EPA 816-Z-00-001
  Thursday,

  May 4, 2000
  Part n



  Environmental

  Protection Agency

  40 CFR Part 9 et al.
  National Primary Drinking Water
  Regulations: Public Notification Rule;
  Final Rule

-------
25982
Federal Register/Vol. 65, No.  87/Thursday, May 4, 2000/Rules and Regulations
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
AGENCY

40 CFR Parts 9,141,142 and 143
[FRL-6580-2]
RIN 2040-AD06

National Primary Drinking Water
Regulations: Public Notification Rule
AGENCY: Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Final rule.

SUMMARY: Today, EPA is publishing
final regulations to revise the general
public notification regulations for
public \vater systems to implement the
public notification requirements of the
1996 Safe Drinking Water Act (SDWA)
amendments. The regulations set the
requirements that public water systems
must follow regarding the form, manner,
frequency, and content of a public
notice. Public notification of violations
is an integral part of the public health
protection and consumer right-to-know
provisions of the 1996 SDWA
amendments. Owners and operators of
public water systems are required to
notify persons served when they fail to
comply with the requirements of the
National Primary Drinking Water
Regulations (NPDWR); have a variance
or exemption from the drinking water
regulations; or are facing other
situations posing a risk to public health.
EPA is also publishing today revisions
to the Consumer Confidence Report
(CCR) regulation to be consistent with
the final public notification regulation.
DATES: Today's rule is effective June 5,
2000. However, the new regulations
under Part 141, Subpart Qdo not apply
to public water systems in States with
primacy for the public water system
supervision program until May 6, 2002
or until the State-adopted rule becomes
effective, whichever comes first. The
new regulations under Part 141, Subpart
Q also  do not apply to public water
systems in jurisdictions where EPA
directly implements the program until
October 31, 2000. Until the new
regulations under Part 141, Subpart Q
apply,  public water systems must
continue to comply with the public
notification requirements under
§141.32. For purposes of judicial
review, this final rule is promulgated as
of 1 p.m. Eastern time on May  18, 2000.
ADDRESSES: Copies of the public
comments received, EPA responses, and
all other supporting documents are
available for review at the U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency; 401
M Street SW, Water Docket (MC-4101),
Docket #W-98-19, Room EB 57,
                        Washington, DC 20460. For an
                        appointment to review the docket, call
                        202-260-3027 between 9 a.m. and 3:30
                        p.m. and refer to docket W-98-19.
                        FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: The
                        Safe Drinking  Water Hotline, toll free
                        (800) 426—4791 for general information
                        about the rule and copies of this
                        document. For technical inquiries,
                        contact Carl B. Reeverts at (202) 260-
                        7273 or e-mail: reeverts.carl@epa.gov.
                        SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

                        Acronyms Used in This Rule
                        CCR  Consumer Confidence Report
                        CWS  Community Water System
                        DBF  Disinfection Byproduct
                        EPA  Environmental Protection Agency
                        HPC  Heterotrophic Plate Count
                        IESWTR  Interim Enhanced Surface
                            Water Treatment Rule
                        IOC  Inorganic Chemical
                        LCR  Lead and Copper Rule
                        MCL  Maximum Contaminant Level
                        MCLG  Maximum Contaminant Level
                            Goal
                        MRDL  Maximum Residual
                            Disinfectant Level
                        MRDLG  Maximum Residual
                            Disinfectant Level Goal
                        NCWS  Non-Community Water System
                        NPDWR  National Primary Drinking
                            Water Regulation
                        NTNCWS  Non-Transient Non-
                            Community Water System
                        NTU  Nephelometric Turbidity Unit
                        OGWDW  Office of Ground Water and
                            Drinking Water
                        OW  Office of Water
                        PN  Public Notification
                        PWS  Public Water System
                        SDWA  Safe Drinking Water Act
                        SMCL  Secondary Maximum
                            Contaminant Level
                        SOC  Synthetic Organic Chemical
                        SWTR  Surface Water Treatment Rule
                        TCR  Total Coliform Rule
                        TT  Treatment Technique
                        TWS  Transient Non-Community Water
                            System
                        VOC  Volatile Organic Chemical

                        Table of Contents
                        I. Statutory Authority
                        II. Regulation Background
                        III. Significant Decisions Affecting the Final
                            Rule
                        IV. Discussion of Final Rule
                          A. Purpose and Applicability
                          B. Effective Dates and Rationale
                          C. Summary of Changes to Current Public
                            Notification Requirements
                          D. "Plain Language" Format of Final Rule
                          E. General Provisions of Final Rule
                            (§141.201)
                          1. Who Must Give Public Notice?
                          2. What Type of Public Notice is Required
                            for Each Situation?
                          3. Who Must Be Notified?
                          F. Form, Manner, and Frequency of the
                            Tier 1 Public Notice: Violations and
    Situations With Significant Potential to
    Have Serious Adverse Effects on Human
    Health as a Result of Short-Term
    Exposure (§ 141.202)
  1. Tier 1 Violations and Situations
  2. Timing of the Tier 1 Public Notice (and
    Consultation Requirement)
  3. Form and Manner of the Delivery of the
    Tier 1 Notice
  G. Form, Manner, and Frequency of the
    Tier 2 Public Notice: Other Violations
    With Potential To Have Serious Adverse
    Effects on Human Health (§ 141.203)
  1. Tier 2 Violations and Situations
  2. Timing of the Tier 2 Public Notice
  3. Form and Manner of the Delivery of the
    Tier 2 Notice
  H. Form, Manner, and Frequency of the
    Tier 3 Public Notice: All Other
    Violations and Situations Requiring
    Public Notice (§ 141.204)
  1. Tier 3 Violations and Situations
  2. Timing of the Tier 3 Public Notice
  3. Form and Manner of the Delivery of the
    Tier 3 Notice
  4. Option to Use an Annual Notice,
    Including the CCR, to Deliver Tier 3
    Notices
  I. Content of the Public Notice (§ 141.205)
  1. Standard Elements of the Public Notice
  2. Multilingual Requirements for Public
    Notices
  3. Standard Health Effects Language
  4. Standard Language for Monitoring and
    Testing Procedure Violations
  5. Standard Language to Encourage
    Customers Receiving the Public Notice
    To Distribute the Notice to Other Persons
    Served
  J. Other Public Notification Requirements
  1. Notice to New Billing Units or New
    Customers (§ 141.206)
  2. Special Notice to Announce the
    Availability of the Results of
    Unregulated Contaminant Monitoring
    (§141.207)
  3. Special Notice for Exceedance of the
    Fluoride Secondary Maximum
    Contaminant Level (SMCL) (§  141.208)
  4. Special Notice for Nitrate Exceedances
    Above the MCL by Non-Community
    Water Systems (NCWS), Where Granted
    Permission by Primacy Agency Under
    §141.11(d)(§ 141.209)
  5. Conditions Under Which the Primacy
    Agency May Give Notice on Behalf of
    Public Water System (§ 141.210)
  K. Reporting to the Primacy Agency and
    Retention of Records
  1. Public Water System Reporting to the
    Primacy Agency (§ 141.31)
  2. Retention of Records by Public Water
    Systems (§ 141.33)
  L. Other Changes to the Current Code of
    Federal Regulations (CFR) To Be
    Consistent With the Final Public
    Notification Regulations
  M. Special State/Tribal Primacy
    Requirements and Rationale (40 CFR Part
    142, Subpart B)
V. Changes to  the Consumer Confidence
    Report (CCR) Regulation To Be
    Consistent With the Final Public
    Notification Regulation
VI. Cost of Rule
VII. Other Administrative Requirements

-------
                Federal  Register/Vol. 65, No.  87/Thursday, May 4,  2000/Rules and Regulations
                                                                        25983
  A. Executive Order 12866: Regulatory
    Review
  B. Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA), as
    amended by the Small Business
    Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act of
    1996 (SBREFA), 5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.
  C. Paperwork Reduction Act
  D. Executive Order 13132: Federalism
  E. Executive Order 13084: Consultation
    and Coordination With Indian Tribal
    Governments
  F. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act
  G. Executive Order 12898: Environmental
    Justice
   H. Executive Order 13045: Protection of
    Children From Environmental Health ',
    Risks and Safety Risks
   I. National Technology Transfer and
    Advancement Act
   J. Congressional Review Act

   Regulated Entities. Entities potentially
 regulated by this action are public water
 systems (PWS). The following table    ;
 provides examples of the regulated
 entities under this rule. A public water
 system, as defined by section 1401 of ;

    TABLE OF REGULATED ENTITIES  :
SDWA, is "a system for the provision of
water for human consumption through
pipes or other constructed conveyances,
if such system has at least fifteen service
connections or regularly serves at least
twenty-five individuals."  EPA defines
"regularly served" as receiving water
from the system sixty or more days per
year. EPA has an inventory totaling over
170,000 public water systems
nationwide.
                Category
                            Examples of regulated entities
 State/Local/Tribal governments



 Industry 	


 Federal government	
  Publicly-owned PWSs, such as municipalities; county governments, water districts, water and
    sewer authorities, state governments, and other publicly-owned entities that deliver drinking
    water as an adjunct to their primary business (e.g., schools, State parks,  roadside rest
    stops).
  Privately-owned PWSs, such as private utilities, homeowner associations, and other privately-
    owned entities that deliver drinking water as an adjunct to their primary business (e.g., trailer
    parks, factories, retirement homes, day-care centers).
  Federally-owned PWSs, such as water systems on military bases.
   The table is. not intended to be
 exhaustive but rather provides a guide
 for readers regarding entities likely to be
 regulated by this action. This table lists
 the types of entities that EPA is now
 aware could potentially be regulated by
 this action. Other types of entities not
. listed in this table could also be
 regulated. To  determine whether your
 facility is regulated by this action, you
 should carefully examine the
 applicability criteria in § 141.201 of the
 rule. If you have questions regarding the
 applicability of this section to a
 particular entity, consult the person
 listed in the FOR FURTHER  INFORMATION
 CONTACT section.

 I. Statutory Authority

   Section 114 of the Safe Drinking
 Water Act Amendments of 1996 (Public
 Law 104-182), enacted August 6,1996,
 amended section 1414(c) of the Act (42
 U.S.C. 300g-3(c)). Sections 1414(c)(l)
 and (c)(2) were significantly revised and
 require EPA to amend the existing
 public notification regulations. The
 amended rules are intended to give
 consumers more accurate  and timely
 information on violations, taking into
 account the seriousness of any potential
 adverse health effects that may be
 involved. There is no deadline for
 promulgating  the revised public
 notification rule, but EPA is publishing
 the final rule today to enable States to
 coordinate public notification rule
 adoption and  implementation with the
 ongoing adoption and implementation
 of the Consumer Confidence Report
 regulations.
   The public notification (PN)        '.
 provisions were part of the original
 SDWA in 1974 and were subsequently
 modified in the 1986 SDWA          :
 amendments. The public notification
 regulations currently in place were
 promulgated in 1987 and became     '
 effective in 1989 (40 CFR 141.32). The •
 existing rule remains in place until the
 new rule goes into effect.
   SDWA Section 1414(c)(l) establishes
 who must give public notice, under
•.what circumstances a notice must be  '
 given, and who must receive the notice.
 Section 1414(c)(l)(A) requires that all
 public water systems (PWS) give notice
 to persons served of any failure to
 comply with any national primary
 drinking water regulations (NPDWR),
 including any required monitoring.
 Section 1414(c)(l)(B) further requires a^
 PWS to provide a notice when it is
 operating under a variance or
 exemption, or when a PWS fails to
 comply with the requirements of a
 variance or exemption. Section
 1414(c)(l)(C) authorizes EPA, at the
 Administrator's discretion, to require  •
 PWSs to provide notice of the
 concentration level of any unregulated
 contaminant monitored under EPA
 regulations. Except for the addition of
 paragraph (C) of section 1414(c)(l),
 these requirements are unchanged from
 the previous SDWA.
   Section 1414(c)(2) sets the specific
 requirements for the form, manner, and
 frequency of a notice. Section
 1414(c)(2)(A) requires EPA to issue    .
 regulations, after consultation with the
 States, that prescribe the detailed public
 notification requirements. The
regulations must provide for different
frequencies of notices based on the
persistence of the violations and the
seriousness of any potential adverse
health effects that may be involved.
Except for the explicit requirement in
the 1996 amendments that EPA consult
with the States prior to promulgating
the revised regulations, the general
directions to EPA for issuing regulations
are unchanged.
  Section 1414(c)(2)(B) enables States,
at their option, to establish alternate
requirements with respect to the form
and content of the public notice, as long
as the alternative State program
provides the same type and amount of
information as required under the EPA
regulations. This section was added as
a result of the 1996 amendments.
  Section 1414(c)(2)(C) directs EPA to
issue regulations which require PWSs to
distribute a notice within 24 hours to
persons served for violations with
potential to have serious adverse effects
on human health from short-term
exposure. The PWS is also required to
send the same notice to the primacy
agency and to consult with the primacy
agency within the same 24-hour period
on any additional public notice
requirements. This section is also a new
statutory requirement.
  Section 1414(c)(2)(D) directs that
EPA's regulations require PWS to
provide written notice to each person
served for each violation not covered
under Section 1414(c)(2)(C). The section
specifies that the notice may be: (1) In
the first bill, if any, after the violation;
(2) in an annual report issued no later
than one year after the violation; or (3)

-------
 25984
Federal Register/Vol. 65, No. 87/Thursday, May 4,  2000/Rules and Regulations
 by mail or direct delivery as soon as
 practicable, but no later than one year
 after the violation. This section
 significantly revises and simplifies the
 previous statutory requirements on the
 form, manner, and timing of the notice.
   Section 1414(c)(2)(E) allows the
 Administrator the option to require a
 PVVS to give notice to persons served of
 the results of unregulated contaminant
 monitoring required by EPA under
 section 1445(a). EPA recently published
 a revised unregulated contaminant
 monitoring regulation (UCMR), which
 requires some systems to monitor for
 specified contaminants (64 PR 50556,
 September 17,1999). This Section is
 new under the 1996 SDWA
 amendments.
   Today's final rule fulfills the
 rulemaking requirements outlined in
 amended Sections 1414(c)(l) and
 1414(c){2) of the SDWA, as amended.
 n. Regulation Background
   The final rule published today was
 proposed  on May 13,1999 (64 FR
 25963). At the same time as the rule was
 proposed, EPA made available for
 review a draft Public Notification
 Handbook, comprised of public notice
 templates for different violation
 situations and other aids to public water
 systems to support implementation of
 the revised regulation. The final rule is
 based on input from a broad range of
 stakeholders from the public and private
 sectors. The Agency has also actively
 involved the States as partners in the
 rule development, as required under
 Section 1414(c)(2)(A) of the 1996 SDWA
 amendments.
   To gain early input and information
 from stakeholders on problems with the
 current public notification program,
 EPA held a series of stakeholder
 meetings in Indianapolis, Indiana,
 Washington, D.C., and Seattle,
 Washington in late 1997, prior to
 initiating the rulemaking. EPA also used
 the findings and recommendations from
 a June, 1992 GAO report ("Drinking
 Water Consumers Often Not Well
 Informed of Potentially Serious
 Violations" (GAO/RCED-92-135)).
  In May and June of 1999, during the
 public comment period after the rule
 was proposed, EPA hosted public
 meetings in Madison, Wisconsin;
 Washington, DC; Allentown,
 Pennsylvania; and Phoenix, Arizona.
 The purpose of the meetings was to take
 comment on the proposed public
 notification rule and to discuss (in a
 workshop-type setting) the draft Public
 Notification Handbook. The meetings
 were very well attended and the results
greatly benefitted  both the  final public
notification rule and the final Public
                        Notification Handbook. The final
                        Handbook is expected to be published
                        shortly. Reports from all the meetings
                        are available for review at EPA's Water
                        Docket (W-98-19) or by downloading
                        the documents from EPA's website
                        (www.epa.gov/safewater).
                          EPA consulted with the States
                        throughout the development of this rule,
                        as required under section 1414(c)(2)(A).
                        Prior to initiating the rulemaking, EPA
                        met with a group of States, as part of the
                        early involvement meetings set up by
                        the Association of State Drinking Water
                        Administrators (ASDWA), to develop
                        the scope of the process and identify
                        significant issues under the new statute.
                        During the development of the proposed
                        rule, several State drinking water
                        managers participated as members of
                        the EPA regulation workgroup. Their
                        involvement in the workgroup
                        continued through the development of
                        this final rule. EPA also provided
                        briefings to ASDWA on request several
                        times as the rule moved forward.

