United States .          Office of Water    EPA816-R-01-012
Environmental Protection      (4606)      June 2001
Agency
Implementation Guidance
for the
Stage 1 Disinfectants/
Disinfection Byproducts Rule

-------

                                                                            lliiUlllliiiliE ••
                                                                           HI iillliiiiEBliiiiii


 * i nis document aoeTnoFsubstitute''for,'JEPA regiiKifion'horls" this
 •  i; 1 if. •'..	'i ".*'!;,. I'	'.: v,',i	MiBS	.('J	VT'-H .;!";'""«''" 'Ke1'*?:*11;?!;*?)!1™: .~fn',"^fif.r-t M •«:! -:;;«t s,w,i-sVf ;,~s '.i.' '• '"-., r i - •:.., >.-
 ^dggurn^nt jeg^atipn_ itself.  Thus, it. cannot |mpose legally-binding
 'agjuirements' on EPA, states, or the 'regulated* coninimi^,'an3 may
 ^JSEIPJply to a particular situation Based upon the circumstances.
      •IH'n™T'''»"*''B""1*"'!'1'1
 lillllllliilli'llflllllliilliiilllSlllr
Illsi I nil
 illli il


                                                                        1
                                                                                   11

-------
 Contents
Introduction .............. '. .................. . , ... ... . . . .  . . ..-..•., .... ..... . . .... .  ix

Section I.     Rule Requirements . . . . .  ............ . .	 . . ........... . . . ... 1
       A.     Stage 1 DBPR Executive Summary	  ........... . ..'.... . . .  . 3
       B.     Key Dates for the Stage'1 DBPR . . . . . ... ....................  ... ...... . .  11

Section H.    SDWIS Reporting and SNCDefinitions...•'. ...... . . .'.".- .	...  .	 .  . 1
       A.     Safe Drinking Water Infonnation System (SDWIS) Reporting Under the Stage 1 DBPR  . 3
             A.I    Federally Reported Violations ,'. .......... . . ...... -.-..	3
       B.     SNC Definitions for the Stage 1 DBPR . ... ...... ....  . . .... ...... . . . . ... . .  14

Section HI.   State Primacy Revision Applications . .	 . ..................... .  . 1
       A-     State Primacy Program Revision ......................................... 3
    ;         A.I    The Revision Process  . . . > .	'.....	 5
             A.2    The Final Review Process  ......:...............................  . 7
       B.     State Primacy Program Revision Extensions  ....... . . .  :. . . .... . ............. 7
             B.I    The Extension Process	 •'. ..... 1
             B.2    Criteria that an Extension Request Must Meet ............... ... . . . . . .... 7
             B.3    Conditions of the Extension	 8
       C,     State Primacy Package  . . .  ;	,	  10
             C.I    SectionI—The State Primacy Revision Checklist(40 CFR 142.10) .........  10
             C.2    Section n—Text of the State's Regulation	  11
             C.3    Section III—Primacy Revision Crosswalk	 . . . . .	11
             C.4    Section IV—State Reporting and Recordkeeping Checklists  ..............  11
             C.5    Section V—Special Primacy Requirements (40 CFR 142.16)  .............  12
             C.6    Section VI—Attorney General's Statement of Enforceability	 . . . .  12
       D.     Guidance for Special Primacy Requirements	 . . .  15
             D.I    Special Primacy Requirements—Stage 1 DBPR ....;........	  15
             D.2    Other Requirements  in the  Stage 1 DBPR	.....	.;............  26

Section TV.   Other Resources and Guidance	 1
       A-     Technical Information Available on the Stage 1 DBPR	 . . . . . .  . 3
       B.     Rule Presentation  .		  .	4
       C.     Fact Sheets .............................	..,,.....:	. ...	.4
       D.     Frequently Asked Questions		  .	  17
       E.     Determining Monitoring Frequency for TTHM and HAA5 Sampling . . . . .  .... . ....  39


Appendices
Appendix A   Primacy Revision Crosswalk  .................. ^	A-l
Appendix B   Sample Extension Agreement	 B-l
AppendixC   Statement of Principles—Guidance on Audit Law Issues  .  . . .'-. . . ... . . .  . . . . . .-. . C-l
AppendixD   Stage 1 Plain English Summary  ....................................... D-l
AppendixE    .Stage 1 DBPR Rule Language -,.-	 .:. ... . . . .... .> . .  . . . . . . ...  ... . . . . . E-l
Appendix F    Examples of Stage 1 DPBR Monitoring Forms for States .......... . .	 F-4
Stage 1 DBPR Implementation Guidance
June 2001

-------
                                This page is left intentionally blank.
June 2001                                       ii            Stage 1DBPR Implementation Guidance

-------
Regional Contacts
Region I
Kevin Reilly
617-918-1694"
Linda Tsang
617-918-1395

Region II
Michael Lowy
212-637-3830

Region III
Jason Gambatese
215-814-5759

Region IV
David Parker
404-562-9460

Region V
Miguel Del Toral
312-886-5253

Region VI
Blake Atkins
214-665-2297

Region VII
Ralph Flournoy
913-551-7374
Regi
Bob Clement
303-312-6653

Region IX
Bruce Macler
415-744-1884

Region X
Wendy Marshall
206-553-1890
Stage IDBPR Implementation Guidance           Hi                   :               June 2001

-------
 State Contacts
 REGION I

 Connecticut
 Gerald Iwan

 Maine
 Nancy Beardsley

 Massachusetts
 David Terry

 New Hampshire
 Anthony Giunta

 Rhode Island
 June Swallow

 Vermont
 Jay Rutherford
REGION H

New Jersey
Vince Monaco

New York
Ron Entringer

Puerto Rico
Olga Rivera

US Virgin Islands
Christine Lottis
REGION HI

Delaware
Ed Hallock

Maryland
Nancy Reilman

Pennsylvania
John Wroblewski

Virginia
John Capito
Bob Taylor

West Virginia
Vic Wilford
REGION IV

Alabama
Joe Alan Power

Florida
Van Hoofhagle

Georgia
Onder Serefli

Kentucky
Vicki Ray

Mississippi
David Mitchell

North Carolina
Jessica Miles

South Carolina
Alton C. Boozer

Tennessee
W. David Draughon
June 2001
                                            IV
        Stage 1DBPR Implementation Guidance

-------
 REGION V
     REGION Xffl
 Illinois
 Dave Antonacci
 Mike Crumly
 Jerry Kuhn
 Eric Portz
 Roger Selburg
 Indiana
 Stacy Jones
 Jill Shalabi

 Michigan
 Jarnes Cleland

 Minnesota
 Dennis E. Maki

 Ohio
 Kirk Leifheit

 Wisconsin
 Robert Baumeister
REGION VI

Arkansas
Harold R. Seifert

Louisiana
Bobby Savoie

New Mexico
Robert Gallegos

Oklahoma
Jon L. Craig-

Texas
Steven Walden
     Colorado
     Jerry Biberstine

     Montana
     John Camden

     North Dakota
     tarry Thelen

     South Dakota
     Garland Erbele

    •Utah;. .:.
     Russ Topham

     Wyoming
     Gary Beach
    REGION IX

    American Samoa
    Sheila Wiegman

    Arizona
    Jeff Stuck

    California
    David P. Sp'ath

    Guam
    Fred Castro

    Hawaii
    Bill Wong

    Nevada
    Galen Denio

    Northern Mariana Islands
    Miriam Seman
REGION VH

Iowa
Dennis Alt

Kansas
Dave Waldo

Missouri
Terry Timmons

Nebraska
Jack Daniel
    REGION X

    Alaska
    James Weise

    Idaho
    Tom John

    Oregon
    Michael Grimm

    Washington
    Jim Hudson
Stage 1DBPR Implementation Guidance
v .
June 2001

-------
                                 This page is left intentionally blank.
June 2001                                      vi             Stage 1DBPR Implementation Guidance

-------
Abbreviations Used in This Document

ASTM: American Society for Testing and Materials      .           .
AWWA: American Water Works Association                               '
BAG: Biologically Activated Carbon
BAT: Best Available Technology                          .
CCR: Consumer Confidence Report
CDC: Centers for Disease Control and Prevention
CFE: Combined Filter Effluent                  ,      ,
CFR: Code of Federal Regulations                                              ,
CWS: Community Water System      \    • -                                                 :  '
D/DBP: Disinfectants and Disinfection Byproducts
DBP: Disinfection Byproducts                                               :
DBPP: Disinfection Byproducts Precursors
DBPR: Disinfection Byproducts Rule
DOC: Dissolved Organic Carbon
DTF: Data Transfer Format
DWPD: Drinking Water Protection Division
EC: Enhanced Coagulation
EPA: United States Environmental Protection Agency
ES: Enhanced Softening                  ;
ESWTR: Enhanced Surface Water Treatment Rule
FACA: Federal Advisory Committee Act
FR: Federal Register
FRDS: Federal Reporting Data System
GAC10: Granular Activated Carbon with ten minute empty bed contact time and 180 day reactivation
frequency                     .                •               .
GWR: Ground Water Rule
GWUDI: Ground Water Under the Direct Influence of Surface Water
HAA5: Haloacetic Acids (five)(chlofoacetic acid, dichlofoacetic acid, trichloroacetic acid, bromoacetic acid
and dibromoacetic acid)
HPC: Heterotrophic Plate Count
ICR: Information Collection Rule (issued under section 1412(b) of the SDWA)
IESWTR: Interim Enhanced Surface Water Treatment Rule
Log Inactivation: Logarithm of (N0/NT)
Log: Logarithm (common, base 10)
LRAA: Locational Running Annual Average
LTIESWTR: Long-Terml Enhanced Surface Water Treatment Rule
LT2ESWTR: Long-Term 2 Enhanced Surface Water Treatment Rule
MCL: Maximum Contaminant Level
MCLG: Maximum Contaminant Level Goal
M-DBP: Microbiarand Disinfectants/Disinfection Byproducts
mg/L: Milligrams per Liter                                     :
M/R: Monitorihg/Reporting
MRDL: Maximum Residual Disinfectant Level

Stage 1 DBPR Implementation Guidance       .     vii                                    June 2001

-------
 MRDLG: Maximum Residual Disinfectant Level Goal
 MPDWR: National Interim Primary Drinking Water Regulation
 nm: nanometers
 NPDES: National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System
 NPDWR: National Primary Drinking'.Water Regulation
 NSCEP: National Service for Environmental Publications
 NTIS: National Technical Information Service
 NTNCWS: Non-Transient Non-Community Water System
 OAR: Office of Air and Radiation
 OECA: Office of Enforcement and Compliance Assurance
 OGC: Office of General Counsel
 OGWDW: Office of Ground Water and Drinking Water
 OMB: Office of Management and Budget
 ORC: Office of Regional Counsel
 OSWER: Office of Solid Waste and Emergency Response
 OW: Office of Water
 PWS: Public Water System
 PWSS: Public Water Supply Supervision Program
 Reg. Neg.: Regulatory Negotiation
 SDWA: Safe Drinking Water Act, or the "Act," as amended 1996
 SDWIS: Safe Drinking Water Information System
 SNC: Significant Non-Compliance
 Subpart H: PWS using surface water or  ground water under the direct influence of surface water
 SUVA: Specific Ultraviolet Absorbance
 SW: Surface Water
 SWTR: Surface Water Treatment Rule
 TCR: Total Coliform Rule
 TNCWS: Transient Non-Community Water Systems
 TOG: Total Organic Carbon
 TT: Treatment Technique
 TTHM: Total Trihalomethanes (chloroform^ bromdichloromethane, dibromochloromethane, and
 bromoform)
 USGS: United States Geological Survey
 UV: Ultraviolet
 WTP: Water Treatment Plant
 x log removal: Reduction to 1/10X of original concentration
June 2001                                    viii           Stage 1DBPR Implementation Guidance

-------
 Introduction
 This document provides guidance to EPA Regions and states exercising primary enforcement responsibility
 under the Safe Drinking Water Act (SDWA) concerning how EPA interprets the Stage 1 Disinfection
 Disinfectants Byproduct Rule (Stage 1 DPBR) under SDWA. It also provides guidance to the public and
 the regulated community on how EPA intends to exercise its discretion in implementing the statute and
 regulations. This guidance is designed to implement national policy on these Issues.

 The SDWA provisions and EPA regulations described in this document contain legally binding requirements.
 This document does not substitute for those provisions or regulations, nor is it a regulation itself. It does not
 impose legally-binding requirements on EPA, states, or the regulated community, and may not apply to a
 particular situation based upon the circumstances. EPA and state decisidnmakers retain the discretion to
 adopt approaches on a case-by-case basis that differ from this guidance where appropriate.  Any decisions
 regarding a particular facility will be made based on the applicable statutes and regulations.  Therefore,
 interested parties are free to raise questions and objections about the appropriateness of the application of
 this guidance to a particular situation, and EPA will consider whether or not the recommendations or
 interpretations in the guidance are appropriate in that situation based on the law and regulations. EPA may
 change this guidance in the future,    - .

 This manual was developed through a workgroup process involving Regions, states, and stakeholders, and
 contains the following sections: /

 Section I summarizes the Stage 1 DBPR and presents a timetable of important dates for this rule. Section II
 addresses violation determination and associated reporting requirements to assist states in their compliance
 activities. Section HI covers state primacy revision requirements, including a detailed timefiame  for
 application review and approval. This section also contains guidance and references to help states adopt
 each new special primacy requirement included in these rules. Section IV contains a series of "stand-alone"
 guidance materials that will help states and public water systems comply with the new requirements.

 The Appendices  of this document also provide information that will be useful to states and EPA Regions
 throughout the primacy revision application process. Appendix A contains the primacy revision application
 crosswalk for the rule. Appendix B contains a sample extension agreement between EPA and a state which
 will allow the state and EPA to document how they Will share rule implementation responsibilities if the state
 does not submit a primacy application by the deadline. Appendix C contains a "Statement of Principles"
 which outlines the criteria EPA will use to determine whether states with audit laws have retained adequate
 enforcement and information gathering authority to meet the requirements of the Safe Drinking Water Act
 (SDWA). Appendix D contains a Plain English summary of the  rule. Appendix E contains the rule language
 of Stage 1 DBPR incorporating the  technical amendments. Appendix F contains sample monitoring forms
 that can be used  as template by states developing their own forms,

 EPA and state decision makers retain the discretion to adopt approaches on a case-by-case basis that differ
 from this guidance where appropriate. Any decisions regarding  a particular facility will be made based on
 the applicable statutes  and regulations. Therefore, interested parties are free to raise questions and
 objections about  the appropriateness of the application of this guidance to a particular situation,  and EPA
will consider whether or not the recommendations or interpretations in the guidance are appropriate in that
 situation.  EPA may change this guidance in the future.
Stage 1DBPR Implementation Guidance             ix                                      June 2001

-------
                                 This page is left intentionally blank.
June 2001                                       x            Stage 1DBPR Implementation Guidance

-------
Section I.
Rule -Requirements

-------
                                 This page is left intentionally blank.
June 2001                                       1-2            Stage 1DBPRImplementation Guidance

-------
 I-A.     The Stage 1 DBPR Executive Summary


 Purpose


 The purpose of this summary is to acquaint state decision-makers and public health officials with the Stage
 1 Disinfectants/Disinfection Byproducts Rule (Stage 1 DBPR). The Stage 1 DBPR, published in the
 Federal Register on December 16, 1998 (63 FR 69390; www.epa.gov/OGWDW/mdbp/dbpfr.html:
 66 FR 3770; www.epa.gov/safewater/mdbp/iesfr.html: Appendix E—rule language only), is the first part of
 a series of rules, the "Microbial-Disinfectants/Disinfection Byproducts Cluster" (M-DBP Cluster), to be
 published over the next several years that are intended to control microbial pathogens while minimizing the
 public health risks of disinfectants and disinfection byproducts (DBFs). The Stage 1 DBPR specifically
 addresses risks associated with disinfectants and DBFs. This rule  was published concurrently with the
 Interim Enhanced Surface Water Treatment Rule (IESWTR), which addresses control of microbial
 pathogens.         :                      ,             .             ,


 Background


 The 1974 Safe Prinking Water Act (SDWA) called for EPA to regulate drinking water by creating the
 national interim primary drinking water regulations (NIPDWR). In 1979, the first interim standard
 addressing DBPs was set for total trihalornethanes (TTHMs), a group of four volatile organic chemicals-
 which form when disinfectants react with natural organic matter in the water.

 Although SDWA was amended slightly in 1977, 1979, and 1980, the most significant changes to the 1974
 law occurred when SDWA was reauthorized in 1986. Disease-causing microbial contamination had not
 been sufficiently controlled under the original Act. To safeguard public health, the 1986 Amendments
 required EPA to  set health goals, or maximum contaminant level goals (MCLGs) and maximum contaminant
 levels (MCLs) for 83 named contaminants. EPA was also required to establish regulations within certain
 time frames, require disinfection of all public Water supplies, specify filtration requirements for nearly all
 water systems that draw their water from surface sources, and develop additional programs to protect
 ground water supplies.

 In 1989, EPA issued two important National Primary Drinking Water Regulatipris (NPDWR):  The Total
 Coliform Rule (TCR) (40 CFR 141.21) and the Surface Water Treatment Rule (SWTR) (40 CFR 141
 Subpart H).  The TCR and SWTR 40 CFR 141 Subpart H provide the foundation for the M-DBP Cluster
 and are summarized below.                      :

 The TCR covers  all public water systems. Since cojiforms are easily detected in water, they are used to
 indicate a water system's vulnerability to pathogens in the water.  In the TCR, EPA set a MCLG of zero for
 total coliforms. EPA also set a MCL for total coliforms. If more  than 5.0 percent of the samples contain
 coliforms within  a month, water system operators  must report this'violation to the state and the public. In
 addition, sanitary surveys are required every five or ten years (depending on the quality of the source water)
 for every system  that collects fewer than five samples per month (typically systems that serve less than
 4,100 people).                       \       •

 EPA issued the SWTR in response to Congress' mandate requiring disinfection, and where necessary,
 filtration of systems that draw their water from surface sources before distribution. The SWTR applies to
 all systems that use surface water or ground Water under the direct influence of surface water :(GWUDI).
 The rule sets MCLGs for  Legionella, Giardia lamblia, and viruses at zero since any exposure to these
 contaminants presents some level of health risk.
Stage 1 DBPR Implementation Guidance            1-3                                     June 2001

-------
 Specifically, the rule requires that a surface water system have sufficient treatment to reduce the source
 water concentration of Giardia lamblia and viruses by at least 99.9 percent (3 log) and 99.99 percent (4
 log), respectively. A detectable disinfection residual must be maintained throughout the entire distribution
 system.  For systems that filter, the adequacy of the filtration process is determined by measuring me
 turbidity of the treated water since high levels of turbidity often indicate that the filtration process is not
 working properly. The goal of the SWTR is to reduce risk to less than one infection per year per 10,000
 people. However, the SWTR does not account for systems with high pathogen concentrations that, when
 treated at the levels required under the rule, still may not meet this health goal, and the rule does not
 specifically control  for the protozoan Cryptosporidium.

 In 1990, EPA's Science Advisory Board, an independent panel of experts established by Congress, cited
 drinking water contamination as one of the most important environmental risks and indicated that disease-
 causing microbial contaminants (i.e., bacteria, protozoa, and viruses) are probably the greatest remaining
 health-risk management challenge for drinking water suppliers. Data from the Centers for Disease Control
 (CDC) confirm this concern and indicate that between 1980 and 1994, 379 waterborne disease outbreaks
 were reported, with over 500,000 cases of disease. During this period, a number of agents were implicated
 as the cause, including protozoa, viruses, bacteria, and several chemicals.  Most of the cases (but not the
 outbreaks) were associated with surface water, including a single outbreak of cryptosporidiosis in Milwaukee
 (over 400,000 cases).

 In response to these findings, the SDWA was further amended in 1996 to improve public health protection
 by incorporating new data on the adverse health effects of contaminants, the occurrence of contaminants in
 public water  systems, and the estimated reduction in health risks that would result from further regulation.
 The Act also increased scientific research requirements and emphasized cost-benefit analyses in the
 regulatory decision process.

 Based on prevailing scientific data, the MJDBP Cluster is intended to control microbial pathogens while
 minimizing the public health risk from disinfectants and DBFs.  Since multiple threats require multiple
 barriers, the IESWTR and Stage 1 DBPR expand on the foundation of the TCR, SWTR, and TTHM
 standards to target health risk outliers unaddressed by prior regulations.

 The TTHM NPDWR of 1979 set a standard for TTHMs only for public water systems (PWSs) serving
 10,000 or more people.  The Stage 1 DBPR builds on the TTHM Rule by lowering the MCL and widening
 the range of affected systems to include all PWSs that add a disinfectant.  Therefore, EPA  believes that the
 promulgation of the Stage 1 DBPR will significantly decrease the risks posed by DBFs and disinfectants by
 covering many PWSs not currently regulated for TTHM or other DBFs.

 Many water systems treat their water with a chemical disinfectant in order to inactivate pathogens that cause
 disease. The public health benefits of common disinfection practices are significant and well-recognized;
 however, disinfection poses risks of its own. While disinfectants are effective in controlling many harmful
 microorganisms, they react with organic and inorganic matter (disinfection byproduct precursors—DBPPs) ,
 in the water and form DBFs, some of which pose health risks at certain levels. Since the discovery of
 chlorination byproducts in drinking water in 1974, numerous toxicological studies have been conducted that
 show some DBFs to be carcinogenic and/or cause reproductive or developmental effects in laboratory
 animals.  Additionally, exposure to high levels of disinfectants over long periods of time may cause health
problems, including damage to blood and kidneys. While many of these studies have been conducted at high
 doses, the weight-of-evidence indicates that DBFs present a potential public health problem that must be
addressed. One of the most complex questions facing water supply professionals is how to reduce risks from
disinfectants and DBFs while providing increased protection against microbial contaminants. Much of the
population is  exposed to these risks; therefore, a substantial concern exists.
June 2001                                       1-4            Stage 1 DBPR Implementation Guidance

-------
 To address this concern, the Stage 1. DBF-Rule updates and supersedes the 1979 TTHM standard by
 lowering the MGL for TTHMs and establishing maximum residual disinfection level (MRDL) limits for
 chlorine, chloramines, and chlorine dioxide and new MCLs for chlorite, bromate, and haloacetic acids
 (HAA5) for all community water systems and nontransient noncommunity water systems that add a
 chemical disinfectant for either primary or residual treatment.  In addition, the Stage 1 DBF Rule requires
 conventional filtration systems to remove specified percentages of organic materials measured as total
 organic carbon (TOC) that may react with disinfectants to  form DBFs.

 By buildhig on the foundation set forth by the original SDWA, the quality of drinking water has improved
 and public health protection has increased. The TESWTR and Stage 1 DBF Rules are part of a series of
 rules designed to expand on the foundation of prior rulemaking efforts.  By encompassing previously
 unaddressed health risks from micrbbials and disinfection byproducts, the M-DBP Cluster continues to
 maximize dunking water quality and public health protection.

 Development of the Stage 1 DBPR


 The new rules are a product of 6 years of collaboration among the water supply industry, environmental and
 public health groups, and local, state, and federal governments. EPA first launched a rule-making.process in
 1992 and convened a Regulatory Negotiation (RegNeg) Advisory Committee under the Federal Advisory
 Committee Act (FACA), representing a range of stakeholders affected by possible regulation. The 1996
 SDWA Amendments required EPA to develop rules to balance the risks between microbial pathogens and
 disinfection byproducts.

 In 1997,  a similar FACA process was implemented with the Microbial-Disinfectants/Disinfection Byproducts
 (M-DBP) Advisory Committee. The M-DBP Committee convened to collect, share, and analyze new
 information available since 1994, review previous assumptions made during the RegNeg process, as well as
 build consensus on the regulatory implications of this new information. Negotiations resulted in the following
 three proposals:                                                                      ,       .

       •      A staged approach to regulation of DBFs (referred to as the Stage 1 and Stage 2 DBPRs)
               incorporating Maximum Contaminant Levels (MCLs), Maximum Residual Disinfectant
               Levels (MRDLs), and treatment technique requirements;

       •      A companion Interim Enhanced Surface Water treatment Rule (IESWTR) designed to
               improve control of microbial pathogens and prevent inadvertent reductions in microbial
               safety as a result of DBF control efforts; and,

       •       An Information Collection Rule (ICR) to collect information necessary to reduce many key
               uncertainties prior to subsequent negotiations for the Stage 2 DBPR,


 Benefits of the  Stage 1 DBPR


 The Stage 1 DBPR is expected to reduce the risks associated with exposure to disinfectants and DBFs. The
 MCLs will reduce exposure to  specific DBFs from the use of ozone (byproduct: bromate), chlorine dioxide
 (byproduct: chlorite), and chlorine (byproducts: TTHM and  five Haloacetic Acids-
-------
Applicability and Compliance Dates
The existing TTHM requirements apply only to systems serving 10,000 or more people. The Stage 1 DBPR
covers a larger number of PWSs, applying to community Water, systems (CWSs) and nontransient
noncommunity water systems (NTNCWSs) which add a chemical disinfectant to the water in any part of
the drinking water treatment process. In addition, certain requirements apply to transient noncommunity
water systems (TNCWSs) that use chlorine dioxide.

Subpart H systems (PWSs that use surface water or ground water under the direct influence of surface
water—GWUDI—as a source) serving 10,000 or more people must comply with the requirements of the
Stage 1 DBPR beginning January 1, 2002. States can grant up to 24 Additional months for capital
improvements for Subpart H systems serving 10,000 or more people. This extension extends the compliance
date for meeting the MCL, but the system must monitor as required by the rule and report the results of any
detected Stage 1 DBPR contaminants in their CCR.  Since the system would not be in violation of the
MCL, public notification would not be required. Subpart H systems that serve fewer than 10,000 people,
and all affected ground water systems, must comply with the requirements beginning January 1, 2004.
Requirements of the Rule: Public Water Systems
MCLGs and MCLs for disinfection byproducts

The Stage 1 DBPR sets maximum contaminant level goals (MCLGs) for some of the regulated DBPs, sets a
more stringent maximum contaminant level (MCL) for TTHM, and sets new MCLs for HAAS, brotnate,
and chlorite. MCLGs are non-enforceable public health goals set at concentrations to which no known or
anticipated adverse health effects are expected to occur with an adequate margin of safety. MCLs are
enforceable contaminant standards that are feasible to achieve.
Disinfection Byproduct
Total Trihalomethanes (TTHM)
Chloroform
Bromodichloromethane
Bromoform
Dibromochloromethane
Five Hatoacetic Acids (HAAS)
Monochloroacetic Acid
Dichloroacetic Acid
Trichloroacetic Acid
Monobromoaceric Acid
Dibromoacetic Acid
Chlorite
Bromate
MCLG (mg/L)
j- °
f i
zero
zero
0.06
\ . V
"* s ^
zero
0.3
" * •** * ^ **•«>
I
0.8
zero
MCL (mg/L)
0.080
' . , '*-.'-•"
! " 'V ! •* *
' ; " >
/ f ^
* '/'* <--
0.060
' ' v'
*• -^ >
' ' V ° •. " <* *' ° "
f " ' f" J '
'. >"
* * * *• ^
} v
- * < ' ,
c { •* ^
1.0
0.010
June 2001
1-6
Stage 1 DBPR Implementation Guidance

-------
 Compliance for TTHM and HAAS MCLs is based on a running annual arithmetic average, computed
 quarterly, of quarterly averages of all samples.  Compliance for..the chlorite MCL is based on an arithmetic
 average of each three sample set taken in the distribution system. Compliance for the brbmate MCL is
 based on a running annual arithmetic average, computed quarterly, of rnpnthly samples.            .

 MRJ>LGs andMRDLs for disinfectant residuals

 To protect against potential health risks caused by high levels of residual disinfectants, the Stage 1 DBPR
 sets the following maximum residual disinfectant level goals (MRDLGs) and maximum residual disinfectant
 levels (MRDLs). Like MCLGs and MCLs, respectively, MRDLGs are non-enforceable, while MRDLs are
 enforceable.
Disinfectant
Chlorine
Chloramines
Chlorine Dioxide
MKDLG(mg/L)
4(asCl2)
4(asCl2)
0.8(asC102)
MRDL (mg/L)
4.0 (as C12)
4.0(asCl2)
0.8 (as C102)
 Systems using chlorine or chloramines may temporarily increase residual disinfectant levels to an appropriate
 level protect to public health in order to address specific microbiological contamination problems. These
 problems may be caused by circumstances such as, but not limited to, distribution line breaks, storm run-off
 events, source water contamination events, or cross-connection events.  This option is NOT available for
 the use of chlorine dioxide.

 Compliance for chlorine and chloramine MRDLs is based on a running annual arithmetic average, computed
 quarterly, of monthly averages of all samples. Compliance for the chlorine dioxide MRDL is based on
 consecutive daily samples.

 Treatment technique for disinfection byproduct precursors

 The rule includes a treatment technique that applies to Subpart H systems using conventional filtration      '
 technology. The treatment technique was established because .disinfectants can react with disinfection
 byproduct precursors (DBPPs) to form both regulated and non-regulated DBFs. The treatment technique
 requirements in the rule are designed to provide  public health protection by minimizing the production of all
 DBFs. Compliance with the rule's treatment technique requirement can be achieved by removing specified
 percentages of Total Organic Carbon (TOC) using enhanced coagulation or enhanced softening.
 Alternatively, systems are compliant by showmg they meet alternative performance criteria.

 Best available technology (BAT)

 EPA has specified the Best Available Technology (BAT) for each MCL and MRDL established in the rule.
 These technologies and methods are believed to  be effective in controlling chemicals in drinking water while
 remaining economically feasible for PWSs to employ. PWSs must use the specified BAT if they wish to
 qualify for variances.                                   ;
Stage 1 DBPR Implementation Guidance
1-7
                                        June 2001

-------
Chemical
DBFs
Disinfectants
TIHM and HAAS
Chlorite
Bromate
Chlorine, chloramine,
and chlorine dioxide
Best Available Technology
Enhanced coagulation or granular activated carbon (GAC 10), with
chlorine as the primary and residual disinfectant
Control of treatment processes to reduce disinfectant demand and
• control of disinfection treatment processes to reduce disinfectant
levels
Control of ozone treatment process to reduce production of
bromate
Control of treatment processes to reduce disinfectant demand and
control of disinfection treatment processes to reduce disinfectant
levels
 Public water system recordkeeping and reporting requirements

 For each disinfectant, contaminant, contaminant group, and treatment technique, EPA has developed
 routine compliance monitoring schemes to be protective of acute and chronic health concerns. The
 compliance monitoring requirements vary by the size and type of system, the treatment employed, and the
 disinfectant used. In many cases, systems may reduce monitoring frequencies after establishing a baseline
 that shows violations are unlikely.

 Systems required to sample quarterly or more frequently must report to the state within 10 days after the
 end of each quarter in which the samples were collected. Those required to sample less frequently than
 quarterly must report to the state within 10 days after the end of each monitoring period in which samples
 were collected. Systems that are required to conduct additional monitoring because of the disinfectant used
 (e.g., chlorine dioxide) are subject to additional reporting requirements if certain chemical levels are
 measured.

 Laboratory methods and certification

 The rule specifies analytical methods for measuring each relevant water quality parameter, disinfectant,
 contaminant,  and DBPP. Consistent with current regulations, only certified laboratories can analyze samples
 for compliance with the MCLs with the exception of the daily measurement of chlorite at the entrance to the
 distribution system. For the daily measurement of chlorite, disinfectants and other specified parameters that
 EPA believes can be adequately measured by other than certified laboratories, and for which there is good
 reason to allow on-site analysis (e.g., for samples that may deteriorate before reaching a certified
 laboratory), EPA is requiring that analyses be conducted by a party approved by the state.
Requirements of the Rule: States or Other Primacy Agents
State primacy, recordkeeping, and reporting requirements

The Stage 1 DBPR requires states to adopt several new regulatory requirements including public notification
requirements, MCLs for DBPs, MRDLs for disinfectants, and the requirements of Subpart L. In addition,
states are required to adopt special primacy requirements and keep records of their activities, records of
decisions, and PWS monitoring results. State reporting to EPA is covered under existing regulation.
June 2001
1-8
Stage 1 DBPR Implementation Guidance

-------
                More information can be obtained from:

                 .   o®1 The Stage 1 Disinfectants/Disinfection Byproducts Rule
                '-.••„.;•..  -•      63 FR 69390 (December 16, 1998)     -
                               www.epa.gOv/OGWDW/mdbp/dbp:fr.htmI
                    "®". The Stage 1 Disinfectants/Disinfection Byproducts Rule:
                       Technical Corrections
                               66 FR 3770 (January 1.6, 2001)
                               www.epa.gov/safewater/mdfap/iesfr.htnil
                   .W'- The EPA Safe Drinking Water Hotline, Telephone:
                      '         1.800.426.4791
Stage 1DBPR Implementation Guidance
1-9
1 June 2001

-------
                                 This page is left intentionally blank.
June 2001                                      1-10           .Stage 1DBPR Implementation Guidance

-------
 I-B.    Key Pates for the Stage 1 DBPR
 The compliance dates for the Stage 1 Disinfectants/Disinfection Byproducts Rule (Stage 1 DBPR) are
 January 1, 2002 and January 1, 2004. Surface water systems and systems using ground water under the
 dirept influence (GWUDI) of surface water that serve 10,000 or more people (large subpart H systems) will
 have to comply with the provisions of the rule beginning January 1, 2002. Surface water and GWUDI
 systems that serve fewer than 10,000 people (small subpart H systems) and all ground water systems will
 have to comply with the provisions of the rule beginning January 1, 2Q04. The timetable for the Stage 1
 DBPR is presented in Table I-1,

              Table 1-1: Timetable for the Stage  1 DBPR Requirements
Date
December 16, 1998
February 16, 1999
February 16, 1999
December 16,2000
January 1,2001
January 1, 2002
January 1,2002
January 1, 2002
January 1,2002
December 16,2002
January 1,2003
December 3 1,2003
January 1, 2004
DBPR Requirement
Rule is published in Federal Register [63 FR 1 69390].
60-day legal challenge period ends.
Methods specified in § 1 41 . 1 3 1 for analyzing disinfection byproducts, disinfection
residuals, and DBF precursors are approved for use [40 CFR 141.131(a)].
Final primacy applications must be submitted to EPA unless granted an extension [40
CFR 142.12(b)(l)] '•.-.'.'
Large Subpart H systems should begin monitoring to determine Step 1 TOC removal
before the compliance date.
Large Subpart H CWSs and NTNCWSs must comply with the MCLs for TTHM, HAA5,
bromate, and chlorite [40 CFR 141. 64(b)(l)].
Large Subpart H CWSs and NTNCWSs must comply with the MRDLs for chlorine,
chloramines, and chlorine dioxide [40 CFR 141. 65(b)(l)].
Large Subpart H TNCWSs that use chlorine dioxide must comply with the MRDL for
chlorine dioxide [40 CFR 141. 65(b)(2)]. ,
Requirements of Subpart L generally apply to large Subpart H CWSs and NTNC Ws [40
CFR141.130(b)(l)].
• Monitoring requirements.
Reporting and recordkeeping requirements.
*, • Compliance.
• Treatment technique for control of DBF precursors.
Final primacy revisions applications with approved extensions must be submitted to
EPA[40CFR142.12(b)(2)],
Small Subpart H systems should begin monitoring to determine Step 1 TOC removal
before the compliance date.
Systems which received an extension from the state to install GAC or membranes must
comply with the Stage 1 DBPR [40 CFR 141,64(b)(2)]. \ .•'
Small Subpart H and all ground water CWSs and NTNCWSs must comply with the
MCLs for TTHM, HAA5, bromate, and chlorite [40 CFR 141.64(b)(,l)].
Stage 1 DBPR Implementation Guidance
I-11
June 2001

-------
Date
January 1,2004
January 1,2004
January 1, 2004
June 30, 2005
DBPR Requirement
-
Small Subpart H and all ground water CWSs and NTNCWSs must comply with the
MRDLs for chlorine, chloramines, and chlorine dioxide [40 CFR 141.65(b)(l)].
Small Subpart H and all ground water TNCWSs that use chlorine dioxide must comply
with the MRDL for chlorine dioxide [40 CFR 141.65 (b)(2)].
Requirements of Subpart L generally apply to small Subpart H and all ground water
CWSs andNTNCWs [40 CFR 141.130(b)(l)].
• Monitoring requirements.
• Reporting and recordkeeping requirements.
• Compliance.
• Treatment technique for control of DBF precursors.
Systems that made a clear and irrevocable financial commitment before the applicable
compliance date to install technologies that limit TTHM and HAA5 to 0.040 mg/L and
0.030 mg/L, respectively, must have these technologies installed and operating. [40
CFR141.135(a)(2)(iii)].
June 2001
1-12
Stage 1 DBPR Implementation Guidance

-------
Section II.
SDWIS Reporting and SNC
Definitions

-------
                                 This page is left intentionally blank.
June 2001                                      11-2            Stage 1DBPR Implementation Guidance

-------
 II-A.   Safe Drinking Water Information System (SDWlS)

          Reporting Under the Stage 1 DBPR

 SDWIS/FED (Safe Drinking Water Information System/Federal version) is an EPA national database
 storing routine information about the nation's drinking water.  Designed to replace the system known as
 FRDS (Federal Reporting Data System), SDWIS/FED stores the information EPA needs to monitor
 approximately 175,000 public water systems.              .

 States supervise the drinking water systems within their jurisdictions to ensure that each public water system
 meets state and EPA standards for safe drinking water.  The Safe Drinking Water Act (SDWA) requires
 states to report drinking water information periodically to EPA; this information is maintained in
 SDWIS/FED/.   ".       .            '.•  v   ;  -.-•-     .-.;;'; //;    '•."."•"'  v      .--:•.;.

 States report the following information to EPA:

 •      Basic information on each water system, including: name, ID number, number of people served,
       type of system (year-round or seasonal), and source of water (ground water or surface water)

 •      Violation information for each water system: whether it has followed established monitoring and
       reporting schedules, complied with mandated treatment techniques, or violated any Maximum
       Contaminant Levels (MCLs)

 •      Enforcement information: what actions states have taken to ensure that drinking water systems
       return to compliance if they are in violation"of adrinking Water regulation

 •      Sampling results for unregulated contaminants and for regulated contaminants when the monitoring
       results exceed the MCL                                      ;

 EPA uses this information to determine if and when it needs to take action against non-compliant systems,
 oversee state drinking water programs, track contaminant levels, respond to public inquiries, and prepare
 national reports. EPA also uses this information to evaluate the effectiveness of its programs and
 regulations, and to determine whether new regulations are needed to further protect public health.


 II-A.I   Federally Reported Violations

 Under SDWIS/FED reporting, states only report when violations occur. In the interest of reducing the
 reporting burden on states, EPA has limited the number and type of violations to be reported to
 SDWIS/FED. However, PWSs must still keep records and report all required information to the state. Any
 violation of the rule, whether included in the accompanying table or not, is a basis for a state or federal
 enforcement  action.                                                  '.••-'.;'

 Table II-1 summarizes  the violation and contaminant codes that will'be used to report violations of the Stage
 1 DBPR to SDWIS/FED.    •                                             .     :
Stage 1DBPR Implementation Guidance           II-3                                   June 2001

-------
   Table H-l: SDWIS/FED Codes for Federal Reporting Under the Stage 1 DBPR
Violation
Code
02
II1

37
12
46

272

06
Contaminant
Code
1009
1011
2456
2950
1006
1008
0999

0400
0400
2920

0400
1011
2920
appropriate
MCL/MRDL
contaminant
code

appropriate
MCL/MRDL/
TOC
contaminant
code
MCL and MRDL Violations '•;"', '"' " ?
Chlorite
Bromate
Haloacetic Acids
Total Trihalomethanes
Chloramines
Chlorine Dioxide (Acute and Non-Acute)
Chlorine .
„ Treatment Technique (TT) Violations" - ~ - ' ; '
Failure to submit/obtain state approval for significant treatment modifications
Failure to have qualified operator
Failure to meet DBF precursor removal (TOC)
Monitoring and Reporting (M/R) Violations ' , ' " * ~
Major: Failure to develop, implement, or submit monitoring plan
Major: Failure to collect and report 100% of required bromate samples
Major: Failure to collect source and finished water TOC/alkalinity samples
Major: Failure to collect and report at least 90% of required samples
(except for bromate) '
Minor: Collecting and reporting between 90-99% of required samples
(except for bromate)
Public Notification (PM) Violations* „ v ,
Failure to notify public after a violation
* ThcrcvisedPNruIc(65FR25981)iseffectiveMay6,2002andwillsupercedethePNviolationlistedabove.
Table tt-2 contains the federally reportable violations for the Stage 1 DBPR in more detail. These violations
are listed by contaminant or requirement and violation type. The table includes the SDWIS/FED reporting
codes, the regulatory citation, system type affected, a detailed description of the violation, and the initial
compliance date. This table will allow a user to better understand violations listed in SDWIS.  For more
information on how to report Stage 1 DBPR violations to SDWIS, please refer to the State Reporting
Guidance for the Stage 1 Disinfectants and Disinfection Byproducts Rule which will be available at
www.epa.gov/safewater/mdbp/implement.hrmlinfall2001.
       'Flag used to denote acute or non-acute for chlorine dioxide

       2Flag used to denote major or minor.
June 2001
II-4
Stage 1 DBPR Implementation Guidance

-------
 1 d
 ••«'.2
 PH co
 w «-

 to" 'S

 a o
 .d


 .d
   VI
 o

M
lit

 5 '> -ES
        -cc
         jet'

         "B
         I
         o
         tt
         «

         I
ri
 «L>

i
H

















Violations
d
^?























8
-i fi '
TO ^ Gi
IP
. e
U ;




Violation







d
0
-2
U


-gll
'ts -s ^ '
"3 s .2
If "3 ^
u rt


B +j '
•° S" • '
"3 I «
IS3
K
ra 13
JT3 S




-'^





vo .







V)



Ti-



ro





fv)







^






•<— r . . i— r

3 o £« O
.)— > .CS l-» CSJ

1 •§ -

ning annual average com]
of monthly samples exes
: 0,010 mg/L
H ^~> hJ
S '^ c«^


^ ra o
^ &-S/.
«§•-..-
All systems using ozone
disinfection or oxidatioi



u
s. • -


1? : -
^ '
t— t •
' l — I ,



H
• o
J-t




»— 1
0 :
r— i • .
CN
O


T — 1 r— 1 .
&* ' - • t*
S CN 2 •1*3'
3 23 §
i-> CS i-> «N

+-T ' • _•
1 CO
rage of any three sample
;heMCLofl.Omg/L.

^ y^


•So
tfH ^
d. P
All systems using chlori:
dioxide for disinfection
oxidation



|



-^ :
^
S
CO3
. • . •• '


I' "'•-•'.'
^

U .



§ •"•••
O
T~H .'.- '
fNj
O


T-H ' ^— 1

1 o | o
^ tsj i-^ -» O
S "^ T^J


^S c3 *S 5
te- & § W

CO
"E.
5" . '



d ' -
s. • '•


^
^F*
i — i
i — i
002



-
.•5

• W . .



vo •••"-. ;
•^j-
". 
-------








L Violations
u
02
i





















o
u
1 a -S
a |«
u

Violation
 CS i-, ol
If the annual average, computed
quarterly, of monthly averages exceeds
4.0 mg/L I
(unless increased residual levels in the
distribution system address specific
microbial contamination problems)
„
All systems using
chloramines -
If systems use both
chloramines and chlorin
systems must average al
results for compliance


i


cd

1— t
ear,


M
S3
1
§
o
3
o



VD
0
0
*— t
1 — 1
»— (


' 1 — 11 — 1
§ o 3 o
§ 0 § 0
H? CN! H? CS
Exceedance of the MRDL for Chlorine:
4.0mg/L
(unless increasedresidual levels in the
distribution system address specific
microbial contamination problems)
S  cs >-> csi
ACUTE : If any of the three required
distribution samples taken on the day
following a daily entry point sample
MRDL exceedance 0.8 mg/L
NON-ACUTE: If any two consecutive
daily samples exceed 0.8mg/L and all
distribution samples are less than 0.8
mg/L : . .
So.
J J
I !


i



vv
r— 4
(D
12
.2
O • •
u . •
"C . .
8
3- ' . .
o - , .
£
_y
^ - -
oo >5-
C5 ^B
^5 fl>
^5 § '-
T— 1 <1 •


^H" *-?
Is Is
m O S' O
I— s Ol I— i CN
Failure to collect and report additional
samples the day following and MRDL
exceedance This is specified in the rule
as a MRDL violation.
1) lH
All systems using chlori
dioxide for disinfection
oxidation


1 :'

"ST

CN
m
r— t
i— 1

."2
S
S

-n
o
3' .
.0
£
y
^
00 ^i

o o
§1 •-'
  •
 S
 o
'•e
I




1

-------
h €>
• M &'
f~\ t. .
§ o
s s
: t> .0
T* "3 - '•
fl 1 . ±J
.« >-•
3 fr
sM"'
s
•& ]2
'•S '3,
Is
0} 03
3 t!
•f 1 .
li
•8 « .
<4-J W
°U
'•S3 §
£ §
£ o
•s r
_§ ^
•s ^
c 2
- . « . »
-i->
d 3-
PH g
pq «
Qt>5 .
-£
a ^
-2 s" "
I/D >
o 
> ^ g
JJ Q K
.0 on a
S. 'd 8
" •§ "cs
>. 2 S- "
^ ^^
I^-S
«ft
,.cj w +2
+3 R CO
a ••§ *•
-g a b
-§ 'S «S
-§ •> '.a •-•
O !(_,. «
-s ^ £
S 0- rt ' '
•-||.S
r^ ^ C













T—H
*""" .
c«o
1
(D
a3
p^
.(D
•'"3
PS!
:jz;
PH
(D
i/l
•>
H
(D
f— I
m t
O
o
'z.
***-*/

fi
o
1
in
0
_«

s
=-










w

fS """^ •£
a "fc
1-1 1
--





_ ; a
0
tj2
^3
-'0
^






1
: •§" '-a

1 1
CO S
a
i


a.
i «
ctf ^*
^H r^
•FN
• ^




a
o
•-B
a
•FK
u

5=«
V W 2
"S s S
III
3*.

II
•S •§
•§ 1 u

3 13-"
£! .SJ



^









ve








VJ






™








fi





-









i— 1 i— t ' ' . ' '
£*. >> .
S S ; • ' ' ' -. '
..- § o -3" o
-^-°H, ®

• ,+j ^ . • . .. . ••
g s a . S
2 ^ G cd ^_ ^H t_i
• 1) O flj M cd o
.O ^ -fcl \f3 > U »-i-. O 'C -
'3 <£ ^ |"'5b g-S.-'^^u- ^
S^ M Q X "^ 2 §* §''§ I**
- ^ 'i)-§ ^ ' i ^ ^ "S-.^ -o :.|


o ^ .§ _&•§ g -| j--"B §..|
, ,|-_|P ^ J "S J J g ,| .g j
fr s > -2- oo 'o o 2 > S S

. .-



en
• •'• S . .-'.•;';
~t~t , - , . - ' .
05 ' '' -'
,-H . ; . , . .





!2
.3 S o
 O • /it - W
-g y G w -g CL
lUllllli




--ivo.osooo\:voo o
1 — ' o o\ o o *r> r^ «o
OOOsOO^ON O\
,-, ,_i o rt j-| CS Ol. CM
O O O O"O O O . O
   S
  si
  o
 '•K

 S
  5t

"•'I-
 S
I
 IP

-------
I
 a
.s







1X1
jchnique Violation
H
^i»
tA
Q)
1

rtj .H
Failure to have a state-approv
listed qualified operator runn
plant
en
rr\
AllCWSsandNTNCW!
which add a chemical
disinfectant




t . :•



x— N
^^
O
CO
T-H
T— 1
1—1

1
|g
H
KJ. S

-------
 II
 G tiL.
 [3 ^
 * S


 !1


 I!

i^
 ^ d

 < -S
 P-l M
 W u
 « £
 4a o
 S ->-•.
 tS g'-

 g^
 O csj
II-

 a5^
.5 .-*"*


 I's

 *" ^i
 u cdl

'^S-tt
 60 o
.9 S1
 O »H

^§ "^

"8 S
t±_, co -


  1

 53 2



SI
 n
 
s S ^
w> oj *S
JK> C5 ^
W o ^
U P«

A +*
•° n
j> 1 1
22 g o
•B£ u
?s "^
H S3






SO




:








_







r^





^*)













r— 1 - TT-(
§ CN 2 ^
I'§ 1§
i-» . '
on . o



'!_

^ 'cf
S S




©3
CO CO
1— I r— t
COO COO
j '••• • -
PH
bO ,

'£
3
I
^



o
°- :. - ' ' :
O :

CM
. - ,.' ' ';. ' -• •
: "
1^^ 1"^.' :•- "
§,O § 0
J-i CM i-t CM
Failure to collect and report at least 90
percent of samples (taken at same time
and location as total coliform samples),
failure to monitor using the EPA-
approved monitoring & analytical
methods and certified labs, and/or failure
to report within 10 days after the end of
the applicable reporting period.



t"\ --.:"
3 '
to aj
g .S
^ ra
^ o
•<'"S - '-.••.-



^

?S '??
s s . •



1 — 1 • " ,. '
o
co ...'.:.-
i— t "
i~ i
coo

w
o
.3 . - •

§ '•-"'-•••
i -"-"•'• . •'•"-• •-••-•
o
• -


\o
o. . ' '- ••-.".
O . ' .
T-H . .

CM



."' ' "

Collecting and reporting between 90 .- 99
percent, or '':'...
Failure to monitor using the EPA-
approved monitoring & analytical
methods and certified labs, and report
between 90% and 99% of all required

. • •













results and information within 10 days
after the end of the applicable reporting
period, for the applicable contaminant.










ll

















' . -


























-"•••' ' " ' --•-

                                                                            0\
                                                                            I

                                                                            I
                                                                            IP

-------








Ui
a
0
I
WD

•H
^
o
t
«
Pf4
1

f
1
i
o
^



















o
o
— i
ca .2 ca
•^3 a *5
u



Violation


o
"S -a
S u
2 ts

W ^
P
§
-*•*
14
a
_o

at ^


C
o
2
U

•g | 1
Sl I
So ^ '3
P$ o .S
CJ w

§^
33 «"
« .3
jf 1 •§
M 1 CJ

^
p IB
CO CS



*""



vo




in







"*




f>




M






^







i— t t—H
fill
i^? cN i^? cN

f* K n1^
Failure to collect and report 100% of
required samples: I/month/plant on
routine monitoring or I/plant/quarter <
reduced monitoring (system must reve
to routine if running annual ave. source
water bromide s 0.05mg/L)
Si
<8
« «
rt 0
o '•»
8-3
s>i
1 S
co a
a .2

-K o
CO i3
•-' 'S
 CO i— > CN

^3 / 	 s
Failure to collect and report a? least 9
percent of samples (taken at same time
and location as total coliform samples

 CN
OS
ON
Collecting and reporting between 90 -
percent:


>,
-2 -2 S
-g "o en _C gf
t>o t*-< S ^ *£2
f^ f3 o o Q
'co co
CO ^,

4> ^^
f^ .
^-S-3
f 
-------
,0-C^
4J3
  6-S













I Reporting Violations
TS
03
&»•
cj
|-
1
jP
• ^





•



















• -'. u .•
- S
pj ™ fl>
S ^H
hH o .
u






§
.- •*•(
is

System Size and Type
Affected
c
•° V
K
"o H
5?


J3
. O
C
e«
^3 •
: U


•a ! 1
"11
t*S L^
5 *^

'*S s ^^
PH o ^
O- W

§ 1
"•S 2
.2 .§
1 1 3

S ^^
ft "§••
f/i 3



t-










V)


TT







fv
















-<





'-l - .
- . ** . ' • y - • . • • ' . • • ' .- -
; &."._ g. . / '--"' .'••',:••• -: -
§ o ' § o - • -
>— > C^ 1— i CS) . - '
- . ; '• Ov- • -.. : •
O ^ PH ^
't? c3 3 "w ° - • •-' -
 g o. .
. P3 t^j Or
•tS •" g g '• • 8'. ' . '
lilt 1 '
,-0 «w -B -g- , M ' - . .
•B • ° .S -«-« • O
g -S^ .8 .'•g c , .
' JH 8 J-S «• - o
's S o ^ ^ «
fi< a 5 £ , Up,
Ijlilflilll
||| l|| Iflll .
^H ^2 **"!• ^~» Cy u ^ ^> **T* O w •
^L, J.3 ^J y2 nj }-H W CO CO LH W »~H


. o ..> o ,
W -jj> M _g
^H <5 i^^ .• ••..-:.. . . • •
i — < - - . . - - - -
^^ '"•'"'
O^ ' - ~

^H - T— t

3. O 3 O •"'.:••
*2 ^^ " S ^^
1^? CS t-? CN|
' a ' '"
''•-•' ! • 'PI 5
^ CD °J
to • ^> P § P-i
« :| | "E "^ - :
ill 1 1
.l||i||
O to ^S .w 'g g
111 111
All Subpart H systems that
use conventional filtration
- Systems can remain on
reduced monitoring as long
as annual average treated
TOC does not exceed 2.0
mg/L


, " J-l '
^ 'H1
"S ^ -


/*-N
'"H . - • •
^•^
S-
f^l
m
»— i • .
i— t •' - - ••
COO
eV • ; -••'
'§
P •
U
^-1 • .
. PH
. P " - .
CQ
Q -. :. ' ."'



0 •; . ' • ;

Os
CJ

ts
                                                                              5
                                                                              I
                                                                              •^,
                                                                              SH
                                                                              I
                                                                              I'

-------
.1

3











•
wa H
I Reporting Violation
ig at least 10,000 peo
^-* M

Monitoring ,
Jubpart H ser
vrj







•
tN
O
0
tN

3
1
^5
1 ..'
•*<. W3
« 4J

Failure to collect and repo
90 percent of required san
Routine = 4/quarter/plant
Reduced = 1 /quarter/plant








o
a x
B &

Collecting and reporting b
- 99 percent of required sa

Subpart H serving at least
10,000 people
- Systems on reduced must
revert to routine if annual
average exceeds 0.060
mg/L for TTHM or 0.045
mg/LHAA5


g'l


tN
CO
r-t
eoo


P^ fid





U
vo o
^? n\
Q CJ
r- r~
tN tN

















GA J— ! .
1 Reporting Violation
ng 500 to 9,999 peop
•a 5
ft £
Monitoring \
Subpart H se










i^>
o
fN
&•'••'

1
"fc? +-* C^-
-i 1 "^ »
« J bj>g | "E

. §^ § +_. ^ g -^ S
s-SliJ, 'f-g.
"2 a.~e J S t: -s
a.^s^jj a&
$8*! S3 ««•
|«g-J-|-|. |o
Jfi4! II
2 a S 8 B •§ S
3 -« '5 3 g ^ ft
^3 P< 3 T3 ^ « Ch
ci o P ^ SH ' O os
"PL, CT! Pi Pd 0 U i

1 It, 3:
o -a a vo o
n-> « -a o ^
M s 5a o °
Ifiiiii
t &H § 2 ^ ^2 §
-OT-S"'0? § 1 g3 S


it ii


tN

l— t
coo
11
*o o
>n >o

-------
.1
















••£
Reporting Violations
ng at least 10*000 peop
1 1
.WO s*
gjjp?
43'
I8'
if
5






~ ' • "•''••':'
1 1 '-.' :'•' .
.*.
w 0
^ . OJ li
"i i*^ Jj 1
flj W" SH *& *H-

H .§;-§J 1
tCU "t-»


u S
u o -- ^ a-
Iliil
'S.o Q <4 2-
PH Ch (2^ Pi S
O
er\
1 J
£ t
u g
-0 g
S?-d
C fl^
'-P 2
. ^ '3
ft CF<
ST 
-S > 0 S S o ft -
£3 K *^!j - ^ C j^ -+->
S f 1 till
Ground water serving fewer
than 10,000 people
- If any sample exceeds
0.060 mg/L for TTHM or
0.045 mg/L HAAS system
must increase to quarterly
monitoring

p^-2,
$ 5
r^t &


CS
en
T 	 1
T— |
T 	 1 . .
li
VO 0 '.".--.
in >n
CM ts
CM CM
                                                                                                      I
                                                                                                      8"

                                                                                                     I-

                                                                                                     I

                                                                                                     .1
                                                                                                     '
                                                                                                      §•-
                                                                                                     I

-------
H-B.   SNC Definitions for the Stage 1DBPR

Significant noncompliers (SNCs) are community, non-transient non-community and transient non-
community water systems that have more serious,, frequent, or persistent violations.  The criteria which
designate a system as a SNC vary by contaminant.  Once a system is designated as a SNC, it is subject to
EPA's timely and appropriate policy. SNCs that have not returned to compliance or are not addressed
timely and appropriately are called Exceptions.  Timeliness for SNCs is eight months after the system
became a SNC. (Two months for the state to determine, and become aware of, the system's SNC status
and six months in which to complete the follow-up/enforcement action). The types'of actions considered
appropriate include the issuance of a formal state or federal administrative or compliance order, a civil or
criminal referral to state Attorney General or Department of Justice, or state bilateral compliance agreement
signed by both the state and the violator..

