[Federal Register Volume 65, Number 73 (Friday, April 14, 2000)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 20304-20313]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 00-9089]
[[Page 20303]]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
Part III
Environmental Protection Agency
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
40 CFR Part 9 et al.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
Revisions to the Interim Enhanced Surface Water Treatment Rule
(IESWTR), the Stage 1 Disinfectants and Disinfection Byproducts (Stage
1 DBPR), and Revisions to State Primacy Requirements To Implement the
Safe Drinking Water Act (SDWA) Amendments; Final Rule and Proposed Rule
Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 73 / Friday, April 14, 2000 / Rules
and Regulations
[[Page 20304]]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
40 CFR Parts 9, 141, and 142
[FRL-6575-9]
RIN 2040-AD43
Revisions to the Interim Enhanced Surface Water Treatment Rule
(IESWTR), the Stage 1 Disinfectants and Disinfection Byproducts Rule
(Stage 1 DBPR), and Revisions to State Primacy Requirements To
Implement the Safe Drinking Water Act (SDWA) Amendments
AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Direct final rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: This direct final action will make minor revisions to the
Interim Enhanced Surface Water Treatment Rule (IESWTR) and the Stage 1
Disinfectants and Disinfection Byproducts Rule (Stage 1 DBPR) which
were published December 16, 1998 and the Revisions to State Primacy
Requirements to Implement Safe Drinking Water Act (SDWA) Amendments
(Primacy Rule) published April 28, 1998. This Direct Final Rule revises
the compliance dates for the IESWTR and the Stage 1 DBPR by shifting
them back approximately two weeks from the middle of the month to the
beginning of the following month. This change will shift the monitoring
periods to coincide with calendar quarters which will facilitate the
implementation of both rules. This action will also extend the use of
new analytical methods included in these rules to compliance monitoring
for long standing drinking water regulations for total trihalomethanes.
The revisions also include several changes to the regulatory language
for clarification. In addition, this document corrects typographical
errors, replaces inadvertently deleted text, and clarifies some of the
new regulatory provisions found in the published rules. Lastly, this
document contains corrections to the Primacy Rule. These regulations
relate to the requirements and procedures for States to obtain primary
enforcement authority (primacy) for the Public Water System Supervision
(PWSS) program under the Safe Drinking Water Act as amended by the 1996
Amendments.
DATES: This regulation is effective on June 13, 2000 without further
notice unless EPA receives adverse comment by May 15, 2000. If EPA
receives such comment, EPA will withdraw this direct final rule before
its effective date by publishing a timely withdrawal in the Federal
Register informing the public the rule will not take effect. For
judicial review purposes, this final rule is promulgated as of 1:00
p.m. EST on April 28, 2000 as provided in 40 CFR 23.7.
ADDRESSES: Send written comments to the Comment Clerk, docket number W-
99-11, Water Docket (MC 4101), U.S. Environmental Protection Agency,
401 M Street, SW, Washington, DC 20460. The record for this rule has
been established under docket number W-99-11. The record is available
for inspection 9 a.m. to 4 p.m. Monday through Friday, excluding legal
holidays at the Water Docket, East Tower Basement, US EPA, 401 M
Street, SW, Washington DC. The rule making records for the original
IESWTR and the Stage 1 DBPR are also available for inspection at the
Water Docket. For access to docket materials, please call 202-260-3027
to schedule an appointment. Comments may be hand-delivered to the Water
Docket, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency; 401 M Street, SW, East
Tower Basement, Washington, DC 20460. Comments may be submitted
electronically to [email protected]. No facsimiles (faxes) will
be accepted.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Jennifer Melch, Implementation and
Assistance Division, Office of Ground Water and Drinking Water (MC-
4606), U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 401 M Street, SW,
Washington, DC 20460, (202) 260-7035. Information may also be obtained
from the EPA Safe Drinking Water Hotline. Callers within the United
States may reach the Hotline at (800) 426-4791. The Hotline is open
Monday through Friday, excluding Federal holidays, from 9:00 a.m. to
5:30 p.m. EST.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Regulated Entities
The entities regulated by the IESWTR and Stage 1 DBPR, and thus by
these revisions to those rules, are public water systems. These include
community and noncommunity water systems. States are subject to the
primacy rule requirements as revised.
Regulated categories and entities include the following:
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Examples of
Category potentially SIC
regulated entities
------------------------------------------------------------------------
State, Tribal, and Territorial States, Territories, 9511
Governments. and Tribes that
analyze water
samples on behalf
of public water
systems required to
conduct such
analysis; States,
Territories, and
Tribes that operate
public water
systems required to
monitor under the
IESWTR or Stage 1
DBPR.
Industry................................. Private operators of 9511
public water
systems required to
monitor under the
IESWTR or Stage 1
DBPR.
Municipalities........................... Municipal operators 9511
of public water
systems required to
monitor under the
IESWTR or Stage 1
DBPR.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
This table is not intended to be exhaustive, but rather provides a
guide for readers regarding entities likely to be regulated by this
action. This table lists the types of entities that EPA is now aware
could potentially be regulated by this action. Other types of entities
not listed in the table could also be regulated. To determine whether
your facility is regulated by this action, you should carefully examine
the applicability criteria in Secs. 141.2, 141.70, 141.130, 141.170,
142.2, 142.3, and 142.10 of title 40 of the Code of Federal
Regulations. If you have questions regarding the applicability of this
action to a particular entity, consult the person listed in the
preceding FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section or the Regional
contacts that follow.