                        HI. Significant Decisions Affecting the
                        Final Rule
                          The final rule published today makes
                        a number of significant changes to what
                        was proposed, based on decisions EPA
                        made in response to the comments
                        received. Section IV of the preamble
                        gives a detailed summary of the final
                        rule and an explanation of the
                        significant changes made in response to
                        comments. Decisions on five  key issues
                        affecting the final rule are highlighted
                        below:

                        A. List of Violations and Situations
                        Requiring a Tier 1 (24-Hour) Public
                        Notice
                          EPA received many comments related
                        to the proposed public notice tier level
                        for violations of the Total Coliform Rule
                        (TCR)  and the Surface Water Treatment
                        Rule (SWTR). Except for violations
                        where fecal contamination was found,
                        the notice tier level for all the TCR MCL
                        and SWTR TT violations was proposed
                        to be Tier 2 (30-day notice). Over half
                        of the commenters on this issue
                        recommended that the final rule change
                        the notice requirement for at least some
                        of the TCR and SWTR violations to Tier
                        1. In particular, many of these
                        commenters believed that violations
                        related to exceedances of the  turbidity
                        limit were more often than not a strong
                        indicator of harmful drinking water
                        posing a significant risk from short-term
                        exposure. The rest of those commenting
                        on this issue specifically supported
                        leaving as Tier 2 the routine TCR
                        violations and all SWTR violations,
                        including those violations related to.
                        exceedances of the turbidity limit.
These commenters believed that
turbidity violations were more often
than not a false indicator of potential
health risk.
  After considering all the comments,
EPA decided to stay with the proposal
requiring a Tier 2 notice for all TCR and
SWTR violations (other than where fecal
contamination is found under the TCR
rule) because EPA believes that an
automatic Tier 1  notice requirement is
not justified. Routine TCR and SWTR
violations (without supporting
evidence) are not sufficiently strong or
predictable indicators of significant
potential of risk from short-term
exposure. At the  same time, in response
to the range  of comments related to the
appropriate tier level for turbidity
exceedances, EPA agrees that certain
exceedances of the turbidity limit
deserve special attention by the primacy
agency for public notification purposes.
  Accordingly, the final rule continues
to classify all turbidity violations as Tier
2; adds a new requirement that PWSs
consult with the primacy agency within
24 hours when exceedances of the
maximum allowable turbidity limit
occur; enables the primacy agency after
the consultation to elevate  specific
turbidity violations to Tier 1 when
warranted; and requires an automatic
Tier 1 notice when consultation does
not take place within the 24-hour
period. Since the significance of the risk
to health of an exceedance  of the
turbidity limits is situational, EPA
believes the  final rule ensures that
notices for turbidity violations
indicating an immediate health risk will
go out quickly when necessary (based
on the immediate consultation
requirement) and unnecessary notices
will be avoided where the violation
indicates no immediate risk to health.
These decisions are discussed in greater
detail in section IV.F.l of the preamble.

B. Standard Health Effects  Language
Required in Notices for MCL/TT
Violations
  EPA requested comment on EPA's
proposal to use the CCR standard health
effects language to meet the public
notification requirement. Although most
commenters supported keeping the CCR
and public notice health effects
language the same, a significant
minority of commenters believed that
the public notice language should be
separate from the CCR language because
of the different objectives of the public
notice. Several commenters also
believed that the  proposed  language for
specific violations needed revision, and
several offered alternative language that
they believed was more accurate and
useful.

-------
               Federal Register/Vol. 65, No.  87/Thursday, May 4, 2000/Rules and  Regulations
                                                                     25985
  After considering all the comments,
EPA decided to reaffirm its intent to
keep the standard health effects
language identical for the public
notification and CCR rules. Today's rule
publishes identical language in the two
rules for all the existing regulated
contaminants. EPA believes the benefits
of having identical core health effects
language outweighs the value  of
tailoring the language to any unique
objectives of the public notice. EPA also
reviewed the comments offering
alternative language for specific
violations, with particular focus on
whether any of the proposed language
was erroneous or misleading. With three
exceptions, the final language in today's
rule (including the amended CCR rule)
is the same language as was proposed.
The three exceptions are for fluoride,
fecal coliform/E.coli, and several of the
disinfectant/disinfection byproducts.
These decisions are discussed in greater
detail in section IVJ.3 of the preamble.

C. Tier 2 (30-Day) Notice Deadline and
Flexibility To Extend in Appropriate
Circumstances
  EPA requested comment on the
proposed 30-day time period required
for the initial Tier 2 public notice, the
requirement for a repeat notice of
ongoing violations every three months,
and the discretion given to the primacy
agency in specific circumstances to
extend the initial notice to three months
or the repeat notice frequency to one
year (either on a case-by-case  basis or by
rule). EPA received a wide range of
comments on the proposed 30-day time
period, ranging from leaving the current
14-day requirement intact (or even
requiring the notice sooner), to support
for the 30-day proposed period, to
moving the  initial notice to 90 or 120
days after the violation. The comments
received related to the  proposed
discretion allowing primacy agencies to
extend the deadline also ranged widely,
from disagreeing with allowing any
discretion at all, to extending the
deadline, to requesting that the
discretion allowed be more open-ended.
   After considering the wide  range of
comments, EPA retained the proposed
30-day deadline for the initial notice
and the 3-month repeat notice frequency
in the final  rule. But EPA did make
changes in the final rule language in
response to commenters requesting
reconsideration or clarification of EPA's
intent in the proposed rule. The final
rule redefines how and when a primacy
agency would be  allowed to extend the
initial notice beyond 30 days and under
what circumstances the primacy agency
could allow less frequent repeat notices
for unresolved violations. The final rule
specifically disallows extensions
beyond 30 days for unresolved      '.
violations or less frequent repeat notice
for ongoing TCR and SWTR violations.
The final rule also does not allow    ;
primacy agencies to set "across-the-  i
board" extensions in their policies and
rules that would automatically extend
the notice period or frequency of repeat
notice for all the other violations.
  EPA continues to believe that
extensions to the fixed deadlines may!be
appropriate in certain circumstances,
since Tier 2 violation situations  are very
diverse. Tier 2 situations range from
violations that on some occasions may
pose potential adverse health effects
from short-term exposure (such  as
SWTR TT violations), to unresolved  ;
violations that pose chronic health
effects from long-term exposure  (such: as
benzene violations), and to resolved
violations no longer posing any
potential risk to health. One size does;
not fit all. The final rule reaffirms this
intent to provide flexibility to the
primacy agency to deviate from  the
deadline in EPA's rule where warranted.
These decisions are discussed in greater
detail in Section IV.G.2 of the preamble.

D. Form and Manner of the Delivery of
Public Notices
  EPA requested comment on the    ;
revised requirements in the proposal for
deciding on the method of delivery of
the public notice. The proposed rule i
would require a water system to: (1)
Select at least one minimum method •
from a short list in the regulation, and
(2) provide additional notices by any '
other method reasonably calculated  to
reach other persons not reached by the
initial method selected. Some
commenters believed the minimum  list
should be expanded to allow, for
instance, use of the newspaper as the,
minimum method, as in the current
rule. Other commenters requested that
the final rule require that water systems
use more than one minimum method,
since one method is likely to be an
inadequate response in many cases.
  After considering the comments, EPA
has decided to maintain the basic
requirement as proposed: To require
water systems to select at least one  ;
delivery method from the regulatory list
and to take steps reasonably calculated
to reach the others served by the system.
EPA believes requiring water systems to
select at least one minimum method sets
a simple, enforceable baseline level  of
performance for all public notices. This
initial step must be supplemented by
other actions when the minimum
method is not likely to reach all persons
served by the system. In the final rule,
EPA did not expand the list of
minimum delivery methods it proposed
but it does give the primacy agency
discretion to select a different minimum
method not listed in EPA's rule where
warranted. The final rule also includes
other minor changes to the rule
language to respond to specific requests
for clarification of EPA's intent. These
decisions for each of the three notice
tiers are discussed in greater detail in
sections IV.F.3, IV.G.3, and IV.H.3 of the
preamble.

E. Consolidating Public Notice
Regulations Into New Subpart (40 CFR
Part 141, Subpart Q).
  As part of the development of the
final rule, EPA conducted a thorough
search of Part 141 of the current Code
of Federal Regulations (CFR) to identify
all the places where a public
notification requirement is set or  where
the current public notification
regulations are referenced. This led to a
consolidation of several ongoing public
notification requirements into the new
public notification regulations in
Subpart Q of 40 CFR Part 141. The
benefits of consolidating all the
requirements in one place (Subpart Q)
are significant. The final Subpart Q
provides in one place a complete and
easily referenced  set of requirements.
This should greatly enhance the
understanding of the public notification
requirements and lead to greater
voluntary compliance. Many of these
ancillary public notification
requirements are  not in the current
regulations under § 141.32 and many
were not part of the proposed rule
revision on May 13,1999. EPA believes
that since they do not substantively alter
the existing requirements, they do not
require prior notice and opportunity for
comment. A summary list of the
changes to the CFR are included  in
Table C in Section IV.L of the preamble.

IV. Discussion of Final Rule
   This section explains the elements of
the final regulation, comments
requested and comments received on
the proposal, and EPA's response to the
comments. EPA made a number of
significant changes to the proposal
based on comments received, clarified
some requirements, and edited and
reorganized some of the proposed
regulatory language to improve the
presentation. EPA requested comment
on all elements of the proposed
regulation. Comments were received
from 53 individuals and organizations,
representing 22 States, 20 utilities, and
 11 environmental organizations and
public interest groups. Almost 200
people participated in at least one of the
four public meetings hosted by EPA to

-------
  25986
Federal Register/VoI. 65, No.  87/Thursday, May 4, 2000/Rules and Regulations
  take comment on the proposed
  regulation. The "Response to
  Comments" document, all the written
  comments, and the public meeting
  reports are available for review at EPA's
  Water Docket (W-98-19). Copies are
  also available by downloading the
  documents from EPA's website
  (mwv.epa.gov/so/ejvater/pivs/pn/
  pn.html),
  A. Purpose and Applicability
   Today's rule revises the minimum
  requirements that public water systems
  must meet regarding the form, manner,
  frequency, and content of the public
  notification. Public water systems must
 give notice to persons served for all
  violations of National Primary Drinking
 Water Regulations (NPDWR) and for
 other situations posing a risk to public
 health from the drinking water. The
 torm NPDWR Violations is used in the
 public notification regulations to
 include violations of the Maximum
 Contaminant Level  (MCL), Maximum
 Residual Disinfectant Level (MRDL),
 treatment technique (TT), monitoring,
 and testing procedure requirements.
 Public notice is not required, for
 example, for violation of the Consumer
 Confidence Report regulation. See Table
 1 and Appendix A of the final rule for
 the NPDWR violations and other
 situations requiring a public notice.
 Violations and situations not listed in
 Appendix A do not require a public
 notice under Subpart Q.
  The rule applies to existing and new
 public water systems that violate a
 NPDWR or have other situations that
 posa a risk to health from the drinking
                       water. A "public water system," as
                       defined in 40 CFR 141.2 , is "a system
                       for the provision to the public of water
                       for human consumption through pipes
                       or *  * * other constructed
                       conveyances, if such system has at least
                       fifteen service connections or regularly
                       serves at least twenty-five individuals
                       daily at least 60 days out of the year."
                       Public water systems regulated under
                       Part  141 may be publicly-owned or
                       privately-owned.
                         A public water system CPWS) is either
                       a community water system (CWS) or
                       non-community water system (NCWS).
                       A CWS, as defined in § 141.2, means "a
                       public water system which serves  at
                       least 15  service connections used by
                       year-round residents or regularly serves
                       at least 25 year-round residents." A
                       NCWS means "a public water system
                       that is not a community water system."
                         Non-community water systems are
                       further broken out in the drinking  water
                       regulations into transient non-
                       community water systems (TWS) and
                       non-transient non-community water
                       systems  (NTNCWS). A NTNCWS is
                       defined by EPA under § 141.2 as "a
                       public water system that is not a
                       community water system and that
                       regularly serves 25 of the same people
                       over six  months of the year." An
                       example is a school or business that has
                       its own water well. A TWS is defined
                       by EPA under § 141.2 as "a non-
                       community water system that does not
                       regularly serve 25 of the same persons
                       over six months of the year." An
                       example is a roadside rest stop with its
                       own water well.
   For illustration purposes, Table A
 provides a summary of the number of
 public water systems, broken out by
 type of system, the number of these
 systems with violations during fiscal
 year 1998, and the total number of
 violations during the same period. The
 numbers have been updated from those
 presented in the preamble of the
 proposed rule, which were based on FY
 1996 information in the Safe Drinking
 Water Information System (SDWIS) in
 mid-1997.
   Public water systems must meet the
 requirements of all NPDWRs in effect.
 Currently, there are NPDWRs in effect
 covering 80 separate contaminants. EPA
 has also published final regulations for
 the Interim Enhanced Surface Water
 Treatment Rule (IESWTR) and the Stage
 1 Disinfection/Disinfectant Byproducts
 Rule (D/DBP), which will increase the
 number of regulated contaminants to 88
 once they go into effect. There are also
 other regulations in progress that will
 increase the number of regulated
 contaminants to over 90 contaminants
 by 2002.
   Table A shows that 36,467 (21
 percent)  of the 170,376 PWS had one or
 more violations in FY 1998. Overall, the
 36,467 PWS with violations committed
 a total of 128,459 violations in FY  1998.
 Over 86 percent (or 108,459) of these
 violations were for failure to monitor
 according to the regulations. Although
 not all violations require a separate
 public notice, each violation requires
 the PWS to comply with the public
 notification requirements.
                 TABLE A.—NUMBER OF PUBLIC WATER SYSTEMS (PWS) AND VIOLATIONS IN FY 1998
Type of PWS
1, Community Water Systems (CWS) 	
2. Non-transient Non-community Water Systems (NTNCWS) 	
3. Transient Non-cominunity Water Systems (TWS) 	

Total 	 	
Number of
PWS
54 367
20255
95 754

170,376
Number of
PWS with
violations
•10 rfiA
4 672
1ft 771

36,467
Number of
violations

97 7ft*;


128,459
  Source: FY 1998 inventory and violation data from Safe Drinking Water Information System (SDWIS), January, 1999.
  As shown in Table A, 54,367 (32
percent) of the public water systems are
CWSs. CWSs must comply with all
NPDWRs in effect. CWSs serve
residential populations and range from
large municipal systems that serve
millions of persons to small systems
that serve fewer than 100 persons. CWSs
can be further categorized as publicly-
owned systems, privately-owned
systems, and systems that provide water
as an ancillary function of their
principal purpose. In FY 1998,13,024
                      CWSs committed 64,914 violations.
                      Approximately 80 percent of
                      community water systems serve fewer
                      than 3,300 people.
                        Of the public water systems, 20,255
                      (12 percent) are NTNCWS. Virtually all
                      NTNCWSs provide water as an ancillary
                      function of their principal purpose (for
                      example, schools, day-care facilities,
                      factories). In general, NTNCWSs must
                      comply with the same national primary
                      drinking water regulations as
                      community water systems. During FY
1998, 4,672 NTNCWSs committed
27,785 violations. Approximately 99
percent of NTNCWSs serve fewer than
3,300 people.
  The rest of the regulated public water
systems (95,754 systems or 56 percent)
are TWSs. Virtually all TWSs provide
water as an ancillary function of their
principal purpose (for example,
highway rest stops, gas stations, state
parks). TWSs must comply only with
specified national primary drinking
water regulations where short-term

