the
survey
is
designed
to
minimize
coding
as
much
as
possible,
recoding
will
be
done
to
provide
a
measure
of
the
degree
of
inter­
coder
reliability.
In
such
cases,
a
five
percent
sample
of
forms
will
be
duplicated
and
sent
to
independent
coders
before
coding.
Ordinarily,
manually­
coded
data
items
will
receive
a
100
percent
verification
of
the
first
20
cases
coded
by
each
coder
and
a
10
percent
sample
thereafter.
Error
rates
will
be
used
as
a
criterion
for
release
or
retraining.

Data
Edit
and
Imputation.
Data
edits
will
be
developed
jointly
by
EPA,
Cadmus,
and
the
survey
subcontractor,
Abt
Associates
Inc.
Edits
will
specify
when
respondents
are
to
18
be
followed
up
to
resolve
unlikely
or
inconsistent
responses.
EPA
will
determine
which
questions
contain
information
that
is
critical
for
conducting
subsequent
analyses
in
support
of
regulatory
development
and
implementation
efforts.
Responses
to
these
questions
will
receive
additional
review
by
technical
experts.
The
review
will
focus
on
determining
whether
the
responses
to
these
questions
are
consistent
with
each
other
and
to
responses
to
other
questions.

The
questionnaires
will
be
subjected
to
100
percent
editing
review.
The
process
will
check
skip
patterns,
standardize
the
recording
of
quantitative
data,
and
identify
any
potential
problems.
Protocols
will
guide
the
data
preparation
staff;
any
changes
to
responses
will
be
documented
and
logged.

General
computer
edit
packages
that
provide
for
parameters
to
be
specified
for
individual
surveys
are
useful
for
improving
productivity.
Abt
Associates
Inc.
routinely
uses
several
such
packages
for
its
surveys.
Data
validation
checks
will
include
distribution
frequencies
for
categorical
and
continuous
variables,
univariates
for
each
continuous
variable,
itemspecific
cross
tabulations
of
categorical
variables,
item­
specific
cross­
univariates
of
continuous
data,
and
item­
specific
logic
edits.

Missing
items
will
require
imputation.
Abt
Associates
Inc.
routinely
uses
imputation
methods
such
as
cell
means,
regression,
and
hot
deck
to
supply
imputed
values
for
missing
items.
After
analyzing
the
edited
data
file,
Abt
Associates
will
prepare
an
imputation
plan
for
review
by
EPA.
After
imputation
is
complete,
the
data
file
will
be
re­
edited
to
ensure
that
imputed
values
meet
edit
requirements.

Monitoring.
A
routine
component
of
Abt
Associate
Inc.'
s
quality
control
effort
is
monitoring
its
staff
performance
and
reporting
on
data
quality
and
system
performance.
Recognizing
that
every
system
has
inherent
variability,
these
monitoring
activities
will
seek
to
uncover
unexpected
variations
having
assignable
causes.
Also,
they
will
provide
a
baseline
for
future
guidance.

Data
Processing.
Once
the
reviewed,
edited,
and
validated
database
is
prepared,
several
data
processing
steps
will
create
files
suitable
for
analysis
and
tabulations.
These
steps
include
devising
rules
for
handling
missing
data,
creating
derived
variables
from
the
survey
data,
and
attaching
sample
weights
to
the
analytical
file.
Detailed
specifications
will
guide
each
step,
and
each
step
will
be
documented.
Version
control
will
be
maintained
for
all
computer
programs
and
for
each
interim
stage
of
all
data
files.
19
A.
5.
c.
Small
Entity
Flexibility
EPA
is
proposing
a
major
change
in
the
CWSS
designed
to
reduce
the
data
collection
burden
on
small
entities.
Specifically,
we
have
proposed
for
small
community
water
systems
that
the
data
be
collected
by
professional
water
supply
engineers
employed
by
the
contractor.
The
principal
method
used
by
the
contractor
when
on­
site
will
be
a
physical
inspection
of
the
water
system's
plant
and
equipment.
This
exercise
imposes
no
burden
on
the
small
system
owner
and
operator.
Therefore,
the
only
burden
anticipated
for
small
entities
is
that
associated
with
providing
small
amounts
of
information
that
cannot
be
supplied
through
the
physical
inspection.
These
will
include
location
of
financial
information
(
if
any)
and
giving
oral
answers
to
questions
posed
by
the
site
engineer.

This
method
has
been
used
in
both
the
1995
and
1999
Drinking
Water
Infrastructure
Needs
Surveys.
In
both
of
these
surveys,
it
was
credited
with
substantially
increasing
small
entity
flexibility.

A.
5.
d.
Collection
Schedule
The
following
schedule
assumes
OMB
clearance
for
this
collection
will
be
obtained
by
November
6,
2000.
For
each
task,
we
show
the
date
by
which
the
task
will
be
completed.

Task
Date
to
be
Completed
Design
Questionnaires
and
Sampling
Plan
May
2000
Pretest
Questionnaires
July
2000
Do
Pilot
Test
December
2000
Draw
Sample
and
Begin
Full
Survey
December
2000
End
Data
Collection
July
2001
Submit
Draft
Report
November
2001
Submit
Final
Report
December
2001
A.
6
ESTIMATING
THE
BURDEN
AND
COST
OF
THE
COLLECTION
A.
6.
a.
Estimating
Respondent
Burden
Respondent
cost
estimates
are
based
on
separate
estimates
for
systems
with
service
populations
of
3,300
and
below,
those
with
service
populations
of
3,301
to
500,000,
and
those
with
service
populations
over
500,000.
As
mentioned
above,
our
data
collection
methods
will
be
different
for
small
systems.
The
questionnaire
for
very
large
systems
is
larger
than
the
questionnaire
for
small,
20
medium,
and
large
systems,
and
the
complexity
of
their
systems
may
require
additional
time
to
respond
to
the
survey.
This
will
result
in
different
levels
of
burden.
To
the
extent
possible,
the
current
estimates
are
based
on
the
pre­
test
and
the
experience
of
The
Cadmus
Group,
Inc.
with
similar
surveys
using
the
same
methodologies
for
the
same
respondents.
These
include
the
1995
and
1999
Surveys
of
Drinking
Water
Infrastructure
Needs.

For
small
systems
(
serving
populations
of
up
to
3,300),
the
most
likely
respondent
will
be
the
system
operator.
For
financial
questions,
particularly
for
systems
with
service
populations
larger
than
1,000,
the
operator
may
need
to
consult
with
a
clerical
person
who
handles
financial
records.
For
systems
serving
populations
greater
than
3,300,
the
primary
respondent
will
be
the
system
operator,
or
system
engineer.
The
request
for
financial
information
will
be
referred
to
the
accounting
department.
As
with
small
systems,
it
usually
can
be
handled
by
a
clerk
or
bookkeeper
in
the
accounting
department.
EPA
assumes
that
the
average
hourly
rate
for
respondents
in
systems
serving
populations
greater
than
3,300
will
be
$
28,
and
the
hourly
rate
for
systems
serving
populations
smaller
than
3,300
will
be
$
14.50.
These
are
the
rates
used
in
the
ICR
for
the
1999
Drinking
Water
Infrastructure
Needs
Survey.
They
also
are
consistent
with
rates
used
in
other
drinking
water
ICRs
associated
with
proposed
regulations.
These
are
conservative
estimates.

The
average
amount
of
time
required
for
a
respondent
in
a
system
serving
populations
of
3,300
or
fewer
is
30
minutes.
While
our
site
visit
personnel
may
be
on­
site
for
a
longer
time
(
an
hour
or
more),
much
of
that
time
is
spent
conducting
a
physical
inspection
of
the
system
rather
than
asking
questions.
Our
current
estimate
of
the
average
amount
of
time
required
for
a
respondent
in
a
system
serving
populations
of
3,301
to
500,000
is
2
hours.
Our
estimate
for
systems
serving
populations
over
500,000
is
2.5
hours.

In
addition
to
the
activities
of
community
water
systems,
the
States
will
be
asked
to
verify
the
list
of
small
systems
to
be
visited.
(
See
section
B.
2.
b.
in
part
B.)
EPA
assumes
States
personnel
will
spend
0.2
hours
on
each
small
system
to
be
visited.
It
also
assumes
the
average
hourly
rate
of
those
reviewing
the
list
of
small
systems
is
$
40.
These
estimates
are
based
on
EPA's
experience
in
the
1999
Needs
Survey.

This
is
planned
as
a
one­
time
collection
and
does
not
entail
any
record
keeping
or
future
reporting.

A.
6.
b.
Estimating
Respondent
Costs
The
total
respondent
costs
are
calculated
below
based
on
the
labor
effort
and
costs
described
in
the
previous
section
(
A.
6.
a.).
There
are
no
capital
or
operating
and
maintenance
costs
to
the
respondents
in
this
collection
effort.
21
Table
A­
2.
Preliminary
Burden
and
Cost
Estimate
for
Respondents
Size
of
System
Sample
Size
Burden
Hrs.
Cost/
Hr.
Total
Hrs.
Total
Cost
Less
than
3,300
557
0.5
$
14.50
279
$
4,038
3,301
to
500,000
827
2
$
28.00
1,654
$
46,312
Greater
than
500,000
58
2.5
$
28.00
145
$
4,060
Total
1,442
2,078
$
54,410
The
estimated
burden
and
costs
to
the
States
are
shown
in
table
A­
3,
based
on
the
labor
effort
and
costs
described
in
the
previous
section.

Table
A­
3.
Preliminary
Burden
and
Cost
Estimate
for
the
States
Size
of
System
Sample
Size
Burden
Hrs.
Cost/
Hr.
Total
Hrs.
Total
Cost
Less
than
3,300
557
0.2
$
40.00
111
$
4,456
3,301
to
500,000
827
0
$
0.00
0
$
0
Greater
than
500,000
58
0
$
0.00
0
$
0
Total
1,442
111
$
4,456
A.
6.
c.
Estimating
Agency
Burden
and
Costs
Annual
agency
burden
and
cost
estimates
for
the
survey
are
based
upon
the
experience
of
EPA's
technical
staff
in
developing
surveys
of
this
magnitude.
These
estimates
are
presented
in
Section
A.
6.
e.

The
labor
rates
used
to
calculate
costs
of
EPA
employees
and
contractors
performing
the
survey
activities
were
estimated
for
three
labor
classes:
Manager,
Technical,
and
Clerical.
The
Manager
rate
was
$
46.12
per
hour
assuming
GS15,
Step
5.
The
technical
rate
was
$
39.20
per
hour
based
on
a
GS14,
Step
5.
The
clerical
rate
was
$
12.70
based
on
a
GS5.
Overhead
costs
were
equal
to
9.5%
of
direct
labor.
The
Contractor
rate
was
assumed
to
be
$
80.00
per
hour
to
develop
the
questionnaire
and
sampling
plan,
$
50
per
hour
to
collect
the
data
from
medium,
large,
and
very
large
systems,
and
$
65.00
per
hour
to
conduct
the
site
visits,
conduct
quality
assurance
and
quality
control,
develop
the
data
base,
and
to
conduct
the
initial
analysis
of
the
data.
These
rates
included
all
direct
and
all
applicable
indirect
costs
and
fee.

A.
6.
d.
Estimating
the
Respondent
Universe
and
Total
Burden
Cost
Since
we
are
expecting
557
completed
data
collection
instruments
for
systems
serving
populations
of
less
than
3,300
at
30
minutes
per
system,
we
estimate
the
total
respondent
burden
for
small
22
systems
to
be
279
hours
total.
We
estimate
the
total
burden
for
the
States
to
be
0.2
hours
per
small
system,
for
a
total
burden
to
the
States
of
111
hours.
Since
we
are
expecting
827
completed
data
collection
instruments
for
systems
serving
populations
of
more
than
3,300
at
2
hours
per
system,
we
estimate
the
total
respondent
burden
for
medium,
and
large
systems
to
be
1,654
hours.
Since
we
are
expecting
58
completed
data
collection
instruments
for
systems
serving
populations
of
more
than
500,000
at
2.5
hours
per
system,
we
estimate
the
total
respondent
burden
for
very
large
systems
to
be
145
hours.
There
is
no
record
keeping
burden
associated
with
these
surveys;
therefore,
the
annual
burden
and
cost
is
the
same
as
the
respondent
burden
and
cost.

At
$
14.50
an
hour,
557
small
systems
will
complete
the
survey
at
a
cost
of
$
4,038.
At
$
28.00
an
hour,
885
medium,
and
large
systems
will
complete
the
survey
at
a
cost
of
$
46,312.
At
$
28.00
an
hour,
58
very
large
systems
will
complete
the
survey
at
a
cost
of
$
4,060.
At
a
cost
of
$
40
an
hour
the
cost
to
States
to
verify
the
list
of
575
small
systems
is
$
4,456.
The
total
cost
to
respondents
is
estimated
to
be
$
54,410.

ANNUAL
BURDEN:

Burden
to
Respondents:
Hrs.
per
Small
System
Respondent
(
0.5)
x
No.
of
Respondents
(
557)
+
Hrs.
per
Medium
Large
System
Respondent
(
2)
x
No.
of
Respondents
(
827)
+
Hrs.
per
Medium
Large
System
Respondent
(
2.5)
x
No.
of
Respondents
(
58)
=
2,078
hours
Average
burden
per
respondent
=
1.44
hours
Burden
to
States:
Hrs
per
Small
System
(
0.2)
x
No.
of
Respondents
(
557)
=
111
hours
ANNUAL
COST:

Cost
to
Respondents:
Cost
per
Hour
for
Small
System
($
14.50)
x
No.
of
Hours
(
279)
+
Cost
per
Hour
for
Medium
and
Large
System
($
28.00)
x
No.
of
Hours
(
1,654)
+
Cost
per
Hour
for
Very
Large
System
($
28.00)
x
No.
of
Hours
(
145)
=
$
54,410
Average
cost
per
respondent
=
$
37.73
Cost
to
States:
Cost
per
Hour
($
40.00)
x
No
of
Hours
(
111)
=
$
4,456.

A.
6.
e.
Bottom
Line
Burden
Hours
and
Cost
Tables
The
Agency
master
table
displaying
the
Agency
burden
and
cost
estimates
B
including
contractor
costs
B
is
presented
in
the
table
below:
23
Table
A­
4.
Agency
Burden
Cost
Estimates
Hours
Tasks
Contractor
Manager
Technical
Clerical
Total
Total
Cost
Defining
Survey
Objectives
430
40
200
8
678
$
45,498
Questionnaire
Design
1,140
40
400
8
1,588
$
111,555
Sample
Design
210
24
300
8
542
$
31,147
Internal
EPA
and
OMB
Approval
1,200
24
350
8
1,582
$
113,474
Cleaning
Sample
Frame
400
20
100
8
528
$
31,389
Sample
Selection
500
40
210
8
758
$
43,595
Training
for
Data
Collection
600
40
420
8
1,068
$
59,069
Data
Collection
9,300
130
1,050
40
10,520
$
541,758
QA/
QC
of
Data
600
80
210
8
898
$
52,106
Data
Base
Development
2,800
40
310
8
3,158
$
197,369
Data
Analysis
3,400
130
520
8
4,058
$
249,867
Report
Preparation
2,700
40
520
40
3,300
$
200,286
Storing
and
Maintaining
Data
0
4
210
40
254
$
9,729
Total
23,280
652
4,800
200
28,932
$
1,686,842
AGENCY
TOTAL
BURDEN:
28,932
HRS.

AGENCY
TOTAL
COST:
$
1,686,842
Table
A­
4
summarizes
the
total
burden
and
cost
of
the
survey,
including
respondent,
contractor,
and
agency
burdens
and
costs.

Table
A­
5.
Summary
of
Burden
and
Cost
Estimates
EPA
Contractor
States
Respondents
Total
Burden
(
hours)
5,652
23,280
111
2,078
31,121
Cost
(
dollars)
240,662
1,446,180
4,456
54,410
1,745,708
24
A.
6.
f.
Reasons
for
Change
in
Burden
This
section
is
not
applicable
since
we
are
not
renewing
or
modifying
an
existing
ICR.

A.
6.
g.
Burden
Statement
The
following
burden
statements
appear
on
the
inside
covers
of
the
questionnaires.

EPA
is
conducting
a
statistical
survey
on
operating
and
financial
characteristics
of
community
water
systems.
The
results
of
this
survey
will
be
used
to
support
economic
analyses
of
the
costs
and
benefits
of
new
regulations
and
changes
to
existing
regulations
on
consumers,
the
water
supply
industry,
and
the
nation.
The
information
also
will
be
used
to
measure
the
financial
burden
of
EPA's
regulations
on
consumers
and
the
industry.
It
is
important
that
those
who
develop
regulations
have
a
full
and
complete
understanding
of
system
finance
and
operations.
Responses
to
the
survey
are
voluntary.

The
public
reporting
and
recordkeeping
burden
for
this
collection
of
information
is
estimated
to
average
1.45
hours
per
response
or
to
range
from
30
minutes
to
2.5
hours
per
respondent
annually.
Burden
means
the
total
time,
effort,
or
financial
resources
expended
by
persons
to
generate,
maintain,
retain,
or
disclose
or
provide
information
to
or
for
a
Federal
agency.
This
includes
the
time
needed
to
review
instructions;
develop,
acquire,
install,
and
utilize
technology
and
systems
for
the
purposes
of
collecting,
validating,
and
verifying
information,
processing
and
maintaining
information,
and
disclosing
and
providing
information;
adjust
the
existing
ways
to
comply
with
any
previously
applicable
instructions
and
requirements;
train
personnel
to
be
able
to
respond
to
a
collection
of
information;
search
data
sources;
complete
and
review
the
collection
of
information;
and
transmit
or
otherwise
disclose
the
information.
An
agency
may
not
conduct
or
sponsor,
and
a
person
is
not
required
to
respond
to,
a
collection
of
information
unless
it
displays
a
currently
valid
OMB
control
number.
The
OMB
control
numbers
for
EPA's
regulations
are
listed
in
40
CFR
Part
9
and
48
CFR
Chapter
15.

