It’s the End of the Year - How do systems know if they submitted all of their drinking water samples?

2022 is coming to a close! That means systems must have all their required testing results submitted to the department in a timely manner. Every year, the department issues an average of 3,000 to 4,000 monitoring and/or reporting violations. To prevent any unnecessary violations, we highly encourage systems to review their monitoring schedule. We also recommend that systems sample early, to allow your lab adequate time to process and submit your sample results.  

You can find the most up-to-date monitoring schedules by visiting the department’s monitoring schedule website and searching for your system’s PWSID (COXXXXXXX) or name. Your monitoring schedule will clearly identify your testing requirements and if the department has received the test results.

If you notice that some of your results are not showing as “received,” please contact your contract laboratory and your drinking water compliance specialist. Stay tuned for 2023 - we are releasing new data tracking tools.

➽ Nicole Graziano Drinking Water Compliance Assurance Section Manager 

Simple Fixes: Using Facility Status and Availability with Waterworks

What are the implications when a water system changes the status or availability? 

Public water systems’ waterworks facilities have both a ‘status’ and ‘availability’ that is tracked by the state. Facility status is either ‘active’ or ‘inactive.’ Facility availability is typically either ‘permanent’, ‘seasonal’, ‘interim’, ‘emergency.’ Changing any of these items has significant regulatory implications and must be understood in order to avoid unintended consequences. 

Waterworks status

Any waterworks with an ‘inactive’ status MUST be physically disconnected from the public water system. The status of ‘inactive’ means the waterworks are not in use and are physically disconnected. If you intend to change the status from ‘inactive’ to ‘active,’ you must ensure that each waterworks element has received design approval prior to (re)connecting the waterworks. Typically, getting design approval will mean documenting construction of the waterworks, additional water quality sampling, and may even require treatment modifications. Design submittals for community water systems require the stamp of a professional engineer licensed in Colorado. Visit the Water Quality Control Division's (division) design approval website for more information. 

Waterworks availability

Any waterworks with an availability status of ‘emergency’ is considered a special case and can be connected and ‘active’, but as emergency infrastructure, the waterworks has not been reviewed for compliance with all chronic contaminants and may not have robust treatment in place for continuous use. Therefore, modifying a waterworks availability from ‘emergency’ to ‘seasonal’, ‘interim’, or ‘permanent’ means you must ensure that each waterworks element has received design approval prior to changing the availability. As stated above, obtaining design approval will typically mean additional water quality sampling and may even mean treatment modifications. 

Since the Department of Public Health and Environment (department) has seen an increase in the activation of ‘inactive’ waterworks or the changing of availability of ‘emergency’ infrastructure to ‘seasonal’ or ‘permanent’ waterworks, the department developed a few key examples using commonly asked questions to help refresh public water systems on the department’s requirements.

1. What does a public water system need to do before beginning to use a waterworks facility, currently having a status of ‘inactive?’

The division does not consider inactive waterworks to meet the prior approval requirements of Section 11.4 of Regulation 11 Colorado Primary Drinking Water Regulations (Regulation 11).  Even waterworks that may have received department approval in the past, once converted to inactive, are presumed disconnected from the water system and are no longer approved.  The department uses this interpretation because conditions and criteria change over time; inactive waterworks are not reviewed during sanitary surveys; and systems may not adequately maintain or upgrade this infrastructure to reliably protect public health over time.  

As an example, consider a well that has been inactive and disconnected for several years. Over time, the regulations may have evolved (e.g., regulations for continuous chlorination with 4-log virus capability, newly regulated compounds like PFAS, etc). Also, design standards may have changed including the burden of proof to confirm a well is not under the direct influence of surface water.

If connected and brought back online, the source may introduce contaminants that exceed maximum contaminant levels, introduce pathogens, or cause lead and copper corrosion violations. The department finds that the design review process mitigates these concerns.  

For a public water system to change a waterworks element from emergency status to seasonal or permanent use, the public water system must first submit and receive approval of the waterworks element to the Department in accordance with Section 11.4 of Regulation 11.  

2. If I want to inactivate a waterworks element, what types of disconnection/valving off are required?

The department requires inactive waterworks to be isolated from the system. If a waterworks element is disconnected (blind flanged) and not under construction, the department expects the facility status to be inactive. During a sanitary survey, the inspector may identify concerns with a waterworks element isolated from the system by a valve and require that this element be physically disconnected from the system (blind flanged) due to concerns related to sanitary defects from leaky valves, etc. Valves are not an acceptable means of isolation for inactivation of a facility as valves can leak or accidentally be opened by untrained staff. If an inactive facility is valved off as the means of isolation, it may be identified as a significant deficiency and/or cross connection during the sanitary survey. This is because inactive facilities are not usually maintained to the same sanitary standards as active facilities and can be a potential source of contamination to the finished water.  

