F Flint Water Crisis Public Archive

Correspondence between

Emails where every selected person appears as a sender, recipient, or copied participant.

Dan Wyant Susan Hedman

RE: talking points

See all emails with these participants
Further to our conversation, please note that lead and copper monitoring is used to determine: 1) Whether corrosion control is optimized. Under 141.81(b)(3), a water system is deemed to have optimum corrosion control if it submits results of tap water monitoring that demonstrates for 2 consecutive six-month periods that the 90" percentile ievel is below 5 ug/L (ppb). Because Flint exceeded this level, the City is required to implement corrosion contro! — as noted in MDEQ's August 17" letter to the City of Flint which states: “Since the City did not meet these criteria in both the July-December 2014, and January-June 2015, sampling periods, the City must now recommend a treatment to fully optimize corrosion control treatment... .” 2) Whether the lead action level (15ug/L) has been exceeded. Under 141.84(a), systems that fail to meet the lead action level in tap samples after installing corrosion control treatment must replace lead service lines — 7% of the lead service lines in its distribution system.

RE: talking polnts

See all emails with these participants
Further to our conversation, please. note that lead and copper monitoring is used to determine: 7) Whether corrosion control is optimized. Under 141.81(b)(3), a water system is deemed to have optimum corrosion control if It submits.resulfs of tap water monitoring that demonstrates for 2 consecutive six-month periods that the 90" percentile level is below 5 ug/L (ppb). Because Flint exceeded this level, the City is required to implement corrosion control — as noted in MDEQ’s August 17" letter to the City of Flint which states: “Since the City did not - meet these criteria in both the July~December 2014, and January-June 2015, sampling periods, the oy must now recommenda treatment to fully optimize corrosion control treatment . 2) Whether the lead action level (15ug/L) has been exceeded. Under 141.84(a), systems that fail to meet the lead action level in tap samples after installing corrosion control treatment must replace lead service lines — 7% of the lead service lines in its distribution system.

Flint

See all emails with these participants
Hi Dan -- It strikes me that one of the most important questions that EPA will be asked at the press conference later this week and in the months to come relates to EPA's assessment of the protocols that MDEQ and MDHHS are using to gather and analyze data collected as part of your "10 Point Plan." For that reason, | think that it would be useful to have some conversations now -- before sampling begins -- and | am cc-ing Tom Burke (who heads up EPA's Office of Research and Development) in the hope that we can get that conversation started today. Please let me know when you plan to talk and | will join you if | can -- which may be difficult because | am traveling to Oklahoma City for an oil and gas task force meeting (where | will be seeing folks from DEQ"s OOGM.) It's not essential for me to be part of this conversation -- but | think it is essential for you to start talking with Tom right away. Thanks, Susan Sent from my iPhone xxxEND_PAGE:deq17_b201_1301_1302_2

Use of SRF to replace lead service lines

See all emails with these participants
Hi Dan — Here’s a quick answer to your question about using SRF to replace lead service lines. Under the federal SRF program, SRF funds can be used to replace lead service lines on both public and private property. (We don’t know if Michigan rules allow for the use of SRF funding on private property, but presumably you know whether that’s the case.) If you have additional questions, your staff can follow up with Steve Marquardt, Chief of the R5 Water Division State and Tribal Program Section. His number is 312-353-3214. Please keep me posted on the time for the event later this week. Thanks, Susan Susan Hedman Region 5 Administrator/Great Lakes National Program Manager U.S. Environmental Protection Agency 77 West Jackson Blvd - 19th Floor Chicago, Illinois 60604-3590 The information contained in this e-mail, including any attachments, is confidental, intended only for the named recipient(s), and may be legally privileged If you are not the intended recipient, please delete the e-mail and any attachments, destroy any printouts that you may have made and notify us Immediately by return e- mail Neither this transmission nor any attachment shall be deemed for any purpose to be a "signature" or “signed” under any electronic transmission acts, unless otherwise specifically stated herem Thank you xxxEND_PAGE:treasury01_b41_7622_7971_312 TEC STATES ENVIROPIVENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY Vass * uN ie MEMORANDUM SUBJECT: — Etigibiliry of Replacement of Lead Service Lines on Private Property Under the DWSRPF. FROM: Joanne Hogan ~ se Attormey- Advisor | pe al Civil Rights and Financial w Office Office of General Counsel THROUGH: Wendel Askew “a4 Assiaunt General Counsel. Civil Rights and Financial Law Office Office of General Counsel Ken Redden ae Deputy Associate General Counsel Civil Rights and Financial Law Office Office of General Counsel TO: Peter Shanaghan Team Leader Drinking Water State Revolving Fund Team Office of Ground Water and Drinking Water, Office of Water Question Presented, You have asked whether financial assistance from a State’s Drinking Water State Revolving Loan Fund can be used by eligible entities to fund projects that involve replacing lead service lines that may be on private property and that connect to private dwellings. Brief Answer We believe that lead service line projects, regardless of the ownership of the property on which the pipe is placed, may be funded by a State’s DWSRF so long as the loans are made to an eligible entity and all other requirements of the DWSRF are met. xxxEND_PAGE:treasury01_b41_7622_7971_313 Analysis The statute and the regulatory provisions governing the use of State DWSRF funds, though defining which entities may receive funds, do not require the Public Water System to have control over all portions of a project that is funded by the DWSRF. Congress gave EPA's Administrator the clear authority to determine which projects would be eligible under §1452: “Financial assistance... may be used. . . only for expenditures of a type or category which the Administrator has determined, through guidance, will facilitate compliance with national primary drinking water regulations.” PHSA §1452 (a)(2). The only broad statutory limitations on the types of projects that cannot be funded are projects which include monitoring, operation, of maintenance expenditures. or projects for the acquisition of real property unless the purchase is made from a willing seller and the acquisition is integral to the project. 40 CFR §35.3520 (b}{2) sets forth the categones of projects that can be funded by a DWSRF. This provision includes the transmission and distribution of water to be a category of eligible projects. Specifically, the regulation provides examples of such projects to include: “installation or replacement of transmission and distribution pipes to improve water pressure to safe levels or to prevent contamination caused by leaks or breaks in the pipes.” See 40 CFR §35.3520 (2yii). Lead pipes can contaminate water at any point, including on its way to a private home. Allowing a public water system to use its funds tu replace such pipes is consistent with this allowable category of projects, and is similarly consistent with the overall health protections of the Safe Drinking Water Act. See PHSA 1452 (a)(1)(A). Note that ifa Public Water System wishes to purchase and retain an easement so that it maintains control of such infrastructure, that purchase is authorized as Well: “Funds shall not be used for real property or interests therein unless the acquisition is integral to the project authorized... and the purchase is from a willing seller. . .” PHSA 1452(a}(2). This determination that replacement of lead pipes on privately owned property is an eligible project cost so long as it otherwise complies with the PHSA is consistent with prior approved eligible projects, such as water efficiency projects, that do not require all elements of a project to be under the control of a Public Water System. In a Memorandum dated July 25, 2003, then Assistant Administrator for Water G. Tracy Mehan III informed Water Division Directors in the regions that projects such as the installation or retrofit of plumbing fixtures and appliances, installation of water meters, and implementation of incentive programs to conserve water, such as rebates or conservation rate structures were all eligible projects under the DWSRF. Therefore. so long as the assistance is given to an eligible entity, and the project otherwise meets the tequirements of the DWSRF, the project may be funded regardless of ownership or control of the resulting infrastructure. xxxEND_PAGE:treasury01_b41_7622_7971_314 Stanton, Terry A. (Treasury)