Send
comments
on
the
Agency's
need
for
this
information,
the
accuracy
of
the
provided
burden
estimates,
and
any
suggested
methods
for
minimizing
respondent
burden,
including
through
the
use
of
automated
collection
techniques
to
the
Director,
Collection
Strategies
Division,
U.
S.
Environmental
Protection
Agency
(
2822),
1200
Pennsylvania
Ave.,
NW,
Washington,
D.
C.
20460;
and
to
the
Office
of
Information
and
Regulatory
Affairs,
Office
of
Management
and
Budget,
725
17th
Street,
NW,
Washington,
DC
20503,
Attention:
Desk
Officer
for
EPA.
Include
the
EPA
ICR
number
and
OMB
control
number
in
any
correspondence.
Do
not
send
the
completed
survey
to
this
address.
25
PART
B
OF
THE
SUPPORTING
STATEMENT
B.
1.
SURVEY
OBJECTIVES,
KEY
VARIABLES,
AND
OTHER
PRELIMINARIES
B.
1.
a.
Survey
Objectives
The
overall
purpose
of
conducting
this
survey
is
to
supply
the
Office
of
Ground
Water
and
Drinking
Water
with
accurate,
up­
to­
date
information
on
the
water
systems
it
regulates
so
that
it
may
comply
with
statutory
requirements
and
executive
orders,
support
the
administration's
recommendations
for
reauthorizing
the
Safe
Drinking
Water
Act,
and
accomplish
its
many
other
program
responsibilities
as
described
in
Part
A,
Sections
A.
2.
a,
A.
2.
b,
A.
3.
d,
and
5.
c.

In
accomplishing
this
purpose,
the
survey
will
achieve
the
following
objectives:

(
1)
Help
to
determine
the
cost
of
any
new
federal
drinking
water
regulations;

(
2)
Help
predict
the
ability
of
water
systems
of
various
sizes
to
absorb
additional
regulatory
costs
imposed
by
EPA;

(
3)
Determine
the
extent
of
need
by
water
systems
for
technical
and
financial
assistance
in
maintaining
existing
operations
and
in
meeting
current
Federal
requirements;

(
4)
Determine
the
collective
impacts
of
all
water
regulations
implemented
since
the
last
survey
in
1995;

(
5)
Help
guide
implementation
of
significant
new
administration
initiatives;

(
6)
Assist
the
agency
in
crafting
regulations
that
are
sensitive
to
small
system
needs
and
capabilities;

(
7)
Guide
States
and
other
assistance
providers
in
targeting
needy
water
systems
and
developing
technical
assistance
programs;

(
8)
Help
determine
the
operating
and
financial
factors
associated
with
successful
regulatory
compliance,
and
identify
factors
associated
with
poor
compliance
records;

(
9)
Help
to
verify
the
accuracy
of
information
contained
in
the
Safe
Drinking
Water
Information
System
(
SDWIS).
26
B.
1.
b.
Key
Variables
To
satisfy
the
objectives
of
the
survey
the
following
kinds
of
essential
information
for
the
water
systems
will
be
collected:

$
Size
of
population
served
$
Type
of
ownership
$
Type,
number
and
geographic
distribution
of
water
source
$
Volume
of
water
pumped
and
delivered
$
Type
and
extent
of
distribution
system
$
Types
of
water
treatment
processes
employed
$
Revenues
(
by
source)

$
Expenditures
(
by
source)

$
Rate
structure
$
Sources
of
capital
B.
1.
c.
Statistical
Approach
The
survey
will
be
of
a
scientific
probability
sample
of
community
water
systems.
The
inferences
to
be
made
to
the
entire
target
population
will
satisfy
the
survey
objectives
and
the
information
needs
of
EPA's
programs.
A
sample
survey
is
being
conducted
instead
of
a
census
survey
because
the
latter
would
be
prohibitively
expensive,
and
unnecessarily
burdensome
to
community
water
systems.

The
survey
is
being
designed
and
conducted
with
the
assistance
of
a
contractor:

Contractor
Contractor
Roles
The
Cadmus
Group,
Inc.
135
Beaver
St.
Waltham,
MA
02154
$
Technical
oversight
for
all
contractor
activities.

$
Questionnaire
design
and
testing.

$
Oversight
of
field
operations,
including
site
visits
and
administration
of
questionnaire.

$
Oversight
of
statistical
sample
design.

$
Data
processing.

$
Training,
mailing,
and
logistics.

$
Preparation
of
tables
and
final
statistical
report
and
survey
documentation.
Contractor
Contractor
Roles
27
Abt
Associates
Inc.
55
Wheeler
St.
Cambridge,
MA
02138
$
Data
collection
and
data
processing.

$
Statistical
sample
design.

B.
1.
d.
Feasibility
For
medium,
large,
and
very
large
systems,
the
survey
questionnaires
have
been
designed
with
the
capabilities
of
the
typical
respondent
in
mind.
A
major
portion
of
the
survey
questionnaires
are
refinements
of
the
1995
survey.
This
survey
provided
guidance
in
developing
questions
that
respondents
would
be
able
to
answer.
Generally,
the
respondent
should
be
able
to
obtain
the
requested
information
from
readily
accessible
records
and
reports
kept
by
the
system.

To
reduce
the
burden
on
small
systems,
EPA
contractor
engineers
will
visit
the
water
systems
that
serve
3,300
or
fewer
people.
The
contractor
engineers
will
spend
approximately
one­
half
hour
with
the
system
owner
or
operator,
requesting
information
that
will
be
helpful
in
estimating
system
infrastructure
needs.
The
engineer
will
then
conduct
a
physical
inspection
of
the
system
to
confirm
information
provided
by
the
owner
or
operator.

Reliance
on
site
visits
to
small
CWSs
was
strongly
recommended
by
the
EPA
workgroup
to
avoid
problems
faced
in
past
surveys
of
small
community
water
systems:

$
Total
non­
response.
Since
many
systems
have
not
clearly
identified
responsible
parties,
and
since
responsible
parties
often
are
reluctant
to
respond
to
data
collection
instruments,
it
is
difficult
to
use
a
mail
or
telephone
survey
to
obtain
the
necessary
information.

$
Item
non­
response.
System
owners
and
operators
often
do
not
know
the
details
of
the
operating
or
financial
characteristics
of
their
systems.
Because
EPA
contractor
engineers
will
conduct
site
visits
to
gather
data,
item
non­
response
should
be
eliminated.

$
Reliability.
State
drinking
water
regulators
are
suspicious
of
information
provided
directly
from
owners
or
operators
of
small
CWSs.
Unlike
larger
systems,
small
CWSs
usually
do
not
have
professional,
certified
operators.
Instead,
one
is
likely
to
meet
trailer
park
owners,
volunteers
from
homeowners
associations,
and
others
who
are
not
water
supply
professionals.

Finally,
employing
site
visits
will
substantially
reduce
the
burden
on
small
CWSs.
Total
burden
on
the
systems,
on
average,
will
be
about
one­
half
hour.
Instead
of
completing
a
data
collection
instrument,
the
system
owner
or
operator
can
answer
questions
asked
by
the
visiting
engineer.
28
The
approach
was
discussed
with
knowledgeable
State
drinking
water
regulators,
as
well
as
representatives
of
small
CWSs,
and
all
parties
agreed
that
it
was
the
best
approach
to
achieve
the
desired
results
of
the
survey.

Sufficient
funds
are
available
in
the
existing
contract
to
complete
the
survey.

The
time
frame
for
the
survey
is
acceptable
to
users
of
the
data
within
the
Office
of
Ground
Water
and
Drinking
Water.

B.
2
SURVEY
DESIGN
B.
2.
a.
Target
Population
and
Coverage
The
target
population
is
Community
Water
Systems
in
operation
in
2000.
A
CWS
is
a
public
water
system
that
serves
at
least
15
service
connections
used
by
year­
round
residents
or
regularly
serves
at
least
25
year­
round
residents
(
40
CFR
141.2).

B.
2.
b.
Sample
Design
The
Community
Water
System
survey
will
be
based
on
a
nationally
representative
sample
of
community
water
systems.
The
survey
will
use
a
stratified
random
sample
design
to
ensure
the
sample
is
representative.
The
sample
will
be
stratified
by
several
characteristics
of
water
systems
to
increase
the
efficiency
of
estimates
based
on
the
sample.
To
improve
the
quality
of
the
data
collected,
the
survey
will
be
administered
on­
site
for
small
systems;
to
limit
the
travel
costs
involved
in
visiting
each
small
system
in
the
sample,
they
will
be
selected
in
geographic
clusters
in
a
two­
stage
design.

B.
2.
b.
1.
Sample
Frame
The
sampling
frame
is
developed
from
the
Safe
Drinking
Water
Information
System
(
SDWIS).
SDWIS
is
a
centralized
database
of
information
on
public
water
systems,
including
their
compliance
with
monitoring
requirements,
maximum
contaminant
levels
(
MCLs),
and
other
requirements
of
the
Safe
Drinking
Water
Act
(
SDWA)
Amendments
of
1996.
The
following
information
will
be
extracted
from
SDWIS
for
the
statistical
survey:

$
Name
of
system
$
Address
of
system
$
Population
served
$
Total
design
capacity
$
Number
of
connections
$
Primary
source
(
surface
water
or
ground
water)

$
Public
water
system
identification
number
(
PWSID)

$
Ownership
type
29
$
Consecutive
system
(
i.
e.,
does
system
purchase
or
sell
water)

From
these
data,
we
will
develop
a
list
frame
from
which
we
will
(
1)
calculate
summary
statistics
for
use
in
calculating
sample
size,
and
(
2)
randomly
choose
systems
within
the
design
strata
which
will
take
part
in
the
survey.

Justification
For
The
Use
of
SDWIS
SDWIS
is
the
appropriate
sampling
frame
because:

$
It
fully
covers
the
target
population.

$
It
contains
no
duplication.

$
It
contains
no
foreign
elements
(
i.
e.,
elements
that
are
not
members
of
the
population).

$
It
contains
information
for
identifying
and
contacting
the
units
selected
in
the
sample.

$
It
contains
other
information
that
will
improve
the
efficiency
of
the
sample
design.

SDWIS
is
the
ideal
choice
for
a
sample
frame
because
of
its
inclusive
coverage
of
all
units
of
observation
for
this
survey.
In
addition,
SDWIS
has
two
other
advantages:
it
contains
information
that
will
facilitate
contacting
the
respondents,
and
it
contains
other
information
that
is
useful
in
stratifying
the
sample,
thereby
improving
the
efficiency
of
the
sample
design.

The
use
of
SDWIS
as
a
sample
frame
in
previous
surveys
was
subject
to
some
criticism.
Since
1989,
EPA
has
conducted
audits
of
the
quality
of
SDWIS
data.
As
a
result,
EPA
is
aware
of
the
problems
with
SDWIS.
The
audits,
however,
show
that
errors
in
classification
of
systems
by
strata
proposed
for
this
survey
are
rare.
Audits
show
that
systems
are
misclassified
by
population
or
source
in
fewer
than
one
percent
of
all
cases.

The
EPA
took
several
steps
to
prepare
SDWIS
for
use
as
a
sample
frame
for
the
1999
Drinking
Water
Infrastructure
Needs
Survey.
Problematic
data
were
identified
,
and
the
States
were
asked
to
review
the
data
and
provide
any
necessary
changes.
The
data
were
further
refined
during
the
course
of
the
Needs
Survey
data
collection
period.
These
data,
updated
with
the
latest
SDWIS
data,
will
serve
as
the
sample
frame
for
the
2000
Community
Water
System
Survey.
30
B.
2.
b.
2.
Sample
Size
The
domains
of
the
population
of
interest
for
the
OGWDW
are
based
on
two
major
characteristics
of
the
systems.

$
The
primary
source
of
water.
Systems
that
rely
primarily
on
ground
water
are
distinguished
from
surface
water
systems.

$
The
size
of
the
population
served
by
the
system.
Eight
size
categories
will
be
used:
systems
that
serve
less
than
100
people;
systems
that
serve
101
to
500
people;
systems
that
serve
from
501
to
3,300
people;
systems
that
serve
from
3,301
to
10,000
people,
systems
that
serve
from
10,001
to
50,000
people;
systems
that
serve
50,001
to
100,000
people;
systems
that
serve
from
100,001
to
500,000
people;
and
systems
serving
more
than
500,000
people.

The
two
water
sources
and
the
eight
system
sizes
produce
sixteen
strata.

The
regulatory
impact
models
require
reasonably
precise
parameter
estimates
from
each
of
these
domains.
The
sample
size
in
each
domain
should
be
large
enough
to
provide
a
sufficient
number
of
completed
questionnaires
to
obtain
estimates
with
reasonable
precision.
Table
B­
1
shows
the
number
of
systems
in
the
sample
frame
and
the
minimum
sample
size
required
to
obtain
an
estimate
for
a
50
percent
statistic
with
an
error
not
exceeding
±
10
percentage
points
(
except
for
a
1
in
20
chance)
in
each
domain.
We
will
take
a
census
of
systems
serving
more
than
100,000
people.

We
used
a
50
percent
statistic
because
the
standard
error
is
largest
when
the
population
percentage
is
50
percent.
The
error
will
be
smaller
for
other
population
percentages.

B.
2.
b.
3.
Stratification
Variables
The
sample
is
stratified
to
achieve
two
goals.
First,
stratifying
the
data
allows
us
to
draw
inferences
about
specific
population
domains.
For
example,
EPA
may
wish
to
draw
conclusions
about
systems
serving
populations
of
less
than
10,000
or
3,300.
We
can
ensure
that
estimates
of
the
sub­
populations
will
meet
the
required
levels
of
precision
by
drawing
the
necessary
number
of
observations
for
each
stratum.

The
second
goal
achieved
by
stratifying
the
data
is
that
we
can
increase
the
efficiency
of
our
estimates
by
grouping
systems
into
relatively
homogeneous
strata.
The
strata
were
chosen
to
minimize
the
differences
among
systems
within
strata,
and
to
maximize
the
differences
among
strata.
Based
on
the
results
of
previous
surveys,
we
assume
there
are
important
differences
in
the
way
systems
are
operated
and
in
their
finances
across
the
strata
selected.
The
operating
characteristics
and
treatment
requirements
of
ground
water
systems
tend
to
be
different
from
surface
water
systems.
The
operating
and
financial
characteristics
of
large
systems
tend
to
be
31
more
complex
than
small
systems.
System
management,
and
the
resources
available
to
it,
also
may
vary
by
system
size.

Table
B­
1.
Frame
and
Sample
Sizes
by
Strata
Source
of
Water
Population
Served
Frame
Size
Sample
Size
Ground
100
or
less
14,263
95
101­
500
14,538
95
501
­
3,300
10,168
95
3,301
­
10,000
2,468
92
10,001­
50,000
1,293
89
50,001
­
100,000
159
60
100,001
­
500,000
73
73
More
than
500,000
8
8
Surface
100
or
less
1,034
88
101­
500
1,892
91
501
­
3,300
3,572
93
3,301
­
10,000
1,840
91
10,001­
50,000
1,609
91
50,001
­
100,000
316
74
100,001
­
500,000
257
257
More
than
500,000
50
50
All
53,540
1,442
The
size
of
the
population
served
and
the
primary
source
of
water
are
the
explicit
stratification
variables.
The
sample
frame
will
be
divided
by
eight
population
sizes:
less
than
100;
100
B
500,
501
B
3,300,
3,301
B
10,000,
and
10,000
B
50,000,
50,001
B
100,000,
and
100,001
B
500,000,
and
more
than
500,000.
Systems
will
be
further
divided
by
two
source­
water
categories:
ground
water
and
surface
water.
32
B.
2.
b.
4.
Sampling
Method
Systems
serving
populations
greater
than
100,000
will
be
selected
with
certainty.
For
systems
serving
populations
of
100,000
or
fewer,
the
sampling
method
will
be
an
equal
probability
systematic
sample
within
each
explicitly
defined
stratum.
There
are
twelve
such
strata,
given
by
the
intersection
of
the
six
population
size
classes
whose
systems
are
not
being
selected
with
certainty
and
the
two
water
sources.
Within
each
stratum,
the
data
will
be
sorted
by
EPA
Region
and
size
of
the
population
served.
This
ensures
the
geographical
dispersion
among
the
sample
systems
and
increases
the
probability
that
a
range
of
population
sizes
within
each
explicit
stratum
is
sampled.
The
total
sample
size
B
including
the
strata
that
will
be
sampled
with
certainty
B
will
be
1,442.

The
survey
statisticians
will
prepare
detailed
specifications
to
direct
the
sampling,
and
to
document
the
process.
These
specifications
will
ensure
the
sample
is
drawn
in
conformity
with
the
sample
design
and
in
a
statistically
valid
manner.
Standard
statistical
software
will
be
used
to
draw
the
sample.

B.
2.
b.
5.
Multi­
Stage
Sampling
In
order
to
achieve
the
required
precision,
reduce
the
burden
to
small
systems,
and
to
keep
costs
down,
a
two­
stage
cluster
sample
will
be
used
for
systems
serving
fewer
than
3,300
people.
The
use
of
a
two­
stage
sample
design
will
result
in
slightly
reduced
precision
for
the
stratum­
level
estimates.

First­
Stage
Sample
All
small
CWSs
will
be
assigned
to
a
county
(
or
county
equivalent
in
jurisdictions
that
do
not
have
counties).
Data
on
all
small
CWSs
will
be
sorted
by
county
so
that
we
can
determine
the
number
of
systems,
by
strata,
in
each
county.
The
first­
stage
sample
will
be
approximately
200
counties,
using
a
method
that
ensures
that
counties
with
more
small
community
water
systems
have
a
greater
probability
of
being
selected.

States
will
be
given
a
SDWIS
list
of
small
CWSs
in
the
county
(
or
counties)
selected
in
the
firststage
sample
for
their
jurisdictions,
and
EPA
will
ask
States
to
verify
that
the
systems
on
the
list
are
active
CWSs
with
populations
of
3,300
and
fewer.
If
the
number
of
systems
in
a
county
is
large
(
e.
g.,
100
or
more),
we
will
select
a
sub­
sample
of
the
systems
in
that
county
to
reduce
the
burden
on
the
State.
This
review
by
the
States
will
produce
a
clean
sample
frame
for
the
secondstage
sample.
33
Second­
Stage
Sample
In
the
second
stage,
a
stratified
sample
of
four
systems
will
be
drawn
from
each
of
the
200
counties.
States
will
be
asked
to
verify
the
names,
addresses,
and
telephone
number
of
the
four
selected
systems
in
each
county
selected
in
their
State.

