DIFICULTADES Y RETOS

The state must review each system's proposed WCP plan and either approve, reject, or conditionally approve the plan. See Appendix G for review criteria for use by states when

reviewing WCP plans (both required and recommended elements of a WCP are presented in Appendix G). If the plan is approved, or if the system agrees to implement the state's conditions for approval, the system will be awarded 0.5-log Cryptosporidium removal credit to apply toward the LT2ESWTR treatment requirements. The PWS will need a decision from the state within three years after bin assignment as outlined in Exhibit 2.1 and Figure 2-1 in order to fulfill the treatment requirements of the LT2ESWTR. If the state does not respond to a WCP plan by the required date, the WCP plan shall be considered “state-approved” and the 0.5-log WCP credit shall be awarded to the water system as long as the submitted WCP plan includes all required elements (40 CFR 141.716(a)(4)). Under any circumstances, the state can later withdraw an approved WCP credit if the state determines that the PWS has not implemented and maintained the activities outlined in the approved WCP plan (40 CFR 141.716(a)(5) and (6)).

The initial approval will be valid as long as the PWS continues to implement and maintain the approved WCP plan, as described in more detail below.

2.2.3.2 Maintenance of the WCP Credit

Systems that have obtained state approval of their watershed control programs are eligible for the 0.5-log WCP credit as long as they continue to implement and maintain the efforts

outlined in their state-approved WCP plan, as well as satisfactorily completing the following: • Submit an annual WCP status report to the state (40 CFR 141.716(a)(5)(i)).

• Conduct a watershed sanitary survey every three years for community water systems (five years for non-community systems) using state guidelines and personnel approved by the state for this work and submit the survey report to the state (40 CFR 141.716(a)(5)(ii)). After approval of the WCP plan, if the PWS determines that a change in the plan is needed, the PWS must notify the state prior to making the change and must outline any measures proposed to mitigate any reduction in SWP that is likely to result from this change (40 CFR 141.716 (a)(5)(i)). The description of this change must also be included in the next annual status report.

The annual status reports, WCP plan, and watershed sanitary surveys that are conducted every three years must be made available to the public upon request. These documents must be in plain language format and include criteria by which to evaluate the success of the program in achieving plan goals. The state may withhold portions of the annual status report, WCP plan, and watershed sanitary survey as requested by the PWS based on security considerations (40 CFR 141.716(a)(5)(iii)). To assist the state in this regard, the PWS should clearly indicate the specific information that should be held confidential. The system can identify those items for the state, or provide parallel “vetted documents” for dissemination to the public.

Once awarded the 0.5-log WCP credit, water systems will continue to receive the credit as long as they continue to implement and maintain the activities outlined in their state-approved WCP plan, including preparation and submittal of annual progress reports and sanitary survey reports every three years, as required. States may withdraw the credit if they determine that the

PWS is not carrying out the activities outlined in the state-approved WCP (40 CFR 141.716(a)(6)).

More details on preparation and review of the required reports by the PWS (or collection of PWSs in a joint WCP) and the state are briefly outlined below.

2.2.3.2.1 Annual Status Report

The annual WCP status report must be submitted by the date established by the state. The report must describe the PWS’s implementation of the approved plan and assess the adequacy of the plan for meeting the system's goals. It also must explain how the system is addressing any shortcomings in plan implementation, including those previously identified by the state or by the system during a watershed survey. If the system made any substantial changes to its approved program, it must describe the changes and explain the reason for making them. If the change is likely to reduce the level of SWP, the system must explain what actions it will take to mitigate the effects (40 CFR 141.716(a)(5)(i)).

The annual status report must describe progress being made implementing individual control measures (40 CFR 141.716(a)(5)(i)). Progress should be compared with the original timetable provided in the WCP plan. Implementation delays should be explained, and actions to prevent further delays should be described.