3. What does a public water system need to do before beginning to use an existing waterworks element whose availability is currently identified as ‘emergency?’

The division does not consider emergency waterworks to meet the requirements of Section 11.4 of Regulation 11 Colorado Primary Drinking Water Regulations (Regulation 11).  Even waterworks that may have received department approval in the past, once converted to emergency, are not considered approved.  The department uses this interpretation because conditions and criteria change over time; emergency waterworks are reviewed during sanitary surveys but only for immediate health risks. The department has found that ‘emergency’ wells and tanks may not be adequately maintained for continuous use.  

As an example, consider a well source that has only been connected to the distribution system and has an availability of ‘emergency.’  Over time the source water qualities may change and create public health issues.  In addition, the system’s water quality may equilibrate without the constant input from this emergency source. If brought back online, the source may introduce constituents that exceed maximum contaminant levels (e.g., radionuclides, PFAS) or cause lead and copper corrosion violations. The department finds that the design review process mitigates these concerns by confirming the compatibility of water quality prior to use.  

For a public water system to change a waterworks element’s availability from emergency to seasonal or permanent, the public water system must notify compliance assurance and  submit and receive approval of the waterworks element to the department in accordance with Section 11.4 of Regulation 11.  Once approved, the system may request a change for this waterworks’ availability by updating their monitoring plan and submitting it to the drinking water portal.  

Because this article does not cover all potential variations, please reach out to the department if you have any questions regarding converting a water facility’s ‘status’ or ‘availability.’ The department encourages suppliers to reach out before making changes to make sure no unintended consequences occur. You can find contact information for our engineering section in this publicly available document. 

➽ Bret Icenogle Engineering Section Manager 

➽ Tyson Ingels Lead Drinking Water Engineer

New Storage Tank? Prior Approval Required

Prior to 2010, the Department did not consistently inspect, review, or approve storage tanks within distribution systems. The Department did however approve storage tanks located at drinking water treatment plants for the purpose of achieving necessary disinfection for treatment. The Department would like to use this opportunity to remind systems that all new storage tanks and major modifications to storage tanks must obtain prior approval from the Department’s Engineering Section. Obtaining prior approval will help ensure public health is adequately protected and help make sure that hatches, vents, and overflows will be acceptable to Department inspectors on future sanitary surveys. This can save your system the time and money associated with having to repair or replace these items in the future.

The two articles below were published in 2009 and 2019 respectively. In the 2009 article, the Department introduced the concept of requiring storage tanks to receive prior approval from the Department before being constructed. A decade later in 2019, the Department realized that some pump station wet wells (which are considered storage tanks) were being installed without approval and reminded the regulated community that those structures are considered storage tanks as well.

As with all design-related questions, should you have a concern or question about which types of projects should be submitted to the Department, please visit our design approval website or feel free to contact us CDPHE.WQEngReview@state.co.us.

➽ Tyson Ingels, Lead Drinking Water Engineer

1. 2009 Aquatalk Article: Submitting Plans for Storage Tanks (updated references in parentheses have been added):

Prior Design Review and Approval Requirement Extended to All Storage Facilities

➽ Gary Soldano

Starting in January 2010, the Safe Drinking Water Program will require prior approval of all such projects as required by Article 1.11 (current regulatory reference is Section 11.4(1)) of the Colorado Primary Drinking Water Regulations. This requirement has been in place for many years for storage vessels that are actively used to provide disinfection contact time. The requirement will be extended to all storage tanks in an effort to address issues preventatively rather than upon discovery during sanitary surveys or, worse yet, waterborne disease outbreak investigations.

The applicable design criteria for storage facilities can be found in Appendix I of "Design Criteria for Potable Water Systems ... " (current reference is Chapter 7 of the Colorado Design Criteria for Potable Water Systems, 2022 version). As many readers know, a stakeholder group process has been established to update that document and will resume work to finalize a revised document in the near future. Until that process is completed, the current criteria will continue to be used (criteria were updated in 2013, 2017, and again in 2022).

To prepare a complete submittal, water system staff and consultants should review the design criteria and obtain an "Application for Construction Approval" form from engineering section staff or the section's Web page links that can be found at https://cdphe.colorado.gov/design (hyperlink updated to be active).

Applicable design calculations should be bundled with design drawings and specifications for submittal to the engineering section unit manager whose geographic area includes the county in which the water system is located. For community water systems, a professional engineer's seal and signature is required on the documents.