B.
2.
c.
Precision
Requirements
B.
2.
c.
1.
Precision
Targets
To
satisfy
EPA's
decision­
making
needs,
the
sample
is
designed
to
provide
estimates
of
percentages
of
error
not
exceeding
10
percentage
points
(
expect
for
a
1
in
20
chance)
within
each
domain
for
an
estimated
proportion.
The
domains
are
shown
in
Table
B­
1.
For
example,
suppose
50
percent
of
the
systems
in
a
domain
report
that
they
boost
chlorine
residuals
in
their
distribution
system.
EPA
could
be
95
percent
confident
that
between
40
percent
and
60
percent
of
the
systems
within
this
domain
boost
chlorine
residuals.

Systems
serving
populations
greater
than
100,000
will
be
sampled
with
certainty;
therefore,
there
will
be
no
sampling
error
in
these
domains.

B.
2.
c.
2.
Nonsampling
Error
EPA
will
use
several
quality
assurance
techniques
to
maximize
response
rates,
response
accuracy,
and
processing
accuracy
to
minimize
nonsampling
error.
A
pretest
will
supplement
the
experience
of
EPA
and
its
contractors
(
The
Cadmus
Group,
Inc.,
and
Abt
Associates
Inc.)
in
formulating
a
strategy
to
reduce
non­
sampling
error.

The
data
collection
approach
proposed
by
EPA
should
reduce
both
overall
non­
response
rates
and
item
non­
response.
It
also
should
improve
both
the
accuracy
and
consistency
of
the
data
reported
by
the
systems.
Small
systems
will
be
visited
by
EPA
contractor
engineers,
which
will
ensure
that
the
necessary
data
are
collected
and
are
consistent
across
systems.
Technical
assistance
will
be
made
available
to
medium,
large,
and
very
large
systems
to
help
them
fill
out
the
questionnaire
and
to
ensure
accurate
and
consistent
responses
to
the
survey's
questions.
Each
system
will
be
contacted
by
contractor
staff;
also,
systems
will
be
provide
a
dedicated
toll­
free
telephone
number
they
can
call
for
assistance.

In
addition,
the
following
steps
will
improve
the
quality
of
the
data:

$
A
brief
cover
letter
will
be
sent
to
the
respondents
that
will
explain
the
purpose
of
the
survey
and
the
information
to
be
collected.
It
will
be
on
official
EPA
letterhead,
and
will
be
signed
by
a
senior
EPA
official.
34
$
The
data
collection
instrument
design,
content,
and
format
will
be
thoroughly
reviewed
and
tested
before
the
survey
begins.
The
approach
will
be
pretested
to
ensure
that
the
necessary
data
can
be
collected.

$
Items
being
asked
are
those
that
owners
or
operators
of
systems
should
know.
We
do
not
ask
questions
that
require
monitoring,
research,
or
calculations
on
the
part
of
the
respondents.

$
Standardized
software
will
be
used
for
sample
selection.

$
We
expect
complete
coverage
of
the
target
population
using
SDWIS,
as
updated
by
EPA.

$
Data
will
be
100
percent
independently
keyed
and
verified.

B.
2.
d.
Questionnaire
Design
The
questions
contained
in
the
surveys
are
designed
to
obtain
information
on
a
variety
of
water
system
related
technical
and
financial
data.
Many
of
the
questions
seek
to
obtain
qualitative
information,
which
would
then
be
used
to
create
descriptive
statistics.
Section
A.
4.
b.
1.
provides
the
justification
for
each
question
in
the
survey.

In
order
to
limit
the
burden
on
respondents
and
to
improve
the
quality
of
the
data
collected,
small
community
water
systems
will
not
be
required
to
fill
out
a
questionnaire.
As
discussed
in
section
B.
4,
EPA
contractor
engineers
will
visit
water
systems
serving
3,300
or
fewer
people,
and
will
fill
out
the
questionnaire
based
on
the
information
they
collect.
Contractor
personnel
will
provide
assistance
to
systems
serving
populations
over
3,300.
If
the
information
requested
in
a
question
is
available
in
schematics
or
other
documentation
of
the
system,
the
system
may
simply
attach
the
documentation
to
the
question
rather
than
fill
out
the
question.

To
ensure
quality
of
the
data
collected
by
the
questionnaire,
it
was
subject
to
several
rounds
of
close
review
and
comment
by
EPA,
Cadmus,
and
independent
reviewers.
(
See
section
A.
3.
c
in
Part
A
for
the
list
of
reviewers.)
Special
attention
will
be
paid
to
the
presentation
and
layout
of
the
questions,
response
categories,
response
recording
blocks,
and
instructions
to
clarify
the
questionnaire
for
respondents.

A
copy
of
the
survey
instrument
is
in
Appendix
C.
35
B.
3.
PRETESTS
AND
PILOT
TESTS
B.
3.
a.
Pretests
A
pre­
test
of
the
approach
was
conducted
on
seven
eligible
water
systems
identified
by
ODWGW.
The
questionnaires
and
instructions
were
revised
in
accordance
with
the
results.
B.
3.
b.
Pilot
Study
Following
the
pre­
test
data
collection
instrument
revisions,
a
pilot
study
of
up
to
50
respondents
will
be
conducted
for
both
the
site
visits
to
small
systems
and
the
multi­
step
data
collection
for
medium
and
large
systems.

The
purpose
will
be
to
fine­
tune
any
troublesome
questions,
increase
clarity,
reduce
respondent
burden,
and
test
survey
processing
systems
before
the
surveys
are
fielded.
We
plan
to
use
the
pilot
responses
for
any
water
systems
also
selected
in
the
main
survey.

B.
4.
COLLECTION
METHODS
AND
FOLLOW­
UP
B.
4.
a.
Collection
Methods
Site
visits
will
be
conducted
of
small
systems
C
those
serving
3,300
or
fewer
systems.
EPA
contractor
engineers
will
physically
inspect
the
system
and
interview
system
owners
and
operators.
They
will
then
fill
out
the
questionnaire
based
on
the
information
they
collect.

Systems
serving
populations
of
over
3,300
will
be
asked
to
fill
out
the
questionnaire.
Each
potential
respondent
will
be
contacted
to
provide
technical
assistance
and
to
respond
to
questions.
Systems
will
be
asked
to
mail
in
site
plans
and
other
diagrams
along
with
the
completed
questionnaire.

Several
measures
will
be
in
place
to
assure
the
quality
of
the
data
collection.
The
final
version
of
the
questionnaires
will
incorporate
lessons
learned
from
the
pre­
test
and
pilot
test.
Complete
and
detailed
question­
by­
question
specifications
will
be
prepared
for
every
questionnaire
item,
to
unambiguously
document
for
interviewers
and
analysts
the
meaning,
purpose,
and
context
of
all
questions.
Interviewers
will
receive
formal
training
for
interviewing
techniques
and
for
specific
CWSS
topics.
Staff
with
detailed
substantive
knowledge
of
water
systems
will
conduct
follow
up
phone
calls
to
address
technical
issues
that
may
arise.
Supervisory
staff
will
monitor
the
interviews.
Special
data
collection
operations
(
such
as
tracing)
will
be
used
to
improve
response
rates,
sample
coverage,
and
locating
the
correct
sampled
CWS.

B.
4.
b.
Survey
Response
and
Follow­
Up
The
target
response
rate
for
the
survey
will
be
70
percent.
The
response
rate
is
the
ratio
of
responses
to
eligible
respondents.
36
B.
5.
ANALYZING
AND
REPORTING
SURVEY
RESULTS
B.
5.
a.
Data
Preparation
The
contractor
will
key
and
independently
verify
the
data.
Senior
data
entry
operators
will
be
used
for
the
verification
to
assure
quality
control.
Editing
will
consist
of
automated
logic
and
range
checks,
and
checks
for
missing
data.
Missing
data
will
be
imputed
by
using
standard
methods
such
as
cell
means,
regression,
and
hot
deck
to
supply
values
for
the
missing
items.

B.
5.
b.
Analysis
The
statistical
procedures
used
to
analyze
the
data
will
be
left
up
to
the
individual
data
users.
The
OGWDW
contractor
will
prepare
a
report
tabulating
the
results
of
the
survey
and
indicating
the
precision
of
the
resulting
national
estimates.
Examples
of
statistics
that
will
be
produced
are:

Frequency
distributions
of
all
discrete
variables
in
the
questionnaire;

Counts
of
customers
being
served
by
water
systems
in
each
domain
(
e.
g.,
the
number
of
active
residential
connections
served
by
ancillary
systems,
with
fewer
than
500
customers,
receiving
primarily
surface
water);

Counts
for
each
domain
of
interest
of
water
systems
with
certain
characteristics
(
e.
g.,
the
number
of
treatment
technologies
for
each
of
the
population
categories
and
water
sources);

Mean
and
median
rates
by
customer
category,
revenues,
expenses,
capital
expenditures,
and
other
financial
data
for
each
domain
of
interest.

The
fully
weighted
data
will
be
provided
on
a
data
file
accessible
to
the
EPA
program
offices
for
customized
analyses.

B.
5.
c.
Reporting
Results
The
survey
results
will
be
made
available
to
the
Agency
and
the
public
through
the
following
means:

A
printed
report
of
key
statistical
tables.
These
survey
results
will
be
distributed
to
participants
in
the
survey
and
all
interested
offices
at
EPA.
Additional
copies
will
be
made
available
to
the
general
public
through
the
National
Technical
Information
Service
(
NTIS);
and

Mainframe
access
(
Agency
only).
37
A
report
containing
the
questionnaire,
sampling
plan,
weights,
variances,
and
formulas
and
response
rates
will
be
prepared
and
distributed
with
the
data.
Record
layouts,
codes
and
complete
file
documentation
will
be
developed
for
Agency
mainframe
data
file
users.
38
This
page
intentionally
left
blank
39
Appendix
A
Relevant
Sections
of
Statutes
40
This
page
intentionally
left
blank
41
Sec.
300j­
4(
a)(
1)(
A)

(
1)(
A)
Every
person
who
is
subject
to
any
requirement
of
this
subchapter
or
who
is
a
grantee,
shall
establish
and
maintain
such
records,
make
such
reports,
conduct
such
monitoring,
and
provide
such
information
as
the
Administrator
may
reasonably
require
by
regulation
to
assist
the
Administrator
in
establishing
regulations
under
this
subchapter,
in
determining
whether
such
person
has
acted
or
is
acting
in
compliance
with
this
subchapter,
in
administering
any
program
of
financial
assistance
under
this
subchapter,
in
evaluating
the
health
risks
of
unregulated
contaminants,
or
in
advising
the
public
of
such
risks.
In
requiring
a
public
water
system
to
monitor
under
this
subsection,
the
Administrator
may
take
into
consideration
the
system
size
and
the
contaminants
likely
to
be
found
in
the
system's
drinking
water.

Sec.
300g­
1(
b)(
3)(
C)

(
C)
Health
risk
reduction
and
cost
analysis.
­
(
i)
Maximum
contaminant
levels.
­
When
proposing
any
national
primary
drinking
water
regulation
that
includes
a
maximum
contaminant
level,
the
Administrator
shall,
with
respect
to
a
maximum
contaminant
level
that
is
being
considered
in
accordance
with
paragraph
(
4)
and
each
alternative
maximum
contaminant
level
that
is
being
considered
pursuant
to
paragraph
(
5)
or
(
6)(
A),
publish,
seek
public
comment
on,
and
use
for
the
purposes
of
paragraphs
(
4),
(
5),
and
(
6)
an
analysis
of
each
of
the
following:
(
I)
Quantifiable
and
nonquantifiable
health
risk
reduction
benefits
for
which
there
is
a
factual
basis
in
the
rulemaking
record
to
conclude
that
such
benefits
are
likely
to
occur
as
the
result
of
treatment
to
comply
with
each
level.
(
II)
Quantifiable
and
nonquantifiable
health
risk
reduction
benefits
for
which
there
is
a
factual
basis
in
the
rulemaking
record
to
conclude
that
such
benefits
are
likely
to
occur
from
reductions
in
co­
occurring
contaminants
that
may
be
attributed
solely
to
compliance
with
the
maximum
contaminant
level,
excluding
benefits
resulting
from
compliance
with
other
proposed
or
promulgated
regulations.
(
III)
Quantifiable
and
nonquantifiable
costs
for
which
there
is
a
factual
basis
in
the
rulemaking
record
to
conclude
that
such
costs
are
likely
to
occur
solely
as
a
result
of
compliance
with
the
maximum
contaminant
level,
including
monitoring,
treatment,
and
other
costs
and
excluding
costs
resulting
from
compliance
with
other
proposed
or
promulgated
regulations.
(
IV)
The
incremental
costs
and
benefits
associated
with
each
alternative
maximum
contaminant
level
considered.
(
V)
The
effects
of
the
contaminant
on
the
general
population
and
on
groups
within
the
general
population
such
as
infants,
children,
pregnant
women,
the
elderly,
individuals
with
a
history
of
serious
illness,
or
other
subpopulations
that
are
identified
as
likely
to
be
at
greater
risk
of
adverse
health
effects
due
to
exposure
to
contaminants
in
drinking
water
than
the
general
population.
(
VI)
Any
increased
health
risk
that
may
occur
as
the
result
of
compliance,
including
risks
associated
with
co­
occurring
contaminants.
42
(
VII)
Other
relevant
factors,
including
the
quality
and
extent
of
the
information,
the
uncertainties
in
the
analysis
supporting
subclauses
(
I)
through
(
VI),
and
factors
with
respect
to
the
degree
and
nature
of
the
risk.
(
ii)
Treatment
techniques.
­
When
proposing
a
national
primary
drinking
water
regulation
that
includes
a
treatment
technique
in
accordance
with
paragraph
(
7)(
A),
the
Administrator
shall
publish
and
seek
public
comment
on
an
analysis
of
the
health
risk
reduction
benefits
and
costs
likely
to
be
experienced
as
the
result
of
compliance
with
the
treatment
technique
and
alternative
treatment
techniques
that
are
being
considered,
taking
into
account,
as
appropriate,
the
factors
described
in
clause
(
i).
(
iii)
Approaches
to
measure
and
value
benefits.
­
The
Administrator
may
identify
valid
approaches
for
the
measurement
and
valuation
of
benefits
under
this
subparagraph,
including
approaches
to
identify
consumer
willingness
to
pay
for
reductions
in
health
risks
from
drinking
water
contaminants.
(
iv)
Authorization.
­
There
are
authorized
to
be
appropriated
to
the
Administrator,
acting
through
the
Office
of
Ground
Water
and
Drinking
Water,
to
conduct
studies,
assessments,
and
analyses
in
support
of
regulations
or
the
development
of
methods,
$
35,000,000
for
each
of
fiscal
years
1996
through
2003.

Sec.
300g­
1(
b)(
4)(
D)

(
D)
Definition
of
feasible.
­
For
the
purposes
of
this
subsection,
the
term
''
feasible''
means
feasible
with
the
use
of
the
best
technology,
treatment
techniques
and
other
means
which
the
Administrator
finds,
after
examination
for
efficacy
under
field
conditions
and
not
solely
under
laboratory
conditions,
are
available
(
taking
cost
into
consideration).
For
the
purpose
of
this
paragraph,
granular
activated
carbon
is
feasible
for
the
control
of
synthetic
organic
chemicals,
and
any
technology,
treatment
technique,
or
other
means
found
to
be
the
best
available
for
the
control
of
synthetic
organic
chemicals
must
be
at
least
as
effective
in
controlling
synthetic
organic
chemicals
as
granular
activated
carbon.

Sec.
300g­
4(
a)(
1)(
A)

(
a)
Notwithstanding
any
other
provision
of
this
part,
variances
from
national
primary
drinking
water
regulations
may
be
granted
as
follows:
(
1)(
A)
A
State
which
has
primary
enforcement
responsibility
for
public
water
systems
may
grant
one
or
more
variances
from
an
applicable
national
primary
drinking
water
regulation
to
one
or
more
public
water
systems
within
its
jurisdiction
which,
because
of
characteristics
of
the
raw
water
sources
which
are
reasonably
available
to
the
systems,
cannot
meet
the
requirements
respecting
the
maximum
contaminant
levels
of
such
drinking
water
regulation.
A
variance
may
be
issued
to
a
system
on
condition
that
the
system
install
the
best
technology,
treatment
techniques,
or
other
means,
which
the
Administrator
finds
are
available
(
taking
costs
into
consideration),
and
based
upon
an
evaluation
satisfactory
to
the
State
that
indicates
that
alternative
sources
of
water
are
not
reasonably
available
to
the
system.
The
Administrator
shall
propose
and
promulgate
his
finding
of
the
best
43
available
technology,
treatment
techniques
or
other
means
available
for
each
contaminant
for
purposes
of
this
subsection
at
the
time
he
proposes
and
promulgates
a
maximum
contaminant
level
for
each
such
contaminant.
The
Administrator's
finding
of
best
available
technology,
treatment
techniques
or
other
means
for
purposes
of
this
subsection
may
vary
depending
on
the
number
of
persons
served
by
the
system
or
for
other
physical
conditions
related
to
engineering
feasibility
and
costs
of
compliance
with
maximum
contaminant
levels
as
considered
appropriate
by
the
Administrator.
Before
a
State
may
grant
a
variance
under
this
subparagraph,
the
State
must
find
that
the
variance
will
not
result
in
an
unreasonable
risk
to
health.
If
a
State
grants
a
public
water
system
a
variance
under
this
subparagraph,
the
State
shall
prescribe
at
the
[
1]
time
the
variance
is
granted,
a
schedule
for
­
(
i)
compliance
(
including
increments
of
progress)
by
the
public
water
system
with
each
containment
level
requirement
with
respect
to
which
the
variance
was
granted,
and
(
ii)
implementation
by
the
public
water
system
of
such
additional
control
measures
as
the
State
may
require
for
each
contaminant,
subject
to
such
contaminant
level
requirement,
during
the
period
ending
on
the
date
compliance
with
such
requirement
is
required.
Before
a
schedule
prescribed
by
a
State
pursuant
to
this
subparagraph
may
take
effect,
the
State
shall
provide
notice
and
opportunity
for
a
public
hearing
on
the
schedule.
A
notice
given
pursuant
to
the
preceding
sentence
may
cover
the
prescribing
of
more
than
one
such
schedule
and
a
hearing
held
pursuant
to
such
notice
shall
include
each
of
the
schedules
covered
by
the
notice.
A
schedule
prescribed
pursuant
to
this
subparagraph
for
a
public
water
system
granted
a
variance
shall
require
compliance
by
the
system
with
each
contaminant
level
requirement
with
respect
to
which
the
variance
was
granted
as
expeditiously
as
practicable
(
as
the
State
may
reasonably
determine).