The following are SNC definitions for the Stage 1 DBPR. The requirements of the Stage 1 DBPR prescribe
different monitoring frequencies depending on the constituent (e.g.  chlorine, TTHM/HAA5, TOC),  The
following definition categorizes SNC based on the frequency of monitoring.  In many cases, a system will be
monitoring at multiple frequencies (i.e.  monthly sampling for TOC and chlorine, quarterly for TTHM and
HAAS). To determine if a system is a SNC, the violations for like monitoring  frequencies are added
together.  For example, System A received a MRDL violation for chlorine (monthly monitoring), one
treatment technique violations for DBF precursors (monthly monitoring), and two major M/R violations for
failing to collect all monthly TOC monitoring.  System A has triggered the quarterly SNC definition.        '


MONTHLY for more frequent) MONITORING
 (excluding chlorine dioxide)

•      A system that has a combination of four (4) or more MCL or MRDL violations in any 12
       consecutive months.                                           .

•      A system that has a combination of six (6) or more MCL or MRDL violations and Major M/R
       violations in any 12 consecutive months.            _

•      A system that has a combination of ten (10) or more MCL or MRDL violations, Major M/R
       violations, and Minor M/R violations in any 12 consecutive months.

QUARTERLY MONITORING

•      A system that has a combination of two (2) or more MCL violations, MRDL violations, TT   .
       violations, and Major M/R violations in any 12 consecutive months.

•      A system that has a combination of three (3) or more MCL violations, MRDL violations, TT
       violations, Major M/R violations, and Minor M/R violations in  any 12 consecutive month.

YEARLY OR LESS MONITORING

•      A system which fails to collect and report all required sample(s).

Note: A system which has one (1) MCL violation in any compliance cycle converts to quarterly monitoring
(§141.133(b)(l)(ii)). Please refer to SNC definition for systems monitoring quarterly.
June 2001                                    11-14          Stage 1 DBPR Implementation Guidance

-------
CHLORINE DIOXIDE:

•       A system that has four (4) non-acute chlorine dioxide violations in any 12 consecutive months.

•       A system that has one (1) acute chlorine dioxide MRDL violation in any 12 .consecutive months.

TTHM      ,••/.;   -"  \*. -•" '..:''  -':. .-.<•,'  .--  ..  ;  ..:.:."..'/:  ..".•.""-.:    ...  .    '-:

•       Failure to obtain state approval before making any significant modification to its existing treatment
        process (§141.30(i)).                                                  '
Stage 1DBPR Implementation Guidance       :    11-15       ,                             June 2001

-------
                                 This page is left intentionally blank.
June 2001           '                          11-16           Stage 1DBPR Implementation Guidance

-------
Section III.
State Primacy ^Revision
Applications

-------
                                  This page is left intentionally blank.
June 2001                                      III-2      ,      Stage 1DBPR Implementation Guidance

-------
 Changes to the Primacy Revision Process

 40 CFR 142.sets out requirements for states to obtain and/or retain primary enforcement responsibility
 (primacy) for the Public Water System Supervision (PWSS) program as authorized by §1413 of the Safe/
 Drinking Water Act (SDWA). The 1996 SDWA Amendments create an additional requirement .and modify
 the process for states to obtain and/or retain primacy. On April 28, 1998, EPA promulgated the Primacy
 Rule to reflect these statutory Changes (63 FR 23361).                     ,

 For consistency with the Amendments to §1413, the Primacy Rule makes the following changes to the
 existing regulations in 40 CFR 142:

 1)     Administrative Penalty Authority—As a condition of primacy, states must now have
       administrative penalty authority for all violations of their approved primacy program, unless
       prohibited by the states' constitution.This encompasses applicable requirements in 40 CFR  141 and
        142 including, but not limited to, National Primary Drinking Water Regulations, variances and
       exemptions, if applicable, and public notification requirements.

 2)     Interim Primacy—The Primacy Rule also codifies the new processi which grants primary
       enforcement authority to states while their applications to modify their primacy programs are under
       review (interim primacy). New section 142.12(e) explains that any state already having primacy for
       all existing national primary drinking water regulations in effect when a new regulation is
       promulgated is considered to have interim primacy for a new or revised regulation, once it has
       submitted a complete and final primacy revision application. This interim enforcement authority
       begins on the date of submission of a complete and final primacy revision application or the
       effective date of the new or revised state regulation, whichever is later, and ends when EPA makes
      , a final determination.

 3)     Time increases for rule adoptions—The rule also increases the time for a state to adopt new or
       revised federal regulations from 18 months to 2 years.

 4)     Examples of emergencies—Finally, the Primacy Rule adds examples of circumstances that require
       an emergency plan for me provision of safe drinking water.  Emergencies include earthquakes,
       floods, hurricanes, and other natural disasters.

 For consistency with the Amendments to § 1401(4), the  Primacy Rule expands the definition of a public
 water system (PWS) to include not only systems which provide water for human consumption through  :
 pipes, but also systems which provide water for human consumption through "other constructed
 conveyances."
ni-A.  State Primacy Program Revision

Pursuant to § 142.12, Revision of State Programs, complete and final requests for approval of program
revisions to adopt new or revised EPA regulations must be submitted to the Administrator no later than 2
years after promulgation of the new or revised federal regulations (see Table HI-1). Until those 'applications
are approved, EPA Regions have responsibility for directly implementing the IESWTR and the Stage 1
DBPR. The state and EPA can agree to implement the rule together during this period. However, if a state
is eligible for interim primacy, once it submits a complete and final revision package, it will have full
implementation and enforcement authority. A state may be granted additional time, up to two years, to
submit its application package. During this period, an extension agreement outlining the state's and EPA's
responsibilities is required.
Stage 1 DBPR Implementation Guidance           III-3                                    June 2001

-------
           Table m-1: State Rule Implementation and Revision Timetable
EPA/State Action
Rules published by EPA ,
State and Region establish a process and agree upon a schedule for application
review and approval
State, at its option, submits draft program revision package including:
Preliminary Approval Request
Draft state Regulations and/or Statutes
Regulation Crosswalk
Regional (and Headquarters if necessary) review of draft
State submits final program revision package including: •
Adopted state Regulations
Regulation Crosswalk
40 CFR 142.10 Primacy Update Checklist
40 CFR 1 42. 1 4 and 1 42. 1 5 Reporting and Recordkeeping
40 CFR 142.16 Special Primacy Requirements
Attorney General's Enforceability Certification
EPA final review and determination:
Regional review (program and ORC)
Headquarters concurrence and waivers (OGWDW, OECA, OGC)
Public Notice
Opportunity for hearing
EPA's Determination '. . .
Rule Effective Date
Time Frame
December 16, 1998
May 1999
September 1999
(Suggested)
Completed within 90 days
of state submittal of Draft
By September 16, 2000*
Completed within 90 days
of state submittal of final
45 days Region
45 days Headquarters
Systems serving > 10,000
people January 1, 2002
Systems serving < 10,000
people January 1, 2004
* EPA suggests submitting an application by September 2000, to ensure timely approval. EPA regulations allow
until December 16,2000 for this submittal. An extension of up to 2 additional years may be requested by the state.
June 2001
' HI-4
Stage 1DBPR Implementation Guidance

-------
 III-A.l  The Revision Process

 The approval of state program revisions is recommended to be a two-step process comprised of submission
 of a draft request (optional) and then submission of a complete and final request for program approval.
 Figure HI-1 diagrams these processes and their timing.                                 ,

 Draft Request—At the state's option, it may submit a draft request for EPA review and tentative
 determination. The request should contain drafts of all required primacy application materials. A draft
 request should be submitted by 9 months after rule promulgation. EPA will make a tentative determination
 on whether the state program meets the applicable requirements. The tentative determination should be
, made within 90 days.                                                             .   .

 Complete and Final Request—This submission must be in accordance with §142.12(c)(l) and (2) and
 include the Attorney General's statement. If the state has submitted a draft request for EPA review, the
 state must address  any comments and/or program deficiencies identified in the tentative determination in
_ their final submission. Regions should make states aware that submission of only a final request may make it
 more difficult for the states to address any necessary changes within the allowable time for state rule
 adoption.                       .;•-••

 EPA requests that states submit their complete and final revision package within 21 months of rule
 promulgation. This will ensure that states will have interim primacy within 24 months and will prevent states
 from becoming backlogged with revision applicationsto adopt future federalrequirements.

 The state and Region should agree to a plan and timetable  for submitting the state primacy revision
 application as soon as possible after rule promulgation—ideally within 5 months of promulgation.
Stage 1DBPR Implementation Guidance    *        III-5                               ,      June 2001

-------
    Figure IDL-1: Recommended Review Process for State Request for Approval of
                                       Program Revisions
                                                                           'imeline
                                                                            Start
                                          EPA Promulgates
                                            Stage 1 DBPR
                                        Establish Process and
                                        Tentative Schedule for
                                         State Rule Approval
                                         State Submits Draft
                                          Primacy Revision
                                         Application to EPA
              Request for
               Extension
               §142.12(b)
   EPA Review and
Tentative Determination
   (within 90 days)
                                           State Submits
                                         Complete and Final
                                          Primacy Revision
                                         Application to EPA
                                           §142.12(d)(2)(i)
EPA Review arid
 Determination
(within 90 days)
 §142,12(d)(3)
                      December 16,1898 •
                             May 1999 •^•1 5 Months Later
                        September 1999 •^ll 9 Months Later
                        September 2000 ^l 21 Months Later
                                                                           -
                        December 2000 •«• 24 Months Later
June 2002
        HI-6
                    Stage 1 DBPR Implementation Guidance

-------
 ni-A.2  The Final Review Process

 Once a state application is complete and final, EPA has a regulatory (and statutory) deadline of 90 days to
 review arid approve or disapprove of the revised program. The Offices of Ground Water, and Drinking
 Water (OGWDW) and Enforcement and Compliance Assurance (OECA) will conduct detailed reviews of
 the first state package from each Region, The Region should submit their comments with the state's
 package for Headquarter's review. When the Region has identified all significant issues^ OGWDW and
 OECA will waive concurrence on all other state programs in that Region, although HQ will retain the option
 to review .additional state programs with cause. The Office of General Counsel (OGC) has delegated its
 review and approval to the Office of Regional Counsel (ORC).

 In order to meet the 90 day deadline for packages undergoing Headquarters' review, the review period will
 be equally split giving both the Regions and Headquarters 45 days to conduct their respective reviews. For
 the first package in each Region, Regions should forward copies of the primacy revision applications and
 their comments to the director of the Drinking Water Protection Division (DWPD) in OGWDW. The
 DWPD Director will take the lead on the review process. OGWDW will provide OECA with a copy for
 their concurrent review. OECA will concur on OGWDW approvals.


 III-B.  State Primacy Program Revision Extensions (40 CFR

          142.12(b))
III-B.l  The Extension Process

Under §142.12(b), states may request that the 2-year deadline for submitting the complete and final request
for EPA approval of program revisions be extended for up to 2 additional years in certain circumstances.
The extension request must be submitted to EPA within 2 years of the date that EPA published the
regulation. The Regional Administrator has been delegated authority to approve .extension applications.
Headquarters concurrence on extensions is not required.


III-B.2  Criteria that an Extension Request Must Meet

For an extension to be granted under §  142.12 (b), the state must demonstrate that it is requesting the
extension because it cannot meet the original deadline for reasons beyond its control^ despite a good faith
.effort to do so. A critical part of the extension application is the state's proposed schedule for submission of
its complete and final request for approval of a revised primacy program. The application must also  .  ,
demonstrate at least one of the following:

(i)     That the state currently lacks the legislative or regulatory authority to enforce thejaew or revised
       requirements; or,                        • "'.-.;•  .         •.  •

(ii)    That the state currently lacks the program capabilityAdequate to implement the new or revised
       requirements; or,                           :                            ,

(iii)    That the state is requesting the extension to group two or more program revisions in a single
       legislative or regulatory action.                         ;

In addition, the state must be implementing the EPA requirements to be adopted in its program revision
within the scope of its current authority and capabilities.           '•:-•


Stage 1DBPR Implementation Guidance           III-7                                    June 200.1

-------
 III-B.3  Conditions of the Extension

 If an extension is granted, the Region and state will negotiate certain conditions that must be met during the
 extension period. These conditions will be determined during the extension approval process and, are decided
 on a case-by-case basis. The conditions must be included in an extension agreement between the state and
 the EPA Regional office.  Appendix B contains a sample extension agreement

 Conditions of an extension agreement may include:

        •       Informing PWSs  of the new EPA (and Upcoming state) requirements and that the Region
                will be overseeing implementation of the requirements until they approve the state program
                revisions or until the state submits a complete and final revision package if the state
                qualifies for interim primacy;

        •       Collecting, storing and managing laboratory results, public notices, and other compliance
                and operation data required by the EPA regulations;

        •       Assisting the Region in the development of the technical aspects of enforcement actions and
                conducting informal follow-up on violations (telephone calls, letters, etc.);

        •    .   Providing technical assistance to public water systems;

        •       For states whose request for an extension is based on a current lack of program capability
                adequate to implement the new requirements, taking steps agreed to by the Region and the
                state during the extension period to  remedy the deficiency;

        •       Providing the Region with all the information required under § 142.15 on state reporting.

 Figure HI-2 provides a checklist the Region can use to review state extensions.
June 2001                                      III-8           Stage 1 D&PR Implementation Guidance

-------
                          Figure HI-2: Extension Request Checklist
   I. Reason for State Request                                                          ,

              	   Clustering of Program Revisions
              	Statutory Barrier
              __   Regulatory Barrier
              	   Lack of Program Capability                               .
                             '-     Insufficient Resources
                            __    Funding Level                 •
       •                     	Staffing
                            	    Lack of Adequately Trained Staff
       .'•'-'•         ,      	    Inadequate Procedures, Guidelines, and Policies
              	   Other	           •'  .      •-•'.

   II. Actions Taken by the State to Justify an Extension
                            -                           .                Schedule Dates
                                                                        (or attachments)
              	.  Seeking Increases in Program Resources	•-   .
              	   Training Existing Personnel/Revising Training Programs   	   •
              ,	   Revising State Regulations or Statutes              '.  '       	
              __   Developing Revised/New Procedures, Guidelines, Policies
                    Other
   III. Extension Decision
              	;    Extension Request Approved                   Date: __/__/__

                           	.   Period of Extension Request:   /  7       to

              __    Extension Request Denied             .-.'-'  Date: __/__/_            •     -.

                  :-••.       	   Reason Cited:.	             •	

   IV* Conditions of the Extension

      During the extension period the state will (check all that apply):
              ^    Inform public water systems of the new requirements and the fact that EPA will be
                    overseeing their implementation until the state's program is approved or submitted if state
                   _ qualifies for interim primacy
              	    Collect and store laboratory results and other compliance data
               •     Provide technical assistance to public water systems
              ^	    Provide EPA with the information required under section 142.15 of the primacy rule
   '•'  .    . .      •   Other              V  '  '•'-'''-  '.   :       '        -•-'.',-'"•   ''''.••'•-
.Stage 1DBPR Implementation Guidance            III-9        ,                .               June 2001

-------
 HI-C.  State Primacy Package
 The primacy revision application package should consist of the following sections:
 III-C.l  Section I—The State Primacy Revision Checklist (40 CFR 142.10)

 This section is a checklist of general primacy requirements, taken from 40 CFR 142.10, as shown in Table
 ]U-2. In completing this checklist, the state must identify the program elements that it has revised in
 response to new federal requirements. If an element has been revised the.state should indicate a "Yes"
 answer in the second column next to the list of program elements and should submit appropriate
 documentation. For elements that need not be revised, the state need only list the citation and date of
 adoption in the second column. During the application review process, EPA will insert findings and
 comments in the third column.

                     Table HI-2: State Primacy Revision Checklist
Required Program Elements
§142.10
§142.10(a)
§142.10(b)(l)
§142.10(b)(2)
§142.10(b)(3)
§142.10(b)(4)
§142.10(b)(5)
§142.10(b)(6)(i)
§142.10(b)(6)(ii)
§142.10(b)(6)(iii)
§142.10(b)(6)(iv)
§142.10(b)(6)(v)
§142.10(b)(6)(vi)
§142.10(b)(6)(vii)
§142.10(c)
§142.10(d)
§142.10(e)
§142.10(f)
Primary Enforcement
- Definition of Public Water System*
Regulations No Less Stringent
Maintain Inventory
Sanitary Survey Program
Laboratory Certification Program
Laboratory Capability
Plan Review Program
Authority to apply regulations
Authority to sue in courts of competent
jurisdiction
Right of Entry
Authority to require records
Authority to require public notification
Authority to assess civil and criminal
penalties
Authority to require CWSs to provide CCRs
Maintenance of Records
Variance/Exemption Conditions (if
applicable)**
Emergency Plans
Administrative Penalty Authority*
Revision to
State Program


















EPA
Findings/Comments


















   New requirement from the 1996 Amendments. Regulations published in the April 28,1998 Federal Register.
** New regulations published in the August 14,1998 Federal Register.
June 2001
III-10
Stage 1DBPR Implementation Guidance

-------
 'The 1996 SDWA Amendments include new provisions for PWS definition and administrative penalty
 authority. States must adopt provisions at least as stringent as these new provisions, now codified at CFR
 142.2 and 142.10. Failure to revise primacy for these new provisions can affect primacy for the Stage 1
 DBPR. However, states may still receive primacy for the Stage 1 DBPR even if they have not yet revised
 their base program to comply with the new statutory requirements provided that the time to adopt these
 requirements (including the extension period if applicable) has not expired (April 2000 and April 2002 with
 extension).                                      -  '

 Rule Bundling—States may bundle the new PWS definition, administrative penalty authority, variance and
 exemption requirements or any other drinking water regulation with the Stage 1 DBPR primacy revision
 packages so long as the submittal date (two years plus two year extension) has not lapsed. If states choose
 to bundle these requirements, the state needs to include the text of the state regulation/statute. The Attorney
 General statement should reference these new requirements.


 III-C.2 Section H—Text of the State's Regulation (40 CFR 142.11)

 Each primacy application package must include the text of the state regulation.


 III-C.3 Section III—-Primacy Revision Crosswalk

 The Primacy Revision Crosswalk, found in Appendix A, should be completed by states in order to identify
 state statutory or regulatory provisions that correspond to each federal requirement. If the state's provisions
 differ from federal requirements, the state should explain how its requirements are "no less  stringent."


 III-C.4 Section IV—State Reporting and Recordkeeping Checklists (40 CFR
          142.14 and 142.15)

 This section addresses state reporting and recordkeeping requirements. The state should use these checklists
 to explain how state reporting and recordkeeping requirements are consistent wifli federal requirements. If
 state requirements are inconsistent with federal requirements, the state must explain how its requirements
 are "no less stringent"' as per §142.10. The checklist for the  Stage 1 DBPR is presented in Table m-3.

     Table HI-3: Reporting and Recordkeeping Checklist for the Stage 1 DBPR
                           Requirement
Are state policies consistent
with federal requirements?
   If not, please explain.
 Each state that has primary enforcement responsibility must keep records of
 currently applicable or most recent state determinations including all
 supporting information and an explanation of the technical basis for each
 decision made under 40 CFR 141 subpartLforthe control of disinfectants
 and disinfection byproducts; records must also include interim measures
 toward installation.
 Each state that has primary enforcement responsibility must keep records of
 systems that are installing GAC or membrane technology in accordance with
 §141.64(b)(2); records must include date by which the system is required to
 have completed installation.
Stage 1 DBPR Implementation Guidance       •   III-ll                               , .    June 2001

-------
Requirement
Each state that has primary enforcement responsibility must keep records of
systems that are required by the state to meet alternative minimum TOC
removal requirements or for whom the state has determined that the source
water is not amenable to enhanced coagulation ^accordance with
§141.135(b)(3) and (4); records must include the alternative limits and the
rationale for establishing alternative limits.
Each state that has primary enforcement responsibility must keep records of
Subpart H systems using conventional treatment meeting any of the
alternative compliance criteria in §141. 135(a)(2) or (3).
Each state that has primary enforcement responsibility must keep a register
of qualified operators that have met the state requirements developed under
§142.16(0(2).
Each state that has primary enforcement responsibility must keep records of
systems with multiple wells considered to be 1 treatment plant in
accordance with §14 1.132(a)(2) and § 142. 16(f)(5).
Each state that has primary enforcement responsibility must keep
monitoring plans for Subpart H systems serving more than 3,300 people in
accordance with §141. 132(f).
Each state that has primary enforcement responsibility must keep a list of
laboratories approved for analyses in accordance with §141. 13 l(b).
Each state mat has primary enforcement responsibility must keep a list of
systems required to monitor for disinfectants and disinfection byproducts in
accordance with 141 subpart L; list must indicate what disinfectants and
DBFs other than chlorine, TTHM, and HAAS, if any, are measured.
Are state policies consistent
with federal requirements?
If not, please explain.



. . • •



III-C.5  Section V—Special Primacy Requirements (40 CFR 142.16)

See section D. This section provides guidance on how states may choose to meet each special primacy
requirement.
m-C.6  Section VI-
          142.11)
-Attorney General's Statement of Enforceability (40 CFR
The complete and final primacy revision application must include an Attorney General statement certifying
that the state regulations were duly adopted and are enforceable. The Attorney General statement should
also certify that the state does not have any audit privilege or immunity laws, or if it has such laws, that
these laws do not prevent the state from meeting the requirements of the Safe Drinking Water Act. If a state
has submitted this certification with a previous revision package, then the state should indicate the date of
submittal and the Attorney General need only certify that the status of the audit laws has not changed since
the prior submittal. An example of an Attorney General statement is presented in Figure HI-3.
June 2001
                    111-12
Stage 1DBPR Implementation Guidance

-------
                  Figure Hl-3: Example of Attorney General Statement
  Model Language                                               .   '  ..'                        :

  I hereby certify, pursuant to my authority as (1) and in accordance with the Safe Drinking Water Act as
  amended, and (2), that in my opinion the laws of the [state / commonwealth of(3)1 [or tribal ordinances of(4)1
  to carry out the program set forth in the "Program Description" submitted by the (5) have been duly adopted and
  are enforceable. The specific authorities provided are contained in statutes or regulations that are lawfully
  adopted at the time this Statement is approved and signed, and will be fully effective by the time the program is .'
  approved.

  Guidance For States on Audit Privilege and/or Immunity Laws

  In order for EPA to properly evaluate the state's request for approval, the state Attorney General or independent
  legal counsel should certify that the state's environmental audit immunity and/or privilege and immunity law
  does'not affect its ability to meet enforcement and information gathering requirements under the Safe Drinking
  Water Act. This certification should be reasonably consistent with the wording of the state audit laws and
  should demonstrate how state program approval criteria are satisfied

  EPA will apply the criteria outlined  in its "Statement of Principles" memo issued on 2/14/97 (See Appendix C)
  in determining whether states with audit laws have retained adequate enforcement authority for any authorized
  federal programs. The principles articulated in the guidance are based on the requirements of federal law,
  specifically the enforcement and compliance and state program approval provisions of environmental statutes
  and their corresponding regulations. The Principles provide that if provisions of state law are ambiguous, it will
  be important to obtain opinions from the state Attorney General or independent legal counsel interpreting the
  law as meeting specific federal requirements. If the law cannot be so interpreted, changes to state laws may be
  necessary to obtain federal program  approval. Before submitting a package for approval, states with audit
  privilege and/or immunity laws should initiate communications with appropriate EPA Regional Offices to
  identify and discuss the issues raised by the state's audit privilege and/or immunity law.
 Model Language

 I.   For States with No Audit Privilege and/or Immunity Laws

 Furthermore, I certify that [state / commonwealth of(3)1 has not enacted any environmental audit privilege
 and/or immunity laws.                                                                .


 n.   For States with Audit Laws that do Not Apply to the State Agency Administering the Safe Drinking
      Water Act

 Furthermore, I certify that the environmental [audit privilege and/or immunity law] of the [state/
 commonwealth of £3}] does not affect £3} ability to meet enforcement and information gathering requirements
 under the Safe Drinking Water Act because the [audit privilege and/or immunity law] does not apply to the
 program set forth in the "Program Description." The Safe Drinking Water Act program set forth in the
 "Program Description" is administered by (5}; the [audit privilege and/or "immunity law] .does not affect
 programs implemented by (5), thus the program set forth in the "Program Description" is unaffected by the
 provisions of [state / commonwealth of C3)] [audit privilege and/or immunity law].
Stage 1DBPR Implementation Guidance           HI-13                        .              June 2001

-------
  ffl. For States with Audit Privilege and/or Immunity Laws that Worked with EPA to Satisfy
      Requirements for Federally Authorized, Delegated or Approved Environmental Programs

  Furthermore, I certify that the environmental [audit privilege and/or immunity Jaw] of the [state /
  commonwealth offfll does not affect £3} ability to meet enforcement and information gathering requirements
  under the Safe Drinking Water Act because [state / commonwealth of £3)] has enacted statutory revisions and/or
  issued a clarifying Attorney General's statement to satisfy requirements for federally authorized, delegated or
  approved environmental programs.                                             '
  Seal of Office
       Signature
       Name and Title
       Date
  (1) State Attorney General or attorney for the primacy agency if it has independent legal counsel
  (2) 40 CFR 142.1 l(a)(6)(i) for initial primacy applications or 142.12(c)(l)(iii) for primacy program revision
     applications..

  (3) Name of state or commonwealth

  (4) Name of tribe

  (5) Name of primacy agency
June 2001
m-14
                                                              Stage 1 DBPR Implementation Guidance

-------
 ni-D.   Guidance for Special Primacy Requirements

 This section contains guidance states can use when addressing the special primacy requirements of 40 CFR
 142.16. It specifically addresses the specialprimacy conditions added for implementation of the Stage 1  ,
 Disinfectants/Disinfection Byproducts Rule (Stage 1 DBPR). The guidance in Section HI-D.l addresses
 special primacy conditions in the same order that they occur in the rule. Guidance for provisions not
 included as special primacy requirements may be found in section III-D.2;

 States should note that, in several sections, the guidance makes suggestions and offers alternatives that go
 beyond the minimum requirements indicated by reading the subsections of §142.16, EPA does this to
 provide states with information arid/or suggestions that may be helpful to states' implementation efforts.
 Such suggestions are prefaced by "may" or "should" and are to be considered advisory. They are not
 required elements of states'applications for program revision.
                    •   •'.'       '   -*         -   "         "                   : '  •       -

 III-D.l   Special Primacy Requirements—Stage 1 DBPR

 §142.16 Special primacy requirements (h)(l): Section 141.64(b)(2) of this chapter (interim treatment
 requirements). Determine any interim treatment requirements for those systems electing to install GAC or
 membrane filtration and granted additional time to comply with §14L 64 of this chapter.

 Guidance

 Under §141.64(b)(2) of the Stage 1 Disinfectants and Disinfection Byproducts Rule, a system that is
 installing GAC or membrane technology to comply with the MCLs for disinfection byproducts may apply to
 the state for an extension of up to 24 months (but not beyond December 31, 2003) for compliance with
 MCLs. This provision only applies to subpart H systems1 that serve 10,000 or more people, since all other
 affected systems have up to 60 months to  comply.

 States which grant MCL extensions will need to establish an  extension conditions for the requesting system.
 While states are only required to address how they will determine interim treatment requirements to satisfy
 the special primacy condition, guidance is also provided below on a range of possible  extension conditions
 for the state's reference.                                              ;

 Interim measures

 EPA believes that it is important for states to consider each system's potential for achieving meaningful  ,
 overall risk reduction through reasonable interim treatment requirements. In their applications for program
 revision, states must explain how they will determine interim treatment requirements they may choose to
 mandate. ,

 In making these determinations, states may wish to;

        •       Examine monitoring data            ,

        •       Examine current treatment practices

        •       Examine current plant inrrastructure              '
       ^he rule defines subpart H systems as systems that use surface water or ground water under the direct
influence of surface water as a source.                                •  -

Stage 1 DBPR Implementation Guidance          HI-15             .                      June 2001

-------
 Some possible treatment measures that states may wish to consider, (if appropriate) include the following:

        •      Moving the point of disinfectant application.

        •      Treatment changes designed for better disinfection byproduct precursor removal.

        •      Changing of primary and/or secondary disinfectants.

        •      Adjusting disinfection dose based on temperature and/or pH.

        •      Changing pH to reduce DBP formation.

        •      Implementation of a main flushing program in areas with high detention times and/or
               biofilm problems.

 EPA strongly recommends states evaluate all potential interim treatment requirements in terms of their
 impact on not only disinfection byproduct formation, but also microbial protection, corrosion control, and
 other public health issues.  Additional guidance and case studies are presented in the "Microbial and
 Disinfection Byproduct Rules Simultaneous Compliance Guidance Manual," USEPA, August 1999, (EPA-
 815-R-99-015) and is available at EPA web site: www.epa.gov/safewater/mdbp/implement.html.

 Qualifying for an extension

 Section 141.64(b)(2) allows a system that is installing GAG or membrane technology, to comply with the
 DBP MCLs, to apply to the state for an extension for compliance of up to two years. The rule sets no
 criteria for this extension. However, states may wish to establish criteria such as the following for systems
 to qualify for an extension:

        •      Demonstrate, through monitoring data, a need for an extension to comply with Stage 1
               DBP MCLs.

        •      Show that the scope and/or complexity of the capital improvements warrant the length of
               the extension. (i.e. Extensions would be granted for only the period necessary to install the
               required capital improvements;

 Section 141.64 (b)(2) was intended to facilitate compliance through a reduction in DBP precursors. An
 additional aspect of that intent was to allow utilities to move beyond the Stage 1 Disinfectants and
 Disinfection Byproducts Rule (DBPR),MCLs to Stage 2 targets. The Federal Advisory Committee
 Agreement in Principle, signed in September 2000, recommended that compliance with Stage 2 DBPR
 TTHM and HAAS MCLs be determined based on a Locational Running Annual Average (LRAA) - a
 running annual average must be calculated at each sample location.

 Extension  conditions

 Extension conditions for systems must require:                           ,

        •      Compliance schedules with milestones (including construction-based milestones). Failure to
               meet the schedule or interim treatment requirements is a violation of a National Primary
               Drinking Water Regulation.
June 2001                                     HI-16     :     Stage 1 DBPR Implementation Guidance

-------
Other extension conditions may include:

    ..--••••     Timely progress reports following each milestone date.

        •.      Compliance with interim measures For public health protection as determined by the state.
               .*          .  .    '    '  '   -   - •        , "  • '    '    •   ' '    ' '   --- •          '' :-  •
        •       Notice of the extension in the annual Consumer Confidence Report.

        •       Reporting in the annual Consumer Confidence Report of the monitoring results for the
               contaminant for which the extension was granted.     :

        •       Adherence to Public Notice requirements if the MCL for which the extension was granted
               is exceeded.                                                        ,

        •       A consideration for publishing a "Notice of Availability" of a public hearing or requiring the
               PWStodoso,

References for more detailed guidance                       .

1.  Microbial and Disinfection Byproduct Rules Simultaneous Compliance Guidance Manual, USEPA,
,   August 1999 (EPA 815-R-99-015).                   .      ,                    ''"-
        Available from:
               www.epa.gov/safewater/mdbp/implement.html; and
               Safe Drinking Water Hotline: 1-800-426-4791

2.  Alternative Disinfectants and Oxidants Guidance Manual, USEPA,  April 1999 (EPA 815-JR.-99-014).
        Available from:
               www.epa.gov/safewater/mdbp/implement.htail; and
               Safe Drinking Water Hotline: 1-800-426-4791

3.  Chldramination for THM Control: Principles and Practices, American Water Works Association Seminar
   Proceedings, 1984 Annual Conference.                               .
        Available from:                                                                '„,'.''
   - .;  • ;       AWWA   ..   :-'."..• /,      '           .        :,             :       .       ..  :
               6666 West Quincy Avenue
               Denver, CO 80235
               Phone: 1-800-926-7337
Stage 1DBPR Implementation Guidance          ni-17                                    June: 2001

-------
 §142.16 Special primacy requirements. (h)(2): Section 141.130(c) of this chapter (qualification of
 operators). Qualify operators of public water systems subject to 40 CFR part 141, subpart L.
 Qualification requirements established for operators of systems subject to 40 CFR part 141, subpart
 H—Filtration and Disinfection may be used in whole or in part to establish operator qualification
 requirements for meeting 40 CFR part 141, if the state determines that the subpart H requirements are
 appropriate and applicable for meeting subpart L requirements.                         •

 Guidance

 Section 141.130(c) requires that each community water system (CWS) and nontransient noncommunity
 water system (NTNCWS) regulated under the Stage 1 DBPR be operated by qualified personnel.  Since the
 Stage 1 DBPR also regulates TNCWSs using chlorine dioxide, states should also consider requiring qualified
 operators in this system category as well.

 States are given the discretion to determine  the standards for operator qualifications. Under.40 CFR Part
 141, Subpart H—Filtration and Disinfection, states were required to qualify operators of systems as a
 condition for primacy for systems covered under the SWTR. The new Stage 1 DBPR allows states to
 continue to use these procedures to qualify operators if the state determines that these requirements are
 appropriate and applicable to the set of systems covered by the Stage 1 DBPR.

 The guidance for the SWTR operator personnel qualifications recommends that plant operators have a basic
 knowledge of science, mathematics, and chemistry involved with water treatment and supply. In this case,
 the state primacy application should contain a description of the SWTR procedure, how it will cover all
 affected PWSs, and the rationale for determining that the procedure is appropriate and applicable.

 Additionally, under section 1419 of the SDWA, EPA was required to develop guidelines for the certification
 and re-certification of operators of community and nontransient noncommunity water systems. In
 consultation with states, final guidelines were developed and published in the Federal Register on February
 5, 1999. States are required to adopt and implement an operator certification program which meets EPA's
 guidelines in order to avoid a withholding from their state revolving fund. Each state operation certification
 program must include, as a minimum, the essential elements of 9 baseline standards. These include:
 authorization; classification of systems, facilities, and operators; operator qualifications; enforcement;
 certification renewal; resources needed to implement the program; re-certification; stakeholder involvement;
 and program review. State operator certification programs that follow these guidelines will also be deemed to
 meet this special primacy requirement.

 The state can also identify alternate programs they will use to qualify operators.  In general,  operator
 certification programs should consider indicators of public health risks,  such as the complexity, size, and
 source water for treatment facilities, and the  complexity and size of distribution systems when classifying
 and setting standards for system types and sizes.

 Operators should have an understanding of the following areas:

        •      The principles of water treatment and distribution and their characteristics.

        •      The uses of potable water and variations in its demand.

        •      The importance of water quality to public health.                        ' •;  .

        •      The equipment, operation, and maintenance Of the distribution system.
        •      The treatment process equipment used, its operational  parameters,  and maintenance.
        •      The principles of each unit.                                            .      ,

        •      Performance criteria to determine operational adjustment.


June 2001                                     Hi-is           Stage 1 DBPR Implementation Guidance

-------
        »       Common operating problems.
        •       Current regulations and monitoring requirements.
        •       Methods of sample collection and sample preservation.
        •  .     Laboratory equipment and tests used to analyze samples.
        •       Use of laboratory results to analyxe plant efficiency.
        •       Recordkeeping.
        •       Customer relations.                      •
        •       Budgeting and supervision.

 References for more detailed guidance
 1. Guidance Manual for Compliance With the Filtration and Disinfection Requirements for Public Water
   Systems Using Surface Water Sources, American Water Works Asspciation, 1990
        Available from:                                                  • •     ''  .
     ,   -       AWWA                  '-. :    ';  .  :   -               .';  .
                6666 West Quincy Avenue              /
               Denver, CO 80235
 2. Guidelines for the Certification and Recertification of the Operators of Community and Nontransient
   Noncommunity Public Water Systems, February 5, 1999 (64 FR 5915).
   Available from:                                          .               .
               http://www.epa.gov/safewater/opcert/opcerta.htm: and
               Safe Drinking Water Hotline: 1-800-426-4791
Stage. 1DBPR Implementation Guidance          111-19                                    June 2001

-------
 §142.16 Special primacy requirements. (h)(3): Section 141.131(c)(2) of this chapter (DPD colorimetric
 test kits). Approve DPD colorimetric test kits for free and total chlorine measurements, state approval
 granted under §141.74(a)(2) of this chapter for the use of DPD colorimetric test kits for free chlorine
 testing is acceptable for the use of DPD test kits in measuring free chlorine'residualsas  required in 40
 CFR part 141, subpartL.

 Guidance

 Section 141.131(c)(2) of the Stage 1 DBPR offers states the discretion to allow systems to use DPD
 colorimetric test kits for measuring residual levels for chlorine, chloramines, and chlorine dioxide. The
 residual measurements may then be used for compliance determinations in regard to CT requirements and
 maximum residual disinfectant levels (MRDLs). EPA recommends that states address the issue directly in
 their rules. They may wish to do this by simply adding DPD colorimetric test kits as one of the approved
 methods for disinfectant residual compliance monitoring or by clearly stating such kits are not approved for
 this purpose. When DPD test kits are approved, the state may need to establish procedures that systems
 must follow for making dilutions of water samples that contain chlorine concentrations that are greater than
 the range of the colorimetric test kit.

 To meet the terms of this special primacy condition, states need only explain how the issue is addressed in
 their rules or other authorities, cite the relevant sections, and include copies of those rules or authority in
 their primacy revision applications.
June 2001                                     ni-20          Stage 1 DBPR Implementation Guidance

-------
 142.16 Special primacy requirements. (h)(4): Sections 141.131 (c) (3) and (d) of this chapter (state
 approval of parties to conduct analyses). Approve parties to conduct pH, bromide, alkalinity, and
 residual disinfectant concentration measurements. The state's process for approving parties performing
 water quality measurements for systems subject to 40 CFR part 141, subpart H requirements in
 paragraph (b)(2)(i)(D) of this section maybe used for approving parties measuring water quality
 parameters for systems subject to subpart L requirements, if the state determines the process is
 appropriate and applicable.

 Guidance

 Sections 141 J3i(c)(3) and (d) of the Stage  1 DBPR require systems to have analyses for disinfectant
 residuals, pH, bromide, alkalinity, UVA and TOG conducted by parties approved by the state or EPA. The
 approved parties could include, but would not be limited to, EPA- or state-certified laboratories, m addition,
 the technical corrections (66 FR 3770) requires daily chloride samples at the entrance to the distribution
 system to also be measured by a party approved by;EPA or the state. It is suggested that the state's process
 for approval of parties cover daily chloride sampling as well. To meet this special primacy requirement,
 states must describe how they will approve parties to conduct these measurements. The process described
 by the state  should ensure that the measurements are reliable and accurate. To achieve this, the tests should
 be conducted by personnel who have adequate training and experience and who are properly equipped.
 Therefore, the primacy revision application should describe the criteria the state will consider, including
 minimum prerequisite training and laboratory facilities, when granting approvals to parties for conducting the
 analyses.                          .

 States may wish to limit their approvals to certain levels (or classes) of certified operators that have been
 provided with proper training. For some on-site measurements such as disinfectant residuals, states may
 determine that it is appropriate for parties to conduct the measurements if they are under the direct
 supervision of a certified operator.

 States were required  to develop processes and procedures for approving parties conducting measurements
 under the SWTR. As mentioned above, if states determine it to be appropriate and applicable, they may use
 those same processes and procedures to fulfill this special primacy requirement.
Stage 1DBPRImplementation Guidance           111-21                                     June2001

-------
142.16 Special primacy requirements. (h)(5): Section 141.132(a)(2) of this chapter (multiple wells as a
single source). Define the criteria to use to determine if multiple wells are being drawn from a single
aquifer and therefore be considered a single source for compliance with monitoring requirements.

Guidance

Section 142.132(a)(2) of the Stage 1 DBPR gives states the discretion to allow PWSs to reduce TTHM and
HAAS monitoring and associated costs by considering multiple wells drawing water from the same aquifer
as one treatment plant for determining the minimum number of TTHM and HAA5 samples required.  This
provision is applicable when there are multiple treatment plants applying the same disinfectant to multiple
wells completed in the same aquifer. To qualify for the!ability to make this discretionary reduction, states
must establish criteria under this special primacy requirement. The criteria adopted by states should be
designed to ensure that each well is indeed drawing from the identified aquifer. In addition, the finished
water quality characteristics of all wells should be very similar. Thus,'the water from the wells should be
expected to react alike in terms, of formation of disinfection byproducts.

In general,  EPA recommends that states require PWSs that are seeking a reduction in monitoring under
§141.132(a)(2) to submit an evaluation or study performed by a professional competent in the field of
hydrogeology such as a geologist, hydrogeologist, or professional engineer.2 The evaluation required by the
state should, with reasonable certainty, show all wells are completed in, and drawing water from, the  same
aquifer and that the water quality characteristics/chemistry of each well are enough alike to conclude
disinfection byproduct formation would be very similar.

Some of the criteria states may consider for making these determinations include the following:

Well construction and geology                                            .

        •       Well locations—the locations of all wells should be marked on topographic maps.

               Well depths.

        •       Well logs—the logs should show the geological strata encountered during well construction,
               identify water producing zones,  screened or slotted sections, and grouting.

        •       Static water levels based upon a common elevation point.

        •       Aquifer studies and maps.

        •       Treatment applied.  -      .

Water characteristics and chemistry

               pH (field).

        •       Temperature (field).

        •       Specific conductivity.                                              ,
        2 Often relevant information can be obtained from the USGS, state geological surveys, or state bureaus of
mines and geology.

June 2001                                     111-22           Stage 1 DBPR Implementation Guidance

-------
        •       Total organic carbon (TOC).

        •       Analyses of common ions with a calculated cation/anion balance(calcium, magnesium,
                iron, manganese, sodium, sulfate, alkalinity, chloride).

 In many cases there.may be reports, maps, or studies available from state or federal agencies that will be
 helpful in making the determinations.
Stage 1DBPR Implementation Guidance           111-23                                     June 2001

-------
 142.16 Special primacy requirements. (h)(6): Approve alternate minimum TOC removal (Step 2)
 requirements, as allowed under the provisions of 141.135(b) of this chapter.      ..

 Guidance

 Subpart H systems that use conventional filtration treatment are required to operate with enhanced
 coagulation or enhanced softening to achieve mandatory levels of total organic carbon (TOC) removal
 unless the system meets one or more of the "alternative  compliance criteria" listed in §141.135(a)(2) or
 (a)(3) of the Stage 1 DBPR. This requirement of §141.135 is designed to provide a level of protection for
 unknown and/or unregulated disinfection byproducts.

 Systems which cannot achieve the Step 1 minimum TOC removal requirements as presented in the table
 found in §141.135(b)(2) due to water quality parameters or operational constraints must apply to the state
 for approval of alternative minimum TOC removal (Step 2) requirements. The applications systems make to
 the state for approval of Step 2 minimum TOC removal requirements must include, as a minimum, results
 of bench- or pilot-scale testing conducted pursuant to §141.135(b)(4)(i) of the Stage 1 DBPR. Guidance for
 systems conducting this testing and for states in determining how and under what conditions to approve Step
 2 TOC removal requirements, is found in the Guidance Manual for Enhanced Coagulation and Enhanced
 Softening, USEPA, 1999.

 In states' applications for primacy revision, adequate information must be provided to ensure that approvals
 for alternative minimum TOC removals (Step 2) will meet the requirements of 14L135(b). The state should
 describe the process they will use to determine appropriate Step 2 removal requirements.

 References for more detailed guidance

 1. Enhanced Coagulation and Enhanced Precipitative Softening Guidance Manual, USEPA, May 1999
   (EPA 815-R-99-012).
        Available from:
               www.epa.gov/safewater/mdbp/implementhtml; and
               Safe Drinking Water Hotline: 1-800-426-4791                     ,
June 2001                                    JII-24          Stage 1DBPR Implementation Guidance

-------
 III-D.2  Other Requirements in tlie Stage 1 DBPR

 §141.132 (f) Monitoring plans: Each system required to monitor under this subpart must develop and
 implement a monitoring plan, The system must maintain the plan and make it available for inspection by
 the state and the general public no later than 30 days following the applicable compliance dates in
 §141.130(b). All Subpart H systems serving more than 3300 people must submit a copy of the monitoring
 plan to the state no later than the date of the first report required under §141.134s. The state may also
 require the plan to be submitted by any other system. After review, the state may require changes in any
 plan elements. The plan must include the, following elements:

        1.      Specific locations and schedules for collecting santples for any parameters included in
                this subpart.

        2.      How the system will calculate compliance withMCLs, MRDLs, and treatment techniques.

        3.      Ifapproved for monitoring as a consecutive system, or ifproviding water to d
                consecutive system, under the provisions of §141.29, the sampling plan must reflect the
                entire distribution system.

 Guidance

 Section 141.132(f) requires each system  to develop and implement a monitoring plan for monitoring that
 must be performed pursuant to subpart L. Systems must make the plan available for review by the state and
 public no later than 30 days following the applicable compliance dates (see §l4l.l30(b)). Surface water
 systems (including GWTJDI) serving more than 3,300 people must submit a copy of their monitoring plan
 with their first monitoring report required under subpart L. States may require other systems to submit
 copies as well.

 The monitoring requirements of the Stage 1 DBPR can be complex; therefore, monitoring plans should be
 helpful to systems in terms of ensuring compliance. Although there is no special primacy condition related to
 monitoring plans, EPA believes that limited guidance may be helpful to states.

 EPA suggests that states consider developing a procedure for PWSs to follow when preparing the required
 monitoring plans. The procedure should ensure that systems prepare all plans iri a format that is useful to
 both the systems and the state. Some items states may wish to consider as suggestions (or requirements) for
 systems to .include in their monitoring plans are the following:

    • •  A cover page that identifies the public water system and includes relevant information such as-—  -
             System name
             PWSID Number        :                                 '
             Address                                          .  ,
             Contact person ;and phone number
             System type (community,  nontransient noncommunity, transient noncommunity)
             Population served
             Source water information (number and type)
             Entry points (tied to source(s))
             Treatment provided (tied to sources" and entry points)

        A summary of the subpart L monitoring that will be required of the system, including monitoring
        for—     '     -          .         .  '/.'.-'    . '   .   -  ',-.. -      •     ,      .     ..  .. '.. "
        •     Disinfection byproducts
        3 §141.134 of the Stage 1 DBPR addresses the reporting and recordkeeping requirements of public water
systems. In general, reports are required to be submitted to the state within 10 days after the end of the monitoring
period.     '           .     ••'',-...•    '.     .  '    ,        : '   •'        V             .".-;;•

Stage1 DBPR Implementation Guidance           111-25                    :                 June 2001

-------
        •    Disinfectants
        •    Disinfection byproduct precursors

    •   Schematic drawings of all treatment facilities, including—
        •    Source(s)
        •    Identification of treatment type and purpose
        •    Identification of chemicals applied and points of application
        •    Each unit process of each treatment train (with flow rates)
        •    Sampling points identified and numbered (e.g. T-l, T-2)                                 :

    •   A schematic drawing of the distribution system (and consecutive systems), including—
        •    Sources
        •    Entry points
        •    Treatment facilities
        •    Storage facilities
        •   ( Sampling points identified and numbered (e.g. D-l, D-2)

    •   A summary of typical system operating characteristics (on a seasonal basis if necessary) explaining
        how sources are used to meet system demands, where extended residence times4 are expected to
        occur, etc.

    •   A schedule for collecting all required samples including frequency and times for collection, sample
        site identification number, sample handling/preservation requirements, and analysis plan for each
        sample (on site analysis, certified laboratory). The schedule should address both regular monitoring
        and reduced monitoring frequencies  (if allowed by the state).

    •   The plan should also distinguish between compliance samples and those taken for process control
        and/or information.

    •   For conventional treatment plants for Subpart H systems, a summary of the system's enhanced
        coagulation/softening requirements.

    •   A plan for calculating compliance with MCLs, MRDLs, and treatment techniques (unless
        compliance is calculated by the state based upon required monitoring reports).

Some states may wish to expand the subpart  L monitoring requirements to include other monitoring
requirements. A single monitoring plan, addressing all of a system's monitoring requirements, may be a
useful tool for both the state and the PWS.

References for more detailed guidance

1. ICR Sampling Manual, USEPA, April 1996 (PB96-157508).
        Available from:
               NTIS
               5285 Port Royal Rd
               Springfield, VA 22161
               Phone: 1-800-553-6847
2. ICR Water Utility Database System Users'Guide, USEPA, April 1996 (PB96-157219).
        Available from:
               NTIS
               5285 Port Royal Rd
               Springfield, VA 22161
               Phone:1-800-553-6847
       4 In some cases states may wish to require modeling to establish locations of high residence time.


June 2001                                     El-26           Stage 1DBPR Implementation Guidance

-------
SectionlV.
Other Resources and
Guidance

-------
                                  This page is left intentionally blank.
June 2001                                       IV-2           Stage 1DBPR ImplementationGuidance

-------
 IV-A.  Technical Information Available on the Stage 1 DBPR

 A series of guidance manuals support the Stage 1 DBPR. The manuals will aid EPA, state agencies, and
 affected PWSs in implementing this rule and will help ensure that implementation among these groups is  ...
 consistent.  Summaries of the manuals and information on how to obtain: them are provided below.. The
 three technical guidance manuals associated with the Stage  1 DBPR are:
           S      Alternative Disinfectants and Oxidants Guidance Manual
           /      M-DBP Simultaneous .Compliance Guidance Manual
           /     Enhanced Coagulation and Enhanced Precipitative Softening Guidance Manual

 Alternative Disinfectants and Oxidants Guidance Manual (EPA 815-R-99-014)

 Objective:    To provide technical data and engineering information on disinfectants and oxidants that are
              not as commonly used as chlorine so that systems can evaluate their options for developing
              disinfection schemes to control water quality problems such as zebra mussels and Asiatic
              clams, and oxidation to control water qualify problems associated with iron and manganese.

 Contents:     The manual discusses six disinfectants and oxidants: ozone, chlorine dioxide, potassium
              permanganate, chloramines, ozone/hydrogen peroxide combinations, and ultraviolet light. A
              decision tree is provided to assist in evaluating which disinfectant,  or disinfectants, is most
              appropriate given certain site-specific conditions (e.g., water quality conditions, existing
              treatment, and operator skill). The manual also contains a summary of existing alternative
 :             disinfectants used in the.LLS. and cost estimates for the use .of alternative disinfectants.

 M-DBP Simultaneous Compliance Guidance Manual (EPA 815-R-99-015)

 Objective:   To assist PWSs on complying simultaneously with various drinking water regulations (e.g.,
              Stage 1 DBPR, IESWTR, Lead and Copper Rule, and the Total Coliform Rule). The
              manual discusses operational problems systems may encounter when implementing these
              rule.                   '                         -•--.••'".

 Contents:    The manual provides detailed information on the requirements in the Stage 1 DBPR and the
              IESWTR,

 Enhanced Coagulation and Enhanced Precipitative Softening Guidance Manual
 (EPA 815-R-99-012)

 Objective:   To assist utilities in implementing, monitoring, and complying with the treatment technique
              requirements in the final Stage  1 DBPR and to provide guidance to state staff responsible for
              implementing the treatment requirements.

 Contents:     The manual provides detailed information on the total organic carbon (TOC) removal
              requirement, explains how to set an alternative TOC removal percentage under the Step 2
              procedure, details monitoring, reporting, and compliance requirements, and discusses
              strategies that can be employed to mitigate the potential secondary effects on plant
              performance due to implementationof the treatment technique.
Stage 1 DBPR Implementation Guidance
IV-3
June 2001

-------
             Links to these manuals can be found at the website:
                    www.epa.gov/safewater/mdbp/implement.html. .

             They are also available free of charge (while supplies last) from:
                 "S"   The National Service for Environmental Publications (NSCEP,
                      formerly NCEPI) at 1.800.490.9198

                 rar   The Office of Water Resource Center at 1.202.260.7786.
IV-B.  Rule Presentation

        A presentation that can be used for workshops for the Stage 1 DBPR is available in Power Point
        format on the Drinking Water Academy web site.
        (http://www.epa.gov/safewater/dwa/electronic/M-DBPmodule.html)
IV-C.  Fact Sheets

The following pages are fact sheets on the rules. They may be useful in conveying information to water
systems, new personnel, and for educating stakeholders about the rules. The fact sheets are included in this,
section are:

               
-------
                   United States
                   Environmental Protection
                   Agency
Office of Water
(4607)
EPA816-F-01-012
June 2001
                   Drinking Water Priority Rulemaking:
                   Microbial and Disinfection Byproduct Rules
Disinfection of drinking water is one .of the major public health advances in the 20th century. One hundred
years ago, typhoid and cholera epidemics were common throughout American cities and disinfection was a
major factor in reducing these epidemics. However, the disinfectants themselves can react with naturally-
occurring materials in the water to form unintended byproducts which may pose health risks.

Over the past ten years, we have also learned that there are specific microbial pathogens, such as
Cryptosporidium, that are highly resistant to traditional disinfection practices. In 1993, Cryptosporidium
caused 400,000 people in Milwaukee to experience intestinal illness. More than 4,000 were hospitalized, and
at least 50 deaths have been attributed to the disease. There have also been cryptosporidiosis outbreaks in
Nevada, Oregon, and Georgia over the past several years.

A major challenge for water suppliers is how to balance the risks from microbial pathogens and disinfection
byproducts. It is  important to provide protection from these microbial pathogens while simultaneously
ensuring decreasing health risks to the population from disinfection byproducts (DBFs). The Safe Drinking
Water Act (SDWA) Amendments, signed by President Clinton in August 1996, required EPA to develop
rules to achieve these goals.

These new rules  are a product of six years of collaboration between the water industry, environmental and
public health groups, and local, state and federal government. This  fact sheet contains general information
about the two new rules and others that are a part of the Microbial-Disinfectants and Disinfection
Byproducts (M-DBP) Rules. Separate fact sheets focus on the Interim Enhanced Surface Water Treatment
Rule (EPA 816-F-01-013) and the Stage 1 Disinfectants and Disinfection Byproducts Rule (EPA 816-F-01-
014).                                                       ,    ...'.

                               Schedule of M-DBP Rules
December 1 6, 1 998 - Final Rule
June 8, 2001 - Final Rule
Summer 2001 - Final Rule
Spring/Summer 2002 - Final Rule
May 2002 -Final Rule .
Interim Enhanced Surface Water Treatment Rule and ,
Stage 1 Disinfectants and Disinfection Byproducts Rule
Filter Backwash Recycling Rule
Long Term 1 Enhanced Surface Water Treatment Rule
Ground Water Rule
Long Term 2 Enhanced Surface Water Treatment Rule and
Stage 2 Disinfectants and Disinfection Byproducts Rule

-------
 PUBLIC HEALTH CONCERNS
Most Americans drink tap water that meets all existing health standards all the time. These new rules will
further strengthen existing drinking water standards and thus increase protection for many water systems.