Regional Contacts
I. Katie Leo, Water Supply Section 1 Congress Street, Suite 1100-CMU,
Boston, MA 02114, (617) 918-1623
II. Michael Lowy, Water Supply Section, 290 Broadway 24th Floor, New
York, NY 10007-1866, (212) 637-3830
III. Jason Gambatese, Drinking Water Section (3WM41), 1650 Arch Street,
Philadelphia, PA 19103-2029, (215) 814-5759
IV. David Parker, Water Supply Section, 345 Courtland Street, Atlanta,
GA 30365, (404) 562-9460
V. Miguel A. Del Toral, Safe Drinking Water Branch, 77 W. Jackson Blvd.
(WD-15J), Chicago, IL 60604, (312) 886-5253
VI. Blake L. Atkins, Drinking Water Section, 1445 Ross Avenue, Dallas,
TX 75202, (214) 665-2297
VII. Ralph Flournoy, Drinking Water/Ground Water Management Branch,
[[Page 20305]]
901 N. 5th St., Kansas City, KS 66101, (913) 551-7374
VIII. Bob Clement, Municipal Systems Unit (8P-W-MS), 999 18th Street,
Suite 500, Denver, CO 80202-2466, (303) 312-6653
IX. Bruce Macler, Water Supply Section, 75 Hawthorne Street, San
Francisco, CA 94105, (415) 744-1884
X. Wendy Marshall, Drinking Water Unit, 1200 Sixth Avenue (OW-136),
Seattle, WA 98101, (206) 553-1890
Abbreviations
CWS: Community water system
DBPR: Disinfectant and Disinfection Byproducts Rule
EPA: Environmental Protection Agency
GWUDI: Ground water under the direct influence of surface water
HAA5: Haloacetic Acids (monochloroacetic, dichloroacetic,
trichloroacetic, monobromoacetic and dibromoacetic acids)
ICR: Information Collection Request
IESWTR: Interim Enhanced Surface Water Treatment Rule
MCL: Maximum contaminant level
MCLG: Maximum contaminant level goal
MRDL: Maximum residual disinfectant level
MRDLG: Maximum residual disinfectant level goal
NPDWR: National Primary Drinking Water Regulation
NTNCWS: Non-transient, non-community water system
OMB: Office of Management and Budget
PWS: Public water system
RFA: Regulatory Flexibility Analysis
SDWA: Safe Drinking Water Act
TNCWS: Transient, non-community water system
TOC: Total organic carbon
TTHM: Total Trihalomethanes (chloroform, bromodichloromethane,
dibromochloromethane, and bromoform)
UMRA: Unfunded Mandates Reform Act
Table of Contents
I. Background
II. Today's Action
A. IESWTR and Stage 1 DBPR
B. Primacy Rule
III. Administrative Requirements
A. Executive Order 12866--Regulatory Planning and Review
B. Executive Order 13045--Protection of Children from
Environmental Health Risks and Safety Risks
C. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act
D. Paperwork Reduction Act
E. Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA), as amended by the Small
Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act of 1996 (SBREFA), 5
U.S.C. 601 et seq.
F. National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act
G. Executive Order 12898--Federal Actions to Address
Environmental Justice in Minority Populations and Low-Income
Populations
H. Executive Order 13132--Federalism
I. Executive Order 13084--Consultation and Coordination with
Indian Tribal Governments
J. Administrative Procedure Act
K. Congressional Review Act
I. Background
On December 16, 1998, EPA published the final Interim Enhanced
Surface Water Treatment Rule (IESWTR; 63 FR 69478) and Stage 1
Disinfectants and Disinfection Byproducts Rule ( Stage 1 DBPR; 63 FR
69390). On April 28, 1998, EPA published the Revisions to State Primacy
Requirements to Implement the SDWA Amendments (63 FR 23362).
IESWTR: The IESWTR was designed to improve control of microbial
pathogens, including specifically the protozoan Cryptosporidium, in
drinking water and to address risk trade-offs with disinfection
byproducts. The IESWTR builds upon the treatment technique requirements
of the Surface Water Treatment Rule. Key provisions established in the
final IESWTR include: a Maximum Contaminant Level Goal (MCLG) of zero
for Cryptosporidium; 2-log Cryptosporidium removal requirements for
systems that filter; strengthened combined filter effluent turbidity
performance standards and individual filter turbidity monitoring
provisions; disinfection benchmark provisions to assure continued
levels of microbial protection while facilities take the necessary
steps to comply with new disinfection byproduct standards; inclusion of
Cryptosporidium in the definition of ground water under the direct
influence of surface water (GWUDI) and in the watershed control
requirements for unfiltered public water systems; requirements for
covers on new finished water reservoirs; and sanitary surveys for all
surface water and GWUDI systems regardless of size.
The IESWTR applies to public water systems that use surface water
or GWUDI and serve 10,000 or more people, except that the rule requires
primacy States to conduct sanitary surveys for all surface water and
GWUDI systems regardless of size.
EPA believes that implementation of the IESWTR will significantly
reduce the level of Cryptosporidium in finished drinking water supplies
through improvements in filtration and reduce the likelihood of the
occurrence of cryptosporidiosis outbreaks by providing an increased
margin of safety against such outbreaks for some systems. In addition,
the filtration provisions of the rule are expected to increase the
level of protection from exposure to other pathogens (i.e., Giardia or
other waterborne bacterial or viral pathogens).
Stage 1 DBPR: The Stage 1 DBPR was designed to reduce the levels of
disinfectants and disinfection byproducts in drinking water supplies.
The DBPR established maximum residual disinfectant level goals (MRDLGs)
for chlorine, chloramines, and chlorine dioxide; maximum contaminant
level goals (MCLGs) for four trihalomethanes (chloroform,
bromodichloromethane, dibromochloromethane, and bromoform), two
haloacetic acids (dichloroacetic acid and trichloroacetic acid),
bromate, and chlorite; and National Primary Drinking Water Regulations
(NPDWRs) for three disinfectants (chlorine, chloramines, and chlorine
dioxide), two groups of organic disinfection byproducts (total
trihalomethanes (TTHM)--a sum of chloroform, bromodichloromethane,
dibromochloromethane, and bromoform; and haloacetic acids (HAA5)--the
sum of dichloroacetic acid, trichloroacetic acid, monochloroacetic acid
and mono- and dibromoacetic acids), and two inorganic disinfection
byproducts (chlorite and bromate). The NPDWRs consist of maximum
residual disinfectant levels (MRDLs) for these disinfectants and
maximum contaminant levels (MCLs) or treatment techniques for their
byproducts. The NPDWRs also include monitoring, reporting, and public
notification requirements for these compounds.
The Stage 1 DBPR applies to public water systems that are community
water systems (CWSs) and nontransient noncommunity water systems
(NTNCWSs) that treat their water with a chemical disinfectant for
either primary or residual treatment and to CWSs and NTNCWSs that
purchase water and provide water that contains a chemical disinfectant.
In addition, certain requirements for chlorine dioxide apply to
transient noncommunity water systems (TNCWSs).
The Stage 1 DBPR provides public health protection for households
that were not previously covered by drinking water rules for
disinfection byproducts. In addition, the rule, for the first time,
provides public health protection from exposure to haloacetic acids,
chlorite (a major chlorine dioxide byproduct) and bromate (a major
ozone byproduct).
Primacy Rule: This rule codified new statutory requirements under
the 1996 Amendments to the Safe Drinking Water Act (SDWA) involving
changes to the
[[Page 20306]]
process and requirements for States to obtain or retain primary
enforcement authority for the Public Water System Supervision program
under Sec. 1413 of the SDWA and to the definition of a ``public water
system'' under Sec. 1401 of the SDWA.
II. Today's Action
A. IESWTR and Stage 1 DBPR
This document revises the IESWTR and Stage 1 DBPR to move
compliance dates to facilitate implementation, correct typographical
errors identified in these rules, replace text inadvertently deleted,
delete incorrect text, and clarify certain provisions in the final
rules. The revisions include the following modifications:
Shifting Compliance Date of Rules: This action will revise the
compliance dates of both rules by extending them approximately two
weeks. This shift will facilitate the implementation of the IESWTR and
the Stage 1 DBPR as the monitoring periods for both rules will coincide
with calendar quarters and consequently with the monitoring periods for
other contaminants.