If you have any questions about the process, please contact an engineering section staff member or unit manager. We look forward to working together with water systems to ensure safe drinking water throughout storage and distribution systems in this effort.

2. 2019 Aqua Talk Article: Submitting Plans for Pump Station Wet wells to be approved as Storage Tanks

How does my PWS stay in the know?

Using Aqua Talk and engagement website

One of the most frequent questions that our Local Assistance Unit (LAU) coaches get is: how does our public water system stay in the know with rule and regulation updates? To answer this question we are presenting some tools for you to access up-to-date information and to stay engaged with the division. These tools include: 

1. The Aqua Talk Blog engagement functions: searching the blog and using the tag function 
2. The WQCD engagement website: calendar, signing up for engagement email notifications
3. Safe Drinking Water Program’s Local Assistance Unit website: free monthly training opportunities, one-on-one coaching requests, and on-demand free online trainings

Aqua Talk Blog

If you are reading this article then you know about the safe drinking water program’s Aqua Talk blog that is published 2-3 times a month. What you may not know is that this blog platform offers many functions to help you find the information that you need to run your public water system. The first function we want to highlight is the search function. To start, you will go to the Aqua Talk homepage. On the upper right hand corner you will see a search box that says “Search This Blog.” By typing topics of interest to you into the search box you can locate articles on specific topics. 

For example, if you would like to learn about recent updates to the lead and copper rule you can type “lead and copper” into the search bar and click “Search.” The blog will then show you all articles that have the words lead and copper in their title or the body text. The blog defaults to sort the articles by relevance. If you would like to see the most recent articles you can click on the blue text at the top of the page that says “Sort by date.” Please note that the “Show all posts” link will send you back to the Aqua Talk homepage where you can see all posts in our archive (since 2019).

Another helpful function of the blog is the tag section. Starting on the Aqua Talk homepage you scroll a quarter of the way down the page until you see the “Topics/Tags” box on the right hand side of the screen. You can then click on the topics that interest you to see all the articles that have been tagged with those topics. 

The WQCD Engagement Page

The second tool we want you to know about is the WQCD engagement website. This website is a space for water and wastewater systems to play a part in updates that the division makes to regulations, guidance, and policies. We want to hear from you on these proposals. Whether you are a member of the public who is interested in what the state is doing or a regulated entity that is impacted by these measures, we want your feedback. The information on this webpage reflects current efforts you should be aware of and possible engagement opportunities. There are many opportunities for you to engage on the website. 

The first tool you will see is the engagement calendar. This calendar shows all scheduled WQCD engagement events.  You can select how you want to view the calendar by selecting the “Week” or “Month'' tab at the top of the calendar and then select the timeline you want to view by clicking on the horizontal arrows. If you are interested in learning more about a specific event click on the blue text in the calendar and a window will pop up with more information and links to either find more information or to copy the event to your work calendar. Many events have specific contact information at the bottom of the calendar post so, be sure to scroll to the bottom of each event to access that information. 

Another aspect of the engagement website to look into is the engagement email notifications sign-up form. If you scroll past the engagement calendar you will see a red box with a link to “Sign up for email notifications.” If you click on this link it will send you to a separate website where you can sign up for different WQCD email listservs. The subscription form will ask for the following information: 

You will then select which emails you would like to receive by clicking on the blank box next to the topics you are interested in: 

Please note that these emails will be sent out through a third party website. You can opt out of these emails at any time by clicking on the “unsubscribe” link at the bottom of the email. 

There are many other options for you to plug into division activities on the WQCD engagement page, too many to list in this article. We recommend that you spend some time looking into this website as it is a crucial tool for you to stay in-the-know. 

Safe Drinking Water Program’s Local Assistance Unit website

Lastly we want to highlight the LAU website. To start, the LAU website lists many free training opportunities for water systems. Please note that the team rotates between in-person and virtual offerings for our group training events. Please click on the registration documents (see links below) to see upcoming dates and register for the training you would like to attend by selecting your date and filling out the registration form. The LAU team will send you attendance information within 48 hours.  