In 1990, EPA's Science Advisory Board concluded that exposure to microbial contaminants such as
bacteria, viruses, and protozoa (e.g., Giafdia lamblia and Cryptosporidium) was likely the greatest remaining
health risk management challenge for drinking water suppliers.  Acute health effects from exposure to
microbial pathogens is documented and associated illness can range from mild to moderate cases lasting only
a few days to more severe infections that can last several weeks and may result in death for those with
weakened immune systems.

While disinfectants are effective in controlling many microorganisms, they react with natural organic and
inorganic matter in source water and the distribution system to form potentially harmful DBFs. Many of
these DBFs have been shown to cause cancer and reproductive and developmental effects in laboratory
animals. More than 200 million people consume water that has been disinfected. Because of the large
population exposed, health risks associated with DBFs, even if small, need to be taken seriously.
 EXISTING REGULATIONS
               Surface Water Treatment Rule - The Surface Water Treatment Rule, promulgated in 1989,
               applies to all public water systems using surface water sources or ground water sources
               under the direct influence of surface water. It establishes maximum contaminant level goals
               (MCLGs) for viruses, bacteria and Giardia lamblia. It also includes treatment technique
               requirements for filtered and unfiltered systems that are specifically designed to protect
               against the adverse health effects of exposure to these microbial pathogens.

               Total Coliform Rule - The Total Coliform Rule, revised in 1989, applies to all PWSs and
               establishes a maximum contaminant level (MCL) for total cpliforms.

               Total Trihalomethane Rule - In 1979, EPA set an interim MCL for total trihalomethanes of
               0.10 mg/1 as an annual average. This applies to any community water system serving at
               least  10,000 people that adds a disinfectant to the drinking water during any part of the
               treatment process.

               Information Collection Rule - The Information Collection Rule, promulgated in 1996,
               established monitoring and data reporting requirements for large public water systems
               serving at least 100,000 people to support the M-DBP rulemaking process. This rule was
               intended to provide EPA with information on the occurrence in drinking water of microbial
               pathogens and DBFs. In addition, EPA collected engineering data on how PWSs currently
               control such contaminants.
 INTERIM ENHANCED SURFACE WATER TREATMENT
 RULE AND STAGE 1 DISINFECTANTS AND DISINFECTION
 BYPRODUCTS RULE
EPA published the Interim Enhanced Surface Water Treatment Rule and Stage 1 Disinfectants and
Disinfection Byproducts Rule in December 1998. The final rules resulted from formal regulatory
negotiations with a wide range of stakeholders that took place in 1992-93 and 1997.

-------
 Interim Enhanced Surface Water Treatment Rule

 The Interim Enhanced Surface Water Treatment Rule applies to systems using surface water, or ground
 water under the direct influence of surface water, that serve 10,000 or more persons. The rule also includes
 provisions for states to conduct sanitary surveys for surface water systems regardless of system size. The
 rule builds upon the treatment technique requirements of the Surfape Water Treatment Rule with the
 following key additions and modifications:

 •>   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.

 •   Individual filter turbidity monitoring provisions.     ' .

 •   Disinfection profiling and benchmarking provisions.

 •   Systems using ground  water under the direct influence of surface water now subject to the new rules
    , dealing with Cryptosporidium.                  -.'..''•'.

 •  - Inclusion of Cryptosporidium in the watershed control requirements for unfiltered public water systems.

 •   Requirements for covers on new finished water storage facilities. ;

. *   Sanitaiy surveys, conducted by states, for allsurface water systems regardless of size.

 The Interim Enhanced Surface Water Treatment Rule, with tightened turbidity performance criteria and
 required individual filter monitoring, is designed to optimize treatment reliability and to enhance physical
 removal efficiencies to minimize the Cryptosporidium levels in finished water. In addition, the rule includes
 disinfection benchmark provisions to assure continued levels of mierobial protection while facilities take the
 necessary steps to comply with new DBF standards.

 Stage 1 Disinfectants and Disinfection Byproducts Rule

 The final Stage 1 Disinfectants and Disinfection Byproducts Rule applies to community water systems and
 non-transient non-community systems and transient non-community water systems using chlorine dioxide
 MCLs, including those serving fewer than 10,000 people, that add a disinfectant to the drinking water during
 any part of the treatment process.

 The final Stage 1 Disinfectants and Disinfection Byproducts Rule includes the following key provisions:

    Maximum residual disinfectant level goals (MRDLGs) for chlorine (4 mg/L), chloramines (4 mg/L), and
    chlorine dioxide (0.8  mg/L).

    Maximum contaminant level goals (MCLGs) for three trihalomethanes (bromodichloromethane (zero),
    dibromochloromethane (0.06 mg/L), and bromoform (zero)), two haloaeetic acids (dichloroacetic acid  '
    (zero) and trichlorpacetic acid (0.3 mg/L)), bromate (zero), and chlorite (0.8 mg/L).

 •'•  MRDLs for three disinfectants (chlorine (4.0 mg/L), chloramines (4.0 mg/L), and chlorine dioxide (0.8
                                 ''           '                                      "
    MCLs for total trihalomethanes (0.080 mg/L) -a sum -of the three listed above plus chloroform,
    haloaeetic acids (HAA5) (0.060 mg/L)- a sum of me two listed above plus monochloroacetic acid and

-------
    mono- and dibromoacetic acids), and two inorganic disinfection byproducts (chlorite (1.0 mg/L)) and
    bromate (0.010 mg/L)).

•   A treatment technique for removal of DBF precursor material.

The terms MRDLG and MRDL, which are not included in the SDWA, were created during the negotiations
to distinguish disinfectants (because of their beneficial use) from contaminants. The final rule includes
monitoring, reporting, and public notification requirements for these compounds. This final rule also
describes the best available technology (BAT) upon which the MRDLs and MCLs are based,
 FUTURE RULES
Long Term 1 Enhanced Surface Water Treatment Rule

While the Stage 1 Disinfectants and Disinfection Byproducts Rule will apply to systems of all sizes, the
Interim Enhanced Surface Water Treatment Rule only applies to systems serving 10,000 or more people.
The Long Term 1 Enhanced Surface Water Treatment Rule, expected in 2001, will strengthen microbial
controls for small systems (i.e. those systems serving fewer than 10,000 people). The rule will also prevent
significant increase in microbial risk where small systems take steps to implement the Stage 1 Disinfectants
and Disinfection Byproducts Rule.

EPA believes that the rule will generally track the approaches in the Interim Enhanced Surface Water
Treatment Rule for improved turbidity control, including individual filter monitoring and reporting. The rule
will also address disinfection profiling and benchmarking.

Long Term 2 Enhanced Surface Water Treatment Rule and Stage 2 Disinfectants and Disinfection
Byproduct Rule

The SDWA, as amended in 1996, requires EPA to finalize a Stage 2 Disinfectants and Disinfection
Byproducts Rule by May 2002. Although the 1996 Amendments do not require EPA to finalize a Long
Term 2 Enhanced Surface Water Treatment Rule along with the Stage 2 Disinfectants and Disinfection
Byproducts Rule, EPA believes it is important to finalize these rules together to ensure a proper balance
between microbial and DBF risks.

EPA began discussions with stakeholders in December 1998 on the direction for these rules. EPA
anticipates proposed rules in 2001. The intent of the rules is to provide additional public health protection,  if
needed, from DBPs and microbial pathogens.

Ground Water Rule

EPA is finalizing the Ground Water Rule which specifies the appropriate use of disinfection and, just as
importantly, addresses other components of ground water systems to ensure  public health protection. There
are more than 158,000 public ground water systems. Almost 89  million people are served by community
ground water systems, and 20 million people are served by non-community ground water systems.
Ninety-nine percent (157,000) of ground water systems serve fewer than 10,000 people. However, systems
serving more than 10,000 people serve 55 percent (more than 60 million) of all people who get their
drinking water from public ground water systems.

Filter Backwash Recycling Rule

The Filter Backwash Recycling Rule establishes a standard to return all recycle flows to a point  that
incorporates all treatment processes  of the system's existing conventional or direct filtration systems or at an
alternate location approved by the state. The regulation will apply to public water systems that use surface
water or ground water under the direct influence of surface water, practice conventional or direct filtration,

-------
and recycle spent filter backwash, sludge thickener supernatant, or liquids from dewatering processes.  The
rule was promulgated on June 8, 2001.
 ADDITIONAL INFORMATION
EPA encourages public input into regulation development. Public meetings and opportunities for public
comment on M-DBP rules are announced in the Federal Register. EPA's Office of Ground Water and
Drinking Water also provides this information for the M-DBP rules and other programs in its online
Calendar of Events.                                                    •-'-••-.-

For more information, contact EPA's Safe Drinking Water Hotline, 1-800- 426-4791, or see the Office of
Ground Water and Drinking Water web page at http://www.epa.gov/safewater/standards.htmL

-------
This page is left intentionally blank.

-------
                       United States                    Office of Water                   EPA816-F-01-014
                       Environmental Prqtection         ,   (4607)                         June 2001 '
                       Agency                   '.',-''           ,,             •
                       Stage 1  Disinfectants  and Disinfection

                       Byproducts Rule

 In the past 25 years, the Safe Drinking Water Act (SDWA) has been highly effective in protecting public
 health and has also evolved to respond to new and emerging threats to .safe drinking water. Disinfection pf
 drinking water Is one of the major public health advances in the 20th century. One hundred years ago,
 typhoid and cholera epidemics were common through American cities; disinfection was a major factor in
 reducing these epidemics.

 However, the disinfectants themselves can react with naturally-occurring materials in the water to form
 unintended byproducts which may pose health risks. In addition, in-the past 10 years, we have learned that
 there are specific microbial pathogens, such as Cryptosporidium, which can cause illness, and is highly
 resistant to traditional disinfection practices.

 Amendments to the SDWA in 1996 require EPA to develop rules to balance the risks between microbial
 pathogens and disinfection byproducts (DBFs). It is important to strengthen protection against microbial
 contaminants, especially Cryptosporidium, and at the same time, reduce potential health risks of DBFs. The
 Stage 1  Disinfectants and Disinfection Byproducts Rule and Interim Enhanced Surface Water Treatment
 Rule, announced in December 1998, are among the first of a set of rules under the 1996 SDWA
 Amendments. This fact sheet focuses on 'the Stage 1 Disinfectants and Disinfection Byproducts Rule. A
 separate fact sheet focuses on the Interim Enhanced Surface Water Treatment Rule (EPA 816-F-01-013).
  PUBLIC HEALTH CONCERNS
While disinfectants are effective in controlling many microorganisms, they react with natural organic and
inorganic matter in source water and distribution systems to form DBFs. Results from toxicology studies
have shown several DBFs (e.g., bromodichloromethane, bromoform, chloroform, dichloroacetic acid, and
bromate) to.be carcinogenic in laboratory animals. Other DBFs (e.g., chlorite, bromodichloromethane, and
certain haloacetic acids) have also been shown to cause adverse reproductive or developmental effects in
laboratory animals. Several epidemiology studies have suggested a weak association between certain cancers
(e.g., bladder) or reproductive and developmental effects, and exposure to chlorinated surface water. More
than 200 million people consume water that has been disinfected. Because of the large population exposed,
health risks associated with DBFs, even if small, need to be taken seriously.
 WHO MUST COMPLY WITH THE RULE?
The Stage 1 Disinfectants and Disinfection Byproducts Rule applies to all community and nontransient
noncommunity water systems that add a chemical disinfectantin any part of the drinking water treatment
process and transient NCWSs using chlorine dioxide.
 WHAT DOES THE RULE REQUIRE?
The Stage 1 Disinfectants and Disinfection Byproduct Rule updates and supersedes the 1979 regulations for
total trihalomethanes. In addition, it will reduce exposure to three disinfectants and many disinfection
byproducts,                                                                  •••;

-------
The rule establishes maximum residual disinfectant level goals (MRDLGs) and maximum residual
disinfectant levels (MRDLs) for three chemical disinfectants—chlorine, chloramine and chlorine dioxide (see
Table 1). It also establishes maximum contaminant level goals (MCLGs) and maximum contaminant levels
(MCLs) for total trihalomethanes, haloacetic acids, chlorite and bromate (see Table 1).

                                               Table 1
                   MRDLGs, MRDLs, MCLGs and MCLs for Stage 1 Disinfectants
                                  and Disinfection Byproducts Rule
Disinfectant Residual
Chlorine
Chloramine
Chlorine Dioxide
Disinfection Byproducts
Total trihalomethanes (TTHM)1
- Chloroform
- Bromodichloromethane
- Dibromochloromethane
- Bromoform
Haloacetic acids (five) (HAA5)2
- Dichloroacetic acid
- Trichloroacetic acid
Chlorite
Bromate
MRDLG
(mg/L)
4 (as C12)
4(asCl2)
0.8 (as C1O2)
MCLG (»*g/L)
N/A
N/A
zero
0.06
zero
N/A
zero
0.3
0.8
zero
,MRDL(mg/L)
4.0 (as C12)
4.0(asCl2)
0.8 (as C1O2)
MCL'Ong/LK"
0.080
0.060
1.0 ••:-
0.010
- , Compliance
Based On
Annual Average
Annual Average
Daily Samples
C Compliance/
Based On
Annual Average
Annual Average
Monthly Average
Annual Average .
     N/A    Not applicable because there are individual iVTCLGs for TTHMs or HAAs.
     1      Total trihalomethanes is the sum of the concentrations of chloroform, bromodichloromethane,
            dibromochloromethane, and bromoform.
     2      Haloacetic acids (five) is the sum of the concentrations of mono-, di-, and trichloroacetic acids and mono- and
            dibromoacetic acids.

Water systems that use surface  water or ground water under the direct influence of surface water and use
conventional filtration treatment are required to remove specified percentages of organic materials, measured
as total organic carbon (TOC), that may react with disinfectants to form DBFs (See Table 2). Removal will
be achieved through a treatment technique (enhanced coagulation or enhanced softening) unless a system
meets alternative criteria.

-------
           '.:     '..:'   -  .   '-  •-  ,..     -.;.-  : Table'2  .   1       ;          ;   • v: •..    y  -    ; '•.
 Required Removal of Total Organic Carbon by Enhanced Coagulation and Enhanced Softening for
                        Subpart H Systems Using Conventional Treatment1
Source Water TOC
(mg/L)
>2.0-4.0
>4.0-8.0
>8.0
Source Water Alkalinity (mg/L as CaCO3)
0-60
*^ ''35.0%, *
"/, ^45.®% ' r;t*
^ ? -Ss- s- *
~, * - 50.9% / «| < '<
>60-120
< ^l ,25,0%
/ ^35.0%- w.; J>'
•> rj , ^
' -^fft.0% <.,
>1202
' . nkdfo ' -{"'
x
•-25.0%" - "J,
»• - ' josVo
 1 -Systems meeting at least one Of the alternative compliance criteria in the rale are not required to meet the removals in this table.
 2-Systems practicing softening must meet the TOC removal requirements in the last column to the right
  WHAT ARE THE COMPLIANCE DEADLINES?
Surface water systems and systems using ground water under the direct influence of surface water serving
10,000 or more people are required to comply with the Stage 1 Disinfectants and Disinfection Byproducts
Rule by January 1, 2002.  All ground water systems and systems using surface water or ground water under
the direct influence of surface water serving less than 10,000 people must comply with the:Stage 1
Disinfectants and Disinfection Byproducts Rule by January 1, 2004.
 WHAT ARE THE COSTS AND BENEFITS OF THE,
 RULE?
EPA estimates that implementation of the Stage 1 Disinfectants and Disinfection Byproducts Rule will result
in:         •    '         '••:--.-'"   -•-•.-,•-•'.••''-'.:'-

1-  As many as 140 million people receiving increased protection from DBFs.

2-  24 percent national average reduction in TTHM levels.

3-  Reduction in exposure to the major DBFs from use of ozone (bromate) and chlorine dioxide (chlorite).

The total annual cost of the rule is about $700 million. EPA believes that the benefits exceed the costs of the
Stage 1 Disinfectants and Disinfection Byproducts Rule. An estimated 115 million households are affected
by the Stage 1  Disinfectants and Disinfection Byproducts Rule. EPA estimates that 95 percent of the
households will incur additional costs of less than $ 1 per month on their water bills. An additional four
percent will pay between $1 and $10 per month more, and one percent are expected to incur increased
water bills of $10 to $33  per month, if they choose to install treatment. However, many of these systems
may chose less costly non-treatment options, such as consolidation. The majority of households incurring
the highest costs are small systems serving less than 10,000 people that have never been regulated for
DBFs.  ' '    :           ;'" -    •.'".'.    • "•- :    "  '":.'•  -  '-": .'-.-•"   --../ •'.'-•.-•-.-•   •'   -

-------
  WHAT TECHNICAL INFORMATION WILL BE AVAILABLE
  ONTHERULE?
A series of guidance manuals have been developed to support the Stage 1 Disinfectants and Disinfection
Byproducts Rule. The manuals will aid EPA, state agencies and affected public water systems in
implementing the Stage 1 DBPR. The guidance manual are available on EPA's website at
www.epa.gov/safewater/mdbp/iniplement.html.

Guidance Manual for Enhanced Coagulation and Enhanced Precipitative Softening
Objective: To assist utilities in implementing, monitoring, and complying with the treatment technique
requirements in the final Stage 1 Disinfectants and Disinfection Byproducts Rule and to provide guidance to
state staff responsible for implementing the treatment requirements.
Contents: The manual provides detailed information on the total organic carbon (TOC) removal
requirement; explains how to set an alternative TOC removal percentage under the Step 2 procedure; details
monitoring, reporting, and compliance requirements; and discusses strategies that can be employed to
mitigate the  potential secondary effects on plant performance due to implementation of the treatment
technique.


Alternative Disinfectants and Oxidants Guidance Manual
Objective: To provide technical data and engineering information on disinfectants and oxidants that are not
as commonly used as chlorine, so that systems can evaluate their options for developing disinfection
schemes to control water quality problems  such as zebra mussels and Asiatic clams, and oxidation to control
water quality problems associated with iron and manganese.                               :
Contents: The manual discusses six disinfectants and oxidants: ozone,  chlorine dioxide, potassium
permanganate, chloramines, ozone/hydrogen peroxide combinations, and ultraviolet light. A decision tree is
provided to assist in evaluating which disinfectant(s) is most appropriate given certain site-specific conditions
(e.g., water quality conditions, existing treatment and operator skill). The manual also contains a summary
of existing alternative disinfectants use in the United States and cost estimates for the use of alternative
disinfectants.                      .                        ,


M/DBP Simultaneous Compliance Manual
Objective: To assist public water systems on complying simultaneously with various drinking water
regulations (e.g., Stage 1 Disinfectants and Disinfection Byproducts Rule, Interim Enhanced Surface Water
Treatment Rule, Lead and Copper Rule and the Total Coliform Rule). The manual discusses operational
problems systems may encounter when implementing these rules.
Contents: The manual provides  detailed information on the requirements in the Stage 1 Disinfectants and
Disinfection Byproducts Rule and the Interim Enhanced Surface Water Treatment Rule .and issues involved
with simultaneously complying with other rules.


For more information, contact EPA's Safe Drinking Water Hotline, 1.800.426.4791, or see the Office of
Ground Water and Drinking Water web page at http://www.epa.gov/safewater/stahdards.html.

-------
vvEPA
                         United States
                         Environmental Protection
                         Agency
                              Office of Water
                              (4606)
EPA816-F-01-010
May 2001
viTvw.epa.gov/safevvater
Stage 1  Disinfectants  and Disinfection
Byproducts  Rule:
A  Quick Reference  Guide
                          Title
                          Purpose
                          General
                          Description
                          Utilities
                          Covered
              Stage 1 Disinfectants and Disinfection Byproducts Rule (Stage 1 DBPR)
              63 FR 69390 - 69476, December 16,1998, Vol. 63, No. 241

              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
              66FR3770, January 16, 2001, Vol 66, No. 29     - ;
              Improve public health protection by reducing exposure to disinfection byproducts. Some
              disinfectants and disinfection byproducts (DBPs) have been shown to cause cancer and
              reproductive effects in lab animals and suggested bladder cancer and reproductive effects in
              humans.
              The Stage 1 DBPR is the first of a staged set of rules that will reduce the allowable levels of
              DBPs in drinking water. The new rule establishes seven new standards and a treatment
              technique of enhanced coagulation or enhanced softening to further reduce DBP exposure. The
              rule is designed to limit capital investments and avoid major shifts in disinfection technologies
              until additional information is available on the occurrence and health effects of DBPs.
              The Stage 1 DBPR applies to all sizes of community water systems and nontransient
              noricommunity water systems that add a disinfectant to the drinking water during any part of the
              treatment process and transient noncommunity water systems that use chlorine dioxide.
                         Implementation of the
                         Stage 1 DBPR will
                         result in ...
                         Estimated impacts of
                         the Stage 1 DBPR
                         include...
                      As many as 140 million people receiving increased protection from DBPs.

                      24 percent average reduction nationally in trihalomethane levels.

                      Reduction in exposure to the major DBPs from use of ozone (DBP = bromate) and
                      chlorine dioxide (DBP = chlorite).
                      National capital costs:  $2.3 billion
                      National total annualized costs to utilities:  $684 million

                      95 percent of households will incur an increase of less than $1 per month.
                      4 percent of households will incur an increase of $1-10 per month.
                      <1 percent of households will incur an increase of $10-33 per month.
                                                                         :'\  ^    '
                          ^.,^:t,*&t&rt™^f **••••* <-,^,-<-l<-V'*'-r,^,-ff'i-tt^,!.!M	,J.ji^,i^;r,'i,\aii 1   -,.   -".
                         January 1,2002
                         January 1, 2004
                            Surface water systems and ground water systems under the direct
                            influence of surface water serving > 10,000 people must comply with the
                            Stage 1 DBPR requirements.
                            Surface water systems and ground water systems under the direct
                            influence of surface water serving < 10,000, and all ground water systems
                            must comply with the Stage 1 DBPR requirements.
                         For .States
                         December 16, 2000
                         December 16, 2002
                            States submit Stage 1 DBPR primacy revision applications to EPA
                            (triggers interim primacy).
                            Primacy extension deadline - all states with an extension must submit
                            primacy revision applications to EPA.               '

-------
  For additional information
  on the Stage 1 DBPR

  Call the Safe Drinking Water
  Hotline at 1-800-426-4791;
  visit the EPA web site at
  www.epa.gov/safewater; or
  contact your State drinking
. water representative.

  Additional material is
  available at www.epa.gov/
  safewater/mdbp/
- implementhtml.

jSps^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
  Regulated
  Contaminants
                                                      Regulated
                                                      Disinfectants
  Total Trihalomethanes (TTHM)
     Chloroform
     Bromodicriloromethane
     Dibromochloromethane
     Bromoform
  Five Haloacetic Acids (HAAS)
     Monochloroacetic acid
     Dichloroacetic acid
     Trichloroacetic acid
     Brornoacetic acid
     Dibromoacetic acid
                                                      Chlorine dioxide
                                                        Stage 1 DBPR includes maximum residual
                                                       disinfectant levels (MRDLs) and maximum
                                                       residual disinfectant level goals (MRDLGs)
                                                       which are similar to MCLs and MCLGs, but for
                                                       disinfectants.
Bromate (plants that use ozone)
Chlorite (plants that use chlorine
dioxide)
 Treatment Technique
 Enhanced coagulation/enhanced softening to improve removal of DBP precursors (See Step 1 TOC Table) for
 systems using conventional filtration treatment.
   Source Water
    TOC (mg/L)
> 2.0 to 4.0
> 4.0 to 8.0
>8.0
                            Source Water Alkalinity, mg/L as CaCQ,
                            0-60
                           35.0%
                           45,0%
                           SO.0%
                                             > 60-120
                                           , ,.23.0%
                                             35.0%
                                            "40.0%
                                                                  >120
                                                                 30.0%
1 Systems meeting at least one of the alternative compliance criteria in the rule are not required to meet the
 removals in this table.
'Systems practicing softening must meat the TOC removal requirements in the last column to the right
TTHM/HAA5
Bromate
Chlorite
Chlorine dioxide
Chlorine/Chloramines
DBP precursors
                            Coverage
                     Surface and ground water
                     under the direct influence of
                     surface Water serving S 10,000
                     Surface and ground water
                     under the direct influence of
                     surface water serving 500 -
                     9,999
                     Surface and ground water
                     under the direct influence of
                     surface water serving < 500
                     Ground water serving & 10,000
                     Ground water serving < 10,000
                     Ozone plants
                     Chlorine dioxide plants
                     Chlorine dioxide plants
                    All systems
                   Conventional filtration
                                                    Monitoring
                                                     Frequency
                                                4/plant/quarter
                                               1/plant/quarter
                                               1/plant/year in month of
                                               warmest water temperature*1
                                               1/plant/quarter
                                               1/plant/year in month of
                                               warmest water temperature*
                                               Monthly
                                               Daily at entrance to
                                               distribution system; monthly
                                               in distribution system
                                               Daily at entrance to
                                               distribution system
Same location and frequency
as TCR sampling
Monthly for total organic
carbon arid alkalinity
                              Compliance
                          Running annual average
                          Running annual average
                          Running annual average
                          of increased monitoring
                          Running annual average
                          Running annual average
                          of increased monitoring
                          Running annual average
                          Daily/follow-up monitoring
                          Daily/follow-up monitoi
                                                                           Running annual ayeragi
                                                                         Running annual average
1 System must increase monitoring to 1 sample per plant per quarter if an MCL is exceeded.

-------
IV-D.  Frequently Asked Questions

•''.-;•"'  .•'..'-•                    TABLEOF CONTENTS    ".'".  V.'...".  , • , '.'•'•-  ,   -
1.0 Stage 1 Disinfectants/Disinfection Byproducts Rule  . . ....... ........ . . . ... ...... . . . . ..... '- 19
1.1    Disinfectants ................... .',.v. ..................... ...	 19
       1.1.1   Chlorine and CUoramines ... ... .	 . .	 19
       1.1.2   Chlorine Dioxide	  .	  . ........... 20
1.2    Disinfection Byproducts ............. . ;	. . . . ;	 . . . . 21
       1.2.1   TTHM and HAA5 . . . . . . .  . . ......	. . .... . .... ..'.'.'.  . .  .... ... ..... . . 21
       1.2.2   Bromate ............. .... . . . . . . . . . .... . .... . .....  ... . . , .......... 26
       1.2.3   Chlorite .  ... . . . . ...	 . . . .	. . . ... . . . ... .  .'.'.. .	... ... 27
1.3    Disinfection Byproduct Precursors	     28
1.4    Monitoring ...... ... .... . . . . .  . . .....	 . , . . . .  . ............ ... 33
       1.4.1   General Monitoring Issues .  . . . . .	  .	 33
       1.4.2   Monitoring Plans .	 . ... .... ....	 34
       1.4.3   Multiple Wells Drawing from a Single Aquifer	 . . .	35
       1.4.4   Reporting and Recordkeeping	 . . ........ 35
       1.4.5   Consecutive Systems . . . '.	 . . ............. 36
2.0 General Program Requirements . . . ....;.. ... . ... . . ... . . ....	 36
       2.1     Primacy .	 36
       2.2     Violations,  ,SDWIS Reporting and SNC Definitions  . . . ... .... ... ... ......... .37
       2.3     Qualified Operators	.^	 37

-------
                                 This page is left intentionally blank.
June 2001                                    TV-18          Stage 1DBPR Implementation Guidance

-------
 1.0  Stage 1 Disinfectants/Disinfection Byproducts Rule

 1.1  Disinfectants

     1.1*1     Chlorine and Chloramines

         For further information, see the following mle sections:
Citation
§141.32(e)(76), (77)
§141.201
§141.54
§141.65
§141.131(c)(l), (2), (3)
§141.132(c)(l)(i), (ii), (iii)
§141.133(c)(l)(i), (ii)
§141.134(0)
PartTitle
Public Notification
Public Notification of Drinking Water Violations
Maximum Residual Disinfectant Level Goals
Maximum Residual Disinfectant Levels
Analytical Requirements
Monitoring Requirements
Compliance Requirements
Reporting and Recprdkeeping Requirements
     Q:   Under the Surface Water Treatment Rule water systems can measure heterotrophic plate counts
      _    (HPG) in lieu of chlorine residuals. If the results ofthe'HPCare acceptable (< 500 cfu/ml) they
          are determined to be in compliance with the requirement for a detectable residual in the
          distribution system.  Will these systems now be required to measure a chlorine residual to
          ensure they do not exceed the MRDL?
     A:   Yes. The Stage 1 DBPR requires that disinfection residuals be measured to ensure the MRDL is
          not exceeded. Therefore, HPC measurements cannot be performed in lieu of this testing.:
          However, where detectable residuals are not found, HPCs may be conducted for SWTR
          compliance.


     Q:   Our state requires daily chlorine residual measurements to  be taken throughout the distribution
          system. What samples should be considered when calculating compliance with the MRDL?
     A:   For the Stage 1 DBPR's MRDL, compliance is based upon the samples  collected under
          §141.132(c)(l), The  samples are collected at the same time and place as coliform samples as
          specified in §141.21. Subpart H systems may use samples collected under the requirements of the
          SWTR ( §141.74(c)(3)(i)) in lieu of taking separate samples.  The system's monitoring plan will
          indicate which samples are to be used for compliance determinations.               .


     Q:   Can systems use additional chlorine sampling sites  (if states have approved additional sites
          beyond the TCR)?                                      '
     A:    Yes, if these are included in the monitoring plan.


     Q:  Does the Stage 1 DBPRapply to chlorine added to the treatment process as an oxidant?
     A:    Yes. The requirements are applicable to chlorine added anywhere in the treatment process due to
          the potential formation of TTHM and HAA5.
Stage 1 DBPR Implementation Guidance
IV-19
June2001

-------
     Q:  For a system to comply with the MRDLsfor chlorine and chloramine, what residual
          disinfectant concentration should be measured?
     A:  For a system that uses free chlorine for residual maintenance, either free or total chlorine
          measurement is acceptable. For a system that uses chlorahiines for residual maintenance, the
          measure must be combined or total chlorine.
        1.1.2   Chlorine Dioxide

                For further information, see the following rule sections:
Citation
§141.32(e)(78)(i), (JO
§141.201
§141.54
§141.65
§141.131(c)(l), (2), (3)
§141.132(cX2)@, (ii),(iii)
§141.133(c)(2)(i), (ii)
§141.134(c)
Part Title
Public Notification
Public Notification of Drinking Water Violations
Maximum Residual Disinfectant Level Goals
Maximum Residual Disinfectant Levels
Analytical Requirements
Monitoring Requirements
Compliance Requirements
Reporting and Recordkeeping Requirements
               Does daily monitoring for chlorine dioxide mean 7 days a week? Some systems are not
               staffed on the weekend. Do systems that, add chlorine dioxide need to have someone in on
               the weekend in order to stay in compliance?
               Yes, systems will have to conduct this monitoring daily. Systems have 3 or 5 years,
               depending on source water type and size, to get the plant staffed for conducting the
               required monitoring or change the disinfectant. This monitoring is required and must be
               conducted daily due to the acute health risks associated with chlorine dioxide.
        Q:      What systems are required to monitor for chlorine dioxide and chlorite?
        A:      All nontransient noncommunity and community systems that use chlorine dioxide,
                regardless of the purpose, (e.g., disinfection, oxidation, or maintenance of a residual) must
                monitor for both chlorine dioxide and for the disinfection byproduct, chlorite. Transient
                noncommunity systems that use chlorine dioxide must monitor for chlorine dioxide, but not
                for chlorite. There is no provision under the rule for reduced chlorine dioxide monitoring
                even if the chlorine dioxide is not used for primary disinfection. If the system is using
                chlorine dioxide intermittently, the system is not required to conduct the daily monitoring
                for chlorine dioxide and chlorite for days when the chlorine dioxide is not in use or monthly
                monitoring for chlorite if the chlorine dioxide has not been used at all for the entire month.
                Monthly monitoring for chlorite is required if chorine dioxide is used at any time during the
                month.
June 2001
IV-20
Stage 1 DBPR Implementation Guidance

-------
               If my system is triggered into repeat CIO2 sampling and I have booster chlorination, the
               rule says one of the repeat samples must be "as close to the first customer as possible. "
               Does this mean the first customer in the entire distribution system, or the first customer
               after booster chlorination?
               The term "first customer", refers to the first "customer "in the distribution system. However,
               the sample that is taken at the longest residence time for compliance with C1O2 monitoring
               requirements at §141.132(c)(2)(ii) should be downstream of the point of booster
               chlorination.
 1.2     Disinfection Byproducts

        1.2.1   TTHM and HAAS

               For further information, see the following rule sections:
Citation
§141.32(e)(79) ,
§141.201
§141.53 . , .
§141.64. . ,
§141.131(b)(l), (2)
§141.132(b)(l)(i),(uV(iii),(iv)
§14L133(b)(l)(i), (ii), (iii) ,
§141.134(b)
Part Title
Public Notification :
Public Notification of Drinking Water Violations
Maximum Contaminant Level Goals
Maximum Contaminant Levels
Analytical Requirements
Monitoring Requirements . -,
Compliance Requirements :
Reporting and Recordkeeping Requirements
        Q:     If a system rechlorinates in the distribution system, are these rechlorination .stations
               considered "separateplants" under the Stage 1 D/DBPR?                  •
        A:     No, these rechlorination stations are not generally considered separate plants for minimum
               monitoring determinations. However, they should be taken into consideration when
               developing monitoring plans so that maximum residence time/maximum DBF formation is
               seen, and depending upon the specifics of the system the state may wish to consider these
               stations as "separate plants".


        Q:     The TTHM Rule requires systems to take all required samples -within a 24-hour period.
               The Stage 1 Rule,  however, does not specify a time-frame,when all the samples need to be
           •    collected.  When should systems take their required TTHM/HAA5 samples?
        A:     EPA believes that most systems will find it advantageous to take all their samples in one
               day but this is not required by the Stage 1 DBPR. However, states may require systems to
               collect all their TTHM/HAA5 samples within a specified period of time. K either case,.
               systems must specify when then- TTHM/HAA5 samples will be taken in their monitoring
               plan.                                                V
Stage 1 DBPR Implementation Guidance
IV-21
June 2001

-------
        Q:     With respect to the new compliance requirements for TTHM testing that take effect in
               2002 (or 2004 for small systems), when the new TTHM MCL comes into effect, will
               compliance be calculated based on the samples collected in the 2001 (or 2003) calendar
               year? Or, are they calculated based on the samples collected during the 2002 (or 2004)
               calendar year? At what point does the waterworks go out of compliance between the
               annual average of 0.100 mg/L and 0.080 mg/L?
        A:     Compliance with the new MCL is based on samples taken beginning in the first quarter of
               2002/2004. During the first year of compliance calculation if the sum of fewer than four
               quarters of data exceeds 0.320mg/L for TTHM or 0.240mg/L for HAAS, the system is
               immediately in violation (since they will exceed the MCL even if the remaining quarters are
               zero).


        Q:     Can you be on routine monitoring for TTHMs and reduced monitoring for HAAS, or vice
               versa?                    .
        A:     No, a system cannot qualify for reduced monitoring for one contaminant and not for the
               other.


        Q:     Will systems currently on reduced TTHM monitoring for the 1979 TTHM Rule be able to
               remain on reduced monitoring under the Stage 1 DBPR?
        A:     Unless these systems conducted TTHM/HAA5 monitoring under the ICR, and have
               qualified with those samples, they will have to revert to routine monitoring under the Stage
               1 DBPR until they re-qualify for reduced monitoring. Systems must have an annual
               average  less than or equal to 0.040 mg/L and 0.030 mg/L for TTHM and HAAS
               respectively before they can qualify  for reduced monitoring.


        Q:     To qualify for reduced TTHM and HAAS monitoring, a Subpart H system must have one
               year of source water TOC data. To  remain on reduced monitoring does the system need
               to have TOC data (i.e., is this a one time average or a rolling average)?
        A:     To qualify for reduced TTHM and HAAS monitoring, a Subpart H system must have one
               year of source water TOC data with an annual average no more than 4.0 mg/L prior to
               treatment. To remain on reduced monitoring the Subpart H system's annual average TOC
               level, before any treatment, must be less than or equal to 4.0 mg/L TOC. This is based on
               a rolling annual average and is not a one-time test. If a plant does not use conventional
               treatment, it is not required to monitor monthly for TOC for the enhanced coagulation
               requirement. However, if it wants to qualify for, and remain on, reduced monitoring for
               TTHM and HAAS, it must monitor monthly for TOC before any treatment.


        Q:     Will states and systems need to adjust their monitoring and compliance activities based
               on the quarters created by the publication date of the rules ore December 16? (i.e., will
               states and systems be allowed to start the new quarter on January 1 rather than
               December 16?)
        A:     This issue was addressed with a technical correction to the rule published in the Federal
               Register on January 16, 2001. Monitoring and compliance activities will take  effect
               beginning on January 1 following the December 16 compliance dates in the rule as
               published on December 16, 1998.
June 2001                                    IV-22          Stage 1 DBPR Implementation Guidance

-------
        Q:     Please clarify compliance dates for monitoring under this rule. The rule states that the
               systems must comply -with the rule requirements beginning January 1, 2002, or 2004
               depending on the system size and source. What is the definition of beginning? Does this
               mean that systems must conduct their monitoring for TTHM and HAA5'a year'in advance
               to determine compliance on December 16, 2001 (or 2003)? Or, do they start the
           • •   monitoring in the.first quarter of 2002 (or 2004) to determine compliance after the fourth
               quarter of 2002 (or 2004)?                            .                    ;
        A:      Monitoring begins in first quarter 2002/2004, with compliance determined after the fourth
               quarter, if quarterly samples are required. If the TTHM and HAAS results are less than or  •
               equal to 0.080 rng/L or 0.060 mg/L respectively,  the PWS is in compliance. If the results
               are greater than 0.080 mg/L or 0.060 mg/iv for systems monitoring annually (or less
               frequently), the system goes to increased (quarterly) monitoring.


        Q:      Can states phase out the TTHM rule faster than the DBPR allows?
        A:      Yes,  but only if states adopt and implement the Stage 1 DBPR ahead of schedule.


        Q:      Can samples be taken for operational purposes and not be used for compliance? ,
        A:      Yes.  Systems are encouraged to take operational  samples as necessary. Operational
               samples do not have to be used for compliance; however all samples used for compliance
               purposes must be noted in the system's monitoring plan.


        Q:      Under the Stage 1 DBPR, if a system must increase its chlorine or chloramine levels to
               address an emergency (e.g. a main break or other contamination event), and is scheduled
               to collect DBF samples, should the system reschedule its TTHM/HAA5 sampling?
        A:      The system is required to monitor during normal operating conditions, this includes changes
               in disinfection levels caused by water quality fluctuations. However, if the system is    ;
               experiencing an emergency, and must increase its chlorine or chloramine levels during the
               period that monitoring is required under the sampling schedule, the system must consult
               with the state to determine if sampling may be delayed until the emergency has ended, and
               normal operation is resumed.                   .


        Q:      How can systems with more than one treatment plant determine compliance if each plant
               provides a different percentage of the system's.supply? Averaging of all of the samples
               taken from a surface water source providing 90% of the systems water and a ground
               water plant serving the other 10% may not truly reflect the level ofTTHMs and HAAS in
               the entire system.                                     ,
        A:      EPA believes that for systems with more than one treatment plant, the quarterly average,
               representative of each treatment plant, should be determined separately. The quarterly
               average for the entire system should be calculated by weighing the averages for each of the
               treatment plants (total number of treatment plants — n) as follows:
Stage 1 DBPR Implementation Guidance  •:.     IV-23                                    June200l

-------
                       (Quarterly average for samples representing treatment plant 1)
                       X (fraction of flow*into system from plant 1)


                       +    (Quarterly average for samples representing treatment plant 2)
                             X (fraction of flow* into system from plant 2)


                       + ...  (Quarterly average for samples representing treatment plant n)
                             X (fraction of flow* into system from plant n)


                       = quarterly average for the system


                * for the purposes of this determination only, flow is defined as the average daily flow for
                the subject treatment plant during the subject compliance period.         •
                (Note: this formula is taken directly page 13 of EPA's 1983 Guidance titled:
                Trihalomethanes in Drinking Water - Sampling, Analysis, Monitoring, and Compliance).
                For added explanation, we offer the following based on the above formula:
                      , Plant  1 serves 90% of the water to the system and has a quarterly average of 120
                       ppb for TTHM and plant 2 serves the other 10% and has a quarterly average of 40
                       ppb for TTHM or (120 X 0.9) + (40 X 0.1) =  112 ppb as a quarterly average for
                       the system.                                         -


        Q:      Assume a system has multiple wells and a single surface water, source. Are the TTHM and
                HAAS monitoring requirements for each plant, ground water and surface water,  based
                upon the requirements for Subpart H systems?                  •
        A:      Yes. A system that uses ground water as well as surface water or ground water under the
                influence of surface water as part of their source is considered a Subpart H system. The
                monitoring requirements for all plants are as established in the rule for Subpart H systems.
                See also Section IV-G: Determining Monitoring Frequency for TTHM and HAAS
                Sampling, Mixed Sources (Surface Water and Ground Water), Example SG3.


        Q:      If a Subpart H system serving greater than or equal to 10,000 persons has two treatment
               plants and the distribution system is configured in such a way that one of the samples
                (e.g., max residence time)  is in effectively the same location for both plants can the
                system use one sample to cover both treatment plants or does the system have to take two
                samples? In the most simple example, can the system take 7 samples instead of 8 with one
                sample counting for two?
        A:      If a system can demonstrate in its monitoring plan to the satisfaction of the state that a
                sample taken within the distribution system effectively covers the monitoring requirements
                for two plants, it could count one sample as meeting the intent of the regulation. States
                should be reviewing the sampling plan to determine if by not taking a sample the system
                will still have data reflective of the spacial and temporal conditions in the distribution
                system for byproduct formation. However, this would not be considered appropriate for
                systems which are only required to take samples at one location per plant.
June 2001                                     IV-24          Stage 1DBPR Implementation Guidance

-------
        Q:     If.asystem uses surface water to supplement its ground water source on a seasonal basis
               what kind of 'system is it> Subpart H or ground water? What is the routine monitoring
               frequency for TTHMand HAAS and'how does the system qualify for reduced monitoring?
        A:  -I.'.- The system -would monitor according to the subpart H requirements during any quarter
               when using either surface water or ground water under the influence of surface water, the
               sample shall be taken so the results are representative of the surface source. When only
               using ground water, the system would monitor according to the requirements for a ground
               water system. (See the table under §141.132) The compliance calculations are based on a
               .running annual average computed quarterly. If the running annual average computed
               quarterly for TTHM and HAA5 is less than or equal to 0.040 mg/L and 0.030 mg/L,
               respectively, and meets the TOC levels required for the months that the system uses
               surface water, the system qualifies for reduced monitoring.
               See also Section TV-G: Determining Monitoring Frequency for TTHM and HAA5
               Sampling, Mixed Sources (Surface Water and Ground Water), Example SG4.


        Q:     How does a system determine its month of warmest water temperature for  the purposes of
               monitoring for TTHM and HAAS on a yearly or less frequent basis under the Stage 1
               DBPR?
        A:     Systems should monitor me temperature of their treated water or use historical data to
               ensure they are collecting samples during the month of warmest water temperatures (i.e.
               when disinfection byproduct formation is accelerated). For most systems this is likely to
               occur in July, August, or September. If the system operates during; these months, this
               would likely be the time to take the TTHM and HAA5 samples. Systems that do not
               operate during these months must take their samples during the warmest month in which
               they operate. This requirement is designed to allow less frequent monitoring by collecting
               samples during worst case conditions.


        Q:     Why are the levels of TTHM and HAAS established at lower concentrations to qualify for
               reduced monitoring than to stay on reduced monitoring once qualified?          ,
        A:     Routine monitoring for TTHMs and HAAS gives an indication of "average" disinfection
               byproduct occurrence in the distribution system. On the other hand, sampling requirements
               for reduced monitoring are designed to ensure that the sample measures "worst case"
               conditions for occurrence of the disinfection byproducts. Thus, these worst case samples
               are expected to contain higher concentrations of DBFs than the average of routine samples.

        Q:     If a system is  conducting routine yearly monitoring for TTHM/HAA5 and exceeds the
               MCLfor either DBF in this yearly sample, is the system in violation under the Stage 1
               DBPR?     •'•-.."
        A:     -The system is not immediately in violation. The system must increase their monitoring to
               quarterly the very next quarter. If after a year of quarterly monitoring the system exceeds
               the MCL as an annual average, the system is in; violation. If the system fails to perform all
               of the quarterly monitoring, compliance "will be determined based on the .available data and
               the system will also have a monitoring violation.


        Q:     If the system uses an ICR approved lab to do the testing fdr TTHM and HAAS in the first
               year, can it use the data collected to qualify for reduced TTHM and HAAS monitoring?
        A:     If the state approves the lab, then the system can use  the data to qualify for reduced
               TTHM and HAAS monitoring provided that the data meets all the other D/DBPR
               compliance sampling and analysis requirements. In addition, Subpart H systems must meet
Stage 1 DBPR Implementation Guidance          TV-25   .                     '             June2001

-------
               applicable TOC levels. Systems which collected TTHM and HAAS data for applicability
               monitoring under the IESWTR (see Q and A in section 2.2) can use that data if the samples
               were analyzed by a certified laboratory using approved ICR methods.


        Q:     Do TTHM and HAAS samples have to be collected at the same time and location?
        A:     Yes, they should. However, there is no regulatory requirement to sample at the same time
               and location. The system has to specify locations and schedules for collecting samples in
               its monitoring plan.


        Q:     Does the use of any oxidant mean that my system is required to sample for TTHMs?
        A:      A system that uses an oxidant tirat can also be used as a disinfectant (such as C1O2 or O3)
               must sample for TTHMs. However, a ground water system that uses an oxidant that is
               NOT a disinfectant (such as KMnO4 for taste and odor oxidation) and does not add another
               disinfectant to their water, is not required to monitor for TTHMs.


        Q:     Do systems that only add ozone have to monitor for TTHM and HAAS?
        A:     Yes, all systems that supply water treated with a chemical disinfectant are required to
               monitor for TTHM and HAA5.
        1.2.2   Bromate

               For further information, see the following rule sections:
        Q:

        A:
Citation
§141.32(e)(80)
§141.201
§141.53
§141.64
§141.131(b)(l),(2)
§141.132(fa)(3)(i), (if)
§141.133(b)(2)
§141.134(b)
Part Title
Public Notification
Public Notification of Drinking Water Violations
Maximum Contaminant Level Goals ,
Maximum Contaminant Levels
Analytical Requirements
Monitoring Requirements
Compliance Requirements
Reporting and Recordkeeping Requirements
May bromate monitoring be modified for systems based on the population served (as
TTHM and HAAS monitoring is structured)?
No, there are no provisions in the Stage 1 DBPR to monitor for bromate based on system
type and/or size.
June 2001
                              IV-26
Stage 1 DBPR Implementation Guidance

-------
        Q:     Do systems usinglowlevels of ozone at the beginning of the plant for purposes of
                enhancing filtration need to testfor bromate under this rule? .
        A:     Yes'.The rule specifies that any communityor nonttansient noncommunity system that    :
                usesozone,--"for disinfection or oxidation,.musttake one bromate sample per month per
             . •. treatment plant using ozone at: the entrance to the distribution-system..- (See §141.132(b)(3))
        1.2.3   Chlorite

                For further information, see the following rule sections:
        Q:

        A:
Citation
§141.32(e)(81)
§141.201
§141.53
§141.64
§141.131(b)(l), (2)
§l41.132(b)(2)(i),(ii)
§141.133(b)(3)
§141.134(b)
Pairt Title
Public Notification ,
Public Notification of Drinking Water Violations
Maximum Contaminant Level Goals
Maximum Contaminant Levels
Analytical Requirements
Monitoring Requirements
Compliance Requirements
Reporting and Recordkeeping Requirements
May chlorite monitoring be modified for systems based on the population served (as
TTHM and HAAS monitoring is structured)?
No, there are no provisions in the Stage 1 DBPR to monitor for chlorite based on system
type and/or size.
        Q:     Daily monitoring means 7 days a week. Some systems are not staffed on the weekend. Do
               systems that add chlorine dioxide need to have someone in on the weekend in order to
               stay in compliance?                                                   ,            .
        A:     Yes, systems required to conduct daily monitoring under the Stage 1 DBPR will have to
               conduct this monitoring daily. The system has 3 or 5 years, depending on its source water
               type and size, to get the plant staffed for conducting the required monitoring or change their
               disinfectant. This monitoring is required and must be conducted daily due to the acute
               health risks associated with chlorine dioxide.


        Q:     Can you use analytical methods other than those listed in the Federal Register?
        A:     The methods in the rule must be used.


        Q:     When we have to do additional sampling because of an exceedence of 1.0 mg/Lchlorite
               at the entrance to the distribution system, say 1.5 mg/L, and chlorite in the distribution is
               less than  that level, can we assiime that if the level at the entrance to the distribution
               system is 1 2 mg/L, the level in the distribution will be lower and forego monitoring?
        A:     If me system exceeds 1.0 mg/L, the system MUST conduct the additional monitoring (3
               samples in the distoibution system) the following day.
Stage 1 DBPR Implementation Guidance
                              IV-27
                                                                        June 2001

-------
        Q:     Do the MCL and monitoring requirements for chlorite apply to transient systems that use
                chlorine dioxide?
        A:     The MCL and monitoring requirements for chlorite apply only to community arid
                nontransient noncommunity systems that use chlorine dioxide. Chlorite is riot regulated for
                transient systems.


        Q:     Does EPA intend for daily chlorite samples to be sent out to a certified laboratory for
                analysis or could systems do hand held testing at the entrance to the distribution system
               for chlorite?
        A:     The original rule requires that the analysis be performed by a certified laboratory, however,
                EPA updated the rule through technical corrections published in the Federal Register on
                January 16, 2001 to allow daily chlorite sampling and analysis to be performed by a party
                approved by the state.
 1.3     Disinfection Byproduct Precursors

        For further information, see the following rule sections:
        Q:

        A:
Citation
§141.32(e)(79)
§141.201
§141.131(d)(l), (2), (3), (4), (5)
§141.132(d)(l), (2)
§141.133(d)
§141.134(d)
§141. 135 [entire part]
Part Title
Public Notification
Public Notification of Drinking Water Violations
Analytical Requirements
Monitoring Requirements
Compliance Requirements
Reporting and Recordkeeping Requirements
Treatment Technique for Control of DBF Precursors
Do lime softening plants need to consider alternative compliance criteria and/or Step 1
TOC removal requirements or can they go right to the Step 2 bench-scale testing?
EPA believes that all lime softening plants will meet at least one of the alternative
compliance criteria, one of the additional alternative compliance criteria for softening plants,
or will be able to achieve step 1 TOC removal requirements. The Step 2 bench testing
procedures are not designed for softening systems since the step 2 procedure is designed to
lower pH while the softening process raises pH. Thus Step 2 does not apply to softening
systems.  .
        Q:     Some treatment plants operate seasonally. How do you determine quarterly averages?,
        A:     These systems must use the average of the available data in each quarter the plant operates.


        Q:     Would you ever end up with a treated water TOC higher than an untreated source water
               TOC?                         :   •
        A:     This may happen as a result of the analytical methods used to measure TOC where minor
               variations  (measurement error) may show a treated water TOC slightly higher than a source
               water TOC level.
June 2001
                              TV-28
Stage 1DBPR Implementation Guidance

-------
        Q:     When the treated water TOC level is greater than the untreated water TOC level, what
                number should be used in the monthly calculation?
        A: !    There are two ways to calculate compliance with the Step 1 TOC removal requirements.
                The first is to Calculate the actual percentage of TOC removal from the source and treated
                waters for that month [141.135(c)(l)(i)]. In any month where the treated water TOC level
                is greater than the source water TOC level, the monthly calculation would be a negative
                number. Second, the system could use an alternative compliance calculation method. For
                example, if the system's treated or source water TOC is less than 2.0 mg/L the system
                would assign the value  of 1.0 for that month. For ariymonth that a system practicing
                softening removes at least 10 mg/L of hardness (as CaCOs) the; system would assign the
                value of 1,0 for that month [141.135(c)(2)(i)].


        Q:     Does the addition of a disinfectant affect where and when source water TOC sampling is
               performed?

        A:     Yes, TOC monitoring must occur before any disinfectant is added into the system.


        Q:    If a system meets one of the alternative compliance criteria is it exempted from
                implementing enhanced coagulation?            ,          ,
        A:     If a system meets one of the alternative compliance criteria as a running annual average,
                calculated quarterly, they are in compliance with the precursor removal treatment technique
                and do not have meet the Step 1 TOC removal requirements. For those systems that must
               implement enhanced coagulation or enhanced softening, alternative compliance criteria can
               also.be used for compliance calculations On a month-by-month basis. (See § 141.l35(c)(2))


        Q:    If a system has met the same alternative compliance criterion for the past four quarters
               does this mean it is in compliance for the previous year or for the following year?
        A:     This system is in compliance for the .previous year.


        Q:     Does a system always have to use the same alternative compliance criterion to avoid
               employing enhanced coagulation?
        A:'    In order to avoid employing enhanced coagulation, the system must meetthe ,same
               alternative compliance criterion for the past four quarters to calculate a running annual
               average.  If it cannot meet this same criterion for four quarters, the system is required to
               perform enhanced coagulation and perform the compliance calculations required in
               §141.135(c).  However, once a system is required to employ enhanced coagulation, they
               may employ alternative  compliance criteria on a month-by-month basis (§l4l.l35(e)(2Xi)-
            ,   (v)) in lieu of performing the calculationsin §141.135(c)(l). Alternative compliance
               criteria used on a month-by-month basis for calculating compliance can change depending
               onthe time of year and the characteristics of the water.


        Q:     If I meet an alternative compliance criterion for the month and have exceeded the Step 1
               removal requirements, should I use 1.0 or the calculated number in my compliance
               calculations?                                      ;              ;
        A:     You should use the calculated number, since if you exceed the Step 1 removal
           ,    requirements,  this number will be greater than 1.0. This number will "help" the quarterly
               average you calculate assuming you have a month where your TOC percent removal ratio
               is less than 1.0.      -                            -         •-
Stage 1DBPR Implementation Guidance          IV-29                                 :   June 2001.

-------
        Q:     Does the state need to approve all TOCpercent removal levels under the Stage 1 DBPR?
        A:     The state is only required to approve the Step 2 removal levels, not the Step 1 TOC
               removal levels.                         ,


        Q:     What should a conventional softening system do if it must meet the TOC removal
               requirements under the Stage 1 DBPR by dropping alkalinity and then must recarbonate J
               to adjust pH and alkalinity for achieving compliance with the Lead and Copper Rule?
        A:     The system may use either the TOC percentage removal requirement or the alternative
               compliance criteria (less than 60 mg/L (as GaCO3) to comply with the rule. The system
               may then recarbonate to comply with the Lead and Copper Rule. Treated water alkalinity,
               for purposes of compliance with the Stage 1 DBPR, should be measured prior to
               recarbonation and may be measured anywhere in the treatment plant.


        Q:     Do labs have to be certified to conduct TOC monitoring?
        A:     A system must use a party approved by EPA or the state to measure TOC, with any of the
               methods specified in the regulations. Use of a certified laboratory is not required.