New Analytical Methods Use: This action modifies Sec. 141.30 to
extend the use of new analytical methods included in the DBPR
Sec. 141.131(b) for compliance monitoring for long standing drinking
water regulations for total trihalomethanes.
Regulated Entities Compliance with Stage 1 DBPR: Today's rule makes
language clarifications in Sec. 141.130(a) to the criteria that
determines which systems must meet the new MCLs and MRDLs under the
DBPR. The original language specified that systems which ``add a
chemical disinfectant to the water in any part of the drinking water
treatment process'' are subject to the rule. Today, EPA is correcting
that language to also include systems that ``provide water that
contains a chemical disinfectant.'' By setting the original criteria,
EPA inadvertently excluded consecutive systems, or those that purchase
water, from the requirement to monitor for and meet the MCLs and MRDLs
of the DBPR, although such systems were included in regulatory impact
analyses and costed as part of the original rule.
TTHM and HAA5 Monitoring and Compliance Provisions: The regulatory
language addressing TTHM and HAA5 monitoring and compliance
determinations has been slightly revised to clarify the intention of
the regulatory requirements in Sec. 141.132(b)(1). The first
clarification adds language that was inadvertently left out in the
final rule. This clarification specifies the criteria under which
surface water systems serving 500 people and ground water systems
serving 10,000 people on increased monitoring may return to routine
monitoring. Systems on increased monitoring may return to routine
monitoring if their TTHM annual average is 0.040 mg/L or less and their
HAA5 annual average is 0.030mg/L or less. These values are the same
criteria that systems on routine quarterly monitoring must meet in
order to be eligible for reduced monitoring. This change is also
reflected in the table in Sec. 141.132(b)(1) where the reference to
``paragraph c'' in the third and fifth entries is replaced by
``paragraph (b)(1)(iv).''
The second revision clarifies the requirements for ground water
systems serving 10,000 people that after annual sampling show that they
have met the requirements for reduced monitoring (one sample per plant
every 3 years). In the situation where that sample collected during
reduced monitoring exceeds the MCL, there is a concern that the
existing language is ambiguous and could be interpreted to require such
a system to return to routine monitoring (one sample per plant per
year) before being triggered to quarterly monitoring. EPA's intention
was to assure that these systems would perform quarterly monitoring
immediately following a result that exceeds the MCL. Therefore, EPA has
clarified the language to specify the intent of the requirement which
is to have such systems immediately triggered to quarterly monitoring,
which is consistent with the requirements for the other system
categories.
The final clarification for Sec. 141.133(b)(1) is on compliance
determination for TTHM and HAA5. The intention of the requirement was
that systems monitoring less frequently than quarterly, and that
measure TTHM or HAA5 above the MCL, would not be in violation of the
MCL until they conduct four consecutive quarters of monitoring under
the increased monitoring requirements. (The exceptions to this are when
the results of fewer than four quarters will cause the running annual
average to exceed the MCL, or if the system fails to collect the four
samples over four consecutive quarters, in which case the MCL is
calculated based on available data for that monitoring period). This
intent is clarified by deleting the last two sentences of
Sec. 141.133(b)(1)(i), revising paragraphs (b)(1)(ii) and (iii), and
adding new paragraph (b)(1)(iv).
Chlorite Provisions: Today's rule also revises two provisions
addressing chlorite. First, EPA is correcting the general requirements
for transient non-community water systems (TNCWS) in Sec. 141.130 which
incorrectly states that TNCWS must comply with chlorite requirements.
This correction is accomplished by deletion of the chlorite reference
in that section. Second, EPA is clarifying the monitoring provisions in
Sec. 141.131(b) for daily chlorite samples which require the analysis
to be performed by a certified lab. Because systems are capable of
analyzing by amperometric titration the daily chlorite samples taken at
the entrance to the distribution system, language has been added to
allow public water systems to be approved for such monitoring to reduce
the financial and operational burden on the systems.
Disinfection Byproduct Precursors Provisions: This rule also
clarifies the public notification requirements related to compliance
with DBP precursors under Sec. 141.133 and provides revised language
regarding the Step 2 TOC removal requirements under Sec. 141.135 in
order to eliminate ambiguous text. This revision clarifies that the
submitted bench or pilot-scale tests must be used to determine the
alternate enhanced coagulation level. In the table in
Sec. 141.135(b)(2), minor revisions correct ``60-120'' to
read ``>60-120'' in the heading of the second column and add percentage
signs--%--to all values while deleting the word ``percent'' from the
three column headings.
System Reporting and Recordkeeping: This revision adds system
reporting requirements which were inadvertently omitted from
Sec. 141.175 of the IESWTR. Today's rule requires that when a direct or
conventional filtration system exceeds the maximum turbidity limit of 1
NTU, the system must inform the State no later than the end of the next
business day. Similarly, when a system using alternative filtration
technologies exceeds the maximum turbidity level set by the State, the
system must inform the State no later than the end of the next business
day.
Today's rule also adds clarifying text to the Sec. 141.134
reporting tables. These changes will facilitate a system's reporting
requirements for the disinfectant byproducts, disinfectants, and
disinfectant byproduct precursors and enhanced coagulation or enhanced
softening.
In the section (b) table, all entries in the ``You must report''
column are revised to add the citation of the MCL and replace the word
``exceeded'' with ``violated.'' In the second entry, under the second
reporting requirement, the phrase ``last quarter'' is replaced with
``last monitoring period,'' and in the fourth entry, the language in
all four
[[Page 20307]]
reporting requirements is revised. In the section (c) table, all
entries in the ``You must report'' column are revised to add the
citation of the MRDL and replace the word ``exceeded'' with
``violated.'' In the section (d) table, the first entry is revised by
delete the phrase ``prior to continuous disinfection'' from the first
reporting requirement.
Filtration Provisions: Revisions to Sec. 141.174 add language to
clarify that if there is a failure in the continuous turbidity
monitoring equipment and the system is conducting grab sampling, the
system must repair the equipment within five working days or it is in
violation.
EPA believes that the limited changes to the rules outlined above
will only minimally alter the estimates of benefits and costs which are
associated with the IESWTR and Stage 1 DBPR. Burden associated with the
system reporting requirements in Sec. 141.175(c) are covered in an
existing ICR (OMB No. 2040-0090) and the estimates are not expected to
change.
B. Primacy Rule
The final primacy regulations subject to these corrections increase
the time for a State to adopt new or revised Federal regulations from
18 months to two years. Inadvertently, this time increase was not
reflected in Sec. 142.12(d)(2) of the final regulations. This rule
corrects that error.
In addition, this rule updates the interim primacy provision.
Interim primacy gives States full responsibility for implementation and
enforcement during the time that EPA reviews the primacy revision
application, provided that States have full primacy for all prior
National Primary Drinking Water Regulations. When extensions to the
time frame for submission of primacy revision applications are granted,
States must agree to conditions for rule implementation. These
conditions are lifted when a State receives primacy. EPA believes that
under the SDWA amendments, these conditions should also be lifted when
a State receives interim primacy. Inadvertently, this intent was not
reflected in the Federal Register of Tuesday, April 28, 1998 (63 FR
23362). Today's change to Sec. 142.12(b)(3)(i) clarifies that the
conditions that go with an extension are not necessary after a State
receives interim primacy.