-------
               Federal Register/Vol. 65, No.  87/Thursday, May 4, 2000/Rules and Regulations
                                                                     25987
exposure may pose a health threat—
total coliform, nitrate, nitrite, total
nitrate and nitrite, and violations of the
Surface Water Treatment Rule. TWSs
using surface water serving 10,000
persons or more must also comply with
the new Interim Enhanced Surface
Water Treatment Rule (IESWTR) and
certain provisions of the Stage 1
Disinfectant/Disinfection  Byproducts
(D/DBP) rule when they go into effect
starting in 2002. TWSs using surface
water serving less than 10,000 persons
or using ground water sources must
comply with certain provisions of the
Stage 1 D/DBP rule by 2004. In FY 1998,
18,771 TWSs committed 35,760
violations. Over 99 percent of TWSs
serve fewer than 3,300 people.
B. Effective Dates and Rationale
   Today's Rule: The public notification
rule provisions under Part 141, Subpart
Qbecome effective June 5, 2000.
However, public water systems will
continue to comply with the public
notification requirements under
§ 141.32 until the date the new Subpart
Q regulations go into effect in each
State, Territory, Tribe, or  the District of
Columbia. EPA has set different
compliance deadlines based on whether
EPA or the State (or Territory or Tribe]
has primary enforcement authority
("primacy") for the public water system
supervision program. As of today's rule,
States (or Territories] have primacy in
all jurisdictions except Wyoming, the
District of Columbia, and on Indian
lands. EPA directly implements the
public water system supervision
programs in Wyoming, Washington,
D.C., and on all Indian lands. The term
"primacy agency" is used in the final
public notification rule to refer to either
EPA or the State (or Territory or Tribe)
in cases where EPA, or the State,
Territory, or Tribe, exercises primary
enforcement responsibility for the
Subpart Q public notification. The term
"State" is used throughout the rule to
apply to States, Territories, Tribes, and
the District of Columbia.
   Public water systems in primacy
States must continue to comply with the
public notification requirements under
§ 141.32 until  May 6, 2002 or until the
date the  State's revised regulation under
its approved primacy program becomes
effective, whichever comes first. The
two-year period matches the maximum
time period allowed for States under the
primacy regulations (40 CFR Part 142,
Subpart B) to adopt new and revised
National Primary Drinking Water
Regulations (NPDWRs). EPA believes it
is appropriate to make the effective date
in primacy States consistent with the
basic two-year time primacy revision
period. Coordinating the phase-in of the
new public notification requirements
with the State adoption of the revised
regulations in each State will avoid the
potential confusion of having  different
State and EPA requirements in effect in
the State at the same time. Although
States are free to wait the full two years
to adopt the new rule, EPA strongly
encourages States to consider  early
adoption in order to combine the public
notification rule and the Consumer
Confidence Report rule into one
primacy revision package or to
otherwise take early advantage of the
efficiencies in today's rule.        '.
  Public water systems in jurisdictions
where the drinking water program is
directly implemented by EPA must
continue to comply with the public
notification requirements under
§ 141.32 until October 31, 2000. EPA
believes that setting the compliance date
for the new rule at 180 days after   '
publication is  appropriate and
achievable for public water systems in
the jurisdictions directly implemented
by EPA. Six months after publication of
the final rule is sufficient time for EPA
and the water systems to adjust their
operating procedures to comply with
the new requirements. Early
implementation will enable the water
systems to take advantage of the
efficiencies in the new regulation as
early as possible, leading to a more
effective public notification program.
  In practical terms, the different
compliance dates allowed under this
rule mean that the new requirements
will go into effect at different times
nationwide, based on the speed of the
State adoption of the new requirements
and whether EPA or the State directly
implements the program. Regardless of
the State primacy situation, the latest
the rule will go into effect in any State
will be May 6, 2002, even in those
States that request and are granted  an
extension to adopt the revised
regulation beyond the basic two-year
primacy revision time period.
  The final public notification rule
applies to new and existing violations
and situations after the date public
water systems must comply with the
new rule. However, EPA is not requiring
that public water systems provide initial
public notices under the new rule where
the initial public notice has already
been given under the regulations in
place at the time. However, unless the
primacy agency makes a different
determination on a case-by-case basis,
the new rule will apply to repeat notices
for existing violations or for any public
notice requirements applying to ongoing
violations after the new rule is in effect.
  Comments Requested on Proposal:
EPA had asked for comment on the
proposed effective dates and solicited
suggestions on other options to put the
new regulations into effect earlier.
Several comments were received on the
proposed effective date, all in support of
the two-year period allowed for water
systems in primacy States.
  EPA Response to Comments: The two-
year effective date in the final rule for
water systems in primacy States is
identical to what was proposed. The
final rule does, however, change the
proposed effective date for water
systems in drinking water programs
directly implemented by EPA from 90
days after publication to 180 days after
publication. The shift from 90 days to
180 days was a result of a strong
concern raised during discussions on
the proposed rule that 90 days gave EPA
insufficient time to effectively make the
transition from the existing program to
the new program in areas where it
directly implements the program. EPA
believes the change to 180 days in the
final rule better fits the time period
needed to shift to the new program
under the revised regulations.
C. Summary of Changes to Current
Public Notification Requirements

   The final rule is a significant revision
from the public notification regulation
under § 141.32 of this part, which has
been in effect since 1989. The regulation
under § 141.32 is referred to throughout
the preamble as the "current rule." The
reason EPA chose to refer to the rule
under § 141.32, which will be replaced
by today's action, as the "current rule"
is because it will continue to apply to
some water systems for up to two years
after publication of today's rule. Table B
is a summary of the major differences
between the current rule and the final
revised rule.

-------
25988
Federal Register/Vol.  65,  No.  87/Thursday, May 4,  2000/Rules and  Regulations
                 TABLE B.—SUMMARY OF DIFFERENCES BETWEEN REVISED PN  RULE AND CURRENT RULE
   Statutory authority (SDWA, as amended in
                   1996)
                                       Current rule (§141.32)
    Revised PN rule (part 141, subpart Q)
1414(c){1), Each owner or operator of a PWS
  shall give notice of NPDWR violations, levels
  of unregulated contaminants, and existence
  of a variance or exemption to the persons
  served by the system.
1414(c)(2)(A), Manner, frequency, and form are
  prescribed  based  on seriousness  and fre-
  quency of violations.
1414(c)(2){C)(i«),  Notice must be  provided to
  Administrator or primacy agency.
1414{c)(2)(C)(1), For violations with potential to
  have  serious adverse  effects  on  human
  health as a result of short-term exposure, no-
  tice must be  distributed as soon as prac-
  ticable  but no later than 24 hours after the
  occurrence of the violation.
                            (§141.32(a) and  (b)) Owner or operators of
                              PWSs must  notify  persons served by the
                              system for the following  violations/ situa-
                              tions:.
                            Maximum contaminant levels (MCL)
                            Treatment technique
                            Testing procedure
                            Monitoring
                            Operation under a variance or exemption
                            Noncompliance with  variance  or exemption
                              schedule.
                            (§§141.32(a)(1)(iii)  and  141.32(a)  and  (b))
                              There is a three-tier system, although tiers
                              are not named.
                            Public notices are divided into three tiers: vio-
                              lations of MCLs  that may pose an acute
                              risk to human health; MCLs, treatment tech-
                              nique, and variance or exemption schedule
                              violations;  and other  violations (including
                              monitoring) and operation under a variance
                              or exemption.
                            (§141.31(d)) System must provide a copy of
                              the notice to the State within 10 days.
                            (§141.32(a)(1)(iii)(A)-(D) Acute violations in-
                              clude.
                            (1) Any violations specified by State
                            (2) Nitrate/nitrite MCLs
                            (3) Fecal coliform/E. coli
                            (4) Waterborne disease outbreak in unfiltered
                              systems subject to Surface Water Treat-
                              ment Rule.
(§§141.201(a) and 141.202(a)) Includes viola-
  tions  from current rule and adds broader
  definition  of  waterborne  disease outbreak
  and other waterborne emergencies,  adds
  new IESWTR and DBP  standards, moves
  fluoride SMCL and  nitrate exceedances of
  the MCL  for NCWS when allowed by pri-
  macy  agency under  141.11(d), failure to
  take confirmation sample for  nitrate,  and
  unregulated contaminant monitoring public
  notices from  other parts of the  regulations.
  Adds a new  Appendix A to the  rule listing
  all  violations and  situations where public
  notification is required.
(§141.201(c)) Requires water systems to no-
  tify owners or operators of consecutive sys-
  tems. Also allows primacy agencies to per-
  mit systems to limit distribution of the notice
  if the violation is in a portion of the distribu-
  tion  system  that is  physically  or  hydrau-
  lically isolated from  other parts  of the sys-
  tem.
(§141.201(b)) Tiers are defined based on se-
  riousness  of the violation or situation and of
  potential health effects, and all violations or
  situations  are assigned to a tier (Appendix
  A).
Tier 1 notice for violations  or situations with
  significant potential to have serious  adverse
  effects  on human  health as  a result of
  short-term exposure;
Tier 2 notice for all other violations or situa-
  tions with  potential to have serious  adverse
  effects on  human health; and
Tier 3 notice for all other violations and situa-
  tions not included in Tier 1 and Tier 2.
(§141.31(d)) Revised to require PWS to  sub-
  mit to the  primacy agency within  10 days a
  certification, with copies of the notices, for
  both the initial notice  cycle and all repeat
  notice cycles.
(§§141.202(b)(2)  and   141.203(b)(3))   New
  sections added to require consultation with
  primacy agency  within  24 hours for viola-
  tions or situations requiring a Tier 1 notice
  and for violations of the turbidity MCL of 5
  NTU  or a treatment  technique resulting
  from a single  exceedance of turbidity limits.
(§141.202) Tier 1 notice—Violations and  situ-
  ations include those defined as acute in the
  current rule, plus: an expanded definition of
  waterborne disease  outbreak to include  all
  water systems and to add other waterborne
  emergencies;  violations of the  maximum
  turbidity limit  where  determined  by  the  pri-
  macy agency or where  consultation   be-
  tween the  system and the primacy agency
  does not occur within 24 hours; chlorine di-
  oxide MRDL violation under new DBP rule
  where samples taken in the distribution  sys-
  tem exceed the standard or where repeat
  samples are  not taken in the  distribution
  system when  required; violation of the test-
  ing procedures to determine if fecal coliform
  is  present  after  any repeat sample tests
  positive for coliform; violations of combined
  nitrate and nitrite MCL; and failure to take a
  confirmation sample for  nitrate  within  24
  hours when initial sample exceeds MCL.

-------
                Federal Register/-Vol.  65, No.  87/Thursday,  May  4,  2000/Rules  and Regulations
                                                                             25989
         TABLE B.—SUMMARY OF DIFFERENCES BETWEEN REVISED PN RULE AND CURRENT RULE—Continued
  Statutory authority (SDWA, as amended in
                   1996)
          Current rule (§141.32)
    Revised PN rule (part 141, subpart Q)
1414(c)(2)(D)(1), Regulations shall specify noti-
  fication procedures for violations other than
  Tier 1; notice shall be in written form.
                                             'rovide copy of notice to radio  and TV sta-
                                              tions within 72 hours, or by posting or hand
                                              delivery within 72 hours. Posting must con-
                                              tinue as long as the violation persists.
Additional notices: by  newspaper  within 14
  days or posting or hand delivery if no news-
  paper is  available; by mail within 45 days
  (may be waived if state determines violation
  has  been  corrected);  and  repeat notice
  every three months thereafter.
(§141.32)(a)) For MCL, treatment technique,
  and variance or exemption schedule viola-
  tions.
                                             By newspaper within 14 days or by posting or
                                               hand delivery if no newspaper is available.
                                             Additional notices:  by mail within  45 days
                                               (may be waived if State determines viola-
                                               tion  has been corrected), and repeat notice
                                               every three months thereafter  by mail or
                                               hand delivery.                      '
                                              (§141.32(b), For monitoring and testing pro-
                                                cedure violations, and operation under vari-
                                                ance or exemption.
Under  §141.209, Tier 1  notice is  also  re-
  quired  for exceedance of the  nitrate MCL
  by NCWS where permitted to exceed  the
  MCL by the primacy agency.
Timing revised to require notice within  24
  hours;  must use at a minimum electronic
  media,  posting, hand  delivery,  or  other
  method approved by  the  primacy agency,
  plus any additional methods  necessary to
  reach all persons served.
 Revised  to not require  additional notices for
  same violation, deferring instead to the  pri-
  macy agency to set additional requirements
  (including  additional notices) on a case-by-
  case basis.

 (§141.203)  Tier 2 notice includes those  de-
  scribed in  §141.32(a) of  the  current rule,
  plus the new standards under the IESWTR
  and  DBF  rules, and serious and persistent
  monitoring and testing procedure violations,
  as determined by the primacy agency.
 Revised  under §141.203(b) to require  notice
  within  30  days unless the primacy agency
  allows an extension of up to three months
  in  appropriate circumstances. Extensions
  will not be allowed for any unresolved viola-
  tions, nor will automatic "across-the-board"
  extensions for the  remaining  violations be
  allowed. Unless primacy agency directs  oth-
  erwise, CWS must use mail or direct deliv-
  ery, and  other methods  reasonably  cal-
  culated to  reach  persons served.  NCWS
  must use posting  (for as long as violation
  persists or for at least seven days), direct
  delivery, or mail,  and  other  methods  rea-
  sonably calculated to  reach persons served.
  Also requires  systems to consult the  pri-
   macy  agency within 24 hours of learning of
  an exceedance of maximum turbidity  limits.
 The initial  notice does not require multiple
   methods of delivery unless needed to reach
   persons  served.  Repeat notice  required
   every three months where violation persists,
   unless the primacy agency determines  less
   frequent  repeat  notice (no  less frequent
   than annually) is  warranted  in appropriate
   circumstances. Primacy agencies may not
   allow less frequent repeat notices for micro-
   biological  violations,   nor  will  automatic
   "across-the-board" decreases in  frequency
   be  allowed for  the   remaining  violations.
   Method of delivery for repeat notice  will be
   the same as that required for initial notices.
 (§141.204) The violations  and  situations re-
   quiring a  Tier 3  notice  are  the same as
   those  described in §141.32(b)  of  current
   rule.
 Tier 3 notice is also required to announce the
   availability of unregulated contaminant mon-
   itoring results  as required under  §141.207;
   and for exceedances of the SMCL for fluo-
   ride as required under § 141.208.

-------
 25990
Federal Register/Vol.  65, No. 87/Thursday, May 4, 2000/Rules  and Regulations
           TABLE B.—SUMMARY OF DIFFERENCES BETWEEN REVISED PN RULE AND CURRENT RULE—Continued
   Statutory authority (SDWA, as amended in
                    1996)
                                      Current rule (§141.32)
     Revised PN rule (part 141, subpart Q)
 Nolica to new billing units or new customers
   (not in statute).
 1414(c)(2){C)(iO and  1414(c)(2)(D)(ii), Content
   of notices.
Providing notice in other languages (not in stat-
  ute).
Special notice for exceedance of Fluoride Sec-
  ondary Maximum Contaminant Level (SMCL)
  (not In statute).