• Monitoring and Operating for Regulatory compliance
• Offered the first Wednesday of every month 
• Tailored to operators and decision makers 
• 0.4 free TUs offered 
• Meets mandatory regulatory training (MRT) requirements for certified drinking water operators
• Sanitary Survey Preparation 
• Offered the third Wednesday of every month 
• Tailored to operators and decision makers who would like to prepare for their next drinking water sanitary survey inspection 
• 0.3 free TUs offered 
• Resilience training: Emergency Management & Financial Planning
• Offered the third Tuesday of the last month of every quarter 
• This training is primarily offered in-person as the curriculum is heavily activity based
• Tailored to decision makers but operators may find valuable 
• 0.4 free TUs offered 

The LAU will continue to develop our group training event offerings to meet the needs of the drinking water community. We also work with our technical assistance providers in the state (RCAC, CRWA, EFCN, AWWA, CoWARN, and Indigo Water) to provide free training across the state and via webinar. We strive to meet the needs of our training customers, if you have suggestions of curriculum we should offer in the coming months and years please email cdphe.wqdwtraining@state.co.us with your suggestions. Please see the LAU website to see the on-demand and on-line training opportunities that we offer for free. 

In addition to group training events our coaches also offer one-on-one visits in which we will meet virtually or in-person at your facility to provide technical, managerial, and financial technical assistance. To request a coaching visit with your drinking water facility please fill out our online assistance request form. As with the WQCD engagement website, there are many more opportunities for learning and plugging into the division on the LAU website. We invite you to take some time to look at the website. 

Thank you for your dedication to protecting public health by providing safe drinking water to your communities. We hope these tools help you in this endeavor and look forward to your engagement! 

➽ Kyra Gregory Drinking Water Training Specialist

Most Frequently Cited Significant Deficiencies and Violations - Inspection Year 2022

The Field Services wrapped up the 2022 inspection year (IY 22) in September and the new IY 23 inspection year started on October 1, 2022. We appreciated all the assistance from public water systems in completing 469 sanitary surveys in 2022! We anticipate completing over 550 sanitary surveys in 2023. In this article we will share the top 10 most frequently cited significant deficiencies and violations to raise awareness and help operators identify and correct issues before they become a potential health threat or citations in a sanitary survey. 

According to Regulation 11, Section 11.3(72), a significant deficiency means: any situation, practice, or condition in a public water system with respect to design, operation, maintenance, or administration, that the state determines may result in or have the potential to result in production of finished drinking water that poses an unacceptable risk to health and welfare of the public served by the water system. Field-based Violations of Regulation 11 have either Tier 2 or Tier 3 public notice requirements that are dependent upon the severity of the violation and any potential public health effects, pursuant to Regulation 11, Sections 11.33(1)(a,b), 11.33(2)(a), 11.33(3)(a) and 11.33(4)(a). All issued notifications must comply with the general content and distribution requirements and notice reporting requirements that are included in Regulation 11.33(5),(6) and (7).

During the 2022 inspection year, 1,155 significant deficiencies and violations were cited in 469 sanitary surveys. The Top 10 most frequent inspection citations were:

Storage tank deficiencies (F310 and T310), in the distribution system and before the entry point (CT tanks) lead the pack with 17% of all citations in 2022. Storage tank deficiencies can include improperly protected screens, hatches and overflows. This underscores the importance of robust routine tank inspections under the Storage Tank Rule and also for tanks that are used for contact time. 

The next most frequently cited significant deficiency, with 9% of the total 2022 citations is for wellhead pathways of contamination (S030). This can include loose wellhead seals, missing or damaged vent screens, missing gaskets, broken/open electrical boxes/conduit, cracked sanitary seal plates and wellheads. 

Backflow prevention and cross connection control (BPCCC) has several violations and two significant deficiencies that make the Top 10 list, including failure to develop BPCCC annual reports, failure to implement the BPCCC program and failure to meet the assembly testing ratio which is a Tier 2 public notice violation.

Groundwater entry point chlorine monitoring (R212) accounted for 40 significant deficiencies, including monitoring weekly entry point chlorine residual in the wrong location. Chlorine residual monitoring equipment practices (R531) which can apply to both groundwater and surface water systems rounded out the Top 10. Frequently encountered chlorine residual monitoring equipment violations include using expired DPD reagent, caked glassware (grayish tinged), not switching a colorimeter to High Range and using the appropriate vials when needed, and not performing weekly checks of online chlorine analyzers. In accordance with Regulation 11, Section 11.46, 40 CFR 141.74(a), and Policy 4 Guidance, suppliers must field verify online chlorine analyzers once each week by taking a grab sample and analyzing it for chlorine residual.

Please check your water systems for these issues to protect public health and avoid significant deficiencies and violations during your next sanitary survey. If you would like additional assistance on technical issues or sanitary survey preparation, please sign up for individualized coaching here.  For any questions or concerns about sanitary surveys please email our Field Services team at cdphe_wqcd_fss_questions@state.co.us. Thank you for all your efforts to protect public health!