III. Administrative Requirements
A. Executive Order 12866--Regulatory Planning and Review
Under Executive Order 12866, (58 FR 51735 (October 4, 1993)) the
Agency must determine whether the regulatory action is ``significant''
and therefore subject to OMB review and the requirements of the
Executive Order. The Order defines ``significant regulatory action'' as
one that is likely to result in a rule that may:
(1) Have an annual effect on the economy of $100 million or more or
adversely affect in a material way the economy, a sector of the
economy, productivity, competition, jobs, the environment, public
health or safety, or State, local, or tribal governments or
communities;
(2) Create a serious inconsistency or otherwise interfere with an
action taken or planned by another agency;
(3) Materially alter the budgetary impact of entitlements, grants,
user fees, or loan programs or the rights and obligations of recipients
thereof; or
(4) Raise novel legal or policy issues arising out of legal
mandates, the President's priorities, or the principles set forth in
the Executive Order.
It has been determined that this rule is not a ``significant
regulatory action'' under the terms of Executive Order 12866 and is
therefore not subject to OMB review.
B. Executive Order 13045--Protection of Children From Environmental
Health Risks and Safety Risks
Executive Order 13045 (62 FR 19885, April 23, 1997) applies to any
rule that: (1) Is determined to be ``economically significant'' as
defined under Executive Order 12866, and (2) concerns an environmental
health or safety risk that EPA has reason to believe may have a
disproportionate effect on children. If the regulatory action meets
both criteria, the Agency must evaluate the environmental health or
safety effects of the planned rule on children, and explain why the
planned regulation is preferable to other potentially effective and
reasonably feasible alternatives considered by the Agency. This final
rule is not subject to the Executive Order because it is not
economically significant as defined in Executive Order 12866.
C. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act
Title II of the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (UMRA), Public
Law 104-4, establishes requirements for Federal agencies to assess the
effects of their regulatory actions on State, local, and tribal
governments and the private sector. Under section 202 of the UMRA, EPA
generally must prepare a written statement, including a cost-benefit
analysis, for proposed and final rules with ``Federal mandates'' that
may result in expenditures to State, local, and tribal governments, in
the aggregate, or to the private sector, of $100 million or more in any
one year. Before promulgating an EPA rule for which a written statement
is needed, section 205 of the UMRA generally requires EPA to identify
and consider a reasonable number of regulatory alternatives and adopt
the least costly, most cost-effective or least burdensome alternative
that achieves the objectives of the rule. The provisions of section 205
do not apply when they are inconsistent with applicable law. Moreover,
section 205 allows EPA to adopt an alternative other than the least
costly, most cost-effective or least burdensome alternative if the
Administrator publishes with the final rule an explanation why that
alternative was not adopted. Before EPA establishes any regulatory
requirements that may significantly or uniquely affect small
governments, including tribal governments, it must have developed under
section 203 of the UMRA a small government agency plan. The plan must
provide for notifying potentially affected small governments, enabling
officials of affected small governments to have meaningful and timely
input in the development of EPA regulatory proposals with significant
Federal intergovernmental mandates, and informing, educating, and
advising small governments on compliance with the regulatory
requirements.
Today's rule makes minor revisions and corrections to three SDWA
regulations. EPA has determined that this rule does not contain a
Federal mandate that may result in expenditures of $100 million or more
for State, local, and tribal governments, in the aggregate, or the
private sector in any one year. Thus, today's rule is not subject to
the requirements of sections 202 and 205 of the UMRA.
For the same reason, EPA has determined that this rule contains no
regulatory requirements that might significantly or uniquely affect
small governments. Thus, today's rule is not subject to the
requirements of section 203 of UMRA.
D. Paperwork Reduction Act
Under the Paperwork Reduction Act, 44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.,
information collection, reporting and record keeping requirements must
be submitted to the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) for approval.
Information Collection Request (ICR) documents for the original IESWTR,
Stage 1DBPR and Primacy Rule were prepared by EPA and approved by OMB
(OMB No.'s 2040-0205, 2040-0204, and 2040-0915 respectively) and copies
may be obtained from Sandy Farmer by mail at
[[Page 20308]]
OPPE Regulatory Information Division; U.S. Environmental Protection
Agency (2137); 401 M St., S.W.; Washington, DC 20460, by email at:
[email protected], or by calling: (202) 260-2740.
The system reporting requirements contained in Sec. 141.175(c) are
covered by the general PWSS program ICR (OMB No. 2040-0090). This ICR
calculates the burden associated with reporting turbidity exceedences
under Sec. 141.75(a)(5). Although Sec. 141.175(c) alters for large
systems the level at which turbidity exceedences are reported, data
indicate that such systems already have high compliance rates with the
new levels and there would be no significant increase in violations and
burden associated with this new level. The Part 9 table is amended in
this rule to reflect OMB approval of these reporting requirements.
E. Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA), as Amended by the Small Business
Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act of 1996 (SBREFA), 5 U.S.C. 601 et
seq
The RFA generally requires an agency to prepare a regulatory
flexibility analysis of any rule subject to the notice-and-comment
rulemaking requirement under the Administrative Procedure Act or any
other statute unless the agency certifies that the rule will not have a
significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities.
Small entities include small businesses, small organizations, and small
government jurisdictions. This rule makes only minor revisions,
corrections, and clarifications to promulgated regulations that will
facilitate the implementation of those regulations. This rule does not
impose additional burden on any regulated small entity since impacts
were included in the original rule analysis. The additional reporting
requirements contained in today's rule apply only to systems that serve
10,000 or more people. Thus, I certify that this action will not have a
significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities.
F. National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act
Section 12(d) of the National Technology Transfer and Advancement
Act of 1995 (NTTAA), Public Law 104-113 Section 12(d) (15 U.S.C. 272
note), directs EPA to use voluntary consensus standards in its
regulatory activities unless to do so would be inconsistent with
applicable law or otherwise impractical. Voluntary consensus standards
are technical standards (e.g., material specifications, test methods,
sampling procedures, and business practices) that are developed or
adopted by voluntary consensus standards bodies. The NTTAA directs EPA
to provide Congress, through the Office of Management and Budget (OMB),
explanations when the Agency decides not to use available and
applicable voluntary consensus standards.
This action extends the applicability of analytical methods
established under the Stage 1 DBPR in the December 16, 1998 Federal
Register. In developing the Stage 1 DBPR, EPA's process for selecting
analytical test methods was consistent with section 12(d) of the NTTAA.