The original watershed program plans must include an analysis of the effectiveness and feasibility of control measures that could reduce Cryptosporidium loadings from sources of contamination to the system’s source water. Annual status reports should provide updates on the control measures as they are implemented. The report should address progress being made on priority activities and, to the extent possible, evaluate whether projects are achieving their objectives. The report should also identify emerging issues and incorporate them into the watershed protection program. Since the annual status reports must be made available to the public on request, reports must be written in plain language format (40 CFR 141.716(a)(5)(iii)), though portions of the report can be withheld for PWS security considerations. To assist the state in this regard, the PWS should clearly indicate information in the status report that should be held confidential. The PWS can identify those items for the state, or provide a parallel “vetted report” for dissemination to the public.

2.2.3.2.2 Watershed Sanitary Survey Report

A state-approved watershed survey must be conducted once every three years for community water systems (five years for non-community water systems), with the first report due three years after the WCP approval date (see Exhibit 2.1). The survey must be conducted according to state guidelines by persons approved by the state to conduct watershed surveys. A report on the results of the survey must be submitted to the state. The survey must meet the following criteria (40 CFR 141.716(a)(5)(ii)(A)):

• Cover the area of the watershed that was identified in the approved WCP plan as the area of influence.

• Assess the implementation of actions to reduce source water Cryptosporidium levels. • Identify new sources of Cryptosporidium.

If the state determines that significant changes may have occurred in the watershed since the previous watershed sanitary survey, systems must undergo another watershed sanitary survey by a date required by the state, which may be earlier than the regularly scheduled survey (40 CFR 141.716(a)(5)(ii)(B)). In such an instance, the next survey and subsequent surveys will be required three years from this new date.

States developing a watershed sanitary survey program may wish to use the watershed sanitary survey manual developed by the California Department of Health Services and the California/Nevada Section of American Water Works Association (AWWA). PWSs are required to use state-designated persons for the sanitary survey. Conducting a useful watershed survey relies in large part on the competence of the individuals responsible for its execution. It is expected that the state will designate appropriately trained individuals, including civil or

environmental engineers, or sanitarians with experience in the operation of water systems and a sound understanding of public health principles and waterborne diseases. Although other people may be performing the work for these individuals, the people designated by the state will

supervise and direct the activities conducted for the survey. Efforts performed during the survey could include activities such as the following:

• Review of relevant National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) permits and discharge records.

• Review of pertinent databases (e.g., county geographic information system (GIS) systems, etc.).

• Review of most recent available aerial photography.

• Interviews with Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS), soil conservation service, local county planning agencies, regional planning organizations, and other organizations as applicable.

A final survey report must be submitted to the state for approval (40 CFR

141.716(a)(5)(ii)). The report should be completed as soon as possible after the survey is conducted. The length of the report will depend on the findings of the survey and the size and complexity of the watershed. The survey report should include: 1) the date of the survey; 2) who was present during the survey; 3) survey findings; 4) recommended improvements to the

The watershed survey reports must be written in a plain language format. Survey results must be made available to the public upon request. The state may withhold portions of the survey report based on security considerations (40 CFR 141.716(a)(5)(iii)). To assist the state in this regard, the PWS should clearly indicate the specific information in the report that should be held confidential. The system can identify those items for the state, or provide parallel “vetted

documents” for dissemination to the public.

2.2.3.3 State Review and Continuation of the WCP Credit

Once water systems are awarded the 0.5-log WCP credit, they will continue to receive the credit as long as they implement and maintain the efforts outlined in their state-approved WCP plan. After the WCP plan is approved, ongoing reviews are the annual status report and the report from the sanitary surveys conducted and submitted once every three years.

The initial approval will be valid as long as the PWS continues to implement and maintain the approved WCP plan. After approval of the WCP plan, if the PWS determines that a change in the plan is needed, the PWS must notify the state prior to making the change and must outline any measures proposed to mitigate any reduction in SWP that is likely to result from this change (40 CFR 141.716 (a)(5)(i)). The description should include the impact of that change on the protection of the watershed so the state and water system will both understand whether the assumptions made during the “verbal approval” stage are holding true.

2.2.4 PWS and State Checklist for Preparation, Implementation, and Maintenance of the