Special notice for exceedance of nitrate MCL
  for NCWS (not in statute).
                                              By newspaper within three months of the vio-
                                                lation or the granting of variance or exemp-
                                                tion, or by hand delivery or posting if no
                                                newspaper is available.  State  may allow
                                                less frequent public notice (up to 1 year) for
                                                minor monitoring violations.
                            Repeat notice every three months thereafter
                              by mail or hand delivery.
                            (§141.32(c))  Community water system must
                              give a copy of the most recent public notice
                              for any outstanding violation of any MCL,
                              any treatment technique requirement,  or
                              any V&E schedule.
                           (§ 141.32(d)) Each notice must provide a clear
                              explanation of the violation, potential health
                              effects, population at risk, steps being taken
                              to correct violation, telephone  number  of
                              the owner,  operator,  or designee  of the
                              public  water system, necessity for seeking
                              alternative water supplies, if any, and any
                              preventive  measures  consumers  should
                              take until the violation is corrected.
                                             (§141.32(e)) Systems  must include standard
                                               health effects language for MCL, treatment
                                               technique, variance or exemption schedule
                                               violations, and operation under a variance
                                               or exemption.
                           (§141.32(d))  Systems  must  provide  multi-
                             lingual notices "where appropriate".
                           (§141.32(f))  Notice  of SMCL exceedances
                             between 2 mg/l and 4 mg/l (the MCL level)
                             required within 12 mos.; shall contain lan-
                             guage in §143.5(b).
                           Dublic   notice   is   required   as  part   of
                             §141.11(d).  §141.11(d)  allows  NCWS  to
                             have nitrate  levels above MCL> (10 mg/l),
                             up to 20 mg/l,  if State approves and if they
                             post and meet other conditions.
 Revised to require notice within one year. Un-
   less  primacy  agency  directs  otherwise,
   CWS must use mail or direct delivery, and
   other  methods reasonably  calculated  to
   reach  persons  served. NCWS  must  use
   posting (for as long as violation persists or
   minimum of seven days), direct delivery, or
   mail, and  other methods  reasonably  cal-
   culated to reach persons served. Consumer
   Confidence reports (CCRs) or other annual
   reports may be used, as long as notice in
   CCR meets PN requirements.
 Repeat notice  annually; method  of  delivery
   must be the same as in the initial notice.
 (§141.206) Revised to require notice for any
   outstanding  violation  or situation requiring
   notice, including monitoring and testing pro-
   cedure violations.

 Revised to require non-community water sys-
   tems to keep  notice  posted for as  long as
   violation persists, even if notice was initially
   hand-delivered or otherwise distributed.
 (§141.205) Adds "when violation or situation
   was found"  and "when system expects to
   return  to compliance  or resolve  the situa-
   tion" to content elements. New requirement
   to include "contaminant level." Adds name
   and business  address to phone number of
   operator.  Adds  new  element  requiring
   standard language, where applicable,  ask-
   ing bill paying customers to  provide copies
   of notice to other persons served who  may
   not have received the notice directly from
   the PWS.
Also, adds minimum content elements for no-
   tices of operation under variance or exemp-
   tion, which parallel CCR requirements. No
   longer requires health effects language for
   operation under a variance or exemption.
(New Appendix  B) Revises  standard  health
   effects language, using  language identical
   to the CCR rule.
Adds standard  language for monitoring  and
  testing procedure violations.
(§141.205(c)(2)) Revised to  require that no-
  tices contain  information in the appropriate
  language(s) regarding the importance of the
  notice or contain a telephone number or ad-
  dress so  people  can obtain  a translated
  copy or request assistance in the appro-
  priate language, if system serves a large
  proportion of  non-English speaking  con-
  sumers. Systems must determine what con-
  stitutes  a  "large  proportion"  if  primacy
  agency does not make a determination.
(§141.208) Moved to new Subpart Q (deletes
  §143.5); mandatory language is simplified.
[§141.209) Incorporates public notice require-
  ments in §141.11(d) to new Subpart Q, re-
  quiring the  PN to follow Tier 1  notice re-
  quirements  and  content  requirements  in
  §141.205; changes §141.11 (d) to cross ref-
  erence the Subpart Q PN requirement.

-------
               Federal Register/Vol.  65, No.  87/Thursday, May 4,  2000/Rules and Regulations
                                                                       25991
         TABLE B.—SUMMARY OF DIFFERENCES BETWEEN REVISED PN RULE AND CURRENT RULE—Continued
  Statutory authority (SDWA, as amended in
                 1996)
           Current rule (§141.32)
    Revised PN rule (part 141, subpart Q)
Public  notice  by  primacy  agency  (not
  in statute).
1414(c)(2)(E) Administrator may require notice
  of levels of unregulated contaminants mon-
  itored under section 1445(a).
1414(c)(2)(B) States may establish  alternative
  notification requirements.
 (§ 141.32(g)) The State may give notice to the
   public on behalf of the public water system
   if the State complies with the requirements
   of §141.32.  However, the  owner or loper-
   ator of the public water system remains le-
   gally responsible.
 (§141.35(d)) Written notice of availability of
   results within three months  after system re-
   ceives  results (surface water systems only
   need to notify after the first  quarter of moni-
   toring).
 (§142.10(a)) Authority to require public water
   systems to give public notice that is no less
   stringent  than the EPA requirements in
   §§141.32 and 142.16(a).
 (§142.16(a)) If the state chooses to decrease
   notice frequency for minor monitoring viola-
   tions it must submit to EPA  the priteria used
   to decide the decreased  frequency  and
   which violations are minor, and it must sub-
   mit the new notice requirements.     ;
(§141.210) No change.
(§141.207) Revised to require notice of avail-
  ability of results within 12 months, following
  Tier   3  delivery  requirements;  deletes
  §141.35(d).

(§142.10(a)) No change.
                                                                                 (§142.16(a)) Deletes current requirement. Al-
                                                                                  lows primacy agencies to establish alter-
                                                                                  native public notification requirements with
                                                                                  respect to form and content of notice, con-
                                                                                  sistent with  1414(c)(2)(B) of 1996 SDWA
                                                                                  amendments, as long as they provide same
                                                                                  type and amount of information.
                                                                                 New §142.16(a)(2) added to  require State to
                                                                                  include in primacy program enforceable re-
                                                                                  quirements  and  procedures when State
                                                                                  augments its program to take advantage of
                                                                                  the flexibilities built into EPA's rule. List of
                                                                                  special primacy requirements  included  in
                                                                                  § 142.16(a)(2).
D. "Plain Language" Format of Final
Rule
  Today's Rule: As discussed in the
preamble to the proposed rule, EPA has
formatted Subpart Q of these regulations
in question-and-answer format and
made other changes in format and
language, consistent with the
requirements outlined in the June 1,
1998 memorandum sent by President
Clinton to all Federal agencies, to take
steps to improve both the clarity and
comprehension of regulatory language.
The intent of "plain language" is to
produce rules which are clear, concise,
straight-forward, understandable, and
enforceable without extensive
"legalese." The current public
notification rule, in particular, has been
criticized by the General Accounting
Office (GAO) and others as being too
complex and confusing to implement.
This criticism was viewed by GAO in its
1992 report as one of the reasons the
public notification process is
ineffective.
  Comments Requested on Proposal:
EPA requested  comment on the new
format and solicited ideas on ways to
make the public notification regulation
more readable by the regulated
community. In  general, commenters
supported the new format, finding it a
significant improvement from the
current  rule.
  EPA Response to Comments: The final
rule is consistent with the overall "plain
language" strategy incorporated into the
proposed rule. EPA has made minor
formatting and language changes in :
response to specific comments that •
improve the overall presentation.

E, General Provisions of Final Rule
(§141.201)

  Today's final rule replaces the
existing public notification regulation
with an entirely new subpart (40 CFR
Part 141, Subpart Q), which
incorporates the new provisions under
sections 1414(c)(l) and (c)(2) of the ;
SDWA, as amended in 1996. The final
rule streamlines the requirements to:
more  effectively meet the objectives of
the public notification process. Today's
final rule revises the existing public,
notification requirements:
  • To tailor the public notification
requirements to address the potential
risk from the violations, with particular
focus on the notice for violations posing
the greatest potential risk to public
health;
  • To simplify the requirements and
make them more self-implementing,1
allowing water systems to understand
and implement their public notification
obligation without further
interpretation;
  • To give greater latitude to States to
develop alternative programs to meet
their unique needs and to provide
greater flexibility to public water
systems to tailor distribution of the
notice to best reach persons served;
  • To better integrate the public
notification requirements for less
serious violations with the annual
Consumer Confidence Report (CCR) for
community water systems and with
other annual reporting mechanisms for
non-community water systems; and
  • To reduce the burden on water
systems of complying with the public
notification requirements.

1. Who Must Give Public Notice?

  Today's Rule: The final rule under
§ 141.201(a) requires owners and
operators of public water systems to
give notice to persons they serve for all
violations of national primary drinking
water regulations (NPDWRs), when they
are operating under a variance or
exemption (or violate conditions of the
variance or exemption), and for
waterborne emergencies and other
specified situations posing a potential
risk to public health. The violation
categories and other situations requiring
a public notice  are identified in the final
rule in Table 1 to § 141.201 and
Appendix A of Subpart Q.

-------
25992
Federal Register/Vol.  65,  No. 87/Thursday, May 4,  2000/Rules  and Regulations
  The final rule makes several changes
to the current public notice regulatory
language to improve the clarity and
understanding of when a public notice
is required. Appendix A provides a
complete reference guide (including
regulatory citations) to all violations and
situations requiring a public notice. Not
all violations under the EPA drinking
water regulations require a public
notice. For instance, public notices are
not required for violations of the
reporting regulations under § 141.31 and
other Part 141 sections. Public notices
are also not required for violations of
the Consumer Confidence Report
regulations under Subpart O of Part 141.
Appendix A will be updated as new  '
NPDWRs are promulgated or when
other situations arise where a public
notice is required. A public notice is
only required for the violations or other
situations listed in Appendix A.
  Several other changes were made to
Table 1 to § 141.201 in today's rule
modifying the violations and situations
requiring a public notice:
  • Speciafpublic notice provisions
already required in the current
regulations, but not included in the
current public notification regulations
under § 141.32, are added to the list of
violations and situations requiring a
public notice in Table 1 to § 141.201.
These special public notice provisions
include: The  notice requirements for
exceedance of the fluoride secondary
maximum contaminant level (SMCL)
under the existing § 143.5; the
requirement to give notice of the
availability of unregulated contaminant
monitoring results originally found
under § 141.35; and the public notice
required of non-community water
systems under the current § 141.11(d)
for exceedances of the MCL of 10 mg/
1  for nitrate (up to 20 mg/1) without
receiving a violation. These changes are
discussed in Section IVJ of the
preamble related to special public
notices.
  • The existing requirement to give
notice for waterborne disease outbreaks
under the Surface Water Treatment Rule
is broadened  and clarified to include a
requirement for a public notice for any
waterborne disease outbreak and other
waterborne emergencies. This change is
discussed in Section IV.F.l of the
preamble related to Tier 1 public
notices.
  • A new requirement is added that
explicitly incorporates additional public
notice requirements as determined by
the primacy agency for other violations
and situations not explicitly listed in
Appendix A of Subpart Q. This enables
the primacy agency to broaden the
applicability of the public notice
                        regulation to any situation it deems
                        important.
                          Comments Requested on Proposal:
                        EPA asked for comment on the proposal
                        to add explicit regulatory language
                        enabling the primacy agency to require
                        public notification for other situations it
                        believes have the potential for serious
                        health risk. EPA also asked for comment
                        on its proposal to present in tabular
                        form all the situations requiring a public
                        notice and its plans to update Appendix
                        A as new rules are published. In
                        general, commenters strongly supported
                        the addition of Appendix A to the
                        revised regulation and the flexibility
                        explicitly allowed the primacy agency
                        to require public notices beyond those
                        listed in Appendix A.
                          EPA Response to Comments: The final
                        rule is consistent with what was
                        proposed. Other than several minor
                        formatting and wording changes to
                        improve the presentation, the only
                        significant change to what was proposed
                        was to revise the proposed Table 1 to
                        § 141.20l(a) to conform to the changes
                        made in other sections of the rule. Table
                        1 to § 141.201(a) now includes other
                        situations requiring a Tier 1 notice
                        under § 141.202(a) that were added in
                        response to comments. These changes to
                        the Tier 1 requirements are discussed in
                        Sections IV.F.l and IVJ of the preamble.
                        2. What Type of Public Notice Is
                        Required for Each Situation?
                          Today's Rule: The final rule under
                        § 141.201(b) divides the public notice
                        requirements  into three tiers:
                          • Tier 1 Public Notice, for violations
                        and situations with significant potential
                        to have serious adverse  effects on
                        human health as a result of short-term
                        exposure;
                          • Tier 2 Public Notice, for other
                        violations and situations with potential
                        to have serious adverse  effects on
                        human health; and
                          • Tier 3 Public Notice, for all other
                        violations and situations requiring a
                        public notice not included in Tier 1 and
                        Tier 2.
                          The form, manner, and frequency of
                        the public notice is determined by the
                        tier to which the violation or situation
                        is assigned. Appendix A assigns each
                        violation and  situation to one of the
                        three tiers. The specific  requirements for
                        the public notice in each tier are defined
                        under §§ 141.202,141.203, and 141.204.
                          EPA is establishing the three-tier
                        approach to public notification to be
                        consistent with the intent of the new
                        public notification provisions in the
                        1996 SDWA amendments. Section
                        1414(c)(2)(A) directs the Administrator
                        to issue regulations that provide for
                        different frequencies of notice based on
the differences between intermittent and
persistent violations and the seriousness
of any potential adverse health effects.
Section 1414(c)(2)(C) sets very specific
requirements for violations with the
potential to have serious adverse effects
on human health from short-term
exposure. This includes a new
requirement that such notices be
distributed to persons served no later
than 24 hours after the occurrence of the
violation. Section 1414(c)(2)(D) requires
EPA to define in its regulations the
notification procedures for all violations
not included under subparagraph (C).
This section requires that such
procedures specify that the water
system provide written notice to each
person served in either: (1) The first bill
prepared, if any, after the violation; (2)
in an annual report issued no later than
one year after the violation; or (3) by
mail or direct delivery as soon as
practicable, but no later than one year
after the violation.
  Comments Requested on Proposal:
EPA requested comment on whether a
two-or three-tiered structure would be
more appropriate for the final EPA
regulation and what the advantages and
disadvantages of the preferred tier
structure would be. All but three of the
twenty commenters supported the three-
tier structure.
  EPA Response to Comments: EPA
made no changes in the final rule to
what was proposed under Section
141.201(b). In response to the three
commenters preferring a two-tier notice
structure, EPA believes that a three-tier
approach is more appropriate than a
two-tier approach because it provides
more effective tailoring of the public
notice requirements based on the
seriousness of any potential health
effects and is still relatively simple and
straightforward to implement.
Violations span a wide range of
potential health risks. A "middle-tier"
public notice requirement between the
24-hour notice and the annual notice is
appropriate for those lower-tier
violations and situations that may have
the potential for serious adverse effects
on human health, but are not significant
or urgent enough to require an
emergency notice. EPA believes a three-
tier system of public notification
effectively separates the form, manner,
content, and frequency of public notice
based on the seriousness of any
potential adverse health effects. The
three-tier system also meets the clear
objectives and purposes of public
notification, is simple and
straightforward to implement, and
meets the requirements of the statute.