        Q:     Is GAC effective in removing DBFs? May it be used by conventional plants in lieu of the
               treatment technique for DBF precursor removal under  the Stage 1 DBPR?
        A:     The system may use GAC if it provides adequate TOC removal to allow the system to
               meet either Step 1 or one of the alternative compliance criteria for finished water. GAC is
               effective depending on the type of carbon used, the contact time, and the nature of the
               DBFs. Depending on the type of carbon used, it can also be expensive and cause
               operational and disposal problems. EPA recommends that systems not use GAC for
               removal of DBPs after flocculation but instead use it for DBP precursor (TOC) removal, if
               necessary. GAC can be used to "enhance" enhanced coagulation and TOC removal in
               conventional plants. However, because GAC tends to work most effectively when used in
               tandem with enhanced coagulation rather than in lieu of, it is not normally a substitute for
               DBP precursor removal.


        Q:     How often does  a system doing Step 2 have to perform  bench- or pilot-scale testing?
        A:     The rule only requires that it be performed; the frequency is  determined by the state. In the
               EPA guidance on Enhanced Coagulation, the recommended frequency for the Step 2
               bench- or pilot-scale testing is at least quarterly for the first year. If source water quality
               changes significantly on a more frequent basis, Step 2 testing may need to be conducted
               more frequently. The minimum levels pf TOC removal will be determined by this testing
               and established as regulatory requirements by the state.
               The guidance manual (EPA 815-R-99-012) is available at EPA's website:
               www.epa.gov/safewater/mdbp/implement.html or from  NSCEP at 1,800.490.9198.


        Q:     Why are enhanced coagulation and enhanced softening only required at conventional
               plants?
        A:     Enhanced coagulation and enhanced softening involve the addition of higher levels of
               coagulants (i.e., higher than is required for turbidity removal). Therefore,  a sedimentation
               (solids removal) process is necessary to remove solids prior to filtration. Without
               sedimentation, the solids would plug the filters, and result in short filter runs and poor
June 2001                                    IV-30   .        Stage 1 DBPR Implementation Guidance

-------
                operation. In the Stage 1 DBPR,the precursor removal requirements apply to those
                systems best able to remove DBF precursors at felatively.low cost.


        Q:     Do you change Step 2 TOC removal requirements when there is a routine seasonal
            "'..   change in source water quality?^
        A:     The frequency of the Step 2 bench- or pilot-scale testing is determined by the state. In the
                EPA guidance on Enhanced Coagulation, the recommended frequency for the Step 2
                bench- or pilot-scale testing is at least quarterly for the first year. If source water quality
                changes significantly on a more frequent basis, Step 2 testing may need to be conducted
                more frequently. Theminimum levels of TOC removal will be determinedby this testing
                and established as regulatory requirements by the state. In addition, it may vary on a
                seasonal basis if approved by the state.                                ;
                The EPA  guidance manual (EPA'815-R-99-012) is available:at
                www.epa.gov/safewater/mdpb/implement.htmlor.fromNSCEP at 1.800.490.9198


        Q:     For the "simultaneous" paired sample, what is the time-lag allowed between samples
                (accounting for detention time)?                                          :
        A:     The rule requires the paired samples to be collected "at the same time." In practice EPA
                expects that systems will typically collect the source water sample followed., in a few
                minutes to a few hours, by the treated water sample. In situations where raw water quality
                fluctuates frequently, the system may need to provide a time-lag between the samples equal
                to the residence time of the water between sampling points. This will ensure the samples
                accurately reflect me actual TOC removal. In all cases systems should address their
                sampling procedure in their monitoring plans.
        Q:     If a system treats blended water from two very different source waters (one source meets
               an alternative compliance criterion, the second source does not) may the system forego
               enhanced coagulation?                             .
        A:     The enhanced coagulation/enhanced softening requirements are based on the source water
               TOC and alkalinity. All measurements and compliance determinations must be made on the
              . - water that is actually treated in the plant under normal operating conditions. If that water is
               comprised of a blend from multiple sources, the composition of the blend will determine
             .whether alternative compliance criteria are met or whether achieving the minimum TOC
               removal requirements of enhanced coagulation is necessary.


        Q:     What if for one month water is not'amenable to enhanced coagulation?
        A:     Compliance is based on a runningannual average. The system may elect to use the
               calculated data, use an alternative compliance criterion (if possible) that month, or apply for
               a Step 2 removal requirement  for the month.  •  :.  ."••',/,..


        Q:     If a system is unable to meet any alternative compliance criteria or Step  1 TOC removal
               requirements in the first quarter of monitoring, can it decide to go to Step 2 immediately,
               rather than waiting for the full year of data collection?
        A:     The system may elect to conduct the necessary bench-scale testing immediately but
               because compliance is based on a running annual average, the  system is not eligible for Step
               2 removal until one year of data have been collected.
Stage 1 DBPR Implementation Guidance           IVX31      :            :                  June 2001

-------
        Q:   .  If a system, through excessive lime softening, lowers the alkalinity to below 60 mg/L
               and/or removes at least 10 mg/L of magnesium hardness and, therefore, meets one or
               more of the compliance criteria, why does it need to do the TOC monitoring? Do states
               have the flexibility to allow such systems to forego TOC monitoring?
        A:     States do not have the flexibility to allow systems to forego TOC monitoring. EPA believes
               that systems may not always meet one of the alternative compliance criteria, and that the
               system needs to have the data in such cases to determine compliance. Additionally, in order
               to qualify for, and remain on, reduced monitoring for TTHM and HAA5 these Subpart H
               systems must continue to perform monthly TOC monitoring of untreated source water.


        Q:     If a softening system wishes to use the additional alternative compliance criteria for
               softening systems and its jar-testing demonstrates a finished water, alkalinity below 60
               mg/L, but samples in the plant that incorporate the prescribed coagulant dose still exceed
               60 mg/L, is the system in compliance with the Step 2 requirements?
        A:     There are no Step 2 provisions for softening systems. The alkalinity or magnesium
               hardness removal levels must be met in the full-scale plant. For non-softening systems,
               Step 2 determines a removal requirement, not a coagulant dose requirement.


        Q:     How should the state deal with the situation  where the full-scale results do not achieve
               the required step 2 TOC removals predicted by jar testing?
        A:     Failure to meet step 2 TOC removal requirements results in a violation. The system should
               be encouraged to experiment with acids,  alternative coagulants, etc. to improve TOC
               removal and ensure compliance.


        Q:     May a system grandfather Step 2 jar testing results in advance of the effective date of the
               Stage 1 D/DBPR requirements provided that the  system meets all the technical criteria
               specified in the rule?
        A:     To meet the special primacy requirements, the state has to develop Step 2 methodology. If
               a system wishes to begin testing early, the system should ensure that the state has
               submitted its Step 2 methodology to EPA for approval.             •


        Q:     If there is a group of surface water intakes close  to each  other,  can they do one raw water
               TOCsample?
        A:     No, Because the TOC levels in surface water can vary greatly by time and location in a
               water body. Plants are required to take TOC samples at each intake, because the samples
               must reflect the treated water samples.


        Q:     Section 141.135(b)(3) says that once  the state approves a Step 2 TOC removal
               percentage, the state may make that percentage retroactive.  However,  Section 141.133(d)
               says that systems which do not meet the Step 1 requirements during the first 12 months
               are not eligible for retroactive approval of Step 2 requirements. Which is correct?
        A:     Both are correct.  Section 141.133(d) limits what may be done in the first year for a system
               which elects to enter the compliance period uninformed. Systems may begin monitoring in
               2001/2003 to determine whether Step 1 levels can be met. This monitoring is not
               mandatory and failure to monitor during the 12 months prior to the compliance date is not a
               violation. However, failure to conduct this monitoring makes a system ineligible for
               retroactive approval of a step 2 alternative TOC removal level during 2002/2004. After
               2002/2004, all systems are eligible for retroactive step 2 approval, whether the early
               monitoring was conducted or not. The M-DBP FACA negotiating committee and EPA

June 2001                                    IV-32           Stage 1DBPR Implementation Guidance

-------
                believed that systems should not be allowed to claim ignorance of whether compliance had
                been achieved, but also recognized that future changes in source water quality may affect a
                system's ability to achieve compliance; To balance these two, the, rule allows for retroactive
                approval of Step 2 criteria if the system'has data that indicates that the system has taken
                prudent measures to comply, Failure to determine compliance status is not prudent. Such
                retroactive approval is not available for MCL compliance or for compliance with other
            ;    treatment techniques.                        •'-    \  '                   r


        Q:      How does a system that is treating for zebra mussel control by injecting chlorine at the
                intake collect untreated:source water samples for TOC?      :                 :
        A:      The system may have to discontinue its: chlorine feed for a brief period in order to collect
                the sample. Alternatively, the state may allow a grab sample at the entrance tp the intake to
                the plant before any treatment. This situation should be addressed in the system's
              ,  monitoring plan.                                                  :         :    ;


        Q:      TOC measurements are limited to two significant figures.  The use of these values in
                compliance calculations under §141.135 (c) cannot produce a value with a greater
            •    number of significant figures. However, systems  are required to compare the value
                calculated far compliance to 1.00 which has three significant figures.  How do you
                reconcile this?
        A:      The increase in significant figures was an oversight by EPA. The intent was for systems to
                compare the calculated value at two decimal places.


1.4     Monitoring

        1.4.1    General Monitoring Issues


        Q:     How do you determine TOC levels to qualify for or remain on reduced monitoring for
                TTHM and HAA5 if you have multiple treatment plants? Can you have reduced
               monitoring for one plant and not another? Or should all the plants be treated the same?
        A:      Systems cannot be  on reduced monitoring for TTHM and HAA5 atone of their plants and
               routine monitoring  for another because compliance is based on the TTHM and HAAS
               levels for the entire system.  Each plant's source water TOC level must be less than or
               equal to 4.0 mg/L.


        Q:     If you have both ground water and surface water the system is.considered to be a Subpart
               H system. As a Subpart H system,  is it required to follow the monitoring for Subpart H
               systems for all of their treatment plants including ground water plants?
 _',--'-'   A:     Yes, If the system is a Subpart H system the monitoring requirements for Subpart H
               systems apply to all plants whether ground water or surface water.


        Q:     How does a system (either ground water or surface water) determine the month of
               warmest water temperature, when there is little or no temperature variability?
        A:     To meet this requirement systems should regularly monitor their source and distribution
   "           water temperatures oruse historical data. In cases where the water temperature is very
               constant, the system may consult with the state regarding the proper month in which to
               conduct sampling. The results of this consultation would then be incorporated into the
Stage 1DBPR Implementation Guidance           IV-33 .-'-.'.                               June 2001

-------
                system's monitoring plan. The state may also be able to better spread out the monitoring to
                avoid lab capacity issues.
        1.4.2   Monitoring Plans

                For further information, see the following rule sections:
        Q:
        A:
Citation
§141.132(a)(l),(2),(3)
§141.132(f)(l), (2), (3)
Part Title .
Monitoring Requirements (General requirements)
Monitoring Requirements (Monitoring plans)
Under the Stage 1 DBPR, when does the monitoring plan need to be completed?
The monitoring plan must be complete and available for inspection by the state and public
no later than 30 days following the applicable compliance dates in §  141.130(b). Subpart H
systems > 3,300 must submit their monitoring plans with their first monitoring report.
        Q:     Do all monitoring plans have to be reviewed and approved by the state to ensure the
               system is planning monitoring that will achieve compliance in all areas of the Stage 1
               DBPR?
        A:     States are encouraged to review or approve monitoring plans. States will generally check
               the monitoring plans during the sanitary surveys or other visits. Subpart H systems serving
               >3,300 must submit monitoring plans to the state for review.  States may require plans to be
               submitted by any other system and may require changes to the plan.


        Q:     How should a system determine residence times and conduct monitoring under the
               Stage 1 DBPR if it has a complicated distribution system?
        A:     This should be addressed in the monitoring plan for the system and should be reviewed by
               the state to ensure the system will be in compliance. In the monitoring plan, the system
               should indicate why samples are being taken in a particular location. EPA intends for sites
               to be generally selected based on best professional judgement rather than on computer ,
               analyses and tracer studies.


        Q:     Is there a restriction on how often a system can revise their monitoring plan?
        A:     The frequency of allowable modifications to the monitoring plan is not addressed in the
               rule. Clearly changes in sources, disinfectants, etc. will make modifications necessary and
               sometimes unpredictable. EPA believes this is best left up to states' discretion. Any time a
               Subpart H system serving greater than 3,300 people modifies  its sampling plan, the system
               must submit this modified sampling plan to the state.
June 2001
                               IV-34
Stage 1 DBPR Implementation Guidance

-------
         1.4.3   Multiple Wells Prawing from a Single Aquifer

                For further information, see the following rule sections:
        Q:

        A:
Citation
§141.132(a)(2) ..
Part Title
Monitoring Requirements (General requirements)
If a system has multiple wells drawing from the same aquifer, what is the monitoring
frequency for TTHM and HAAS?
The wells may be treated as one plant for the purposes of determining monitoring
frequency for TTHM and HAA5, This is true even if each well or some of the wells have
their own treatment.
        Q:     If a system has one treatment plant with multiple wells from different aquifers, how is the
               monitoring frequency determined?
        A:     If all the sources are combined into a single treatment plant, the number of samples
               required for that plant is determined by system size.
        1.4.4   Reporting and Recordkeeping

               For further information, see the following rule sections:
Citation
§141.134(b)&(c)
Part Title
Reporting and Recordkeeping Requirements
               Section 141.134J reporting and recordkeeping requirements for TTHM/HAA5, chlorite,
               bromate, chloramines and chlorine, requires systems to report "whether the MCL (or
               MRDL) was exceeded. "  The requirements for systems monitoring for chlorine dioxide,
               on the other hand, are to report "whether the MRDL was exceeded" and "whether the
               MRDL was exceeded in any two consecutive daily samples and whether the resulting
               violation was acute or chronic. " Does the requirement to report "whether the MCL (or
               MRDL) w,as exceeded, " mean the system should report any single sample that exceeds the
               MCL (or MRDL) or only report exceedences that result in violations?
               For each  compliance period, Systems are required to report results of all samples whether
               or not they exceed the MCL or MRDL, they are also required to report any violations of
               the MCL or MRDL, based upon the compliance .determination for the monitoring period
               for which they are reporting.                                    •
Stage 1DBPR Implementation Guidance
                              TV-35
                                                                       June 2001

-------
        1.4.5   Consecutive Systems

               For further information, see the following rule sections:
        Q:

        A:
Citation
§141.132(f)(3)
Part Title
Monitoring Requirements (Monitoring plans)
Will a wholesale system be required to change its treatment process if there is an MCL or
MRDL exceedence in system that purchases its water?
Each system is responsible for achieving and maintaining compliance. In most cases EPA
expects wholesalers to cooperate with purchased water systems to ensure their compliance
but, as previously mentioned,  each water system is ultimately responsible for its own
compliance.                                                       ,
        Q:     Does this rule apply to consecutive systems that buy chlorinated water and that do not
               add a chemical disinfectant?
        A:     EPA believes that all consumers should be protected against DBFs. EPA anticipates
               clarifying requirements for those systems in the Stage 2 DBPR. Until the Stage 2 rule is ,
               finalized, EPA anticipates that states will specify how consecutive  systems that purchase
               disinfected water but do not add a disinfectant must monitor.
2.0   General Program Requirements


2.1     Primacy


        Q:     If the state has a blanket letter from the Attorney General that covers all regulations, does
               it have to get a new letter specifically for the Stage 1 DBPR?
        A:     Yes. States would not be able to use a letter from the Attorney General that provided
               certification of rules not in existence at the time the certification letter was written. The
               certification would also have to confirm that there are no state audit laws preventing
               enforcement of the rules.


        Q:     Do you need to adopt the PWS definition (if applicable) and obtain administrative
               penalty authority in order to receive interim primacy for the Stage 1 DBPR?
        A:     A state is eligible for interim primacy for new regulations provided they have primacy or
               interim primacy for all existing regulations. At a time when multiple regulations are being
               promulgated, a state qualifies for interim primacy for each rule as the rules are adopted by
               the state as long as the time period allowed for adoption (two years plus up to a two year
               extension, if applicable) has not expired.  For example, even though the CCR was
               promulgated before the Stage 1 DBPR, a state can obtain interim primacy for the Stage 1
               DBPR before the CCR, as long as the deadline to adopt the CCR has not passed.
               However, if time period allow for adoption of the CCR has passed and the state has not
               adopted the CCR, then the state would not be eligible for interim primacy for the Stage 1
               DBPR.
June 2001
                              IV-36
Stage 1 DBPR Implementation Guidance

-------
        Q:     Can states "bundle" regulations in their primacy revision package?                /
        A:     Yes, states may combine two ormore rules in one primacy revision package provided that
            ,,    the states' adoption of the rules falls within the statutory two year period and two year
                extension.period, if applicable.      ;                                              •


        Q:     May a state adopt the Stage 1 DBPR by reference?
        A:     Yes, if the state law allows this. However, the state will still need to .address the special
                primacy requirements which givei'thpstate flexibility and discretion in meeting certain
                requirements.


        Q:     Our State's Attorney General does not have the authority to approve regulations. Will
                this be a problem for us in terms of obtaining primacy for new rules?
        A:     EPA does not require the State's Attorney General to provide approval of regulations
                adopted for purposes of the state,achieving primacy under these rules. The requirement is
                for a statement by the Attorney General, or the primacy agency's attorney if it has
                independent legal council, that the laws and regulations adopted by the state were duly
                adopted and are enforceable.     ,                .


2.2     Violations, SDWIS Reporting and SNC Definitions


        Q:     If a system receives 2 treatment technique violations in I month, is that counted as two
                TT violations toward SNC?
        A:    .Yes.    ...                  .             ..      ;     ;    . '._•'•


        Q:     How frequently are SNC .determinations made? Can a system potentially receive a SNC
                designation every month? every  quarter? every year?
        A:     Significant Non-Coriipliance (SNC) determinations for all rules, including the Interim
                Enhanced Surface Water Treatment Rule (IESWTR) and the Stage 1
                Disinfectants/Disinfection Byproducts Rule (DBPR), are made once per quarter,
                compounding over a rolling four quarter period. SDWIS guidance, states that these
                determinations are madeon the first day of the month following the end of the quarter
             .   which covers the 12 month compliance period which ended the previous quarter.      -. '


2.3     Qualified Operators


        Q:     There is a requirement of the SWTR that the systems be operated by  qualified personnel.
                Whatif the system has a membrane plant that is not operated on a full time basis? EPA  .
                has not mandated the number of hours in a operating cycle and systems have been
                installing membrane plants to prevent being required to have a full-time operator.
        A:  ,    Bomme Surface Water Treatment Rule and the Stage r Disinfectants/Disinfection
               Byproducts Rule require regulated systems to be operated by qualified personnel who meet
               the requirements specified by the state  and are included in a state register of qualified
                operators. The rules do  not, however, address the amount of time qualified operators are
               required to spend on site at the plant. EPA believes that this type of determinations should
               be left to the states'discretion.
Stage:! DBPR Implementation Guidance           IV-37;.;.;-                     •          June 2001

-------
        Q:     Who in the state must maintain the list of 'qualified operators? Is it acceptable if 'the
                Public Water Supply Supervision Program (PWSS) does not maintain the list, but another
                agency in the state does?
        A:     Yes, it is acceptable for a state agency other than the primacy agency to maintain the
                state's register of qualified operators. It is essential, however, for the PWSS Program to
                have access to that register.
June 2001                                      IV-38           Stage 1DBPR Implementation Guidance

-------
 IV-E.  Determinhlg Monitoring Frequency for TTHM and HAA5

           Sampling                               -.   :    : ;;':•..'."•'••  .•,  .  vv.1  ,-  -'•-.


 The number,of samples a system must take for TTHMs & HAASs is based upon the* type of water (surface
 water or ground water or combination of both), population size, and the number of .water treatment plants
 (WTPs} a system has. However, this determination is sometimes complicated due to the many different
 configurations a system may have.; The following examples help illustrate the WTP concept for determining
 the number of samples a system must take for TTHMs & HAASs.


                                   Surface Water Sources

  ROUTINE MONITORING FREQUENCY FOR TTHM AND HAAS (§141.132),

  Type of system                    , _     -,     _ Minimum Monitoring Frequency

  Surface water or ground water under direct influence   - Four water samples per quarter per treatment plant
  of surface water serving at least 10,000,persons >

  Surface water or ground water under direct influence    One water sample per quarter per treatment plant
  of surface water serving from 500 to 9,999 persons        ' '   "~  •

  Surface water or ground water under direct influence -  One sample per year per treatment plant during month
  of surface water serving fewer than 500 persons        of warmest water temperature


 SI      A system serves > 10,000 people and has two surface water treatment plants. However, the water
        from both plants is combined prior to entering the distribution system. How many WTPs does this
        systemhave?


        This system has .one WTP and would take four samples per quarter. In general, as long as the
        water is combined and therefore being mixed pjipi to entering the distribution system the system .
        has one WTP for monitoring purposes.


 S2      A system serves S: 10,000 people and has two surface water treatment plants that are drawing water
        from the same river but at different locations and enter the distribution system at different locations.
        How many WTPs does this system have?


       This system has two WTPs and would take eight samples per quarter. They are considered two '-"••-'
        WTPs even mough mey draw water from the same river because the treatment in the two plants
        cannot be exactly the same. Additionally, the treated waters do not have an opportunity to mix
        prior to entering the distribution system because they enter attwo different locations.


 S3      A system serves > 10,000 people and has one surface water treatment plant.  The system also
        utilizes another surface water treatment plant during high demand times from May to September.
        During these high demand times, water from the second plant enters the distribution system at a
        different location from the first plant How many WTPs does this system have?
Stage 1DBPR Implementation Guidance,          IV-39                                   June 2001

-------
        This system would have one WTP in the first and fourth quarters and would take four samples per
        quarter for those quarters.  However, for the second and third quarters this system would have two
        WTPs and would need to take eight samples per quarter for those quarters.
                                    Ground Water Sources
 err""	      ~"  -----                       •''„„*'
 iRqUTINE MONITORING FREQUENCY FOR TIM AND BAAS '($141332)
 v	-	:	-	;      -             -       '-"'Y  '"',-;{/'''      '* -^
 •jpType. of system                                f   --Mimmum MoBi'tdring ffregufency
 «-                                           x *^    ^    >  ; , ,,   f , /   f
 E :-' ' -                                      •>  'S/1    *  ^    ,',"•' ,'<*'  "    ', y
 fBystem using only ground water not under direct     *  oii^ water sample per            _   i     .,  ,    ,,.,,-
 f
 .ptjiitem using only ground water not under direct"   '    one sample per year per treatment plant1 'during rnoMl'
 | influence of surface water using chemical disinfectant   of warmest wafeHemperature   ,   ,      ' -,,
 I arid serving fewer than 10,000 persons      -  /         „  /            "                 ,'  '  */  ^
 fr^   ' ,.   ',                   '   .  ,',,,**     * *"   *   "  ~"    ,?~>'S ><,"<*''  '   '"'',*'<•''.
 J 'Multiple wells drawing water from a single aquifer may be considered one treaita^nt plant for determiiiiag the  *
 £ mmirnum number of samples required, with state approval. _,   '             '     ' <•  ,  /   '


 Gl     A system serves ;> 10,000 people and has thirty-three wells that the state has determined all come
        from one aquifer. The water from these wells enter the distribution system in thirty-three different
        locations.  How many WTPs  does this system have?


        This system has one WTP and would take one sample per quarter. In general, as  long as the wells
        have been determined by the  state to come from the same aquifer, the system has one WTP for
        monitoring purposes.


 G2     A system serves 2:10,000 people and has twenty-eight wells that the state has determined to come
        from fourteen aquifers. All the wells enter the distribution system in different locations. How many
        WTPs does this system have?


        This system has fourteen WTPs and would take fourteen samples per quarter.


 G3     A system serves s 10,000 people and has ten wells that the state has determined to come from ten
        aquifers.  The wells are paired such that two wells go into one pipe where the water is disinfected
        and then enters the distribution system in five different locations. How many WTPs does this
        systemhave?


        This system would have five WTPs and Would have to take five samples per quarter.  The number
        of WTPs is reduced because the water from each pair of wells are combined into a single pipe,
        treated and mixed prior to entering the distribution system.                 ,;


 G4     A system serves z 10,000 people and has ten wells that the state has determined to come from ten
        different aquifers.  These wells enter the distribution system at ten different locations.  However,


June 2001                                     IV-40          Stage 1DBPR Implementation Guidance

-------
        the system only uses all ten wells during high demand times from May through August. The
        remainder of the year, the system only uses five wells.  How many WTPs does this .system have?


        This system would have five WTPs in the first and fourth quarters and would take five samples per
        quarter for those quarters. For the  second and third quarters this system would have ten WTPs and
        would take ten samples per quarter for those quarters.
 MIXED SOURCES (SURFACE WATER AND GROUND WATER)


 SGI    A system serves >• 10,000 people and has one surface water treatment plant. The system also
 .       purchases finished surface water from one system and disinfected ground water from another
        system; The purchased surface water and purchased ground water are not further disinfected.  All
        three sources of water enter the distribution system at different locations. How many WTPs does
        this system have?                                   '.---'•'.


        This system has one WTP and would take four samples per quarter.  However, the three sources
        represent three different qualities of water with differing treatment and DBP formation potential.
        This system could be considered as having three WTPs and therefore would take twelve samples
        per quarter, but there is no federal requirement to do so.                           •


 SG2    A system serves ;> 10,000 people and has one surface water treatment plant. The system also ,
        purchases finished surface water from one system and disinfected ground water from another
        system.  The purchased surface water and purchased ground water are further disinfected by the
        purchasing system. All three sources of water enter the distribution system at different locations.
        How many WTPs  does this system have?


        Since a disinfectant has been added to the purchased sources, the Stage 1 DBPR applies to all three
        sources. This system would have three WTPs and would take twelve samples per quarter.


 SG3    A system serves > 10,000 people and has one surface water treatment plant and another water
        treatment plant from wells drawing from a single aquifer. How many WTPs does this system
        have?     .•:'..',    •..•   .•"       . .    -.    .      -   •  :   '      .    -   .-  ':      .-.--'


        Since the system uses surface water, the monitoring requirements for subpart H systems (SW or
        GWUDI) take precedence and apply to all WTPs irrespective if they are from ground or surface
        water.  This system would have two WTPs and would have to collect eight samples per quarter.


 SG4    A system serves k 10,000 people and has a water treatment plant from wells the state has
        determined are drawing water from a single aquifer. This system also supplements their supply
        with a surface water treatment plant in the second and third quarters.- Both sources enter the
        distribution system at different locations. How many WTPs does this system have?


        Tms system would have one WTP m me first and fourth quarters and would take one sample per
        quarter for those quarters:  However, since the system uses  surface water in the second and third
        quarters, the monitoring requirements for subpart H systems (SW or GWUDI) take precedence.
Stage 1 DBPR Implementation Guidance          IV-41                                    June 2001

-------
        This system would have two WTPs in the second and third quarters and would have to collect eight
        samples per quarter for those quarters.


 SG5   A system serves z 10,000 people and has eighty-six wells that the state has determined to come
        from thirty-eight aquifers. The system also has three surface water treatment plants.  The water
        from one of the surface water treatment plants is purchased from another system.  Water from all
        the sources are combined into one pipe prior to entering the distribution system. How many WTPs
        does this system have?


        This system has one WTP since all the sources are combined prior to entering the distribution
        system and would have to take four samples per quarter since the system uses surface water.  In
        general, as long as the water is combined and therefore being mixed prior to entering the distribution
        system the system has one WTP for monitoring purposes.
June 2001                                     IV-42          Stage 1DBPR Implementation Guidance

-------
AppendixA
Primacy Revision
Crosswalks
The Primacy revision crosswalk for the Stage 1 Disinfectants/Disinfection Byproducts Rule
(Stage 1 DBPR) is presented on the following pages and includes the amendments published on
January 16, 2001, Regulatory language which was amended on January 16, 2001 appears
underlined in the following table.                     ,

Under 40 CFR 142.12, states must adopt the requirements of the Stage 1 DBPR within 2 years of
the final rule's publication, or by December 16, 2000. While states may find it easier to combine
the amendments to the Stage 1 DBPR with the original Stage 1 DBPR, the amendments must be
adopted within 2 years their publication or by January 16, 2003.

Please note there have been many changes to the Public Notice (PN) and Consumer Confidence
Report (CCR) rules since the publication of Stage 1 DBPR. Additional information on these
changes is available at www.epa.gov/safewater/pn.html and www.epa.gov/safewater/ccrl .html.

-------
                                  This page is left intentionally blank.
June 2001                                   Appendix A-2         Stage 1DBPR Implementation Guidance

-------











PH
tt
P
1
H
cc
H
H
PH
1
qi
to
1
U
*w
5
i

1
&

s
PM




.' o -'.a •
: g H | -,-
Q ^q fe
g g CO y
H S ^ S
z 1 o E
W - B ^
-'3 cc | .
• & ^
Q W
• &T
§ M «-.
Q *-j 5
^ § 1 "
5 w g
§ "1
•<* flu H
g. * 0-
Ow
. CO
• 'W
5
OD



' ^"2 "
w • ^ ••
' S U









1
w
..•'«
FEDERAL REQU




































I
^1 '•
•\ }
i
PM
g|




































§ 141.2 DEFINITIONS























ri'
.•*
coo










Enhanced coagulatibn























(N
•*
coo










Enhanced softening























0)
•*
coo










0
1
























P<
g
O
S3
o
o
o
o"
fli
applies to ground water CWSs that servi
December 3 1.2003.


















c
E
h
>
t
I
t
}-
h
C
f
C
(•
?
f
h
•^
)-
^
*
£
*i
*
X
S
H
E;
c
^
c
F-
P
P
B
5


















/5
•H
1
^ i
3;
2
^
y<
3(
Qi
1
^i
J*
"H
>*i
*!
*s
1-
";
^ :
5

5j
•• ;
f|
|
)\
•4 I
II
li












s
i
1
.P
§*
P4
^
w
O
|
j
.t-H
?
^
-^
cf
B
i
c«
a
5
H
S
:§
o:
* -
SOS






















. _, '
o"
ro
.5
coo

v, ^
Is,
C^ ri

1 "i
en Jo
1 1
S ^
§ S
Compliance with § 141 . 12 shall be based
quarterly samples collected by the syste
(2) . ,
  I
 I
  ID
 S
 o
•
1
I

-------
1 H 1
9 w S H
g s w 5
b g o a
g 5 z w
I W 3
E ^*
p &
w
£
fc <->
w £
«2 _i> <:
£ OJ £>
5 Ed K
y a *2
& g §
O g ^
< 5 h
5 g
H
W


;$ 2
w S
Fjl C
e o



FEDERAL REQUIREMENT























I
5
CO3
CO
1 Samoline and analysis made pursuant to this section shall be
1 conducted bv one of the total trihalomethanes methods as directed ir
 r
0 | -
^^[ C?
u f i
^•i ca i
3 i <
F
^
P
(a
E-
P
•<
P
g
5
<*
c
E-
P
P
P
£
3 | j
^ 13 S i
Us
* i\ **
i 
S ^ TI
J O! (£>:
a g, 1;
' § 1
cs ^
y1* ^
«T ^
^ S «rf^
•i ° S j
5 
3 g|
5 I*
1 1 zl
3 £ i
^ tS " ^
H S ?
IN



























§ 141.3.2 PUBLIC NOTIFICATION





















e
V 	 '
•§•
(N
CO
.— H
von
bfl
For violations of the MCLs of contaminants and MRDLs of
•disinfectants that may pose an acute risk to human health, by
furnishing a copy of the notice to radio and television stations servir
the area served by the PWS as soon as possible but in no case later
than 72 hours after the violation




















X
l§.
^
CO
5
z,
•o
Violation of the MRDL for chlorine dioxide as defined in §141.65 an
determined according to § 141 . 1 33(c)(2)























CN"
CO
T— <
z,
>> V
Owner/operator of CWS must give copy of the most recent public
notice for any .outstanding violation of any MCL, any MRDL, or an
treatment technique requirement, or any variance or exemption to all
new billing units or new hookups prior to or at the time service begi





















G-
J^,
cf
CO
g
«»

Chlorine public notification language
•;
 §
 'C
 •
 I

 1
 ^
 5)-
 f
 I.

-------
°' S
^ H ^
Sfh
" z B O M
i & s *
i - ^ s3 ;
as
Ef •' - /.
•£.;.. •
p

• z ."ST-
S j^ 3 -
8 § S
z ^ •§ •
,2 |S
0, 1
w
-g.-'
on

•..as '
. D ^
So ..







H
I •'"• "
PS .
. I; .
"- w
. : > . •





















§
(D
gi
«x,








•
I*
1
s
•1
Chloramines public notific





















oo
'&'
r$
m
coo








1
1
Q'
3



1
a

i
o
tfl
1
o
i
1
"o
Chlorine Dioxide Acute Vi





















,

r*
von

.0 :
.1
. &

' m
Q

1

^
Treatment
•o
Disinfection Byproducts a
notification language





















. o"
oo
-2-

cO3









I
^ .
1 Bromate public notificatioi























en
«x>









1
J
Chlorite public notification
" "™

5 -
i_j
H
^
H
fa
53
HH
Q

*< • '
a >
CO
S i
1 .!
52 ">
8 '•
2 !
s '
CO
j2
s i
N >
S i
a ;
^y '
§-
1" '

H ;
1
^-
H
:^^
•S
i
t/i
S
i
- r~j
1
a
s-
ijrj
- • '
r- 1
GOO























•*'
coo









. ' f 	 N
: o
. 0
-7tv§
.Chlorine: 4 mg/L (asCI2)
Chloramines: 4 mg/L (as C
Chlorine dioxide: 0.8 mg/L
 O

I
 a*
 -f •
 o
 ft
 w

 1
 a
 -
:§•
       I
       I

      ;§
      •
      I


      I



      1
      *^<
      ^
      f

-------
d H
u 5
-hi
O u
& is <« w
, W 7 W
g £ 0 B
1 i 1 M
E! &
Q S
1
b '—'
Ci3 &j
§ g §
1§ i
K K -S:
PO O
< «
«•• PL! G
P O
a s
^
CO



y.
•^ o
H S
IG





FEDERAL REQUIREMENT
">^'1' "*•"*""•




OD
^
S
s
w
§
89
fi
H
M
a
CA
S
§
(3
5"
M
d
jg

1
CO
fcq
S
n3
H
H
S
O
1
CO

















en
Q
Q
O
ci
M
z
0
§
z
So
c:
Q
rr LEVELS)
§141*64 MAXIMUM CONTAMINAP

























1
2
«»



Total trihalomethanes: 0.080 mg/L
Haloacetic acids (five): 0.060 mg/L
Bromate: 0.010 mg/L
Chlorite: 1.0 mg/L





^,
C-
vo
2
CO3

•g ^








g
^^
III
lii
itr
Subpart H systems serving 10,000 or more people i
this section beeinnine January 1. 2002: Suboart H s-
fewer than 10,000 people and ground water system
this section beginning January 1 . 2004























, — ,
si
i
vq
S
co*.
O r*> ^
'K §'•»•*
O «-t (D O '
•s -*§ g ,2 .
g< . C S *3
o ^ a 0 t,_
t! C U *5 O
!ll§§
filial
System installing GAC or merribranes may apply tc
of up to 24 months past the compliance dates but n
December 3 1 , 2003; state must set a schedule for co
specify interim measures that the system must take:
schedule or the interim requirements constitutes a v:
NPDWRs ' ,

























1
3
'v»



BATs for TTHMs, HAA5, Bromate, Chlorite



























P
1
H
SINFECTAN
§ 141 .65 MAXIMUM RESIDUAL Di

























is".
2
COO



Chlorine: 4.0 mg/L (as C12)
Chloramines: 4.0 mg/L (as C12)
Chlorine Dioxide: 0.8 mg/L (as C1O2)


»— (

IU
10,000 or mor
marv 1.2002:
s
C3
le and ground
inuarv 1. 200^
CWSs and NTNCWSs: Subpart H systems serving
people must comply with this section beginning Jar
Subpart H systems serving fewer than 10,000 peopl
systems must comply with this section beginning Jj
  o
 *KA

 S


 .1
 »*-»
  B.
-S3

 *?'
-<
  1)

 I

-------
M!H
'r& ' D W H
E s •Ba - s

%• BOW
'§ • 5 §
w g 2 -
/3 ^

tj '. •
| ..
-g ^ ^
P td Fh
U CO ,3
' § § i
*>*' -^ 2
ril
^ ' ^ h
UH LJ
,Tj W
U CO
H
H '

:-j;z
M P
- ' 0 H
• ' : S U :







FEDERAL REQUIREMENT

•

S
© .
"o •
2
6OO
0)


 
-------
ill H
g s S> 3
g || |
S i3
Ed"
P
S K
S of S
§ 1 1
A § 3
•¥s|
2 o §
f" < S-1
:< * h
B i
w
f-
W3
i §
ty*
C> "^

s o




FEDERAL REQUIREMENT

















^_li^ :
-3.
o
en
5
«»

S
CWSs and NTNCWSs must be operated by qualified personnel who
meet the requirements specified by the state and are included in a stal
register of qualified operators

















^^
S
o

•?
CO,


Systems may increase residual disinfectant levels in the distribution
system for chlorine or chloramines but not chlorine dioxide to a level
and for a time necessary to protect public health to address specific
microbiological contamination problems

























§141.131 ANALYnCALREQUIREMEl>JTS

















X


en
4
coo

1-4
System must only use analytical methpd(s) specified in this section o
approved by EPA to demonstrate compliance; methods are effective
February 16, 1999
















S

S-

en
5
coo


Documents containing analytical methods are incorporated by
reference
















f 	 S
,-— s
e

2
5
coo


Systems must measure DBPs by the methods listed in (b)(l)
















s

£,

, en
5
coo


Analysis for DBPs must be conducted by EPA or state-certified labs

labs must analyze PE samples annually for certification; lab must
achieve a 95% confidence interval 80% of the time to remain certified
















en
^^
'e.-

£!
T?
COO

-------
1 1 S-H
g ',-g w '^j
g -1" o w
g 3 . z w
^ -§ 2 ' '
-l,;l.
bf
" b
H
i ^
o § 52
0 . g |
^ z • -£3
P 1 1
S * -5 '
y g.
65 •
01 | • '

3 2
« 1 :

^^ . -.







FEDERAL REQUIREMENT





••












i — i
•• — '
T-T
en

^
CO,





: measuring alkalinity
Methods foi

















tN,
T?
en

^f
CO3





• measuring bromide
Methods foi

















G,
<&
en

rt-
'«»





r measuring TOC
Methods foi

















S-
T?
en

^i-
=0,





00
1
Methods foi
















f 	 ^
:^,
T?
m

•*
coo





r measuring DOC
Methods foi
















.^
g^
T?
en

Tf
co,





.M
CO
1
"Methods foi

















G
T?
en

Tf
=0,





r measuring pH .'•.•'•-.
| Methods foi




























I MONITORING REQUIREMENTS
r4
iH
OGC

















£?
"c?
en

. 5
CO?

CO
d
.S
•rH
st take all samples during normal operating cone
Systems mu

















S
• g
of
en
.
5
CO3
% ."-•
1
43 "a -„•

a a >
' consider multiple wells drawing water from a si
le treatment plant for determining the minimum
HAAS samples required in (h) with state appro
Sysfemmay
aquifer as 01
TTHM aid

















S
®
of
en
.
5
^




a
onitor in accordance with the monitoring plan is
violation
Failure to ni
monitoring i

















g..
®
e^
.
"5 "".".-•
GOO'-. . -

"o § "rt
'£•* S s r^
Q> -t-» Q

onitor will be treated as a violation for the entire
oi annual -average where compliance is based on i
lonthly or quarterly samples or averages and a s
aiiitor makes it impossible to determine MCL/]V
. c m *-<- 5 flj
If llf
ci o - ^ 'S O
fc 'o ca eS p

















S
®
of
en
*""!
,5
CO3


CO
a ..

y use only data collected under the provisions o:
ubpart M to qualify for reduced monitoring
Systems rha
subpartorS
















e
S
S1
of
en
"~i
5-
^




"
i.
H
. (-1
1
!
t
o
Routine moi
















• ,-.,
i — i
g
en
* I
5!-
c^>





mitoring requirements for TTHM and HAAS
Reduced me
 I
I
s
 s
 'O
 §


-------
o E
r»i ^J
1 i £
g s « S
E S K W
is S 6 ta
[35^'^
2 a §
| g a
Q W
t»r
vj
•3 Cl3 r*
oil
f IS
|| 1

OCd
OT
M
H
CO

^ 2
w 5
(§ U







Ed
W
1










'








,;;, •
y-^t
x

en
T?
m
1 3>4 *
o S Q) o
Ja o e H*
" 2 0.080 me/1 or the HAA5


























£
td
bi
C
1
1 is >0.060 me/L. the system must go to increased monil

























b
S
1

^
1 freauencv identified in (Wild) in the Quarter immedia






























| the monitoring period of the exceedance.




















/—
v_
s
eN
5
CO-
bi
C
1
'c
c

Systems on increased monitoring may return to routine





























CA
S
•*;
K
"&
•c
1
5
c
1
S
a
00



















S
,>
\


3

























§

i

^
coo





Routine daily monitoring requirements for chlorite



















@
S
g
cs
en
5
coo





Routine monthly monitoring requirements for chlorite




















S
g
tN
^
coo





Additional monitoring requirements for chlorite



















g
S
Ci-
i
v *
cooS





No reduced daily monitoring for chlorite



















g
:3
cs
g
fSI

COO ^H





Reduced monitoring in distribution system for chlorite




















en
j$
ts
en
5
coo





Routine monitoring requirements for bromate




















m
2~
(N
en
5
coo





1 Reduced monitoring requkements for bromate




















^
' O
exi
5
coo


CA
IU

1
Routine monitoring requirements for chlorine and chlor




















X
0
CH
m
5
coo





No reduced monitoring for chlorine and chloramines




















S
0
eN
en
5
coo





Routine monitoring requirements for chlorine dioxide
 «1>

  •
 §
 1
 •s
 s
 I.
 W).



 I
 o

 
-------
a -g :"
' | §•! g
!'? 3.
6 ' (3 '
H. -

• 1 fS |
B w 3

1, a 1
111
?S' * o
0 BT
••• s.
- K

2 -2
Q <
H . H
fc rj






FEDERAL REQUIREMENT














1

®
CS
en
•*
coo




Additional monitoring requkements for chlorine dioxide














&
s
^~
CN
: en
^t
CO3




No reduced monitoring for chlorine dioxide















CT1
@
CN"
en
'^~
coo




Routine monitoring requirements for DBF precursors




:










®
•§•
CN7
en
Tf
CGO




Reduced monitoring requkements for DBF precursors
















•"•§
CN
en
•*
• CO3


s .
1
Monitoring requirements for bromide, to remain on reduced to
monitoring- : , ••••,'•













• - - . - - - -


& - ••'-''•
CN
en • • .
5
Z • _

to • (-<
-•. ^'- . a •§.'>, a
^ '3 .^ ^ Q. S rr*
Each system required to monitor must develop and implement
monitoring plan; system must maintain the plan and make it av
to the state and the general public no later than 30 days followi
applicable compliance dates; Subpart H systems serving more
3,300 must submit a copy of the monitoring plan to the state n
than the date of the first report required under §141.134; state :
require any system to submit its monitoring plan; state may ra
changes in any plan element















. / — v
©
CN
en
' 2 '
^ •


t_(
to
Monitoring plan: locations and schedules for collecting sample:
any parameters















oT
©
CN
m
5
COo .


j" "

Monitoring plan: how system will calculate compliance with N
MRDLs, treatment techniques •- . ,















en" : :
Q
CN
en
^
Z, ..


; • -
'.3' <*,'-
Monitoring plan: sampling plan must reflect the entire distribu
system if approved for monitoring as a consecutive system or i
providing water to a consecutive system .

























§141.133 COMPLIANCE REQUIREMENTS















'. — •••
s
m
en
5
£..
. ^-i
. eg.
'•§•
••s.
System fails to monitor that makes it impossible to determine
compliance with the MCLs or MRDLs will be treated as a viol
entire period covered by an annual average















S
1?
en

^
£ /

c
'i:
"S
All samples,taken and analyzed under this subpart must be incl
determining compliance eyen if the number is greater than the
minimum requked ,
 O

.S
 s
 O
4


1
•s
 s>
 IP
•I..

-------
"• & a5
I|8B
[u 2» jo
III"
| % 2
O Q
w
3 td K
0 3 <

** '£•&
2 5 o
^ £ P
6 %
Id
i-
H
W
-8
II
M +*
iS 0


FEDERAL REQUIREMENT


















s~^
i
>£,
en
en
CO3
*\
If, during the first year of monitoring, any individual quarter's averag(
will cause the 'annual average of that system to exceed the MCL the
system is out of compliance at end of that quarter


















<-.
1
m
en
CO?

Compliance requirements for TTHM and HAAS MCLs for systems
monitoring quarterly


















o
B
1
en
en
T— *
CO3

Compliance requirements for TTHM and HAAS MCLs for systems
monitoring less than quarterly; system must increase monitoring to
once per quarter if MCL exceeded


















/ — \

en
en
coo

Compliance requirements for TTHM and HAAS MCLs, if running
annual arithmetic average of quarterly averages covering any four-
quarter period exceeds the MCL, the system is in violation of the
MCL.


















£
V 	 '
en
en
«'
co a
, 	 1 r* O
Compliance requirements for TTHM and HAAS MCLs, if a PWS fai
to complete four consecutive quarters of monitoring, compliance witl
the MCL for the last four-quarters compliance period must be based
an average of the available data:



















1
en
en
z,

Compliance requirements for bromate



















1
en
en
coo

Compliance requirements for chlorite


















.,_,
§
en'
en
coo

1 Compliance requirements for chlorine and chloramines; if the MRDL
is exceeded the system must notify the public and report to the state


















g;
V 	 '
'o*
en
en
coo

1 Compliance requirements for systems switchins between the use of
1 chlorine and chloramines


















^,
S
en '
en
COO

Compliance requirements for chlorine dioxide acute violations


















/—^
i
en
en.
COO

Compliance requirements for chlorine dioxide nonacute violations



















g
en
en
cos

Compliance requirements for DBP precursors
  •
 R

,O

 C
I
    .
f
I

-------
d ""• w
M i^j
J.J1 - . , L r"j
" S ^ S .
g H ^
:§ I 1 *
-.CJ S ^ pd
"S" B' § ' w
I1!
i
H - -
H /~^
!? . W
g W g
O S «
- •& ;g |
.2 § §
H ^ a
U 09
W .' '
H

0 fc
"-So-.
Q ^

fe O
•






FEDERAL REQUIREMENT
























^
^i
-g
|
P
^f •

EEPINGR
§141.134 REPORTING AND RECORDK





















> — s " ' ' ' • '
® , :
•3-
CO

5 . '
coo
bo
fll P*

||-I| '.
Systems required to sample at least quarterly must repi
1 within 10 days after the end of each quarter in which sa
collected; systems required to sample less frequently th
must report to the state within 10 days after the end of <
period in which samples were collected






















t^.

CO

xt-
COO




Reporting Requirements for DBFs






















t£.

CO

•*
coo



1
Reporting Requirements for TTHM and HAAS






















<£-

co

TJ-
CO,




Reporting Requirements for Chlorite






















e

CO

••*
.00




Reporting Requirements for Bromate






















Q

CO

Tt
coo




Reporting Requirements for Disinfectants






















o

CO

•*•
coo




, Reporting Requirements for Chlorine and Chloramines






















^o.

CO

^1-
coo




1 Reporting Requirements for Chlorine Dioxide






















g

CO

-*
coo




Reporting Requirements for DBP precursors



















^
g
1
2

• *
fe
•8
Q
fe
o
^^
o
RCONTR(
§ 141.135 TREATMENT TECHNIQUE FO




.- .

.'•--.. / -.














T-* '
^ 	 '
®

co . • . .

5
coo

/^~\ ' t-<
CN , O
*3- _ a> £S
lift
• ..Subpart. H systems using conventional filtration (as defii
must operate with enhanced coagulation or enhanced so:
achieve the TOC percent removal levels specified in (b)
system meets at least one of alternative compliance crite
(a)(3) .:.: -. .'-.:.-•. .





















S
• '3' ';

CO
*~^
;?
COO



«> S3 /— >
3 §S
£ £R
g 
-------
1 1 a H
£ S " |
s! 1 i w
| g |
R w
P
W 0"!
•5 oJ* l5
S g |
g S 1
1 11
3*8
w
H
t-
C/3

**3 f\
< W
1 §




FEDERAL REQUIREMENT
















_^
^-^
&
®
in
2
5
«»
Alternative compliance criterion: source water running annual average
TOC < 4.0 mg/L; alkalinity > 60 mg/L; TTHM s 0.040 mg/L and
HAAS s 0.030 mg/L or system has made a clear and irrevocable
financial commitment to use technologies that will limit the levels of
TTHMs and HAASs
















^
S;
S

in
CO
SJ
«»
Alternative compliance criterion: running annual average TTHM <
0.040 mg/L and annual average HAAS < 0.030 mg/L; system uses
only chlorine for primary disinfection and maintenance of a residual in
the distribution system

















, — \
si
®
if)
CO
?
«»
Alternative compliance criterion: source water SUVA s 2.0 L/mg-m
















 120 mg/L for specified source
water TOC .

















, — x
£2>
® '.

m
S
coo
Subpart H systems that cannot achieve the TOC removals in (b)(2)
must apply to state within 3 months of failure to achieve the removals
for the approval of alternative minimum TOC removal requirements
  '
 5
I



1
 I?

-------
o ' w •
£-1
- g fc -<
|| S:H
• g -g W ft;
z B o ti
1 I § :
C3 " [^
• H :
H ,.'
z . 'IS*
l;w «

Q CQ w
Ii 1
0^1
- ^-1 O O
H ^ y
< fe H
EH -O
o ;g
-w .
H
!»
• -l:
• " | i •' -
,-• &-B


FEDERAL REQUIREMENT





















g
•si
v_
.£
2
CO
Applications to the state for alternative minimum TOC removals under





















•s
X
-

o
1 (WSYmust include the results of bench- or pilot-scale testing under


























| {bVWit used to determine an alternate enhanced coagulation level





















•••3
g
(/I
m
2
tcb
pefiriitidn'of alternate enhanced coagulation level





















:ri
•- — ••
S
2
C05
Requirements for bench- or pilot-scale testing





















:f ' '•
g .
in
S
co=
Requirements for waters with alkalinities < 60 mg/L for which small
amounts of alum or equivalent addition of iron coagulant drive the pH
below 5.5 before significant TOC removal occurs





















g -
? - '
CO
"2j
CO3
System may operate at any coagulant dose of pH necessary (consistent -
with otherNPDWRs) to achieve the minimum TOC percent removal
approved in (b)(3) ... ...




.. - ..
















S '
g - •'•.'-.•
a.
2
«». - ,
System may apply- to the state for a waiver of enhanced coagulation
requirements if water is deemed non-amenable to enhanced
coagulation (if the TOC removal is consistently less than 0.3 mg/L of
TOC per lOmg/L of incremental alum dose at all dosages of alum, the
water is deemed to contain TOC not amenable to enhanced
.coagulation) •' , _ .






















g
CO
2;
col'
. . Systems must calculate compliance quarterly beginning after the
system has collected 12 months of data ,





















^
•^
S
"*
coo
Determine actual monthly TOC percent removal ••'.





















•g.'--'
^
in
CO
Tt-
CO3
Determine required monthly TOC percent removal from (b)(2) or
(b)(3) ; ;_,../•• . .".',"•'••.





















g
^
m
CO
^i-
CO3
Divide value from (c)(l)(i) by value from (c)(l)(ii)





















->"
' ^
«n
CO
'S-
CO3
Add results for (c)(l)(iii) for last 12 months and divide by 12





















8.
-77-
>n
CO
•3-
CO3
If value from: (c)(l)(iv) < 1.00 the system is not in compliance with the •
TOC percent removal requirements .






















S;
>n
CO
5
coo
Systems may use provisions in (c)(2)(i) through (v) in lieu of the
calculations in (c)(l)(i) through (v) to determine compliance with TOC
percent removal requirements ; -
 s
.o
'C
 s
t


1:.
~~i.
Su

-------
r? W
i i s H
g g w W
1 ll8
| g 3
p W
1 ef 1
£? Cd rh
O C3 53
§s
<
o S

S O
a s
H
V)

J *

K jp
5^ "^t
D L^
fiC


FfeDERAL REQUIREMENT

















Q
f?
X
&

CO
COQ
. E
If in any month treated or source water TOG < 2.0 mg/L the syst
may assign a monthly value of 1.0

















j*c
of
X
A
»n
CO
vcn
It
In any month the.system practicing softening removed at least 10
of magnesium hardness (as CaCO3) the system may assign a mon
value of 1.0

















I

^^
^O,
^O
en
Z.
&
s
In any month source water SUVA prior to treatment £ 2.0 L/mg-
system may assign a monthly value of 1 .0

















/^>
r>T
^ — *
SO/.
*o
en
^
a
Krv
In any month finished water SUVA prior to treatment <. 2.0 L/mj
the system may assign a monthly value of 1 .0

















S
t*~ ^
d

^o^
Vl
en
r— (
£
.£•8
•M §
In any month a system practicing enhanced softening lowers alka
below 60 mg/L (as CaCO3) the system may assign a monthly val
1.0



















^^
^,
y-j
en
^
If
Subpart H systems using conventional treatment may also comp
the requirements of this section by meeting the criteria in (a)(2) p





'.-













f — s
S'
*o
en
Z,
•a
8
Agency identifies treatment techniques for DBF precursors: enha
coagulation or enhanced softening
\






s
fc^
? •
a-
1!
•S

1
i
3
J:
.2
g
S
p.'
o
"S|:
||
li
ll
U s
sf
it
^K W
W cti
O ^:
.Ji
{••^ ^^
ll
M O
GO »






















K
1
O
fe
§141.154 REQUIRED ADDITIONAL HEALTH &



















/~-s -
^2^,
^"
y^
£
° ^
CWSs that detect TTHM above 0.080 mg/L but below the MCL
§141. 12 as an annual average monitored and calculated under §14"
must include health effects language prescribed by paragraph (73]
Appendix C to Subpart O
  I
I
I
I
,-

 I

-------















PH
PT-I
1
H
1
|

PRIMACY REVISION CR
*
o
u
2
PM
TS
, B
•S
a
..o
£
o
B
o
••o
1
|
U
'•a
1
r4"
to

Federal Requirement
y


















£j
M
I
H
1
W
,o





















§142.14 RECORDS KEPT BY STATES

















c?
I .
COS
CM '.
Records of currently applicable or most recent state determinations; explanation <
technical basis for each decision; interim measures toward installation

















c-T
1
§
S
States must keep records of systems installing GAC or membrane technology; ik
by which system is required to have completed installation

















??
|; "•.-;.
coo

State must keep records of systems that are required to" meet alternative minimun
TOC removal requirements or for whom state has determined that source water it
not amenable to enhanced coagulation; alternative limits and rationale for
establishing alternative limits - . . .'••••.
















^_^
£?
v 	 ^
.§.,'
coo

States must keep records of Subpart H systems using conventionar treatment
meeting any of flie alternative compliance criteria in §141.1 35(a)(2) or (3)
















g
g-
"• — ',
r-t. "•
en
States must keep a register of qualified operators that have met state requirement
under § 14 l,16(f)(2): .^ . . . . •

















S
I
coo

Records of systems with multiple wells considered to be 1 treatment plant

















• ^
I
coo

Monitoring plans for 'Subpart H systems serving more than 3,300 people

















£"
1
i — i
COO

List of laboratories approved for analyses

















<£• '
g
coo

List of systems required to monitor for disinfectants and DBFs;, indicate what
disinfectants and DBFs (other than chlorine, TTHM, and HAA5) aremeasured





















§142.16 SPECIAL PRIMACY REQUIREMENTS


















1
i
coo
'S
Requirements for states to adopt 40 CFR part 141, Subpart L (state regs must be
least as stringent) • : ... .'" .


















®
^

Application must contain description of how state will accomplish program
requirements •' • . , "'..-.'• ...

















