Correspondence among

Date: Monday, January 12, 2015 1:02:05 PM | have several questions about this matter. Why does “public traffic’ deserve a higher consideration than concern for state workers? How does that reasoning appear to state employees? A visitor may take one drink of water from this site in their lifetime. State workers (like any employees) may get half of the water they consume each day at their place of employment. Which group faces the greater health risk

Date: Monday, January 12, 2015 1:02:00 PM | have several questions about this matter. Why does “public traffic’ deserve a higher consideration than concern for state workers? How does that reasoning appear to state employees? A visitor may take one drink of water from this site in their lifetime. State workers (like any employees) may get half of the water they consume each day at their place of employment. Which group faces the greater health risk

have several questions about this matter, Why dees “public traffic’ deserve a higher consideration than concer for state workers? How does that reasoning appear to state ernployees? A visitor may take one drink of water from this site in their Hfetime. State workers (ike any employees) may get half of the water they consume each day at their place of employment. Vvhich group faces the greater health risk frorn drinking water in state occupied premises? Are other state owned/occupied facilities in Flint being provided with the sare service? How about a Secretary of State’s offices or the DHS facilities? Are there any state correctional facilities that receive drinking water from Fint? hat would DTMB have done if the problern had occurred in Lansing? Vvould the stete of Michigan be providing bottled water or an alternate supply of drinking water to all of the slate owned or stale employee locations that receive Lansing drinking water and allow public access? Vho would make that decision? Why wouldn't that decision maker seek the advice of the Office of Drinking Water and Municipal Assistance before deciding? VVould it be building by building or one decision be made for state facilities? How does this action by OTMB impact the answer when ODVWMA, district staff are asked by others in the media or from the general public about whether Flint residents should continue to consume Flin’s drinking water with elevated disinfection bypraducis? No doubt it wil make it more difficult from a perceplion standpoint for ODWMA staff. if this matter were about an acute health threat, such as E.coli or nitrates, then i would applaud the decision. But when we are dealing with a chronic health threat in a community water system, | think the appropriate action is to ensure public awareness and education, establish a reasonable compliance schedule, and alow individuals to make personal choices if they wish. And if someone like (5M or the State of Michigan decides to implement such measures as supplying an altemate water supply for a chronic nealth threal inat should be of 4 limited duration, fine, but it should be uniformiy implemented. xxxEND_PAGE:deq20_b01_001_057_23 Hf DIME waouid ike fo meet to discuss this issue and procedures for communication and possible actions in future, sinilar events, we would be willing to participate. Richard Bengzie, PE, Chief Field Operations Section Office of Drinking Water and Municipal Assisiance, MDEQ 817-284-6512