-------
               Federal  Register/Vol. 65, No. 87/Thursday, May 4, 2000/Rules and Regulations
                                                                     25993
3. Who Must Be Notified?
  Today's Rule: The final rule under
§ 141.201(c) requires that each public
water system provide public notice to
persons served by the water system.
EPA believes that consumers have a
right to know in a timely manner
whenever violations occur that may
affect them, to allow them to make their
own choices about using drinking water,
based on their own perceived risk. This
is consistent with the statutory
requirement under the SDWA, which
requires that public notice be provided
to "the persons served by the system."
(SDWA, Section 1414(c)(l))- In response
to comments on the proposal, EPA in
the final rule has clarified the
requirement in three ways.
  First, EPA interprets the obligation of
the water system to reach persons
served to extend beyond bill-paying
customers and service connections to all
consumers of the system's drinking
water. This is defined in the final rule
to require that water systems provide
the notice in a form and manner
"reasonably calculated to reach persons
served." EPA recognizes that reaching
the persons served beyond the bill-
paying customers and service
connections may pose a challenge to
some water systems. Some consumers
(such as apartment dwellers, other
renters, university students, prison
inmates, and condominium residents)
may not be the persons paying the water
bill or be otherwise linked to the service
connection address. The form and
manner of the public notice necessary to
reach all the persons served depends on
the local situation. To illustrate how
EPA interprets the breadth of this
obligation, EPA has added examples in
the rule language under §§ 141.202(c),
141.203(c), and 141.204(c) outlining
what additional efforts it expects of
public water systems to reach persons
other than the bill-payers or the service
connection addresses.
  EPA has also added standard language
under § 141.205(d)(3) for water systems
to use in their public notices (where
applicable) to encourage those receiving
the notice to distribute it to other
persons who may drink the water.
Examples where the use of this standard
distribution language would apply
include notices that are sent to
apartment and condominium managers,
building managers or physical plant
superintendents, or others who receive
the notice who provide drinking water
to others.
  Second, language under
§ 141.201(c)(a)(l) has been added to
define the public notice obligation of
public water systems that sell or
otherwise provide drinking water to
other public water systems. These
"parent" systems are responsible for
providing public notice of the violation
or situation to the owner or operator of
the "consecutive" systems to whom
they sell water, but they are not required
under the rule to distribute the notice to
persons served by the consecutive    ,
system. Although different public notice
arrangements are sometimes made
between the parent and consecutive
system, the consecutive system is the
water system responsible under this rule
for delivering the notice to the persons'
it serves. Although the legal obligation.
is clear under the rule, EPA
recommends that each consecutive
•water system in its contract with the
parent system agree on the most
effective approach for distributing
public notices. EPA will give examples
of such agreements in the Public
Notification Handbook.
  Third, language under § 141.201(c)(2)
has been added to enable the primacy
agency, at its option, to make exceptions
to the system-wide notice requirement if
specific regulatory criteria are met. The
new language will allow a water system
to limit distribution of the notice to
those persons served by a portion of the
distribution system impacted by the
violation, where the water system is
able  to demonstrate that the affected
portion of the system is physically or
hydraulically isolated from all other
parts of the distribution system. This
replaces the more limited discretion
given to primacy agencies in the current
rule, which allows less than system-
wide notice for violation of EPA's
chemical standards only when the    ;
elevated contaminant levels are
contained in a separable portion of the
distribution system with no          ;
interconnections. Today's rule broadens
the allowable exceptions to a system-
wide notice by adding "hydraulically
isolated" to the exception criteria.
Although not open-ended, the amended
language recognizes situations other
than physical separation where there is
clear and certain evidence that persons
served by a portion of the distribution
system have no chance of being affected
by the  violation.
  To meet EPA's criterion that a portion
of the distribution system must be
physically isolated to be eligible for an
exception to the system-wide notice
requirement, a system must show the
primacy agency that the affected portion
is separated from other parts of the
distribution system with no
interconnections. Because of the
physical separation, the elevated
contaminant levels contained in only
that portion of the system would have
no bearing on the contaminant levels in
other parts of the system. In such a
situation, EPA believes a primacy
agency may permit an exception to
system-wide notice. These exceptions to
system-wide notice are already allowed
in the current rule for violations of the
chemical standards under
§§ 141.23(i)(4), 141.24(f)(l5)(iii), and
(h)(ll)(iii). Today's rule incorporates
this exception criteria into
§141.201(c)(2).
  To meet EPA's criterion that a portion
of the distribution system must be
hydraulically isolated to be eligible for
an exception to the system-wide notice
requirement, a system must show that
the water in the affected  portion is
separated  from the water in all other
parts of the distribution system because
the projected water flow patterns and
water pressure zones effectively isolate
the water to that portion of the system.
This hydraulic isolation can result from
the design of the distribution system
(e.g., pressure zones, backflow
prevention devices) or be created
through system operation (e.g., flow
control). An example associated with
the Total Coliform Rule is the presence
of E. coli downstream from a pipe break
that the system can demonstrate, to the
satisfaction of the primacy agency, led
to the entry of fecal contamination, and
that the water downstream from the
break does not flow into  any other part
of the distribution system. Another
example, related to a chemical standard
(e.g., nitrate, fluoride), is a situation
where contaminant levels exceeding the
MCL are shown to be from a single
source and found only in the
distribution main leading from that
source. The water system in this
situation may be eligible for an
exception if it could demonstrate, using
other monitoring information and
distribution flow modeling, that
exceedances above the MCL could only
be found in the single distribution main
because of water flow patterns and
pressure zones (the "hydraulics") under
all operational scenarios. For both of
these examples, the decision on whether
to permit an exception to the system-
wide notice requirement rests solely
with the primacy agency.
  Primacy agencies seeking authority to
grant exceptions to the system-wide
notice requirement must meet the
special primacy conditions under
§ 142.16(a)(2) in their approved primacy
program. Decisions by the primacy
agency to permit exceptions must be in
writing and otherwise documented
based on use of the regulatory criteria in
today's rule. EPA recognizes that there
are other situations where the water
system has evidence that not all the

-------
25994
Federal Register/Vol.  65, No. 87/Thursday, May 4, 2000/Rules and Regulations
persons served by the system are
affected equally by the violation. In
these situations, EPA expects the water
system to tailor the language in the
public notice its sends system-wide, to
communicate who is at most risk from
the violation and who is at minimal
risk. All such notices, unless the water
system is granted an exception by the
primacy agency, are required to be
distributed system-wide according to
the requirements in this part.
  Comments Requested on Proposal:
EPA asked for comments on its
interpretation of who must be notified
under the SDVVA and the proposed rule.
A substantial number of commenters
recommended that EPA allow
exceptions to the proposed ,(and current)
requirement that the notice  go to
persons served by the entire system,
particularly where it is. clear that only
a portion of the persons served are
affected by the violation. Other
commenters asked EPA to clarify how
far the water system must go to ensure
that its notice reaches all persons
served.
  EPA Response to Comments: The final
rule reaffirms the statutory language that
water systems provide the public notice
to persons served by the entire system.
In response to comments, however, the
final rule now includes language
enabling the primacy agency, at its
option, to make exceptions to the
system-wide notice requirement where
the violation is shown to be due to
exceedancos in a portion of the system
that is physically or hydraulically
isolated from the rest of the system. EPA
also added language in the final rule to
respond to requests that EPA clarify
public notice responsibilities for
persons selling water to other water
systems (i.e., "consecutive systems").
  Several commenters requested that
EPA change the distribution
requirement from "persons  served by
the system" to "persons affected," to
allow less than system-wide notice
where the available evidence indicates
that the violation affects only a portion
of the persons served by the system.
EPA disagrees with changing the
baseline requirement to distribute
notices of all violations system-wide,
because EPA strongly believes that
consumers have a right-to-know in a
timely manner when violations occur
that may affect them. In situations
where evidence indicates that not all
persons served are affected equally by
the violation, EPA expects the water
system to  tailor the language in the
public notice to communicate who is at
most risk and what actions they should
take, not to limit the notice  distribution
based on relative risk. EPA does agree,
                        however, that exceptions to the system-
                        wide notice distribution may be
                        warranted when the contaminant
                        exceedances are shown to be contained
                        exclusively in an isolated portion of the
                        distribution system. In such a situation,
                        only those persons served by that
                        portion of the system are affected.
                        Accordingly, EPA has added language
                        in the final rule allowing the primacy
                        agency to grant exceptions, at its option,
                        where the violation is shown to be due
                        to exceedances in a portion of the
                        system that is physically or
                        hydraulically isolated from the rest of
                        the system.
                          Several other commenters gave
                        examples of situations where they
                       .believed a system-wide notice is
                        unwarranted. EPA believes the language
                        added in the final rule effectively
                        addresses these comments by allowing
                        exceptions to the system-wide
                        requirement, at the primacy agencies
                        discretion, when the system can
                        demonstrate that specific engineering
                        and hydraulic criteria are met. EPA's
                        intent in adding the language is
                        explained earlier in this preamble
                        section. EPA's detailed response to
                        specific comments on this provision is
                        contained in the "Response to
                        Comments" document contained in the
                        docket for this rule.
                        F. Form, Manner, and Frequency of the
                        Tier 1 Public Notice: Violations and
                        Situations With Significant Potential to
                        Have  Serious Adverse Effects on Human
                        Health as a Result of Short-Term
                        Exposure (§141.202)

                        1. Tier 1 Violations and Situations
                          Today's Rule: The final rule under
                        § 141.202(a) requires a Tier 1 public
                        notice for specific violation categories
                        and other situations. The list of
                        violations requiring a Tier \ public
                        notice in today's rule includes all
                        violations in the current rule defined as
                        posing acute health effects. In addition,
                        a number of new violations and
                        situations have been added to those
                        already required under the current
                        regulation. Tier 1 notice requirements
                        under the final rule are required for:
                          • Violation of the MCL for total
                        coliform, when fecal coliform or E. coli
                        are present in the water distribution
                        system, or when the water system fails
                        to test for fecal coliforms or E. coli after
                        any repeat sample tests positive for
                        coliform. Failure to test for fecal
                        coliform or E. coli is not defined as an
                        acute  violation requiring a 72-hour
                        notice in the current rule.
                          • Violation of the MCL for nitrate,
                        nitrite, or total nitrate and nitrite, or
                        when a water system fails to take a
confirmation sample within 24 hours of
the system's receipt of the first sample
showing exceedance of the nitrate or
nitrite MCL. Violation of the total nitrate
and nitrite MCL and the failure to take
a required confirmation sample are not
defined as acute violations in the
current rule.
  • Exceedance of the nitrate MCL by
non-community water systems
(NCWSs), where permitted to exceed the
MCL by the primacy agency under the
criteria established under § 141.11(d).
The authority given by primacy agencies
under § 141.11 (d) to allow NCWS to
exceed the MCL level of 10 mg/1 (up to
20 mg/1) is unchanged by today's action.
The final public notification rule
incorporates the public notice
requirements for qualifying NCWSs into
a new special public notice under
§ 141.209. Qualifying NCWS must
follow the Tier 1 notice requirements.
This existing requirement is not
explicitly incorporated into the current
public notice rule.
  • Violation of the MRDL for chlorine
dioxide, where one or more samples
taken in the distribution system the day
following an exceedance of the MRDL at
the entrance of the distribution system
exceed 'the MRDL. A Tier 1 notice is
also required when the water system
does not take required samples in the
distribution system. These are new Tier
1 notice requirements incorporated from
the Stage 1 D/DBP rule published on
December 16, 1998 (63 FR 69390).
  • Violation of the turbidity MCL
under § 141.13(b) or a violation of the
SWTR and IESWTR treatment technique
requirements resulting from a single
exceedance of the maximum allowable
turbidity level, where the primacy
agency determines after consultation
initiated by the water system that a Tier
1 public notice is required. Violations
resulting from exceedance  of these
turbidity limits will routinely require a
Tier 2 notice except where the primacy
agency determines, after consultation,
that a Tier 1 notice is required for the
specific situation. The consultation
requirement under § 141.203(b)(3) is
triggered whenever these specific
turbidity violations occur. Consultation
must take place as soon as  practical but
no later than 24 hours after the violation
is known. If the water system is unable
to consult with the primacy agency
within the 24-hour period, the public
notice requirement is automatically
elevated to a Tier 1. Where the notice
requirement is elevated to a Tier 1, the
public water system must distribute the
notice as soon as practical but no later
than the subsequent 24-hour period
after the Tier 1 requirement is known
(.i.e., no later than 48 hours after the

-------
               Federal Register/Vol. 65, No. 87/Thursday, May  4,  2000/Rules  and Regulations
                                                                      25995
public water system first learns of the
violation). This provision is not
included in the current rule.
  • Occurrence of a waterborne disease
outbreak,  as defined in Section 141.2,
and other waterborne emergencies. This
is an expanded Tier 1 notice
requirement from that required under
the current rule, which is limited to
outbreaks related to violations of the
Surface Water Treatment Rule for
unfiltered systems. Today's final rule
adds an explicit reference to § 141.2 to
clarify the definition of waterborne
disease outbreaks requiring a Tier 1
public notice. The following definition
of a waterborne disease outbreak is in
§141.2:
  Waterborne disease outbreak means the
significant occurrence of acute infectious
illness, epidemiologically associated with the
ingestion of water from a public water system
which is deficient in treatment, as
determined by the appropriate local or state
agency.
Today's final rule also adds "other
waterborne emergencies" to the list of
situations requiring a public notice. The
definition of "waterborne emergency" is
illustrated in the final rule by example,
but EPA's intent is to have the Tier 1
public notice requirement apply to any
waterborne emergency (whether a
violation or not) with significant
potential to pose adverse health effects
from short-term exposure. The examples
in the final  rule to illustrate this
include, but are not limited to: Failure
or significant interruption  in key water
treatment processes, a natural disaster
that disrupts the water supply or
distribution system, or a chemical spill
or unexpected loading of possible
pathogens into the source water that
significantly increases the  potential for
• drinking  water contamination.
   • Other violations or situations with
 significant potential to have serious
 adverse health effects from short-term
 exposure, as determined by the primacy
 agency. This enables the primacy
 agency to elevate to Tier 1  other
 violations and situations not specifically
 identified as requiring a Tier 1 notice in
 Appendix A, when necessary to protect
 public health. The final rule allows the
 primacy agency to elevate  either
 violations or situations; the current rule
 applies only to "violations."
   EPA has  limited its list of violations
 and situations routinely requiring a  Tier
 1 notice to those with a significant
 potential for serious adverse health
 effects from short-term exposure. There
 are other serious violations which may
 indicate a potential for adverse health
 effects from short-term exposure in
 specific circumstances. But EPA did not
 designate these other violations as
automatically requiring a Tier 1 notice
because they represent exceedances of
indicator parameters which are not    <
strongly or consistently linked to the  ,
occurrence of the possible acute health1
effects. Most routine Total Coliform
Rule (TCR) MCL violations and Surface
Water Treatment Rule (SWTR) TT
violations would fall into this category.
These violations are included in the
Tier 2 list. EPA believes focusing the 24-
hour notice requirement in its rule on
the more limited set of violations will
increase the effectiveness of the Tier 1
notices and lead to greater health
protection. When a  specific violation or
situation clearly warrants a Tier 1 notice
based on the strength of the evidence,
EPA expects the primacy agency to use
its discretion to elevate the notice     ,
requirement to Tier 1. Use of this
discretion is authorized under the final
EPA rule to ensure that the public is
effectively informed of these violations
and situations not explicitly listed by
EPA as requiring a Tier 1 notice.
  EPA decided to include violations  <
resulting from exceedance of the
maximum allowable turbidity limit in
its Tier 1 list of violations under Table
1 to § 141.202, but Tier 1 would only
apply when the primacy agency directs
such a notice after consultation with the
public water system. This was because
EPA believes that violations resulting •
from an exceedance of the maximum
allowable turbidity limit may be an
indicator that there is significant
potential of adverse health effects from
short-term exposure. There is a strong
possibility of serious consequences to
public health if the public is not alerted
quickly when pathogens have passed
through to the drinking water. However,
EPA does not believe that all such
turbidity excursions should prompt a
Tier 1 notice, thus justifying a new
requirement that the system consult  :
with the primacy agency within 24
hours to determine whether the specific
situation warrants a Tier 1 notice.
Requiring immediate consultation with
the primacy agency will ensure that Tier
1 notices will be required when
supported by the evidence. Requiring '
consultation rather than an automatic
Tier 1 notice also avoids unnecessary
and costly notices.  When consultation
with the primacy agency does not occur
within 24 hours, the final rule
automatically requires that a Tier 1
notice be distributed.                ;
   EPA expects that some of the routine
violations related to turbidity
exceedances should require a Tier 2 (not
a Tier 1) notice because a turbidity
exceedance by itself, without other
supporting information, has not been
shown to date to be a predictable
indicator of a pathogen loading in the
finished water. A single exceedance of
the maximum allowable turbidity limit,
although a violation, may also prove to
be a false reading because of a testing
equipment malfunction. EPA is
continuing research on turbidity as an
indicator of pathogen loading as part of
the development of the Long Term
Enhanced Surface Water Treatment
Rule. Given the relatively small number
of single exceedance turbidity violations
(estimated at less than 200 per year), the
additional primacy agency workload for
consultation should not be overly
burdensome. The final rule provides the
best balance between getting a notice
out quickly to protect public health and
avoiding unnecessary alarm and
confusion through issuance of
unnecessary notices.
   Comments Requested on Proposal:
EPA requested comment on its proposed
list of violations and situations
requiring Tier 1 public notification. EPA
received a range of comments
recommending changes to the proposed .
list.
   First, many commenters specifically
focused on those proposed Tier 2
violations which may in some
circumstances pose a significant and
immediate risk from short-term
exposure, specifically violations of the
TCR and SWTR/IESWTR. In particular,
over half of these commenters
recommended that turbidity excursions
resulting in a violation be automatically
elevated to a Tier 1 notice because they
believed that turbidity violations were
more often than not a strong indicator
of harmful drinking water posing a
significant risk from short-term
exposure. The rest of those commenting
on this issue specifically supported
leaving all turbidity violations in Tier 2
(as was proposed) because they believed
that turbidity violations were more often
than not a false indicator of potential
health risk. Virtually all the commenters
agreed that turbidity was useful as an
indicator to trigger immediate follow-up
by the water system.
   Second, commenters asked EPA to be
more precise in defining which
violations or situations required a Tier
1 notice. In particular, commenters
asked EPA to better define when EPA
intended a Tier  1 notice to be triggered
for a waterborne disease outbreak, to
clarify when failure to test for fecal
coliform required a Tier 1 notice, and to
better specify which chlorine dioxide
violations required a Tier 1 notice.
   Third, several commenters requested
that EPA provide more explicit criteria
for when EPA intended for the primacy
agency to elevate other violations and

