Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
Lead-Free Definition Under the
Safe Drinking Water Act
Jeffrey Kempic
Office of Water/USEPA
Stakeholder Meeting
August 16, 2012
1
Overview
Overview:
• Current Safe Drinking Water Act (SDWA) Section
1417 Requirements
• Reduction of Lead in Drinking Water Act
Amendments
• Next steps
2
Current SDWA Requirements
• SDWA 1417(a)(1)(A)
– In general. No person may use any pipe, pipe or plumbing
fitting or fixture, any solder, or any flux, after June 19, 1986,
in the installation or repair of:
– (i) any public water system; or
– (ii) any plumbing in a residential or nonresidential facility
providing water for human consumption,
– that is not lead free (within the meaning of subsection (d)
• The use prohibition in SDWA also applies to entities
other than public water systems (PWS)
• PWS includes collection, treatment and storage in
addition to distribution facilities under SDWA
3
Current SDWA Requirements
• SDWA 1417(a)(3): Effective 2 years after Aug 6, 1996, it shall
be unlawful –
– (A) for any person to introduce into commerce any pipe, or any
pipe or plumbing fitting or fixture, that is not lead free, except for a
pipe that is used in manufacturing or industrial processing;
– (B) for any person engaged in the business of selling plumbing
supplies; except manufacturers, to sell solder or flux that is not lead
free; or
– (C) for any person to introduce into commerce any solder or flux
that is not lead free unless the solder or flux bears a prominent
label stating that it is illegal to use the solder or flux in the
installation or repair of any plumbing providing water for human
consumption
4
Current SDWA Requirements
• SDWA 1417(b) State Enforcement
(1) Enforcement of Prohibition – The requirements of subsection (a)(1)
shall be enforced in all States effective 24 months after the enactment
of this section. States shall enforce such requirements through State or
local plumbing codes, or other such means of enforcement as the State
may determine to be appropriate.
• SDWA 1417(c) Penalities – If the Administrator determines that a State is not enforcing the
requirements of subsection (a) as required pursuant to subsection
(b), the Administrator may withhold up to 5 percent of Federal funds
available to that State for State program grants under 1443(a).
5
Current SDWA Requirements
• 1417(d) Definition of lead free – For purposes of this
section, the term “lead free” -
– (1) when used with respect to solders and flux refers to
solder and flux containing not more than 0.2 percent lead;
– (2) when used with respect to pipes and pipe fittings refers to
pipe and pipe fittings containing not more than 8.0 percent
lead, and
– (3) when used with respect to plumbing fittings and fixtures,
refers to plumbing fittings and fixtures in compliance with
standards established in accordance with subsection (e)
– NOTE: EPA recognized in a August 22, 1997 Federal Register
notice that the standard for lead free plumbing fittings and fixtures
had been established in Section 9 of NSF/ANSI Standard 61
6
Reduction of Lead in Drinking Water Act
of 2011 • Amends SDWA Section 1417 – Prohibition on Use and
Introduction into Commerce of Lead Pipes, Solder and Flux
– Modifies the applicability of the prohibitions by creating exemptions
– Changes the definition of “lead-free” by reducing lead content from
8% to a weighted average of not more than 0.25% in the wetted
surface material (primarily affects brass/bronze)
– Eliminated provision that required certain products to comply with
“voluntary” standards for lead leaching
– Establishes statutory requirement for calculating lead content
– Effective 36 months from signature – January 4, 2014
7
New Lead Free Exemptions
• Exemptions to the prohibition on use and introduction
into commerce provisions in 1417(a)(1) and (3)
– 1417(a)(4)(A)
• One exemption is for “pipes, pipe fittings, plumbing fittings, or fixtures,
including backflow preventers, that are used exclusively for
nonpotable services, such as manufacturing, industrial processing,
irrigation, outdoor watering, or any other uses where the water is not
anticipated to be used for human consumption;”
– 1417(a)(4)(B)
• Another exemption is for “toilets, bidets, urinals, fill valves, flushometer
valves, tub fillers, shower valves, service saddles, or water distribution
main gate valves that are 2 inches in diameter or larger.