EPA performed literature searches to identify analytical methods from
industry, academia and voluntary consensus standards, and provided an
opportunity for comment. For a more detailed discussion, refer to page
69457 of the Stage 1 DBPR (63 FR 69390, Dec. 16, 1998). Neither the
IESWTR nor the Primacy Rule involve standards subject to this Act.
G. Executive Order 12898--Federal Actions To Address Environmental
Justice in Minority Populations and Low-Income Populations
Executive Order 12898--``Federal Actions to Address Environmental
Justice in Minority Populations and Low-Income Populations'' (February
11, 1994) focuses Federal attention on the environmental and human
health conditions of minority populations and low-income populations
with the goal of achieving environmental protection for all
communities. Today's changes to the IESWTR, Stage 1 DBPR, and Primacy
Rule will not diminish the health protection to minority and low-income
populations.
H. Executive Order 13132--Federalism
Executive Order 13132, entitled ``Federalism'' (64 FR 43255, August
10, 1999), requires EPA to develop an accountable process to ensure
``meaningful and timely input by State and local officials in the
development of regulatory policies that have federalism implications.''
``Policies that have federalism implications'' is defined in the
Executive Order to include regulations that have ``substantial direct
effects on the States, on the relationship between the national
government and the States, or on the distribution of power and
responsibilities among the various levels of government.''
Under section 6 of Executive Order 13132, EPA may not issue a
regulation that has federalism implications, that imposes substantial
direct compliance costs, and that is not required by statute, unless
the Federal government provides the funds necessary to pay the direct
compliance costs incurred by State and local governments, or EPA
consults with State and local officials early in the process of
developing the proposed regulation. EPA also may not issue a regulation
that has federalism implications and that preempts State law unless the
Agency consults with State and local officials early in the process of
developing the proposed regulation.
This final rule does not have federalism implications. It will not
have substantial direct effects on the States, on the relationship
between the national government and the States, or on the distribution
of power and responsibilities among the various levels of government,
as specified in Executive Order 13132. This rule makes only minor
revisions, corrections and clarifications to three SDWA rules that were
promulgated in l998. The result of these revisions, corrections and
clarifications will be to facilitate the implementation of these
regulations at the State and local levels of government. Thus, the
requirements of section 6 of the Executive Order do not apply to this
rule.
I. Executive Order 13084--Consultation and Coordination With Indian
Tribal Governments
Under Executive Order 13084, EPA may not issue a regulation that is
not required by statute, that significantly or uniquely affects the
communities of Indian tribal governments, and that imposes substantial
direct compliance costs on those communities, unless the Federal
government provides the funds necessary to pay the direct compliance
costs incurred by the tribal governments, or EPA consults with those
governments. If EPA complies by consulting, Executive Order 13084
requires EPA to provide to the Office of Management and Budget, in a
separately identified section of the preamble to the rule, a
description of the extent of EPA's prior consultation with
representatives of affected tribal governments, a summary of the nature
of their concerns, and a statement supporting the need to issue the
regulation. In addition, Executive Order 13084 requires EPA to develop
an effective process permitting elected officials and other
representatives of Indian tribal governments ``to provide meaningful
and timely input in the development of regulatory policies on matters
that significantly or uniquely affect their communities.''
This rule makes minor revisions, corrections and clarifications to
[[Page 20309]]
promulgated regulations. It does not significantly or uniquely affect
the communities of Indian tribal governments, nor does it impose
substantial direct compliance costs on them. Accordingly, the
requirements of section 3(b) of Executive Order 13084 do not apply to
this rule.
J. Administrative Procedure Act
EPA is publishing this rule without prior proposal because it views
these changes as noncontroversial amendments and anticipates no adverse
comment. The changes simply facilitate implementation of existing rules
and correct minor typographical errors, and inadvertently deleted text.
However, in the ``Proposed Rules'' section of today's Federal Register
publication, EPA is publishing a separate document that will serve as
the proposal for Revisions to the IESWTR, Stage 1 DBPR and Primacy Rule
if adverse comments are filed. This rule will be effective on June 13,
2000 without further notice unless EPA receives adverse comment by May
15, 2000. If EPA receives adverse comment, it will publish a timely
withdrawal in the Federal Register informing the public that the rule
will not take effect. EPA will address all public comments in a
subsequent final rule based on the proposed rule. EPA will not
institute a second comment period on this action. Any parties
interested in commenting must do so at this time.
K. Congressional Review Act
The Congressional Review Act, 5 U.S.C. 801 et seq., as added by the
Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act of 1996, generally
provides that before a rule may take effect, the agency promulgating
the rule must submit a rule report, which includes a copy of the rule,
to each House of the Congress and to the Comptroller General of the
United States. EPA will submit a report containing this rule and other
required information to the U.S. Senate, the U.S. House of
Representatives, and the Comptroller General of the United States prior
to publication of the rule in the Federal Register. A major rule cannot
take effect until 60 days after it is published in the Federal
Register. This action is not a ``major rule'' as defined by 5 U.S.C.
804 (2). This rule will be effective June 13, 2000.
List of Subjects in 40 CFR Parts 9, 141, and 142
Analytical methods, Drinking water, Environmental protection,
Intergovernmental relations, Public utilities, Reporting and
recordkeeping requirements, Reservoirs, Utilities, Water supply,
Watersheds.
Dated: April 4, 2000.
Carol M. Browner,
Administrator.
For the reasons set out in the preamble, title 40, chapter I of the
Code of Federal Regulations is amended as follows:
PART 9--OMB APPROVALS UNDER THE PAPERWORK REDUCTION ACT
1. The authority citation for part 9 continues to read as follows:
Authority: 7 U.S.C. 135 et seq., 136-136y; 15 U.S.C. 2001, 2003,
2005, 2006, 2601-2671; 21 U.S.C. 331j, 346a, 348; 31 U.S.C. 9701; 33
U.S.C. 1251 et seq., 1311, 1313d, 1314, 1318, 1321, 1326, 1330,
1342, 1344, 1345 (d) and (e), 1361; E.O. 11735; 38 FR 21243, 3 CFR,
1971-1975 Comp. p. 973; 42 U.S.C. 241, 242b, 243, 246, 300f, 300g,
300g-1, 300g-2, 300g-3, 300g-4, 300g-5, 300g-6, 300j-1, 300j-2,
300j-3, 300j-4, 300j-9, 1857 et seq., 6901-6992k, 7401-7671q, 7542,
9601-9657, 11023, 11048.
2. In Sec. 9.1 the table is amended by removing the entry
``141.174-141.175'' and by adding in numerical order under the
indicated heading new entries to read as follows:
Sec. 9.1 OMB Approvals Under the Paperwork Reduction Act.
* * * * *
------------------------------------------------------------------------
40 CFR citation OMB control No.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
* * * * *
National Primary Drinking Water Regulations
* * * * *
141.174(a)-(b)................................. 2040-0205
141.175........................................ 2040-0205
141.175(a)-(b)................................. 2040-0205
141.175(c)..................................... 2040-0090
------------------------------------------------------------------------
* * * * *
PART 141--NATIONAL PRIMARY DRINKING WATER REGULATIONS
3. The authority citation for part 141 continues to read as
follows:
Authority: 42 U.S.C. 300f, 300g-1, 300g-2, 300g-3, 300g-4, 300g-
5, 300g-6, 300j-4, 300j-9, and 300j-11.
