{"id":9973,"date":"2021-01-19T10:17:01","date_gmt":"2021-01-19T15:17:01","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/blogs.edf.org\/health\/?p=9973"},"modified":"2025-07-08T15:04:17","modified_gmt":"2025-07-08T20:04:17","slug":"epas-new-service-line-inventory","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/blogs.edf.org\/health\/2021\/01\/19\/epas-new-service-line-inventory\/","title":{"rendered":"EPA\u2019s new service line inventory: The good, the bad, and the absurd"},"content":{"rendered":"

Tom Neltner, J.D.<\/a> is the Chemicals Policy Director<\/p>\n

This is the first<\/em> in a series of blogs<\/a> evaluating various aspects of EPA\u2019s <\/em>December 2020 revisions<\/em><\/a> to the Lead and Copper Rule (LCR) and what they may mean for accelerating lead service line (LSL) replacements. The blogs cover: 1) the new service line inventory; 2) three new LSL notices; <\/em>3) environmental justice implications; 4) communicating health effects of lead; 5) economic implications; and 6) sampling and trigger\/action level.\u00a0<\/em><\/p>\n

Note that President Biden’s Executive Order on Protecting Public Health and the Environment and Restoring Science to Tackle the Climate Crisis<\/a> directs agencies to review the former administration’s regulations and actions, including the Lead and Copper Rule.\u00a0<\/em><\/p>\n

The backbone of the revised LCR is a new service line inventory[1]<\/a> that all public water systems, whether large or small, rural or urban, must develop by January 2024 unless they can demonstrate that they have no LSLs. If properly designed and implemented, the inventory should transform how utilities, communities and states approach LSLs by moving from rough estimates to a data-driven approach that allows water systems to identify what is known and not known about the service lines, communicate that information to the public, and establish LSL replacement priorities.<\/p>\n

Unfortunately, EPA has included an unfortunate and absurd new detail in the inventory that requires systems to categorize service lines that contain a two-foot piece of lead pipe, often known as a gooseneck, as \u201cNon-lead.\u201d We anticipate that the absurdity of calling a lead pipe \u201cNon-lead\u201d will undermine the inventory\u2019s credibility and effectiveness.<\/p>\n

What is the new service line inventory and how is it used?<\/strong><\/p>\n

By January 2024, water systems must submit a service line inventory to the state and make it publicly accessible pursuant to 40 CFR \u00a7 141.84(a). To develop the inventory, they must assign all service lines, regardless of ownership, for the portions on public or private property to one of four categories:<\/p>\n

    \n
  1. Lead<\/strong>: where a portion of the service line is made of lead (excluding lead connectors, such as goosenecks, as explained below). We presume this includes lead-lined pipe.<\/li>\n
  2. Galvanized Requiring Replacement<\/strong>: where a portion of the service line is galvanized iron or steel.[2]<\/a> If the system can determine that the galvanized pipe was never downstream of an LSL (or lead connector, such as a gooseneck[3]<\/a>), then it is essentially a galvanized pipe not requiring replacement and can be categorized as \u201cNon-lead.\u201d<\/li>\n
  3. Non-lead:<\/strong> where the line is determined not to be \u201cLead\u201d or \u201cGalvanized Requiring Replacement\u201d (see discussion below for lead connectors). Our understanding is that systems could assume service lines installed after the 1986 federal ban on lead pipe are \u201cNon-Lead.\u201d<\/li>\n
  4. Lead Status Unknown<\/strong>: where it has not been determined if the service line met the SDWA Section 1417 definition of \u201cLead-free\u201d at 42 U.S.C. \u00a7 300g-6<\/a>. We presume this means that solder or flux must be less than 0.2% lead and other wetted surfaces must be less than 8% from 1986 to 2013 and less than 0.25% for 2014 to present.[4]<\/a><\/li>\n<\/ol>\n

    Under these requirements, a service line is classified as an LSL if it is in the \u201cLead\u201d or \u201cGalvanized Requiring Replacement\u201d categories.[5]<\/a><\/p>\n

    <\/p>\n

    Water systems must determine the proper assignment based on a mandatory review of five sources of information:<\/p>\n

      \n
    1. Materials evaluation used to develop a pool of sampling sites under the current rule.<\/li>\n
    2. All documentation indicating the service line materials including construction and plumbing codes, permits, and existing records.<\/li>\n
    3. All water system records including maps and drawings, historical records on each connection, meter installation records, historical capital improvement or master plans, and standard operations procedures.<\/li>\n
    4. All inspections and records of the distribution system.<\/li>\n
    5. Any other means provided by or required by the State to assess service line materials.[6]<\/a><\/li>\n<\/ol>\n