-------
 25996
Federal Register/Vol.  65,  No. 87/Thursday, May 4,  2000/Rules and Regulations
 situations not explicitly listed in the
 EPA rule to a Tier 1 notice.
   EPA Response to Comments: The final
 rule reflects several substantive changes
 to what EPA proposed, based on
 comments received on the proposal. In
 response to comments recommending
 that the proposal be changed to require
 that all TCR MCL violations and all
 SWTR TT violations require a Tier 1
 notice because of their potential risk
 from short-term exposure, EPA decided
 to stay with the Tier 2 requirement as
 proposed. EPA believes that an
 automatic Tier 1 notice requirement is
 not justified because routine TCR and
 SWTR violations (without supporting
 evidence) are not sufficiently strong or
 predictable indicators of significant
 potential of risk from short-term
 exposure. Routine TCR violations with
 no evidence of fecal contamination
 clearly do not provide sufficient
 evidence indicating significant potential
 of short-term health risk. Routine
 violations of the treatment technique
 requirements under the SWTR and
 IESWTR do provide an indication of
 problems with disinfection or filtration
 treatment, but they are not in
 themselves sufficient evidence
 indicating significant potential of short-
 term health risk.
   In response to the range of comments
 related to the appropriate tier level for
 turbidity violations, EPA agrees that
 certain exceedances of the turbidity
 limit deserve special attention in the
 final rule. Accordingly, EPA has added
 language in the final rule addressing
 this specific situation. For the reasons
 outlined earlier in this section, the final
 rule: Continues to classify all turbidity
 violations as Tier 2; adds a new
 requirement that PWSs consult with
 their primacy agency within 24 hours
 when exceedances of the maximum
 allowable turbidity limit occur; enables
 the primacy agency after the
 consultation to elevate specific'turbidity
 violations to Tier 1 when warranted;
 and requires an automatic Tier 1 notice
 when consultation does not take place
 within the 24-hour period. Since the
 significance of the risk to health of an
 exceedance of the turbidity limit is
 situational, EPA believes the final rule
 ensures that Tier 1 notices will go out
 quickly when necessary (based on the
 immediate consultation requirement)
while avoiding unnecessary notices
where the violation poses no risk to
health.
  In response to comments asking that
EPA clarify the violations and situations
requiring a Tier \ notice, EPA agrees
and has added language in Table 1 to
§ 141.202 of the final rule to more
precisely define when a Tier 1 notice is
                        required. In response to specific
                        comments, EPA also added several new
                        Tier 1 categories to Table 1 to ensure
                        that Table 1 accurately and completely
                        lists all the violations and situations
                        where a Tier 1 notice is required. In
                        addition, the final Table 1 list
                        incorporates two existing public notice
                        requirements not explicitly referenced
                        as Tier 1 requirements under the
                        proposal: The notice required under
                        § 141.11(d) for those NCWS allowed by
                        the primacy agency to exceed the nitrate
                        standard; and the notice required under
                        § 141.23(f)(2) when a system fails to take
                        a nitrate confirmation sample after the
                        initial sample showed an exceedance of
                        the MCL. These changes incorporated
                        existing requirements currently found in
                        other sections of the CFR. Finally,
                        changes were made in the final rule
                        language to broaden the definition of
                        waterborne disease outbreak by adding
                        other waterborne emergencies and
                        making minor changes in the language
                        related to failure to test for  fecal
                        coliform and chlorine dioxide violations
                        to clarify when the Tier 1 notice is
                        required.
                          In response to comments asking for
                        more explicit criteria to guide primacy
                        agencies on when .to elevate other
                        violations and situations to the Tier 1
                        list, EPA has decided not to specify
                        additional criteria in the final rule. EPA
                        believes that the primacy agency needs
                        wide latitude to access individual
                        situations based on the regulatory
                        definition of the Tier 1 notice under
                        § 141.201(b). EPA also encourages
                        public water systems to use the Tier 1
                        notice protocols whenever a violation or
                        situation has significant potential to
                        pose adverse health effects from short-
                        term exposure. Since time is of the
                        essence to protect public health in such
                        situations, public water systems should
                        act quickly to notify persons served,
                        without waiting for direction from the
                        primacy agency. EPA will shortly be
                        issuing the final Public Notification
                        Handbook and the Public Notification
                        Primacy Guidance, which will offer
                        examples of other situations where it
                        believes a Tier 1 notice may be
                        necessary.

                        2. Timing of the Tier 1 Public Notice
                        (and Consultation Requirement)
                          Today's Rule: The final rule under
                        § 141.202(b) requires that a Tier 1 public
                        notice be provided by the public water
                        system as soon as possible but no later
                       than 24 hours after the system learns of
                       the violation. The public water system
                       is also required to initiate consultation
                       with the primacy agency within that
                       same 24-hour period and comply with
                       whatever subsequent public notification
 requirements are established during that
 consultation.
   The timing and process established
 for the Tier 1 public notice in the final
 rule is significantly different from the
 current rule.
   •  First, the public water system is
 required to distribute the notice within
 24 hours (as required under Section
 1414(c)(2)(C)(i) of the SDWA), rather
 than within 72 hours required in the
 current rule. This is a statutory
 obligation for such violations under the
 1996 SDWA amendments. EPA
 interprets the statute under Section
 1414(c)(2)(C)(i) to require this initial
 public notice within the first 24 hours
 to apply regardless of when the
 consultation with the primacy agency
 takes place.
   •  Second, the final rule sets a new
 requirement that the water system
 consult with the primacy agency to
 determine subsequent public
 notification requirements. EPA
 interprets the statute under Section
 1414(c)(2)(C)(iii) and (C)(iv) to require
 that the public water system consult
 with the primacy agency within the first
 24 hours after the violation becomes
 known to the water system, to
 determine  subsequent public notice
 requirements (e.g., repeat notice
 frequencies, form and manner of
 subsequent notice, etc.). In contrast, the
 current rule sets the subsequent public
 notice requirements in the rule itself,
 rather than on a case-by-case basis as  a
 result of consultation with the primacy
 agency.
  The final rule identifies a number of
 elements which may be covered during
 the consultation, including the timing,
 form, manner, frequency, and content of
 subsequent notices, the duration of the
 notice when posted, and other actions
 reasonably calculated to ensure the
 notice is provided to persons served.
 Additional notices may be necessary to
 reach other persons served who may not
 have seen the initial notice and to
 reaffirm the seriousness of the public
 health risk from drinking the water. EPA
 also believes, but does not require in the
 final rule, that a supplemental notice to
 announce that the violation has been
 resolved and the risk from the drinking
 water has been abated is an effective
 way to bring closure to the emergency
 situation. The decision on when to
 require subsequent notices can best be
 handled by the primacy agency on a
 case-by-case basis in consultation with
the public water system.
  Comments Requested on Proposal:
EPA requested comment on the new
requirement for a 24-hour notice for Tier
 1 public notices and the new
consultation process within the same

-------
               Federal Register/Vol. 65, No.  87/Thursday, May 4,  2000/Rules and Regulations
                                                                    25997
24-hour period proposed in lieu of more
prescriptive EPA requirements. EPA
also asked for comment on its
interpretation of the statute under
Section 1414(c)(2)(C), which allows EPA
to require public water systems to
consult with the primacy agency. EPA
received many comments on the new
24-hour notice requirement, ranging
from support of the new requirement to
a request that the final rule give water
systems (or the primacy agency]
flexibility to allow more than 24 hours
when necessary to produce an effective
notice. Some commenters supported
maintaining the 72-hour requirement in
the current rule, others thought that 24
hours was too long a period. Many other
comments were received requesting
clarification of when the 24-hour clock
would start.
  EPA Response to Comments: In
response to comments received, EPA
made minor changes in rule language to
what was proposed, primarily to clarify
EPA's intention. In response to
comments that the 24-hour deadline be
increased or decreased, EPA has
decided to maintain the proposed
period because of the clear statutory
language and intent under the 1996
SDWA amendments. As described in
the preamble to the proposed rule, in
setting the deadline  for Tier 1
notification, EPA was limited by the
provisions of the Safe Drinking Water
Act (1414(c)(2)(C)(i)), which allow a
maximum of 24 hours for violations
with the potential to cause  serious
health effects as a result of short-term
exposure.
  In response to questions about when
EPA intended the 24-hour clock to
begin, EPA wants to reaffirm the
language in the proposal:"  *  * * as
soon as possible but no  later than 24
hours after the system learns of the
violation." EPA believes it  is  important
to hold the PWS responsible for learning
about a violation and the actions it is
required to take. Accounting in the rule
for every way in which a system could
learn of a violation would make the rule
overly complicated. EPA wishes to
restate that the trigger point for
notification is when the system learns
that the violation has occurred, not at
the point when a system expects that a
violation will occur (e.g., when the
presence of coliform is discovered and
the system is awaiting the results of a
confirmation sample). If systems use an
independent laboratory, this means that
the 24-hour clock starts when the
laboratory reports to the public water
system the analytical results that
indicate a violation has occurred.  To get
the notice out as soon as practical but
no later than 24 hours, EPA encourages
systems to "gear up" in advance for
preparing a notice. EPA recommends
that public water systems review the :
public notification requirements for
each violation type and develop a fill-
in-the-blank Tier 1 notice based on the
templates to be issued with the final
Public Notification Handbook.
  In response to comments on the
proposed new consultation requirement
under § 141.202(b)(2) and (b)(3), EPA
has decided to retain the language as •
proposed. Some commenters requested
that the consultation deadline be
changed from 24 hours to the end of the
next business day. Even though the
public water system is required to
distribute the notice to persons served
within 24 hours whether or not
consultation occurs, EPA believes that
any delay in getting the primacy agency
involved is unwarranted given  the
seriousness of the Tier 1 situation. Other
commenters asked for clarification of
the term "initiate consultation,"
particularly when the water system is
unable to contact the State within the
24-hour period. EPA intends the phrase
"initiate consultation" to require, at a
minimum, that the system take active
steps to contact the primacy agency.
EPA and most States now have voice
mail or an emergency hotline, so public
water systems should always be able to
leave a message indicating that an
attempt at initiating consultation was
made. EPA recognizes that  full  and
complete consultation may not be
possible if the primacy agency is
unavailable. EPA plans to work with
States during the primacy revision
process to augment the States' capability
to respond on a 24-hour basis to
potential Tier 1  notice situations.
  Finally, several commenters believed
that the proposed requirement under
§ 141.202(b)(3) to comply with  any
additional notice requirements  resulting
from the consultation was too vague and
open-ended. In response, EPA intends
that the primacy agency have broad-
based discretion to respond to the
specific situation. Authorizing the
primacy agency to respond
appropriately to the specific situation
will strengthen the public notice
response to situations posing significant
potential of short-term risk to health.