Sec.
300g­
4(
e)

(
e)
Small
system
variances
(
1)
In
general
A
State
exercising
primary
enforcement
responsibility
for
public
water
systems
under
section
300g­
2
of
this
title
(
or
the
Administrator
in
nonprimacy
States)
may
grant
a
variance
under
this
subsection
for
compliance
with
a
requirement
specifying
a
maximum
contaminant
level
or
treatment
technique
contained
in
a
national
primary
drinking
water
regulation
to
­
(
A)
public
water
systems
serving
3,300
or
fewer
persons;
and
(
B)
with
the
approval
of
the
Administrator
pursuant
to
paragraph
(
9),
public
water
systems
serving
more
than
3,300
persons
but
fewer
than
10,000
persons,
if
the
variance
meets
each
requirement
of
this
subsection.
(
2)
Availability
of
variances
A
public
water
system
may
receive
a
variance
pursuant
to
paragraph
(
1),
if
­
44
(
A)
the
Administrator
has
identified
a
variance
technology
under
section
300g­
1(
b)(
15)
of
this
title
that
is
applicable
to
the
size
and
source
water
quality
conditions
of
the
public
water
system;
(
B)
the
public
water
system
installs,
operates,
and
maintains,
in
accordance
with
guidance
or
regulations
issued
by
the
Administrator,
such
treatment
technology,
treatment
technique,
or
other
means;
and
(
C)
the
State
in
which
the
system
is
located
determines
that
the
conditions
of
paragraph
(
3)
are
met.
(
3)
Conditions
for
granting
variances
A
variance
under
this
subsection
shall
be
available
only
to
a
system
­
(
A)
that
cannot
afford
to
comply,
in
accordance
with
affordability
criteria
established
by
the
Administrator
(
or
the
State
in
the
case
of
a
State
that
has
primary
enforcement
responsibility
under
section
300g­
2
of
this
title),
with
a
national
primary
drinking
water
regulation,
including
compliance
through
­
(
i)
treatment;
(
ii)
alternative
source
of
water
supply;
or
(
iii)
restructuring
or
consolidation
(
unless
the
Administrator
(
or
the
State
in
the
case
of
a
State
that
has
primary
enforcement
responsibility
under
section
300g­
2
of
this
title)
makes
a
written
determination
that
restructuring
or
consolidation
is
not
practicable);
and
(
B)
for
which
the
Administrator
(
or
the
State
in
the
case
of
a
State
that
has
primary
enforcement
responsibility
under
section
300g­
2
of
this
title)
determines
that
the
terms
of
the
variance
ensure
adequate
protection
of
human
health,
considering
the
quality
of
the
source
water
for
the
system
and
the
removal
efficiencies
and
expected
useful
life
of
the
treatment
technology
required
by
the
variance.
(
4)
Compliance
schedules
A
variance
granted
under
this
subsection
shall
require
compliance
with
the
conditions
of
the
variance
not
later
than
3
years
after
the
date
on
which
the
variance
is
granted,
except
that
the
Administrator
(
or
the
State
in
the
case
of
a
State
that
has
primary
enforcement
responsibility
under
section
300g­
2
of
this
title)
may
allow
up
to
2
additional
years
to
comply
with
a
variance
technology,
secure
an
alternative
source
of
water,
restructure
or
consolidate
if
the
Administrator
(
or
the
State)
determines
that
additional
time
is
necessary
for
capital
improvements,
or
to
allow
for
financial
assistance
provided
pursuant
to
section
300j­
12
of
this
title
or
any
other
Federal
or
State
program.
(
5)
Duration
of
variances
The
Administrator
(
or
the
State
in
the
case
of
a
State
that
has
primary
enforcement
responsibility
under
section
300g­
2
of
this
title)
shall
review
each
variance
granted
under
this
subsection
not
less
often
than
every
5
years
after
the
compliance
date
established
in
the
variance
to
determine
whether
the
system
remains
eligible
for
the
variance
and
is
conforming
to
each
condition
of
the
variance.
(
6)
Ineligibility
for
variances
A
variance
shall
not
be
available
under
this
subsection
for
­
45
(
A)
any
maximum
contaminant
level
or
treatment
technique
for
a
contaminant
with
respect
to
which
a
national
primary
drinking
water
regulation
was
promulgated
prior
to
January
1,
1986;
or
(
B)
a
national
primary
drinking
water
regulation
for
a
microbial
contaminant
(
including
a
bacterium,
virus,
or
other
organism)
or
an
indicator
or
treatment
technique
for
a
microbial
contaminant.
(
7)
Regulations
and
guidance
(
A)
In
general
Not
later
than
2
years
after
August
6,
1996,
and
in
consultation
with
the
States,
the
Administrator
shall
promulgate
regulations
for
variances
to
be
granted
under
this
subsection.
The
regulations
shall,
at
a
minimum,
specify
­
(
i)
procedures
to
be
used
by
the
Administrator
or
a
State
to
grant
or
deny
variances,
including
requirements
for
notifying
the
Administrator
and
consumers
of
the
public
water
system
that
a
variance
is
proposed
to
be
granted
(
including
information
regarding
the
contaminant
and
variance)
and
requirements
for
a
public
hearing
on
the
variance
before
the
variance
is
granted;
(
ii)
requirements
for
the
installation
and
proper
operation
of
variance
technology
that
is
identified
(
pursuant
to
section
300g­
1(
b)(
15)
of
this
title)
for
small
systems
and
the
financial
and
technical
capability
to
operate
the
treatment
system,
including
operator
training
and
certification;
(
iii)
eligibility
criteria
for
a
variance
for
each
national
primary
drinking
water
regulation,
including
requirements
for
the
quality
of
the
source
water
(
pursuant
to
section
300g­
1(
b)(
15)(
A)
of
this
title);
and
(
iv)
information
requirements
for
variance
applications.
(
B)
Affordability
criteria
Not
later
than
18
months
after
August
6,
1996,
the
Administrator,
in
consultation
with
the
States
and
the
Rural
Utilities
Service
of
the
Department
of
Agriculture,
shall
publish
information
to
assist
the
States
in
developing
affordability
criteria.
The
affordability
criteria
shall
be
reviewed
by
the
States
not
less
often
than
every
5
years
to
determine
if
changes
are
needed
to
the
criteria.
(
8)
Review
by
the
Administrator
(
A)
In
general
The
Administrator
shall
periodically
review
the
program
of
each
State
that
has
primary
enforcement
responsibility
for
public
water
systems
under
section
300g­
2
of
this
title
with
respect
to
variances
to
determine
whether
the
variances
granted
by
the
State
comply
with
the
requirements
of
this
subsection.
With
respect
to
affordability,
the
determination
of
the
Administrator
shall
be
limited
to
whether
the
variances
granted
by
the
State
comply
with
the
affordability
criteria
developed
by
the
State.
(
B)
Notice
and
publication
If
the
Administrator
determines
that
variances
granted
by
a
State
are
not
in
compliance
with
affordability
criteria
developed
by
the
State
and
the
requirements
of
this
subsection,
the
Administrator
shall
notify
the
State
in
writing
of
the
deficiencies
and
make
public
the
determination.
46
(
9)
Approval
of
variances
A
State
proposing
to
grant
a
variance
under
this
subsection
to
a
public
water
system
serving
more
than
3,300
and
fewer
than
10,000
persons
shall
submit
the
variance
to
the
Administrator
for
review
and
approval
prior
to
the
issuance
of
the
variance.
The
Administrator
shall
approve
the
variance
if
it
meets
each
of
the
requirements
of
this
subsection.
The
Administrator
shall
approve
or
disapprove
the
variance
within
90
days.
If
the
Administrator
disapproves
a
variance
under
this
paragraph,
the
Administrator
shall
notify
the
State
in
writing
of
the
reasons
for
disapproval
and
the
variance
may
be
resubmitted
with
modifications
to
address
the
objections
stated
by
the
Administrator.
(
10)
Objections
to
variances
(
A)
By
the
Administrator
The
Administrator
may
review
and
object
to
any
variance
proposed
to
be
granted
by
a
State,
if
the
objection
is
communicated
to
the
State
not
later
than
90
days
after
the
State
proposes
to
grant
the
variance.
If
the
Administrator
objects
to
the
granting
of
a
variance,
the
Administrator
shall
notify
the
State
in
writing
of
each
basis
for
the
objection
and
propose
a
modification
to
the
variance
to
resolve
the
concerns
of
the
Administrator.
The
State
shall
make
the
recommended
modification
or
respond
in
writing
to
each
objection.
If
the
State
issues
the
variance
without
resolving
the
concerns
of
the
Administrator,
the
Administrator
may
overturn
the
State
decision
to
grant
the
variance
if
the
Administrator
determines
that
the
State
decision
does
not
comply
with
this
subsection.
(
B)
Petition
by
consumers
Not
later
than
30
days
after
a
State
exercising
primary
enforcement
responsibility
for
public
water
systems
under
section
300g­
2
of
this
title
proposes
to
grant
a
variance
for
a
public
water
system,
any
person
served
by
the
system
may
petition
the
Administrator
to
object
to
the
granting
of
a
variance.
The
Administrator
shall
respond
to
the
petition
and
determine
whether
to
object
to
the
variance
under
subparagraph
(
A)
not
later
than
60
days
after
the
receipt
of
the
petition.
(
C)
Timing
No
variance
shall
be
granted
by
a
State
until
the
later
of
the
following:
(
i)
90
days
after
the
State
proposes
to
grant
a
variance.
(
ii)
If
the
Administrator
objects
to
the
variance,
the
date
on
which
the
State
makes
the
recommended
modifications
or
responds
in
writing
to
each
objection.

Sec.
300g­
2
(
a)
In
general
For
purposes
of
this
subchapter,
a
State
has
primary
enforcement
responsibility
for
public
water
systems
during
any
period
for
which
the
Administrator
determines
(
pursuant
to
regulations
prescribed
under
subsection
(
b)
of
this
section)
that
such
State
­
(
1)
has
adopted
drinking
water
regulations
that
are
no
less
stringent
than
the
national
primary
drinking
water
regulations
promulgated
by
the
Administrator
under
subsections
(
a)
and
(
b)
of
section
300g­
1
of
this
title
not
later
than
2
years
after
the
date
on
which
the
regulations
are
promulgated
by
the
Administrator,
except
that
the
Administrator
may
provide
for
an
extension
of
not
more
than
2
years
if,
after
submission
and
review
of
47
appropriate,
adequate
documentation
from
the
State,
the
Administrator
determines
that
the
extension
is
necessary
and
justified;
(
2)
has
adopted
and
is
implementing
adequate
procedures
for
the
enforcement
of
such
State
regulations,
including
conducting
such
monitoring
and
making
such
inspections
as
the
Administrator
may
require
by
regulation;
(
3)
will
keep
such
records
and
make
such
reports
with
respect
to
its
activities
under
paragraphs
(
1)
and
(
2)
as
the
Administrator
may
require
by
regulation;
(
4)
if
it
permits
variances
or
exemptions,
or
both,
from
the
requirements
of
its
drinking
water
regulations
which
meet
the
requirements
of
paragraph
(
1),
permits
such
variances
and
exemptions
under
conditions
and
in
a
manner
which
is
not
less
stringent
than
the
conditions
under,
and
the
manner
in
which
variances
and
exemptions
may
be
granted
under
sections
300g­
4
and
300g­
5
of
this
title;
(
5)
has
adopted
and
can
implement
an
adequate
plan
for
the
provision
of
safe
drinking
water
under
emergency
circumstances
including
earthquakes,
floods,
hurricanes,
and
other
natural
disasters,
as
appropriate;
and
(
6)
has
adopted
authority
for
administrative
penalties
(
unless
the
constitution
of
the
State
prohibits
the
adoption
of
the
authority)
in
a
maximum
amount
­
(
A)
in
the
case
of
a
system
serving
a
population
of
more
than
10,000,
that
is
not
less
than
$
1,000
per
day
per
violation;
and
(
B)
in
the
case
of
any
other
system,
that
is
adequate
to
ensure
compliance
(
as
determined
by
the
State);
except
that
a
State
may
establish
a
maximum
limitation
on
the
total
amount
of
administrative
penalties
that
may
be
imposed
on
a
public
water
system
per
violation.
(
b)
Regulations
(
1)
The
Administrator
shall,
by
regulation
(
proposed
within
180
days
of
December
16,
1974),
prescribe
the
manner
in
which
a
State
may
apply
to
the
Administrator
for
a
determination
that
the
requirements
of
paragraphs
(
1),
(
2),
(
3),
and
(
4)
of
subsection
(
a)
of
this
section
are
satisfied
with
respect
to
the
State,
the
manner
in
which
the
determination
is
made,
the
period
for
which
the
determination
will
be
effective,
and
the
manner
in
which
the
Administrator
may
determine
that
such
requirements
are
no
longer
met.
Such
regulations
shall
require
that
before
a
determination
of
the
Administrator
that
such
requirements
are
met
or
are
no
longer
met
with
respect
to
a
State
may
become
effective,
the
Administrator
shall
notify
such
State
of
the
determination
and
the
reasons
therefor
and
shall
provide
an
opportunity
for
public
hearing
on
the
determination.
Such
regulations
shall
be
promulgated
(
with
such
modifications
as
the
Administrator
deems
appropriate)
within
90
days
of
the
publication
of
the
proposed
regulations
in
the
Federal
Register.
The
Administrator
shall
promptly
notify
in
writing
the
chief
executive
officer
of
each
State
of
the
promulgation
of
regulations
under
this
paragraph.
Such
notice
shall
contain
a
copy
of
the
regulations
and
shall
specify
a
State's
authority
under
this
subchapter
when
it
is
determined
to
have
primary
enforcement
responsibility
for
public
water
systems.
(
2)
When
an
application
is
submitted
in
accordance
with
the
Administrator's
regulations
under
paragraph
(
1),
the
Administrator
shall
within
90
days
of
the
date
on
which
such
48
application
is
submitted
(
A)
make
the
determination
applied
for,
or
(
B)
deny
the
application
and
notify
the
applicant
in
writing
of
the
reasons
for
his
denial.
(
c)
Interim
primary
enforcement
authority
A
State
that
has
primary
enforcement
authority
under
this
section
with
respect
to
each
existing
national
primary
drinking
water
regulation
shall
be
considered
to
have
primary
enforcement
authority
with
respect
to
each
new
or
revised
national
primary
drinking
water
regulation
during
the
period
beginning
on
the
effective
date
of
a
regulation
adopted
and
submitted
by
the
State
with
respect
to
the
new
or
revised
national
primary
drinking
water
regulation
in
accordance
with
subsection
(
b)(
1)
of
this
section
and
ending
at
such
time
as
the
Administrator
makes
a
determination
under
subsection
(
b)(
2)(
B)
of
this
section
with
respect
to
the
regulation.

Sec.
300g­
4(
e)(
7)

(
7)
Regulations
and
guidance
(
A)
In
general
Not
later
than
2
years
after
August
6,
1996,
and
in
consultation
with
the
States,
the
Administrator
shall
promulgate
regulations
for
variances
to
be
granted
under
this
subsection.
The
regulations
shall,
at
a
minimum,
specify
­
(
i)
procedures
to
be
used
by
the
Administrator
or
a
State
to
grant
or
deny
variances,
including
requirements
for
notifying
the
Administrator
and
consumers
of
the
public
water
system
that
a
variance
is
proposed
to
be
granted
(
including
information
regarding
the
contaminant
and
variance)
and
requirements
for
a
public
hearing
on
the
variance
before
the
variance
is
granted;
(
ii)
requirements
for
the
installation
and
proper
operation
of
variance
technology
that
is
identified
(
pursuant
to
section
300g­
1(
b)(
15)
of
this
title)
for
small
systems
and
the
financial
and
technical
capability
to
operate
the
treatment
system,
including
operator
training
and
certification;
(
iii)
eligibility
criteria
for
a
variance
for
each
national
primary
drinking
water
regulation,
including
requirements
for
the
quality
of
the
source
water
(
pursuant
to
section
300g­
1(
b)(
15)(
A)
of
this
title);
and
(
iv)
information
requirements
for
variance
applications.
(
B)
Affordability
criteria
Not
later
than
18
months
after
August
6,
1996,
the
Administrator,
in
consultation
with
the
States
and
the
Rural
Utilities
Service
of
the
Department
of
Agriculture,
shall
publish
information
to
assist
the
States
in
developing
affordability
criteria.
The
affordability
criteria
shall
be
reviewed
by
the
States
not
less
often
than
every
5
years
to
determine
if
changes
are
needed
to
the
criteria.

Sec.
300g­
5
(
a)(
1)

(
a)
Requisite
findings
A
State
which
has
primary
enforcement
responsibility
may
exempt
any
public
water
system
within
the
State's
jurisdiction
from
any
requirement
respecting
a
maximum
contaminant
level
or
any
treatment
technique
requirement,
or
from
both,
of
an
applicable
national
primary
drinking
water
regulation
upon
a
finding
that
­
49
(
1)
due
to
compelling
factors
(
which
may
include
economic
factors,
including
qualification
of
the
public
water
system
as
a
system
serving
a
disadvantaged
community
pursuant
to
section
300j­
12(
d)
of
this
title),
the
public
water
system
is
unable
to
comply
with
such
contaminant
level
or
treatment
technique
requirement,
or
to
implement
measures
to
develop
an
alternative
source
of
water
supply,
(
2)
the
public
water
system
was
in
operation
on
the
effective
date
of
such
contaminant
level
or
treatment
technique
requirement,
or,
for
a
system
that
was
not
in
operation
by
that
date,
only
if
no
reasonable
alternative
source
of
drinking
water
is
available
to
such
new
system,
(
3)
the
granting
of
the
exemption
will
not
result
in
an
unreasonable
risk
to
health;
and
reasonably
be
made
that
will
result
in
compliance
with
this
subchapter
or,
if
compliance
cannot
be
achieved,
improve
the
quality
of
the
drinking
water.

