HomeMy WebLinkAbout7.d. Adopt Resolution Against Proposed EPA Lead Rules � `
� • . nA
'��rl � � U
�r****************,r********�************MEfi10*****�r*�*****�r*******�****�r*****:r****
DATEt ALAY I1, 1989
T0: PtAYOR & COUNGILFiEMBERS
C/fl ADMiNiSTRATOR JiI,K
FROPt: CITY ENGINEER/PU$LTC WORKS DIRECTQR HEFT�
RE: ITEMS FOR THE MAY 16, 1989 COUNCIL riEETING
NEW BUSINESS
Adopt Resolution Against Praposed EPA Lead Rules
The Utility Commission is forwarding the recommendation to Council to adopt the
attached resolution against proposed EPA Lead Rules. I am attaching my mema to
the Utility Commission which explains some of the impacts that these rules, if
approved by EPA, waulct have on our City.
An analogy I would have regarding this situation would be having the EFA make oil
compani�s responsible for geoples cars being properly tuned and emission control
devices working properly. The basic principle is that if the producer zs
supplying a safe .product, then the producer should not be responsihle for its end
use. In our case, water utilities da not feel it is appropriate to be
responsible for the plumbing inside a residence. We should only be responsible
far delivering a safe product to the residence.
The League of Gities has drafted this sample resolution. We have only filled in
the blanks as it pertains to Rosemount. The League has done a lot of research
regarding this matter and along with the American Water Works Association feels
very strongly that the proposed EPA rules are not realistic.
I£ Couneil adopts this resalution, I will be forwarding the resolution along with
a letter dra£ted by the League to aur Congresszonai delegation.
Recocmnended action far Gouncil to consider would be to adopt the attached
resolution against proposed EPA lead rules.
/
� � . . � � . . . � • . . � . . .
7'Q: ULility Cammission
�` �
FR4M: Rich Hef. ti , City Enpineer/Pu�lic WOt'�{3 I?i.r.ector - `�
�
DATd's: May 4, 1y89
R�: ITEMS FOR MAY 8, 1989 UTILITY M�rTING
NEW BUSINESS .
Item 6b, Recommend lldaption of Resolution A�ainst EPt1 Rules for
Leacl & Copper
Attached to this memo is s resoiution opposing proposed new EPA
rules for lead and copper that the Utility Commis�ion stiould
recommend to the Council for adaption.
The League of Minnesota Cities has put out some information
regarding the costs and implieat�.ons af having to comp�,y w�.tt�
these new rules. Far example, to adjust the pH of our water
would cost between $20 - $SO per million gallons of water pumped.
That would mean an annual expenditure of be tween $5 ,000 Co
$12,000 to increase our 7.8 pH to a pH of 8, the pr_oposed
requi�rement. Because we do have we11 houses with our system, the
chemical feed equigment capital costs would be about $2,OQ0 �er
well. The other costs would be for labor to obtain samples from
residences near the end of the distribution system. Lde would
have to collect 20 samples per quarter every two years. The
problem with th:ts is that it would require en�ering residences tp
obtain the samples. With the number of two incame fRmilies
increa�sing, this will prabably have to be done on a Sata.rci�y on
overtime or else a change af shifts for the utility personnel .
The main objectipn from uti�.ities is having to be responsible for
water once it leaves the City's distribution system. I c�on' t
have a prablem with testing for lead from the City' s w�ter
supply, but it will be very cumbersome and ex��ensive to test ,£or
lead from residence 's taps. Futhermore, I can' t believe that the
difference between our water with a pIi of 7,8 ancl wate� treated
with a pH of 8 wauld �ause significant amount of lead or eopper
to be dissolved. Besides, the treatment to adjt�st the pH wvuld
likely result in sealing and deposits in our water systems.
Besides this draft of Lhe resolution, the Lea�ue h�s �rep�red �
draf� letter to write to our congressmen. I would propose
sending this letter along with the resolution to our congressmen.
Basically, the l,etter outlines the recommendations of eliminat�:ng
the pH level, simpiifying the monitoring program and having any
public education program carried aut by the EPA rather than local
utilities because of their requirements of that EPA section.
Recommended action for Uta,lity Gommission to take wc�tal.cl he to
recommend that tMe City Council ndopt tlie resolution �gai_ns� tile
EPA rt�les for lead ancl co�Per and authori.ze tl�e resoluti.an to be
sent to Minnesota ' s regresentatives and senatars.
y t
� �. . . �� . . .
� . . � � . • . . . � . � . . . . . . .
i
� � . � � � . . � . .
i � . . . . � . . � . .
�
I � � . � � � � � .
I ' . . . � : � . . � � . . ..
a
� CITY OF ROSEMOUNT
�
�
C RESOLUTION 19$9 -
:�
' A RESOLUTION OPPOSING PROPOSED
i NEW EPA RULES FOR LEAD AND COPP�R
,
i
{ WEIEREAS, the City of Rosemount, rtinnesota has a estimated po�ulation of $,SOQ,
� and;
•i
! WHEREAS, the municipai water system is supplied by wells from the 3ardan
'
acquifer, and;
� WHEREAS, the municipal water system meets all federal and state standards for
potabie water, and;
WHEREAS, proposed EPA rules mandate certain testing and pH requirements in
� municipal water systems, and;
�
� WHEREAS, the proposed rules will place an unnecessary financial burden on the ,
users af the system by requiring costly installation of a treatment system, and;
- WHEREAS, the chemical supply and maintenance of the required treatment system
� will be a continuing financial burden, and �I
, `� WiiEREAS, the required testing procedures are too complex,
,
I NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED, that the Gity Council of the Gity of Rosemount
', I respectfully requests that the Congress of the United States amend the proposed
I � ' rules requixing a pH factor of 8 or over and further requests the sampling
,
� methods as required be changed to allow for a less complex and simplified method
� of testing fox lead in the water system.
;
i
� ADOPTED this lbth day of May, 1989.
�
! Ro11an Hoke, Mayor
�
;
ATTEST:
�
;
' Stephan Jilk, City Administrator/Glerk
i