^_^ .
vo"
1 •
coo
coo
Program requirement: determine any interim treatment requirements for systems
electing to install GAC or membranes and are granted additional time to comply
with § 141 .64 {state does not have to respond if it utilizes authority under
1412(b)(10) to extend schedule) .
 I-
 I.
J:
tv

I:
I:

-------
g
a
T3
u
0
U
PH
T)
C
O
u
s
o
o
o
to
C3
C
«
W
g
i
u
•g
o
1












-4-i
Requiremen
Federal
























i
vo
i
ten












&
o
rement: qualify operators
¥
a
£






















1
i

-------
Appendix B
 Sample Extension
 Agreement
Under 40 CFR 142.12, states must adopt the requirements of the Stage 1
Disinfectants/Disinfection Byproducts Rule (Stage 1 DBPR) within 2 years of the final rules'
publication or by December 16, 2000.             ,               :

An extension agreement will be necessary only when states have not submitted a complete and
final primacy revision application package by December 16, 2000. For further detail, please refer
to Section III B.                               •

A sample extension agreement is presented on the following pages. -

-------
                                  This page is left intentionally blank.
June 2001                                   Appendix B-2        Stage 1DBPR Implementation Guidance

-------
                                     Extension Agreement

                                       Name of State Agency
                         U.S, Environmental Protection Agency Region
                                       Extension Agreement
                                     for Implementation of the
                 Stage 1 Disinfectants/Disinfection Byproducts Rule (Stage 1 DBPR)

 On December 16, 1998, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) published the final Stage 1
 Disinfectants/Disinfection Byproducts Rule (Stage 1 DBPR). This rule amends tiie National Primary
 Drinking Water Regulations, 40 CFR Part 141 and the regulations for implementation of the National -
 Primary Drinking Water Regulations, 40 CFR Part 142. Provisions of this rule take effect 36 to 60
 months after publication.

 The April 28, 1998 revisions to the Primacy Rule extend the time allowed for States to adopt new Federal
 regulations from 18 months to 2 years. Therefore, the State must adopt regulations pertaining to the Stage
 1 DBPR and submit a complete and final primacy revision application by December 16, 2000 unless it
 requests an extension of up to 2 years to adopt the new or revised regulations.

 This document records the terms of a Primacy Extension Agreement between the (Name of State
 Agency) (the State) and the EPA, Region	for the Stage 1 Disinfectants/Disinfection Byproducts
 Rule, and shall remain effective from the date (for State's eligible for interim primacy)  this extension
 agreement is signed until either December 16, 2002 or the date the State's primacy application is
 submitted under 40 C.F.R.  § 142.12. To retain primacy the State must submit a final and approvable
 Primacy Revision Application incorporating the above-referenced provisions of the Federal Register to
 EPA, Region,	 by December 16, 2000, or no later than December 16, 2002, if the State has been
 granted an extension.                              ;

 Until the State Primacy Revision Application has been submitted,  for States eligible for  interim primacy,
 or approved, the State and EPA, Region ___ will share responsibility for implementing the primary
 program elements as indicated below.
        •        .•-'•--'-"•      -'.'-',-•' v            •'
 This Extension Agreement outlines the responsibilities of (Name of State Agency) and EPA. Region  .
     as partners in this effort, working toward two very specific  public health-related  goals. The first
 goal is to achieve a high level of compliance with the regulation. The second goal is to facilitate
 successful implementation of the regulation during the transition period before the State has interim
 primacy for the rule. In order to accomplish these goals, education and training will need to be provided
 to water suppliers on then- responsibilities under the Stage 1 DBPR. "
M/DBPImplementation Guidance              AppendixB-3                                  June 2001

-------
 Activities to be carried out by the State or Region:

 Q     Notify PWSs within 60 days of signing this extension agreement of the requirements of the Stage
         1DBPR;                                                    '

 Q     Identify other State agencies that should receive copies of the Stage 1 DBPR.  Within 60 days of
        signing this extension agreement, provide EPA Region with the names, addresses, and phone
        numbers of contacts identified within those agencies;

 Q     Train State staff and PWSs on the requirements of the Stage 1 DBPR;

 Q     Devise a tracking system for PWSs' monitoring and reporting performed pursuant to the Stage 1
        DBPR;

 Q     Issue notices to PWSs that fail to meet requirements of the Stage 1 DBPR;

 Q     Provide copies of the Stage 1 DBPR in response to public inquiries;

 Q     Report Stage 1 DBPR violation and enforcement information to SDWIS as required;        " V '

 Q     Coordinate with water associations to increase awareness of requirements;

 Q     Assist with public outreach efforts to inform and educate PWSs;

 Q     Prepare guidance as needed, or forward national guidance to the States;

 Q     Keep States informed of SDWIS reporting requirements during development and
        implementation;

 Q     Compliance assistance; and,

 Q     Notify States of all Federal enforcement actions.
June 2001                                   Appendix B-4         Stage 1 .DBPR Implementation Guidance

-------
 This Extension Agreement will take effect upon the date of the last signature.


         Dated this       day of                     .2000




         Agency Director or Secretary



         Name of State Agency                         ;



         Dated this	day of                     . 2000
         Regional Administrator
         EPA, Region       ,
M/DBP Implementation Guidance              AppendixB-5-                                 June2001

-------
                                  This page is left intentionally blank.
June 2001                                   Appendix B-6         Stage 1DBPR Implementation Guidance

-------
Appendix G
Statement of
Principles—Guidance on
Audit Law Issues

-------
                                   This page is left intentionally blank.
June 2001                            -.,.    Appendix C-2         Stage 1DBPR Implementation Guidance

-------
                        UNITE

        TOi
                        et of Stats Audit
                      Oh B
                     Timotby
                     •Acting •-Asaijstact A
                                  to
                         , e, w ebtdr,
                                                                       reHcf
                                                                        to
                         "lus
and m,
                                aathoat-f
                                  v,ithaqdrt
Stage 1 DBPR Implementation Guidance      '  Appendix C-3
                                                                                  June 2001

-------
       L Aa vohajtwyaiiditiiig, E?A mil Ise :g*rti«s3tel.y
       other fkctorsT •with w&esfa«r the state has t
              1) Obtain Immediate SBS! 
-------
                1} r^aia^iflfotsatJsn g        auttedty-lt is
                             nfet o
                                                                                          .
                       , sascia^ fcr whjsf efelow«sr5 er     fcs tibM'prsvasai        from obtaining
                              t aoaepaipHaacs to wiash Qss$ are ea.tftied matter Meal law appear to
                                     '                            '

               It is important for EPA:to sksly cosnmiMlsateits positiB.ii';fej states md to
         f ^sirsffi
-------
             to.d ths effect of tha state* s law on Its mforoaasftt auifassty as itis o^tliacd in fesss
             principles,  DcpaKfeg oa ks coBciissEoBs, .Ef A .may deterabe that; tfas
             General's opi» jams SuMcjeat to
             su&odty,
             gatheriag aathoriiy for sash of ft« programs «l«^ ito^. To tias. • ectffit ist ctifife«it or
             mor« specific rw,uk«5S*alsfof srfsitata^fflt&utiisrit^ may tefisaijdM federal kw or
             regulauons, EPA wffl. t^ke &ese Ist« gaccsmt la waductJmilfe'?*''iBw of s&te.pi»gr&a«,
             In sLddJtJon, dais fflsmaranasim do«s sot address     Issoes ti« sould bs      fey
             judit laws, $us?li as tl3« Scope of p^Iic p®rtidpaD.q mp, QECA. aa4 Sftfcstsal pr&fr&ta offices*
       develop a staie-by-sfcate plan so- w^j-k ¥ath states to ^!ja«dv aay p»y$cas ideatifiad pasua
       application of these principles. As. a fest step, r?gic:B5 steald contact     asoraei's g«aeral for
       ma opinion regarding di* sife?t of aaj1 audit pff/ilcge or knmffliity law oa «Ssfote?asieat AUtiiarfty
       as discussed i?
      t
June 2001                                    Appendix C-6         Stage 1 DBP& Implementation Guidance

-------
Appendix D
Stage 1 DBPR Plain English
Summary

-------
This page is left intentionally blank.

-------
United States '-.'.         Office of Water v ,-..'-. EPA816-R-01-014
.Environmental Protection       (4606)       June 2001
Agency  - .  ' • .--' ''  ~ .'".- .   • ,'._•.- - '•- ."-'• .'•'.'..'- .... "' '
The Stage 1 Disinfectants and
Disinfection Byproducts Rule

What Does it Mean to You?

-------
This page is left intentionally blank.

-------
 Contents
 Definitions and Abbreviations  ............ ; .. .-.;.. ...;..... •. ..•;.... "/.'-...•;.'."."..            l
 1. Introduction .... . ... ............. .'.   . . ..... .... . . . . .  ...    . . . .  . . . .            3
  .     Purpose of the Guide ...... . . . . . 1 ... . . . . .......... . .  . ...            .:,          3
       Background..	• ••••••••........... .^ ..................             -3
       Development of the Rule ............. . . . . . . 4 .... . . . . .  . , . . . . . ....    -.-  ... ;      5
       Benefits of the Rule  . ...... . , . . . ...... , . . . . ... .  .... . .  . ... , . .   .•'.'. . . ...   _    5
 2. Applicability and Compliance Dates . . . . ; . . ..'. . . . . ..... .-•. .... .  '. . . ; ....'........ ,. ...... 5
 3. Summary of regulatory requirements ... ............................................. 7
       MCLGs and MCLs for disinfection byproducts .. .^.................... ^.......... 7
       MRDLGs and MRDLs for disinfectant residuals  . . . ; . .	 ....... . . . . .... . .'-. . 8
       Treatment technique for disinfection byproduct precursors  . . .... . '. . . . . ..... ....   .... 8
       Best available technology (BAT)  ..... . . ..............................          8
       Public water system recordkeeping and reporting requirements .-....•'...	 9
       Laboratory methods and certification .................... ..... ........ .         . . 9
4. Additional information ........... . . ...... ... . . . . ... ............... ... .......... 9
5. Detailed regulatory requirements . . . ... .... . .  . . . .... ... . . . .	 . . . . . . . . 10
       Subpart H systems serving at least 10,000 people  .	  . . ..'.'. . . ...........       13
       Subpart H systems serving 500 to 9,999 people .. . .... .... ..... ... . . . .... ......... .19
       Subpart H systems serving fewer than 500 people   .................................  25
       Ground water systems serving at least 10,000 people .. . . ...' ....	 . ... . . •.'•'.'.....  31
       Ground water systems serving fewer than 10,000 people . . ,. . . ........ ... . . . . . . ....   "37
       Systems using .chlorine dioxide .... . ...... . ... .... . ... .. .... . . . .... ..... ...     43
       Systems using ozone	 ...	 .  49
       Subpart H systems using conventionalfiltration treatment..	 . . . . . .... ... . . . ......  53

-------
This page is left intentionally blank.

-------
 Definitions  and Abbreviations
 Definitions •/.  -    '.---..'.'\-   .""-•'.  .'".-•  '•  -     •  .; "." '•••-.•.';,." -"-   •   ;    ;  •./-•.	   ..   '••.'-•

 Enhanced coagulation ---- the addition of sufficient coagulant for improved removal of disinfection
 byproduct precursors by conventional filtration treatment

 Enhanced softening — the unproved removal of disinfection byproduct precursors by precipitative
 softening.                                                           ,

 Maximum residual disinfectant level (MftDL) ->--- a level of a disinfectant added' for water treatment
 that may not be exceeded at the consumer's tap without an unacceptable possibility of adverse health
 effects.        ,         -     .-•'•'•   ".           -".'  '.':•             '    .':"-.•"•• "''  .  :    ••/

 Maximum residual disinfectant level goal (MRDLG) - - the maximum level of a disinfectant added
 for water treatment at which no known or anticipated adverse effect on the health of persons would
 occur, and which allows an adequate margin of safety.  MRDLGs are nonenforceable health goals and do
 not reflect the benefit of the addition of the chemical for control of waterbdrne  microbial contaminants,

 SUVA — Specific Ultraviolet Absorption at 254 nanometers (nm), an  indicator of the humic content of
 water. It is a calculated parameter obtained by dividing a sample's ultraviolet absorption at a wavelength
 of 254 nm (UV 254) (in m -' ) by its concentration of dissolved organic carbon  (DOC) (in mg/L).

 Total Organic Carbon (TOC) —- total organic carbon in mg/L measured using heat,  oxygen, ultraviolet
 irradiation, chemical oxidants, or combinations of these oxidants that convert organic carbon to carbon
 dioxide, rounded to two significant figures.
 Abbreviations Used in This Document

 BAT: Best Available Technology
 CDC: Centers for Disease Control and Prevention
 CWS: Community Water System
 DBF: Disinfection Byproducts                                                ,
 DBPP: Disinfection Byproducts Precursors
 EC: Enhanced Coagulation
 EPA: United States Environmental Protection Agency
 ES: Enhanced Softening           ,                              •
 ESWTR: Enhanced Surface Water Treatment Rule
 FACA: Federal Advisory Committee Act
 FR: Federal Register
 GAC10: Granular Activated Carbon with ten minute empty bed contact time and 180 day reactivation
 frequency                                   '-'/".
 GWR: Ground Water Rule                                                >      '
 GWUDI: Ground Waiter Under me Dkect Influence of Surface Wafer
HAA5: Haloacetic Acids (five)(chloroacetic acid, dichloroacetic acid, trichloroacetic acid, bromoacetic
 acid and dibromoacetic acid)
ICR: Information Collection Rule (issued under section I412(b) of the SDWA)
IESWTR: Interim Enhanced Surface Water Treatment Rule
Log Inactivation: Logarithm of (N0/NT)  .,


   -  •  •"..". '  '• '    -     .'  ..-''.'-•'   :- -: --'.  -  'Page!                ""   "   •;-'•        .. • -'

-------
Log: Logarithm (common, base 10)
LT1ESTWR: Long-Tenn 1 Enhanced Surface Water Treatment Rule
LT2ESWTR: Long-Term 2 Enhanced Surface Water Treatment Rule
MCL: Maximum Contaminant Level                                       ,
MCLG: Maximum Contaminant Level Goal
M-DBP: Microbial and Disinfectants/Disinfection Byproducts
mg/L: Milligrams per Liter
MR: Monitoring/Reporting
MRDL: Maximum Residual Disinfectant Level
MRDLG: Maximum Residual Disinfectant Level Goal
MPDWR: National Interim Primary Drinking Water Regulation
NSCEP: National Service for Environmental Publications
NTIS: National Technical Information Service
NTNCWS: Non-Transient Non-Community Water System
PWS: Public Water System
PWSS: Public Water Supply Supervision Program
Reg. Neg.: Regulatory Negotiation
SDWA: Safe Drinking Water Act, or the "Act," as amended 1996
SDWIS: Safe Drinking Water Information System
Subpart H: PWS using surface water or ground water under the direct influence of surface water
SUVA: Specific Ultraviolet Absorbance
SWTR: Surface Water Treatment Rule
TCR: Total Conform Rule
TNCWS:  Transient Non-Community Water Systems
TOC: Total Organic Carbon
TTHM: Total Trihalomethanes (chloroform, bromdichloromethane, dibromochloromethane, and
bromoform)                                  ,
                                            Page 2

-------
  1. Introduction

  Purpose of the Guide

  The purpose of this guide is.to detail the regulatory requirements of the Stage 1
  Disinfectants/Disinfection Byproducts Rule (Stage 1 DBPR), The Stage 1 DBPR, published in the
  Federal Register on December 16, 1998 (63 FR 69390; www.epa.gov/OCjWDW/mdbp/dbpfr.html: :
  66 FR 3770: www.epa.gov/safewater/mdbp/iesfr.html). is the first part of a series nf mlas; ths
  'Microbial-DisMectants/Disinfection Byproducts Cluster" (M-DBP Cluster), to be published over the
  next several years that are intended to control microbial pathogens while minimizing the public health   ;
  risks of disinfectants and disinfection byproducts (DBPs). The Stage 1 DBPR specifically addresses risks
  associated with disinfectants and DBPs. This rule was published concurrently with the Interim Enhanced
  Surface Water Treatment Rule (IESWTR), which addresses control of microbial.pathogens.

  Background

  The 1974 Safe Drinking Water Act (SDWA) called for EPA to regulate drinking water by creating the
  national interim primary drinking water regulations (NIPDWR). In 1979, the first interim standard
  addressing DBPs was set for total trihalomethanes (TTHMs), a group of four volatile organic chemicals
  which form .when disinfectants react with natural organic matter in the water.

  Although SDWA was amended slightly in  1977, 1979, and 1980, the most significant changes to the
  1974 law occurred when SDWA was reauthorized in 1986.  Disease-causing microbial  contamination
  had not been sufficiently controlled under the original Act. To safeguard public health,  the 1986
  Amendments required EPA to set health goals, or maximum contaminant level goals (MCLGs) and
  maximum contaminant levels (MCLs) for 83 named contaminants.  EPA was also required to establish
  regulations within certain time frames, require disinfection of all public water supplies, specify filtration
  requirements for nearly all water systems that draw their water from surface sources, and develop
  additional programs to protect ground water supplies,      '

  In 1989, EPA issued two important National Primary Drinking Water Regulations (NPDWR): The Total
  Coliform Rule (TCR) and the Surface Water Treatment Rule (SWTR).  The TCR and SWTR provide the
  foundation for the M-DBF'Cluster and are summarized below.

  The TCR covers all public water systems.  Since coliforms are easily detected in water, they are used to
  indicate a water system's vulnerability to pathogens in the water.  In the TCR, EPA set a MCLG of zero
  for total coliforrns. EPA also set a MCL for total coliforrns.; If more than 5.0 percent of the samples
  contain coliforms within a month,  water system operators must report this violation to the state and the
  public.  In addition, sanitary surveys are required every five or ten years (depending on the quality of the
  source water) for every system that collects fewer than five samples per month (typically systems that
  serve less than 4,100 people).               .:.'.-•-.

  EPA issued the SWTR in response to Congress' mandate requiring disinfection, and where necessary;
 filtration of systems that draw their water from surface sources before distribution. The SWTR applies to
 all systems that use surface water or ground water under the direct influence of surface water (GWUDI).
 The rule sets MCLGs for Legionella, Giardia lambliq, and viruses  at zero since any exposure to these
 contaminants presents some level of health  risk. ,

 Specifically, the rule requires that a surface water system have sufficient treatment to reduce the source
 water concentration of Giardia lamblia and viruses by at least 99.9  percent (3 log) and 99.99 percent (4
 l°g)> respectively. A detectable disinfection  residual mustbe maintained throughout the entire
 distribution system;.  For systems that filter, the adequacy of the filtration process is determined by
 measuring the turbidity of the treated water  since high levels of turbidity often indicate that the .filtration
process is not working properly. The goal Of the SWTR is to reduce risk to less than one infection per

••-'   -••.•,.    '•  - ,'".        '  ";-'   -"•.   ..'.  ."     Pages   "../. ."•  •';'-  -'   -.  -.   • -,-...    :  • .--  .     ::

-------
year per 10,000 people. However, the SWTR does not account for systems with high pathogen
concentrations that, when treated at the levels required under the rule, still may not meet this health goal,
and the rule does not specifically control for the protozoan Cryptospotidium.

In 1990, EPA's Science Advisory Board, an independent panel of experts established by Congress, cited
drinking water contamination as one of the most important environmental risks and indicated that
disease-causing rrucrobial contaminants (z'.e., bacteria, protozoa, arid viruses) are probably the greatest
remaining health-risk management challenge for drinking water suppliers. Data from the Centers for
Disease Control (CDC) confirm this concern and indicate that between 1980 and 1994, 379 waterborne
disease outbreaks were reported, with over 500,000 cases of disease. During this period, a number of
agents were implicated as the cause, including protozoa, viruses, bacteria, and several chemicals. Most of
the cases (but not the outbreaks) were associated with surface water, including a single outbreak of
cryptosporidiosis in Milwaukee (over 400,000 pases).

In response to these findings, the SDWA was further amended in 1996 to improve public health   '
protection by incorporating new data on the adverse health effects of contaminants, the occurrence of
contaminants in public water systems, and the estimated reduction in health risks that would result from
further regulation.  The Act also increased scientific research requirements and emphasized cost-benefit
analyses in the regulatory decision process.

Based on prevailing scientific data, the M-DBP Cluster is intended to control microbial pathogens while
minimizmg the public health risk from disinfectants and DBPs. Since multiple threats require multiple
barriers, the IESWTR and Stage 1 DBPR expand on the  foundation of the TCR, SWTR, and TTHM
standards to target health risk outliers unaddressed by prior regulations.

The TTHM NPDWR of 1979 set a standard for TTHMs only for public water systems (PWSs) serving
10,000 or more people. The Stage 1  DBPR builds on the TTHM Rule by lowering the MCL and
widening the range of affected  systems to include all PWSs that add a disinfectant. Therefore, EPA
believes that the promulgation of the Stage 1 DBPR will  significantly decrease the risks posed by DBPs
and disinfectants by covering many PWSs not currently  regulated for TTHM or other DBPs.

Many water systems treat then: water with a chemical disinfectant in order to inactivate pathogens that
cause disease. The public health benefits of common disinfection practices are significant and well-
recognized; however, disinfection poses risks of its own. While disinfectants are effective in controlling
many harmful microorganisms, they react with organic and inorganic matter (disinfection byproduct
precursors—DBPPs) hi the water and form DBPs, some of which pose health risks at certain levels.
Since the discovery of chlorination byproducts in drinking water in 1974, numerous toxicological studies
have been conducted that show some DBPs to be carcinogenic and/or cause reproductive or
developmental effects in laboratory animals. Additionally, exposure to high levels of disinfectants over
long periods of tune may cause health problems, including damage to blood and kidneys'. While many of
these  studies have been conducted at high doses, the weight-of-evidence indicates that DBPs present a
potential public health problem that must be addressed. One of the most complex questions facing water
supply professionals is how to reduce risks from disinfectants and DBPs while providing increased .
protection against microbial contaminants. Much of the population is exposed to these risks; therefore, a
substantial concern exists.

To address this concern, the Stage 1  DBF Rule updates and supersedes the 1979 TTHM standard by
lowering the MCL for TTHMs and establishing maximum residual disinfection level (MRDL) limits for
chlorine, chloramines, and chlorine dioxide and new MCLs for chlorite, bromate, and haloacetic acids
(HAAS) for all community water systems and nontransient noncommunity water systems that add a
chemical disinfectant for either primary or residual treatment. In addition, the  Stage 1 DBF Rule requires
conventional filtration systems  to remove specified percentages of organic materials measured as total
organic carbon (TOC) that may react with disinfectants  to form DBPs.
                                               Page 4

-------
 By building on the foundation set forth by the original SDWA, the quality of drinking water has
 improved and public health protection has increased. The lESWTR and Stage 1 DBF Rules arepart of a
 series of rules designed to expand on the foundation of prior rulemaking efforts. By encompassing
 previously unaddress'ed health risks from microbials and disinfection byproducts, the M-DBP Cluster
 continues tpmaximize drinking Water quality ahdpublic health protection.

 Development of the Rule

 The new rules are a product of 6 years of collaboratiqn among the water supply industry, environmental
 and public health groups, and local, state, and federal governments. EPA first launched a rule-making
 process in 1992 and convened a Regulatory Negotiation (RegNeg) Advisory Committee under the
 Federal Advisory Committee Act (FACA), representing a range of stakeholders affected by possible
 regulation. The 1996 SDWA Amendments required EPA to develop rules to balance the risks between
, microbial pathogens and disinfection byproducts.

 In 1997, a similar FACA process was implemented with the Microbial-Disinfectants/Disinfection
 Byproducts (M-DBP) Advisory Committee. The M-DBP Committee convened to collect, share, and
 analyze new information available since 1994, review previous assumptions made during the RegNeg
 process, as well as build consensus  on the regulatory implications of this new information. Negotiations
 resulted in the following three proposals:

        ••-.    A staged approach to regulation of DBFs (referred to as the Stage land Stage 2,DBPRs)
               incorporating Maximum Contaminant Levels (MCLs), Maximum Residual Disinfectant
               Levels (MRDLs), and treatment technique requirements;

        *      A companion Interim Enhanced Surface Water Treatment  Rule (IESWTR) designed to
               improve control of microbial pathogens and prevent inadvertent  reductions in microbial
               safety as a result of DBF control efforts; and,

        •       An Information Collection Rule (ICR) to collect information necessary to reduce many
               key uncertainties prior to subsequent negotiations for the Stage 2 DBPR.

Benefits of the Rule

The Stage 1  DBPR is expected to reduce the risks associated with exposure to  disinfectants and DBFs.
The MCLs will reduce exposure to specific DBFs from the use of ozone (byproduct: bromate), chlorine
dioxide (byproduct: chlorite), and chlorine (byproducts: TTHM and five Haloacetic Acids—
-------
Subpart H systems (PWSs that use that use surface water or ground water under the direct influence of
surface water—GWUDI—as a source) serving 10,000 or more people must comply with the
requirements of the Stage 1 DBPR no later than January 2002. Subpart H systems that serve fewer than
10,000 people, and all affected ground water systems, must comply with the requirements no later than
January 2004.

The timetable for the Stage 1 DBPR is presented in Table 1. The Stage 1 DBPR and the IESWTR were
published simultaneously to address the inherent tradeoffs between protection from microbial
contamination and the potential health effects from disinfectants and their byproducts. These rales are
the first in a series of rales that will continue to address the public health concerns associated with
microbial pathogens and chemical disinfectants.

                 Table  1:  Timetable for the Stage 1 DBPR Requirements
Date
December 16, 1998
.February 16, 1999
February 16, 1999
January 1,2001
January 1,2002
January 1,2002
January 1,2002
January 1,2002
January 1,2003
December 3 1,2003
January 1, 2004
January 1,2004
January 1,2004
DBPR Requirement
Rule is published in Federal Register [63 FR 241 69390].
60-day legal challenge period ends.
Methods specified in 40 CFR 141. 131 for analyzing disinfection byproducts, disinfection
residuals, and DBF precursors are approved for use [40 CFR 141.13 l(a)].
Large Subpart H systems should begin monitoring to determine Step 1 TOC removal
before the compliance date.
Large Subpart H CWSs andNTNCWSs must comply with the MCLs for TTHM, HAAS,
bromate, and chlorite [40 CFR 141 .64(b)(l)].
Large Subpart H CWSs and NTNCWSs must comply with the MRDLs for chlorine,
chloramines, and chlorine dioxide [40 CFR 141. 65(b)(l)]-
Large Subpart H TNCWSs that use chlorine dioxide must comply with the MRDL for
chlorine dioxide [40 CFR 141.65(b)(2)].
Requirements of Subpart L generally apply to large Subpart H CWSs and NTNCWs [40
CFR141.130(b)(l)].
• Monitoring requirements.
• Reporting and recordkeeping requirements.
• Compliance.
• Treatment technique for control of DBF precursors. '
Small Subpart H systems should begin monitoring to determine.Step 1 TOC removal
before the compliance date.
Systems which received an extension from the state to install GAC or membranes must
comply with the Stage 1 DBPR [40 CFR 141. 64(b)(2)].
Small Subpart H and all ground water CWSs and NTNCWSs must comply with the
MCLs for TTHM, HAA5, bromate, and chlorite [40 CFR 141. 64(b)(l)].
Small Subpart H and all ground water CWSs and NTNCWSs must comply with the
MRDLs for chlorine, chloramines, and chlorine dioxide [40 CFR 141 .65(b)(l)].
Small Subpart H and all ground water TNCWSs that use chlorine dioxide must comply
with the MRDL for chlorine.dioxide [40 CFR 141.65 (b)(2)].
                                             Page 6

-------
Date
January 1, 2004
June30,2005
DBPR Requirement
Requirements of Subpart L generally apply to small Subpart H and all ground water
CWSsandmNCWs[40CFR14l.l30(b)(l)]; V :=- ^
• ••-- Monitoring requirements.
• Reporting and recordkeepingrequireiiients. ^
• • Compliance. , , ,
• Treatment technique for control of DBP precursors. ,
Systems that made a clear and irrevocable financial commitment before the applicable
compliance date to install technologies that limit TTHM and HAA5 to 0.040 mg/L and
0.030 mg/L, respectively, must have these technologies installed and operating [40 CFR
141.135(aX2Xiii)]. ; ,,-.'. ;
3.  Summary of regulatory requirements

MCLGs and MCLs for disinfection byproducts

The Stage 1 DBPR sets maximum contaminant level goals (MCLGs) for some of the regulated DBFs, a
more stringent maximum contaminant level (MCL) for TTHM,. and new MCLs for HAA5, bromate, and
chlorite. MCLGs are set at concentrations at which no known or anticipated adverse health effects are
expected to occur.  They are non-enforceable public health goals. MCLs are enforceable contaminant
standards that are feasible to achieve and measure.

These MCLs, along with the MRDLs and treatment technique explained iri the following paragraphs, will
help reduce exposure to DBFs and disinfectants and their associated health risks.                    ..
Disinfection Byproduct
Total Trihaiomethanes (TTHM)
Chloroform
Bromodichloromethane
Bromoform
Dibromochloromethane
Five Haloacetic Acids (HAAS)
Ivionochloroacetic Acid
Dichloroacetic Acid
Trichloroacetic Acid
Monobromoacetic Acid
DibromOacetic Acid ,
Chlorite • •
Bromate
MCLG (mg/L)


zero
zero
0.06^
,

zero
0.3

N
0.8
zero
MCL (mg/L)
0.080


'
f
0.060



•>
"
1.0
0.010
                                            Page 7

-------
Compliance for TTHM and HAAS MCLs is based on a running annual arithmetic average, computed
quarterly, of quarterly averages of all samples. Compliance for the chlorite MCL is based on an
arithmetic average of each three sample set taken in the distribution system.  Compliance for the bromate
MCL is based on a running annual arithmetic average, computed quarterly, of monthly samples.

MRDLGs and MRDLs for disinfectant residuals

To protect against potential health risks caused by high levels of residual disinfectants, the Stage 1 DBPR
sets the following maximum residual disinfectant level goals (MRDLGs) and maximum residual
disinfectant levels (MRDLs). Like MCLGs and MCLs, respectively, MRDLGs are non-enforceable,
while MRDLs are enforceable.
Disinfectant
Chlorine
Chloramines
Chlorine Dioxide
MRDLG(mgTL)
4(asCl2)
4(asCl2)
0.8
MRDL (mg/L)
4.0(asCl2)
4.0(asCl2)
0.8
Systems using chlorine or chloramines may temporarily increase residual disinfectant levels to an
appropriate level protect to public health in order to address specific microbiological contamination
problems. These problems may be caused by circumstances such as, but not limited to, distribution line
breaks, storm run-off events, source water contamination events, or cross-connection events. This option
is NOT available for the use of chlorine dioxide.

Compliance for chlorine and chloramine MRDLs is based on a running annual arithmetic average,
computed quarterly, of monthly averages of all samples.  Compliance for the chlorine dioxide MRDL is
based on consecutive daily samples.

Treatment technique.for disinfection byproduct precursors

The rule includes a treatment technique that applies to Subpart H systems using conventional filtration
treatment. The treatment technique was established because disinfectants can react with disinfection
byproduct precursors (DBPPs) to form both regulated and non-regulated DBPs. The treatment technique
requirements in the rule are designed to provide public health protection by minimizing the production of
all DBPs. Compliance with the treatment technique can be achieved by removing specified percentages
of Total Organic Carbon (TOC) using enhanced coagulation or enhanced softening. Alternatively,
systems may comply by showing they meet alternative compliance criteria.  For example, systems which
have a low level of TOC in their source or treated water (less than 2.0 mg/L) meet alternative compliance
criteria.

Best available technology (BAT)

EPA has specified the Best Available Technology (BAT) for each MCL and MRDL established in the
rule. These technologies and methods are believed to be effective in controlling chemicals in drinking
water while remaining economically feasible for PWSs to employ. PWSs must use the specified BAT if
they wish to qualify for variances. Otherwise, systems are not required to install BAT and may use any
technology to achieve compliance.
                                               Page 8

-------
Chemical
DBFs
Disinfectants
TTHMandHAAS"
--.-• .•.•••" .:- ," .-..'-
Chlorite ;
Brdmate
Chlorine, chlpramiiie,
and chlorine dioxide
Best Available Technology
Enhanced coagulation or granular activated carbon (GAC 10), with chlorine as
the primary and residual disinfectant ,
Control of treatment processes to reduce disinfectant demand and control of
cKsinfection treatment processes to reduce disinfectant levels
Control of ozone treatment process to reduce production of bromate
Control of treatment processes to reduce disinfectant demand and control of
disinfection treatment processes to reduce disinfectant levels
 Public water system recordkeeping and reporting requirements

 For each disinfectant, contaminant, contaminant group, and treatment technique, EPA has developed
 routine compliance monitoring schemes to be protective of acute and chronic health concerns.  The
 compliance monitoring requirements vary by the size and type of system, the treatment employed, and
 the disinfectant used. In many cases, systems may reduce monitoring frequencies after
 baseline. .                 .  ..;...                    ".;-'.••.'....'  . ..:     .                      ..-••'"•

 Systems required to sample quarterly or more frequently must report to the state within 10 days after the
 end of each quarter in which the samples were collected.  Those required to sample less frequently than
 quarterly must report to the state within 10 days after the end of each monitoring period in which samples
 were collected. Systems .that are required to conduct additional monitoring because of the disinfectant
 used (e.g., chlorine dioxide) are subject to additional reporting requirements if certain chemical levels are
 measured.

 Laboratory methods and certification

 The rule specifies analytical methods for measuring each relevant water quality parameter, disinfectant,
 contaminant, and DBPP. Consistent with current regulations, only certified laboratories can analyze
 samples for cpmpliance with the MCLs. However, chlorite measured at the entrance to the .distribution
 systems is a trigger, not an MCL compliance sample, and may be analyzed by a party approved by the
 state. For disinfectants and other specified parameters that EPA believes can be adequately measured by
 other than certified laboratories, and for which there is good reason to allow on-site analysis (e.g., for
 samples that may deteriorate before reaching a certified laboratory), EPA is requiring that analyses be
 conducted by a party approved by the state.
4.  Additional information

A series of guidance manuals have been developed to support the mterim Enhanced Surface Water
Treatment Rule and the Stage 1 Disinfectants/Disinfection Byproducts Rule, The manuals will aid EPA,
state .agencies and affected public water systems in implementing the two interrelated;rules, and will help
to ensure that implementation among these groups is consistent. The manuals are available on EPA's
website at www.epa.gov/safewater/mdbp/implement.html.  Additional information on ordering these
manuals is provided below.          ,                                         :  '.."••     •

Guidance Manual for Enhanced Coagulation and Enhanced Precipitatiye Softening
(EPA 815-R-99-012)

Objective: To assist utilities in implementing, monitoring, and complying with the treatment technique
requirements in the final Stage 1 Disinfectants and Disinfection Byproducts Rule and to provide
guidance to state staff responsible for implementing thetreatment requirements.
                                              Page 9

-------
Contents: The manual provides detailed information on the total organic carbon (TOC) removal
requirement; explains how to set an alternative TOG removal percentage under the Step 2 procedure;
details monitoring, reporting, and compliance requirements; and discusses strategies that can be
employed to mitigate the potential secondary effects on plant performance due to implementation of the
treatment technique.

Alternative Disinfectants and Oxidants Guidance Manual (EPA 815-R-99-014)

Objective: To provide technical data and engineering information on disinfectants and oxidants that are
not as commonly used as chlorine, so that systems can evaluate their options for developing disinfection
schemes to control water quality problems such as zebra mussels and Asiatic clams, and oxidation to
control water quality problems associated with iron and manganese.

Contents: The manual discusses six disinfectants and oxidants; ozone, chlorine dioxide, potassium
permanganate, chloramines, ozone/hydrogen peroxide combinations, and ultraviolet light. A decision
tree is provided to assist in evaluating which disinfectant(s) is most appropriate given certain site-specific
conditions (e.g., water quality conditions, existing treatment and operator skill). The manual also
contains a summary of existing alternative disinfectants used in the United states and cost estimates for
the use of alternative disinfectants.                                 ,

M/DBP Simultaneous Compliance Manual (EPA 815-R-99-015)

Objective: To assist public water systems on complying simultaneously with various drinking water
regulations (e.g., Stage 1 Disinfectants and Disinfection Byproducts Rule, Interim Enhanced Surface
Water Treatment Rule, Lead and Copper Rule and the Total Coliform Rule). The manual discusses
operational problems systems may encounter when implementing these rules.

Contents: The manual provides detailed information on the requirements in the Stage 1 Disinfectants.
and Disinfection Byproducts Rule and the Interim Enhanced Surface Water Treatment Rule.
 T6 order copies of these guidance manuals you may contact the Safe Drinking Water Hotline at (800)
 426-4791 or you may download an electronic version  from the OGWDW website at;

                             www.epa.gov/safewater/mdbp/implementhtml
                                                  1       ''      *                    '    *
 Guidance manuals are also available through the National Service Center for Bnvironmental, -,, >
 Publications (NSCEP) (free of charge). These documents may also be purchased through National
 Technical Information Service (NTIS)                     /'          _ -   *    -  \~    '    s

                                NSCEP:  1.800.490.9198 \ '         ^    -     -.  \  ''.  .  *
                                NTIS:    1.800^553.6847   '    '   ''"   . *  -
5.  Detailed regulatory requirements

Detailed descriptions of the monitoring and reporting requirements for public water systems (PWSs) are
presented in the following section. The Stage 1 DBPRapplies to all community water systems and
nontransient noncommunity water systems that add a chemical disinfectant or oxidant. as well as
transient noncommunitv water systems that treat their water with chlorine dioxide. However, systems
will monitor at various frequencies depending on type (Subpart H and ground water) and size.
Additionally, the type of chemical monitored will also vary depending on system type and the primary
disinfectant used. For this reason, tables that outline the monitoring and reporting requirements are
presented for each system size and type.


                                               Page 10                               ;

-------
This section is, organized so that specific categories of systems can turn right to where their specific
requirements are.  Keep in mind that some systems may fall into more than one category listed below.
The categories of systems; are:   -'', ••"   *  "..-             "  "          ?          •    -,] --/-

     '.-'•    Subpart H systems serving at least 10,00.0 people (Attachment 1)
        •    Subpart H systems serving 500-9,999 people (Attachment 2)       ;                ,
        •    Subpart H systems serving fewer than.-500 people (Attachment 3)     ,
        •    Ground water systems serving at least 10,000 people (Attachment 4)
        •-,   Grotond water systems serving fewer than 10,000 people (Attachment 5)
       >    Systems using chlorine dioxide (Attachment 6)
        •    Systems using ozohe (Attachment 7)                     '     ..."
        •    Subpart H systems :usmg conventional filtration treatment (Attachment 8)

Systems should review all the attachments which apply to them to gain a full understanding of how the
Stage 1 DBPR will affect them. For example, a surface water system serving 7,000 people using
conventional filtration and chlorine dioxide as an oxidant should review Attachments 2, 6, and 8.
                                            Page 11

-------
                            Stage 1 DPBR Genei-al Requirements
NO
       Is the System
   a CWS, NTNCWS, or a
TNCWS which adds a chemical
   disinfectant to their water?
                           Yes
                           CWS & NTNCWS
      System must conduct TTHM/HAA5 monitoring.
      See attached flow charts. Requirements based
          on population and source water type.
YES
1
r
Required to do Chlorine
Dioxide monitoring. See
Attachments.

. ; i
r
The system has no
requirements under
' this rule.
              Does system use Chlorine or
                    Chloramine?
            Is system a subpart H system with
                conventional treatment?
                                                           YES
                                                                      Chlorine and Chloramine
                                                                   monitoring requirements apply."
                                                                       See Attachments 1-5.
                                                                                Chlorine Dioxide and  Chorite-
                                                                             monitoring requirements apply. See
                                                                                      Attachment 6.
                                                           YES
                                                                                    Bromate monitoring
                                                                                  requirements apply. See
                                                                                      Attachment 7.
                                                           YES
                                                                  Enhanced DBF Precursor removal
                                                                      requirements (Enhanced
                                                                  Coagulation/Enhanced Softening)
                                                                      apply.  See Attachment 8.
                                            Page 12

-------
Attachment 1 - Stage 1 Disinfectants and Disinfection Byproducts Rule Requirements
I operate a surface water system or ground water system
under ike direct influence of surface water that serves at
least 10,QOQ people...
                           Page 13

-------
(Attachment 1) I operate a surface water system or ground water system under the direct influence of
surface water that serves at least 10,000people...

You must conduct the monitoring, compliance determinations, reporting, arid recordkeeping specified in
this section. In addition, you are required to conduct additional monitoring;, compliance determinations,
reporthig and recordkeeping if you meet any of the following criteria:

•       You use chlorine dioxide in treating ypur Water. This includes any use of chlorine dioxide, not
        just chlorine dioxide used for meeting disinfection requirements. Additional requirements are
        found in Attachment 6.

•       You use ozone in treating your water. This includes any use of ozone, not just ozone used for
        meeting disinfection requirements. Additional requirements are found in Attachment 7.

•       You operate a treatment plant that uses conventional filtration treatment.  Additional
        requirements are found in Attachment 8.

In addition, you must develop  and implement a monitoring plan that specifies 1) location and schedules
for collecting all required samples, 2) procedures for calculating compliance  with MCLs, MRDLs, and
treatment techniques, and 3) if receiving water as a consecutive system, or supplying water to a
consecutive system, how the entire distribution system is represented.  The monitoring plan must be
submitted to the state.
                                              Page 14

-------
 (Attachment 1) I operate a surface water system or ground water system under the direct influence of
 surface water that serves at least 10,000 people.,.

 JfTtat RbutlME MONITORING must I conduct under the Stage 1DBPR?
•Chemical
TTHM and HAAS
Chlorine and
Chloramines
Frequency
4 sample? per plant per quarter
•- . '• . •
' ' . •
Same time as total coliform
samples are taken
Where monitoring must be conducted
At least 25% of samples must be at locations representing maximum
residence time. Remaining samples must represent average residence
time and the entire distribution system (account for number of
people served, different sources of water, different treatment
methods).
Same locations as total coliform samples are taken.
' Notes:
 1.  If a system elects to sample more frequently than the minimum required, at least 25% 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, Theremaining samples must be taken at locations
 representative of at least average residence time in the distribution system.
 What REDUCED MONITORING may I conduct under the Stage 1DBPR?
Chemical
TTHM and HAAS
Chlorine and
Chloramines
Frequency
One sample per
plant per quarter
No reduced :
monitoring
Where monitoring must
be conducted
In the distribution system at a
location representing
maximum residence time.
NA : .
Conditions for reduced monitoring
• Source water annual average TOC before
any treatment < 4.0 mg/L and
• Annual average TTHM <. 0.040 mg/L and
• Annual average HAAS <; 0.030 mg/L
NA .;- ' - -•'•-
                                              Page 15

-------
(Attachment 1) I operate a surface water system or ground water system under the direct influence of
surface water that serves at least 10,000 people,,.

How do I DETERMINE IF MY SYSTEM is IN COMPLIANCE with the MCLs and MRDLsin the Stage 1
DBPR?
      Chemical
 TTHM and HAAS
  Chlorine and
  Chloramines
                              Compliance is based on ...
Running annual arithmetic average, computed quarterly, of quarterly arithmetic averages of all
samples collected.
• If annual arithmetic average of quarterly averages covering any consecutive 4-quarter period
  exceeds the MCL, then the system is in violation.
• The system must notify the public and report to the state if in violation.

• If an annual average exceeds the MCL and the system is pn reduced monitoring, it must revert to
  routine monitoring immediately.
Running annual arithmetic average, computed quarterly, of quarterly averages of all samples
collected.                                                  '--..•
• If annual arithmetic average of quarterly averages covering any consecutive 4-quarter period
  exceeds the MRDL, then the system is in violation.
• The system must notify the public and report to the state if in violation.
• If system switches between chlorine and chldramines for residual disinfection during the year,
  compliance must be determined by including together all monitoring results of both chlorine and
  chloramines.
NOTES:
1. Where compliance is based on a running annual average of monthly or quarterly samples or averages and the
system's failure to monitor makes it impossible to determine compliance with the MCLs or MRDLs, this failure to
monitor will be treated as a violation for the entire period covered by the annual average.

2. All samples taken and analyzed under the provisions of the monitoring plan must be included in determining
compliance, even if that number is greater than the minimum required.

3. If duringthe first year of monitoring, any individual quarter's average will cause the running annual average of
that system to exceed the MCL, the system is  out of compliance at the end of that quarter.
Wliat do I have to REPORT to the State under the Stage 1 DBPR?
Chemical
TTHM and
HAAS
Chlorine and
Chloramines
What must be reported '
If conducting routine or reduced monitoring:
Number of samples taken during last quarter
Location, date, result of each sample taken during last quarter
Arithmetic average of all samples taken in last quarter
Annual arithmetic average of quarterly averages for last 4 quarters ,
Whether MCL was exceeded (Report violation of the MCL) . .
Number of samples taken during each month of last quarter
Monthly arithmetic average of all samples taken in each month
Arithmetic average of all monthly averages for last 12 months
Whether MRDL was exceeded (Report violation of MRDL)
NOTES:
1. Systems required to sample quarterly or more frequently must report to the state within 10 days after the end of
each quarter in which samples were collected.
                                                 Page 16

-------
(Attachment 1) I operate a surface water system or.ground water system under the direct influence of
surface'waterthatserves atleast 10,000 people. ..-'•                                              -.;'.
                  TTHlVts<% HAAS.Mpnitpring Requirements for SubpartH Systems Serving £10,000 Persons
                                Subpart H systems serving 2 i 0,000 persons
                                          Routine Monitoring
                               4 TTHM/HAA5 samples per quarter per treatment
                                                plants       '
                                                                                  Is the sum. of
                                                                               quarterly averages
                                                                                  taken so .far
                                                                                  fprTTHMs
                                                                               0.320 or for HAAS
                                                                                   > 0.240?
  Has system
monitored for at
 least 1 year?
                                              Is running
                                            annual average4
                                        (computed quarterly) for
                                         TTHM > 0.080 mg/L or
                                          HAAS > 0.060 mg/L?
                                           source watetavg.
                                           TOG f 4.0 mg/L
                                                AND
                                        are annual averages for
                                         TTHM £ 0.040 mg/L or
                                         HAAS i 0.030 mg/L?
                                          Reduced Monitoring
                            1 TTHM/HAA5 sample per treatment plant per quarter in
                              distribution system at location reflecting maximum
                                            residence time
                                                 Is
                                       annual avg. of all samples
                                      -for TTHMs > 0.060 mg/L or
                                         HAAS > 0.045 mg/L?
          NOTES              .-/•'.    ..--.-''   -• '"            .-'-...       .     ..•••-    '"•.-'.'
          13 sarnples reflect ave.rage residence time.and 1 sample reflects maximum residence time (at least 25% of samples must reflect maximum
          residence time).        :                        -              •    ,            L           .    .
          2 If PWS fails to complete 4 consecutive quarters of monitoring, compliance with the MCL for the last 4 quarter period must be based on
          average of available data.  .    ,   .             .   _     .  .   .         ....
                                                         Page 17

-------
(Attachment 1) I operate a surface -water system or ground water system under the direct influence of
surface water that serves at least 10,000 people...
                                        Monitoring Requirements for Chlorine and Chloramine
                                              CHLORINE
                          System must measure
                          chlorine in distribution
                        system at same location and
                          time as total colifbrm.
                                                                  Are you. a
                                                             CWS or NTNCWS using
                                                             chlorine orchloramine?
  System must measure
  chloramine in distribution
system at same location and
   time as total coliform.
                                                           System is in compliance and
                                                           continues routine monitoring
                      NOTES        .                                                         \          -
                      1, Notwithstanding the MRDLsfor chlorine and cnloramtnes, systems may Increase residual disinfectant levels of
                      chtorfne or chtoramf nes In the distribution system to a level and for a time necessary to protect publich health to address
                      specific microbiological contamination problems.                  .                .          ,  '  '
                      2. If system switches between use of chlorine andchloramlnes, compliance must be determined by including together
                      afl monitoring results of both chlorine and chtoramlnas En calculating compliance,            .       .
                      3, Running annual average Is first calculated after first 12 months of monitoring. .  ,         :
                                                                  Page 18

-------
Attachment 2 - Stage 1 Disinfectants and Disinfection Byproducts Rule Requirements
1operate'asurf"ace water' system or ground water system
under the direct influence of surface water that serves
500to9,999] peopler...
                           Page 19

-------
(Attachment 2) I operate a surface water system or ground water system under the direct influence of
surface water that serves 500 to 9,999 people...

You must conduct the monitoring, compliance determinations, reporting -, and recordkeeping specified ,in
this section. In addition, you are required to conduct additional monitoring, compliance determinations,
reporting and recordkeeping if you meet either of the following criteria:

• You use chlorine dioxide in treating your water. This includes any use of chlorine dioxide, not just
  chlorine dioxide used for meeting disinfection requirements.  Additional requirements are found in
  Attachment 6.

• You use ozone in treating your water. This includes any use of ozone, not just ozone used for meeting
  disinfection requirements. Additional requirements are found in Attachment 7.

• You operate a treatment plant that uses conventional filtration treatment.  Additional requirements are
  found in Attachment 8.                                                                       ,

In addition, you must develop and implement a monitoring plan that specifies 1) location and schedules
for collecting all required samples, 2) procedures for calculating compliance with MCLs, MRDLs, and
treatment techniques, and 3) if receiving water as a consecutive system, or supplying water to a
consecutive system, how the entire distribution system is represented.  For systems serving more than
3,300 people the monitoring plan must be submitted to the state.                              .•
                                              Page 20

-------
(Attachment 2) I operate a surface water system or ground water system under the direct influence of
surface water that serves 500 to 9,999 people...
What ROUTINE MONITORING must I conduct under the Stage 1 DBPR?
Chemical
TTHMand
HAA5
Chlorine and
Chlbramines
Frequency
One sample per plant per
quarter
Same time as total
coliform samples are
taken
-•"•:' Where monitoring must be conducted
Location representing maximum residence time.
Same points as total cpliform samples are taken. ^
NOTES
1.  If a system elects to sample more frequently than the minimum required, at least 25% 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 entire distribution system (account for number of people
served, different sources of water, different treatment methods)
What SEDUCED MONITORING may I conduct under the Stage! DBPR?
Chemical
TTHMand
HAAS .:---.
Chlorine and
Chloramines
Frequency
One sample perplant
per year during month
of warmest temperature
No reduced monitoring
.Where monito ring must
be conducted
In the distribution system at a
location representing maximum
residence tune.
NA ' • •--.': '
Conditions for reduced monitoring
• Source water annual average TOC before
any treatment < 4.0 mg/L and
• Annual average TTHMs 0.040 fng/L and
• Annual average HAA5 <; 0.030 mg/L
NA' ' - - '•"".:•; - : •-." -.•'-• '
                                             Page.21"

-------
(Attachment 2) I operate a surface water system or ground water system under the direct influence of
surface waterthat serves 500to 9,999 people..'.

How do I DETERMINE IF MY SYSTEM IS IN COMPLIANCE with the MCLs and MRDLs in the Stage 1
DBPR?
   Chemical
  TTHM and
  HAAS
  Chlorine and
  Chlorai nines
                                Compliance is based on...
Running annual arithmetic average, computed quarterly, of quarterly arithmetic averages of all
samples collected (routine monitoring).
• If annual arithmetic average of quarterly averages covering any consecutive 4-quarter period exceeds the
  MCL, then the system is in violation.  .                     ..'.-.
• The system must notify the public and report to the state if in violation.

• If an annual average exceeds the MCL and the system is on reduced monitoring, it ftrast revert to routine
  monitoring immediately.
Running annual arithmetic average, computed quarterly, of quarterly averages of all samples collected
• If annual arithmetic average of quarterly averages covering any consecutive 4-quarter period exceeds the
  MRDL, then the system is in violation.
• The system must notify the public and report to the state if in violation.
• If system switches between chlorine and chlorarnines for residual disinfection during the year, compliance
  must be determined by including together all monitoring results of both chlorine and.chlorarnines.
NOTES:
1. Where compliance is based on a running annual average of monthly or quarterly samples or averages and the
system's failure to monitor makes it impossible to determine compliance with the MCLs or MRDLs, this failure to
monitor will be treated as a violation for the entire period covered by the annual average.

2. All samples taken and analyzed under the provisions of the monitoring plan must be included in determining
compliance, even if that number is greater than the minimum required.

3. If during the first year of monitoring,, any individual quarter's average will cause the running annual average of
that system to exceed the MCL, the system is  out of compliance at the end of that quarter.
What do I have to REPORT to the State under the Stage 1 DBPR?
Chemical
TTHM and HAAS
Chlorine and Chlorarnines
What must be reported
• Number of samples taken during last quarter (routine monitoring)
• Location, date, result of each sample taken during last quarter
• Arithmetic average of all samples taken in last quarter
• Annual arithmetic average of quarterly averages for last 4 quarters
• Whether MCL was exceeded
If conducting reduced monitoring:
• Number of samples taken during last year
• Location, date, result of each sample taken during last year
• Arithmetic average of all samples taken over last year
• Whether MCL was exceeded
• Number of samples taken during each month of last quarter
• Monthly arithmetic average of all samples taken in each month
• Arithmetic average of all monthly averages for last 12 months
• Whether MRDL was exceeded
NOTES:
1. Systems required to sample quarterly or more frequently must report to the state within 10 days after the end of
each quarter in which samples were collected.                          •
2. Systems required to sample less frequently than quarterly must report to the state within 10 days after the end of
each monitoring period in which samples were collected. The state.may choose to perform calculations and
determine whether the MCL, MRDL, or treatment technique was met in lieu of having the system report that
information.
                                                 Page 22

-------
(Attachment 2) I operate a surface water system of ground water system under the direct influence of
surface water that serves 500 to 9,999 people >..
                  TTHM & HAAS-Mpnitoring for Subpart H Systems Serving Between 500-9,999 Persons
                               Subpart H systems serving between 500-9,999 persons
                                              Routine Monitoring
                                  1 TTHM/HAA5 sample per quarter per treatment
                                    plant at location representing the maximum;
                                               residence time'.   ,  :   ..
                                                                                      Isitnesum of
                                                                                   quarterlyaverages-
                                                                                      taken so far
                                                                                       for TTHMs
                                                                                     .320 or for HAASs
                                                                                       > 0.240?
  Has system
monitored for at
 least 1 year?
                                                Is the running
                                              annual average?for
                                            TTHM > 0.080 mg/L or
                                             HAA5 > 0.060 mg/L?
                                                  Is source
                                        water TOCann. ayg. •$ 4.0 mg/L
                                                    AND
                                           are annual averages for
                                            TtHM~<; 0.040 mg/L or
                                             HAAS £ 0.030 mg/L?
                                             Reduced Monitoring
                            1 sample per treatment plant per year in the distribution system .
                          reflecting the maximum residence'time and during month of warmest
                               .'..•        watertemperature.  --"-;•
                                   Is the system's annual avg. of all .samples3 for
                                   TTHMs > O.OgO mg/L or HAAS > 0.045,mg/L?
                     YES
                                                                                    NO
          .NOTES'  ';....   •/-•  ,   •  '.  •:.. .•        -. .  -.--  """."'•  .'."  ' .  •"  • '  ~.  •  '      .-.'.,'••.:.',..     '  .
           11f more thanl sample,at least 25% of samples must reflect max residence time.   .   "."                  . "   .'•:.'.  ;  r  ;
           2 If PWS fails to complete 4, consecutive quarters of monitoring, compliance with the MCL for the Iasi4 quarter period must be based on
           average of available data.      •                   •-.'....      _  ...                       . .
           3 Average of all samples taken in the year or the result of the sample for systems which must monitor no more frequently than annually.
                                                          Page 23

-------
(Attachment 2) I operate a surface water system or ground water system under the direct influence of
surface water that serves 500 to 9,999 people...
                                       Monitoring Requirements for Chlorine and Chlpramine
                                              CHLORINE
                          System must measure
                          chlorine in distribution
                       system at same location and
                          time as total coliforrn.
  System must measure
  chloramine in distribution
system at same location and
   time.as total coliform.
                             Is the running
                        annual average of monthly
                          averages, computed
                                , s4.0 mg/1?
                                                          System is in compliance and
                                                           continues routine monitoring
                     NOTES
                     1. Notwithstanding the MRDLsfcr chlorine and chloramlnes, systems may Increase residual disinfectant levels of
                     chlorine or chloramlnes En the distribution system to a level and for a time necessary to protect publich health to address'
                     specific microbiological contamination problems.                         .  .
                     2, If system switches between use of chlorine and chloramines, compliance must be determined by Including together
                     aN monitoring results of both chlorine and chloramlnes En calculating compliance.
                     3, Running annual average te first calculated after first 12 months of monitoring.
                                                                 Page 24

-------
 Attachment 3 - Stage 1 Disinfectants and Disinfection Byproducts Rule Requirements
I operate a surface water system or ground water system
under the direct influent
fewer than 500 people...
                            Page 25

-------
(Attachment 3) I operate a surface water system or ground water system under the direct influence of
surface water that serves fewer than 500 people...