Sec.
300g­
9
(
a)
State
authority
for
new
systems
A
State
shall
receive
only
80
percent
of
the
allotment
that
the
State
is
otherwise
entitled
to
receive
under
section
300j­
12
of
this
title
(
relating
to
State
loan
funds)
unless
the
State
has
obtained
the
legal
authority
or
other
means
to
ensure
that
all
new
community
water
systems
and
new
nontransient,
noncommunity
water
systems
commencing
operation
after
October
1,
1999,
demonstrate
technical,
managerial,
and
financial
capacity
with
respect
to
each
national
primary
drinking
water
regulation
in
effect,
or
likely
to
be
in
effect,
on
the
date
of
commencement
of
operations.
(
b)
Systems
in
significant
noncompliance
(
1)
List
Beginning
not
later
than
1
year
after
August
6,
1996,
each
State
shall
prepare,
periodically
update,
and
submit
to
the
Administrator
a
list
of
community
water
systems
and
nontransient,
noncommunity
water
systems
that
have
a
history
of
significant
noncompliance
with
this
subchapter
(
as
defined
in
guidelines
issued
prior
to
August
6,
1996,
or
any
revisions
of
the
guidelines
that
have
been
made
in
consultation
with
the
States)
and,
to
the
extent
practicable,
the
reasons
for
noncompliance.
(
2)
Report
Not
later
than
5
years
after
August
6,
1996,
and
as
part
of
the
capacity
development
strategy
of
the
State,
each
State
shall
report
to
the
Administrator
on
the
success
of
enforcement
mechanisms
and
initial
capacity
development
efforts
in
assisting
the
public
water
systems
listed
under
paragraph
(
1)
to
improve
technical,
managerial,
and
financial
capacity.
(
3)
Withholding
The
list
and
report
under
this
subsection
shall
be
considered
part
of
the
capacity
development
strategy
of
the
State
required
under
subsection
(
c)
of
this
section
for
purposes
of
the
withholding
requirements
of
section
300j­
12(
a)(
1)(
G)(
i)
of
this
title
(
relating
to
State
loan
funds).
(
c)
Capacity
development
strategy
(
1)
In
general
Beginning
4
years
after
August
6,
1996,
a
State
shall
receive
only
­
(
A)
90
percent
in
fiscal
year
2001;
(
B)
85
percent
in
fiscal
year
2002;
and
50
(
C)
80
percent
in
each
subsequent
fiscal
year,
of
the
allotment
that
the
State
is
otherwise
entitled
to
receive
under
section
300j­
12
of
this
title
(
relating
to
State
loan
funds),
unless
the
State
is
developing
and
implementing
a
strategy
to
assist
public
water
systems
in
acquiring
and
maintaining
technical,
managerial,
and
financial
capacity.
(
2)
Content
In
preparing
the
capacity
development
strategy,
the
State
shall
consider,
solicit
public
comment
on,
and
include
as
appropriate
­
(
A)
the
methods
or
criteria
that
the
State
will
use
to
identify
and
prioritize
the
public
water
systems
most
in
need
of
improving
technical,
managerial,
and
financial
capacity;
(
B)
a
description
of
the
institutional,
regulatory,
financial,
tax,
or
legal
factors
at
the
Federal,
State,
or
local
level
that
encourage
or
impair
capacity
development;
(
C)
a
description
of
how
the
State
will
use
the
authorities
and
resources
of
this
subchapter
or
other
means
to
­
(
i)
assist
public
water
systems
in
complying
with
national
primary
drinking
water
regulations;
(
ii)
encourage
the
development
of
partnerships
between
public
water
systems
to
enhance
the
technical,
managerial,
and
financial
capacity
of
the
systems;
and
(
iii)
assist
public
water
systems
in
the
training
and
certification
of
operators;
(
D)
a
description
of
how
the
State
will
establish
a
baseline
and
measure
improvements
in
capacity
with
respect
to
national
primary
drinking
water
regulations
and
State
drinking
water
law;
and
(
E)
an
identification
of
the
persons
that
have
an
interest
in
and
are
involved
in
the
development
and
implementation
of
the
capacity
development
strategy
(
including
all
appropriate
agencies
of
Federal,
State,
and
local
governments,
private
and
nonprofit
public
water
systems,
and
public
water
system
customers).
(
3)
Report
Not
later
than
2
years
after
the
date
on
which
a
State
first
adopts
a
capacity
development
strategy
under
this
subsection,
and
every
3
years
thereafter,
the
head
of
the
State
agency
that
has
primary
responsibility
to
carry
out
this
subchapter
in
the
State
shall
submit
to
the
Governor
a
report
that
shall
also
be
available
to
the
public
on
the
efficacy
of
the
strategy
and
progress
made
toward
improving
the
technical,
managerial,
and
financial
capacity
of
public
water
systems
in
the
State.
(
4)
Review
The
decisions
of
the
State
under
this
section
regarding
any
particular
public
water
system
are
not
subject
to
review
by
the
Administrator
and
may
not
serve
as
the
basis
for
withholding
funds
under
section
300j­
12
of
this
title.
(
d)
Federal
assistance
(
1)
In
general
The
Administrator
shall
support
the
States
in
developing
capacity
development
strategies.
(
2)
Informational
assistance
(
A)
In
general
Not
later
than
180
days
after
August
6,
1996,
the
Administrator
shall
­
51
(
i)
conduct
a
review
of
State
capacity
development
efforts
in
existence
on
August
6,
1996,
and
publish
information
to
assist
States
and
public
water
systems
in
capacity
development
efforts;
and
(
ii)
initiate
a
partnership
with
States,
public
water
systems,
and
the
public
to
develop
information
for
States
on
recommended
operator
certification
requirements.
(
B)
Publication
of
information
The
Administrator
shall
publish
the
information
developed
through
the
partnership
under
subparagraph
(
A)(
ii)
not
later
than
18
months
after
August
6,
1996.
(
3)
Promulgation
of
drinking
water
regulations
In
promulgating
a
national
primary
drinking
water
regulation,
the
Administrator
shall
include
an
analysis
of
the
likely
effect
of
compliance
with
the
regulation
on
the
technical,
financial,
and
managerial
capacity
of
public
water
systems.
(
4)
Guidance
for
new
systems
Not
later
than
2
years
after
August
6,
1996,
the
Administrator
shall
publish
guidance
developed
in
consultation
with
the
States
describing
legal
authorities
and
other
means
to
ensure
that
all
new
community
water
systems
and
new
nontransient,
noncommunity
water
systems
demonstrate
technical,
managerial,
and
financial
capacity
with
respect
to
national
primary
drinking
water
regulations.
(
e)
Variances
and
exemptions
Based
on
information
obtained
under
subsection
(
c)(
3)
of
this
section,
the
Administrator
shall,
as
appropriate,
modify
regulations
concerning
variances
and
exemptions
for
small
public
water
systems
to
ensure
flexibility
in
the
use
of
the
variances
and
exemptions.
Nothing
in
this
subsection
shall
be
interpreted,
construed,
or
applied
to
affect
or
alter
the
requirements
of
section
300g­
4
or
300g­
5
of
this
title.
(
f)
Small
public
water
systems
technology
assistance
centers
(
1)
Grant
program
The
Administrator
is
authorized
to
make
grants
to
institutions
of
higher
learning
to
establish
and
operate
small
public
water
system
technology
assistance
centers
in
the
United
States.
(
2)
Responsibilities
of
the
centers
The
responsibilities
of
the
small
public
water
system
technology
assistance
centers
established
under
this
subsection
shall
include
the
conduct
of
training
and
technical
assistance
relating
to
the
information,
performance,
and
technical
needs
of
small
public
water
systems
or
public
water
systems
that
serve
Indian
Tribes.
(
3)
Applications
Any
institution
of
higher
learning
interested
in
receiving
a
grant
under
this
subsection
shall
submit
to
the
Administrator
an
application
in
such
form
and
containing
such
information
as
the
Administrator
may
require
by
regulation.
(
4)
Selection
criteria
The
Administrator
shall
select
recipients
of
grants
under
this
subsection
on
the
basis
of
the
following
criteria:
(
A)
The
small
public
water
system
technology
assistance
center
shall
be
located
in
a
State
that
is
representative
of
the
needs
of
the
region
in
which
the
State
is
located
for
addressing
the
drinking
water
needs
of
small
and
rural
communities
or
Indian
Tribes.
(
B)
The
grant
recipient
shall
be
located
in
a
region
that
has
experienced
problems,
or
may
reasonably
be
foreseen
to
experience
problems,
with
small
and
rural
public
water
systems.
52
(
C)
The
grant
recipient
shall
have
access
to
expertise
in
small
public
water
system
technology
management.
(
D)
The
grant
recipient
shall
have
the
capability
to
disseminate
the
results
of
small
public
water
system
technology
and
training
programs.
(
E)
The
projects
that
the
grant
recipient
proposes
to
carry
out
under
the
grant
are
necessary
and
appropriate.
(
F)
The
grant
recipient
has
regional
support
beyond
the
host
institution.
(
5)
Consortia
of
States
At
least
2
of
the
grants
under
this
subsection
shall
be
made
to
consortia
of
States
with
low
population
densities.
(
6)
Authorization
of
appropriations
There
are
authorized
to
be
appropriated
to
make
grants
under
this
subsection
$
2,000,000
for
each
of
the
fiscal
years
1997
through
1999,
and
$
5,000,000
for
each
of
the
fiscal
years
2000
through
2003.
(
g)
Environmental
finance
centers
(
1)
In
general
The
Administrator
shall
provide
initial
funding
for
one
or
more
university­
based
environmental
finance
centers
for
activities
that
provide
technical
assistance
to
State
and
local
officials
in
developing
the
capacity
of
public
water
systems.
Any
such
funds
shall
be
used
only
for
activities
that
are
directly
related
to
this
subchapter.
(
2)
National
capacity
development
clearinghouse
The
Administrator
shall
establish
a
national
public
water
system
capacity
development
clearinghouse
to
receive
and
disseminate
information
with
respect
to
developing,
improving,
and
maintaining
financial
and
managerial
capacity
at
public
water
systems.
The
Administrator
shall
ensure
that
the
clearinghouse
does
not
duplicate
other
federally
supported
clearinghouse
activities.
(
3)
Capacity
development
techniques
The
Administrator
may
request
an
environmental
finance
center
funded
under
paragraph
(
1)
to
develop
and
test
managerial,
financial,
and
institutional
techniques
for
capacity
development.
The
techniques
may
include
capacity
assessment
methodologies,
manual
and
computer
based
public
water
system
rate
models
and
capital
planning
models,
public
water
system
consolidation
procedures,
and
regionalization
models.
(
4)
Authorization
of
appropriations
There
are
authorized
to
be
appropriated
to
carry
out
this
subsection
$
1,500,000
for
each
of
the
fiscal
years
1997
through
2003.
(
5)
Limitation
No
portion
of
any
funds
made
available
under
this
subsection
may
be
used
for
lobbying
expenses.
53
Appendix
B
Federal
Register
Notice
54
This
Page
Intentionally
Left
Blank
55
Insert
Federal
Register
Notice
Here
56
57
Appendix
C
2000
Community
Water
Systems
Questionnaires
58
This
Page
Intentionally
Left
Blank
Small,
Medium
and
Large
System
Questionnaire
Page
59
of
95
2000
Community
Water
Systems
Survey
Small,
Medium
and
Large
Questionnaire
Please
fill
out
this
questionnaire
to
the
best
of
you
ability,
and
return
it
in
the
enclosed
envelope.
If
schematics,
diagrams,
financial
or
other
reports
contain
the
information
requested
by
a
question,
you
may
enclose
and
refer
to
the
documentation
rather
than
fill
out
the
question.
If
you
have
any
questions
about
this
survey,
you
may
call
the
following
toll
free
number
for
assistance.
For
technical
assistance,
call:
(
800)
___­____
Small,
Medium
and
Large
System
Questionnaire
Page
60
of
95
This
page
intentionally
left
blank
Small,
Medium
and
Large
System
Questionnaire
Page
61
of
95
1.
Please
provide
the
name,
title,
and
telephone
number
of
the
most
knowledgeable
person
to
contact
for
information
on:

(
A)
Part
I
 
Operating
Characteristics
Name:
Title:

Tel.
No.
Fax
No.

e­
mail:

(
B)
Part
II
 
Financial
Characteristics
(
Write
"
SAME"
if
same
as
above)

Name:
Title:

Tel.
No.
Fax
No.

e­
mail:

2.
Please
specify
the
end
date
of
the
most
recent
12­
month
period
for
which
you
are
providing
operating
and
financial
information
for
your
public
water
supply.

A.
Operating
information
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
/
/
(
mm
/
dd
/
yy)

B.
Financial
information
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
/
/
(
mm
/
dd
/
yy)

Part
I
 
Operating
Characteristics
3.
Please
classify
your
water
system
using
the
following
criteria
(
circle
one).

Owned
or
operated
by
a
government
or
public
agency
(
including
government­
owned
systems
that
hire
a
private
company
to
operate
the
system)
.
.
.
1
Owned
privately
and
operated
primarily
as
a
water
business
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
2
Owned
privately
and
operated
as
a
necessary
part
of
another
business
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
3
Small,
Medium
and
Large
System
Questionnaire
Page
62
of
95
4.
If
your
system
is
privately
owned,
please
select
one
of
following
that
best
describes
your
water
business
(
circle
one).

Investor
owned;
operating
separately
but
financially
dependent
on
a
parent
company
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
1
Investor
owned;
operating
separately
and
not
financially
dependent
on
a
parent
company
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
2
Owned
and
operated
by
a
homeowners'
association
or
subdivision
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
3
Something
else
(
Please
specify)
4
5.
If
your
system
is
owned
or
operated
by
the
government,
please
select
one
of
following
that
best
describes
the
form
of
government
(
circle
one).

Town,
township,
village,
or
municipal
government
.
.
.
.
1
County,
borough,
or
parish
government
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
2
State
government
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
3
Special
district
government
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
4
An
authority
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
5
The
Federal
government
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
6
Some
other
government
(
Please
specify)
7
Small,
Medium
and
Large
System
Questionnaire
Page
63
of
95
A.
PRODUCTION
and
TREATMENT
6A.
What
was
the
amount
of
water
that
was
produced
and
delivered
to
each
of
the
following
customer
categories
during
the
last
year
[
as
defined
by
your
answer
to
Question
2A]?
(
In
millions
of
gallons.
Note:
if
you
cannot
distinguish
among
the
different
types
of
non­
residential
customers,
enter
the
total
for
your
non­
residential
customers
in
line
3.
d.)

Customer
Type
Total
1.
Sold
to
other
public
water
suppliers:

a.
Treated
Water
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
Millions
of
Gallons/
Yr.

b.
Untreated
Water
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
Millions
of
Gallons/
Yr.

2.
Residential
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
Millions
of
Gallons/
Yr.

3.
Non­
residential
a.
Commercial/
industrial
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
Millions
of
Gallons/
Yr.

b.
Agricultural
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
Millions
of
Gallons/
Yr.

c.
Other
(
specify)
Millions
of
Gallons/
Yr.

d.
Subtotal,
non­
residential
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
Millions
of
Gallons/
Yr.

4.
Unaccounted
for
water
not
included
above
(
including
uncompensated
usage
and
system
losses)
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
Millions
of
Gallons/
Yr.

5.
Total,
all
customer
types
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
Millions
of
Gallons/
Yr.

B.
Provide
the
name
of
each
public
water
supplier
included
in
the
response
to
Question
6A(
a),
above.

1.
Treated
Water
2.
Untreated
Water
7.
How
much
of
the
water
reported
in
Question
6A
came
from
each
of
the
following
sources
last
year?
(
in
millions
of
gallons;
answer
`
none'
if
a
source
does
not
apply).

a.
Surface
water
(
non­
purchased)
(
including
Ground
Water
Under
the
Direct
Influence
of
Surface
Water)
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
Millions
of
Gallons/
Yr.

b.
Ground
water
(
non­
purchased)
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
Millions
of
Gallons/
Yr.

c.
Purchased
water
1)
Treated
water
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
Millions
of
Gallons/
Yr.

2)
Untreated
water
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
Millions
of
Gallons/
Yr.

d.
Other
(
specify)
.
.
.
.
Millions
of
Gallons/
Yr.

8.
What
was
the
maximum
daily
water
production
from
all
sources
for
this
utility
over
a
single
24
hour
period?
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
million
gallons
per
day
Small,
Medium
and
Large
System
Questionnaire
Page
64
of
95
Please
refer
to
the
following
definitions
and
schematic
for
an
explanation
of
the
terms
used
in
questions
9
through
15.
You
may
submit
your
own
diagrams
or
schematics
as
needed
to
respond
to
these
questions.
Please
note
that
the
identifier
numbers
used
in
the
questions
do
not
refer
to
specific
items
in
the
schematic.
For
example,
use
`
S1'
to
refer
to
your
first
surface
water
source,
regardless
of
whether
it
is
a
flowing
stream,
as
depicted
in
the
schematic,
or
another
surface
water
source.