Sec. 141.12 [Amended]
4. Section 141.12 is amended by revising ``December 16, 2001'' to
read ``December 31, 2001'' and by revising the two occurrences of
``December 16, 2003'' to read ``December 31, 2003''.
Sec. 141.30 [Amended]
5. Amend Sec. 141.30 by:
a. Revising the first sentence of paragraph (e); and
b. In paragraph (h), revising ``December 16, 2001'' to read
``December 31, 2001'', and revise the two occurrences of ``December 16,
2003'' to read ``December 31, 2003''.
The revision reads as follows:
Sec. 141.30 Total trihalomethanes sampling, analytical and other
requirements.
* * * * *
(e) Sampling and analyses made pursuant to this section shall be
conducted by one of the total trihalomethanes methods as directed in
Sec. 141.24(e), and the Technical Notes on Drinking Water Methods, EPA-
600/R-94-173, October 1994, which is available from NTIS, PB-104766, or
in Sec. 141.131(b). * * *
* * * * *
Sec. 141.64 [Amended]
6. Amend Sec. 141.64 by:
a. In paragraph (b)(1), revising ``December 16, 2001'' to read
``January 1, 2002'' and revising ``December 16, 2003'' to read
``January 1, 2004''; and
b. In paragraph (b)(2), revise ``December 16, 2003'' to read
``December 31, 2003''.
Sec. 141.65 [Amended]
7. In Sec. 141.65(b)(1) and (b)(2), revise ``December 16, 2001'' to
read ``January 1, 2002'' and revise ``December 16, 2003'' to read
``January 1, 2004''.
Sec. 141.71 [Amended]
8. Section 141.71(b)(6) is amended by revising the two occurrences
of ``December 17, 2001'' to read ``December 31, 2001''.
Sec. 141.73 [Amended]
9. Amend Sec. 141.73 by:
a. In paragraph (a)(3), revising ``December 17, 2001'' to read
``January 1, 2002''; and
b. In paragraph (d), revising ``December 17, 2001'' to read
``January 1, 2002''.
Sec. 141.130 [Amended]
10. Amend Sec. 141.130 by:
a. Revising paragraph (a)(1); and
b. In paragraphs (b)(1) and (b)(2), revising ``December 16, 2001''
to read ``January 1, 2002'' and revising ``December 16, 2003'' to read
``January 1, 2004''; and in paragraph (b)(2), removing the phrase:
``and chlorite'' from the first and second sentences.
The revision reads as follows:
Sec. 141.130 General requirements.
(a) * * *
(1) The regulations in this subpart establish criteria under which
[[Page 20310]]
community water systems (CWS) and nontransient, noncommunity water
systems (NTNCWS) which add a chemical disinfectant to the water in any
part of the drinking water treatment process or which provide water
that contains a chemical disinfectant, must modify their practices to
meet MCLs and MRDLs in Secs. 141.64 and 141.65, respectively, and must
meet the treatment technique requirements for disinfection byproduct
precursors in Sec. 141.135.
* * * * *
Sec. 141.131 [Amended]
11. Amend Sec. 141.131 by revising the first sentence of paragraph
(b)(2) and adding paragraph (b)(3) to read:
Sec. 141.131 Analytical requirements.
* * * * *
(b) * * *
(1) * * *
(2) Analysis under this section for disinfection byproducts must be
conducted by laboratories that have received certification by EPA or
the State, except as specified under paragraph (b)(3) of this section.
* * *
(3) A party approved by EPA or the State must measure daily
chlorite samples at the entrance to the distribution system.
* * * * *
Sec. 141.132 [Amended]
12. Amend Sec. 141.132 by:
a. In paragraph (a)(2), revising the reference
``Sec. 142.16(f)(5)'' to read ``Sec. 142.16(h)(5)'';
b. In paragraph (b)(1)(i), revising the third and fifth entries and
the second footnote in the table;
c. Amend paragraph (b)(1)(iii) by revising the second sentence and
adding a new third sentence, redesignating paragraph (b)(1)(iv) as
(b)(1)(v), adding a new paragraph (b)(1)(iv); and
d. Revising the first sentence in paragraph (c)(1)(i).
The revisions read as follows:
Sec. 141.132 Monitoring requirements.
* * * * *
(b) * * *
(1) * * *
Routine Monitoring Frequency for TTHM and HAA5
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Sample location in the distribution
Type of system Minimum monitoring frequency system
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
* * * * * *
*
Subpart H system serving fewer than One sample per year per Locations representing maximum residence
500 persons. treatment plant during month time.\1\ If the sample (or average of
of warmest water temperature. annual samples, if more than one sample
is taken) exceeds the MCL, the system
must increase monitoring to one sample
per treatment plant per quarter, taken
at a point reflecting the maximum
residence time in the distribution
system, until the system meets reduced
monitoring criteria in paragraph
(b)(1)(iv) of this section.
* * * * * *
*
System using only ground water not One sample per year per Locations representing maximum residence
under direct influence of surface treatment plant \2\ during time.\1\ If the sample (or average of
water using chemical disinfectant and month of warmest water annual samples, if more than one sample
serving fewer than 10,000 persons. temperature. is taken) exceeds the MCL, the system
must increase monitoring to one sample
per treatment plant per quarter, taken
at a point reflecting the maximum
residence time in the distribution
system, until the system meets reduced
monitoring criteria in paragraph
(b)(1)(iv) of this section for reduced
monitoring.
* * * * * * *
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ If a system elects to sample more frequently than the minimum required, at least 25 percent of all samples
collected each quarter (including those taken in excess of the required frequency) must be taken at locations
that represent the maximum residence time of the water in the distribution system. The remaining samples must
be taken at locations representative of at least average residence time in the distribution system.
\2\ Multiple wells drawing water from a single aquifer may be considered one treatment plant for determining the
minimum number of samples required, with State approval in accordance with criteria developed under Sec.
142.16(h)(5) of this chapter.
* * * * *
(iii) * * * Systems that do not meet these levels must resume
monitoring at the frequency identified in paragraph (b)(1)(i) of this
section (sample location column) in the quarter immediately following
the quarter in which the system exceeds 0.060 mg/L or 0.045 mg/L for
TTHMs or HAA5 respectively. For systems using only ground water not
under the direct influence of surface water and serving fewer than
10,000 persons, if either the TTHMs annual average is >0.080 mg/L or
the HAA5 annual average is >0.060 mg/L, the system must go to increased
monitoring identified in paragraph (b)(1)(i) of this section (sample
location column) in the quarter immediately following the quarter in
which the system exceeds 0.080 mg/L or 0.060 mg/L for TTHMs or HAA5
respectively.