• Any item covered by either of the two exemptions can
have any amount of lead.
8
Key Revisions – Definition of Lead Free
• 1417(d) Definition of lead free
– Revises the lead content requirement from not more than
8% to not more than a weighted average of 0.25% lead
when used with respect to the wetted surfaces of pipes, pipe
fittings, plumbing fittings, and fixtures [1417(d)(1)(B)]
– Provides calculation procedure for determining the weighted
average lead concentration of a product from the
components that make up the product [1417(d)(2)]
– Eliminates 1417(d)(3) – which requires certain products
(plumbing fittings and fixtures) to comply with standards for
lead leaching (NSF/ANSI Standard 61 Section 9)
9
Key Revisions – Effective Date
• Effective Date of January 4, 2014 – Amendments become effective at the same for the use
prohibition in 1417(a)(1) and the introduction into commerce prohibition in 1417(a)(3)
– A product introduced into commerce legally on January 3, 2014, can’t be used in the installation or repair of a PWS or residential or non-residential facility providing water for human consumption on January 4, 2014
– Potential purchasers that could be affected by the lack of a staggered effective date include: plumbers, plumbing product retailers, developers, schools, and water systems
– Back inventory that does not meet 0.25% lead free calculation cannot be installed after January 3, 2014 unless it is exempt from the prohibitions
10
Issue #1: Demonstrating that Products
are Lead Free
• Should manufacturers/importers be required to
demonstrate that a product is “lead free” and if so,
how?
• Potential Approaches to Demonstrate Lead Free
• Require manufacturers to have products certified by a
qualified independent third party
• EPA assisted in the development of NSF/ANSI Standard 372 which
uses the same calculation as required under new SDWA lead free
definition
• Manufacturer certification with publicly available
documentation of their calculations/tests
11
Issue #2: Scope of the Exemptions
• 1417(a)(4)(A) Exemption
– This exemption from the lead free requirements is for products that
“are used exclusively for non-potable services”. To qualify for the
exemption, must the product be physically incapable of use in
potable services or could it be physically capable of use in potable
services, but labeled as illegal for use in potable services?
• Potential Approaches – Allow dual product lines (potable and non-potable products that are
interchangeable) if the non-potable version of the product is labeled
as not for potable purposes
– All products that are interchangeable with a potable counterpart
must meet the new lead content limit because it is not “used
exclusively for non-potable services”.
12
Issue #2a: Identifying Non-Potable
Products if Dual Product Lines Allowed
• If dual product lines are allowed, what kind of label should be used?
• Potential Labeling Approaches – Require labeling of package
• Similar to SDWA 1417(a)(3)(C) which contains a labeling requirement for lead solders used for non-potable applications. Label must state it is illegal to use the solder for installation or repair of any plumbing providing water for human consumption
– Require labeling of product • Products can get separated from the packaging, so there is the potential for
purchasers to be unaware of the use restriction
• Product labeling would likely require some sort of symbol due to size restrictions
– Require labeling of package and product 13
Issue #3: Identifying “Lead Free” Products
• How can consumers know if a product meets the
revised “lead free” definition?
– Labeling could help distinguish between back inventory that
does not meet 0.25% lead content requirement and products
that do meet the 0.25% lead content requirement
• Potential Approaches
– Require independent third-party certification against
NSF/ANSI Standard 372, which includes certifier’s mark
– Require manufacturers to label products that meet 0.25%
lead content if not done via third-party certification
– Do not require labeling of lead content
• Rely on labeling of non-potable products or prohibit interchangeable
non-potable products
14
Issue #4: Calculation of Lead Content • Under the new law
– Lead content must be calculated "for each wetted component" and "the lead content of the material used to produce wetted components shall be used to determine compliance with" the 0.25% requirement.
• What constitutes the “lead content of the material used to produce wetted components"?