➽ Heather Young, PE, CWP, Field Services Section Manager

Investigations of Operator Misconduct Complaints

The Water and Wastewater Facility Operators Certification Board (board)’s Guidance 16-1 and  Procedure 16-2 provide direction regarding Water Quality Control Division (division) investigations of possible misconduct by water and wastewater facility operators. It also describes the division’s approach to escalating from a division informal reprimand to a division recommendation of formal disciplinary action by the board.

Background

In Guidance 16-1, the board established that it is neither practical nor desirable for all instances of operator misconduct to result in formal disciplinary action by the board. Therefore, a division investigation needs to determine whether a violation of law or regulation occurred and, if so, whether the operator’s behavior rises to the level of formal disciplinary action.

Specific Allegations

According to Guidance 16-1, an investigation of operator misconduct is limited to the specific allegations against an operator. The division’s task is not to examine the operator under a microscope to see if any possible infraction might be found. Rather, the investigation must determine whether or not there is evidence to support the claim about the operator in question.  

Considerations

When there is evidence of operator misconduct, the division, guided by Board Guidance 16-1, considers the following factors before deciding whether to resolve the issue informally or to recommend formal disciplinary action of the board: 

• The gravity of the incident(s) at issue, including the level of risk posed to public health and the environment.
• The operator’s degree of control over the incident(s).
• The operator’s attitude during and after the incident(s), including the operator’s willingness to cooperate with the division during the investigation.

The division also considers whether correction through training, instruction, and/or coaching might be effective.

Informal Action

When a complaint can be resolved informally, the division notifies the operator, and possibly the operator’s supervisor, of the division’s findings through an informal letter of reprimand. The division may suggest approaches to address the behavior that resulted in misconduct and/or recommend training or coaching to improve the operator’s knowledge and skills. The issuance of an informal letter of reprimand does not close the investigation of possible misconduct. The investigation will remain open and confidential for up to three years. If there is evidence of repeat misconduct or escalation of misconduct during that time, the division will request that the board take formal disciplinary action against the operator. Informal division action does not affect an operator’s standing as a certified water professional. 

Recommendation of Formal Disciplinary Action

Only the board has the authority to formally reprimand an operator or to formally suspend or revoke the operator’s certificate. However, the division does have the authority to immediately suspend or revoke an operator's certificate to protect public health in emergency situations, but then the board must confirm and formalize the division's action at a later date. The division requests formal board action for severe offenses, as well as repeat or escalated behavior. The board follows procedures detailed in Procedure 16-2 when responding to a division request for formal board action. While division informal action is confidential, the board’s disciplinary action decisions (formal reprimand, certificate suspension, or certificate revocation) are made in open meetings and are posted on the board’s website for three years.

➽ Jessica Morgan, Facility and Operator Outreach and Certification Board Liaison

LCRR Stakeholder Process

On January 15, 2021, EPA promulgated the final Lead and Copper Rule Revisions (LCRR), the most comprehensive update so far to the original 1991 Lead and Copper Rule. Following executive review and additional stakeholder input, the LCRR went into effect on December 16, 2021. EPA also noted several areas for additional improvements to the LCRR and committed to promulgating the Lead and Copper Rule Improvements (LCRI) rule by late 2024. The LCRR has an early implementation requirement for public water systems to complete initial lead service line inventories by October 16, 2024. The division is conducting a stakeholder process for the Water Quality Control Commission (Commission) to adopt the LCRR, so that it is effective in Colorado by December 16, 2023 and provides the department enforcement authority, instead of the EPA. This rulemaking process could prove challenging depending on the changes promulgated in the LCRI and when they become effective. 

The LCRR emphasizes lead service line identification and replacement requirements, creates a new lead “trigger level” below the current “action level,” and requires lead sampling at schools and child care facilities. The LCRR adds considerable complexity for both states and water providers. However, some public health experts and community activists believe the LCRR falls short in achieving removal of lead service lines and reducing lead exposure. 

Despite the uncertainty, CDPHE is moving forward to adopt LCRR. LCRR will be adopted and integrated into our existing Colorado Primary Drinking Water Regulations (Regulation 11). The division sees great value and opportunity to gain shared understanding by discussing the requirements during the stakeholder engagement and subsequent rulemaking process. Given the complexity of this rule, these interactions would be invaluable for the division and water suppliers. This will also allow the division to better understand the additional resources needed for LCRR implementation. The division will continue to monitor information from EPA regarding LCRI and its impact on moving forward with LCRR adoption. 

The LCRR stakeholder process launched in July 2022 and is moving forward toward an August 2023 Rulemaking Hearing before the Commission to adopt LCRR. Visit our LCRR web page to get engaged or simply see a great deal of resources to help you and your water system get ready for LCRR.  