You must conduct the monitoring, compliance determinations, reporting., and recordkeeping specified in
this section. In addition, you are required to conduct additional monitoring, compliance determinations,
reporting and recordkeeping if you meet either of the following criteria:

• You use chlorine dioxide in treating your water. This includes any use of chlorine dioxide, not just
  chlorine dioxide used for meeting disinfection requirements.  Additional requirements are found in
  Attachment 6.                                                ,

• You use ozone in treating your water.  This includes any use of ozone, not just ozone used for meeting
  disinfection requirements. Additional requirements are found in Attachment 7.

• You operate a treatment plant that uses conventional filtration treatment.  Additional requirements are
  found in Attachment 8.

In addition, you must develop and implement a monitoring plan that specifies  1) location and schedules
for collecting all required samples, 2) procedures for calculating compliance with MCLs, MKDLs,  and
treatment techniques, and 3) if receiving water as a consecutive system, or supplying water to a
consecutive system, how the entire distribution system is represented. The monitoring plan must be kept
on hand and readily available to the state and public.
                                               Page 26

-------
 (Attachment 3) I operate a surface water system Or ground water system Under the direct influence of
 surface water that serves fewer than 500 people...

 What ROUTINE MONITORING must I conduct under the Stage 1DBPR?
Chemical
TTHMand,HAA5
•
Chlorine and Chloramines
Frequency ,
'•-.". "• " - '•."'• ' -:
• Onfe sample per plant per year during.month of
Warmest water temperature - if MCL is .exceeded
in -yearly sample, system goes to increased :
monitoring of 1 sample per plant per quarter
Same time as total coliform samples are taken
'-''•- - " . .
Where monitoring must be
conducted
Location representing maximum
residence time.
Same points as, total coliform samples .
are taken.
 NOTES
 1.  The system may revert to annual monitoring if the annual average is i 40/30 based on at least four; quarters of
 monitoring.                           ,   •"....'

,2.  If a system..elects to sample more frequently than the minimum required, at least 25% 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 aHeast average residence time in the distribution system;                       .
 What REDUCED MONITORING may I conduct under the Stage 1DBPR?
Chemical
TTHM and
HAA5
Chlorine and.
Ghloramines
Frequency
No reduced monitoring ,
No reduced monitoring
Where monitoring must be
conducted
NA •" •'•: "., ;
NA
•
Conditions for reduced
monitoring
NA
NA . . -- : • .
                                              Page 27

-------
(Attachment 3) I operate a surface water system or ground water system under the direct influence of
surface water that serves fewer than 500 people...

How 
-------
(Attachment 3) I operate a surface water system or ground water system under the direct influence of
surface water that serves fewer than 500 people...
                             TTHM & HAAS Monitoring for Subpart H Systems Serving <500 persons
                                   Suppart'H systems serving <500'persons
                                                   z
                                             Routine Monitoring
                                  1 TTHM/HAA5 sample per treatment plant p/sr.
                                 year at location reflecting maximum residence
                                time and in.morith of warmest water temperature..
                                               Is the.sample
                                         or the average of all sampl
                                                taken)for
                                          HM > 0.080 mg/L or HAA
                                              > 0.060 mg/L?
                                    "'":.      Increased Monitoring
                             1 TTHM/HAA5 sample/treatment plant/quarter @ points
                                  reflecting the maximum residence time In the.   .
                                          - distribution system.
                                                                                     Is the sum of
                                                                                   quarterly averages
                                                                                     taken so far
                                                                                      forTTHMs.
                                                                                   0.320 or for HAA
                                                                                       > 0.240?
  Has system
monitored for at
 least 1 year?
                                           l.s the system's annual
                                       average, based on 4 quarters of
                                     monitoring, for TTHM i 0.060 mg/L
                                         and HAAS & 0.045 mg/L?
                                              Is the average
                                             of ail samples for
                                           TTHM > 0.080 mg/L or
                                           HAA5 > 0.060 mg/L?
                NOTES
                1) If a.system elects to sample more frequently than the mlnlmumreciujred, at least 25 percent of all samples collected each quarter (Including those taken
                in excess of the required frequency) must 05 taken at locations that represent the maximum residence time of the water in the distribution system. The
                remaining samples must betaken at locations representative of at least average residence time in the distribution system
                                                            Page 29

-------
(Attachment 3) I operate a surface water system or ground water system under the direct influence of
surface water that serves feiver than 500people...
                                        Monitoring Requirements for Chlorine and Chloramine
                                               CHLORINE
                           System must measure
                           chlorine In distribution
                        system at same location and
                           time as total cotiform.
   System must measure
  chloramine in distribution
system at same location and
   time as total coliform.
                                                            System is in compliance and
                                                            continues routine monitoring
                       1. Notwithstanding the MRDLs for chlorine and chlora mines, systems may increase residual disinfectant levels of
                       chtorino or chtoraminos in the distribution system to a level and for a time necessary to protect publich health to address
                       specific microbiological contamination problems.                      •       ' ,
                       2, tf system switches between use of chlorine and chloramines, compliance must be determined by including together
                       att monitoring results of both chlorine and chloramines in calculating compliance.  .=  "
                       3. Running annual average Is first calculated after first 12 months of monitoring.
                                                                   Page 30

-------
Attachment 4 - Stage 1 Disinfectants and Disinfection Byproducts Rule Requirements
I operate a ground water system not under the direct
influence of surface water that serves at least 10>000
people .;.:•- •.-'-.   -:: '•'-..  •: /-.. .'•. ,\ ;;-•';. :,v  • •,'•:, .   :   ^  ' • .
                              PagaSl

-------
(Attachment 4) I operate a ground water system not under the direct influence of surface water that
serves at least 10,000 people...

You must conduct the monitoring, compliance determinations, reporting , and recordkeeping specified in
this section. In addition, you are required to conduct additional monitoring, compliance determinations,
reporting and recordkeeping if you meet either of the following criteria:

• You use chlorine dioxide in treating your water. This includes any use of chlorine dioxide, not just
  chlorine dioxide used for meeting disinfection requirements. Additional requirements are found in
  Attachment 6.

• You use ozone in treating your water. This includes any use of ozone, not just ozone used for meeting
  disinfection requirements. Additional requirements are found in Attachment 7.

In addition, you must develop and  implement a monitoring plan that specifies 1) location and schedules
for collecting all required samples, 2) procedures for calculating compliance with MCLs and MRDLs,
and 3) if receiving water as a consecutive system, or supplying water to a consecutive system, how the
entire distribution system is represented.  The monitoring plan must be kept for review by the state and
public.
                                              Page 32  .

-------
(Attachment 4) I operate a ground water system not under the direct influence of surface water that
serves at least 10,000people...

What ROUTINE MONITORING must I conduct under the Stage 1 DBJPR?
Chemical
TTHMand
HAAS
Chlorine and
Chloramines
Frequency
One sample per plant per
quarter ;
Same time as total
cpliform samples are
taken
Where monitoring must be conducted
Location representing maximum residence time.
- . " ' :• . ". - " - " " - " • . '
Same points as total colifofm samples are taken. •
• r . . • . /' - .. ;'--'- ' • •
NOTES:
1.  Multiple wells drawing water from a single aquifer may be considered one treatment plant for determining the
minimum numb.er of samples required,; with state approval.                              ,               ;
2.  If ajsystem elects to sample more frequently.than the minimum required, at least 25% 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.
What REDUCED MONITORING may I conduct under the Stage 1 DBPR?
Chemical
TTHMand
HAA5 :
Chlorine and
Chloramines
Frequency
One sample per plant per
year during month of
warmest water temperature
No reduced monitoring
Where monitoring must
be conducted
Location representative of
maximum residence time
NA •'.'.-• - '•• ": ,.
Conditions for reduced monitoring
• Annual average TTHM s 0.040 rng/L and
• Annual average HAA5 ^ 0.030 mg/L
NA : ; : . ' ; ' - ..-- -••'•';
                                              Page 33

-------
 (Attachment 4) I operate a ground water system not under the direct influence of surface water that
 serves at least 10,000 people...


 How do I DETERMINE IF MY SYSTEM IS IN COMPLIANCE with the AfCts and MJRDLs of the Stage I
 DBPR?
   Chemical
  TTHM and
  HAAS
  Chlorine and
  Chloramines
                                Compliance is based on...
Running annual arithmetic average, computed quarterly, of quarterly arithmetic averages of all
samples collected.
• If annual arithmetic average of quarterly averages covering any consecutive 4-quarter, period exceeds the
  MCL, then the system is in violation.
• The system must notify the public and report to the state if in violation.
• If an annual average exceeds the MCL and the system is on reduced monitoring, it must revert to routine
  monitoring immediately.                     •
Running annual arithmetic average, computed quarterly, of quarterly averages of all samples collected
• If annual arithmetic average of quarterly averages covering any consecutive ^quarter period exceeds the
  MRDL, then the system is in violation.                                         ,
• The system must notify the public and report to the state if in violation.                ' -  .  '

• If system switches between chlorine and chloramines for residual disinfection during the year, compliance
  must be determined by including together all monitoring results of both chlorine and chloramines.
NOTES:
1. Where compliance is based on a running annual average of monthly or quarterly samples or averages and the
system's failure to monitor makes it impossible to determine compliance with the MCLs or MRDLs, this Failure to
monitor will be treated as'a violation.for the entire period covered by the annual average.

2. All samples taken and analyzed under the provisions of the monitoring plan must be included in determining
compliance, even if that number is greater than the minimum required.

3. If during the first year of monitoring, any individual quarter's average will cause the running annual average of
that system to exceed the MCL, the system is out of compliance at the end of that quarter.
 Wliat do I have to REPORT to the State under the Stage 1 DBPR?
Chemical
TTHM and
HAAS
Chlorine and
Chloramines
What must be reported
' Number of samples taken during last quarter
• Location, date, result of each sample taken during last quarter :
• Arithmetic average of all samples taken during last quarter
• Annual arithmetic average of quarterly arithmetic average for last 4 quarters
• Whether MCL was exceeded
If conducting reduced monitoring:
• Number of samples taken during last year
• Location, date, result of each sample taken during last year
• Arithmetic average of all samples taken over last year
• Whether MCL was exceeded
• Number of samples taken during each month of last quarter
• Monthly arithmetic average of all samples taken in each month
• Arithmetic average of all monthly averages for last 12 months
• Whether MRDL was exceeded ,
NOTES:
1. Systems required to sample quarterly or more frequently must report to the state within 10 days after the end of
each quarter in which samples were collected.

2. Systems required to sample less frequently than quarterly must report to the state within 10 days after the end of
each monitoring period in which samples were collected. The state may choose to perform calculations and
determine whether the MCL, MRDL, or treatment technique was met in lieu of having the system report that
information.
                                                 Page 34

-------
 (Attachment 4) I operate a ground water system not under the direct influence of surface water that
.serves at least 10,000people...                                       :                              ,
                       TTHM & HAAS Monitoring for Ground Water Systems Serving i 10,000 Persons
                                    Ground water systems serving z 10,000 persons
                                                Routine Monitoring
                                        1 TTHM/HAA5 sample per quarter per
                                                 treatment plant1'2
                                                                                        Is the sum of
                                                                                     quarterly averages
                                                                                        taken so far
                                                                                        forTTHMs
                                                                                      .320 or for H
                                                                                          > 0.240?
                             Has system
                            monitored for at
                             least 1 year?
                                                  Is 1he running
                                            annual average (computed
                                                  quarterly)3 for
                                              TTHM > 0.080 mg/L or
                                                AA5 > 0.060 mg/LJ
                                           Is the system's TTHM annual
                                               avg. sO.040 mg/L and
                                          HAAS annual ayg.sO.030 mg/L?
                              .       -     ••'•'. Reduced Monitoring
                             1 TTHM/HAA5 sample per year per treatment plant in distribution
                               system location reflecting the maximum residence time and  '
                                     during month of warmest water temperature.
                                                 Is the system's .
                                           annual avg. of all samples-1 for
                                              TTHM > 0.060 mg/L or
                                               HAAS > 0.045 mg/L?
YES
                                                                NO
           NOTES     •      •.•-•;••     •  -        _.       :_  _..      ..--...    ...-.-  .:_-..
           ..1)lfmorethan1 sample is taken, 25% must reflect maximum residence time.        :   "-..'''..,.'   '•' .   •     '_'           ,
           2)Multiple.wellsdrawingwaterfromasiri^leaquifermaybeconsideredonetreatmentplant.          .     -   -
           .3) If PWS fails.to complete 4;conSeGulive. quarters.of monitoring, compliance vyith the MCL for the last 4 quarter period must be based on
           average of available data.   '.    ;.."-.  .-          ...         ...    '       .    .   ..        '•.-'.'       '"",-.
           4) Average of all samples taken in.the year brjhe. result of the sample for systems which must monitor no more frequently than annually.
                                                            Page 35

-------
(Attachment 4) I operate a ground water system not under the direct influence of surface water that
serves at least 10,000people...
                                        Monitoring Requirements for Chlorine and Chloramme
                                                                    Are you a ,
                                                              CWS or NTNCWS using
                                                               chlorine orchloramine?:
                          System must measure
                          chlorine in distribution
                        system at same location and
                           time as total coliform.
  System must measure
  chloramine in distribution
system at same location and
   time as total coliform.
                                                               notify state and public.
                               Did system
                                measure
                              chlorine with
                             total coliform?
       did system
        measure
     chloramines with
       tal coliform
                             Is the running
                        annual average of monthly
                           averages, computed
                           uarteriy, s4.0 mg/T?1*
                                                            System is in compliance and
                                                            continues routine monitoring
                     NOTES                                            ,                 '         , ,
                     1. Notwithstanding the MRDLsfor chlorine and chloramines, systems may increase residual disinfectant levels of
                     chlorine or chloramines In the distribution system to a level and for a time necessary to protect publich health to address
                     specific microbiological contamination problems.                                      ' •      .   '
                     2, If system switches between use of chlorine and chloramines, compliance must be determined by including together
                     alt monitoring results of both chlorine and chloramines in calculating compliance.                :          ,
                     3, Running annual average is first calculated afterfirst 12 months of monitoring^ -
                                                                   Page36

-------
Attachment 5 - Stage 1 Disinfectants and Disinfection Byproducts Rule Requirements
I operate a ground water system not under the direct
influenceof* surface^ ^a^r^^r serves
people...
                           Page 37 ;

-------
(Attachment 5) I operate a ground water system not under the direct influence of surface water that
serves fewer than 10,000 people...

You must conduct the monitoring, compliance determinations, reporting ,-- and recordkeeping specified in
this section. In addition, you are required to conduct additional monitoring, compliance determinations,
reporting and recordkeeping if you meet either of the following criteria:

• You use chlorine dioxide in treating your water. This includes any use of chlorine dioxide, hot just
  chlorine dioxide used for meeting disinfection requirements. Additional requirements are found in
  Attachment 6.

• You use ozone in treating your water. This includes any use of ozone, not just ozone used for meeting
  disinfection requirements. Additional requirements are found in Attachment 7.           .

In addition, you must develop and implement a monitoring plan that specifies 1) location and schedules
for collecting all required samples, 2) procedures for calculating compliance with MCLs, MRDLs, and
treatment techniques, and 3) if receiving water as a consecutive system, or supplying water to a
consecutive system, how the entire distribution system is represented. The monitoring plan must be
made available for review by the state and public.
                                               Page 38

-------
(Attachment5) I operate a ground water system not under the direct Influence of surface water that
serves fewer than 10,000 people...

JfTtaf ROUTINE MONITORING must I conduct under the Stage 1DBPR?
Chemical
TTHMand
HAAS
Chlorine and
Ciloramines
Frequency
One sample per plant per
year during month of
warmest water
temperature
.-. Same time as total
coliform samples are
taken
Where monitoring must be conducted
Location representing maximum residence time.
• - ~ -
Same points as total coliform samples are taken.
NOTES:
1. Multiple wells drawing water from a single aquifer may be considered one treatment plant for determining the
rninimum number of samples required, with state approval.
2. If a system elects to sample more frequently than the'miriimum required, at least 25% 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.   ,
What REDUCEft MONITORING may Iconduct under the Stage! DBPR?
Chemical
TTHMand
HAAS
Chlorine and
Chloramines
Frequency
One sample per plant per
3-year cycle during
month of warmest water
temperature
No reduced monitoring
Where monitoring must
be conducted
Location representative
of maximum residence
time.
NA --•'-.- ;'
Conditions for reduced monitoring
• Annual average TTHM <, 0.040 mg/L &
annual average HAAS <. 0.030 mg/L for 2
consecutive years; OR
• Annual average TTHM <; 0.020 mg/L &
annual average HAAS <. 0.015 mg/L for 1 year
-NA ; -" • • ' •
                                              Page 39

-------
(Attachment 5) I operate a ground water system not under the direct influence of surface water that
serves fewer than 10,000 people...

How do I DETERMINE IF MY SYSTEM IS IN COMPLIANCE with the MCLsandMRDLs of the. Stage 1
DBPR?
   Chemical
  TTHM and
  HAAS
  Chlorine and
  Chloramines
                                Compliance is based on...
Average of samples taken in the year.
• If the average of these samples exceeds the MCL, the system must increase monitoring to once per quarter
  per treatment plant.
• The system must notify the public and report to the state if in violation,

• If an annual average exceeds the MCL and the system is on reduced monitoring, it must go to increased
  monitoring immediately. If a system on increased monitoring exceeds the MCL, it is in violation.
Running annual arithmetic average, computed quarterly, of quarterly averages of all samples collected
• If annual arithmetic average of quarterly averages covering any consecutive 4-quarter period exceeds the
  MRDL, then the system is in violation.                             • •   '    • -
• The system must notify the public and report to the state if in violation.       .

• If system switches between chlorine and chloramines for residual disinfection during the year, compliance
  must be determined by including together all monitoring results of both chlorine and chloramines.
NOTES:
1. Where compliance is based on a running annual average of monthly or quarterly samples or averages and the
system's failure to monitor makes it impossible to determine compliance with the MCLs Or MRDLs, this failure to
monitor will be treated as a violation for the entire period covered by the annual average.

2. AH samples taken and analyzed under the provisions of the monitoring plan must be included in determining
compliance, even if that number is greater than the minimum required.

3. If during the first year of monitoring, any individual quarter's average will cause the running annual average of
that system to exceed the MCL, the system is out of compliance at the end of that quarter.
What do I have to REPORT to the State under the Stage 1 DBPR?
Chemical
TTHM and
HAAS
Chlorine and
Chloramines
What must be reported
• Number of samples taken during last year .
• Location, date, result of each sample taken during last year
• Arithmetic average of all samples taken over last year . • '
• Whether MCL was exceeded
If conducting reduced monitoring:
• Location, date, result of last sample taken
• Whether MCL was exceeded
• Number of samples taken during each month of last quarter
• Monthly arithmetic average of all samples taken in each month
• Arithmetic average of all monthly averages for .last J2 months .
• Whether MRDL was exceeded
NOTES:                                                                     .  ,   •  ;
1. Systems required to sample quarterly or more frequently must report to the state within 10 days after the end of
each quarter in which samples were collected. •

2. Systems required to sample less frequently than quarterly must report to the state within 10 days after the end of
each monitoring period in which samples were collected. The state may choose to perform calculations and
determine whether the MCL, MRDL, or treatment technique was met in lieu'of having the system report that
information.                                                        .                           ,         •
                                                 Page 40

-------
(Attachment 5) I operate a ground water system not under the direct influence of surface water that
serves fewer than 10,000 people...
                               TTHM & HAAS Monitoring for Ground Water Systems Serving < 10,000 Persons
                    Ground water systems serving< 10,000 parsons
                                Routine Monitoring      _
                  1 TTHM/HAA5 sample per treatment plant per year at
                    locations reflecting the maximum residence time
                     during month ofwarmesf water temperature1  -.
                                                                     Is TTHM an
                                                             i. zO.040 mg/L and HAAS aiinu;
                                                             0.030.mg/L for 2 consecutive y
                                                                    . ".    .OR
                                                          TTHM annual avg. sO.020 mg/L and HAAS
                                                                 annual avg. sO.015 mg/L
                                                                       for 1 year?
                             for TTHM > 0.080 mg/L
                               HAAS > 0.060
                               Increased Monitonng
                 1 TTHM/HAA5 sample per treatment plant per quarter
                   at points reflecting the maximum residence time in
                              the distribution system.
                                                               Is the sum of
                                                            quarterly averages
                                                               taken so far
                                                                forTTHMs
                                                            0.320 or for HAA5
                                                                 > 0.240?
                                                                   Reduced Monitoring
                                                                 1TTHM/HAA5. sample*
                                                                 per treatment plant per 3
                                                                 . year monitoring cycle3
  Has system
monitored for at
 least i year?
                                                                                                   .   Is the
                                                                                                  annual avg. for
                                                                                                  .TTHM < 0.060
                                                                                                  mg/L and HAAS
                                                                                                    0.045 mg/L?
    Is the average
  of all t samples4 for
TTHM > 0.080 mg/L or
      > 0.060 mg/L?
                                 s the system's
                              annual avg. for TTHM
                                £0.060 mg/L and
                                    sp.045mn/L
                                                                     Is the.annual
                                                                   average for TTHM
                                                                    >0.080mg/Lor
                                                                     HAAS >0,0.60
                                                                        mg/L?
            NOTES          .'.••"•                  '.••".'        ..    '.-'".'-      '     •          '    .          ...  '
            1) If a system elects to sample more frequently than the minimum required, at leases percent of all samples collected each quarter (including those' taken in
            excess of the required frequency) must be taken at locations that represent tAa maxtmunuesidence" time ofthe water in the distribution system.' The'
            remaining samples must be taken at locations representative of af least average residence time in the distribution system.              -
            2)SampIes mustbetakendun'ngmonthof^armestwatertemperalureaflocatEon representing the maximum residence time."          ""      ' .
            3} 3 year cycle begins on January'1 following the quarter In which system qualifies for reduced monitoring.           •             ...
            4) If PWS fails to complete 4 consecutive quarters pf monitoring, compliance with the MCL for the last 4 quarter period mustbebasedon average of
            available data.  .    .   '.-,•'•    .     '   .    ' "        '       ,       .     '              .  .•
                                                                  Page 41

-------
(Attachment 5) I operate a ground water system not under the direct influence of surface water that
serves fewer than 10,000 people.
                                        Monitoring Requirements for Chlorine and Chloraminc
                                               CHLORINE
                          System must measure
                          chlorine in distribution
                        system at same location and
                           time as total colifbrm.
   Systeni must measure
  chloramine in distribution
system at same location and
   time as total coliform.
                              Is the running
                         annual average of monthly
                           averages, computed
                            arteriy. s4.0 mg/1?1^
                                                            System is in compliance and
                                                            continues routine monitoring
                      NOTES
                      1. Notwithstanding the MRDLsfor chlorine and chloramines, systems may Increase residual disinfectant levels of
                      chtoflno or chloraminas In the distribution system to a level and for a time necessary to protect publich health to address
                      specific microbiological contamination problems.                                            .
                      2. If system switches between Use of chlorine and chloramines, .compliance mjjs,t be determined by Including together
                      all monitoring results of both chlorine and chloramtnes In calculating compliance.                     .' .  .
                      3. Running annual average is first calculated after first 12 months of monitoring.       .
                                                                   Page 42

-------
Attachment- 6 - Stage 1 Disinfectants and Disinfection Byproducts Rule Requirements
I operate a treatment plant that uses chlorine dioxide.
                               Page 43

-------
(Attachment 6) I operate a treatment plant that uses chlorine dioxide...
What ROUTINE MONITORING must I conduct under the Stage 1DBPR?
Chemical
Chlorite
Chlorine
Dioxide
Frequency
Daily
One 3-sample set per
month
Additional: On any day
following any daily sample
that exceeds 1 .0 mg/L,
system must take 3
samples
Daily
Additional: For any daily
sample that exceeds the
MRDL, system must take 3
samples
. Where monitoring must be conducted
Entrance to the distribution system.
Near first customer, location representative of average residence time, location
representative of maximum residence time in distribution system.
Near first customer, location representative of average residence time, location
representative of maximum residence time in distribution system. The system
may use results to meet monthly 3-sample set monitoring requirement if the
monthly 3-sample set has not yet been taken.
Entrance to the distribution system.
• For chlorine dioxide, chloramines, or chlorine used to maintain disinfectant
residual and NO booster chloririation: all samples as close as possible to
first customer at intervals of at least 6 hours
• If chlorine is used to maintain disinfectant residual AND booster
chlorinatipn: as close as possible to first customer, location representative of
average residence time, as close as possible to end of distribution system
NOTES:
1. Not required for transient noncommunity water systems
Wliat REDUCED MONITORING may I conduct under the Stage 1 DBPR?
Chemical
Chlorite
(daily)
Chlorite
(monthly)
Chlorine
Dioxide
Frequency
No reduced monitoring
One 3-sample set per
quarter
No reduced monitoring
Where monitoring must be
conducted
NA
Near first customer, location
representative of average residence
time, location representative of
maximum residence time in
distribution system.
NA
Conditions for reduced
monitoring
NA .' ".
• No daily sample has exceeded the
MCL
• No additional monitoring has been
required
• No quarterly sample exceeds the
MCL
NA -
NOTES:
1. Not required for transient noncomrnunity water systems
                                           Page 44

-------
 (Attachment 6) 1 operate a treatment plant that uses chlorine dioxide *..
How do /DETERMINE IF MY SYSTEM IS IN COMPLIANCE with the MCLsandMRDLs of theStage 1
DBPR?         '.:-•'•''   .---:•-   '  -•'.•• V:-'-::'    .'•  •-'.''' :-/'  '--•..>'-'- "-•'-:,'-',. .'-''••
    Chemical'
                                                   Compliance 5s based on
  Chlorite
Average of 3-sample sets.                t                         '               ,
•  If arithmetic average of any 3-sample set in the month exceeds the MCL, the system is in violation.
•  The system must notify the public and report to the state if in Violation.
  Chlorine
  Dioxide-
  Acute Violation
Consecutive daily samples collected.              '•-,'-.'        •_'- •               ;
•  If any daily sample taken at entrance to distribution system exceeds 0.8 mg/L, and on the following
   day 1 or more of the 3 samples taken in the distribution system exceeds 0.8 mg/L, the system is in
   acute violation.       ,
•  The system must take immediate corrective action to lower the level of chlorine dioxide below 0,8
   mg/L, notify the public and report to the state.                        :  ,
•  Failure to take; samples in the distribution system following an exceedance of the MRDL at the   .
   entrance to the distribution system is also an acute violation. System must notify public of acute
   violation.
  Chlorine
  Dioxide—
  Nonacute
  Violation
Consecutive daily samples collected.
• If any two consecutive daily samples taken at entrance to distribution system .exceed 0.8 mg/L, and all
  distribution system samples are below 0.8 mg/L, the system is in noiiacute violation.
• The system must take immediate corrective action to lower the level of chlorine dioxide belowO.8
  mg/L, notify the public and report to the state.
• Failure to take samples at the distribution system entrance following an exceedance of the MRDL is
  also a violation. System must notify public of nonacute violation.
What do I have to REPORT to the State under the Stage 1 DBPR?
Chemical
Chlorite
Chlorine
Dioxide
What must be reported
• Number of samples taken each month for last 3 months
• Location, date, result of each sample taken during last quarter
• For each month in the reporting period, the arithmetic average of all samples taken in the month
• Whether MCL was exceed based on 3-sample set average and in which month it was exceeded.
• Dates, results, locations of samples taken during last quarter .
• Whether MRDL was exceeded
• Whether MRDL was exceeded in any two consecutive daily samples and whether resulting violation was
acute or nonacute
NOTES:
1.  Systems required to sample quarterly or more frequently must report to the state within ,10 days after the end of
each quarter in which samples were collected.                                                             -
                                                   Page, 45

-------
(Attachment 6) I operate a treatment plant that uses chlorine dioxide...
                                           Chlorine Dioxide Monitoring for Systems Using Chlorine Dioxide
                                                             Is the system
                                                         a CWS, NTNCWS, or
                                                       TNCWS that uses Chlorine
                                                              Dioxide?
                                                            No monitoring requirements
                                                             for Chlorine Dioxide an
                                                                    Chlorite
                                                                           System must also monitor for Chlorit
                                                                                 (For Chlorite monitoring
                                                                                requirements sea Chlorite
                                                                                flow chart on next page.)
                                Chlorine Dioxide Monitoring
                               1 dally sample at the entrance
                                 to the distribution system
                                                                    On following day, 3 Chlorine Dioxld
                                                                       distribution system samples in
                                                                         addition to daily sample1
Is daily sample
 >0.8 mg/L?
                                                             Did system
                                                       take additional samples in
                                                       distribution system the day
                                                            following the
                                                            exceedance?
                                                   to distribution syste
                                                          following the
                                                          exceedance?
                                                                                                                  System must take immediate
                                                                                                                  corrective action and notify
                                                                                                                   public of nonacute public
                                                                                                                        health risk.
                                      Have 2 consecutive
                                   daily entry point samples
                                      exceeded 0.8 mg/L?
                                                                                Is any
                                                                           individual sample in
                                                                           distribution system
                                                                               >0.8 mg/L
A
k
Acute MRDL Violation
System must take Immediate
corrective action and notify the public
(141,32) and the State (141.134)
                   NOTES             .                                                                                            .
                   1) If cnforIne dioxide or chloramines are used to maintain a disinfectant residual in the distribution system (DS), or if chlorine is used to
                   maintain a disinfectant residual In the DS and there are no disinfection addition points {i.e., no booster chlorinatton) after the entrance to the
                   DS, the system must take 3 samples as close to the first customer as possible, at intervals of at least every 6 hours. If chlorine is used to
                   maintain a disinfectant residual In the DS and (here are one ormore booster chlorihation stations, the system must take one sample as close
                   to tho 1st customer as possible, one in a location representative of average residence time; and one as close to the end of the distribution
                   system as possible,                     '  -                 ,                                  ;    '
                                                                             Page 46

-------
 --•_  •     "   /--_     .-^     -.     ^ "jv •    •          ".-•'  •   .   '  ;-    .:  :-"'  -' . '  -. -^ --",    .-   f-  ••"."'.
(Attachment 6)  I operate a treatment plaint that  uses chlorine dioxide. ;,
                                  Chioi-ite Mpriitpring Requirements for Systems Using Chlorine Dioxide
                                                                                                              No monitoring requirements
                                                                                                               for Chlorine Dioxide and
                                                                                                                    - Chlorite  '""-
                                                                YES
                                                     Need to sample for Chlorine Dioxide and
                                                     Chlorite. (For Chlorine Dioxide monitoring
                                                           requirements, see Chlorine;
                                                      .Dioxide flowchart on previous page.)
                                Routine daily Moniiorino.
                                                                                                   Routine monthly monitoring
                                                                                                   3 sample set per month in the
                                                                                                      distribution system1
                                                                                                        Is the arithmetic
                                                                                                        avg. of 3 sample
                                                                                                        set>i.bmg/L? '
                                                                                                  System must notify the public
                                                                                               (141-32) and the State (141.1'34)t [if on
                                                                                                reduced.monitoring, must revert to
                                                                                                           routine].
                                   Is the arithmetic
                                   avg. of 3 sample
                          NO   \ set>1.0mg/L?
                                                                                                                 Have al! chlorite
                                                                                                               samples taken at the
                                                                                                               entrance to or io the
                                                                                                             distribution system for th
                                                                                                               past years I.O'rhg/L?
                                                                                                                  Was system
                                                                                                              required to conduct any
                                                                                                            additional distribution syste
                                                                                                             monitoring (3-sample set
                                                                                                             following exceedance at
                                                                                                                 entrance to DS)
                                                                                                                   last year?
                                                                                   3 sample set per quarter
Note:
1) Th
              ote:     .".-.••                            :_             "..."     ."•''              '    •
              ) The system must take one sample at each of the following locations: near the first customer, at a location representative of avenage residence time and at a location
             reflecting maximum residence time in the distribution system.                                , '  .                 .        -           ,        ' •  -.
             2) If the system has not performed the routine monthly sampling for chlorite, they can use this 3 sample set for their monthly chlorite samples.
                                                                        'Page 47

-------
(Attachment 6) I operate a treatment plant that uses chlorine dioxide.
                                  This page is left intentionally blank.
                                               Page 48

-------
Attachment? ••• Stage 1 Disinfectants and Disinfection Byproducts Rule Requirements
I operate a treatment plant that uses ozone.
                                Page 49

-------
(Attachment 7) I operate a treatment plant that uses ozone.
What ROUTINE MONITORING must I conduct under the Stage 1DBPR?
Chemical
Bromate
Bromide
Frequency
One sample per ozone
plant per month
One sample per ozone
plant per month
Where monitoring must be conducted
Entrance to the distribution system.
In source "water (only required if the system wishes to qualify for reduced
bromate monitoring).
Wttat REDUCED MONITORING may I conduct under the Stage 1 DBPR?
Chemical
Bromate
Bromide
Frequency
One sample per ozone plant
per quarter
No reduced monitoring if
wishing to conduct reduced
bromate monitoring
Where monitoring must be
conducted
Entrance to the distribution system.
NA , .
Conditions for reduced monitoring
• Annual average source water
bromide concentration < 0.05 mg/L
NA
NOTES:
1. System must resume monthly bromate monitoring if running annual average of source water bromide >0.05
mg/L.                                       .
                                           Page 50

-------
 (Attachment 7) I operate a treatment plant that uses ozone. -;".•
How do I DETERMINE IE MY SYSTEM IS IN COMPLIANCE with the bf ornate MCL in the Stage 1 DBPR?
Chemical
Bf ornate
. - Compliance is based on ... ;
Running annual arithmetic average, computed quarterly, of monthly samples (or average of all sample
taken during the month if more than 1 sample was collected).
• If average of samples covering any consecutive 4-quarter period exceeds the MCL, the system is in
violation. . • . ..'. '•"'-. .
• The: system must notify the public and report to the state if in violation. ••.. • '
NOTES:
1. Where compliance is based on a running annual average of monthly Or quarterly samples or, averages and the .
.system's failure to monitor makes it impossible to determine compliance with the MCLs or MRDLs, this failure to
monitor will be treated as a violation for the entire period covered by the annual average.

2. All samples taken and analyzed under the provisions of the monitoring plan must be included in determining
compliance, even if that number is greater than the minimum required.                     ;

3. If during the first year of monitoring, any individual quarter's average will cause the running annual average of
that system to exceed the MCL, the system is out of compliance at the end of that quarter.
What do I have to REPORT to the State under the Stage1 DBPR?
Chemical
Bromate
; . What must be reported
• Number of samples taken during last quarter
• Location, date, result of each sample taken during last quarter
• Arithmetic average pf monthly arithmetic averages of all samples taken in last year ,
• Whether MCL was exceeded .' . ' , •'• .
NOTES:
:1_. Systems required to sample quarterly of more frequently must report to the state within 10 days after the endof
each quarter in which samples were collected.
                                               Page 51

-------
(Attachment 7) I operate a treatment plant that uses ozone...
                                Monitoring Requirements for Bromate for Systems using Ozonation
                                                          Are you a CWS or a
                                                        NTNCWS using ozone?
                                                          Routine Monitoring
                                               Isample per month per treatment plant at the
                                             entrance to distribution system while the ozpnation .
                                               system is operating under normal conditions.
                                                                                             Is the sum of
                                                                                           quarterly averages
                                                                                             taken so far
                                                                                             for bromate
                                                                                               >0.040?
  Has system
monitored for at
least one year?
                                                              Is bromate
                                                        average (running annual
                                                          arithmetic average
                                                          computed quarterly)
                                                           > 0.010 mg/L?2
                                                            Is the system s
                                                        annual average1 source
                                                         water bromide level
                                                            <0.05 mg/L?
                                                         Reduced Monitoring
                                                    1 bromate sample per.quarter per
                                                            treatment plant
                   Kotos:
                   1) Tha average Is based upon representative monthly bromide measurements for one year (In months where more than one sample Is.taken, use the average of
                   a* samples taken during the month). <
                   2) If a PWS falls to complete 12 mos of monitoring, compliance must be based on average of available data.                                .
                                                             Page 52

-------
Attachment 8 - Stage 1 Disinfectants and Disinfection Byproducts Rule Requirements
I operate a surface water system or ground water system
under the directinfluence of surface water and operate
a conventionalfiltration treatment plant, *.
                           Page 53

-------
(Attachment 8) I operate a surface water system or ground water system under the direct influence of
surface water and operate a conventional filtration treatment plant...

Enhanced Coagulation and Enhanced Precipitative Softening Treatment Technique

What is the goal of  enhanced coagulation and enhanced precipitative softening?
The goal of enhanced coagulation and precipitaive softening is to pfovide additional removal of the
natural organic material (referred to as total organic carbon or "TOC") that is a precursor to DBF              V
formation. TOC and disinfectants commonly used in drinking water treatment can combine to form            ._.__-
DBFs.  Adding additional amountsof coagulant or lime:to coagulation or softening treatment trains.,           .
respectively, can increase the amount of TOC removed and .thereby lower DBF levels in finished water.

Which public water systems does the treatment technique apply to?
The treatment technique applies to Subpart H systems (systems using surface water or groundwater under
the direct influence of surface water) that use conventional treatment.  Conventional treatment is defined
in §141.2 as a series of processes including coagulation, fiocculation, sedimentation, and filtration
resulting in substantial particulate removal.

How is the treatment technique implemented by public water systems?
Public water systems (PWSs) that use conventional treatment are required to remove a percentage of
TOC from the raw water. The percent removal is based on raw water  TOC and alkalinity levels. A pair
of TOC samples must be taken simultaneously in the raw water and no later than the combined filter
effluent at least once per month to calculate the percent removal and demonstrate compliance via a
running annual average. PWS unable to meet the required TOC removal may set an alternative TOC
percent removal based on jar or pilot testing that reflects the treatability of their water. PWSs may also
use one of the alternative compliance criteria to demonstrate compliance.

                                                                                                              '
The treatment technique is effective for systems serving 10,000 or more people in January 2002.  The
effective date for systems serving under 10,000 people is January 2004.
                                              Page 54

-------
(Attachment 8) I operate a surface water system or ground water system under the direct influence of
surface water and operate a conventional filtration treatment plant...
What ROUTINE MONITORING must I conduct under the Stage 1DBPR?
Chemical
TOC and
Alkalinity
(conventional
treatment)
• - -
. . - • , •
Frequency
One paired TOC sample ,
per plant per month
One alkalinity sample per
plant per month at same
time as source water TOG
sample is taken
--'.;• Where monitoring must be conducted
TOC (paired samples)
• In source water prior to any treatment .
• No later than the point of combined filter effluent turbidity monitoring and
representative of filtered water
Alkalinity
• Same location as source water TOC sample is taken. ,
What REDUCED MONITORING may I conduct under the Stage! DBPR?
  Chemical
      Frequency
   Where monitoring must be
          conducted
     Conditions fpr reduced
          monitoring
 TOC and
 Alkalinity
 (conventional
 treatment)
One paired TOC sample
per plant per quarter

One alkalinity sample per
plant per quarter at sattie
time as source water TOC
sample is taken
TOC (paired samples)

• In Source Water prior to any
  treatment             .-•'••

« No later than the point of
  combined filter effluent turbidity
  monitoring and representative of
  filtered water :

Alkalinity

* Same location as source water
  TOC sample is taken.
Average treated water TOC < 2.0
mg/L for 2 consecutive years or <1.0
mg/L for 1 year
                                              PageSS

-------
 (Attachment 8) I operate a surface water system or ground water system under the direct influence of
 surface water and operate a conventional filtration treatment plant	

 How do I DETERMINE IF MY SYSTEM IS IN COMPLIANCE with the TOC removal requirements of the
 Stage 1DBPR?
Chemical
TOC (conventional
treatment)
, Compliance is based on ...
"Step 1" or "Step 2" removal targets or alternative compliance criteria (see flowcharts for determining
TOC compliance)
NOTES:
1. Where compliance is based on a running annual average of monthly or quarterly samples or averages and the
system's failure to monitor makes it impossible to determine compliance with the tf eatnient technique, this failure to
monitor will be treated as a monitoring violation for the entire period covered by the annual average.
2. All samples taken and analyzed under the provisions of the monitoring plan must be included in determining
compliance, even if that number is greater than the minimum required.
 What do I have to REPORT to the State under the Stage 1 DBPR?
    Chemical
  TOC and
  Alkalinity
  (conventional
  treatment)
                                  What must be reported
• Number of paired samples taken during last quarter

• Location, date, result of each paired sample and associated alkalinity taken during last quarter,

• For systems using Step 1 or Step 2, enhanced coagulation or enhanced softening

  • For each month in the reporting period, the arithmetic average of the percent reduction of TOC for
    each paired sample and the required TOC percent removal
  • Calculations for determining compliance with the TQC percent removal requirements

• For systems using an alternative compliance Criterion                       -
  • Running annual arithmetic average of source water SUVA or treated water SUVA if using this
    criterion for alternative compliance

  • Running annual arithmetic average based on monthly average of source or treated water, TOC if using
    this criterion for alternative compliance

  • Running annual arithmetic average of source water alkalinity or treated water alkalinity if using this
    criterion for alternative compliance
  • Running annual average for both TTHM and HAA5 if using this criterion for alternative compliance

  • Running annual average of amount of magnesium hardness removal if using this criterion for
    alternative compliance

  ' Whether system is in compliance with particular alternative compliance criterion

• Whether system is in compliance with the enhanced coagulation or enhanced softening percent removal
  requirements for the last 4 quarters :
NOTES:
1. Systems required to sample quarterly or more frequently must report to the state within 10 days after the end of
each quarter in which samples were collected.
                                                 Page 56

-------
(Attachment 8) I operate a surface water system or ground water system under the direct influence of
surface water and operate a conventional filtration treatment plant...
                                            Disinfection Byproducts Precursor Removal
                                                        Treatment Technique
                           Is system
                        Subpart H System
                       using conventional
                           filtration
                           treatment?
                      System must conduct
                         DBP Precursor -
                          Monitoring.
                         Does system
                         have difficulty
                     meeting Step 1 removals
                  due to water quality parameters
                         or operational
                         constraints?
•^ - 	 	 —
m meei:^\x^
e of the ^-^ YES.
35(aj(2) and/^
? r^

System in compliance
with enhanced
coagulation/enhanced
spftening (EC/ES)
requirements.

• •. - -- .
.- W
System mUs
demonstrate
continue' to me
complianc

t monitor to
^ that they
et alternative
a.cnteria.
  System must conduct
Step 2 testing to determine
 alternative minimum TOC
     requirements.2
                          NO.
      Can system
identify a Step 2 alternative
 minimurn TOC removal
     requirement?
                                                                                                          System applies to the
                                                                                                          State for a waiver of
                                                                                                          EC/ES requirements. ?
                            System applies to the:State.
                           for alternative minimurn TOC
                           removal (Step 2) requirements
                            within 3 mos of not meeting
                                   Stepl.
                         Does system
                       meet Stepl TOC
                   removals [141.135(b)] asann.
                      ave. (including use of
                       ctorsin141.135(c))
          1} Subpart H = Public water systems using surface water or ground water un?Jer the direct Influence of surface water.
          2) Until the state approves alternate Step 2, system must meet Step 1 removals.
                                                             Page 57

-------
(Attachment 8) I operate a surface water system or ground water system under the direct influence of
surface water and operate a conventional filtration treatment plant....
                             Monitoring Requirements for Disinfection Byproduct Precursors (DBPP)
                                                     Is system ,a Subpart H system1 usin
                                                       conventional filtration treatment?
                              Sgurcewater:sampl ing 2
                        Minimum of 1 TOC sample per month per
                         treatment plant in the source water prior
                                 to any treatment
      "paired sample"
«	:	——>
     Treated water sampling
Minimum of 1 sample per month per
 treatment plant taken no later than
     combined filter effluent
                        1 source water alkalinity sample taken at
                         same time and location as source water
                                  TOC sample.
                         Return to routine
                        monitoring In month
                       following quarter where
                       annual average 22.0
                             mg/L.
                                                                 Did
                                                          system conduct required
                                                              monitoring?  ^  NO
                                                          Is the system s annual
                                                     average treated water TOC <2.0mg/il
                                                        for two consecutive years or
                                                          <1 .Omg/L for one yea
                                                           Reduced Monitoring
                                                     May reduce monitoring to one paired
                                                     sample and one alkalinity sample per
                                                         quarter per treatment pair
          1.) Subpart H = PuWta water systems using surface water or ground water under the direct Influence of surface water.
          2.) TUB source water and the treated watar samples are referred to as "paired samples" and are to be taken simultaneously
                                                              Page 58

-------
     Appendix E
     Stage  1 DPBR  Rule
     Language
     - • • ,  /     C—j-'    - ^y  •'     ."• -'
This appendix contains the rule language for the Stage 1 DBPR incorporating the technical amendments:
Changes to me original rule language are .shown as highlighted text A complete electronic copy of the Stage
1 DBPR, including preamble as,publishecl on December 16,1998, can'be found at the EPA web site at
www.epa.gov/OGWDW/mdbp/dbpfr.html. A complete electronic copy of the technical amendments for the
EESWTR and Stage 1 DBPR, including preamble as published On January 16, 2.001, can be found on |he
EPA website at www.epa.gov/safewater/rtidbp/iesfr.htmL        ':-'•;'".'•'..   -,         '

-------
                                 This page is left intentionally blank.
June 2001                                  Appendix E-2       Stage 1DBPR Implementation Guidance

-------
  For .the reasons set put in the preamble, title 40 chapter I of the Code of Federal Regulations is amended as
  follows:-'      •:••'-.-.•  .-;..•.  .'.-"..;"•   ;:  -;.       "•'..'•'".'.".    •'.  -'  /•.'•'•'  ;. ,-  "'  •"    -..-:•  •;

  PART 9 - [AMENDED]   .         :•'        .•;.:''.     •'     ^  V'v;^"'   "'  < V.;'''"   :-.-./
  1. The authoritycitation for part 9'continues to read as follows:    "
  Authority: 7 U.S.C. 135 et seq., 136-l36y; 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, 1.342,  *
  1344, 1345 (d) and (e), 1361; E.G. 11735, 38 FR 21243, 3 CFR, 1971-1975 Comp. p. 973; 42 U.S.C. 241,
  242b, 243, 246, 300fr 300g,  300g-l, 300g-2, 300g-3, 300g-4, 300g-5, 300g-6, 300J-1, 300J-2, 300^ 300J-
 .4, 300J-9, 1857 et seq., 6901-6992k, 7401-767Iq, 7542, 9601-9657, 11023, 11048.
  2. Section 9.1  is amended by adding the new entries to the table to read as follows:
  §9.1 OMB approvals under the Paperwork Reduction Act.    _
  *  .-*•-;    *       *      *            '.'•'-.     -•-••-    •. •._              -      :
  40 CFR Citation     OMB Control No.                                                           "
  *  -     *    '• *     .*.-*.'  -    '   .  - -'      •-. -. •--. •    -•"."•' •      ' '-'.   '   '      "''•'.

  National Primary Drinking Water Regulations
  14L130-141.132     2040-0204        '•';'.'"••'.    ;   ,                                 .-•'•'•,''
  141.134-141.135     2040-0204         ,                       -
  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-l, 300g-2 300g-3, 300g-4, 300g-5, 300g-6, 300J-4, 300J-9, and
  300J-11.

  4. Section 141.2 is amended by adding the following definitions in alphabetical order to read as follows:

  §141.2 Definitionis.
  *    "'#,.'..-*       *     '-#,-".'•'-'  '  : ;•    '         ;           • ..   '  .   "-..'.-.•    . '•   "
  Enhanced coagulation means the addition of sufficient coagulant for improved removal of disinfection
  byproduct precursors  by conventional filtration treatment.                      .                   :-
  *'    ' :' ' *    ';'*".-.'*.'.   ' *  •   '   '•'••.•-•'.-•'".•.      •..'-..-.-'-.".-'••••   "•'..'
 .Enhanced softening means the improved removal of disinfection byproduct precursors by precipitative
 "softening.  ' •  -   :  .'•••'"-'   l^  •:.''.'. -':. .'  -.•.""'•.  :   ••- '-.- .  .-.-.; . -  • .,  . -:    :   -...'•/'  . ,•' ..'.'   . -
  *       *-       *       *       *   "   "   "'..'••'•    ''.''-    '    .---•'..'.      :
  GAC10 means granular activated carbon filter beds with an empty-bed contact time of 10 minutes based on
  average daily flow and a carbon reactivation frequency of every  180 days.
"'#'.'  *-•-'.    *      ' *     •  •#     •  .         -'.  --     '     '•;"    :. -   . '  .  •               '•-•.-•.
  Haloacetic acids (five) (HAAS) mean the sum of the concentrations in inilligrams per Hter of the haloacetic
  acid compounds (monochloroa,cetic acid, dichloroacetic acid, triehloroacetic acid, monobromoacetic acid,
  and dibromoacetic acid), rounded to two significant figures after addition.
•••'*'.    ••'*." .....  *  • '    *   ,  .'• .* -.'.""•     . . •   - '  ' '       '        " '  '         :          /   '  .  -
  MaximumTesidual disinfectant level (MRDL') means a level of a disinfectant;added for water treatment tha't
 may not be exceeded at the consumer's tap without an unacceptable possibility of adverse health effects.
 For chlorine and chloramines, a PWS is in compliance with the MRDL when the running annual average of
 monthly averages .of -.samples' taken in the distrijjution system,: computed quarterly, is less than or equal to
 the MRDL. For chlorine dioxide, a PWS is in compliance; with the MRDL when daily samples are taken at
 me entrance to the distribution systena and no two consecutive daily samples exceed me MRDL, MRDLs
 are enforceable in the same manner as maximum eontammant levels under Section 1412 of t^^
 Stage 1 DBPR Implementation Guidance ,      AppendixE-3                                 June 2001

-------
Drinking Water Act. There is convincing evidence that addition of a disinfectant is necessary for control of
waterborne microbial contaminants. Notwithstanding the MRDLs listed iii §141.65, operators may increase
residual disinfectant levels of chlorine or chloramines (but not chlorine dioxide) in the distribution system to
a level and for a time necessary to protect public health to address specific microbiological contamination
problems caused by circumstances such as distribution line breaks, storm runoff events, source water
contamination, or cross-connections.                              .
*      *      *       * .-#-.-              ":  •"..••     ...-,...
Maximum residual disinfectant level goal (MRDLG) means the maximum level of a disinfectant added for
water treatment at which iio known or anticipated adverse effect on the health of persons would occur, and
which allows an adequate margin of safety. MfeDLGs are nonenforceable health goals and do not reflect
the benefit of the addition of the chemical for control of waterhorne microbial contaminants,            ,
*      *      *       *      *
Subpart H systems means public water systems using surface water or ground water under the direct
influence of surface water as a source that are subject to the requirements of subpart H of this part.
*      *      *       *      *                     '••'•'.•                 .  •  - •           .
SUVA means Specific Ultraviolet Absorption at 254 nanometers' (nm), an indicator of the humic content of
a water. It is a calculated parameter obtained by dividing a sample's ultraviolet absorption at a wavelength
of 254 nm (UV254) (in"') by its concentration of dissolved organic carbon (DOC) (in mg/L).
*      *      *       *      *
Total Organic Carbon (TOO means total organic carbon in mg/L  measured using heat, oxygen, ultraviolet
irradiation, chemical oxidants, or combinations of these oxidants that convert organic carbon .to carbon
dioxide, rounded to two significant figures.
*      *      *       *      *                     • .   .        ..'•:"-.--•'

5. Section 141.12 is revised to read as follows:
§141.12  Maximum contaminant levels for total trihalomethanes.                                 ,
        The maximum contaminant level of 0.10 mg/L for total  trihalomethanes (the sum of the
concentrations of bromodichloromethane, dibromochloromethane, tribromomethane (bromoform), and
trichloromethane (chloroform)) applies  to subpart H community water systems which serve a population of
10,000 people or more until December  31, 2001. This level applies to community water systems that use
only ground water not under the direct influence of surface water and serve a population of 10,000 people
or more until December 31, 2003.  Compliance with me maximum contaminant level for total
trihalomethanes is calculated pursuant to §141.30. After Decemb;ef!3:ls2003, this section is no longer
applicable.

6. Sectionl41.30 is amended by revising the the first sentences inparagraphs (d) and (f) and adding
paragraph (h) to read as follows:
§141.30 Total trihalomethanes sampling, analytical and other requirements.
*      *      *       *      *
 (d) Compliance with §141.12 shall be determined based on a running annual average Of quarterly samples
collected by the system as prescribed in paragraph (b)(l)  or (2) of this section.
 (e)  Sampling and analyses made pursuant to this section shall be conducted by one of the total
trihalomethanes methods as directed in  §141.24(e), and the Technical Notes on Drinking Water Methdds, .
EPA-600/R-94-173, October 1994, which is available from NTIS,PB-J04766, or in'§141.131(b),
*****
 (f) Before a community water system makes any significant modifications to its existing treatment process
for the purposes of achieving compliance with §141.12, such system must submit and obtain State approval
of a detailed plan setting forth its proposed modification and those safeguards that it will implement to
ensure mat me bacteriological quality of me diking water served by such system will not be adversely
affected by such modification. ***
*      *       *       *       *             .'.."•.
  (h) The requirements in paragraphs (a) - (g) of this section apply to subpart H community water systems
which serve a population of 10,000 or more imtirDeeettiber 31^20te The requirements in paragraphs (a)


June 2001                                  Appendix E-4       Stage 1 DBPR-Iniplemehtation Guidance

-------
 through (g) of this section apply to community water systems which use only ground water not under the
 direct influence of surface water that add a disinfectant (oxidant) in any part of the treatment process and
 serve a population of 10,000 or more until becember*31,,2003\ After December 3l,"2003, this section is
 no longer applicable.

 •7..- Section 141.32 is amended by revising the heading in paragraph (a) introductory text, the first sentence
 of paragraph (a)(l)(iri) introductory text.; the first sentence of paragraph (c) introductory text, the first
 sentence of paragraph (e) introductory text, and adding paragraphs (a)(l)(iii)(E) and (e)(76) through (81), to
 read as follows:                                    /                   -                  '
 Section 141.32 - Public notification.