(iv) Systems on increased monitoring may return to routine
monitoring if TTHM annual average is 0.040 mg/L and HAA5
annual average is 0.030 mg/L.
* * * * *
(c) * * *
(1) * * *
(i) Routine monitoring. Community and nontransient noncommunity
water systems that use chlorine or chloramines must measure the
residual disinfectant level in the distribution system when total
coliforms are sampled, as specified in Sec. 141.21. * * *
* * * * *
Sec. 141.133 [Amended]
13. Amend Sec. 141.133 by:
a. In the first sentence of paragraph (a)(1), revising ``system's''
to read ``system'', and revising the first occurrence of ``failure'' to
read ``fails'' and
b. Removing the last two sentences of paragraph (b)(1)(i), revising
paragraphs (b)(1)(ii) and (iii), and adding new paragraph (b)(1)(iv);
c. Removing the phrase ``of quarterly averages'' in the second
sentence of paragraph (c)(1)(i) and adding the phrase ``in addition to
reporting to the State pursuant to Sec. 141.134'' to the end of the
second and third sentences in paragraph (c)(2)(i) and the second and
third sentences of paragraph (c)(2)(ii); and
d. In paragraph (d), revising the reference ``Sec. 141.135(b)'' in
the first
[[Page 20311]]
sentence to read ``Sec. 141.135(c)'' adding a sentence to the end of
paragraph (d).
The revisions and additions read as follows:
Sec. 141.133 Compliance requirements.
* * * * *
(b) * * *
(1) * * *
(ii) For systems monitoring less frequently than quarterly, systems
demonstrate MCL compliance if the average of samples taken that year
under the provisions of Sec. 141.132(b)(1) does not exceed the MCLs in
Sec. 141.64. If the average of these samples exceeds the MCL, the
system must increase monitoring to once per quarter per treatment plant
and such a system is not in violation of the MCL until it has completed
one year of quarterly monitoring, unless the result of fewer than four
quarters of monitoring will cause the running annual average to exceed
the MCL, in which case the system is in violation at the end of that
quarter. Systems required to increase monitoring frequency to quarterly
monitoring must calculate compliance by including the sample which
triggered the increased monitoring plus the following three quarters of
monitoring.
(iii) If the running annual arithmetic average of quarterly
averages covering any consecutive four-quarter period exceeds the MCL,
the system is in violation of the MCL and must notify the public
pursuant to Sec. 141.32 in addition to reporting to the State pursuant
to Sec. 141.134.
(iv) If a PWS fails to complete four consecutive quarters of
monitoring, compliance with the MCL for the last four-quarter
compliance period must be based on an average of the available data.
* * * * *
(d) * * * For systems required to meet Step 1 TOC removals, if the
value calculated under Sec. 141.135(c)(1)(iv) is less than 1.00, the
system is in violation of the treatment technique requirements and must
notify the public pursuant to Sec. 141.32, in addition to reporting to
the State pursuant to Sec. 141.134.
Sec. 141.134 [Amended]
14. Amend Sec. 141.134 by:
a. In paragraph (b), revising the table.
b. In paragraph (c), revising the table; and
(c). In paragraph (d), revising the first entry.
The revisions read as follows:
Sec. 141.134 Reporting and recordkeeping requirements.
* * * * *
(b) * * *
------------------------------------------------------------------------
If you are a. . . You must report. . . \1\
------------------------------------------------------------------------
(1) System monitoring for TTHMs and (i) The number of samples taken
HAA5 under the requirements of Sec. during the last quarter.
141.132(b) on a quarterly or more (ii) The location, date, and
frequent basis. result of each sample taken
during the last quarter.
(iii) The arithmetic average of
all samples taken in the last
quarter.
(iv) The annual arithmetic
average of the quarterly
arithmetic averages of this
section for the last four
quarters.
(v) Whether, based on Sec.
141.133(b)(1), the MCL was
violated.
(2) System monitoring for TTHMs and (i) The number of samples taken
HAA5 under the requirements of Sec. during the last year.
141.132(b) less frequently than (ii) The location, date, and
quarterly (but at least annually). result of each sample taken
during the last monitoring
period.
(iii) The arithmetic average of
all samples taken over the
last year.
(iv) Whether, based on Sec.
141.133(b)(1), the MCL was
violated.
(3) System monitoring for TTHMs and (i) The location, date, and
HAA5 under the requirements of Sec. result of the last sample
141.132(b) less frequently than taken.
annually. (ii) Whether, based on Sec.
141.133(b)(1), the MCL was
violated.
(4) System monitoring for chlorite (i) The number of entry point
under the requirements of Sec. samples taken each month for
141.132(b). the last 3 months.
(ii) The location, date, and
result of each sample (both
entry point and distribution
system) taken during the last
quarter.
(iii) For each month in the
reporting period, the
arithmetic average of all
samples taken in each three
sample set taken in the
distribution system.
(iv) Whether, based on Sec.
141.133(b)(3), the MCL was
violated, in which month, and
how many times it was violated
each month.
(5) System monitoring for bromate under (i) The number of samples taken
the requirements of Sec. 141.132(b). during the last quarter.
(ii) The location, date, and
result of each sample taken
during the last quarter.
(iii) The arithmetic average of
the monthly arithmetic
averages of all samples taken
in the last year.
(iv) Whether, based on Sec.
141.133(b)(2), the MCL was
violated.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ The State may choose to perform calculations and determine whether
the MCL was exceed, in lieu of having the system report that
information.
(c) * * *
------------------------------------------------------------------------
If you are a. . . You must report. . . \1\
------------------------------------------------------------------------
System monitoring for chlorine or (1) The number of samples taken
chloramines under the requirements of during the last quarter.
Sec. 141.132(c). (2) The monthly arithmetic
average of all samples taken
in each month for the last 12
months.
(3) The arithmetic average of
all monthly averages for the
last 12 months.
(4) Whether, based on Sec.
141.133(c)(1), the MRDL was
violated.
System monitoring for chlorine dioxide (1) The dates, results, and
under the requirements of Sec. locations of samples taken
141.132(c). during the last quarter.
(2) Whether, based on Sec.
141.133(c)(2), the MRDL was
violated.
[[Page 20312]]
(3) Whether the MRDL was exceed
in any two consecutive daily
samples and whether the
resulting violation was acute
or nonacute.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ The State may choose to perform calculations and determine whether
the MRDL was exceeded, in lieu of having the system report that
information.
(d) * * *
------------------------------------------------------------------------
If you are a. . . You must report. . . \1\
------------------------------------------------------------------------
System monitoring monthly or quarterly (1) The number of paired
for TOC under the requirements of Sec. (source water and treated
141.132(d) and required to meet the water) samples taken during
enhanced coagulation or enhanced the last quarter.
softening requirements in Sec. (2) The location, date, and
141.135(b)(2)or (3). results of each paired sample
and associated alkalinity
taken during the last quarter.