➽ Bryan Pilson, Haley Orahood, Nicole Graziano, and Ron Falco, P.E. Safe Drinking Water Program

BPCCC Regulation Stakeholder Process Starting

The Division will be updating the Backflow Prevention and Cross Connection Control Program (BPCCC) regulation (in Regulation 11 Section 11.39) in 2023 and the first stakeholder meeting will be on November 9, 2022. Information on the proposed rulemaking and stakeholder sign up is available on our website here. 

The BPCCC rule was originally adopted with stakeholder consensus in 2015 and became effective in 2016. Minor modifications to the rule were made with stakeholder engagement in 2018 and 2020. Three major milestones took effect in 2022. The first, is the final milestone for the staged implementation of the BPCCC surveys that started in 2016 that required suppliers to achieve the survey compliance ratio of 1.0 by December 31, 2021. The second major milestone that took effect in 2022 is the final backflow prevention assembly annual testing compliance ratio must be > 0.90 starting December 31, 2021 and each year after. The third major milestone was the “90 Day Requirement.” This means that beginning January 1, 2022, for each backflow prevention assembly not tested during the previous calendar year, the supplier must ensure the backflow prevention assembly is tested no later than 90 days after the active date of the backflow prevention assembly in the following calendar year. 

Field Services has been identifying violations during sanitary surveys related to these requirements in 2022 and numerous water suppliers have voiced concerns about the requirements and the corresponding Tier 2 public notification requirements. The Division heard these concerns and initiated an update of the rule focused on streamlining the sections to eliminate the tiered implementation structure that has passed, combining the assembly and method test ratios and addressing the “100% compliance” issue. The rulemaking will be scheduled for August 2023, with an effective date in 2024, however the stakeholder process will start in November 2022.

If you are interested in participating, please register for the stakeholder email list on our website here. Thank you for your engagement in the process!

➽ Heather Young, PE, CWP, Field Services Section Manager

➽ Tyson Ingels, PE, Lead Drinking Water Engineer

➽ Clayton Moores, PE, Field Unit I Manager

➽ Cameron Wilkins, PE, Field Unit II Manager

Using Emergency Drinking Water Sources: What Water System Should Know

This updated article was originally published in the spring 2010 edition of Aqua Talk.

For drinking water, an emergency source should only be used as the result of extreme circumstances and is otherwise kept offline. Emergency sources should be out of service and only used very rarely. An emergency source should only be used in a true emergency situation. Emergency examples include:

• Using sources to address natural disasters (e.g., fire/flood);
• Line breaks and water loss; or 
• Source water issues (e.g., a well dries up unexpectedly).

Additionally, emergency sources must be included as part of a water system’s inventory prior to its use and approved by the department. Unlike emergency sources, interim or seasonal sources are used intermittently or seasonally. They are often used to meet high water demand or to maintain water rights. These types of sources should be specifically listed as "interim" or "seasonal" in your monitoring plan.

If your system is experiencing an emergency situation and needs to use an emergency source, contact the department as soon as possible but no later than 24 hours after the source is used. During normal business hours, Monday through Friday, please contact your drinking water compliance specialist. Outside of normal business hours and days, please call the emergency response line at 1.877.518.6508. Additionally, you must collect a nitrate and total coliform sample at the emergency source. The sampling must be conducted within two calendar days of the source being into service. The department may also require additional sampling depending on the situation.

If your system needs to use the well for more than 30 days, the department recommends that suppliers collect lead and copper samples from a portion of its highest risk Lead and Copper Rules sample sites. The sample results could help the supplier determine if any lead release has occurred from the potential change in distribution system water quality. If there is an observed increase in the lead release, this information could be used to inform the public especially if there are concerns raised by customers. All drinking water lead results must be reported to the department. 

If you anticipate that your emergency source will be used for more than 90 days, you must: 

1. Notify the department and submit an updated Drinking Water System Inventory Form. When using the form, please make sure to change the availability designation for the source from “emergency” to “interim” or “permanent” (depending on the specific situation). 
2. If the emergency source has not already been approved as an “interim” or “seasonal” source, submit a Drinking Water Application for Construction Approval Form. The regulations require all sources to have design approval. Please note that the approval as an emergency source does NOT constitute an approval of the source for interim or permanent usage. Specific information regarding design approval can be found here. You may also contact the Engineering Section at 303.692.6298 or via email at CDPHE.WQEngReview@state.co.us.

The key to getting an emergency source activated quickly and in compliance is timely communication with the department.