Term
Definition
Code
in
the
Schematic
Surface
water
intake
A
surface
water
intake
refers
to
the
transmission
of
untreated
water
from
a
surface
water
source
(
flowing
stream,
lake,
reservoir,
or
ground
water
under
the
direct
influence
of
surface
water)
to
a
water
treatment
plant
at
the
utility
(
see
accompanying
diagram).
S1,
S2
Ground
water
intake
A
ground
water
intake
refers
to
the
transmission
of
untreated
water
from
one
or
more
wells
to
a
water
treatment
plant
or
directly
into
the
distribution
system.
Where
the
water
from
multiple
wells
flows
through
a
common
pipe
prior
to
entry
into
the
treatment
plant
or
distribution
system,
the
combined
flow
is
considered
one
ground
water
intake
(
see
accompanying
diagram).
G1
 
G4
Purchased
water
intake
A
purchased
water
intake
refers
to
the
transmission
of
water
from
the
seller's
utility
to
a
water
treatment
plant
or
directly
into
the
distribution
system
of
the
purchaser's
utility.
P1,
P2
Water
treatment
plant
A
facility
where
water
is
filtered,
disinfected,
and/
or
otherwise
treated
prior
to
its
transmission
into
the
distribution
system
(
or
its
conveyance
to
another
purchasing
water
utility).
For
the
purposes
of
this
survey,
simple
disinfection
only
or
pH
adjustment
prior
to
entry
into
the
distribution
system
are
considered
to
be
a
water
treatment
plant.
WTP
1,
WTP
2
Entry
point
An
entry
point
is
where
treated
or
untreated
potable
water
enters
into
the
utility's
distribution
system.
E1
 
E4
Small,
Medium
and
Large
System
Questionnaire
Page
65
of
95
Figure
1:
Sample
Diagram
of
Intakes,
Treatment
Plants,
and
Entry
Points
Small,
Medium
and
Large
System
Questionnaire
Page
66
of
95
9.
Provide
the
following
information
for
the
surface
water,
ground
water,
and
purchased
water
intakes
for
this
utility:
MGD
refers
to
Millions
of
gallons
daily.
If
the
source
is
used
on
a
seasonal
basis,
the
average
daily
amount
is
for
the
months
in
which
water
is
drawn
from
the
source.

A.
Surface
Source.

Surface
water
intake
identifiers
What
is
the
source
type
for
each
surface
water
intake?
(
circle
the
appropriate
number)
What
was
the
average
daily
amount
of
water
drawn
from
each
surface
water
intake
during
the
reporting
period?
(
MGD)
What
is
the
estimated
maximum
daily
potential
amount
of
water
that
can
be
drawn
from
each
surface
water
intake,
given
water
availability
constraints
only?
(
MGD)*
What
is
the
estimated
maximum
daily
potential
amount
of
water
that
can
be
drawn
from
each
surface
water
intake,
given
current
pumping
and
equipment
constraints
only?
(
MGD)*
Flowing
stream
Reservoir
or
lake
Groundwater
under
the
direct
influence
of
surface
water
S1
1
2
3
S2
1
2
3
S3
1
2
3
S4
1
2
3
S5
1
2
3
Q9A
Totals
*
If
not
limited
enter
"
no
limit"
here.

B.
Ground
water
source.

Ground
water
intake
identifiers
How
many
individual
wells
supply
each
ground
water
intake?
What
was
the
average
daily
amount
of
water
drawn
from
each
ground
water
intake
during
the
reporting
period?
(
MGD)
What
is
the
estimated
maximum
daily
potential
amount
drawn
from
each
ground
water
intake
given
water
availability
constraints
only?
(
MGD)*
What
is
the
estimated
maximum
daily
potential
amount
drawn
from
each
ground
water
intake
given
current
pumping
and
equipment
constraints
only?
(
MGD)*

G1
G2
G3
G4
G5
Q9B
Totals
*
If
not
limited
enter
"
no
limit"
here.
Small,
Medium
and
Large
System
Questionnaire
Page
67
of
95
C.
Purchased
water
source.

Purchased
water
intake
identifiers
Provide
the
names
of
the
sellers
for
this
water
What
was
the
average
daily
amount
of
water
drawn
from
each
purchased
water
intake
during
the
reporting
period?
(
MGD)
What
is
the
estimated
maximum
daily
potential
amount
drawn
from
each
purchased
water
intake
given
water
availability
constraints
only?
(
MGD)*
What
is
the
estimated
maximum
daily
potential
amount
drawn
from
each
purchased
water
intake
given
water
availability
constraints
only?
(
MGD)*

P1
P2
P3
P4
P5
Q9C
Totals
*
Totals
for
all
intakes
Q9A­
Q9C
(
MGD)

10.
Provide
the
following
information
for
each
of
the
water
treatment
plants
at
this
utility.
Design
Capacity
refers
to
the
maximum
amount
the
plant
can
produce
in
a
single
24
hour
period
with
all
treatment
trains
operating
at
capacity.
Peak
daily
production
refers
to
the
maximum
amount
produced
in
a
single
day
over
the
last
twelve
months.

If
your
system
does
not
have
a
treatment
plant,
please
check
here

and
go
to
Question
16.

Water
treatment
plant
identifiers
List
all
of
the
surface,
ground,
and
purchased
water
intake
identifiers
from
Question
9
that
feed
into
each
water
treatment
plant.
What
was
the
average
daily
production
for
each
water
treatment
plant?
(
MGD)
What
was
the
peak
daily
production
for
each
water
treatment
plant?
(
MGD)
What
was
the
design
capacity
for
each
water
treatment
plant?
(
MGD)

WTP1
WTP2
WTP3
WPT4
WTP5
Small,
Medium
and
Large
System
Questionnaire
Page
68
of
95
11.
Using
the
water
treatment
plant
identifiers
from
Question
10,
indicate
which
water
treatment
objectives
apply
to
each
plant.
(
Circle
"
1"
for
Yes
and
"
2"
for
No).

Do
you
have
this
treatment
objective
in
the
following
water
treatment
plant?
(
use
the
plant
number
from
Question
9)

WTP1
WTP2
WTP3
WTP4
WTP5
Yes
No
Yes
No
Yes
No
Yes
No
Yes
No
Algae
control
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
1
2
1
2
1
2
1
2
1
2
Corrosion
control
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
1
2
1
2
1
2
1
2
1
2
Disinfection
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
1
2
1
2
1
2
1
2
1
2
Dechlorination
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
1
2
1
2
1
2
1
2
1
2
Oxidation
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
1
2
1
2
1
2
1
2
1
2
Iron
removal
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
1
2
1
2
1
2
1
2
1
2
Manganese
removal
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
1
2
1
2
1
2
1
2
1
2
Fluoridation
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
1
2
1
2
1
2
1
2
1
2
Taste/
odor
control
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
1
2
1
2
1
2
1
2
1
2
TOC
removal
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
1
2
1
2
1
2
1
2
1
2
Particulate/
Turbidity
Removal
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
1
2
1
2
1
2
1
2
1
2
Softening
(
hardness
removal)
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
1
2
1
2
1
2
1
2
1
2
Recarbonation
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
1
2
1
2
1
2
1
2
1
2
Organic
contaminant
removal
(
e.
g.,
VOCs,
pesticides)
.
.
.
.
.
.
1
2
1
2
1
2
1
2
1
2
Inorganic
contaminant
removal
(
e.
g.,
arsenic)
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
1
2
1
2
1
2
1
2
1
2
Radionuclides
contaminant
removal
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
1
2
1
2
1
2
1
2
1
2
Other
(
specify)
1
2
1
2
1
2
1
2
1
2
12A.
Using
the
Water
Treatment
plant
identifiers
from
Question
10,
characterize
the
treatment
used
and
the
sequence
of
treatment
for
each
plant
by
entering
a
number
to
identify
the
order
in
which
each
treatment
process
occurs
for
each
water
treatment
plant.
(
See
example.
If
you
have
the
option
of
more
than
one
treatment
type
for
a
single
step
 
e.
g.,
you
can
use
either
chlorine
or
chlorine
dioxide
for
disinfection
 
assign
the
same
sequence
number
to
each
alternative).

Water
Treatment
Plant
Number
(
from
Question
10)

Treatment
Category
Specify
treatment
type
(
where
applicable)
Example1
WTP1
WTP2
WTP3
WTP4
WTP5
Chlorination
only
Raw
water
storage/
Presedimentation
basin
Predisinfection/
oxidation
prior
to
sedimentation
Chlorine
2
Chlorine
dioxide
Chloramines
Ozone
Potassium
permanganate
3
Other
Predisinfection
Predisinfection/
Oxidation
prior
to
filtration
Chlorine
Chlorine
dioxide
Chloramines
Ozone
Water
Treatment
Plant
Number
(
from
Question
10)

Treatment
Category
Specify
treatment
type
(
where
applicable)
Example1
WTP1
WTP2
WTP3
WTP4
WTP5
Small,
Medium
and
Large
System
Questionnaire
Page
69
of
95
Potassium
permanganate
Other
Predisinfection
Rapid
mix
Coagulation/
Flocculation
Polymers
Settling/
Sedimentation
4
Softening
Lime/
soda
ash
Recarbonation
Ion
exchange
Filtration
Direct
filtration
Micro
strainer
Slow
sand
Bag
and
Cartridge
Rapid
sand
Green
sand
5
Diatomaceous
earth
Dual/
Multi
media
Pressure
filtration
Other
(
specify)

Post­
disinfection
after
filters
Chlorine
10
Chlorine
dioxide
Chloramines
Ozone
UV
Other
post
disinfection
Clearwell
Membranes
Reverse
osmosis
Micro
filtration
Ultrafiltration
Nanofiltration
Corrosion
Control
Miscellaneous
Ion
exchange
Granular
activated
carbon
Activated
Alumina
Aeration
1
Other
(
please
specify)
9
1.
This
is
an
example
of
a
greensand
filter
plant
for
treating
ground
water
for
Iron
and
Manganese
removal.
In
this
example
`
other
`
is
contact
basin.
Small,
Medium
and
Large
System
Questionnaire
Page
70
of
95
B.
Using
the
Water
Treatment
plant
identifiers
from
Question
10,
indicate
which
filter
backwash
techniques
you
use
for
each
treatment
plant
that
uses
filtration.
(
Check
all
that
apply).

Water
Treatment
Plant
Number
(
from
Question
10)

Filter
backwash
Example
WTP1
WTP2
WTP3
WTP4
WTP5
Air
scouring
Surface
wash
x
Recycle
filter
backwash
Filter
to
waste
x
Other
filter
backwash
x
13.
[
ASKED
OF
VERY
LARGE
SYSTEMS
ONLY]

14A.
Using
the
water
treatment
plant
identifiers
from
Question
10,
indicate
if
the
specified
residuals
management
practices
are
used
and
provide
the
requested
information
regarding
potential
discharge.
(
Circle
"
1"
for
Yes
and
"
2"
for
No).

Do
you
use
the
following
residual
management
process
in
the
following
water
treatment
plants?
(
use
the
water
treatment
plant
numbers
from
Question
10)

Residual
Management
WTP1
WTP2
WTP3
WTP4
WTP5
Category
Yes/
No
Yes/
No
Yes/
No
Yes/
No
Yes/
No
Mechanical
dewatering
1
2
1
2
1
2
1
2
1
2
Non­
mechanical
dewatering
1
2
1
2
1
2
1
2
1
2
Chemical
precipitation
1
2
1
2
1
2
1
2
1
2
Land
application
1
2
1
2
1
2
1
2
1
2
Nonhazardous
waste
landfill
1
2
1
2
1
2
1
2
1
2
Deep
well
injection
1
2
1
2
1
2
1
2
1
2
Evaporation
pond
1
2
1
2
1
2
1
2
1
2
French
drain
1
2
1
2
1
2
1
2
1
2
Direct
Discharge
1
2
1
2
1
2
1
2
1
2
Septic
System
1
2
1
2
1
2
1
2
1
2
Sanitary
Sewer
1
2
1
2
1
2
1
2
1
2
Are
direct
discharge
and
sanitary
sewer
options
if
they
are
not
currently
being
used?
1
2
1
2
1
2
1
2
1
2
B.
Please
describe
any
current
limitation
on
the
use
of
discharge
and
sanitary
sewer
for
residuals
management
at
any
of
the
water
treatment
plants
at
this
utility.
Small,
Medium
and
Large
System
Questionnaire
Page
71
of
95
15.
Using
the
water
treatment
plant
identifiers
from
Question
10,
provide
the
following
information
regarding
operators
and
SCADA
usage
at
each
water
treatment
plant
at
this
utility.
(
SCADA
Supervisory
Control
and
Data
Acquisition
system
is
an
automated
system
for
monitoring,
controlling,
and
/
or
transmitting
information
on
water
treatment
plant
processes).

Water
Treatment
Plant
(
use
the
water
treatment
plant
numbers
from
Question
10)

Operator
Information
WTP1
WTP2
WTP3
WTP4
WTP5
Yes/
No
Yes/
No
Yes/
No
Yes/
No
Yes/
No
1.
Is
there
an
operator
on­
site
24
hours
per
day
seven
days
a
week?
(
Circle
yes
or
no)
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
1
2
1
2
1
2
1
2
1
2
2.
If
the
above
answer
is
no,
estimate
the
total
number
of
hours
per
week
that
an
operator
is
on
site
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.

3.
Is
there
a
SCADA
in
use
for
process
monitoring?
(
Circle
yes
or
no)
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
1
2
1
2
1
2
1
2
1
2
4.
Is
there
a
SCADA
in
use
for
process
control?
(
Circle
yes
or
no)
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
1
2
1
2
1
2
1
2
1
2
B.
STORAGE
AND
DISTRIBUTION
SYSTEM
INFORMATION
16.
Please
indicate
whether
you
have
the
following
types
of
treated­
water
storage,
and
if
so,
the
number
of
storage
facilities
and
their
capacity,
in
millions
of
gallons.

Yes
No
If
yes,
what
is
the
total
capacity
of
the
storage
(
in
millions
of
gallons)?

A.
Do
you
have
clearwell
storage
after
treatment?
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
1
2
B.
Do
you
have
storage
after
treatment
(
and
after
clearwell,
if
any),
but
before
the
distribution
system
with
dedicated
entry
and
exit
points?
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
1
2
C.
Do
you
have
storage
after
treatment
(
and
after
clearwell,
if
any),
but
before
the
distribution
system
with
a
common
inlet
and
outlet
(
i.
e.,
rides
the
line)
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
1
2
D.
Do
you
have
storage
within
the
distribution
system
with
dedicated
entry
and
exit
points?
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
1
2
Small,
Medium
and
Large
System
Questionnaire
Page
72
of
95
Please
note:
If
your
system
serves
a
population
that
changes
on
a
seasonal
basis,
please
indicate
the
highest
seasonal
number
of
people
served
or
high
season
active
connections.
17.
Indicate
the
length
and
age
of
the
distribution
mains
pipe
in
your
system,
and
length
of
pipe
replaced.

Percentage
of
pipe
that
is:
Length
of
Pipe
Replaced
in
the
Last
5
Years1
(
In
Miles)
Length
of
Pipe
You
Anticipate
Will
Be
Replaced
in
the
Next
5
Years
(
In
Miles)
Pipe
Diameter
Length
of
Pipe
(
In
Miles)
Less
than
40
Years
Old
Between
40
and
80
Years
Old
More
than
80
Years
Old
Less
than
or
equal
to
6"
%
%
%

Greater
than
6"
but
less
than
or
equal
to
10"
%
%
%

Greater
than
10"
%
%
%

1.
Ending
on
the
date
shown
in
your
answer
to
Question
2A.

18A.
Does
your
system
serve
a
population
that
changes
on
a
seasonal
basis
(
for
example,
is
it
a
winter
or
summer
resort
area)?

1
Yes
2
No
B.
How
many
people
and
connections
does
your
system
currently
serve
year
round?
Please
indicate
the
number
of
connections
and
number
of
people
served
by
your
system
for
all
customer
types
that
apply.
(
If
you
cannot
distinguish
among
the
different
types
of
non­
residential
customers,
enter
the
total
for
your
non­
residential
customers
in
line
c.
4.)

Customer
Type
Connections
Number
of
People
a.
Sold
to
other
public
water
suppliers
1.
Treated
water
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.

2.
Untreated
water
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.

b.
Residential
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.

c.
Non­
residential
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.

1.
Commercial/
industrial
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.

2.
Agricultural
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.

3.
Other
(
specify)

4.
Subtotal,
non­
residential
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.

19.
Please
mark
on
the
enclosed
census
map
the
approximate
area
covered
by
your
service
area.

C.
CROSS
CONNECTION
CONTROL
Small,
Medium
and
Large
System
Questionnaire
Page
73
of
95
20.
Does
your
system
have
a
cross
connection
control
(
CCC)
program?
(
Circle
one)

1
Yes
2
No
(
Go
to
Question
24)

3
Don't
Know
(
Go
to
Question
24)

21.
What
type
of
program
does
your
system
have?
(
Circle
one)

1
Containment
(
a
program
that
addresses
actual
or
potential
backflow
from
a
customer's
premises
into
the
distribution
system.
The
protection
is
at
the
meter).

2
Containment
(
a
program
that
addresses
actual
or
potential
backflow
within
a
customer's
and
isolation
premises,
providing
protection
up
to
the
tap).

22.
Please
indicate
which
elements
are
included
in
the
CCC
program:
(
Circle
1
for
"
yes"
and
2
for
"
no")

Cross
Connection
Control
Does
your
program
include
this
element?

Program
Elements
Yes
No
a.
Right
of
entry
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
1
2
b.
Surveys/
inspections
to
identify
cross
connections
within
the
system/
facility
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
1
2
c.
Policy
specifying
which
service
connections
must
be
equipped
with
backflow
prevention
device/
assemblies
.
.
.
.
.
1
2
d.
Enforcement
authority
to
install
devices/
assemblies.
.
.
.
.
.
.
1
2
e.
Enforcement
authority
to
test
assemblies
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
1
2
f.
Penalties
for
non­
compliance
with
ordinance
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
1
2
g.
Public
education
programs
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
1
2
h.
Training/
certification
of
testers
and
inspectors
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
1
2
23.
What
percentage
of
backflow
prevention
assemblies
fail
annually
during
inspection?
(
An
assembly
is
device
that
can
be
tested)
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
%
Small,
Medium
and
Large
System
Questionnaire
Page
74
of
95
Providing
estimates:
Please
provide
exact
information
from
your
system's
records.
Otherwise,
provide
your
best
estimate
of
financial
information
that
is
applicable
to
your
drinking
water
system.

If
your
system
is
a
joint
drinking
water/
wastewater
facility,
please
be
careful
to
record
only
data
that
are
relevant
to
the
drinking
water
part
of
the
facility
Rounding:
Please
record
your
dollar
amounts
to
the
nearest
dollar.
Do
NOT
record
cents.
Part
III
 
Financial
Characteristics
24A.
During
the
last
year
[
as
defined
in
your
response
to
Question
2(
B)]
what
were
your
drinking
water
system's
revenues
from
water
sales
for
each
of
the
following
customer
categories.
(
If
zero,
enter
"
0".
Note:
if
you
cannot
distinguish
among
the
different
types
of
non­
residential
customers,
enter
the
total
for
your
non­
residential
customers
in
line
e.)