• Potential Approaches
– Lead content at the surface of the product is used
– Lead content of the alloy used to produce the wetted component is used and not just the lead at the surface layer
• Acid-washing can remove surface lead, but higher lead layers can be exposed due to erosion/dezincification
• Coatings may also wear off over time and expose the brass/bronze
• Approach is consistent with the calculation for California and NSF/ANSI Standard 372
15
Issue #5: Repairing and Returning
Products to Service • Section 1417(a)(1)(A)
– Prohibits the use of items that are not lead free “in the installation or
repair” of any PWS or any plumbing in a residential or non-
residential facility providing water for human consumption
– Can a product in the system (or the facility) be repaired using lead
free component parts and returned to service even if other
component parts that were not repaired are not lead free?
• Potential Approaches
– Entire unit would need to meet 0.25% lead content
– Only components being replaced would need to meet the
0.25% lead content
• Approaches assume that all component parts being sold
separately meet the 0.25% lead content 16
Next Steps
• Evaluate information received from the
stakeholders
• Revise 40 CFR 141.43 section on lead free
as part of the Lead and Copper Rule Long-
Term Revisions
• Regulatory revisions are not likely to be
promulgated prior to January 2014 effective
date
• What, if any, interim guidance is needed? 17
MD/States Comments
Barry O’Brien, P.E.
Maryland Water Supply Program
Maryland Department of the
Environment
MDE - Maryland’s Drinking Water Primacy Agency
473 CWS
550 NTNCWS
2404 TNCWS
New Federal Lead-Free
Definition
Passed by Congress Jan 2011
Effective Jan 2014
0.2% lead in solder and flux
0.25% wetted surfaces of pipes, fittings and fixtures
MD Lead-free Definition
Mirrors new federal definition
0.25% lead - wetted perimeter pipes, fittings and fixtures
0.2% solder and flux
2010 St. legislation passed
Effective Jan 2011
2012 Slightly revised
MD Lead Free Requirements
Enforced by the Dept of Licensing and Regulation Plumbing Board
New definition currently in State Statute
Regulations being adopted to revise plumbing code
Maryland Experience With New
Requirements
Need to educate water systems
Water systems may not know this is coming.
Water systems may have large inventories not meeting new requirements
Primacy agency should communicate with agency responsible for enforcement.
State Concerns
Jurisdictional Issues
Many primacy agencies don’t have direct control over requirements of new federal lead-free definition
Plumbing codes
Enforcement
Permitting
State Concerns cont.
What are EPA’s expectations regarding enforcement
State implementation could be a burden
State Concerns cont.
Effects on Water Systems
Loss of inventory
Cost of lead-free complaint plumbing
Will new requirements encourage less distribution maintenance?
Summary
States are concerned about burden of implementing these requirements
Dependent on EPA enforcement expectations
Water systems face cost increases due to lost inventory and potential increased costs of supplies
Discussion
Reduction of Lead in Drinking Water Act
Public Meeting
Latham & Watkins operates worldwide as a limited liability partnership organized under the laws of the State of Delaware (USA) with affiliated limited liability partnerships conducting the
practice in the United Kingdom, France, Italy and Singapore and an affiliated partnership conducting the practice in Hong Kong and Japan. Latham & Watkins practices in Saudi Arabia in
association with the Law Office of Mohammed Al-Sheikh. © Copyright 2011 Latham & Watkins. All Rights Reserved.
Implementation of the Reduction of Lead in
Drinking Water Act Presented by:
Reliance Worldwide Corporation and
Watts Water Technologies, Inc.
August 16, 2012
30 30
Agenda
• Who we are
• The lead content requirements should be introduced in two steps:
• Step 1: a dual-inventories phase similar to current practice based on the California 0.25% rule, using package labeling to distinguish between the two product lines
• Step 2: a single-inventories phase supported by product-by-product specification of what should be lead free regardless of use; labeling and/or product marking unnecessary
• Mandatory third-party testing and certification should be required
• Application of the lead content calculation to replacement parts should be addressed
31
Who We Are
• Two companies partnered together to address the lead
free law:
• Reliance Worldwide Corporation
• Watts Water Technologies, Inc.
• Together, the companies sell thousands of SKUs in the
United States.
• The companies currently are taking steps to ensure
compliance with the lead free law.