3. Form and Manner of the  Delivery of
the Tier 1 Notice
  Today's Rule: The final rule,  under
§ 141.202(c), allows the public water
system some flexibility in choosing the
specific method of delivery to distribute
the notice. This is significantly different
from the current rule, which requires
that an initial notice be provided in all
cases by electronic media and that
subsequent notices be delivered first by
newspaper and later on by mail. The
final rule does require water systems to
use, at a minimum, at least one of the
following delivery methods: appropriate
broadcast media, posting of the notice in
conspicuous locations, hand delivery, or
another minimum delivery method
specified in writing by the primacy
agency. It also establishes an
enforceable performance standard,
requiring the water system to use
delivery methods reasonably calculated
to reach all other persons not reached by
the minimum method within the 24-
hour period, including all residential,
transient, and non-transient users of the
water.
  Comments Requested on Proposal:
EPA requested comment on the revised
requirements defining the form and
manner of the Tier 1 notices. Many
commenters believed that the proposed
list of minimum methods was too
limiting, and that other methods should
be added to this minimum list to give
water systems greater choice. Other
commenters requested that the final rule
require water systems to use more than
one minimum method, since one
method in many cases would not reach
all persons served. Several commenters
felt that the use of a performance
standard ("take steps reasonably
calculated to reach all persons served"),
in lieu of additional listed methods to
reach others not covered by the
minimum method, gave water systems
too much flexibility.
  EPA Response to Comments: EPA
made one substantive change and made
other edits to the language in
§ 141.202(c), in response to the
comments received on the proposal.
Based on comments received, the final
rule added a fourth item to the list of
minimum forms of notice delivery,
which authorizes the primacy agency to
approve in writing the use of a
substitute delivery method not already
listed in EPA's rule. The proposed rule
did not give the primacy agency the
discretion to allow use of methods other
than those explicitly listed under
§ 141.202(c). EPA agrees with the
commenters that the proposed
minimum list of delivery methods
(broadcast media, posting, and hand
delivery) was too limiting and
potentially inappropriate to some Tier 1
situations.
  Commenters recommended adding a
wide variety of delivery methods to the
minimum list, including newspaper,
postal patron mailing, e-mail, or priority
mail. EPA believes the best response to
these comments is to allow primacy
agencies to substitute methods other
than those listed to fit the specific

-------
 25998
Federal Register/Vol. 65, No. 87/Thursday, May 4, 2000/Rules and Regulations
 situation, because no single list will fit
 all situations.
   Other commenters believed EPA
 should require that more than one
 minimum delivery method be used.
 EPA disagrees. Using one of the listed
 minimum methods, coupled with the
 requirement that the system take steps
 "reasonably calculated to reach all
 persons served" ensures that additional
 methods are employed where necessary.
 Although additional methods are not
 always required, EPA expects that most
 community water systems will need to
 use more than one method of delivery
 to effectively reach all persons served.
 In contrast, one method may be
 adequate for many very small
 community water systems or non-
 community systems to reach the persons
 they serve. In addition, the consultation
 with the primacy agency required for
 Tier 1 notices under § 141.202(b) is
 intended to be a backup where systems
 are unable or unwilling to comply fully
 with the requirement.
 G, Form, Manner, andFrequencyofthe
 TierS Public Notice: Other Violations
 With Potential To Have Serious Adverse
 Effects on Human Health (§ 141.203)
 I. Tier 2 Violations and Situations
   Today's Rule; The final rule under
 § 141.203(a) requires a Tier 2 public
 notice for the  following violation
 categories and other situations:
  • All violations of the MCL, MRDL,
 and treatment technique requirements,
 except where a Tier 1 notice is required
 under 141.202(a) or where the primacy
 agency determines a Tier 1 notice is
 required;
  • Violations of the monitoring and
 testing procedure requirements where
 the primacy agency determines that a
 Tier 2 public notice is required; and
  • Failure to comply with the terms
 and conditions of any existing variance
 or exemption in place.
  The above list is similar to the list in
 the comparable section of the current
 rule, with three exceptions:
  • First, the final rule sets the new
 public notice requirements for the Stage
 1 Disinfectant/Disinfection Byproducts
 (D/DBP) Rule and the Interim Enhanced
 Surface Water Treatment Rule (63 FR
 69389 and 69477, December 16,1998).
 (Today's rule also amends the Consumer
 Confidence Report (CCR) regulations to
 define the CCR requirements for these
 new rules. See Section V of the
 preamble for discussion of the CCR rule
 changes included in today's
rulemaking.)
  • Second, the final rule enables the
primacy agency,  at its option, to elevate
the public notice requirement for
                        specific monitoring or testing procedure
                        violations from a Tier 3 to a Tier 2
                        notice, taking into account the potential
                        health impacts and the persistence of
                        the violation. Unless the primacy
                        agency determines otherwise,
                        monitoring and testing procedure
                        violations will be reported in a Tier 3
                        notice.
                          • Third, although the final rule
                        continues to designate turbidity MCL
                        and TT violations as Tier 2 (as in the
                        current rule and as proposed), the final
                        rule has added a new requirement under
                        § 141.203(b)(3) that a public water
                        system consult with the primacy agency
                        within 24 hours after learning of the
                        violation to determine whether the
                        specific situation should be elevated to
                        a Tier 1 notice.
                          Table 1 to § 141.202 explicitly
                        authorizes the primacy agency, after
                        consultation, to elevate to Tier 1 those
                        violations related to exceedance of the
                        maximum allowable turbidity level.
                        When consultation does not take place
                        within the 24-hour period, a Tier 1
                        notice is automatically required. The
                        public water system must distribute the
                        Tier 1 notice by the end of the next 24-
                        hour period (or no later than 48 hours
                        after the system learns of the violation).
                        (See discussion in preamble under
                        Section IV.F.l related to Tier 1 notices
                        and under Section IV.G.2 related to the
                        turbidity consultation requirements.)
                          Comments Requested on Proposal:
                        EPA requested comment on the list of
                        violations included under Tier 2.
                        Comments were also requested on an
                        alternative option that would require a
                        Tier 2 notice, rather than a Tier 3 notice,
                        for all monitoring and testing procedure
                        violations, unless the primacy agency
                        explicitly allowed a Tier 3 notice. Many
                        comments received on this section
                        related to which of the violations
                        proposed as requiring a Tier 2 notice
                        should be elevated to Tier 1. The
                        response to these  comments is included
                        in Section IV.F.l of the preamble,
                        related to Tier 1 requirements. Other
                        than the Tier 1 issue, most of the
                        comments supported the proposed list
                        of violations as requiring a Tier 2 notice.
                        A few of the commenters did, however,
                        recommend that certain violations
                        proposed  as Tier 2 (e.g., Lead and
                        Copper Rule (LCR) treatment technique
                        violations) be moved to Tier 3.  Other
                        commenters asked EPA to clarify and
                        possibly add criteria for the situations in
                        which EPA expects primacy agencies to
                        elevate monitoring violations from a
                        Tier 3 notice to a Tier 2 notice.
                         EPA's Response to Comments:EPA
                        made no changes to the language in
                        § 141.203(a) from  what was proposed,
                       based on comments received on the
 proposal. In response to comments
 recommending that LCR violations be
 moved to Tier 3, EPA has decided to
 leave the rule as proposed. For public
 health and right-to-know reasons, EPA
 believes that treatment technique
 violations deserve the same level of
 notice as MCL violations. LCR TT
 violations are an indicator of potential
 increased levels of lead or copper in
 drinking water. This is a significant
 public health issue for a large segment
 of the population and, for this reason,
 EPA believes that a Tier 3 notice is not
 appropriate. In response to comments
 that EPA specify additional criteria on
 when primacy agencies should elevate
 Tier 3 notices to Tier 2, EPA has
 decided not to add to the performance
 criteria in the proposal ("*  * *  taking
 into account health effects and the
 persistence of the violation  * *  *").
 EPA intends that the primacy agency
 exercise broad discretion on when to
 elevate Tier 3 notices to Tier 2 as part
 of its approved primacy program. EPA
 plans to make recommendations on how
 to decide when to elevate violations to
 higher tiers in its guidance to primacy
 agencies on implementing the public
 notification rule.
 2. Timing of the Tier 2 Public Notice
  Today's Rule: The  final rule under
 § 141.203(b)(l) requires the public water
 system to provide a Tier 2 public notice
 to persons served as soon as practical,
 but no later than 30 days after the
 system learns of the violation. Posted
 notices are required by the final rule to
 remain in place for as long as the
 violation or situation persists, but in no
 case for less than seven days, even if the
 violation or situation is resolved. The
 final rule under § 141.203(b)(2) also
 requires the public water system to
 repeat the notice every three months for
 as long as the violation persists.  In
 contrast, the current rule requires a
 newspaper notice within 14 days, a
 notice mailed to all bill-payers within
 forty-five days, and a repeat notice
 mailed every three months thereafter
 until the violation is resolved.
  The final rule gives the primacy
 agency discretion, in appropriate
 circumstances, to extend the time
 period allowed for the Tier 2 notice
 from 30 days to up to three months for
 the initial notice and to allow repeat
 notice less frequently than every three
 months (but no less than once per year).
Permission must be granted  in writing.
Although the discretion given to the
primacy agency is fairly broad, the final
rule specifically disallows extensions of
the 30-day deadline for the initial public
notice for any unresolved violation. It
also specifically disallows primacy

-------
               Federal  Register/Vol. 65, No. 87/Thursday, May  4,  2000/Rules and Regulations
                                                                     25999
agencies from approving repeat notices
less frequently than every three months
for TCR, SWTR, and IESWTR TT
violations. The final rule also does not
allow primacy agencies to establish
regulations or policies that
automatically give "across-the-board"
extensions or reductions in the repeat
notice frequency for all the other
violations.
  EPA believes that giving the primacy
agency discretion in appropriate
circumstances to extend the initial
notice beyond 30 days or to allow repeat
notices less frequently than every three
months is clearly warranted. The
violation situations under Tier 2 are
very diverse, ranging from violations
that on some occasions may pose
potential adverse health effects from
short-term exposure (such as routine
SWTR TT violations), to unresolved
violations that pose chronic health
effects from long-term exposure (such as
benzene violations), and to resolved
violations no longer posing any
potential risk to health. One size does
not fit all! An extension beyond 30 days
may be appropriate for violations that
were quickly resolved. An extension to
three months may allow the water
system to include the initial notice in
the same mailing as the quarterly bill,
with no loss in effectiveness.
  As referred to earlier in Section IV.G.l
of the preamble, the final rule also
establishes a new provision under
§ 141.203(b)(3) requiring public water
systems to consult with the primacy
agency within 24 hours of learning of a
violation related to exceedance of the
maximum allowable turbidity limit.
Violation of the maximum allowable
turbidity limit, when combined with
other site-specific information, is an
indication that pathogens may have
passed through to the finished water.
EPA is requiring consultation under the
public notification rule so the primacy
agency can determine whether to
elevate the notice requirement to a Tier
1. Where consultation does not take
place as required in the 24-hour period,
a Tier 1 public notice requirement is
automatically triggered and the public
water system must distribute the notice
within the next 24-hour period. The
new consultation requirement overlaps
with current SWTR regulations
requiring public water systems to
inform the primacy agency by the close
of the next business day whenever
turbidity levels exceed 5 NTU. Today's
rule amends the current SWTR rule to
eliminate the overlapping requirement.
A discussion of this new provision,
including why EPA established this new
consultation requirement, is contained
in Section IV.F.l of the preamble.
  Comments Requested on Proposal:
EPA requested comment on the
proposed 30-day time period required
for the initial Tier 2 public notice, the
requirement for a repeat notice of
ongoing violations every three months,
and the discretion given to the  primacy
agency in specific circumstances to
extend the initial notice to three months
or the repeat notice frequency to one
year (either on a case-by-case basis or by
rule). A broad range of comments were
received on the proposed 30-day time
period for the initial Tier 2 notice,  •
ranging from leaving the current 14-day
requirement intact (or even requiring
the notice sooner), to support for the 30-
day proposed period, or to moving the
initial notice to 90 or 120 days  after the
violation. A significant minority of
commenters objected to allowing the
primacy agency any discretion to extend
the Tier 2 deadlines, believing  that such
discretion made a more complex rule
which could be used inappropriately to
give public water systems longer notice
periods than intended under the rule.
Other commenters supported giving the
primacy agency flexibility to extend the
Tier 2 deadlines, but asked for
clarification or offered alternatives to
the proposed extension process..
  EPA Response to Comments: After
considering all the comments,  EPA has
decided to retain the proposed 30-day
period for the initial notice and the 3-
month repeat notice frequency in the
final rule. But, in response to the large
number of commenters requesting
reconsideration or clarification of the
proposed deadline extension, the final
rule redefines how and when primacy
agencies would be allowed to extend the
initial notice beyond 30 days and under
what circumstances the primacy agency
would allow less frequent repeat notices
for unresolved violations. The  proposed
rule would have allowed the primacy
agency the discretion to deviate from
the regulatory time period for "specific
circumstances" as defined under the
individual approved primacy programs.
In § 141.203(b)(l) and (b)(2) of the final
rule, EPA replaced the proposed criteria
allowing extensions in "specific
circumstances" with a list of the
specific violation situations where the
discretion to extend or allow less
frequent repeat notice is prohibited.
  In response to comments
recommending that the Tier 2  deadline
be set at 14 days or less, EPA believes
the 30-day deadline will work most
effectively because of the need to
sharply differentiate the public health
circumstances for violations requiring a
Tier 2 notice from those requiring a Tier
 1 notice. Routine violations in Tier 2 are
not usually considered to pose a serious
 health risk from short-term exposure,
 thus immediate notification is not
 routinely needed to get people out of
 harm's way. The final rule recommends,
 however, that the notice be distributed
 as soon as practical, but sets the outer
 boundary at no longer than 30 days after
 the system learns of the violation. A
 violation that routinely requires a Tier
 2 notice but for whatever reason poses
 elevated risk from short-term exposure
 may be elevated to Tier 1 at the
 discretion of the primacy agency.
  EPA also disagrees with commenters
 recommending that the Tier 2 deadline
 be set at 90 or 120 days after the
 violation is known. EPA believes that a
 30-day baseline period is appropriate
 and achievable for most Tier 2
 violations and situations.  A 30-day
• period is long enough after the violation
 for the system to gather the information
 needed to develop an effective notice
 and soon enough to meet the clear
 preference of many stakeholders to be
 informed as soon as practical after the
 violation. EPA believes setting a 90- or
 120-day baseline period for the wide
 range of violations requiring a Tier 2
 notice would threaten the public health
 and right-to-know objectives
 underpinning the public notification
 requirement. EPA does believe that
 there are situations where it is
 appropriate to extend the time frame for
 notification of some of these violations
 beyond 30 days, but these situations are
 the exception to the norm. The final rule
 addresses the exceptions to the 30-day
 deadline by enabling the primacy
 agency, at its option, to extend the
 deadline for the initial notice up to
 three months in appropriate
 circumstances.
   In response to comments opposing
 any extension of the initial public notice
 period beyond 30 days, EPA believes
 that the violations and situations
 requiring a Tier 2 notice encompass a
 wide range of violations. One size does
 not fit all! Although EPA believes that
 the 30-day deadline is applicable for
 most Tier 2 situations, giving the
 primacy agency the discretion to extend
 the 30-day deadline gives the needed
 flexibility to respond to local situations.
 For example, an extension may be
 especially appropriate for violations that
 were quickly resolved and no longer
 pose a risk to public health, or where an
 extension may allow the water system to
 include the notice in the  same mailing
 as a  quarterly bill with no loss in
 effectiveness. At the same time, EPA has
 limited the primacy agency flexibility to
 grant extensions by prohibiting
 extensions for any unresolved violation.
 The final rule also does not allow
 primacy agencies to establish "across-