  (a) Maximum Contaminant Levels (MCLs), Maximum Residual Disinfectant Levels (MRDLs). ***

  (iii) For violations of the MCLs of contaminants or MRDLs of disinfectants that may pose an acute risk to
 human health, by furnishing a copy of the notice to the radio and television stations serving the area served
.by the public water system as soon as .possible but in no case later than 72 hours after the violation. ***

  (E) Violation of the MRDL for chlorine dioxide as defined in §141.65 and determined according to
 (c) *** The owner or operator of a community water system must give a copy of the most recent public
noticefor anyoutstanding violation of any maximum contaminant level, or any maximum residual
disinfectant level, or any treatment technique requirement, or any variance or exemption schedule to all new
billing units or new hookups prior to or at the time service begins.
*   '"-    *     ..*.'-,*•   .'#•-.'.•   •     •"    •     -. '. - .     .---•-.     . .  .  '         •;.'••
(e)***  ',.- .''"   -"  '    -      ' -.     .   .    .       -.-.   •  '  '••'•  -  :••""•-•.    •   •.'•.-••'   -       •"•• :• '-.'.,
(76)  Chlorine. The United States Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) sets drinking water standards
and has determined that chlorine is a health concern at certain levels of exposure. Chlorine is added to
drinking water as a disinfectant to kill bacteria and other disease-causing microorganisms and is also added
to provide continuous disinfection throughout the distribution system.  Disinfection is required for surface
water systems. However, at high doses for extended periods of time, chlorine has been shown to affect
blood and the liver in laboratory animals. EPA has set a drinking water standard for chlorine to protect
against the risk df these adverse effects. 'Drinking  water which rrieets this EPA standard is associated with
little to none of mis risk and should be considered  safe with.respect to chlorine.
(77)  Chloramines.. The United States Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) sets drinking water
standards and has determined that chloramines are a health concern at certain levels of exposure.
Chloramines are added to drinking water as a disinfectant to kill bacteria and^ other disease-causing
microorganisms and are also added to provide continuous disinfection throughout the distribution system.
Disinfection is required for surface water systems.  However, at high doses for extended periods of time,
chloramines have been shown to affect blood and the liver in laboratory animals.  EPA has set a drinking
water standard for chloramines to protect against the risk of these adverse effects.  Drinking water which
meets this EPA standard is associated with little to none of this risk and should be considered safe with  -.
respecttochloramin.es.
(78)  Chlorine Dioxide. The United States Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) sets drinking water     .:'
standards and has determined that chlorine dioxide is a health concern at certain levels of exposure.
Chlorine dioxide is used in water treatment to kill bacteria aftd other disease-causing microorganisms and can
be used to control tastes and o.dors. Disinfection is required for surface water systenis.  However, at high
doses, cMorine dioxide-treated .drirjking water has been shown to affect blood in laboratory animals. Also,
Mgh levels of chlorme^ dioxide given to laboratoty animals in drinking water have been shown to cause    •''.'
neurological effects on the developing nervous system. These neurodevelopmental effects may occur;as a
result of a short-term excessive chlorine dioxide exposure. To protect against such potentially harmful


Stage 1DBPRImplementation Guidance       AppendixE-5                                  June2001

-------
 exposures, EPA requires chlorine dioxide monitoring at the treatment plant, where disinfection occurs, and
 at representative points in the distribution system serving water users.  EPA has set a drinking water
 standard for chlorine dioxide to protect against the risk of these adverse effects.  Jin addition to the
 language in this introductory text of paragraph (e)(78), systems must include either the language
 paragraph (e)(78)(i) or (e)(78)(ii) of this section.  Systems with a violation at the treatment plant, but
 not in the distribution system, are required to use the language in paragraph (e)(78)(i) of this section
 and treat the violation as a nonacute violation. Systems with a violation jn the distribution system
 are required to use the language in paragraph (e)(78)(ii) of this section and treat the violation as an
 acute violation.]
  (i) The chlorine dioxide violations reported today are the result of exceedances at the treatment facility
 only, and do not include violations within the distribution system serving users of this water supply.
 Continued compliance with chlorine dioxide levels within the distribution system  minimizes the potential risk
 of these violations to present consumers.              .
  (ii)  The chlorine dioxide violations reported today include exceedances of the EPA standard within the
 distribution system serving water users. Violations of the chlorine dioxide standard within the distribution
 system may harm human health based On short-term exposures. Certain groups,, including pregnant women,
 infants, and young children, may be especially susceptible to adverse effects of excessive exposure to
 chlorine dioxide-treated water. The purpose of this notice is to advise that such persons should consider
 reducing their risk of adverse effects from these chlorine dioxide violations by seeking alternatesources of
 water for human consumption until such exceedances are rectified. Local and State health authorities are
 the best sources for information concerning alternate drinking Water.
 (79) Disinfection Byproducts and Treatment technique for DBFs. The United States Environmental
 Protection Agency (EPA) sets drinking water standards and requires the disinfection of drinking water.
 However, when used in the treatment of drinking water, disinfectants react with naturally-occurring organic
 and inorganic matter present in water to form chemicals called disinfection byproducts (DBPs). EPA has
 determined that a number of DBPs are a health concern at certain levels of exposure. Certain DBFs,
 including some trihalomethanes (THMs) and some haloacetic acids (HAAs), have been shown to cause
 cancer in laboratory animals.  Other DBPs have been shown to affect the liver and the nervous system, and
 cause reproductive or developmental effects in laboratory animals. Exposure to  certain DBPs may produce
 similar effects in people. EPA has set standards to limit exposure to THMs, HAAs, and  other DBPs.
 (80) Bromate. The United States Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) sets drinking water standards and
 has determined that bromate is a health concern at certain levels of exposure. Bromate is formed as a
 byproduct of ozone disinfection of drinking water. Ozone reacts with naturally occurring bromide in the
 water to form bromate.  Bromate has been shown to produce cancer in rats. EPA has set a drinking water
 standard to limit exposure to bromate.                                                     .
 (81) Chlorite. The United States Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) Sets drinking water standards and
 has determined that chlorite is a health concern at certain levels of exposure. Chlorite is formed from the
 breakdown of chlorine dioxide, a drinking water disinfectant.  Chlorite in drinking water has been shown to
 affect blood and the developing nervous system.  EPA  has set a drinking water standard for chlorite to
 protect against these effects. Drinking water which meets this standard is associated with little to none of
 these risks and should be considered safe with respect to chlorite.
 #       *      *       *      *

 8. Subpart F is amended by revising the subpart title and adding §§141,53 and 141.54 to read as follows:

 SUBPART F - MAXIMUM CONTAMINANT LEVEL GOALS AND MAXIMUM RESIDUAL
 DISINFECTANT LEVEL GOALS
 *      *      *       *      *     .      .-•     ...'•.        .             -::'-..    '••'•":-'.-
 §141.53 - Maximum contaminant level goals for disinfection byproducts.
 MCLGs for the following disinfection byproducts are as indicated:
 Disinfection byproduct	MCLGdng/D
 BromodicMoromethane                Zero
 Bromofbrm                .           Zero                                                      •
                        *               ' -       '                         •                 ;

June 2001                                  Appendix E-6       Stage LDBPR Implementation Guidance

-------
 Bromate                     v       Zero                                            :
 Dichloroacetic acid   :          •.-  , ;  Zero                       .',-.-- ,.
 Trichloroacetic acid        .-•'.-'•••''..-•    0.3             >                     ;  :  :
 Chlorite    ;    -'  •-• -' "-  .'.--  .-.'      0.8      '--'^'.  '.-..-/'.-''--:\^  :'": \- ":'",-  .. :"Y  -  '..'••
 Dibromocfiloromethane         0.06            ,  J           .      ,   ; L          ;

 §141.54 -Maximum residual disinfectant level goals for disinfectants.
  MRDLGs for disinfectants are as follows:
 Disinfectant Residual          MRDLG(mg/L')
 Chlorine                       ^(asCQ                     ;        '
' Chloramities                   4 (as C12)
 Chlorine dioxide                0.8 (as C1Q2)       •-."••,  ;                -

 9.  Subpart G, Maximum Contaminant Levels, is amended by revising the subpart heading and adding
 §§14-1.64  and 141.65 to read as follows:          ^           ,        .,    :

 SUBPART G - NATIONAL REVISED PRIMARY DRINKING WATER REGULATIONS:
 MAXIMUM CONTAMINANT LEVELS AND MAXIMUM RESIDUAL DISINFECTANT LEVELS
 *    -*•,--'*       *       *          -                  •   ' -   -     ••".-•       '          ' :.
 Section 141.64-Maximum contaminant levels for disinfection byproducts.
  (a) The maximum contaminant.levels (MCLs) for disinfection byproducts are as follows:

 Disinfection byproduct                MCL(mg/L)
 Total trihalomethanes (TTHM)          0.080 .:                       -."..-'".
 Haloacetic acids (five) (HAA5)          0-060     :
 Bromate                              0.010              ..                                   ,
 Chlorite                     ''-.         1.0            ;              ;
 (b) Compliance Dates.                .                :  :
  (1)  CWSs and NTNCWSs.  Subpart H systems serving 10,000 or more persons must comply with this
 section beginning January 1, 2002. Subpart H systems serving fewer than 10,000 persons and systems
 using only ground water not under the direct influence of surface water must comply with this section
 beginning January 1,2004.
  (2) A system that is installing GAC or membrane technology to comply with this section may apply to the
 State for an extension of up to 24 months past, the dates in paragraphs (b)(l) of this section, but not beyond
 December 31, 2003. In granting the extension, States must set a schedule for compliance and may specify
 any interim measures that the system must take. Failure to meet the schedule or interim treatment
 requirements constitutes  a violation of a National Primary Drinking Water Regulation.
  (c) The Administrator, pursuant to Section 1412 of the Act, hereby identifies the following as the best
 technology, freatment techniques,; or other means available for achieving compliance with the maximum
 contaminant levels for disinfection byproducts identified in paragraph (a) of this section:
Stage 1DBPR Implementation Guidance       Appendix E-7         '                       June 2001

-------
 DISINFECTION BYPRODUCT
 TTHM

 HAAS

 Bromate

 Chlorite
               BEST AVAILABLE TECHNOLOGY
               Enhanced coagulation or enhanced softening or GAClO,
               with chlorine as the primary and residual disinfectant.
               Enhanced coagulation or enhanced softening or GAClO.,
               with chlorine as the primary and residual disinfectant.
               Control of ozone treatment process to reduce production
               ofbromate.
               Control of treatment processes to reduce disinfectant  .
               demand and control of disinfection treatment processes to
               reduce disinfectant levels.
 Section 141.65 - Maximum residual disinfectant levels.
  (a) Maximum residual disinfectant levels (MRDLs) are as follows:
 Disinfectant Residual	MRDL (mg/D
 Chlorine
 Chloramines
 Chlorine dioxide
4.0 (as C12).
4.0 (as C12).
0.8(asClO2).
  (b) Compliance dates.
  (1) CWSs and NTNCWSs. Subpart H systems serving 10,000 or more persons must comply with this
 section beginning January 1, 2002.  Subpart H systems serving fewer than 10,000 persons and systems
 using only ground water not under the direct influence of surface water must comply with this subpart
 beginning January 1,2004.
  (2) Transient NCWSs.  Subpart H systems serving 10,000 or more persons and using chlorine dioxide as
 a disinfectant or oxidant must comply with the chlorine dioxide MRDL beginning January 1, 2002.  Subpart
 H systems serving fewer than 10,000 persons and using chlorine dioxide as a disinfectant or oxidant and
 systems using only ground water not under the direct influence of surface water and using chlorine dioxide
 as a disinfectant or oxidant must comply with the chlorine dioxide MRDL beginning January 1, 2004,
  (c) The Administrator, pursuant to. Section 1412 of the Act, hereby identifies the  following as the best
 technology, treatment techniques, or other means available for achieving compliance with the maximum
 residual disinfectant levels identified in paragraph (a) of this section: control of treatment processes to
 reduce disinfectant demand  and control of disinfection treatment processes to reduce disinfectant levels.

 10.  A new subpart L is added to read as follows:

 SUBPART L - Disinfectant Residuals, Disinfection Byproducts, and Disinfection Byproduct
 Precursors
 Sec.
 141.130  General requirements.
 141.131 Analytical requirements.
 141.132 Monitoring requirements.
 141.133 Compliance.
 141.134 Reporting and recordkeeping requirements,
 141.135 Treatment technique for control of disinfection byproduct (DBF) precursors.

 §141.130  General requirements.
  (a) The requirements of this Subpart L constitute national primary drinking water regulations..
  (1) The regulations in this subpart establish criteria under which community water systems (CWSs) and
 nontransient, noncommunity water systems (NTNCWSs)  which add a chemical disinfectant to the water in
 any part of the drinking water treatment process, must modify their practices to meet MCLs ,and MRDLs in
 §§141.64 and 141.65, respectively, and must meet the treatment technique requirements for disinfection
 byproduct precursors in §141.135.
June 2001
            Appendix E-^8
Stage 1DBPR Implementation Guidance

-------
   (2) The regulations in this subpart establish criteria under which transient NCWSs that use chlorine dioxide
  as a disinfectant or oxidant must modify their practices to meet the MRDL for chlorine dioxide in §141.05.
   (3) EPA has established MCLs for TTHM and HAA5 and treatment technique requirements for
  disinfection byproduct precursors to limit the levels of known and unknown" disinfection byproducts which
  may have adverse health effects.  These: disinfection byproducts niay include chloroform;
  brdmodichlpromethane; dibromochloromethane; bromofdrm;  dichloroacetic acid; arid trichloroacetic acid.
   (b) Compliance dates. .(1) CWSs and NTNCWSs. Unless otherwise noted, systems must comply with
 • the requirements of this subpart as follows. Subpart H systems serving 10,000 or more persons must
  comply with this subpart beginning j^a^§i^J2:, Subpart H systems serving fewer than 10,000 persons
  and systems using only ground water not under the direct influence of surface watermust comply with this
  subpart beginning January 1,2004.                                        '       .
   (2) Transient NCWSs.  Subpart H systems serving 10,000 or more persons and using chlorine.dioxide as
  a disinfectant or oxidant must comply with any requirements for chlorine dioxide lld^ilootfe in this subpart
  beginning January 1, 2002. Subpart H systems serving fewer than 10,000 persons arid using chlorine
  dioxide as a disinfectant or oxidant and systems using only ground water not under the direct influence of
  surface water and using chlorine dioxide as a disinfectant or oxidant must comply with any requirements for
  chlorine dioxide and chlorite in this subpart beginning January 1, 2004.
   (c) Each CWS and NTNCWS regulated under paragraph (a) of this section must be operated by qualified
 personnel who meet the requirements specified by the State and are included in a State register of qualified
  operators.      : '                          /                  0
   (d) Control of Disinfectant Residuals.  Notwithstanding the MRDEs in §141.65,  systems may increase
 residual disinfectant levels in the distribution system of chlorine or chloramines (but not chlorine dioxide) to
 a level and for a time necessary to protect public health, to address specific microbiological contamination
 problems caused by circumstances such as, but not.limited to, distribution line breaks, storm run-off events,
 source water contamination,events, or cross-connection events.

 §141.131; Analytical requirements,
   (a) General.  (1) Systems must use only me analytical memod(s) specified in this section, or otherwise
 .approved by EPA for monitoring under this subpart, to demonstrate cqriipliance with the requirements of
 this subpart. These methods are, effective for compliance February 16, 1999.
   (2) The following documents are incorporated by reference. The Director of the Federal Register
 approves this  incorporation by refererice in accordance with 5 U.S.C. 552(a) and 1 CFR part 51. Copies
 may be inspected at EPA's Drinking Water Docket, 401  M Street,  S. W, Washington, DC 20460, or at the
 Office  of the Federal Register, 800 North Capitol Street,  NW, Suite 700, Washington DC.  EPA Method
 552.1 is iri Methods for the Determination of Organic Coriipounds in Drinking Water-Supplement n.
 USEPA, August 1992, EPA/606/R-92/129 (available through National Information Technical Service
 (NTIS), PB92-207703). EPA Methods 502.2, 524.2, 551.1,  and 552.2 are in Methods for the
 Determination of Organic Compounds in Drinking Water-SupplementUJ. USEPA. August 1995,
 EPA/600/R-95/131. (available through NTIS, PB95-261616). EPA Method 300.0 is in Methods for the
 Determination of Inorganic Substances in Environmental Samples. USEPA. August 1993, EPA/fiOn/R-
 93/100. (available through NTIS, PB94-121811). EPA Method 300.1 is titled USEPA Method 300.1.
 Determination of Inorganic Anions in Drinking Water by Ion Chfomatographv. Revision 1.0. USEPA. 1997,
 EPA/600/R-98/118 (available through NTIS, PB98-169196); also available from: Chemical Exposure
 Research Branch, Microbiological & Chemical Exposure Assessment Research Division, National Exposure
 Research Laboratory,,U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Cincinnati, OH 45268, Fax Number:
 513-569-7757, Phone 'number: 513-569-7586. Standard Methods 4500-Cl'D, 4500-C1 E, 4500-C1F, 4500-
 Cl G, 4500-Cl H, 4500-C11,45{)0-C1O2 D, 4500-ClQ2 E, 6251 B, and 5910^B shall be foljowedin
 accordance with Standard Methods for the Examination of Water arid Wastewater. 19th Edition. American
 Public Health Association, 1995; copies may be obtained from the American Public Health Association,
.1015 Fifteenm Street, NW, Washington, DC 20005. Standard Methods 5310 B, 5310 C, arid 5310 D shall
 be followed in accordance with the Supplement to the 19* Edition of Standard Methods for the Examination
 of Water and Wastewater. American Public Health Association, 1996; copies may be obtained from the
 American Public Health Association, 1015 Fifteenth Street, NW, 'Washington, DC 20005, ASTM Method


 Stage 1DBPRImplementation Guidance        AppendixE-9                  :      ,         June 2001

-------
D 1253-86 shall be followed in accordance with the Annual Book of ASTM Standards, Volume 11.01,
American Society for Testing and Materials, 1996 edition; copies may be obtained from the American
Society for Testing and Materials, 100 Barr Harbor Drive, West Conshohoken, PA 19428.
  (b) Disinfection Byproducts. (1) Systems must measure disinfection byproducts by the methods (as
modified by the footnotes) listed in the following table:

      APPROVED METHODS FOR DISINFECTION BYPRODUCT COMPLIANCE MONITORING
                                                            BYPRODUCT MEASURED1
METHODOLOGY2
P&T/GC/E1CD&PID
P&T/GC/MS
LLE/GC/ECD
LLE/GC/ECD
SPE/GC/ECD
LLE/GC/ECD
Amperometric
Titration
1C
1C
EPA
METHOD
502.23
524.2
551.1

552.1
552,2

300.0
300.1
STANDARD
METHOD



6251 B


4500-C1O2E


TTHM
x
X
X






HAAS



x.
X
X



CHLORITE4






X
..x
X
BROMATE








X
'-X indicates method is approved for measuring specified disinfection .byproduct.                            -
2-P&T- purge and trap;  GC = gas chromatography; E1CD = electrolytic conductivity detector; PID =
photoionization detector; MS = mass spectrometer; LLE = liquid/liquid extraction;  BCD = electron capture
detector;  SPE - solid phase extractor; 1C = ion chromatography.
3-If TTHMs are the only analytes being measured in the sample, then a PID is not required.
"-Amperometric titration may be used for routine daily monitoring of chlorite at the entrance to the distribution
system, as prescribed in § 141.132(b)(2)(i)(A).  Ion chromatography must be used for routine monthly monitoring
of chlorite and additional monitoring of chlorite in the distribution system, as prescribed in § 141.132(b)(2)(i)(B)
and(b)(2)(ii).

 (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 tfiis,section. To
receive certification to conduct analyses for the contaminants in §141.64(a), the  laboratory must carry out
annual analyses of performance evaluation (PE) samples approved by EPA or the State. In these analyses
of PE samples, the laboratory must achieve quantitative results within the acceptance limit on a minimum of
80% of the analytes included in each PE sample. The acceptance limit is defined as the 95% confidence
interval calculated around the mean of the PE study data between a maximum and minimum acceptance
limit of+/- 50% and +/- 15% of the study mean.
  (3) A party approved by EPA or the State must measure  daily chlorite samples at the entrance to the
distribution system.
 Co) Disinfectant Residuals.  (1) Systems must measure residual disinfectant concentrations for free chlorine,
combined chlorine (chloramines), and chlorine dioxide by the methods listed in the following table:
June 2001
Appendix E-10
Stage 1JDBPR Implementation Guidance

-------
       APPROVED METHODS FOR DISINFECTANT RESIDUAL COMPLIANCE MONITORING

                                                             Residual Measured1
JVlethodolpgy
Amperometric
Titratibn
Low Level
Amperometric
Titration
DPD Ferrous
Titrimetric
DPD
Colqrimetric
Syringaldazine
(FACTS)
lodometric
Electrode
DPD
Amperometric
Method II ..•
Standard
Method
4500-ClD,
4500-C1E
4500-C1F
4500-ClG
4500-C1H
4500-C1I
4500-C102D
4500-C1O2E
'-: ASTM /-
Method
D 1253-
86 ,

. •- - • - .





Free
Chlorine
. x;;

"•• ;. ; x •".-:-'
x
-\'X'.- '••



Combined
Chlorine
'.' x.'"-;
. - .. •
x
; x •'..-.':"




Total
Chlorine
'"''•' ;x\ • ;
- X :
-•x ; :- ,
: X

X


Chlorine
Dioxide






'. x • .
X
'-X indicates method is approved for measuring specified disinfectant residual.

  (2) If approved by the State, systems may also measure residual disinfectant concentrations for chlorine,
chlofamines, and chlorine dioxide by using DPD colorimetric test kits.
  (3) A party approved by EPA or the State must measure residual disinfectant concentration.
  (d) Additional analytical methods.  Systems required to analyze parameters not included in paragraphs (b)
and (c) of this section must use the following methods. A party approved by EPA or the State must measure
these parameters.                        •-••.       •      ,                                         ;
  (1) Alkalinity.  All methods allowed in §141.89(a) for measuring alkalinity.
  (2) Bromide. EPA Method 300.0 or EPA Method 300.1.                                          '.• •.
  (3) Total Organic Carbon (TOO.  Standard Method 5310 B (High-Temperature Combustion Method) or
Standard Method 5310 C (Persulfate-Ultraviolet or Heated-Persulfate Oxidation Method) of Standard
Method 5310 D (Wet-Oxidation Method). TOC samples may not be filtered prior to analysis. TOC
samples must either be analyzed or must be acidified to achieve pH less than 2.0 by minimal addition of
phosphoric or sulfurie acid as soon as practical after sampling, not to exceed 24 hours. Acidified TOC
samples must be analyzed within 28 days.
  (4) Specific Ultraviolet Absorbance (SUVA). SUVA is equal to the UV absorption at 254nm (UV254)
(measured in m"1) divided by the dissolved organic carbon (DOC) concentration (measured as mg/L), In
order to determine SUVA, it is necessary to separately measure UV2S4 and DOC.  When determining
SUVA, systems must use the methods stipulated in paragraph (d)(4)(i) of this section to measure DOC and
the method stipulated in paragraph (d)(4)(ii)of this section to measure UV254. SUVA must be determined on
water prior to the addition of disinfectants/oxidants by the system. DOC and UV254 samples used to
determine a SUVA value must be taken at the same time and at the same location.;
   (i) Dissolved Organic Carbon (DOC).  .Standard'Method 5310 B (High-Temperature Combustion
Method) or Standard Method 5310. C (Persulfate-Ultraviolet Or Heated-Persulfate Oxidation Method) or
Standard^Method 5310 D (Wet-Oxidatiori Method). Prior to analysis, DOC samples must be filtered
Stags 1DBPR Implementation Guidance
Appendix E-11
June 2001

-------
 through a 0.45 urn pore-diameter filter. Water passed through the filter prior to filtration of the sample must
 serve as the filtered blank.  This filtered blank must be analyzed using procedures identical to those used for
 analysis of the samples and must meet the following criteria: DOC < 0.5 mg/L. DOC samples must be
 filtered through the 0.45 urn pore-diameter filter prior to acidification. DOC samples must either be
 analyzed or must be acidified to achieve pH less than 2.0 by minimal addition of phosphoric or sulfuric acid
 as soon as practical after sampling, not to exceed 48 hours.  Acidified DOC samples must be analyzed
 within 28 days.
   (ii) Ultraviolet Absorption at 254 nm (UV254). Method 5910 B (Ultraviolet Absorption Method). UV
 absorption must be measured at 253.7 nm (may be rounded off to 254 nm). Prior to analysis, UV254
 samples must be filtered through a 0.45 urn pore-diameter filter.  The pH of UV254 samples may not be
 adjusted.  Samples must be analyzed as soon as practical after sampling, not to exceed 48 hours.
  (5)pH. All methods allowed in §141.23(k)(l) for measuring pH.

 §141.132 Monitoring requirements.
  (a) General requirements. (1) Systems must take all samples during normal operating conditions.
  (2) Systems may consider multiple wells drawing water from a single aquifer as one treatment plant for
 determining the minimum number of TTHM and HAA5 samples required, with State approval in
 accordance with criteria developed under §142.16(h)(5) of this chapter.
  (3)  Failure to monitor in accordance with the monitoring plan required under paragraph (f) of this section
 is a monitoring violation.
  (4) Failure to monitor will be treated as a violation for the entire period covered by the annual average
 where compliance is based on a running annual average of monthly or quarterly samples or averages and the
 system's failure to monitor makes it impossible to determine compliance with MCLs or MRDLs.
  (5)  Systems may use only data collected under the provisions of this subpart or subpart M to qualify for
 reduced monitoring.
  (b) Monitoring requirements for disinfection byproducts.
  (1) TTHMs and HAAS,  (i) Routine monitoring. Systems must monitor at the frequency indicated in the
 following table:
June 2001                                 Appendix E-12       Stage 1DBPR Implementation Guidance

-------
                    ROUTINE MONITORING FREQUENCY FOR TTEM AND HAAS
Type of system
 Subpart H system serving at least
 10,000 persons
Subpart H system serving from
500 to 9,999 persons

Subpart H system serving fewer
than 500 persons
System using only ground water
not under direct influence of
surface water using chemical
disinfectant and serving at least
10,00,0 persons          "•...'.•

System using only ground water
not under direct influence of
surface water using chemical
disinfectant and serving fewer than
10,000 persons
Minimum Monitoring
Frequency

four water samples per
quarter per treatment plant
one water sample per
quarter per treatment plant

one sample per year per
treatment plant during
month of warmest water
temperature  ;
one water sample per
quarter per treatment plant2
                                                                 Sample Location in ihe distribution    ,
                                                                 System.-     ;  .        :         _,

                                                                 At least 25 percent of all samples'
                                                                 collected each quarter at locations
                                                                 representing maximum .residence time.
                                                                 Remaining samples taken at locations
                                                                 representative of at least average
                                                                 residence time in the distribution
                                                                 system and representing the entire
                                                                 distribution system, taking into account
                                                                 number of persons served, different
                                                                 sources of water, and different
                                                                 treatment methods'.

                                                                 Locations representing maximum
                                                               ': residence time1,

                                                                 Locations representing maximum
                                                                 residence time1. ,If the sample (or
                                                                 average'of 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)(l)(iy) of this section.

                                                                 Locations representing maximum
                                                                 residence time1.
one sample per year per
treatment plant2 during
month of warmest water
temperature
                                                              .   Locations representing maximum
                                                                 residence time1. If the sample (or
                                                                 average of annual samples, if more than
                                                                 one sample is taken) exceeds the MCL,
                                                                 ffig 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 criteria in paragraph (b)(l)(iy) 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,
§142.16l5(5):of this chapter.                       ;     ;                       V "•   . ..         :
Stage 1DBPR Implementation Guidance    .   Appendix E-13   ,
                                                       June 2001

-------
  (ii) Systems may reduce monitoring, except as otherwise provided, in accordance with the following table:

                  REDUCED MONITORING FREQUENCY FOR TTHM AND HAAS

 IF YOU ARE A...            YOU MAY REDUCE           TO THIS LEVEL
                            MONITORING IF YOU
                            HAVE MONITORED AT
                            LEAST ONE YEAR AND
                            YOUR...
 Subpart H system serving
 at least 10,000 persons
 which has a source water
 annual average TOC level,
 before any treatment, £
 4.0 mg/L

 Subpart H system serving
 from 500 to 9,999
 persons which has a
 source water annual
 average TOC level, before
 any treatment, £ 4.0 mg/L
 System using only ground
 water not under direct
 influence of surface water
 using chemical
 disinfectant and serving at
 least 10,000 persons

 System using only ground
 water not under direct
 influence of surface water
 using chemical
 disinfectant and serving
 fewer than 10,000
 persons
TTHM annual average s;0.040
mg/L and HAAS annual
average ^0.030mg/L
TTHM annual average =s0.040
mg/L and HAAS annual
average s0.030mg/L
TTHM annual average <;0.040
mg/L and HAA5 annual
average ^0.030mg/L
TTHM annual average £0.040
mg/L and HAAS annual
average ^0.030mg/L for two
consecutive years OR TTHM
annual average ^0.020 mg/L
and HAAS annual average
:s0.015mg/L for one year
one sample per treatment plant per quarter at
distribution system location reflecting
maximum residence time
one sample per treatment plant per year at
distribution system location reflecting
maximum residence time during month of
warmest water temperature. NOTE: Any
Subpart H system serving fewer than 500
persons may not reduce its monitoring to less
than one sample per treatment plant per year.

one sample per treatment plant per year at
distribution system location reflecting
maximum residence time during month of
wannest water temperature
one sample per treatment plant per three year
monitoring cycle at distribution system
location reflecting maximum residence time
during month of warmest water temperature,
with the three-year cycle beginning on January
1 following quarter in which system qualifies
for reduced monitoring.
  (iii) Systems on a reduced monitoring schedule may remain oh that reduced schedule as long as the
average of all samples taken in the year (for systems which must monitor quarterly) or the result of the
sample (for systems which must monitor no more frequently than annually) is no more than 0.060 mg/L and
0.045 mg/L for TTHMs and HAAS, respectively.  Systems that do not meet these levels must resume
monitoring at the frequency identified in paragraph (b)(l)(i) of this section (minimum frequency column) in
the quarter immediately following the monitoring period in which the system exceeds  0.060 mg/L or 0.045
mg/L for TTHM orHAA.5, respectively. For systems usittg only ground water not under the direct influence
of surface water  and serving fewer than 10,000 persons,,if either the TTHM annuataverage is >0.080 mg/L
or the HAAS annual average is >0.060 mg/L, the system must go to the increased monitoring identified,in
paragraph (b)(l)(i) of this section (sample location column) in the quarter immediately following the
monitoring period in which the system exceeds 0.080 mg/L or 0.060 mg/L for TTHMs or HAA5
respectively.
  (iv) Systems on increased monitoring mav return to routine monitoring if, after at,least one year of
monitoring their TTHM annual average is <; 0.060 mg/L and their HAA5 annual average is ^0,045 mg/L.
June 2001
               Appendix E-14
    Stage 1DBPR Implementation Guidance

-------
   fv| The State may return ..a system to routine monitoring at the State's discretion.
 :  (2) Chlorite. Community and nqntransieht noncommunity water systems using chlorine dioxide, for
  disinfection;br oxidation,,must conduct monitoring for chlorite.  ,       v              J
   (i) Routine monitoring. (A) Daily monitoring.  Systems must take daily samples at the entrance to the
  distribution system. For any daily sample that exceeds the chlorite MCL, the system must take additional
.  samples m the distribution system the following day at the locations required by paragraph (b)(2)(ii) of this
  section, in addition to ;the sample required at me entrance to the distribution system.
   (B) Monthly monitoring.  Systems must take a three-sample set each month in the distribution system.
  The system must take one sample at each of the following Ideations:  near the first customer, at a location
  representative of average residence; time, and at a location reflecting maximum residence time in the
  distribution system. Any additional routine sampling must be conducted in the  same manner (as three-
  sample sets, at the specified locations). The system may use the results of additional monitoring conducted
  under paragraph (b)(2)(ii) of this section to meet the requirement for monitoring in this paragraph.
   (if) Additionalmonitoring.  On each day following a routine sample monitoring result that exceeds Hip.
  chlorite MCL at the entrance to the distribution system, the system is .required to take three chlorite
  distribution system samples at the following locations: as close to the first customer as possible, in a location
  representative of average residence time, and as close to the end of the distribution system as possible
  (reflecting maximum residence tirne in the.distribution system).
   (iii)  Reduced monitoring. (A) Chlorite monitoring at the entrance to the distribution-system required by
  paragraph (b)(2)(i)(A) of this section may not be reduced.
   (B) Chlorite monitoring in the distribution system requiredby paragraph(b)(2)(i)(B) of this section may be
  reduced to one three-sample set per quarter after one year of monitoring where no individual chlorite sample
  taken in the distribution system under paragraph (b)(2)(i)(B) of .this section has  exceeded the chlorite MCL
  and the system has not been required to conduct monitoring under paragraph (b)(2)(ii) of this section. The
  system may remain on the reduced monitoring schedule until either any of the three individual chlorite
  samples taken monthly in the distribution system under paragraph (b)(2)(i)(B) of this  section exceeds the
  chlorite MCL or the system is required to conduct monitoring under paragraph (b)(2)(ii) of this Section, at
  which time the system must revert to routine monitoring.
   (3) Bromate.  (i) Routine monitoring.  Community and nontransient noncommunity systems using ozone,
  for disinfection or oxidation, must take one sample per month for each treatment plant in the system using
  ozone. Systems must take samples monthly at the entrance to the distribution system while the ozonation
  system is operating under norrnal conditions.   ,                                                  ;
   (ii) Reduced monitoring. Systems required to analyze for bromate may reduce monitoring from monthly
  to once per quarter, if the system demonstrates that the average source water bromide concentration is less
  than 0.05 mg/L based upon representative monthly bromide measurements for  one year.  The system may
  remain on reduced bromate monitoring until the running annual average source water bromide
  concentration, computed quarterly, is equal to or greater than 0.05 irig/L based upon representative monthly
  measurements.  If the running annual average source water bromide concentration is > 0.05 mg/L, the
  system must resume routine monitoring required by paragraph (b)(3)(i) of this section.
   (c) Monitoring requirements for disinfectant residuals.
   (1) Chlorine and chloramines. (i) Routine monitoring. Community and, nontransient nojicommunity water
  systems mat use chlorine or chloramines must measure the residual  disinfectant  level in distribution system
  when total coliforrns are sampled, as specified in "§141.21. Subpart H systems may use the results of
 residual disinfectant concentration sampling conducted under §141.74(b)(6)(i) for unfiltered systems or
  §141.74(c)(3)(i) for systems which filter, in.lieu of taking separate samples.
   (ii) Reduced monitoring. Monitoring may not be reduced.
   (2) Chlorine Dioxide, (i) Routine monitoring;  Community, nontransient nqncpmmunity, and transient
 noncommunity water systems that use chlorine dioxide for disinfection or oxidation must take daily samples
  at the  entrance to the distribution system. For any daily sample that exceeds the MRDL, the system must
 take samples in the distribution system the following day at the locations required by paragraph (c)(2)(ii) of
 this section, in addition to thesample required at the entrance, to the distribution system,                '.'.'•-
   (ii) Additional monitoring. .On each day following a routine sample monitoring result that exceeds the
 MRDL, the system is required to take three chlorine dioxide distribution system  samples. If chlorine dioxide


 Stage 1DBPR Implementation Guidance       Appendix E-15                  .                June 2001

-------
 or chloramines are used to maintain a disinfectant residual in the distribution system, or if chlorine is used to
 maintain a disinfectant residual in the distribution system and there are no disinfection addition points after
 the entrance to the distribution system (i.e., no booster chlorination), the system must take three samples as
 close to the first customer as possible, at intervals of at least six hours. If chlorine is used to maintain a
 disinfectant residual in the distribution system and there are one or more disinfection addition points after
 the entrance to the distribution system (i.e., booster chlorination), the system must take one sample at.each
 of the following locations: as close to the first customer as possible, in a location representative of average
 residence time, and as close to the end of the distribution system as possible (reflecting maximum residence
 time in the distribution system).
  (iii) Reduced monitoring. Chlorine dioxide monitoring may not be reduced.
  (d) Monitoring requirements for disinfection byproduct precursors (DBPP).                        .
  (1) Routine monitoring.  Subpart H systems which use conventional filtration treatment (as defined in
 §141.2) must monitor each treatment plant for TOC no later than the point of combined filter effluent
 turbidity monitoring and representative of the treated water. All systems required to monitor under this
 paragraph (d)(l) must also monitor for TOC in the source water prior to any treatment at the same time as
 monitoring for TOC in the treated water.  These samples (source water and treated water) are referred to as
 paired samples.  At the same time as the source water sample is taken, all systems must monitor for
 alkalinity in the source water prior to any  treatment.  Systems must take one paired sample and one source
 water alkalinity sample per month per plant at a time representative of normal operating conditions and
 influent water quality.
  (2) Reduced monitoring. Subpart H systems with an average treated water TOC of less than 2.0 mg/L for
 two consecutive years, or less than 1.0 mg/L for one year, may reduce monitoring for both TOC and
 alkalinity to one paired sample and one source water alkalinity sample per plant per quarter.  The system
 must revert to routine monitoring in the month following the quarter when the annual average treated water
 TOC *2.0 mg/L.
  (e) Bromide. Systems required to analyze for bromate may reduce bromate monitoring from monthly to
 once per quarter, if the system demonstrates that the average source water bromide concentration is less
 than 0.05 mg/L based upon representative monthly measurements for one year. The system must continue
 bromide monitoring to remain on reduced bromate monitoring.   •
  (f) Monitoring plans. Each system required to monitor,under this subpart must idevelop  and implement a
 monitoring plan. The system must maintain the plan and make it available for inspection by the State and
 the general public no later than 30 days following the applicable compliance dates in § 141.130(b).  All
 Subpart H systems serving more than 3300 people must submit a copy of the monitoring plan to the State
 no later than the date of the first report required under §141.134. The State may also require the plan to be
 submitted by any other system.  After review, the State may require changes in any plan  elements. The
 plan must include at least the following elements.
  (1) Specific locations and schedules for collecting samples for any parameters  included in this subpart.
  (2) How the system will calculate compliance with MCLs, MRDLs, and treatment techniques.
  (3) If approved for monitoring as a consecutive system, or if providing water to a consecutive system,
 under the provisions of § 141.29, the sampling plan must reflect the entire distribution system.

 §141.133 Compliance requirements.
  (a) General requirements.  (1)  Where compliance is based on a running annual average  of monthly or
 quarterly samples or averages and the system fails to monitor for TTHM, HAA5, or bromate, this  failure to
 monitor will be treated as a monitoring violation for the entire period covered by the annual average. Where
 compliance is based on a running annual average of montiily or quarterly samples or averages and the
 system's failure to monitor makes it impossible to determine compliance with MRjDLs for chlorine and
 chloramines, this failure to monitor will be treated as a monitoring violation for  the entire: period covered by
 the annual average.
  (2)  All samples taken and analyzed under the provisions of this subpart must be included in determining
 compliance, even if that number is greater than the mrnimum required.
June 2001                           .   "   Appendix E-16       Stage 1DBPR Implementation Guidance

-------
   (3) If, during the first year of monitoring under §141.132, any individual quarter's average will cause the
"running annual average of that system to exceed the MCL, the system is out of compliance at the end of
 thatquarter.           "      ; -                ,-..      :    :       :             -     •'-.•  '     :
   (b) Disinfection byproducts.    >•                          ."                , ,              • •'
   (1) TTHMs and HAAS. (1)  For systems monitoring quarterly, compliance with MCLs iri §141.64 must
 be based on a running annual arithmetic average,  computed quarterly, of quarterly arithmetic averages of all
 samples collected by the system as prescribed by §141.132(b)(l).
 .  (ii) For systems monitoring less frequently than quarterly, systems demonstrate MCL compliance if the
 average of 'samples taken that year under the provisions of §141.132(b)(l) does not exceed the MCLs in
 §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 MGLj 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
 cdmpliance 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
 §141.32 or §141.32, whichever is effective for your system,  in addition to reporting to the State pursuant
 to §141.134.
   (iv) If aPWS 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.
   (2). Bromate. Compliance must be based on a running annual  arithmetic average, computed quarterly, of
 monthly samples (or, for months in which the system takes more than one sample, the average of all
 samples taken during the month) collected by the system, as prescribed by §14 1.1 32(b)(3). If the average  of
 samples covering any consecutive four-quarter period exceeds the MCL, the system is in violation of the
 MCL and must notify the public pursuant to §141,32, in addition to reporting to the State pursuant to   ,
 §141.134. If aPWS fails to complete 12 consecutive months' monitoring, compliance with the MCL for the
 last four-quarter compliance period must be based oil an average of the available data.
   (3). Chlorite. Compliance must be based on an arithmetic average of each three sample set taken in the
 distribution system as prescribed by §T41.132(b)(2)(i)(B) and §141.132(b)(2)(ii).  If the arithmetic average
 of any three sample sets exceeds the MCL, the system is in violatioh;of the MCL arid must notify the public
 pursuant to subrjktfj^, in addition to reporting to the State pursuant to §141.134.
 (c) Disinfectant residuals .                 . •- • : •   ...-"., ;..-"'.                      •               •
   (1) Chlorine and chloramines. (i) Compliance must be based on a running annual arithmetic average,
 computed quarterly, of monthly averages of all samples collected by the system under §141.132(c)(l). If
 the average ^^ua^c^yi'.^v^d^ps covering any consecutive four-quarter period exceeds the MRDL, the
 system is in violation of the MRDL and must notify the public pursuant to §141.32, in addition to reporting
 to the State pursuant to §141.134.        -                               ;    •         :1  v       -'
  (ii) In cases where systems switch between the use of chlorine and chloramines for residual disinfection
 during the year, compliance must be determined by including together all monitoring results of both chlorine
 and chloramines in calculating compliance. Reports submitted pursuant to §141.134 must clearly indicate
 which residual disinfectant was analyzed for each sample.
  (2) Chlorine dioxide,  (i) Acute violations.  Compliance must be based on consecutive daily samples
 collected by the system under. §141. 132(c)(2). If any daily sample taken at the entrance to the distribution
 system exceeds the MRDL, and on the following day one (or more) of the three samples taken in the
 distribution system exceed the MRDL, the system is hi violation of the MRDL and must take immediate
 .corrective action to lower the level of chlorine dioxide below the MRDL and must notify the public pursuant
 to the procedures for acute health risks in s^patKQ. ^Failure to take samples in the  distribution system the
 day following an exceedance of the chlorine dioxide MRDL at the entrance to the  distribution::system will
 also be considered an MRDL violation and the system must notify the public of the  violation in accordance
 with the provisions for acute violations under subpart'Q in addition to reporting the  State pursuant to
                  "        -
 Stage 1 DBPR Implementation Guidance       Appendix E-17                                 June 2001

-------
  (ii) Nonacute violations. Compliance must be based on consecutive daily samples collected by the system
 under §141.132(c)(2).  If any two consecutive daily samples taken at the entrance to the distribution system
 exceed the MRDL and all distribution system samples taken are below the MRDL, the system is in violation
 of the MRDL and must take corrective action to lower the level of chlorine dioxide below the MRDL at the
 point of sampling and will notify the public pursuant to the procedures for nonacute health risks in subpart Q
 in addition to reporting the State pursuant to §141.134; Failure to monitor at the entrance to the distribution
 system the day following an exceedance of the chlorine dioxide MRDL at the entrance to the distribution
 system is also an MRDL violation and the system must notify the public of the violation in accordance with
 the provisions for nonacute violations under §141.32(e)(78) ££adjStio1i tatepo^
 §141.134.                    •  "       ;        '       "	"..•	': ""'     • "' ""•"""""•	:     '•."".•
 (d) Disinfection Byproduct Precursors (DBPPX Compliance must be determined as specified by
 §141.135(c). Systems may begin monitoring to determine whether Step 1 TOC removals can be met 12
 months prior to the compliance date for the system. This monitoring is not required and failure to  monitor
 during this period is not a violation.  However, any system that does not monitor during this period, and
 then determines in the first 12 months after the compliance date that it is not able to meet the Step 1
 requirements in  §141.135(b)(2) and must therefore apply for alternate minimum TOC removal (Step 2)
 requirements, is  not eligible for retroactive approval of alternate minimum TOC removal (Step 2)
 requirements as  allowed pursuant to §141.135(b)(3) and is in violation. Systems may apply for alternate
 minimum TOC removal (Step 2) requirements any time after the compliance date.  For systems required to
 meet Step 1 TOC removals, if the value calculated under §141.135(c)(l)(iv) is less than  1.00, the system is
 in violation of the treatment technique requirements and must notify the public pursuant to §141.32, in
 addition to reporting to the State pursuant to § 141.134.


 §141.134 Reporting and recordkeeping requirements.
  (a) Systems required to sample quarterly or more frequently must report to the State within 10  days after
 the end of each quarter in which samples Were collected, notwithstanding the provisions of §141.31.
 Systems required to sample less frequently than quarterly must report to the State within 10 days after the
 end of each monitoring period in which samples were  collected.
  (b) Disinfection byproducts. Systems must report the information specified in the following table:
June 2001                                 Appendix E-l 8      Stage 1DBPR Implementation Guidance

-------
 IP YOU ARE A...

 (1) System monitoring for TTHMs
 and HAA5 under the requirements
 of §141.132(b) on aquarterly or
 more frequent basis.
 (2) System monitoring for TTHMs
 and HAA5 under the requirements
 of §141.132(b) less frequently
 than quarterly (but at least
 annually).

 (3) System monitoring for TTHMs
 and HAA5 under the requirements
 of §141.132(b) less frequently
 than annually.

 (4) System monitoring for chlorite
 under the requirements of
 §141.132(b).:        .,-        '.
(5) System monitoring for bromate
under the requirements of
§141.132(b)
 YOU MUST REPORT...1

 (i) The number of samples taken during the last quarter.     •'       ;  ;
 (ii) The location, date, and 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 §141.133(b)(l), the MCL was violated.

 (i) The number of samples taken during the last year.
 (ii) The location, date, and 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 J14L133(b)(l), the MCL was violated.

 (i) The location, date, and result of the last sample taken,
 (ii) Whether, based on §141.133(b)(l), the MCL was violated.
 (i) The number of entry point samples taken each month for 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 eachjhree sample set taken in the distribution system.
 (4) Whether,based on §141.133(b)(3), the MCL was violated, and in
 which month, and how many times it was violated each month.

 (i) The number of samples taken 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 § Ii41,133(b)(2), the MCL was violated.
 The State may choose to perform calculations and determine whether the MCL was exceeded, in lieu of having
the system report that information.
Stage 1' DBPR ImplementationGuidance       Appendix E-19
                                                        June 2001

-------
  (c) Disinfectants. Systems must report-the information specified in the following table:

 IF YOU ARE A...                    YOU MUST REPORT...1

 System monitoring for chlorine or       (1) The number of samples taken during each month of the last quarter.
 chloramines under the                  (2) The monthly arithmetic average of all samples taken in each month
 requirements of §141.132(c)            for the last 12 months.
                                      (3) The arithmetic average of all monthly averages for the last 12
                                      months.
                                      (4) Whether, based on §141.133(c)(l), the MRDL was violated.

 System monitoring for chlorine          (1) The dates, results, and locations of samples taken during the last
 dioxide under the requirements of        quarter.
 §141.132(c)                          (2) mether, base;i^
                                      (3) Whether the MRDL was exceeded 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) Disinfection byproduct precursors and enhanced coagulation or enhanced softening.  Systems must
 report the information specified in the following table:
June 2001                                  Appendix E-20      Stage 1DBPR Implementation Guidance

-------
 IF YOU ARE A...

 System monitoring monthly or
 quarterly for TOC under the   '
 requirements of §l4l,132(d)
 and required to meet the
 enhanced coagulation or
 enhanced softening
 requirements in
 §141,135(b)(2)or(3)     -
 System monitoring monthly or
 quarterly for TOC under the
 requirements of §141.132(d)
 and meeting one or more of the
 alternative compliaiice criteria
 in§14L135(a)(2)or(3)
YOU MUST REPORT...1

(1) The number of paired (source water and treated water) samples taken
during the last quarter,
(2) The location, date, and 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 §141.135(c)(l).
(5) Whether the system is in compliance with the enhanced coagulation or
enhanced softening percent removal requirements in § 141.135(b) for the last
four quarters.

 (1) The alternative compliance criterion that the system is using.
 (2) The number of paired samples taken during the last quarter.
 (3) The location,  date, and result of each paired sample and associated
alkalinity taken during the last quarter.
 (4) The running annual arithmetic average based prt monthly averages (or
quarterly samples) of source water TOC for systems meeting a criterion in
§141.135(a)(2)(i) or (Hi) or'of treated water TOC for systems meeting the
criterion in,§141.135(a)(2)(ii).
 (5) The running annual'arithmetic average based on monthly averages (or
quarterly samples) of source water SUVA for systems meeting the criterioriln
§ 141.135(a)(2)(v) or of treated water SUVA for systems meeting the criterion
m§14U3S(a)(2)(vi).
 (6) The running annual average of source^vater alkalinity for systems meeting
the criterion in §141.135(a)(2)(iii) and of treated water alkalinity for systems
meetingthe criterion in §141.135(a)(3)(i).
 (7) The running annual average for both TTHM and HAA5 for systems meeting
the criterion in § 141.135(a)(2)(iii) or (iv).
 (8) The running annual average of the amount of magnesium hardness removal
(as CaCO3, in mg/L) for systems meeting the criterion in §141.135(a)(3)(ii).
;(9) Whether the system is in compliance with the particular alternative        :
compliance criterion in §141.135(a)(2) or (3).
'• The State may choose to perform calculations and determine whether the treatment technique was metj in lieu of
having the system report that information.
Stage 1DBPR Implementation Guidance:       AppendixE-2r
                                                            June 2001

-------
 §141.135 Treatment technique for control of disinfection byproduct (DBF) precursors.
  (a) Applicability.  (1) Subpart H systems using conventional filtration treatment (as defined in §141.2 )
 must operate with enhanced coagulation or enhanced softening to achieve the TOG percent removal levels
 specified in paragraph (b) of this section unless the system meets at least one of the alternative compliance
 criteria listed in paragraph (a)(2) or (a)(3) of this section.
  (2) Alternative compliance criteria for enhanced coagulation and enhanced softening systems.  Subpart H
 systems using conventional filtration treatment may use the alternative compliance criteria in paragraphs
 (a)(2)(i) through (vi) of this section to comply withthis section in lieu of complying with paragraph (b) of
 this section.  Systems  must still comply with monitoring requirements in §141.132(d).
  (i) The system's source water TOC level, measured according to §141.131(d)(3), is less than 2.0 mg/L,
 calculated quarterly as a running annual average.
  (ii) The system's treated water TOC level, measured according to §141.131(d)(3), is less than 2.0 mg/L,
 calculated quarterly as a running annual average
  (iii) The system's source water TOC level, measured according to §141.131(d)(3), is less than 4.0 mg/L,
 calculated quarterly as a running annual average; the source water alkalinity, measured.according to
 § 141.131(d)(l), is greater than 60 mg/L (as CaCO3),  calculated quarterly as a running annual average; and
 either the TTHM and  HAAS running annual averages are no greater than 0.040  mg/L and 0.030 mg/L,
 respectively;  or prior to the effective date for compliance in §141.130(b), the system has made a clear and
 irrevocable financial commitment not later than the effective date for compliance in §141.130(b) to use of
 technologies that will  limit the levels of TTHMs and HAAS to no more than 0.040 mg/L and 0.030 mg/L,
 respectively.  Systems must submit evidence of a clear and irrevocable financial commitment, in addition to
 a schedule containing  milestones and periodic progress reports for installation and operation of appropriate
 technologies, to the State for approval not later than the effective date for compliance in §141.130(b).
 These technologies must be installed and operating not later than June 30, 2001, Failure to install and
 operate these technologies by the date in the approved schedule will constitute a violation of National
 Primary Drinking Water Regulations.
  (iv)  The TTHM and  HAAS running annual averages are no greater than 0.040 mg/L and 0.030 mg/L,
 respectively, and the system uses only chlorine for primary disinfection and maintenance of a residual in the
 distribution system.
  (v)  The system's source water SUVA, prior to any treatment and measured monthly according to
 §141.131(d)(4), is less than or equal to 2.0 L/mg-m, calculated quarterly as a running annual average.
  (vi)   The system's finished water SUVA, measured monthly according to  §141.131(d)(4), is less than or
 equal to 2.0 L/mg-m, calculated quarterly as a running annual average.
  (3) Additional alternative compliance criteria for softening systems.  Systems practicing enhanced softening
 that cannot achieve the TOC removals required by paragraph (b)(2) of this section may use the alternative
 compliance criteria in paragraphs (a)(3)(i) and (ii) of this section in lieu of complying with paragraph (b) of
 this section. Systems must still comply with monitoring requirements in §141.132(d).
  (i) Softening that results in lowering the treated water alkalinity to less than 60 mg/L (as CaCO3), measured
 monthly according to §141.131(d)(l)  and calculated quarterly as a running annual average.
  (ii) Softening that results in removing at least 10 mg/L of magnesium hardness  (as CaCO3), measured
 monthly and calculated quarterly as an annual running average.
  (b) Enhanced coagulation  and enhanced softening performance requirements.
  (1)  Systems must achieve the percent reduction of TOC specified in paragraph (b)(2) of this section
 between the source water and the combined filter effluent, unless the State approves a system's request for
 alternate minimum TOC removal (Step 2) requirements under paragraph (b)(3) of this section.
  (2) Required Step 1  TOC reductions, indicated in the following table, are based upon specified source
 water parameters measured in accordance with §141.131(d).  Systems practicing softening are required to
 meet the Step  1 TOC reductions in the far-right column (Source water alkalinity >120 mg/L) for the
 specified source water TOC:
June 2001                                 Appendix E-22       Stage 1DBPR Implementation Guidance

-------
  Step 1 Required Removal of TOC by Enhanced Coagulation and Enhanced Softening for Subpart H
                              Systems Using Conventional Treatment1'^
Source-Water TOC,
mg/L , ':;•••:=...:;
>2.0-4.0
>4.0-8.0
>8.0
Source-Water Alkalinity^ mg/L as GaCO3
0-60
". -.-'.^pfei*ettt);... '-.-• .
3.5.0% . ' .
45.0%;
50.0%
>60-420
(percent)
25.0%
•'.'• 35.0%
40.0%
V - >1203 '-....
(percent)
15.0%
25.0%
30.0%
 '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 systems meeting one of the alternative compliance criteria in paragraph (a)(3) of this section are not
 required to operate with enhanced softening.                         :
-•'Systems practicingsoftening;must meet the TOC removal requirements in this column.       :
       ""--_.    -  - '  '                  -'''-      '.."",     "    —    "'"."--       f*
  (3) Subpart H conventional treatment systems that cannot achieve the Step 1 TOC removals required by
 paragraph (b)(2) of this section due to water quality parameters or operational constraints must apply to the
 State, within three months of failure to achieve the TOC removals required by paragraph (b)(2) of this
 section, for approval of alternative minimum TOG (Step 2) removal requirements submitted by the system.
 If the State approves the alternative minimum TOC removal (Step 2) requirements, the State may make
 those requirements retroactive for the purposes of determining compliance. Until the State approves the
 alternate mrnimum TOC removal (Step 2) requirements, the system must meet the Step 1 TOC removals
 contained in paragraph (b)(2) of this section.                         ,
   (4) Alternate minimum TQC 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^ at 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.          .           .
   (i)  Alternate enhanced coagulation level is defined as:                             ,
        Coagulation at a coagulant dose and pH as determinedby the method described in paragraphs
        (b)(4)(i) through (v) of this section such that an incremental addition of 10 mg/L of alum  (or
        equivalent  amount of ferric salt) results ina TOC removal of < 0,3 mg/L. The percent removal of
        TOC at this point on the "TOC removal versus coagulant dose" curve is then defined as the
        minimum TOC removal required for the system.  Once approved by the State, this minimum
        requirement supersedes the minimum TQC  removal required by the^ble in paragraph (b)(2) of this
        section.. This requirement will be effective until such time as the State approves a new Value based
        on the results of a new bench-.and pilot-scale test. Failure to achieve State-set alternative minimum
        TOC removal levels is a violation of National Primary Drinking Water Regulations.
  (ii)  Bench- Or pilot-scale testing of enhanced coagulation must be conducted by using representative water
 samples and adding 10 mg/L increments of alum (or equivalent amounts of ferric salt) until the pH is
 reduced to a level less than or equal to the enhanced coagulation Step 2 target pH shown in the following
 table:* •.   •  ••. '.",  "•  :•''.  '"•' .  - *   •  " •   '.    -  - -  '  .    •   .     '"'-•"'•.'••-     -...•."•'- ;.-  •  •
Stage 1DBPR Implementation Guidance       Appendix E-23
June 2001

-------
ENHANCED COAGULATION STEP 2 TARGET pH
ALKALINITY
(mg/L as CaCO3)
0-60
>60-120
>120-240
>240
TARGET pH
5.5
6,3
7.0
7.5
  (iii) For waters with alkalinities of less than. 60 mg/L for which addition of small amounts of alum or
equivalent addition of iron coagulant drives the pH below 5.5 before significant TOC removal occurs, the
system must add necessary chemicals to maintain the pH between 5.3 and 5.7 in samples until the TOG
removal of 0.3 mg/L per 10 mg/L alum added (or equivalent addition of iron coagulant) is reached.
  (iv) The system may operate at any coagulant dose or pH necessary (consistent with other NPDWRs) to
achieve the minimum TOC percent removal approved under paragraph (b)(3) of this section.
  (v) If the TOC removal is consistently less than 0.3 mg/L of TOC per 10 mg/L of incremental alum dose
at all dosages of alum (or equivalant addition of iron coagulant), the water is deemed to contain TOC not
amenable to enhanced coagulation. The system may then apply to the State for a waiver of enhanced
coagulation requirements.
  (c) Compliance Calculations.  (1) Subpart H systems other than those identified in paragraphs (a)(2) or
(a)(3) of this section must comply with requirements contained in paragraphs (b)(2) or (b)(3) of this section.
Systems must calculate compliance quarterly, beginning after the system has collected 12 months of data,
by determining an annual average using the following method:
  (i) Determine actual monthly TOC percent removal, equal to:
               (1 - (treated water TOC/source water TOC)) x 100.
  (ii) Determine the required monthly TOC percent removal (from either the table in paragraph (b)(2) of
this section or from paragraph (b)(3) of this section).
  (iii) Divide the value in paragraph (c)(l)(i) of this section by the value in paragraph (c)(l)(ii) of this
section.
  (iv) Add together the results of paragraph (c)(l)(iii) of this section for the last  12 months and divide by 12.
  (v) If the value calculated in paragraph (c)(l)(iv) of this section is less than 1.00, the system is not in
compliance with the TOC percent removal requirements.
  (2) Systems may use the provisions in paragraphs (c)(2)(i) through (v) of this section in lieu of the
calculations in paragraph (c)(l)(i) through  (v) of this section to  determine compliance with TOC percent
removal requirements.
  (i) In any month that the system's treated or source water TOC level, measured according to
§141.131(d)(3), is less than 2.0 mg/L, the system may assign a  monthly value of 1,0 (in lieu of the value
calculated in paragraph (c)(l)(iii) of this section) when calculating compliance under the provisions of
paragraph (c)(l) of this section.
  (ii) In any month that a system practicing softening removes at least  10 mg/L of magnesium hardness (as
CaCO3), the system may assign a monthly value of 1.0 (in lieu of the value calculated in paragraph (c)(l)(iii)
of this section) when calculating compliance under the provisions of paragraph (c)(l) of this section.
  (iii) In any month that the system's source water SUVA, prior to any treatment and measured according to
§141.131(d)(4), is ^2.0 L/mg-m, the system may assign a monthly value of 1.0 (in lieu of the value
calculated in paragraph (c)(l)(iii) of this section) when calculating compliance under the provisions of   '
paragraph (c)(l) of this section.
  (iv) In any month that the system's finished water SUVA,  measured according to §141.131(d)(4), is ^2.0
L/mg-m,  the system may assign a monthly value of 1.0 (in lieu  of the value calculated in paragraph
(c)(l)(iii) of this section) when calculating compliance under the provisions of paragraph (c)(l) of this
section.
June 2001
Appendix E-24
Stage 1DBPR Implementation Guidance

-------
   (v) In any month that a System practicing enhanced softening lowers alkalinity below 60 mg/L (as CaCO3),
 the system may assign a monthly value of 1.0 (in lieu of the value calculated in paragraph (c)(l)(iii) of this
 section) when calculating compliance under the provisions of paragraph (c)(l) of this section.
   (3) Subpart H systems using conventional 'treatment may also comply with the requirements of this section
 by meeting the criteria in paragraph (a)(2) or (3) of this section.      .               .       ,
   (d) Treatment Technique Requirements for DBF Precursors.  The Administrator identifies the following as
 treatment techniques to control the level of disinfection byproduct precursors in drinking water treatment
 and distribution systems:  For Subpart H systems using conventional treatment, enhanced coagulation or
 enhanced softening.                                                                  "...-"-,

 11. Section 141.154 is amended by adding paragraph (e) to read as follows:
 §141.154 Required additional health information.
 *'•••"   *•'•'*..'•".•*••.  *        '.            .   • -        .      ",       -'      •.-' •    . • .  '
  (e) Community water systems that detect TTHM above 0.080 mg/1, but below the MCL in § 141.12, as an
 annual average, monitored and calculated under the provisions of §14L30, must include health effects .
 language prescribed by paragraph (73) of appendix C to subpart O.