32
Who We Are
• Leaders in residential/commercial water products • $ Billions in revenue
• Manufacturing and operations in the U.S. and abroad
• Leading brands in most markets served
• Representative products
• Control valves • Hot water safety valves
• Softeners • Pressure reducing valves
• Ball valves • Temperature actuated mixing valves
• Gate valves • Thermal expansion relief valves
• Fittings • Filtration systems
• Backflow preventers • Valve stations
• Piping • Flexible connectors
33
A Workable, Effective Single Inventories Program
• The companies support a single-inventories regime in the long-term,
where each product will be available only as lead-free or only as
traditional. This would:
• Be cost-effective;
• Streamline manufacturing and retail processes;
• Help to ensure traditional products are used properly; and
• Facilitate enforcement.
• The elements of a workable, effective single-inventories regime are:
• Clear product-by-product classification of what is in the scope of the law
and must not exceed 0.25% lead content;
• The classification applies across the industry, capturing all products that
could be used in potable applications; and
• A reasonable transition period.
Why Not Dual Inventories for the Long Term?
• Possible enforcement hurdles: may be relatively harder to
enforce
• Installer could by mistake or with intent use a traditional product in
a potable application.
• May result in unnecessary product expense such as
special dyeing, color coding, or other permanent
identification requirements
• A single inventory regime would negate this need.
• Risks unnecessary complexity and expense in distribution
chain: entails dual stocking, inventory and distribution
challenges, and the possibility of confusion
• In contrast, there are efficiencies, from manufacturing to retail,
from using one material.
34
35 35
Scope of the Law Must Be Clear
• The product-by-product classification must be industry-
wide.
• If not, manufacturers may come to different conclusions about
which products must be lead-free, resulting in products available
on the market in both traditional and lead-free versions.
• Otherwise, compliant companies that offer lead-free products
would be at a competitive disadvantage.
• Scope could be informed by the industry working with
standards bodies.
• The determination of which products are in scope should be
clear cut and apply uniformly.
• EPA could approve the scope and codify an industry
standard through a rulemaking.
36
A Transition Period Based on Dual Inventories Is Necessary
• The industry needs time beyond January 2014 to
transition to a single-inventories regime.
• Additional time is necessary to:
• Determine which products fall within the scope of the law, and
establish the product-by-product classification;
• Revamp product lines; and
• Replace stock.
• Dual inventories provide an effective bridge to a single-
inventories regime.
37 37
A Transition Period Is Necessary (cont.)
• Packaging labeling during the transition period is sufficient to distinguish lead-free and traditional products.
• Color coding, painting or dyeing the products themselves is prohibitively expensive and too difficult to implement for a transition period.
• The companies propose use of standardized packaging labels to distinguish lead-free and traditional products.
38 38
A Transition Period Is Necessary (cont.)
• EPA should confirm that dual inventories are permissible.
• Dual inventories permissible under federal law since at least
1996, when the lead leaching program which focused on
manufacturer intent was promulgated.
• The leaching standard applies to “new plumbing fittings and fixtures
that are intended by the manufacturer to dispense water for human
ingestion.” 42 U.S.C. § 300g-6, subd. (e)(1).
• There is no indication that Congress intended to eliminate dual
inventories.
• The federal law is intended to mirror the California law. 156 Cong.
Rec. H8617 (daily ed. Dec. 17, 2010) (statement of Rep. Michael
Doyle).
• The California law allows dual inventories.
• The Act’s exemptions are consistent with dual inventories
39 39
EPA Has the Discretion to Use a Two-Step Approach
• “[T]he agency, to engage in informed rulemaking, must
consider varying interpretations and the wisdom of its
policy on a continuing basis.” Chevron USA, Inc. v.
Natural Resources Defense Council, Inc., 467 U.S. 837,
863-864 (1984).
• The two-step approach we propose is a prudent policy
choice given the industry provides dual inventories to
comply with the California lead free law, but ultimately a
single-inventories regime is preferable provided it is
implemented appropriately.