Part
A
Water
Sales
Customer
Categories
Water
Sales
Revenues
1.
Sold
to
other
water
suppliers
a.
Treated
water
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
$

b.
Untreated
water
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
$

2.
Residential
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
$

3.
Non­
residential
a.
Commercial/
industrial
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
$

b.
Agricultural
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
$

c.
Other
(
please
specify)
$

d.
Subtotal,
nonresidential
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
$

4.
Total
water
sales
revenues
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
$

B.
Please
indicate
your
water
system's
revenues
during
the
last
year
from
other
water­
related
revenue
sources.
(
If
zero,
enter
`
0')

Part
B
Water­
related
Revenues
5.
Connection
fees
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
$

6.
Development
fees
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
$

7.
Other
fees
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
$

8.
General
fund
revenues
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
$

9.
Other
water
revenues
not
reported
in
the
categories
above
(
e.
g.,
fines,
penalties)
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
$

10.
Total
water­
related
revenues
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
$

11.
Total
water
system
revenues
(
total
of
lines
4
and
10)
.
.
.
.
$
Small,
Medium
and
Large
System
Questionnaire
Page
75
of
95
25.
If
your
primary
business
is
not
water­
related,
please
indicate
the
revenues
you
receive
from
your
primary,
non­
water
related
business,
including
rental
income
and
the
sale
of
other
goods
or
services,
but
excluding
water
sales
and
water­
related
revenues
reported
in
question
24:
(
If
zero,
enter
`
0')
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
$

26.
What
is
the
average
annual
bill
for
a
residential
customer?
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
$

27.
Does
your
system
use
any
of
the
following
rates
that
may
lower
the
cost
of
drinking
water
for
lowincome
or
fixed­
income
households?
(
Circle
"
1"
for
yes
and
"
2"
for
no.)

Yes
No
a.
Ascending
block
rates
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
1
2
b.
Lifeline
rates.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
1
2
c.
Circuit
breakers
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
1
2
d.
Other
(
please
specify)
1
2
28.
Question
28
is
intended
to
account
for
all
of
your
drinking
water
expenses
related
to
the
revenues
referred
to
in
question
24
A
and
B.

A.
Please
enter
the
number
of
people
employed
by
your
drinking
water
system
and
your
system's
direct
compensation
expenses
and
fringe
benefits
in
the
last
year:
(
If
you
don't
know
the
fringe
benefits
enter
your
system's
total
expenses
in
column
4).
If
your
system
is
operated
by
a
contractor,
enter
the
number
of
contract
employees
and
total
expenses
of
the
contractor
on
line
2.

Last
year's
employment
and
compensation
1.

Number
of
Employees
2.
Direct
Compensation
(
in
dollars)
3.
Fringe
Benefits
(
in
dollars)
4.

Total
Expenses
(
in
Dollars)

1.
Employment
and
employee
expenses
2.
Contractor
expenses
B.
Please
enter
other
routine
operating
expenses
in
the
last
year
(
in
dollars)
.
.
.

C.
Please
enter
the
amount
of
debt
service
expenditures
in
the
last
year
(
excluding
expenditures
for
borrowing
to
finance
operating
expenses)
(
in
dollars)
.
.
.
.
.

D.
Please
enter
the
amount
of
other
expenses
(
excluding
operating
and
debt
service
expenses
reported
in
Parts
A,
B,
and
C)
in
the
last
year
(
in
dollars)
.
.

E.
Total
expenses,
Parts
A
through
D.
(
in
dollars)
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
Small,
Medium
and
Large
System
Questionnaire
Page
76
of
95
29A.
If
you
have
paid
for
major
capital
improvements,
repairs
or
expansion
since
January
1,
1994,
allocate
those
expenditures
to
the
following
categories.

Type
of
Expense
Purpose:
Total
Water
quality
improvement
Replacement
or
major
repair
System
Expansion
a.
Land
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
$
$
$
$

b.
Water
source
.
$
$
$
$

c.
Distribution
and
transmission
system
.
.
.
.
.
.
$
$
$
$

d.
Treatment
.
.
.
.
$
$
$
$

e.
Storage
.
.
.
.
.
.
$
$
$
$

f.
All
other
not
included
above
$
$
$
$

g.
Total
capital
expenses
.
.
.
.
$
$
$
$

B.
How
were
the
total
expenses
from
Line
(
g)
in
Part
A
funded?
(
Each
column
should
sum
to
100%)

Percentage
of
capital
expenses
funded
from:
Purpose:
Total
Water
quality
improvement
Replacement
or
major
repair
System
Expansion
a.
Current
revenues
%
%
%
%

b.
Borrowing
%
%
%
%
Very
Large
Systems
Questionnaire
Page
77
of
95
2000
Community
Water
Systems
Survey
Very
Large
Systems
Questionnaire
Please
fill
out
this
questionnaire
to
the
best
of
you
ability,
and
return
it
in
the
enclosed
envelope.
If
schematics,
diagrams,
financial
or
other
reports
contain
the
information
requested
by
a
question,
you
may
enclose
and
refer
to
the
documentation
rather
than
fill
out
the
question.
If
you
have
any
questions
about
this
survey,
you
may
call
the
following
toll
free
number
for
assistance.
Technical
assistance:
(
800)
___­____
Very
Large
Systems
Questionnaire
Page
78
of
95
This
page
intentionally
left
blank
Very
Large
Systems
Questionnaire
Page
79
of
95
1.
Please
provide
the
name,
title,
and
telephone
number
of
the
most
knowledgeable
person
to
contact
for
information
on:

(
A)
Part
I
 
Operating
Characteristics
Name:
Title:

Tel.
No.
Fax
No.

e­
mail:

(
B)
Part
II
 
Financial
Characteristics
(
Write
"
SAME"
if
same
as
above)

Name:
Title:

Tel.
No.
Fax
No.

e­
mail:

2.
Please
specify
the
end
date
of
the
most
recent
12­
month
period
for
which
you
are
providing
operating
and
financial
information
for
your
public
water
supply.

A.
Operating
information
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
/
/
(
mm
/
dd
/
yy)

B.
Financial
information
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
/
/
(
mm
/
dd
/
yy)

Part
I
 
Operating
Characteristics
3.
Please
classify
your
water
system
using
the
following
criteria
(
circle
one).

Owned
or
operated
by
a
government
or
public
agency
(
including
government­
owned
systems
that
hire
a
private
company
to
operate
the
system)
.
.
.
1
Owned
privately
and
operated
primarily
as
a
water
business
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
2
Owned
privately
and
operated
as
a
necessary
part
of
another
business
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
3
Very
Large
Systems
Questionnaire
Page
80
of
95
4.
If
your
system
is
privately
owned,
please
select
one
of
following
that
best
describes
your
water
business
(
circle
one).

Investor
owned;
operating
separately
but
financially
dependent
on
a
parent
company
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
1
Investor
owned;
operating
separately
and
not
financially
dependent
on
a
parent
company
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
2
Owned
and
operated
by
a
homeowners'
association
or
subdivision
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
3
Something
else
(
Please
specify)
4
5.
If
your
system
is
owned
or
operated
by
the
government,
please
select
one
of
following
that
best
describes
the
form
of
government
(
circle
one).

Town,
township,
village,
or
municipal
government
.
.
.
.
1
County,
borough,
or
parish
government
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
2
State
government
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
3
Special
district
government
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
4
An
authority
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
5
The
Federal
government
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
6
Some
other
government
(
Please
specify)
7
Very
Large
Systems
Questionnaire
Page
81
of
95
A.
PRODUCTION
and
TREATMENT
6A.
What
was
the
amount
of
water
that
was
produced
and
delivered
to
each
of
the
following
customer
categories
during
the
last
year
[
as
defined
by
your
answer
to
Question
2A]?
(
In
millions
of
gallons.
Note:
if
you
cannot
distinguish
among
the
different
types
of
non­
residential
customers,
enter
the
total
for
your
non­
residential
customers
in
line
3.
d.)

Customer
Type
Total
1.
Sold
to
other
public
water
suppliers:

a.
Treated
water
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
Millions
of
Gallons/
Yr.

b.
Untreated
water
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
Millions
of
Gallons/
Yr.

2.
Residential
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
Millions
of
Gallons/
Yr.

3.
Non­
residential
a.
Commercial/
industrial
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
Millions
of
Gallons/
Yr.

b.
Agricultural
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
Millions
of
Gallons/
Yr.

c.
Other
(
specify)
Millions
of
Gallons/
Yr.

d.
Subtotal,
non­
residential
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
Millions
of
Gallons/
Yr.

4.
Unaccounted
for
water
not
included
above
(
including
uncompensated
usage
and
system
losses)
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
Millions
of
Gallons/
Yr.

5.
Total,
all
customer
types
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
Millions
of
Gallons/
Yr.

B.
Provide
the
name
of
each
public
water
supplier
included
in
the
response
to
Question
6A(
a),
above.

1.
Treated
water
2.
Untreated
water
7.
How
much
of
the
water
reported
in
Question
6A
came
from
each
of
the
following
sources
last
year?
(
in
millions
of
gallons;
answer
`
none'
if
a
source
does
not
apply).

a.
Surface
water
(
non­
purchased)
(
including
Ground
Water
Under
the
Direct
Influence
of
Surface
Water)
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
Millions
of
Gallons/
Yr.

b.
Ground
water
(
non­
purchased)
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
Millions
of
Gallons/
Yr.

c.
Purchased
water
1)
Treated
water
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
Millions
of
Gallons/
Yr.

2)
Untreated
water
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
Millions
of
Gallons/
Yr.

d.
Other
(
specify)
.
.
.
.
Millions
of
Gallons/
Yr.

8.
What
was
the
maximum
daily
water
production
from
all
sources
for
this
utility
over
a
single
24
hour
period?
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
million
gallons
per
day
Very
Large
Systems
Questionnaire
Page
82
of
95
Please
refer
to
the
following
definitions
and
schematic
for
an
explanation
of
the
terms
used
in
questions
9
through
15.
You
may
submit
your
own
diagrams
or
schematics
as
needed
to
respond
to
these
questions.
Please
note
that
the
identifier
numbers
used
in
the
questions
do
not
refer
to
specific
items
in
the
schematic.
For
example,
use
`
S1'
to
refer
to
your
first
surface
water
source,
regardless
of
whether
it
is
a
flowing
stream,
as
depicted
in
the
schematic,
or
another
surface
water
source.

Term
Definition
Code
in
the
Schematic
Surface
water
intake
A
surface
water
intake
refers
to
the
transmission
of
untreated
water
from
a
surface
water
source
(
flowing
stream,
lake,
reservoir,
or
ground
water
under
the
direct
influence
of
surface
water)
to
a
water
treatment
plant
at
the
utility
(
see
accompanying
diagram).
S1,
S2
Ground
water
intake
A
ground
water
intake
refers
to
the
transmission
of
untreated
water
from
one
or
more
wells
to
a
water
treatment
plant
or
directly
into
the
distribution
system.
Where
the
water
from
multiple
wells
flows
through
a
common
pipe
prior
to
entry
into
the
treatment
plant
or
distribution
system,
the
combined
flow
is
considered
one
ground
water
intake
(
see
accompanying
diagram).
G1
 
G4
Purchased
water
intake
A
purchased
water
intake
refers
to
the
transmission
of
water
from
the
seller's
utility
to
a
water
treatment
plant
or
directly
into
the
distribution
system
of
the
purchaser's
utility.
P1,
P2
Water
treatment
plant
A
facility
where
water
is
filtered,
disinfected,
and/
or
otherwise
treated
prior
to
its
transmission
into
the
distribution
system
(
or
its
conveyance
to
another
purchasing
water
utility).
For
the
purposes
of
this
survey,
simple
disinfection
only
or
pH
adjustment
prior
to
entry
into
the
distribution
system
are
considered
to
be
a
water
treatment
plant.
WTP
1,
WTP
2
Entry
point
An
entry
point
is
where
treated
or
untreated
potable
water
enters
into
the
utility's
distribution
system.
E1
 
E4
Very
Large
Systems
Questionnaire
Page
83
of
95
Figure
1:
Sample
Diagram
of
Intakes,
Treatment
Plants,
and
Entry
Points
Very
Large
Systems
Questionnaire
Page
84
of
95
9.
Provide
the
following
information
for
the
surface
water,
ground
water,
and
purchased
water
intakes
for
this
utility:
MGD
refers
to
Millions
of
gallons
daily.
If
the
source
is
used
on
a
seasonal
basis,
the
average
daily
amount
is
for
the
months
in
which
water
is
drawn
from
the
source.

A.
Surface
Source.

Surface
water
intake
identifiers
What
is
the
source
type
for
each
surface
water
intake?
(
circle
the
appropriate
number)
What
was
the
average
daily
amount
of
water
drawn
from
each
surface
water
intake
during
the
reporting
period?
(
MGD)
What
is
the
estimated
maximum
daily
potential
amount
of
water
that
can
be
drawn
from
each
surface
water
intake,
given
water
availability
constraints
only?
(
MGD)*
What
is
the
estimated
maximum
daily
potential
amount
of
water
that
can
be
drawn
from
each
surface
water
intake,
given
current
pumping
and
equipment
constraints
only?
(
MGD)*
Flowing
stream
Reservoir
or
lake
Groundwater
under
the
direct
influence
of
surface
water
S1
1
2
3
S2
1
2
3
S3
1
2
3
S4
1
2
3
S5
1
2
3
Q9A
Totals
*
If
not
limited
enter
"
no
limit"
here.

B.
Ground
water
source.

Ground
water
intake
identifiers
How
many
individual
wells
supply
each
ground
water
intake?
What
was
the
average
daily
amount
of
water
drawn
from
each
ground
water
intake
during
the
reporting
period?
(
MGD)
What
is
the
average
well
depth?
(
In
feet)
Is
the
intake
a
confined
or
unconfined
acquifer?
What
is
the
estimated
maximum
daily
potential
amount
drawn
from
each
ground
water
intake
given
water
availability
constraints
only?
(
MGD)*
What
is
the
estimated
maximum
daily
potential
amount
drawn
from
each
ground
water
intake
given
current
pumping
and
equipment
constraints
only?
(
MGD)*

G1
G2
G3
G4
G5
Q9B
Totals
*
If
not
limited
enter
"
no
limit"
here.
Very
Large
Systems
Questionnaire
Page
85
of
95
C.
Purchased
water
source.

Purchased
water
intake
identifiers
Provide
the
names
of
the
sellers
for
this
water
What
was
the
average
daily
amount
of
water
drawn
from
each
purchased
water
intake
during
the
reporting
period?
(
MGD)
What
is
the
estimated
maximum
daily
potential
amount
drawn
from
each
purchased
water
intake
given
water
availability
constraints
only?
(
MGD)*
What
is
the
estimated
maximum
daily
potential
amount
drawn
from
each
purchased
water
intake
given
water
availability
constraints
only?
(
MGD)*

P1
P2
P3
P4
P5
Q9C
Totals
Totals
for
all
intakes
Q9A­
Q9C
(
MGD)

10.
Provide
the
following
information
for
each
of
the
water
treatment
plants
at
this
utility.
Design
Capacity
refers
to
the
maximum
amount
the
plant
can
produce
in
a
single
24
hour
period
with
all
treatment
trains
operating
at
capacity.
Peak
daily
production
refers
to
the
maximum
amount
produced
in
a
single
day
over
the
last
twelve
months.

If
your
system
does
not
have
a
treatment
plant
please
check
here

and
go
to
Question
16.

Water
treatment
plant
identifiers
List
all
of
the
surface,
ground,
and
purchased
water
intake
identifiers
from
Question
9
that
feed
into
each
water
treatment
plant.
What
was
the
average
daily
production
for
each
water
treatment
plant?
(
MGD)
What
was
the
peak
daily
production
for
each
water
treatment
plant?
(
MGD)
What
was
the
design
capacity
for
each
water
treatment
plant?
(
MGD)

WTP1
WTP2
WTP3
WPT4
WTP5
Very
Large
Systems
Questionnaire
Page
86
of
95
11.
Using
the
water
treatment
plant
identifiers
from
Question
10,
indicate
which
water
treatment
objectives
apply
to
each
plant.
(
Circle
"
1"
for
Yes
and
"
2"
for
No).

Do
you
have
this
treatment
objective
in
the
following
water
treatment
plant?
(
use
the
plant
number
from
Question
9)

WTP1
WTP2
WTP3
WTP4
WTP5
Yes
No
Yes
No
Yes
No
Yes
No
Yes
No
Algae
control
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
1
2
1
2
1
2
1
2
1
2
Corrosion
control
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
1
2
1
2
1
2
1
2
1
2
Disinfection
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
1
2
1
2
1
2
1
2
1
2
Dechlorination
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
1
2
1
2
1
2
1
2
1
2
Oxidation
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
1
2
1
2
1
2
1
2
1
2
Iron
removal
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
1
2
1
2
1
2
1
2
1
2
Manganese
removal
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
1
2
1
2
1
2
1
2
1
2
Fluoridation
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
1
2
1
2
1
2
1
2
1
2
Taste/
odor
control
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
1
2
1
2
1
2
1
2
1
2
TOC
removal
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
1
2
1
2
1
2
1
2
1
2
Particulate/
Turbidity
Removal
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
1
2
1
2
1
2
1
2
1
2
Softening
(
hardness
removal)
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
1
2
1
2
1
2
1
2
1
2
Recarbonation
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
1
2
1
2
1
2
1
2
1
2
Organic
contaminant
removal
(
e.
g.,
VOCs,
pesticides)
.
.
.
.
.
.
1
2
1
2
1
2
1
2
1
2
Inorganic
contaminant
removal
(
e.
g.,
arsenic)
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
1
2
1
2
1
2
1
2
1
2
Radionuclides
contaminant
removal
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
1
2
1
2
1
2
1
2
1
2
Other
(
specify)
1
2
1
2
1
2
1
2
1
2
12A.
Using
the
Water
Treatment
plant
identifiers
from
Question
10,
characterize
the
treatment
used
and
the
sequence
of
treatment
for
each
plant
by
entering
a
number
to
identify
the
order
in
which
each
treatment
process
occurs
for
each
water
treatment
plant.
(
See
example.
If
you
have
the
option
of
more
than
one
treatment
type
for
a
single
step
 
e.
g.,
you
can
use
either
chlorine
or
chlorine
dioxide
for
disinfection
 
assign
the
same
sequence
number
to
each
alternative).