 PART 142 - NATIONAL PRIMARY DRINKING WATER REGULATIONS IMPLEMENTATION
 12. The authority citation for Part 142 continues to read as follows:
         Authority: 42 U.S.C. 300f, 300g-l, 300g-2 300g-3, 300g-4, 300g-5, 300g-6, 300J-4, 300J-9, and
 300J-11.     :Y            ; .                   -•;   ':  -;-.•

 1.3,  Section 142.14 is amended by adding new paragraphs (d)( 12), (d)( 13), (d)( 14), (d)(i5)j and(d)(16) to
 read as follows.

 §142.14  Records kept by States.
- *.  •   *      *   -   *'•',-•.*      ...''••   •       •        '.-''.-.'•'•               • •-
  (d) * **   .   :'  ..• -  -     --. -   '"  "-  '"  " -   •   ":;.,;.:    .•-.-  \ :'   • '•-.' -.. •/ -' '-.    .   .  . -••'    :
  (12) Records of the currently applicable or most recent State determinations, including all supporting
 information and an explanation of the technical basis for each decision, made under the following provisions.:
 of 40 CER part  141, subpart L for the control of disinfectants and disinfection byproducts. These records
 must also include interim measures toward installation.
  (i) States must keep records of systems that are installing GAC or membrane technology in accordance
 with §141.64(b)(2) of this chapter. These records must include the date by which the system is required to
 have completed installation.
  (ii) States must keep records of systems that are required, by the State, to meet alternative minimum TOC
 removal requirements or for whom the  State has determined that the source water is riot amenable to
 enhanced coagulation in accordance with §141.135(b)(3) and (4) of this chapter, respectively.  These
.records must include the alternative limits and rationale for establishing the alternative limits,   :
  (iii) States must keep records of subpart H systems using conventional treatmerit meeting any of the
 alternative compliance criteria in §141,135(a)(2) or (3) of this chapter.  :
  (iv) States must keep a register of qualified operators that have met the State requirements developed
 under § 142.16(f)(2).              ;                     ;; :  ;       '.::     '    ;     /•;        ,
  (13) Records of systems with multiple wells considered to be oiie treatment plant '-in accordance "with.
 §141,132(a)(2) of this chapter and §142.16(f)(5).                                                 ;
  (14) Monitoring plans for subpart H systems serving more than 3,300 persons in accordance with
 §141.132(f>of this chapter:      /:/                       Y                                   :
  (15) List of laboratories approved for analyses in accordance with §141.131(b) of this chapter.
  (16) List of systems required to monitor for disirifectarits and disinfection byproducts in accordance with
 partl41, subpart L of this chapter. The list must indicate what disinfectants and DBPs, other than chlorine,
 TTHM, and HA AS, if any, are measured.          ,    :
Stage\.l'DBPRImplementation Guidance       AppendixE-25          -                       June 2001

-------
 14. Section 142.16 is amended by adding paragraph (h) to read as follows.
 §142.16  Special primacy requirements.
 #       *      *       *      *            .          .•-,-..'"•      J. .,                     :
  (h) Requirements for States to adopt 40 CFR part 141, subpart L. In addition to the general primacy
 requirements elsewhere in this part, including the requirement that State regulations be at least as stringent as
 federal requirements, an application for approval of a State program revision that adopts 40 CFR part 141,
 subpart L, must contain a description of how the State will accomplish the following program requirements:
         (1) Section 141.64(b)(2) of this chapter (interim treatment requirements). Determine any interim
 treatment requirements for those systems electing to install GAC or membrane filtration and granted
 additional time to comply with §141.64 of this chapter,
         (2) Sectionl41.130(c) of this chapter (qualification of operators). Qualify operators of public waiter
 systems subject to 40 CFR part 14.1, subpart L.  Qualification requirements established for operators of
 systems subject to 40 CFR part 141, subpart H - Filtration and Disinfection may be used in whole or in part
 to establish operator qualification requirements for meeting 40 CFR part 141, subpart L requirements if the
 State determines that the 40 CFR part 141, subpart H requirements are appropriate and applicable for
 meeting subpart L requirements.
         (3) Section 141.131(c)(2) of this chapter (DPD colorimetric test kits). Approve DPD colorimetric
 test kits for free and total chlorine measurements.  State approval granted under §141.74(a)(2) of this
 chapter for the use  of DPD colorimetric test kits for free chlorine testing is acceptable for the use of DPD
 test kits in measuring free chlorine residuals as required in 40 CFR part 141, subpart L.
        (4) Sections 141.131(c)(3) and (d) of this chapter (State approval of parties to conduct analyses).
 Approve parties to conduct pH, bromide, alkalinity, and residual disinfectant concentration measurements.
 The State's process for approving parties performing water quality measurements for systems subject to 40
 CFR part 141, subpart H requirements in paragraph (b)(2)(i)(D) of this section may be used for approving
 parties measuring water quality parameters for systems subject to subpart L requirements,  if the State
 determines the process 'is appropriate and applicable.
        (5) Section 141.132(a)(2) of this chapter (multiple wells as a single source). Define the criteria to
 use to determine if multiple wells are being drawn from a single aquifer and therefore be considered  a single
 source for compliance with monitoring requirements.
        (6) Approve alternate minimum TOC removal (Step 2) requirements, as .allowed tinder the
 provisions of §141.135(b) of this chapter.           ..''•-
June 2001                                  Appendix E-26       Stage 1DBPR Implementation Guidance

-------
Appendix F
Examples of Stage 1 DBPR
Monitoring Forms for States
This appendix contains example monitoring forms that may be helpful if your state is developing
monitoring forms for the Stage 1 DBPR. These examples are provided for demonstration purposes
only. Therefore, instructions for completing the forms are not provided.

-------
                                 This page is left intentionally blank.
June 200J                                  Appendix F-2        Stage 1DBPR Implementation Guidance

-------
Contents
Examples of Selected Quarterly Reports  .-. . . . . ... ....... ... . ........ ., . . , . . . . . -..-. ....... 5
       State of Wyoming
       A.     Sample Generic Quarterly Report Format  .................................. 1
       B.     Sample Quarterly Report for TOC Removed  .......................	...9
       C.     Sample Quarterly Report for Finished Water Magnesium Removed   .............. 10
       State of Texas
       D.     Sample Monthly TOC Removal Report . .  .	..../....: . ................ 11

Examples of Worksheets (These May Be Used in Conjunction with Quarterly Reports)  .	13
       State of Wyoming                          .
       A,     Sample Chlorine/Chloramine Residual Worksheet  . .  . .... . . .... . . . . . .	 15
       B.     Sample TTHM Worksheet . . . , . .... . .  ... ....:.....	.... ...	16
 ;      C.     Sample HAAS Worksheet	 .-.. .............. .	17
       D.     Sample TOC Removed Worksheet . . . . .:". .......... . . . . . . .  ............... 18
       E.     Sample Finished Water Magnesium Removed Worksheet	 19
       F.     Sample Source Water Alkalinity and TOC  and Finished Water TOC for Those Systems on
 ;             an Alternative Compliance Criteria Worksheet ............ . . ..... .-,	.20

Examples for Systems Using Chlorine Dioxide .. ..	•, .......... 21
       State of Wyoming
       A.     Sample Quarterly Report for Daily Chlorine Dioxide Sampling with a Chlorine Booster
              Station . ........................  ... . . .	 i ........... 23
       B.     Sample Quarterly Report for Daily Chlorine Dioxide Sampling with No Chlorine Booster
              Station;. .... .  . ..... . .  . .	 . .... . . . ; .  ... .'.. . . . . ,  . . ............. 24
       C.     Sample Quarterly Report to the Primacy Agency for Daily, Monthly, and Additional
              Chlorite Sampling	 24
       State of Texas
       D.     Sample Chlorine Dioxide Monthly Operating Report ....... . . .... . . .	 25

Other Reporting Forms	 ..... ....  ...... . ..................,.,.;... 27
       Stateof Texas
       Sample Alternative Compliance Criteria Report Forms  . . . .... ... . . . . .... . . . . . . .... .  . . 29
       Sample  Step 2 Jar Test Report . .-.  . . ... ..... ..... ..../.. ..:...., .:,-".'. ........... 31
Stage 1JDBPR Implementation Guidance       Appendix F-3                              June 2001

-------
                                 This page is left intentionally blank.
June 2001                                  Appendix F-4       Sttige 1DBPR Implementation Guidance

-------
                     Examples of Selected Quarterly Reports

    State of Wyoming
    A.     Sample Generic Quarterly Report Format ...... . . . .... ... .... . . .......	 . . . .:. 7
    B.     Sample Quarterly Report for TOC Removed . . ............................ ,	  . . 9
    C     Sample Quarterly Report for Finished Water Magnesium Removed ..!....,.	 10
    State of Texas
    D.     Sample Monthly TOC Removal Report	'.-..: ... . ..... ,.	 . . .  ...... .'..11
Stage 1DBPRImplementation Guidance       AppendixF-5                             June2001

-------
                                 This page is left intentionally blank.
June 2001                                  Appendix F-6       Stage 1DBPR Implementation Guidance

-------
A.     Sample Generic Quarterly Report Format
       (Based on Submission From the State of Wyoming - see next page for ideas on use.)
D
P1
PJ
#*
1.
yo
##
mi
an
-dii
Quarterly Report to thfe Primacy Agency for the Running Annual Average (RAA)
fojr [insert constituent],
ate: System/Treatment Plant
WSID# Filtration Technology : '•' :
-eparedBy (Include lab

Column #1
Check one
1st Quarter
(report by April 10th)
2nd Quarter
(report by July 10th)
3rd Quarter ,
(report by Oct 10th-)'
4th Quarter
(report by Jan 10th)
January of 20_ -_. ..
February of 20 __
March of 20 __
April of 20 .__
May of 20 __
June of 20 __-.
July of 20 	
August of 20 __
Septemberiof 20 	
October of 20 __
November of 20 	
December of 20 _ _
^ "~ ^
' * • '
his sample is the average o
Calculation of Quarterly A
. mg/L then, add all three n
ur quarterly average.) •
*Calculation of Running A
j/L, quarterly average for t
d quarterly average for the
/ide this time by 4. For exe
Column #2
\insert constituent]
Monthly Data [insert
units]*





-




~

*,** ^ ^ ~* *?< **1 >
f all samples taken during i
verage: If the number for J
lumbers up and divide by 3
niiual Average: If the numt
tie 2tfd quarter was 1,2 mg/L
4th quarter was 1.8 mg/L tr
anple..a.5 + 1.2+ 1.1 + 1
oratory results from the last quarter.)
Column #3
\insert constituent
Quarterly Average
[insert units]**
" 0 >* " "
-. >.V '' '//>;* V ;-v

•fj * *•? *•" v i
•> »* % * f
" -,'' ' "'- ^'v/'/;/' i

' * t, ' ''/ *
' i $ i ,* *, •
" f /? ^ £ " ? ^^

• ' ,* 1 ' '/' , '• '
^ *^J/-"  ".
*!• -^ ° J-
0 ^ fl ^ A
-*. X % .
^ j, ^
- .
" ^ V * ^ ^ V
*" X
4, ^ X i
c -. ^ v ^
?,' , ', ' '
y ^^^^.^tfsx ^
" * "^ •>
£ * V X -$
' « «•* -^
^ „ -fr ^^
a ^ ^. fl i
^ 0- S

he month
an. was, 1.5.mg/L, Feb. was 1.9 mg/L and March was
. For example, f i;5 + 1.9 + 1.1)= 1.5 me/L Cthis is
• • "-'•:3-. "
>er for quarterly average foi
,, quarterly average for the
ten, add all four quarterly a
8) = 1.4 mg/L (this is your
..-.--... -:v - -.4 - . - • -
"
.-.-•"-
the 1st quarter was 1.5
3rd quarter was 1 . 1 mg/L
verage numbers up and
running annual average.)
   Stage 1DBPRImplementation Guidance      AppendixF-7
June 2001

-------
EXAMPLES OF CONSTITUENTS FOR GENERIC FORMAT
	r	.j.	^	_._,	,,___	_,	,„ r- ._-_.-.,-,	r	>	o	
alternative compliance criteria.  Constituents that can be inserted may include:
•      Chlorine
•      Chloramines
•      Bromate for systems using ozone
•      Haloacetic Acids Five
•      Total Trihalomethanes
•      Source Water Bromide for systems using ozone to reduce monitoring for bromate
•      Finished Water Alkalinity
•      Source Water Alkalinity
•      Finished Water SUVA
•      Source Water SUVA
•      Source Water Total Organic Carbon
•      Finished Water Total Organic Carbon
•      Finished Water Total Organic Carbon for Reduced Monitoring of Source Water Alkalinity and TOC and
       Finished Water TOC
•      Magnesium Removed
•      Ratio of TOC Removed

See examples from the State of Wyoming on the following pages using the generic format.  Please note there may be
exceptions to the generic form.
Some of these quarterly reports may also be used in conjunction with worksheets to assist in calculations. See the
next section for examples of selected Worksheets.
   June 2001                                Appendix F-8      Stage 1DBJPR Implementation Guidance   '

-------
B.    Sample Quarterly Report for TOC Removed From the State of Wyoming
      (May be used in conjunction with worksheet.  See page F-18 for accompanying worksheet.)
...-..- - -•••'-.' -..-•- -••: ' --.''-•'• - . - . . ' ' . - : •".' ' --,-•".
Quarterly Report to the Primacy Agency for the Running Annual Average (RAA)
for Total Organic Carbon Removed
(?
to
D
Pi
Pi
*C
th<
ay
**
qu
av
ex
. . • - . • .--.'' - ' ' . •
•' • . '. •• - • ',''.-•• •-•••' • ' .". ' • - ' ' •
WSs utilizing conventional treatment must maintain a RAA of greater than 1.00 for the ratio of TOC removed
be in compliance.) ; ' ; •
ate: Svstem/Treatment Plant
WSID# Filtration Technology
•epared Bv -, (Include 1,

Column #1
Check one
1st Quarter
(report by April 10th)
2nd Quarter
(report by July 10th) ;
3rd Quarter
(report by Oct 10th)
4* Quarter
(report by Jan 10th)
January of 20. 	
February of .20 	
March of 20 __
April of 20 _ _
Mayof20_,,_,x
June of 20 __
July of 20 	
August of '20 	
September of 20 _ 2!
October of 20 __
November of 20 	
December of 20 	
- "*•?"'•%
i j **'*'»*#''
Calculation of Quarterly Aver
ai, add all three numbers up a
erage.) •
Calculation of Running Anni
artefly average for .the 2nd qu
erage for the 4th quarter was 1
ample, (1.5 + 1.2+1.1 + 1.8
•• .'-••: 4 • <;":'•
Ratio of
TOC Removed
Monthly Data
(from column F of tne
1st page of this report)





-






*> ** '*' I * v "
age: If the number for Jan, wz
nd divide by 3. For example,
- - - •
lal Average: If the number fo
arter was 1 ,2 mg/L, quarterly
.8 mg/L then, add all four qu
) = 1 .4 mg/L (this is your run
.
iboratory results from the. last quarter.)
Ratio of \
TOC Removed
Quarterly Average
(mg/L)*
' ,' •> * > >
'' ' ~'~ ", ; 1 "* 'I ' ~ •> 4
* *? ^

-"V ",- ", , '
" •* ^ '

'";,' "/,- * " '
•i o *• <• _, -> *
^ \ 1 f S*r -f

%>r* -
^ -^ •>* $ >. s # /*• ~
- *> r ** \ ~0-
„ f „ „ ;,',"' -, '
is 1 .5 mg/L, Feb. was 1 .9 mg
(l;5 + 1.9+l.lV=1.5mg/I
3
r quarterly average for the 1 st
average for the 3rd quarter w<
arterly average numbers up a
ning annual average.)
. " - • -
Ratio of
TOC Removed
Running Annual
Average (mg/L)**
> '
" •> •, 'j
* , <• >
f f
f < *•
. -
•— "^ t ^
"".> ~ v
* *> ' r ' ' V1 "
^ f if,
s " ' '' ' ^ v*~f
« " "
{ if
' ^ / ^,^" ^ ^
" -K < >- *
V" ' ." , \, '\
,/*' -

rL and March was 1 .1 mg/L
^ (this is your quarterly
•. • - - ' " '
quarter was 1.5 mg/L,
is 1.1 mg/L and quarterly
nd divide this time by 4. For

   Stage 1DBPR Implementation Guidance      Appendix F-9
June 2001

-------
    Sample Quarterly Report for Finished Water Magnesium Removed From the
    State of Wyoming
    (May be used in conjunction with worksheet. See page F-19 for accompanying worksheet.)

Additional Alternative Compliance Criteria for Softening Svstems #2

Quarterly Report to the Primacy Agency for the Running Annual Average (RAA)
for Finished Water Magnesium Removed
OF
ar
m
D
F
Pi
*S
rei
**
the
av
**
qu
av
ex
'or a PWS that practices softening that cannot meet the TOC removal requirements for enhanced coagulation
id chooses this additional alternative compliance criteria must maintain a RAA of greater than 10 mg/L for
agnesium removed between the source water and treated water.)
ate: Svstem/Treatment Plant
iVSH)# Filtration Technology ' ««
epared Bv (Include 1

Check one
1" Quarter
(Report by April 10th )
2nd Quarter
(Report by July 10ll>)
3rd Quarter
(Report by Oct 10th)
4th Quarter
(Report by Jan 10lh )
January of 20 	
February of 20 	
March of 20 __
April of 20 __
May of 20
June of 20 __
July of 20 	
August of 20 _ _
September of 20 __
October of 20 __
November of 20 	
December of 20 	

Magnesium
Removed
Monthly Data (mg/L)*
(from column C of page
1 of this report)












'
amples must be taken at the source prior to treatment any
noved, seepage 1 of this report.
Calculation of Quarterly Average: If the number for Jan. \
;n, add all three numbers up and divide by 3. For example,
erage.)
*Calculation of Running Annual Average: If the number f
arterly average for the 2nd quarter was 1.2 rng/L, quarterly
erage for the 4th quarter was 1 .8 mg/L then, add all four qu
ample, (1.5 + 1.2+ 1.1 + 1.8") = 1.4 mg/L (mis is vourrun
4
aboratory results from the last quarter.)
Magnesium
Removed
Quarterly Average
(mg/L)**
s ** r ^
:. ' * - *'

•V -* „ f
>.
/ ' 1 * '

<- * s- °
,

J i f s *
, f «< >- _,

,.
after treatment to determine
ras 1.5 mg/L, Feb. was 1.9 m
f 1.5 + 1.9 + 1.1) = 1.5 ma/I
3 - . - .
or quarterly average for the 1
average for the 3rd quarter w;
arterly average numbers up a
ning annual average,)
Magnesium
Removed
Running Annual
Average (mg/L)***
^ v ' J
'» , , ' •> '
f *>
ff f*
„
'
-^ "
r ^ * >
/< / '*
f '
- < % l '
' ' , '' ' ' '
'. - • ''' ""'*.*'"'

the amount of magnesium
g/L and March was 1 . 1 mg/L
^ (this is your quarterly
st quarter Was 1 .5 mg/L,
is 1.1 mg/L and quarterly
ad divide this time by 4. For

June 2001
Appendix F-10
Stage 1DBPRImplementation Guidance

-------
D;    Sample Monthly TOC Removal Report From the State of Texas

PUBLIC WATER
SYSTEM NAME:
PWS ID No.
Type of treatment:
•'••--' ' • ' ' ' ." •• . • • - ' " • '
n/IONTHLY TOTAL ORGANIC CARBON REMOVAL REPORT (TOC-IWOR)
FOR SURFACE WATER OR GROUND WATER UNDER THE INFLUENCE OF SURFACE WATER SYSTEMS
PLANT NAME OR NUMBER:



I ' •
Conventional


I
Month
Unconvenbbnal, explain
Year: . '

Note: Systems are required to run one TOC Sample Set every month Additional space is provided for those systems that do additional sampling

Data
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
• 11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21.
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
Avg
Max
Min
Monthly TOC Sam
,.,R?^ Raw TOC
Alkalinity |
pie Set
Treated
TOC
Required plant data






















































































1









•
•> »




Actual %
TOC
.Removed
calculated








*

























Stepl
Required %
Removal
from matrix












^


















*' ;'" ,*
:^\ ' -
Stepl
-.Removal
RATIO
calculate^






























f



TOTAL ORGANIC CARBON (TOC)


' TOC Summary
Raw Water Alkalinity

Raw Water TOC

Treated Water TOC
i ••
Optional data
Step 2 Required
;%,Remova!
attach StepSform


































Step 2
'Removal
'•Ratio
ea/cu/ated


v


^

























~'> " °"
,^ f
""' /> 2
ACC # used
altach


































ACC
Removal
Ratio
calculated



































COMPLIANCE
REMOVAL RATIO
calculated


































REMOVAL SUMMARY
TOC % Removal Summary
TOC % Removal | Requirement

TOC Removal
Ratio


1 certify that 1 am familiarwlth the nformat'on contained in this report and that, to the besfo'f my
- knowledge, the information is true, complete, and accurate. - . . ,
' - : - - - = . Certificate '
Operator's Sianature: . ' , . No. and Grade: '- Date- " -'


• " - ~ ' - • , ~ " '
-•- - '. • ' ' • - •



  Stage 1DBPR Implementation Guidance,
Appendix F-l 1
June 2001

-------
                                 This page is left intentionally blank.
June 2001                                 Appendix F-12       Stage 1DBPR Implementation Guidance

-------
                             Examples of Worksheets
          (These May Be Used in Conjunction with Quarterly Reports)
    State of Wyoming
    A.     Sample Chlorine/Chloramine Residual Worksheet	 . . .  ... . . . .... . . .  15
    B.     Sample TTHM Worksheet ..	.... ... .		 . .	 . ... . . . .....  16
    C.     Sample HAA5 Worksheet  . . . . .'.. ...... . . . . . ..... . . ... .... .... . .  . . . . ... . .'. . . .17
    D.     Sample TOC Removed Worksheet  . . ....... . . ...................  ... ...... ....  18
    E.     Sample Finished Water Magnesium Removed Worksheet	 '. ...  19
    F.     Sample Source Water Alkalinity and TOC and Finished Water TOC for Those Systems on an
          Alternative Compliance Criteria Worksheet	 . . .... .  20
Stage 1DBPR Implementation Guidance      Appendix F-13                            June 2001

-------
                                 This page is left intentionally blank.






                                                                                                        0
June 2001                                 AppencJix F-14      Stage 1DBPR Implementation Guidance

-------
A,    Sample Chlorme/Chloramlne Residual Worksheet From tlie State of Wyoming
(1
le
ar
to
to
re
R
. M
Th
1
2
3
- •' • ; - - . : •../,. - •- • • , ' '••:.•. •-.' ••-•'-,:--- .. •
Chlorine/Chloramine Residual Worksheet
Tiis worksheet is provided to assist a system hi calculating the average of all chlorine or chloramme residual
vels recorded during total coliform sampling during the month. Each row will contain only one residual level
id will be located under one of the following headings: routine, repeat, increased routine or other compliance
tal coliform sample. The number from this row will be carried over to column F and summed on the second
last row of the table. The number calculated at the bottom right of this table is the average of all the months
sidual levels and is the number that is entered for that month hi the second column of the chlorine/chloramine
AA monitoring form.) - . -. /
onth Year

A
# of Samples
(1,2, 3, etc.) ;•
' • : -







B
Chlorine/
Chloramine
Level Recorded
for Routine
Total Coliform
Sample
(mg/L)



V


- "
* -.-""' - -
C
Chlorine/
Chloramine
Level Recorded
for Repeat
Total Coliform
Sample
' (mg/L)



-



'D
„ Chlorine/
Chloramine
Level Recorded
for Increased
Routine'Total
Coliform
Sample
(mg/L)





,

E
Chlorine/
Chloramine
Level Recorded
for Other
Compliance
Total Coliform
Sample
,(mg/L)
-
. *.--..Vr





..-.'. Add all the numbers in column F and enter the sum here»
Calculate the average of all residual levels for the month by dividing the sum of column F by
the total number of samples in column. A (F/A). Enter 'this average into the 2nd column of the
monitoring form for calculating the RAA for chlorine/chlorammes.
e monitoring forms for compliance with chlorine dioxide
- ...
Quarterly Report to the Primacy Agency for Daily,
using Chlorine Dioxide.
Quarterly Report to the Primacy Agency for Daily (
for Systems using Chlorine Dioxide.
Quarterly Report to the Primacy Agency for Daily <
station) for Systems using Chlorine Dioxide.
and chlorite are:
Monthly, and Addil
Chlorine Dioxide S
Chlorine Dioxide S
ional Chlorite Sam
ampling (no chlorii
ampling (with a. chl
F
Carry the
Chlorine/
Chloramine
Level in B, or
C, or D, or E to
this column
'(mg/L)
(there should be
only one
sample per row)


•%,;,. - •
' ...





pling for Systems
le booster station)
orine booster

  Stage 1DBPR Implementation Guidance
Appendix F-15
June 2001

-------
B.    Sample TTHM Worksheet From the State of Wyoming
a
di
fo
cc
M
TTHM Worksheet
Tiis worksheet is provided to assist a system in calculating the average of all TTHM samples that were taken
iring the month when more than one sample is required. The number calculated at the bottom right of this
rm is the average of all the months samples and is the number that is entered .for that month hi the second
>lumn of the TTHM RAA monitoring form.)
onth Year

A
# of Samples
(1, 2, 3, etc.)











B
Chloroform
(mg/L)











>
C
Brombform
(mg/L)











r>
Bromodichloro ',.
methane
(mg/L)











E
Dibromochloro
methane
(mg/L)











Add all the numbers in column F for, TTHMs and enter the sum here»
Calculate the average of all samples for the month; by dividing the sum of column F by
the total number of samples in column A (F/A). Enter" this average into the 2nd column
of the monitoring form for calculating me RAA for TTHMs.
F
TTHMs
(mg/L)
(B+C+D+E)















  June 2001
Appendix F-16
Stage 1DBPR Implementation Guidance

-------
C.    Sample HAAS Worksheet From the State of Wyoming
(1
di
fo
CO
M
.";- ' :'. HAAS Worksheet \ ; .
'his worksheet is provided to assist a ;system in calculating the average of all HAAS samples that were taken
iring the month when more than one sample is required, The number calculated at the bottom right of this
rm is the average of all the months samples and is the number that is entered for that month in the second
lumn of me HAAS RAA monitoring form.)
bnth ; Year -

A. •>.•' .
# of
Samples
(1,2,3,
etc.)








*


B
Monochloro
acetic acid
(mg/L)







-




C' -
Dichloro
acetic acid
(mg^)









-
'
D
Trichloro
acetic acid'
(mg/L) ,

-






-

^
E
Monobromo ,
acetic acid ,
(mg/L)








±

-
F
Dibromo
acetic acid
(mg/L)




-






Add all the numbers in column G for HAASs and enter the sum here»
Calculate the average of all samples for the month "by dividing the sum of column G by
the total number of samples in column A (G/A). JSnterjhis average into the 2nd column of
the monitoring form for calculating the RAA for HAASs.
G
HAAS
(mg/L)
(B+C+D+E
+F)
-












••";•'•- ' - - " - " '

   Stage 1DBPR Implementation Guidance
Appendix F-l 7
June 2001

-------
D.    Sample TOC Removed Worksheet From the State of Wyoming
      (To be used in conjunction with quarterly report.)
(I
re
H
fi
A
D
P
P
*j
ap
ad
ds
=M
son
so
2.
th
sy
all
Quarterly Repo
>WSs utilizing conventiona
•moved to be in compliance
as reduced monitoring beei
nished water TOC (yes/no)
Itemative Minimum TOC I
ate: Svstem/Tr
WSID # F
repared Bv
rt to the Primacy Agency for the Running Annual Average (RAA)
for Total Organic Carbon Removed ;•
1 treatment must maintain a RAA of greater than 1.00 for the ratio of TOC
>•) . , " .,.•; •.-.--. !
i granted for source water alkalinity and TOC and
? '•••••• - • • ' ' . • '.'
lemoval Step
eatment Plant
iltration Tech
2 (if applica
bls\ fs

ubstitute this # in column C)
nologv
(Include

Months of 20__
January
February
March
April
May
June
July
August
September
October
November
December
A
Alkalinity
Source
mg/L*












B
TOC
Source
mg/L*












laboratory results from the last quarter.)
C
Percent
TOC
Removed
(from
table)












D
TOC
Finished
(mg/L)*












E
Actual'
TOC
Removed
(l-(D/B))x-,
100 '













F
Ratio of
TOC
Removed
E/C**













Samples for alkalinity and TOC at the source must be taken prior to any treatment including disinfectant
plication and finished water TOC sample must be taken at the combined filter effluent and prior to the
dition of disinfectants (if possible). All three of these samples must be taken on the same hour of the same
ty. ;
'Transfer this data to the 2nd page of this report to column 2 entitled "Ratio of TOC Removed Monthly Data"
id calculate the RAA of the percent TOC removed. If it benefits the PWS, in any month that the system's ,
urce or treated water TOC is less than 2.0 mg/L, the source or treated water SUVA is less than or equal to
0 L/mg-m or a system that practicing softening removes at least 10 mg/L of magnesium hardness or lowers
e alkalinity below 60 mg/L the system may assign a monthly value of 1.0 in lieu of the calculated value. A
stem able to meet any one of the six alternative compliance criteria is required to report the source water
calinity and TOC and finished water TOC but not required to perform the TOC removal calculation.
  June 2001
Appendix F-18
Stage 1DBPR Implementation Guidance

-------
E.     Sample Finished Water Magnesium Removed Worksheet From the State of
       Wyoming  ..;.   -,.'.'•• •'". ';--/-';-:'.:'.•';::;.  ;•-••'.-• .'.-.'.'.":''-••.:.•  ..".-. '  --:  ••'.  "'- ;   -  •'
       (To be used in conjunction with quarterly report.)

Additional Alternative Compliance Criteria for Softening Systems #2

Quarterly Report to the Primacy Agency for the Running Annual Average (RAA)
for Finished Wafer Magnesium Removed.
...OP
af
be
th
D
P1
Pi
*S
**
• #*
fo
or a PWS that practices softening that cannot meet the TOC removal requirements for enhanced coagulation
id chooses this additional alternative compliance criteria must calculate the amount of magnesium removed
tween the source water prior to 'any ; treatment and the finished water. The PWS must also report quarterly.,
e monthly levels of source water alkalinity and TOC and finished water TOC.)
ate: Svstem/Treatment Plant
MSID# Filtration Technologv
epared Bv (Include 1;

Months of 20__
January
February
March
April
May
June '
July
August
September
October
November
December
A ;;•'-.-
Source Water \
Magnesium
(mg/L)*

-

..;: "
:" ;

-

•
' . .


iboratory results>from the last quarter.)
B<>
Finished Water
Magnesium
-(mg/L)**






-
-

-


C
Magnesium
Removed
(mg/L)***
(A-B)













•ample must be taken at the source prior to treatment
Sample must be taken after treatment .'"...".' ,
• . - ,.'.•-.'"..'• ; •' ; . ; • .'.'..• '-.-••'"'••.
*Transfer this number to page two of this report to column 2 entitled "Magnesium Removed Monthly Data"
r calculating the RAA of magnesium removed.
   Stage 1DBPR Implementation Guidance
Appendix F-19
June2001

-------
F.    Sample Source Water Alkalinity and TOC and Finished Water TOC for Those
      Systems on an Alternative Compliance Criteria Worksheet From the State of
      Wyoming
c
(C
T<
re
R
D
P^
Pr
*IJ
all
fin
dis
juarterly Report to the Primacy Agency f
and Finished Water TOC for th<
Conventional PWSs utilizing an alternative c(
DC and finished water TOC. Systems on re
port on the RAA of the finished water TOC
2quirements for Reduced Monitoring have b
ate: Svstem/Treatment Plant
or Source Water Alkalinity and Total Organic Carbon (TOC)
»se Systems on an Alternative Compliance Criteria.
jmpliance criteria must also report source water alkalinity and
duced monitoring from monthly to quarterly must also submit the
•> " '
een met (yes/no) - , , , •


WSID # Filtration Technoloev "
epared Bv

Months of 20__
January
February
March
April
May
June
July
August
September
October
November
December
(Include laboratory results ;from the last quarter.)
Alkalinity
Source
mg/L*








,

'

TOC ^
Source
mg/L*


**
•

'






TOC
Treated
mg/L*




;%v. • "'
' ' ' ':%;v






Fthe system is on reduced monitoring then only one sample of each is required per quarter. Samples for
:alinity and TOC at the source must be taken prior to any treatment including disinfectant application and
ished water TOC sample must be taken at the combined filter effluent and prior to the addition of
infectants (if possible). All three of these samples must be taken on the same hour of the same day.

  June 2001
Appendix F-20
Stage 1DBPR Implementation Outdance

-------
                   Examples for Systems Using Clilorine Dioxide
          (These May Be Used in Conjunction with Quarterly Reports)

  State of Wyoming                     ,
  A.     Sample Quarterly Report for Daily Chlorine Dioxide Sampling with a Chlorine Booster Station . . .  23
  B.     Sample Quarterly Report for Daily Chlorine Dioxide Sampling with No Chlorine Booster
         Station. . . . . . .  ., . .',..,;. ... ,. . ,-. . ..:...	•/...  . ....	'.','•. •	24
  C.     Sample Quarterly Report to the Primacy Agency for Daily, Monthly, and Additional Chlorite
         Sampling .......	 ..................................... ... .  24
  State of Texas
  D.     Sample Chlorine Dioxide Monthly Operating Report , . . .	  25
Stage 1DBPR Implementation Guidance      Appendix F-21            .           ..,..'-   June 2001

-------
                                 This page is left intentionally blank.
June 2001                                Appendix F-22      Stage 1DBPR Implementation Guidance

-------
A.   Sample Quarterly Report for Daily Chlorine Dioxide Sampling with a Chlorine
     Booster Station From the State of Wyoming
'.-•<
• (1
sa
nc
th
th
D
P>
Pi
Quarterly Report
Tie PWS must mo
mples exceeding C
macute violation.
e dist. system the
ree samples taken
ate: S^
NSID#
to the Primacy
stat
nitor for chlorine
.8 mg/L or failui
APWSexceedii
following day at
in the dist. syste
^stem/Treatment
Filtration
Agency for Dai
on) for System!
j dioxide daily a1
re to monitor a d
ig the daily chloi
the first eustonu
m exceed 0.8 m|
Plant
ly Chlorine Dioxide Sampling (with
5 using Chlorine Dioxide)
the entrance of the dist. system. Two
aily sample after exceeding 0.8 mg/L in
ine dioxide level of 0.8 mg/L must take
;r, average and maximum residence tim
l/L, it' is an acute violation.)
. - . .
a chlorine booster
consecutive daily
a daily sample is a
a 3-sample set in
e. If any one of the
Technology
epafedBv CIncluc

Year
Month

1
2
3
4
5 - ..- -
6
7
8
9,
10
11
12
13
14 .
15
•.•!--• -
25
26
27
28 ,
29 ,•.-•
30
31
C102
Daily Data
(mg/L)























C1O2 Dist.
First
Customer
(mg/L) ,


*•




!

.


•


.







e laboratory results from the last quarter.)
C1O2 Dist.
Average
Residence tune
(mg/L) v '
-
-





7 :-•;

, '^':-~..
-

*•



' . . •






C1O2 Dist.
Maximum
Residence
Time
(mg/L)























C1O2 Dist.
Highest Level ..
fasM




















, •


".: ' - •: •- ' •'•'--.. ' ; • .' .-• "- • • • . : . ' • / : • - '.'. --'./ • • "'• '

  Stage 1DBPR Implementation Guidance
Appendix F-23
June 2001

-------
B.    Sample Quarterly Report for Daily Chlorine Dioxide Sampling with No
      Chlorine Booster Station From the State of Wyoming
(Th
Off
dk»
oft!
Dat
PW
Prcj
Quarterly Report to the Primacy Agency for Daily Chlorine Dioxide Sampling (no chlorine booster
station) for Systems using Chlorine Dioxide.
c PWS must monitor for chlorine dioxide daily at the entrance of the dist. system. Two consecutive daily samples exceeding 0.8 rhg/L
lilure to monitor a daily sample after exceeding 0.8 mg/L in a daily sample is a nonacute violation. A PWS exceeding the daily chlorine
tide level of 0.8 mg/L must take a 3-sample set in the dist. system the following day at the first customer at six hour intervals. If any one
ic three samples taken in the dist. system exceed 0.8 mg/L, it is an acute violation.)
e: System/Treatment Plant
SID# Filtration Technoloev
pared Bv

Year
Month 	
1
2
3
•
31
C102
Daily Data
(mg/L)





Include laboratory results-from the last quarter.)
C1O2 Dist.
First Customer
at 0 Hours
(mg/L)





CIO2 Dist.
First Customer f
at 6 Hours '
(mg/L)





C1O2 Dist.
First Customer
-at 12 Hours
(mg/L)






C1O2 Dist.
Highest Level
(mg/L)







C.    Sample Quarterly Report to the Primacy Agency for Daily, Monthly, and
      Additional Chlorite Sampling
                                              II
CTh
cusl
set
cxc
Dat
PW
Pre
Quarterly Rej
c PWS must monit
omer, average and
n the dist. system
seds 1.0 mg/L the s
c: Svs
SID#
>ort to the Pric
or for chlorite daily
maximum residenc
it the first custorrie
>ystem has a nonaci
tern/Treatment PI
Filtration Tec
nacy Agency for Daily, Monthly, and Addit
Systems using Chlorine Dioxide).
at the entrance of the dist. system and one monthly 3-sar
e time. A PWS exceeding the daily chlorite level of 1.0 r
r, average and maximum residence time the following da
ate violation.) Reduced monitoring Thas been granted for r
ant
ional Chlorite
nple set in the dist
ng/L must take an ;
y. If the average o
nonthly monitoring
hnoloev T- ? ">„'
pared Bv (Include lab<

Year
Month 	
1
2
3

31
Chlorite
Daily Data
(mg/L)





Routine
Monthly or
Additional
Dist. Sample





jratojy results from the last quarter.)
Distribution
Chlorite at
First Customer
(mg/L)





Distribution
Chlorite at
Average Time
(mg/L)





Distribution
Chlorite at
Max. Time
(mg/L)





Sampling (for
system at the first
idditional 3-sample
fany 3-sample set
Cyes/no)

Average of
Three Dist.
Samples
(mg/L)







  June 2001
Appendix F-24
Stage 1DBPR Implementation Guidance

-------
D.    Sample Chlorine Dioxide Monthly Operating Report From the State of Texas

PWS NAME:
PWS I.D. Number:
Report Month:
CHLORINE DIOXIDE MONTHLY OPERATING REPORT
FOR PUBLIC WATER SYSTEMS
PLANTNAME
OR NUMBER:
Connections:
Year: ' Population:

RAW DATA
DATE
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
CKfe
Used?






















^

.,






C102
POE





















^




~~ 	 _

}

CIOz Distribution
First































Sec.



















-









.
.
Third








•>






5













f

Chlorite
POE

"







.


-
-












	 i 	

. 	
-
"#> Limit
Max.
Mm.
Avg.
DATA SUMMARY
CI02
POE'




CI02 Distribution
No. of Sets:
First




Sec.





Third

^


Chlorite
POE




DIST




'





<













„




~— •


Chlorite Stock Solution
g/L chlorite
g/L chlorate
BAfbrCIOs 7
Date 1


I Chlorite Distribution Monitoring :
Booster Chlorination No 1 I No of Sets

Chlorine Dioxide (CIOz) Violations
^'V>'>"-r^ ^,°^ Violations
Acute MRDL
Non Acute MRDL
Monitoring
Public Notified?
Date(s): "
TNRCC Notified?
Date(s):

'Chlorite (ClOzl Violations ';
J'{ \ ^ ^ ^ „ ^ No. of Violations
MCL Vidaltdn TBD hy the TNRCC
Monitoring
Public Notified?
Date{s):|
TNRCC Notified?
Date(s): 1

GENERAL REMARKS ABOUT CIO2 GENERATOR


i Total watertreatedJihislMdritHL: v!
' MG

' Sodlurir) Chlorite used this MonthV-
Ibs.

1 certify that 1 arn familiar with the information contained in this report and that, to trie best of my knowledge, the information is .true, complete, and accurate. "'..'.
Operator's Signature: . .''.•/. .
Certificate No. & Class: *


Date:



  Stage 1DBPR implementation Guidance
Appendix F-25
June 2001

-------
                                 This page is left intentionally blank.
June 2001                                 Appendix F-26       Stage 1DBPR Implementation Guidance

-------
                              Other Reporting Forms
    State of Texas
    A.    Sample Alternative Compliance Criteria Report Forms . . . . .... . ... . . . .  ... . . ..... ...'.-. . 29
    B.    Sample Step 2 Jar Test Report  .... .... . . .. ..; ...... ...... .... ............... .31
Stage 1DBPRImplementation Guidance  -   Appendixi?-27            .                 June2001

-------
                                 This page is left intentionally blank.
June 2001                                 Appendix F-28       Stage 1DBPR ImplementationGuidance

-------
A.     Sample Alternative Compliance Criteria Report Forms From the State of
        Texas (Page 1)
                           ALTERNATIVE COMPLIANCE CRITERIA REPORT
             FOR SURFACE WATER  OR GROUND WATER UNDER THE INFLUENCE OF SURFACE WATER SYSTEMS
     PUBLIC WATER SYSTEM
       '  ". ..        NAME:_

               PWSIDNo.:
              PLANT NAME OR
                   NUMBER:
                                                                 Month
                                                                                           Year
     This Alternative Compliance Criteria (ACC) Report is being submitted to request the following ACC: (check one)
     (Put an "X" in the box that shows the number of the Alternative Compliance Criteria you are applying for)
        #1 I   :   -I    #2|       I     #3l     1   #4 I      I   #5 I        I   #6 |      |    #7|      |   #8 |
ACC #1
Source Water TOC less tha
Actual Month/Yr
Monthly TOC
Quarterly Average
Yearly Average
n or equal to 2.0? (calculated quarterly as a runninq annual averaae)
1


2


x° ' ' •*> -- „ ,
* ~ /
3


#DIV/0!
^ X
4
.

5


V* *• -f >'
6




7


8


•4 r c"
?
9




10


11


; "t 1.
12




#2
Treated Water TOC less the
Actual Month/Yl
1 Monthly TOC
Quarterly Average
Yearly Average
in or equal to 2.0? (caIcufatedquarteriy::Ss-a. runninq annual averaqe)
1


2


5 -> * •)
~ />
3


SDIWOI
' >" ,
4


5


* " ^
v- * y"
6



•
7


8


^ V
9



, •
10


*
$
11


'* '
12




#3
Treated Water TOC less th;
AND Source water alkali
Actual MontMXi
Monthly TOC
Quarteriy Average TOC
Yearly Average TOC
Monthly Alkalinity
Quarterly Ave. ;AJkalinity
Yearly Ave. Alkalinity
AND TTHM and HAA5 n
ATTACH COPY O
in or equal to 4.0? (calculated quarterly as a running annual average) :
nity over 60 mci/L (as CaCO3)?:(calculated auarterlv as a runninq annual averaqe)
1


2


% '""I' ''"


"" ^ * V
3





SDivroi
s
4


5


' "",
f. •? $ v J}
' 1



6



*


•? s
-' 7


^


8 -


"S -

s
9



10 11 ,


" •>/•
x


-

' -
/
12







o greater than 0.040 mq/L and 0.030 mq/L. resoectivelv?
Yearly Averaqe TTHM: I I mgIL Yearly Averaqe HAAS: I |mg/L
F COMPLIANCE REPORT FOR DISINFECTION BY-PRODUCTS (TTHM AND HAAS)
           TTHM and HAAS no greater than 0.040 mp/L and 0.030 mq/L. respectively?
                                     Yearly Average TTHM: I      I ma/L
                                                                            Yearly Average HAAS:
                                                   Img/L
                  ATTACH COPY OF COMPLIANCE REPORT F(DR DISINFECTrON BY-PRODUCTS (TTHM AND HAAS)
           AND only chlorine is used in the whole plant and distribution system.

                  I certify that for the last 12 months, only free         *-^\                 •         "..-..,
                  chlorine was used as a disinfectant for primary                           '    .         ..
                  disinfection and for maintenance of a residual in the
                  distribution system.           >„,,,            " ^	"'..•'   ' " '  -  '.'
                                                       Certified Operators Signature/ Certification Number/Date
                  I certify that I am familiar with the information contained in this report and
                  that, to the best of my knowledge, the information is true, complete, and
                  accurate.
         Operator's
         Signature:_
                         Certificate
                     No, and Grade:
                                                                                          Date:
   Stage 1DBPR Implementation Guidance
Appendix F-29
June 2001

-------
A.    Sample Alternative Compliance Criteria Report Forms From the State of
      Texas (Page 2)
ALTERNATIVE COMPLIANCE CRITERIA REPORT
FOR SURFACE WATER OR GROUND WATER UNDER THE INFLUENCE OF SURFACE WATER SYSTEMS
PUBLIC WATER SYSTEM PLANT NAME OR
NAME: NUMBER:



#5
#6
ACC #7
1*8
PWS ID No.:
Source water SUVA les;
(Source water SUVA is the disso
treatment of any kind. Measure
Actual Month/Yea
Monthly SUVA
Quarterly Average SUVA
Yearly Average SUVA
Treated water SUVA les
{Treated water SUVA Is the dlsso
any disinfection of any kind, or m
Finished water measu
Actual Month-Year
Monthly SUVA
Quarterly Average SUVA
Yearly Average SUVA
Treated water alkalinity
[softening practiced)
Actual Month-Year
Monthly Treated Alkalinity
Quarterly Ave. Treated Alk.
Yearly Ave. Treated Alk.
AND cannot achieve the
Stop 1 Compliance Summary:
Mannesium hardness re
softening practiced)
Actual Month-Yeai
Monthly Raw Mg. Hardness
Monthly Treated Mg. Hardness
Monthly Mg Removal
Quarterly Ave. Mg Removal
Yearly Ave. Mg Removal



Month

Year
> than or equal to 2.0 L/mg-m? (calculated quarterly as a running annual average)
ved organic carbon concentration divided by th"s ultraviolet light absorp'tion at 254 nanometers in.the source water before any
nonthlv.
1


2



3




4


»
5


'
,6



7


k
.
8


^
9 10



< '
11



12




s than or equal to 2.0 L/mg-m? (calculated quarterly as a rufming annual average)
Ived organic carbon concentratio'n divided by the ultraviofeflight absorption at 254 nanometers in the finished water .before
easured using a finished water SUVA tar test (See the Instruc
red: | [in Plant | | By Finished Water SUVA Jar Test (attach jar test report)
1


2



3




4



5


- '•
6



7



15 ^ ,.
8



9 10




11


f
12




ess than 60 mg/L (as CaCO3)7 (calculated quarterly as a running annual average)
1


• 2



Step 1 T
3




4



5


-, ;
6



'
7


x
8


t -
9 10


'/'
.. ,
11


'
12




OC removal
TOC % Removal Summary
TOC % Removal

moval greater than or equal to
1 '





2




-,
'
3






4




-
Requirement

TOC Removal Ratio




10 mq/L (as CaCO3)? (calculated
€




,•>« '
>
6






7




~- <
8




/ „
, j''

quarterly as a running annual
9 10




11






12






AND cannot achieve the Step 1 TOC removal
Stop 1 Compliance Summary:



TOC % Removal;Summary
TQC % Removal

^Requirement

1 certify that 1 am familiar with the information contained in this report and
that, to the best of my knowledge, the information is true, complete, and
accurate.
Operator's
Signature: .





TOC Removal Ratio

Certificate
No. and Grade:



Date:



  June 2001
Appendix F-30     Stage 1DBPR Implementation Guidance

-------
B.    Sample Step 2 Jar Test Report From the State of Texas
STEP 2 JAR TEST REPORT
FOR SURFACE WATER ORGROUND WATER UNDER THE INFLUENCE OF SURFACE WATER SYSTEMS
PUBLIC WATER SYSTEM ( PLANTNAME
NAME:.. „ " OR NUMBER.


PWS ID No.
$&$Ke&«it*' ' ' JKt *"
Month Year - ./ '

^K??/ ii-^j -l^/^ax
COAGULANT BEING USED
COAGULANT CONC.
COAGULANT FEED RATE
RAW WATER FLOW RATE

^CURRENT OPE



RATING CONDITIONS- ,*l\ tX^^^-Vi^^iC^" " CV*




%


LBS/DAY ,
GPM

Maximum Allowable
Alum Dose in Jar 1'

ma/L
^
!^&'-F#Ji$3f$r& '^^"/f^^f&M^ DOSING- SOLUTION CALCULATIONS^!^*". \ f^ >V 1" °" *" "°s? •*$£ o*>A "
COAGULANT USED TO MAKE
THE DOSING SOLUTION:
Other C

Coagulant
Chemical Formula
Molecular Formula
Molecular Weight
Cationic Charge
(Alumimum Sulfate, Ferric chtoride,. )
,
rv COSQU
ante





AMOUNT OF COAGULANT NEEDED '"* *'""' '
TO MAKE 1 L OF DOSING SOLUTION: ' "< ; '

^&?M^£^W?~ Vv-
BASE •
,. Concentration ; ;
Type • '

-, '-(a'L)

-:•! ' '-
•ir^?;i:

'«' * «,"*>} **SB?^'
Jar No
RAW
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
Operator's
Signature:
'^w^HM '-
COAGULANT
Dose
(mg/L)

-
,'










Volume
(mL)













MIXING CONDITIONS
Rapid Mix
Speed
(rpm)

Duration
•'(minutes)

Flocculation Settling
Speed
(rpm)

Duration
(mihiites)

Duration
(minutes)

• -,:*.
PERFORMANCE DATA
~; -BASE • ;
Dose
(mg/L)

-
>,
-






''


VolSima;
(mL') '













^ ''.Alkalinity •-
(mg/Las CaCO3)

^1
I certify that I am familiar with the information conSained ii),"
this report and that, to. the best of rny knowledge, the ' "-'
information is true, complete, and accurate.



^jfSii
t^:-^#
jL%^%,fv('hS1^1 ^ ^
pH
?












Certificate
No. and Grade:
^^I^^^^^S'^^^Stf^igs^^iS
TOC
(mg/L)













Incremental
TOC Removal
(mg/L)













TOC Removal
fli)
c.'^' ' '












' "• • '
Date: ,

'-
  Stage 1DBPR Implementation Guidance
Appendix F-31
June2002

-------
                                  This page is left intentionally blank.
June 2001                                  Appendix F-3'2       Stage 1DBPR Implementation Guidance

-------