摘要:

This errata corrects Figure 3 in the article, “Using a Hydraulic Model to Predict Hollow‐Fiber UF Performance,” which appeared in the October 1993 issue of Journal AWWA.

ISSN:0003-150X    

DOI:10.1002/j.1551-8833.1994.tb06142.x

出版商:Wiley    

年代:1994

数据来源: WILEY

ISSN:0003-150X    

DOI:10.1002/j.1551-8833.1994.tb06143.x

出版商:Wiley    

年代:1994

数据来源: WILEY

摘要:

The Florida Water Resources Act of 1972 was enacted to provide for conservation of the available water resources in the state while maximizing beneficial use. The act required that the minimum flow for a given watercourse “shall be the limit at which further withdrawals would be significantly harmful to the resources or ecology of the area.” With two exceptions, the St. Johns River Management District had never set minimum flows and levels for waters in the district. A citizens' group brought this action seeking an injunction against the river management district to require it to establish and maintain minimum flows and levels. The trial court ruled against the citizens.

ISSN:0003-150X    

DOI:10.1002/j.1551-8833.1994.tb06145.x

出版商:Wiley    

年代:1994

数据来源: WILEY

摘要:

Several bills have been introduced in the US Congress to reauthorize the Safe Drinking Water Act (SDWA), and more are expected. Views differ significantly on many issues, which is resulting in an intense political battle. In theory, anything and everything in the act could be changed. In reality, only changes that survive the political process will be made. An overview of SDWA reauthorization is presented in this article, and the issues involved are reviewed.

ISSN:0003-150X    

DOI:10.1002/j.1551-8833.1994.tb06147.x

出版商:Wiley    

年代:1994

数据来源: WILEY

摘要:

Protecting public health from microbial risks as well as chemical contaminants is a shared goal, but is there enough money to accomplish it?This discussion took place June 7, 1993, in San Antonio, Texas, and was updated by participants in November 1993. Panel moderator was Richard Sawey, director, Fort Worth Water Dept., 1000 Throckmorton, P.O. Box 870, Fort Worth, TX 76101. Other participants were Martin J. Allen, director, Technology Transfer Div., AWWA Research Foundation, 6666 W. Quincy Ave., Denver, CO 80235; Steve Clark, acting deputy director, Drinking Water Standards Div., US Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA), WH‐550D, 501 M St. S.W., Washington, DC 20460; Duane Georgeson, assistant general manager, Metropolitan Water District of Southern California, 1111 Sunset Blvd., Los Angeles, CA 90054; Frederick A. Marrocco, chief, Div. of Drinking Water Management, Pennsylvania Dept. of Environmental Resources, P.O. Box 8467, Harrisburg, PA 17105; Peter Shanaghan, small systems coordinator, Office of Groundwater and Drinking Water at USEPA, and Sam Wade, deputy chief executive officer, National Rural Water Association, 2915 S. 13th St., Duncan, OK 73533.

ISSN:0003-150X    

DOI:10.1002/j.1551-8833.1994.tb06148.x

出版商:Wiley    

年代:1994

数据来源: WILEY

ISSN:0003-150X    

DOI:10.1002/j.1551-8833.1994.tb06149.x

出版商:Wiley    

年代:1994

数据来源: WILEY

摘要:

Major changes to USEPA's current regulatory agenda are anticipated when the SDWA is reauthorized.Three earlier articles (published in the Journalin February 1990,March 1992, and February 1993) reviewed the history, content,status, and schedule of regulations mandated by the Safe Drinking Water Act. Current developments related to these rules are presented in this article.

ISSN:0003-150X    

DOI:10.1002/j.1551-8833.1994.tb06150.x

出版商:Wiley    

年代:1994

数据来源: WILEY

摘要:

From reasonable penalties to deliberate overkill, USEPA has imposed sanctions on water utilities that violate the Safe Drinking Water Act or the Clean Water Act.Although the number of enforcement actions against water suppliers to date has been limited, increasing regulation means that utilities are more likely to face US Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA) sanctions under the Safe Drinking Water Act and, to some extent, the Clean Water Act. In this article the author reviews possible criminal and civil actions—the latter consisting of administrative and court actions and citizens' suits—and briefly describes eight cases that exemplify various enforcement actions taken in the last few years. Large monetary penalties are not USEPA's usual goal in acting against a water supplier unless the supplier deliberately makes false reports. Instead, USEPA usually seeks to impose fines that match the amount a violator saved by not complying with regulations. Reorganization last fall at USEPA created the Office of Enforcement and Compliance Assurance, which indicates the agency's intention to streamline enforcement efforts.

ISSN:0003-150X    

DOI:10.1002/j.1551-8833.1994.tb06151.x

出版商:Wiley    

年代:1994

数据来源: WILEY

摘要:

The total national cost of compliance with current SDWA‐mandated drinking water regulations is estimated to be $1.4 billion annually for public water systems.In 1993 Congress directed the US Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA) to prepare a report examining the technical and economic capacity of states and public water systems to implement USEPA drinking water regulations. As part of the report, USEPA was required to address the costs and benefits of current regulations. USEPA submitted the “Chafce Report”—so called because Senators John Chafee (R‐R.I.) and Frank Lautenberg (D‐N.J.) wrote the amendment that required it— to Congress in September 1993. This article summarizes the portions of the report1 that provide demographic information about public water systems and a summary of USEPA's estimates of the costs and benefits of those regulations.

ISSN:0003-150X    

DOI:10.1002/j.1551-8833.1994.tb06152.x

出版商:Wiley    

年代:1994

数据来源: WILEY

摘要:

The problem of affordability of drinking water is not limited to customers of small or rural water systems.National trends in water rates and income levels are examined to determine whether water rates are becoming unaffordable. A more detailed analysis of water rates and income distributions is conducted for 168 water suppliers in Pennsylvania. The author concludes that rates are increasing much more rapidly than income levels for low‐income water customers. Further, the ability of customers to afford water service appears most at risk in large water systems, even though those systems tend to be publicly owned and have lower rates than investor‐owned systems. Overall, anywhere from one in four to one in six water customers is currently paying more than 2 percent of household income for water service. Expected rate increases will place increased pressure on water utilities and all levels of government to develop policies and rate structures to ensure the continued provision of water service to low‐income households.

ISSN:0003-150X    

DOI:10.1002/j.1551-8833.1994.tb06153.x

出版商:Wiley    

年代:1994

数据来源: WILEY