Water
Treatment
Plant
Number
(
from
Question
10)

Treatment
Category
Specify
treatment
type
(
where
applicable)
Example1
WTP1
WTP2
WTP3
WTP4
WTP5
Chlorination
only
Raw
water
storage/
Presedimentation
basin
Predisinfection/
oxidation
prior
to
sedimentation
Chlorine
2
Chlorine
dioxide
Chloramines
Ozone
Potassium
permanganate
3
Other
Predisinfection
Predisinfection/
Oxidation
prior
to
filtration
Chlorine
Chlorine
dioxide
Chloramines
Water
Treatment
Plant
Number
(
from
Question
10)

Treatment
Category
Specify
treatment
type
(
where
applicable)
Example1
WTP1
WTP2
WTP3
WTP4
WTP5
Very
Large
Systems
Questionnaire
Page
87
of
95
Ozone
Potassium
permanganate
Other
Predisinfection
Rapid
mix
Coagulation/
Flocculation
Polymers
Settling/
Sedimentation
4
Softening
Lime/
soda
ash
Recarbonation
Ion
exchange
Filtration
Direct
filtration
Micro
strainer
Slow
sand
Bag
and
Cartridge
Rapid
sand
Green
sand
5
Diatomaceous
earth
Dual/
Multi
media
Pressure
filtration
Other
(
specify)

Post­
disinfection
after
filters
Chlorine
10
Chlorine
dioxide
Chloramines
Ozone
UV
Other
post
disinfection
Clearwell
Membranes
Reverse
osmosis
Micro
filtration
Ultrafiltration
Nanofiltration
Corrosion
Control
Miscellaneous
Ion
exchange
Granular
activated
carbon
Activated
Alumina
Aeration
1
Other
(
please
specify)
9
1.
This
is
an
example
of
a
greensand
filter
plant
for
treating
ground
water
for
Iron
and
Manganese
removal.
In
this
example
`
other
`
is
contact
basin.

B.
Using
the
Water
Treatment
plant
identifiers
from
Question
10,
indicate
which
filter
backwash
techniques
you
use
for
each
treatment
plant
that
uses
filtration.
(
Check
all
that
apply).
Very
Large
Systems
Questionnaire
Page
88
of
95
Water
Treatment
Plant
Number
(
from
Question
10)

Filter
backwash
Example
WTP1
WTP2
WTP3
WTP4
WTP5
Air
scouring
Surface
wash
x
Recycle
filter
backwash
Filter
to
waste
x
Other
filter
backwash
x
13.
Using
the
source
identifiers
from
question
10,
please
list
the
entry
point
number
and
concentration
for
each
water
quality
parameter
(
contaminant)
for
the
reporting
period
recorded
in
Question
2A.
If
you
conducted
multiple
tests
of
a
source
over
the
reporting
period,
report
the
average
concentration.
If
you
did
not
test
for
a
contaminant
mark
N/
A;
if
you
did
not
detect
a
contaminant
mark
ND.
If
you
require
additional
space
for
entry
points/
well
identifiers
please
attach
an
additional
sheet.

A.
Please
provide
raw
water
concentration
in
units
of
parts
per
million
(
ppm)
for
each
compound:

Entry
Point
Identifier/
Well
Identifier
Raw
Water
Concentration
(
units­
ppm,
except
Radon
­
pCi/
L)

Arsenic
Radon
MTBE
Atrazine
Metolachlor
Boron
2,4­
D
Simazine
Glyphosate
Example
1:
G­
1/
W­
1
<
0.002
N/
A
N/
A
N/
A
N/
A
N/
A
ND
0.001
0.01
Example
2:
G­
1/
W­
2
0.002
100
N/
A
N/
A
N/
A
N/
A
ND
ND
ND
Example
3:
WTP­
1
ND
N/
A
N/
A
0.002
N/
A
N/
A
ND
0.001
0.02
Very
Large
Systems
Questionnaire
Page
89
of
95
B.
Please
provide
post­
treatment
concentration
in
units
of
parts
per
million
(
ppm)
for
each
compound:

Entry
Point
Identifier/
Well
Identifier
Raw
Water
Concentration
(
units­
ppm,
except
Radon
­
pCi/
L)

Arsenic
Radon
MTBE
Atrazine
Metolachlor
Boron
2,4­
D
Simazine
Glyphosate
Example
1:
G­
1/
W­
1
<
0.002
N/
A
N/
A
ND
N/
A
N/
A
ND
0.001
0.01
Example
2:
G­
1/
W­
2
0.002
ND
N/
A
ND
N/
A
N/
A
ND
ND
ND
Example
3:
WTP­
1
ND
N/
A
N/
A
ND
N/
A
N/
A
ND
ND
ND
14A.
Using
the
water
treatment
plant
identifiers
from
Question
10,
indicate
if
the
specified
residuals
management
practices
are
used
and
provide
the
requested
information
regarding
potential
discharge.
(
Circle
"
1"
for
Yes
and
"
2"
for
No).

Do
you
use
the
following
residual
management
process
in
the
following
water
treatment
plants?
(
use
the
water
treatment
plant
numbers
from
Question
10)

Residual
Management
WTP1
WTP2
WTP3
WTP4
WTP5
Category
Yes/
No
Yes/
No
Yes/
No
Yes/
No
Yes/
No
Mechanical
dewatering
1
2
1
2
1
2
1
2
1
2
Non­
mechanical
dewatering
1
2
1
2
1
2
1
2
1
2
Chemical
precipitation
1
2
1
2
1
2
1
2
1
2
Land
application
1
2
1
2
1
2
1
2
1
2
Nonhazardous
waste
landfill
1
2
1
2
1
2
1
2
1
2
Deep
well
injection
1
2
1
2
1
2
1
2
1
2
Evaporation
pond
1
2
1
2
1
2
1
2
1
2
French
drain
1
2
1
2
1
2
1
2
1
2
Direct
Discharge
1
2
1
2
1
2
1
2
1
2
Septic
System
1
2
1
2
1
2
1
2
1
2
Sanitary
Sewer
1
2
1
2
1
2
1
2
1
2
Are
direct
discharge
and
sanitary
sewer
options
if
they
are
not
currently
being
used?
1
2
1
2
1
2
1
2
1
2
Very
Large
Systems
Questionnaire
Page
90
of
95
B.
Please
describe
any
current
limitation
on
the
use
of
discharge
and
sanitary
sewer
for
residuals
management
at
any
of
the
water
treatment
plants
at
this
utility.

15.
Using
the
water
treatment
plant
identifiers
from
Question
10,
provide
the
following
information
regarding
operators
and
SCADA
usage
at
each
water
treatment
plant
at
this
utility.
(
SCADA
Supervisory
Control
and
Data
Acquisition
system
is
an
automated
system
for
monitoring,
controlling,
and
/
or
transmitting
information
on
water
treatment
plant
processes).

Water
Treatment
Plant
(
use
the
water
treatment
plant
numbers
from
Question
10)

Operator
Information
WTP1
WTP2
WTP3
WTP4
WTP5
Yes/
No
Yes/
No
Yes/
No
Yes/
No
Yes/
No
1.
Is
there
an
operator
on­
site
24
hours
per
day
seven
days
a
week?
(
Circle
yes
or
no)
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
1
2
1
2
1
2
1
2
1
2
2.
If
the
above
answer
is
no,
estimate
the
total
number
of
hours
per
week
that
an
operator
is
on
site
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.

3.
Is
there
a
SCADA
in
use
for
process
monitoring?
(
Circle
yes
or
no)
1
2
1
2
1
2
1
2
1
2
4.
Is
there
a
SCADA
in
use
for
process
control?
(
Circle
yes
or
no)
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
1
2
1
2
1
2
1
2
1
2
B.
STORAGE
AND
DISTRIBUTION
SYSTEM
INFORMATION
16.
Please
indicate
whether
you
have
the
following
types
of
treated­
water
storage,
and
if
so,
the
number
of
storage
facilities
and
their
capacity,
in
millions
of
gallons.

Yes
No
If
yes,
what
is
the
total
capacity
of
the
storage
(
in
millions
of
gallons)?

A.
Do
you
have
clearwell
storage
after
treatment?
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
1
2
B.
Do
you
have
storage
after
treatment
(
and
after
clearwell,
if
any),
but
before
the
distribution
system
with
dedicated
entry
and
exit
points?
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
1
2
C.
Do
you
have
storage
after
treatment
(
and
after
clearwell,
if
any),
but
before
the
distribution
system
with
a
common
inlet
and
outlet
(
i.
e.,
rides
the
line)?
1
2
D.
Do
you
have
storage
within
the
distribution
system
with
dedicated
entry
and
exit
points?
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
1
2
Very
Large
Systems
Questionnaire
Page
91
of
95
Please
note:
If
your
system
serves
a
population
that
changes
on
a
seasonal
basis,
please
indicate
the
highest
seasonal
number
of
people
served
or
high
season
active
connections.
17.
Indicate
the
length
and
age
of
the
distribution
mains
pipe
in
your
system,
and
length
of
pipe
replaced.

Percentage
of
pipe
that
is:
Length
of
Pipe
Replaced
in
the
Last
5
Years1
(
In
Miles)
Length
of
Pipe
You
Anticipate
Will
Be
Replaced
in
the
Next
5
Years
(
In
Miles)
Pipe
Diameter
Length
of
Pipe
(
In
Miles)
Less
than
40
Years
Old
Between
40
and
80
Years
Old
More
than
80
Years
Old
Less
than
or
equal
to
6"
%
%
%

Greater
than
6"
but
less
than
or
equal
to
10"
%
%
%

Greater
than
10"
%
%
%

1.
Ending
on
the
date
shown
in
your
answer
to
Question
2A.

18A.
Does
your
system
serve
a
population
that
changes
on
a
seasonal
basis
(
for
example,
is
it
a
winter
or
summer
resort
area)?

1
Yes
2
No
B.
How
many
people
and
connections
does
your
system
currently
serve
year
round?
Please
indicate
the
number
of
connections
and
number
of
people
served
by
your
system
for
all
customer
types
that
apply.
(
If
you
cannot
distinguish
among
the
different
types
of
non­
residential
customers,
enter
the
total
for
your
non­
residential
customers
in
line
c.
4.)

Customer
Type
Connections
Number
of
People
a.
Sold
to
other
public
water
suppliers
1.
Treated
water
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.

2.
Untreated
water
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.

b.
Residential
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.

c.
Non­
residential
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.

1.
Commercial/
industrial
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.

2.
Agricultural
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.

3.
Other
(
specify)

4.
Subtotal,
non­
residential
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.

19.
Please
mark
on
the
enclosed
census
map
the
approximate
area
covered
by
your
service
area.
Very
Large
Systems
Questionnaire
Page
92
of
95
C.
CROSS
CONNECTION
CONTROL
20.
Does
your
system
have
a
cross
connection
control
(
CCC)
program?
(
Circle
one)

1
Yes
2
No
(
Go
to
Question
24)

3
Don't
Know
(
Go
to
Question
24)

21.
What
type
of
program
does
your
system
have?
(
Circle
one)

1
Containment
(
a
program
that
addresses
actual
or
potential
backflow
from
a
customer's
premises
into
the
distribution
system.
The
protection
is
at
the
meter).

2
Containment
(
a
program
that
addresses
actual
or
potential
backflow
within
a
customer's
and
isolation
premises,
providing
protection
up
to
the
tap).

22.
Please
indicate
which
elements
are
included
in
the
CCC
program:
(
Circle
1
for
"
yes"
and
2
for
"
no")

Cross
Connection
Control
Does
your
program
include
this
element?

Program
Elements
Yes
No
a.
Right
of
entry
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
1
2
b.
Surveys/
inspections
to
identify
cross
connections
within
the
system/
facility
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
1
2
c.
Policy
specifying
which
service
connections
must
be
equipped
with
backflow
prevention
device/
assemblies
.
.
.
.
.
1
2
d.
Enforcement
authority
to
install
devices/
assemblies.
.
.
.
.
.
.
1
2
e.
Enforcement
authority
to
test
assemblies
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
1
2
f.
Penalties
for
non­
compliance
with
ordinance
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
1
2
g.
Public
education
programs
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
1
2
h.
Training/
certification
of
testers
and
inspectors
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
1
2
23.
What
percentage
of
backflow
prevention
assemblies
fail
annually
during
inspection?
(
An
assembly
is
device
that
can
be
tested)
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
%
Very
Large
Systems
Questionnaire
Page
93
of
95
Providing
estimates:
Please
provide
exact
information
from
your
system's
records.
Otherwise,
provide
your
best
estimate
of
financial
information
that
is
applicable
to
your
drinking
water
system.

If
your
system
is
a
joint
drinking
water/
wastewater
facility,
please
be
careful
to
record
only
data
that
are
relevant
to
the
drinking
water
part
of
the
facility
Rounding:
Please
record
your
dollar
amounts
to
the
nearest
dollar.
Do
NOT
record
cents.
Part
III
 
Financial
Characteristics
24A.
During
the
last
year
[
as
defined
in
your
response
to
Question
2(
B)]
what
were
your
drinking
water
system's
revenues
from
water
sales
for
each
of
the
following
customer
categories.
(
If
zero,
enter
"
0".
Note:
if
you
cannot
distinguish
among
the
different
types
of
non­
residential
customers,
enter
the
total
for
your
non­
residential
customers
in
line
e.)

Part
A
Water
Sales
Customer
Categories
Water
Sales
Revenues
1.
Sold
to
other
water
suppliers
a.
Treated
water
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
$

b.
Untreated
water
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
$

2.
Residential
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
$

3.
Non­
residential
a.
Commercial/
industrial
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
$

b.
Agricultural
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
$

c.
Other
(
please
specify)
$

d.
Subtotal,
nonresidential
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
$

4.
Total
water
sales
revenues
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
$

B.
Please
indicate
your
water
system's
revenues
during
the
last
year
from
other
water­
related
revenue
sources.
(
If
zero,
enter
`
0')

Part
B
Water­
related
Revenues
5.
Connection
fees
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
$

6.
Development
fees
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
$

7.
Other
fees
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
$

8.
General
fund
revenues
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
$

9.
Other
water
revenues
not
reported
in
the
categories
above
(
e.
g.,
fines,
penalties)
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
$

10.
Total
water­
related
revenues
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
$

11.
Total
water
system
revenues
(
total
of
lines
4
and
10)
.
.
.
.
$
Very
Large
Systems
Questionnaire
Page
94
of
95
25.
If
your
primary
business
is
not
water­
related,
please
indicate
the
revenues
you
receive
from
your
primary,
non­
water
related
business,
including
rental
income
and
the
sale
of
other
goods
or
services,
but
excluding
water
sales
and
water­
related
revenues
reported
in
question
24:
(
If
zero,
enter
`
0')
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
$

26.
What
is
the
average
annual
bill
for
a
residential
customer?
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
$

27.
Does
your
system
use
any
of
the
following
rates
that
may
lower
the
cost
of
drinking
water
for
lowincome
or
fixed­
income
households?
(
Circle
"
1"
for
yes
and
"
2"
for
no.)

Yes
No
a.
Ascending
block
rates
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
1
2
b.
Lifeline
rates.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
1
2
c.
Circuit
breakers
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
1
2
d.
Other
(
please
specify)
1
2
28.
Question
28
is
intended
to
account
for
all
of
your
drinking
water
expenses
related
to
the
revenues
referred
to
in
question
24
A
and
B.

A.
Please
enter
the
number
of
people
employed
by
your
drinking
water
system
and
your
system's
direct
compensation
expenses
and
fringe
benefits
in
the
last
year:
(
If
you
don't
know
the
fringe
benefits
enter
your
system's
total
expenses
in
column
4).
If
your
system
is
operated
by
a
contractor,
enter
the
number
of
contract
employees
and
total
expenses
of
the
contractor
on
line
2.

Last
year's
employment
and
compensation
1.

Number
of
Employees
2.
Direct
Compensation
(
in
dollars)
3.
Fringe
Benefits
(
in
dollars)
4.

Total
Expenses
(
in
Dollars)

1.
Employment
and
employee
expenses
2.
Contractor
expenses
B.
Please
enter
other
routine
operating
expenses
in
the
last
year
(
in
dollars)
.
.
.

C.
Please
enter
the
amount
of
debt
service
expenditures
in
the
last
year
(
excluding
expenditures
for
borrowing
to
finance
operating
expenses)
(
in
dollars)
.
.
.
.
.

D.
Please
enter
the
amount
of
other
expenses
(
excluding
operating
and
debt
service
expenses
reported
in
Parts
A,
B,
and
C)
in
the
last
year
(
in
dollars)
.
.

E.
Total
expenses,
Parts
A
through
D.
(
in
dollars)
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
Very
Large
Systems
Questionnaire
Page
95
of
95
29A.
If
you
have
paid
for
major
capital
improvements,
repairs
or
expansion
since
January
1,
1994,
allocate
those
expenditures
to
the
following
categories.

Type
of
Expense
Purpose:
Total
Water
quality
improvement
Replacement
or
major
repair
System
Expansion
a.
Land
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
$
$
$
$

b.
Water
source
$
$
$
$

c.
Distribution
and
transmission
system
.
.
.
.
.
.
$
$
$
$

d.
Treatment
.
.
.
.
$
$
$
$

e.
Storage
.
.
.
.
.
.
$
$
$
$

f.
All
other
not
included
above
$
$
$
$

g.
Total
capital
expenses
.
.
.
.
$
$
$
$

B.
How
were
the
total
expenses
from
Line
(
g)
in
Part
A
funded?
(
Each
column
should
sum
to
100%)

Percentage
of
capital
expenses
funded
from:
Purpose:
Total
Water
quality
improvement
Replacement
or
major
repair
System
Expansion
a.
Current
revenues
%
%
%
%

b.
Borrowing
%
%
%
%