2022 Operator Certification Board Vacancies

The Water and Wastewater Facility Operators Certification Board (WWFOCB) is a 10-member rulemaking body with oversight responsibility for the operator certification program and Regulation 100 plus supporting policies. Members are appointed by the governor to serve four-year terms. The board usually meets up to 10 times a year for half-day meetings. There is also an annual day-long training session, usually in August. While board members volunteer their time, they are entitled to reimbursement of travel expenses.

Currently, there is a vacancy on the WWFOCB:

• A member to achieve geographical representation and to reflect the various interests in the water and wastewater facility certification program. This board member must reside west of the continental divide. This board member is not required to be a certified operator.

The most effective board members have a strong interest in supporting public health and environmental protection through the operator certification program. They are good listeners who can articulate their perspectives in a professional and respectful way. When there is a difference of opinions, effective board members work toward building consensus.

If you are interested in serving on the WWFOCB, and you meet the criteria for the vacancy, please apply online at the Governor’s Office of Boards and Commissions.

Or contact the board office at cdphe.wwfocb@state.co.us for more information.

➽ Brandy Valdez-Murphy, WWFOCB Administrator 

Cybersecurity: Protecting your system = protecting public health

When our drinking water coaches present at conferences, schools, webinars, and on the road the first item that we all discuss is how we in the drinking water sector can work together to create a culture of health. There are many ways to create a shared culture. One of the first steps is to focus on our shared goal in our daily work of providing safe drinking water to the public. The basics of this shared goal are for water providers to follow the drinking water regulations and for the safe drinking water program to ensure that those regulations are being adhered to. As we know regulations can sometimes lag behind current needs and issues that arise in drinking water. So, the question remains, how can we go above and beyond the regulations to protect public health? 

In recent years cyberattacks have been on the rise for critical infrastructure providers, including water providers. Examples of recent attacks include: cutting off operators from their SCADA controls, holding customer billing data ransom, and attempting to alter dosing rates and contaminate the drinking water supply. While the EPA does not currently have any rules for the division to adopt as regulations for cybersecurity, we know this is a critical issue that has the potential to affect systems of all sizes. 

The Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act (Public Law No. 117-58) also known as the Bipartisan Infrastructure Law (BIL) requires the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), in coordination with the Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency (CISA), to develop a Technical Cybersecurity Support Plan. This plan was released on August 22, 2022 and documents current and future steps that the EPA will take to increase their cybersecurity assistance for drinking water systems. In addition to sharing this report with the drinking water community the division would also like to share some resources and initial steps to help your system prepare for cyberattacks. Thank you for the work you do everyday to protect your communities. We hope these resources help with your efforts! 

Resources: 

• New to cybersecurity? Read this article from Simplilearn to learn about the most common types of cyberattacks and simple steps you can take to protect your system
• EPA: Technical Cybersecurity Support Plan for Public Water Systems - Report to Congress
• EPA: Cybersecurity Best Practices for the Water Sector
• CDPHE: Drinking Water Security Response Toolbox
• Cybersecurity Resources: The department gathered resources to help your system prepare and respond to cybersecurity attacks. 
• Guidance: Respond and Report Cyberattacks is a guidance document that can be used when your water/wastewater facility experiences a cybersecurity event. It outlines what steps to take, how to report the event, and what to expect after reporting the event

10 Questions for a Cybersecurity Dialogue within your organization

Does your system …

1. Keep an inventory of control system devices and ensure this equipment is not exposed to networks outside the utility? Never allow any machine on the control network to “talk” directly to a machine on the business network or on the Internet.
2. Segregate networks and apply firewalls? Classify IT assets, data, and personnel into specific groups, and restrict access to these groups.
3. Use secure remote access methods? A secure method, like a virtual private network, should be used if remote access is required.
4. Establish roles to control access to different networks and log system users? Role-based controls will grant or deny access to network resources based on job functions.
5. Require strong passwords and password management practices? Use strong passwords and have different passwords for different accounts.
6. Stay aware of vulnerabilities and implement patches and updates when needed? Monitor for and apply IT system patches and updates.
7. Enforce policies for the security of mobile devices? Limit the use of mobile devices on your networks and ensure devices are password protected.
8. Have an employee cybersecurity training program? All employees should receive regular cybersecurity training.
9. Involve utility executives in cybersecurity? Organizational leaders are often unaware of cybersecurity threats and needs.
10. Monitor for network intrusions and have a plan in place to respond? Be capable of detecting a compromise quickly and executing an incident response plan.

Please contact us at cdphe.wqdwtraining@state.co.us if you have any questions about any of these areas or need assistance with making improvements to your cybersecurity measures. 

