Small systems and SDWA reauthorization

Abstract

USEPA's small systems coordinator summarizes key elements of the agency's report to Congress, emphasizing the issues of viability, low‐cost technology, and financing. Small systems issues have been a prominent feature of deliberations on the Safe Drinking Water Act (SDWA) since its initial formulation. In 1993 the US Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA) prepared a report to Congress that contained a detailed discussion of the SDWA compliance challenges faced by small water systems. This article focuses on three of the major small system issues identified in the report to Congress– viability, lower‐cost technology, and financing—and discusses how USEPA's reauthorization recommendations would address these issues.

WHO GETS CLEAN WATER? AID ALLOCATION TO SMALL WATER SYSTEMS IN PENNSYLVANIA1

“…There are two primary characteristics of small systems that contribute to this. First, they have deteriorating infrastructure resulting from decades of neglect (Shanaghan, 1994;U.S. EPA, 1997a).…”

“…Many water system professionals and researchers identify the inability of small water systems to access and acquire capital to address their infrastructure and organizational limitations as the single most difficult and compelling problem they face (Marrocco et al, 1993;Shanaghan, 1994;U.S. GAO, 1994).…”

“…Discussions have focused on the condition of the nation's water supply infrastructure (U.S. EPA, 1997a) and the operational viability of systems under their current administrations (Cromwell et al, 1997;NRC, 1997). Of particular concern is the cost of meeting drinking water standards set by the Safe Drinking Water Act (SDWA), the primary mechanism for ensuring the quality of drinking water provision, and the impact of these costs on different water systems (U.S. GAO, 1994;Shanaghan, 1994;U.S. EPA, 1997a).…”

“…The assertion that small systems experience a greater difficulty accessing funds than other systems calls into question the efficacy of programs that provide aid. Although researchers (Campbell et al, 1993;Shanaghan, 1994) have identified characteristics of small systems that hinder their access to capital (such as small customer base, diseconomies of scale, dispersed distribution lines, and remoteness from other water systems), few quantitative empirical studies have identified the relationships between system size and accessibility to financial aid. Through a comparison of the size of water systems that received awards from PENNVEST to those that did not, this research determines the effect of size of the population served by the water system on its acquisition of aid from PENNVEST.…”

Technical Assistance Needs and Research Priorities for Small Community Water Systems

“…However, the burden of meeting these regulatory demands falls most heavily on the nation's smallest systems. These systems face numerous community, economic, and environmental challenges in operating and maintaining their systems and meeting regulatory guidelines (Cromwell et al 1992;National Research Council 1996;Shanaghan 1994).…”