(3) For each month in the
reporting period that paired
samples were taken, the
arithmetic average of the
percent reduction of TOC for
each paired sample and the
required TOC percent removal.
(4) Calculations for
determining compliance with
the TOC percent removal
requirements, as provided in
Sec. 141.135(c)(1).
(5) Whether the system is in
compliance with the enhanced
coagulation or enhanced
softening percent removal
requirements in Sec.
141.135(b) for the last four
quarters.
* * * * * * *
------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ The State may choose to perform calculations and determine whether
the treatment technique was met, in lieu of having the system report
that information.
Sec. 141.135 [Amended]
15. Amend Sec. 141.135 by:
a. In paragraph (a)(2)(iii), revising ``as required by'' in the
first sentence of to read ``according to'', and revising ``June 16,
2005'' to read ``June 30, 2005'';
b. In paragraph (b), removing the phrase ``(as aluminum)'' wherever
it appears and revising paragraph (b)(4);
c. In paragraph (b)(2), revising the table entitled: ``Step 1
Required Removal of TOC by Enhanced Coagulation and Enhanced Softening
for Subpart H Systems Using Conventional Treatment,'' and;
d. In paragraph (c)(1), revising the first sentence.
The revisions read as follows:
Sec. 141.135 Treatment technique for control of disinfection byproduct
(DBP) precursors.
* * * * *
(b) * * *
(1) * * *
(2) * * *
Step 1 Required Removal of TOC by Enhanced Coagulation and Enhanced
Softening for Subpart H Systems Using Conventional Treatment 1, 2
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Source-water alkalinity, mg/L as CaCO3
-----------------------------------------
Source-water TOC, mg/L 0-60 >60-120 >1203
(percent) (percent) (percent)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
>2.0-4.0...................... 35.0 25.0 15.0
>4.0-8.0...................... 45.0 35.0 25.0
>8.0.......................... 50.0 40.0 30.0
------------------------------------------------------------------------
1 Systems meeting at least one of the conditions in paragraph (a)(2)(i)-
(vi) of this section are not required to operate with enhanced
coagulation.
2 Softening system meeting one of the alternative compliance criteria in
paragraph (a)(3) of this section are not required to operate with
enhanced softening.
3 System practicing softening must meet the TOC removal requirements in
this column.
(3) * * *
(4) Alternate minimum TOC removal (Step 2) requirements.
Applications made to the State by enhanced coagulation systems for
approval of alternate minimum TOC removal (Step 2) requirements under
paragraph (b)(3) of this section must include, as a minimum, results of
bench- or pilot-scale testing conducted under paragraph (b)(4)(i) of
this section. The submitted bench- or pilot-scale testing must be used
to determine the alternate enhanced coagulation level.
(c) * * *
(1) Subpart H systems other than those identified in paragraph
(a)(2) or (a)(3) of this section must comply with requirements
contained in paragraphs (b)(2) or (b)(3) of this section. * * *
* * * * *
Sec. 141.170 [Amended]
16. Section 141.170(a) is amended by revising ``December 17, 2001''
to read ``January 1, 2002''.
Sec. 141.172 [Amended]
17. Amend Sec. 141.172 by:
a. In paragraph (a)(2)(iii)(A), revising ``March 16, 2000'' to read
``March 31, 2000'';
b. In paragraph (a)(5)(i), revising ``December 16, 1999'' to read
``December 31, 1999'' wherever it appears;
[[Page 20313]]
c. In paragraph (a)(5)(iii), revising ``March 16, 2000'' to read
``March 31, 2000'';
d. In paragraph (b)(2) introductory text, revising ``March 16,
2000'' to read ``April 1, 2000'';
e. In paragraph (b)(3)(i), revising ``March 16, 2000'' to read
``March 31, 2000''; and
f. In paragraph (b)(4)(ii), revising the last sentence.
The revisions read as follows:
Sec. 141.172 Disinfection profiling and benchmarking.
* * * * *
(b) * * *
(4) * * *
(ii) * * * The (CTcalc/CT99.9) value of each segment and
((CTcalc/CT99.9)) must be calculated using the
method in paragraph (b)(4)(i) of this section.
* * * * *
Sec. 141.173 [Amended]
18. In Sec. 141.173, amend the introductory text by revising
``December 17, 2001'' to read ``December 31, 2001''.
Sec. 141.174 [Amended]
19. Section 141.174 is amended by revising paragraph (b) to read as
follows:
Sec. 141.174 Filtration sampling requirements.
* * * * *
(b) If there is a failure in the continuous turbidity monitoring
equipment, the system must conduct grab sampling every four hours in
lieu of continuous monitoring until the turbidimeter is repaired and
back on-line. A system has a maximum of five working days after failure
to repair the equipment or it is in violation.
Sec. 141.175 [Amended]
20. Amend Sec. 141.175 by revising the two occurrences of
``December 17, 2001'' to read ``January 1, 2002'' in the introductory
text and adding paragraph (c) to read as follows:
Sec. 141.175 Reporting and recordkeeping requirements.
* * * * *
(c) Additional reporting requirements.
(1) If at any time the turbidity exceeds 1 NTU in representative
samples of filtered water in a system using conventional filtration
treatment or direct filtration, the system must inform the State as
soon as possible, but no later than the end of the next business day.
(2) If at any time the turbidity in representative samples of
filtered water exceed the maximum level set by the State under
Sec. 141.173(b) for filtration technologies other than conventional
filtration treatment, direct filtration, slow sand filtration, or
diatomaceous earth filtration, the system must inform the State as soon
as possible, but no later than the end of the next business day.
PART 142--NATIONAL PRIMARY DRINKING WATER REGULATIONS
IMPLEMENTATION
21. The authority citation for part 142 continues to read as
follows:
Authority: 42 U.S.C. 300f, 300g-1, 300g-2, 300g-3, 300g-4, 300g-
5, 300g-6, 300j-4, 300j-9, and 300j-11.
Sec. 142.12 [Amended]
22. In Sec. 142.12, revise paragraph (b)(3)(i), and the last
sentence of (d)(2), to read as follows:
Sec. 142.12 Revision of State programs.
* * * * *
(b) * * *
(3) * * *
(i) Informing public water systems of the new EPA (and upcoming
State) requirements and that EPA will be overseeing implementation of
the requirements until the State, if eligible for interim primacy,
submits a complete and final primacy revision request to EPA, or in all
other cases, until EPA approves the State program revision;
* * * * *
(d) * * *
(2) Final request. * * * Complete and final State requests for
program revisions shall be submitted within two years of the
promulgation of the new or revised EPA regulations, as specified in
paragraph (b) of this section.
* * * * *
Sec. 142.15 [Amended]
23. In Sec. 142.15, paragraph (c)(5), revise the reference
``Sec. 141.16(b)(3)'' to read ``Sec. 142.16(b)(3)''.
[FR Doc. 00-9089 Filed 4-13-00; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P