➽ Kyra Gregory Drinking Water Training Specialist and CoWARN Administrator

Fundamentals of the Bipartisan Infrastructure Law (BIL)

On November 15, 2021, President Biden signed the $1.2 trillion Bipartisan Infrastructure Law (BIL) into law. The BIL appropriates a significant amount of funding to the State Revolving Fund Programs (SRF), which is administered by the Colorado Water Resources and Power Development Authority, Department of Local Affairs and CDPHE. The Authority is the grant recipient for the SRF, DOLA evaluates the financial structure of the applicant’s application to the SRFs, and CDPHE manages the technical and compliance aspects of the SRFs. The funding will be allocated in essentially three “buckets” over the next five years, which includes general infrastructure, emerging contaminants, and lead service lines. Colorado will receive approximately $680 million over the next five years, with much available as loan forgiveness (similar to a grant). Below is a table showing the anticipated awards.

Year	Clean Water - Supplemental Infrastructure Funds	Drinking Water - Supplemental Infrastructure Funds	Total
2022	$14,354,000	$35,476,000
2023	$17,616,000	$42,498,600
2024	$19,224,000	$46,377,900
2025	$20,824,000	$50,237,900
2026	$20,824,000	$50,237,900
Total:	$92,842,000	$224,828,300	$317,670,300
Year	Clean Water - Emerging Contaminants Funds	Drinking Water - Emerging Contaminants Funds	Total
2022	$753,000	$14,898,000
2023	$1,800,000	$15,000,000
2024	$1,800,000	$15,000,000
2025	$1,800,000	$15,000,000
2026	$1,800,000	$15,000,000
Total:	$7,953,000	$74,898,000	$82,851,000
Year	NA	Drinking Water - Lead Service Line Replacement Funds	Total
2022		$55,866,000
2023		$56,000,000
2024		$56,000,000
2025		$56,000,000
2026		$56,000,000
Total:		$279,866,000	$279,866,000
Totals:	$100,795,000	$579,592,300	$680,387,300
Blue numbers for 2022 are actual allotment numbers. 2023 through 2026 are estimates.

 

As stated above, the Bipartisan Infrastructure Law (BIL) funding is allocated by the EPA to the existing drinking and clean water state revolving fund (SRF) program. The process for awarding funds is the same as the existing program.

1. Applicants must submit an eligibility survey to be included on the state’s Intended Use Plan (IUP) that describes how funds will be used for the plan year.
2. Based on the eligibility surveys received, the division develops eligibility lists and includes them in the draft IUP. TheWater Quality Control Commission reviews and approves the IUP. 
3. After the commission approves the IUP, the eligibility lists are adopted by the Colorado Water Resources and Power Development Authority,and the General Assembly.
4. Communities that are included on the eligibility lists in the approved IUP may start the application process through the SRF.
5. The steps for a drinking water project are described in the DWRF Loan Program Steps and wastewater projects are described in the WPCRF Loan Program Steps.
6. The BIL requires funds to be issued as a combination of principal forgiveness and a subsidized loan. The eligible criteria are included in the Intended Use Plan. The projects are evaluated based on the criteria and may be awarded principal forgiveness subject to funding availability at the time of loan application. The eligibility criteria and BIL funding categories are included in the Addendum to the 2022 DWRF IUP and Addendum to the 2022 WPCRF IUP.  

This funding represents a major opportunity for Colorado. The existing SRF programs received approximately $34 million in funding from the EPA per year over the past few years. The BIL allocates an additional $121 to $143 million to the SRF program on a yearly basis for the next five years. No funding has been awarded yet, as the state is still in the process of applying for funds. But we currently have 40 applications in process that are being evaluated for eligibility with regards to BIL funding. The department will likely begin issuing funds within the next few months, depending on when EPA sends the funds.

While the BIL represents great opportunity, there are expected challenges too, such as:

1. The BIL funding requires a state match for the next five years. It appears that the state has the matching funds for the first year. But the program is working to determine how the state will meet the match requirements in future years.
2. Staffing and training of new staff is a challenge given the level of additional funding. The program is working quickly to hire additional staff.
3. The Build America, Buy America Act (BABA) applies to BIL funding, and requires  that all construction materials and manufactured products are made in the United States. Additional federal regulations such as BABA may slow funding awards and may be a challenge for projects to comply with. 

We share a collective commitment with local governments to protect public health and ensure safe tap water for all. The BIL funding can help us move forward toward that goal. Contact us if your community is interested in pursuing this funding. Thank you.

➽ Mark Henderson, P.E. Unit Manager, Grants and Loans

➽ Michael Beck Section Manager Community Development & Partnership 

➽ Ron Falco, P.E. Safe Drinking Water Program Director