Sorry this reply is so long. | dicin’t pian to de so, but | wanted to provide you with same information in case you
feel the need to reply in part today.
Brad,
Mike Prysby is on annual leave for a counle of weeks, Steve Busch was in his Jackson office today and
probably on his way home new, Liane tock this afterncon off to attend to personal business in Marshall, and
Pat Cook is gone for the day. Do you need an answer today?
Since this memo is based on the unofficial draft report, do we want to comment? We should probably meet to
discuss before anyone responds.
AS you know, we have agreed to disagree with EPA on a couple of the issues raised by this meme covering an
unofficial EPA report.
To begin, when the lead and copper rules (LOR) were first implemented, large oysterns were allowed to collect
two sets of lead and copper samples in consecutive 6 month monitoring periods and if their 90" percentile lead
level was within & milligrams per iter of the lead level in their source water, they did nat have to further
“optirnize’ corrosion control treatment Vhen Flint changed water sources from the Great Lakes to an Inland
river and employed water treaiment that was significantly different (orecipitative soffening vs. direct filtration}
than that supplied by Detroit, we granted Flint as @ “new supply’ ihe same consideration to determine # their
treatment already provided optimal corrosion control
AS you know, their first @ month monitoring resulis complied with the Action Level for lead and were clase to
demonstrating optimal corrosion control treaiment (OCCT), Since the city would be averaging resulfs from the
two consecutive monitoring periods for the purnoses of OCCT determination, we awaited thelr second set of
results fo see what they would reveal. After getting the second sei, it was determined that Flint was again in
compliance with the iead and copper Action Level but they did net qualify as already practicing OCCT,
Under the original requiatory schedule for implementing OCCT, a community serving more than 50,000 pecple
was given a year to conduct treatment studies and submit them to DEQ. We then have 6 rnanths to review
thelr stucies and designate thelr OCCT. They then have 2 years to install that treatment. During all that time,
no monitoring is required, Our response to the concerns raised in thai memo bul siso more significantly, in
formal discussions with Region & EPA Managers, was fo encourage Flint to not take the time we believe they
were entitied to have for this process but to rave 2s quickly as possible to implement sarne OCCT.
Second, we cantinue fo disagree with EPA on sampling protocols. We have attempted to ensure compllance
with EPA guidance (| believe it was provided in the preamble to their lead and copper regulations} that said
that household use should be “typical” for a rasicential customer on the day before sarnple collection for lead
and copper. Early in the implementation of the LCR, we had encountered too many situations where
compliance samples had been collected from kitchen and bethroom taps that had not been used in days and in
SOMG CASES, even weeks, resulting in excessively stagnated water and correspondingly high lead levels that
did not represent typical exposure expected afler overnight stagnation. Further complicating this issue was the
media spectacie thet was arising over EPA's direct implemeniation of the LCR in Washington, D.C,
where lead results were not always being included in compliance calculations and subsequenily, invalidation
1
xxxEND_PAGE:deq14_b0416_1610_1611_1
of samples was becorning more difficult. in order to avoid thet coriplicated process, we devised our currerit
recornmendations for ensuring appropriate but net excessive stagnation for LCR monitoring.
We continue to believe itis appropriate fo flush these taps the day before sample collection to simulate and/or
ensure typical household use before ine tap is allowed to sit overnight to achieve the expected stagnation time
the regulation stioulates (~8 hours} prior to collecting the first draw sample. The LCR does not say the result
should represent the “absolute worst case” condition ~ it taiks about sampling the highest risk locations dead
plurnbing, lead service lines, high lead content scider piping, etc.) after overnight stagnation and then collecting
a first draw sample so as nol to flush elevaled lead from thal tap al that point in time. Unt EPA changes this
rule, we are satisfied with our sampling protocol.
larn leaving now, so you can use this information as you see fit, or walt until tornorrow fo discuss with Steve,
Liane, Pat encime. We have an all-day ODWMA managers meeting starting at 9 AM Thursday, although
Liane is also attending a meeting first thing In the morning with Jim Sygo, Bob Wagner and Jon Aden.
Richard