Premium
The EPA‐Proposed Granular Activated Carbon treatment Requirement: Panacea or Pandora's Box?
Publication year - 1979
Publication title -
journal ‐ american water works association
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 0.466
H-Index - 74
eISSN - 1551-8833
pISSN - 0003-150X
DOI - 10.1002/j.1551-8833.1979.tb04298.x
Subject(s) - george (robot) , panacea (medicine) , agency (philosophy) , vice president , political science , clean water act , law , administration (probate law) , management , law and economics , public administration , sociology , art , economics , water quality , art history , medicine , alternative medicine , pathology , ecology , social science , biology
The following article is taken in part from the “Comments and Recommendations” filed with the US Environmental Protection Agency by the Coalition for Safe Drinking Water. The Coalition, which was formed to present comments to EPA on its proposed regulation dealing with control of synthetic organic chemicals in drinking water, is a group of approximately 90 water utilities cochaired by Raymond L. Williams, executive vice president of the Indianapolis (Ind.) Water Co. and Foster S. Burba, president of the Louisville (Ky.) Water Co. The article was prepared by George W. Pendygraft, Fred E. Schlegel, and Michael J. Huston of the law firm of Baker & Daniels, Indianapolis and Washington, D.C., counsel to the Coalition.