      Based on these criteria and our experience with state inventories in Illinois<\/a>, Wisconsin, Michigan<\/a>, and Indiana<\/a>, we would expect many water systems to initially designate most of their service lines as \u201cLead Status Unknown\u201d and progressively narrow the list. But there will likely be exceptions such as the Chicago Water System<\/a> (which has classified 80% of its service lines as lead) or systems constructed entirely after 1986 (which would consider all lines as \u201cNon-lead\u201d).[7]<\/a><\/p>\n

      Why are inventories important?<\/strong><\/p>\n

      Inventories serves three distinct purposes:<\/p>\n

        \n
      1. Tracking progress towards full LSL replacement should a water system exceed the existing lead action level or the new trigger level;<\/li>\n
      2. Providing the basis for communicating to the public, customers, residents, and other persons served by the water which of the four categories the service line delivering their water is in; and<\/li>\n
      3. Enabling states and others to verify whether the tap water monitoring samples are being collected from homes with service lines that are lead (unless they have none) as required by the revised rule.<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n

        To accomplish these purposes, the inventory must be \u201cpublicly accessible\u201d and include a \u201clocation identifier\u201d for LSLs. The rule does not define what \u201cpublicly accessible\u201d means, but for water systems serving more than 50,000 people, the inventory must be available online. In addition, water systems must provide consumers with instructions on accessing the inventory in its annual Consumer Confidence Reports and in all printed materials addressing its compliance with the LCR. The instructions must \u201cexplain how to access the service line inventory so the consumer can find out if they have a lead service line.\u201d In addition, the inventory should be accessible enough that prospective homebuyers could use it to determine the composition of the service line.<\/p>\n

        The \u201clocation identifier\u201d is not defined either, but the rule provides \u201cstreet address, block, intersection, or landmark\u201d as examples. EPA encourages exact addresses but allows flexibility to avoid conflicts with state or local privacy laws. The agency hopes that the ambiguity will be offset by the annual notices to customers.<\/p>\n

        The inventory must be updated when changes are identified in the course of normal operations. However, the public version only needs to be updated when submitted to the state as part of its tap water monitoring cycle which can range from 1 to 3 years per \u00a7 141.86(d).<\/p>\n

        Lead \u201cgoosenecks\u201d \u2013 a major flaw in EPA\u2019s definition of an LSL <\/strong><\/p>\n

        For many years before the 1986 ban on lead pipes, water systems sometimes installed a short piece of curved lead pipe connector \u2013 usually 2 feet or less \u2013 often called a gooseneck to connect the water main to the rest of the service line leading to the property. The bendability of lead pipe made installation easier \u2013 especially when connecting a rigid galvanized iron or steel pipe. EPA notes in the preamble to the revised rule that these connectors may also have been used around the meter at the property line.<\/p>\n

        In the final rule, EPA excludes these lead connectors from the definition of a service line even though they are a portion of the piping that connects the water main to the building inlet. As a result, a service line with a lead gooseneck is not considered an LSL under the rule unless<\/em> it is upstream of a galvanized steel pipe that is currently part of the service line.[8]<\/a><\/p>\n

        In the preamble to the rule, the agency reasoned that records on these lead connectors are often extremely limited or may not exist at all and cannot be visually inspected without an excavation \u2013 and deems excavation to identify the material as not feasible or practical for most systems.<\/p>\n

        Recognizing that these lead pipes are a problem, EPA requires that water systems remove them when they are encountered and<\/strong> they are owned by the system. If they are owned by the customer, the water system must only offer to replace the goosenecks but is allowed to leave them in place if the customer does not pay.<\/p>\n

        Unfortunately, EPA\u2019s decision will result in an absurd outcome that undermines the credibility of the entire inventory. Water systems will be obligated to categorize these lead pipes as \u201cNon-lead\u201d even though EPA cites no evidence that they pose significantly less risk than a partial LSL.[9]<\/a> Doubling down on the absurdity, water systems that have only \u201cNon-lead\u201d service lines could consider themselves as having no LSLs and avoid the more burdensome compliance responsibilities of the LCR.<\/p>\n

        We do not know how often this situation arises, but EPA\u2019s approach is a recipe for undermining the credibility \u2013 and therefore the effectiveness \u2013 of the rule. We encourage the agency to fix this problem as soon as possible.<\/p>\n

        Our recommendations<\/strong><\/p>\n

        Overall, the new service line inventory should transform how utilities and communities and states approach LSLs. However, EPA\u2019s convoluted definitions create significant ambiguity that must be addressed.<\/p>\n