40 40
Mandatory Third-Party Testing and Certification
• Mandatory third-party testing and certification would foster
compliance with the new lead free standard. This would:
• Protect the public
• Provide a level playing field for industry participants committed to
compliance
• Third-party certification is authorized under the existing
law, and supported by the legislative history.
• The companies support random product testing by EPA,
to spot check for compliance.
• Recent California Department of Toxic Substances Control test
results show the importance of this check.
41
Application of Lead Content Calculation to Replacement Parts
• EPA should clarify how the lead content calculation
applies to replacement parts, which are subparts or
components of products.
• The lead content of the repair or replacement part should
be evaluated within the context of the product to be
repaired.
• The lead content calculation should not be interpreted to
require manufacturers to create repair or replacement
parts that are different from the original part requiring
repair or replacement.
42 42
Conclusion
• To achieve the goals of the Reduction of Lead in
Drinking Water Act, assure consumer access to high
quality products, and facilitate an effective transition to
the new standard, we ask EPA to:
1. Implement a single-inventories regime following a transition
period during which time dual inventories are allowed with
proper package labeling;
2. Require third-party certification of lead free products; and
3. Clarify how the lead content calculation applies to
replacement parts, recognizing that the Safe Drinking
Water Act’s calculation method distinguishes the “entire
product” from the “component[s]” that comprise that
product.
Massachusetts Water
Resources Authority
Stephen Estes-Smargiassi
Director of Planning
EPA Public Meeting: Potential Regulatory Implications -
Reduction of Lead in
Drinking Water Act of 2011
August 16, 2012
Lead Exposure
Potent and accumulative
Wide array of health impacts
Children especially vulnerable
Public health priority
Consumer/Public Considerations
Unique consumer/public interface
Concern, confusion around lead hazards from all
sources
Definition: “Lead-free” means “free of lead?”
Principles
o Reduce public health risk
o Address contamination at the source
o Increase consumer awareness and
understanding
o Minimize consumer confusion
o Enable informed consumer choices
Pipes and Plumbing: Continuing Progress
» 1986 SDWA Amendments
» 1996 SDWA Amendments
» States: CA, VT, MD
» Certification
» Trends in manufacturing
Reduction of Lead in
Drinking Water Act of 2011
1. Exemptions
2. Definitions
3. Calculation
4. Certification
Implementation Questions/Concerns
EXEMPTIONS
What is the significance of the separation of
exempted items into two lists?
• A. pipes, pipe fittings, plumbing fittings, or
fixtures…. Etc.
• B. toilets, bidets, urinals, fill valves, etc.
Implementation Questions/Concerns
EXEMPTIONS (cont’d)
» How can purchasers/consumers tell the
difference between components meeting the
new “lead-free” definition and those which are
exempt?
» Are there instances where exempt and non-
exempt parts are interchangeable or where non-
exempt parts come into contact with the potable
system and how will those be addressed?
Implementation Questions/Concerns
DEFINITIONS
The new definition reflects experience in
state programs. How will state
implementation experience impact EPA
implementation?
Implementation Questions/Concerns
CALCULATION
What challenges have states using the calculation in the
Act faced in implementation?
Implementation Questions/Concerns
CERTIFICATION
Does the Act impact the performance
standard required in 1996 amendments?
NSF 61 experience
Monitoring compliance?
TIMING CONSIDERATIONS
Effective date for the Act?
Plans for Lead and Copper Rule (LCR) revisions?
Is inclusion in LCR mandatory?
What steps when to maximize risk reduction,
consumer clarity and to work with state experience
and market trends?
IMPLEMENTATION FOCUS
Implementation should focus on:
• Reducing public health risk
• Removing sources of lead in pipes and fixtures
as quickly and to the greatest extent possible
• Ensuring confidence and clarity in terms of lead
content in fixtures, parts, etc.
• Increasing public awareness and ability to make
informed choices
Lynn Thorp
National Campaigns Coordinator
202-895-0420 ext. 109
Discussion
Reduction of Lead in Drinking Water Act
Public Meeting
Please send written comments to:
By August 31, 2012
8/16/2012 U.S. Environmental Protection Agency 59