-------
 26000
Federal  Register/Vol. 65, No.  87/Thursday, May 4,  2000/Rules and Regulations
 the-board" extensions for all violations
 through their rules and regulations. EPA
 will work with the States as they
 develop their primacy revision packages
 to reach agreement on how this
 flexibility will be used in their approved
 primacy program.
 3. Form and Manner of the Delivery of
 the Tier 2 Notice
   Today's Rule: The final rule under
 § 141.203(c) requires public water
 systems issuing Tier 2 notices to'use one
 or more of the minimum methods
 specifically listed in the rale and to take
 other steps that are reasonably
 calculated to reach persons served in
 the required time period. The final rule
 significantly changes the requirements
 for delivery of the Tier 2 notice in the
 current rule. For example,  the current
 rule (for community water systems) first
 requires a newspaper notice, followed
 by a notice either mailed or directly
 delivered to customers.
  In contrast, the final rule requires that
 community water systems, at a
 minimum, mail or otherwise directly
 deliver the notice to each customer
 receiving a bill and to other service
 connections to which water is delivered.
 The requirement to deliver the notice to
 other service connections where water
 is delivered adds an obligation not
 explicit in the current rule. The final
 rule requires that non-community water
 systems, at a minimum, post the notice
 in conspicuous places or mail or
 directly deliver to each customer and
 service connection (if known). Beyond
 this regulatory minimum, all public
 water systems must take steps
 reasonably calculated to reach other
 persons served by the system who
 would not normally be reached by the
 minimum regulatory method. Examples
 where persons served may  not be
 reached by the minimum method
 include: community water systems that
 provide drinking water to persons who
 do not pay a water bill (e.g., students,
 renters, nursing home residents, prison
 inmates) and therefore would not
 routinely see a mailed notice; and non-
 community water systems with
 situations where persons who use the
 drinking water might not see the posted
 notice (e.g,, seasonal residents in a
 resort). The final rule also gives the
 primacy agency the option  to prescribe
 a different method of delivery for the
 water system, based on policies and
 procedures established as part of its
 approved primacy program.
  Cbmmente Requested on Proposal:
EPA requested comment on the revised
requirements for the method of delivery
of the Tier 2 public notice.  Comments
were also requested on an alternative
                        option to the proposal on the method of
                        delivery that would give the public
                        water system discretion to select from a
                        list the methods it would use, with no
                        required minimum, to meet the overall
                        performance standard. Many comments
                        were received on the proposed list of
                        minimum methods systems could
                        choose from. Some commenters
                        believed the minimum list should be
                        expanded to allow, for instance, use of
                        the newspaper as the minimum method,
                        as in the current rule. Other commenters
                        requested that the final rule require that
                        water systems use more than one
                        minimum method. Still other
                        commenters recommended that the final
                        rule add a requirement to consult with
                        the primacy agency before selecting a
                        method.
                         EPA Response to Comments: The final
                        rule maintains the obligation that was
                        proposed, requiring water systems to
                        take steps beyond the specified
                        minimum that are reasonably calculated
                        to reach persons served by the system,
                        whether they were bill-paying
                        customers, other service connections
                        where water is delivered, or other
                        persons served.  The final rule also
                        includes two new requirements that
                        were not in the proposal: delivery of
                        repeat notices must follow the same
                        requirements as the initial notice; and
                        permission given by the primacy agency
                        to deviate from the method of delivery
                        presented in the final rule must be in
                        writing.
                         In response to comments that the
                        proposed list of minimum delivery
                        methods be expanded, EPA believes no
                        additions to the proposed minimum list
                        are necessary, as the listed methods
                        provide a good baseline for most
                        systems in meeting the performance
                        standard to reach all persons served.
                        Beyond this regulatory minimum, water
                        systems are obligated to use any other
                        method reasonably calculated to reach
                        other persons served by the system if
                       they would not normally be reached by
                        solely relying on the minimum
                       regulatory method. Any other methods
                       used would serve to enhance this
                       minimum objective.
                         EPA disagrees that a newspaper
                       notice should be explicitly listed as one
                       of the minimum delivery methods, as it
                       is in the current rule. EPA believes that
                       a newspaper notice is beneficial as a
                       supplemental method to mail or hand
                       delivery, and it may be included in a
                       water system's strategy to use media
                       coverage to reach others not reached by
                       mail or hand delivery. But newspaper
                       notices are not as effective as mail or
                       hand delivery in directly reaching
                       persons  served. Newspaper notices are
                       typically placed in the legal notices
 section of the newspaper where they are
 not likely to be read. If newspapers are
 used as an additional method of
 delivery, EPA strongly recommends that
 systems purchase advertising space near
 the front of the newspaper, rather than
 placing a legal notice. EPA prefers that
 community water systems focus on
 methods that will get the notice in
 people's hands at their place of
 residence.
   In response to comments requesting
 that EPA not set a minimum delivery
 method at all in the final rule, relying
 instead solely on a narrative
 performance standard, EPA believes that
 a list of minimum methods establishes
 a necessary baseline level of
 performance that is clear and simple to
 understand and implement. EPA agrees
 with these commenters on the
 importance of flexibility in the  public
 notification process. However, EPA feels
 that the rule must specify basic
 minimum requirements in order to
 allow the rule to be self-implementing
 and enforceable. Therefore, while the
 rule provides flexibility it also requires
 that at least one listed minimum method
 be used to measure baseline
 performance, to be supplemented if the
 minimum method is not likely to reach
 all persons served. Systems have
 flexibility in determining what
 supplemental methods should be used.
 In addition, primacy agencies may
 allow,  as part of their approved primacy
 program, other minimum methods not
 listed as the minimum methods in
 EPA's rule.

 H. Form, Manner, and Frequency of the
 Tier 3 Public Notice: All Other
 Violations and Situations Requiring
 Public Notice (§ 141.204)

 I. Tier 3 Violations and Situations
   Today's Rule: The final rule under
 Table 1 to § 141.204(a) requires  a Tier 3
 public notice for: a monitoring or testing
 procedure violation, except where a Tier
 1 notice is already required for specific
 violations or where the primacy agency
 determines that the violation requires a
 Tier 2 or Tier 1 notice; operation under
 a variance granted under Section 1415
 or exemption granted under Section
 1416 of the SDWA; announcing the
 availability of unregulated contaminant
 monitoring results, as required under
 § 141.207; and exceedances of the
 secondary maximum contaminant level
 (SMCL) for fluoride, as required under
 § 141.208. The special public notice
required for announcing the availability
 of the unregulated contaminant
monitoring results and the special
notice for exceedances of the fluoride
SMCL, while not included in the

-------
               Federal  Register/Vol.  65, No. 87/Thursday, May 4, 20t)0/Rules and  Regulations
                                                                      26001
comparable section of the current rule,
are not new requirements and can be
found elsewhere in the current Code of
Federal Regulations. The final rule
simply consolidates all the Tier 3 notice
requirements in a single table for ease of
reference.
  Today's rule also makes two other
changes from the current rule. It
explicitly enables the primacy agency to
require a Tier 2 (rather then a Tier 3)
notice for specific monitoring or testing
procedure violations, taking into
account the potential health impacts
and persistence of the violation. It also
explicitly excludes from Tier 3 the
monitoring and testing procedure
violations where a Tier 1 notice is
already required under the rule. These
Tier 1-type monitoring and testing
procedure violations are listed in Table
1 to § 141.202 and discussed in Section
IV.F.l of the preamble.
  Comments Requested on Proposal:
EPA requested comment on the list of
violations proposed to require a Tier 3
notice. Specifically, comments were
requested on an alternative option that
would require a Tier 2 (rather than Tier
3) notice for monitoring and testing
procedure violations, with the option
given to the primacy agency to
downgrade such violations to a Tier 3
notice for minor violations. Most of the
comments received supported the lead
proposal: requiring a Tier 3 notice for
monitoring and testing procedure
violations, but giving the primacy
agency the option to elevate serious
violations to a Tier 2. A  significant
minority of commenters, however,
preferred the alternative option,
requiring Tier 2 notice for these types of
violations, unless the primacy agency
lowered the notice requirement for a
specific violation to Tier 3. A few
commenters requested that the final rule
require a Tier 2 notice for certain
monitoring and testing procedure
violations, rather than giving discretion
to the primacy agency to make these
decisions.
   EPA Response to Comments: EPA
made several changes in the regulatory
language proposed under § 141.204(a),
but the changes did not alter in any
significant way the list of violations and
situations requiring a Tier 3 notice. The
final rule deleted the item from the
proposed Table 1 to § 141,204(a) which
authorized the primacy  agency to add
other violations  and situations to the
Tier 3 list, as it was redundant with the
same authority already granted under
Table 1 to § 141.201(a). The final rule
also added to the Tier 3 list the special
notice requirements already required
under §§ 141.207 and 141.208. Table 1
to § 141.204 of the final rule now offers
a complete list of Tier 3 required notices
for ease of reference. The other changes
made to the proposed language were
similar clarifications to improve the
overall presentation.
  In response to the comments received
on the proposed alternative option to
require Tier 2 notices for monitoring
violations, EPA disagrees and has
decided to retain the lead proposal (i.e.,
requiring Tier 3 notice for monitoring
violations, with discretion given to the
primacy agency to elevate to Tier 2). .
EPA believes that Tier 3 notice is
appropriate because most monitoring
and testing procedure violations pose no
ongoing risk to public health, and
annual notice fulfills the public's right-
to-know expectations about these
violations. While some monitoring and
testing procedure violations may have
the potential for serious adverse health
effects, most do not. EPA believes that
elevating the major or more serious
monitoring and testing procedure
violations from Tier 3 to Tier 2 must be
done on a case-by-case basis, based on
the primacy agency's assessment of the
potential health impacts arising from
the lack of monitoring and the
persistence of the monitoring violation.
It would be impossible to identify in the
rule all instances where Tier 2 notice
would be more appropriate. As a result,
the rule gives primacy agencies the
authority to elevate any monitoring
violation to Tier 2, based on potential
health effects or persistence of the
violation.
   EPA also disagrees with commenters
who recommend that the rule should
distinguish major monitoring and
testing procedure violations from  other
monitoring and testing procedure
violations. EPA believes this would
make the rule unnecessarily complex.
Again, primacy agencies have discretion
under the rule to elevate monitoring and
testing procedure violations to Tier 2,if
they see a need to do so.

2. Timing of the Tier 3 Public Notice
   Today's Rule: The final rule under
§ 141.204(b)(l) requires that public
water systems provide a Tier 3 public
notice to persons served no later than
one year after the system learns of the
violation or other situations requiring a
Tier 3 public notice. The final rule also
requires the public water system to
repeat the notice annually for as long as
the violation or situation persists. In
contrast, the current rule requires an
initial notice to be mailed within three
months (with possible extension to one
year at the State's option for minor
monitoring violations) and a repeat
notice every three months thereafter
until the violation is resolved. EPA
believes that requiring a notice no more
frequently than annually for Tier 3-type
situations is appropriate, given the great
number of violations requiring such a
notice (i.e., 108,599 of the 128,459
violations reported to EPA in FY 1998)
and the fact that most monitoring and
testing procedure violations do not pose
a health risk. The final rule allows water
systems, at their option, to distribute the
Tier 3 public notice as soon as they
believe it is appropriate for their
specific situation.
  Comments Requested on  Proposal:
EPA requested comment on the
proposal to require Tier 3 notices no
later than 12 months after the violation
occurs. A substantial number of
commenters expressed concern over the
long time period (12 months) allowed to
complete the Tier 3 public notice
requirements for monitoring and testing
procedure violations. Some commenters
recommended that the 12-month period
be limited to minor monitoring
violations only (as in the current rule),
with the notice for the major monitoring
violations to be required much sooner.
A significant minority of commenters
believed that 12 months was too long
after the violation to be useful to
consumers and in some cases (transient
non-community water systems) would
be quite ineffective  since consumers
present at the time of the violation will
be long gone.
  EPA Response to  Comments: EPA
carried forward to the final rule the
proposed 12-month requirement for Tier
3 notices, making language changes to
§ 141.204(b) to conform to the changes
made under the comparable section for
Tier 2 requirements. In response to
comments  requesting that the final rule
add the phrase "as soon as  possible" to
the one-year Tier 3  notice deadline, EPA
has decided to retain the language as
proposed, without adding the phrase.
EPA believes that requiring notice "as
soon  as possible" is appropriate and
necessary for the more serious
violations in Tiers 1 and 2. But
violations and situations requiring a
Tier 3 notice by definition do not pose
any direct risk to public health. EPA has
chosen not to parallel this language for
Tier 3, so as not to hinder the
effectiveness of other more immediate
notices. Systems are of course free to
issue the notice in advance of the 12-
month deadline where they believe it is
appropriate.
  In response to comments that a 12-
month period is too long after the
violation to be useful and this deadline
should be limited to minor monitoring
violations only, EPA disagrees with
such a limitation. The routine violations
and situations in Tier 3 are by definition

-------
26002
Federal Register/Vol. 65, No. 87/Thursday, May 4, 2000/Rules and  Regulations
non-serious violations, and EPA
believes that Tier 3 requirements should
apply to all the routine monitoring and
testing procedure violations. Tier 3
notification is more a right-to-know
issue than a public health concern. EPA
acknowledges that some monitoring and
testing procedure violations have the
potential to mask potentially serious
situations. Rather than attempt to
address every case where this may
happen, it is more efficient to provide
primacy agencies the authority to
elevate monitoring and testing
procedure violations to Tier 2 or even
Tier 1 if they believe the need exists.
  A commenter's point that requiring
notice as soon as possible would
motivate systems to return to
compliance more quickly is well taken.
However, EPA believes that the vast
majority of systems with monitoring or
testing procedure violations return to
compliance well in advance of the
requirement for the public notice.
Elevating the notice requirements for
these violations to encourage systems to
return to compliance is not relevant. For
systems with continuing monitoring
violations, using the public notification
process as an incentive to comply with
the monitoring requirements should be
part of the primacy agency's overall
compliance strategy. Primacy agencies
are free under the final rule to elevate
the notice requirements from Tier 3 to
Tier 2 to meet this compliance objective.

3. Form and Manner of the Delivery of
the Tier 3 Notice
  Today's Rule: The notice distribution
requirements for Tier 3 notices are
patterned after the Tier 2 requirements
under § 141.203. The basic requirement
to take steps reasonably calculated to
reach both bill-paying customers and
the other persons served who do not
receive a bill applies for Tier 3 notices
as well. The method of delivery
requirements in the final rule for the
initial Tier 3 notices and any repeat
notices are the same as those prescribed
for the Tier 2 public notice.
  Comments Requested on Proposal:
EPA requested comment on the revised
requirements for the method of delivery
of the Tier 3 notices, Commenters
generally supported the proposed
method of delivery requirements.
Several commenters requested
clarification of EPA's intent related to
reporting multiple monitoring violations
in a single notice, since in some cases
a water system missing a single sample
may generate separate monitoring
violations for all regulated contaminants
under the single analytical technique.
For example, one analytical method is
used to monitor for the 21 regulated
                        VOCs; missing the one sample,
                        therefore, generates 21 monitoring
                        violations.
                          EPA Response to Comments: EPA
                        made minor changes to proposed
                        § 141.204(c), to conform to the changes
                        made in the comparable section of the
                        final rule for the form and manner of the
                        Tier 2 notice. See the discussion of
                        EPA's response to comments in Section
                        IV.G.3 of the preamble. In response to
                        the request that EPA clarify how
                        multiple monitoring violations should
                        be presented in a single Tier 3 notice,
                        EPA strongly supports efforts by
                        systems to use a single Tier 3  notice to
                        communicate multiple violations
                        whenever appropriate. To make EPA's
                        intent clearer, EPA changed the first of
                        the ten elements required in every
                        public notice to  explicitly reference the
                        possibility of multiple violations in a
                        single notice. Section 141.205(a)(l) now
                        reads (with the changes in italics):
                        "* * * description of the violation or
                        situation, including the contaminant(s)
                        of concern * * * " EPA will also
                        provide examples and a notice template
                        in the Public Notification Handbook to
                        illustrate how multiple monitoring
                        violations can be presented in a single
                        notice.
                        4. Option To Use an Annual Notice,
                        Including the CCR, To Deliver Tier 3
                        Notices
                          Today's Rule: The final rule under
                        § 141.204(b)(2) gives the water systems
                        the option of providing an annual notice
                        listing all Tier 3 violations occurring
                        during the previous year, as long as the
                        water system makes certain that the
                        annual notice is distributed no later
                        than one year after the earliest of the
                        included violations. For systems with
                        multiple monitoring violations, the
                        advantages of using an annual notice
                        instead of individual notices for every
                        violation are compelling, both in terms
                        of reduced cost and in terms of effective
                        communication  with the  consumers.
                        Further, § 141.204(d) allows community
                        water systems, if appropriate, to use the
                        annual Consumer Confidence Report
                        (CCR) as the vehicle for giving initial
                        public notice for violations occurring
                        during the previous twelve months.
                        However, the use of the CCR as a
                        vehicle for the annual public notice has
                        strict limitations: the CCR can only be
                        used if the CCR meets the timing,
                        content, and distribution requirements
                        required under the public notification
                        rule. The specific conditions for use of
                        the CCR as the annual Tier 3 public
                        notice are listed in § 141.204(d] of the
                        final rule.
                          Since the vast majority of the
                        violations require a Tier 3 public notice,
the burden on public water systems
with multiple Tier 3 violations would
be dramatically reduced through use of
an annual notice and, where possible,
the CCR. EPA recommends that public
water systems consider how the CCR
and public notification requirements
can be better coordinated to take
advantage of these efficiencies.
  Comments Requested on Proposal:
EPA requested comment on the option
to allow public water systems to provide
an annual notice of violations in lieu of
individual Tier 3 notices and on the use
of the CCR to meet the Tier 3 public
notification requirements. In general,
virtually all commenters supported the
option given to public water systems
with multiple Tier 3 violations to use an
annual public notice. But many
commenters had reservations about the
proposed option for using the CCR as
the vehicle for the annual public notice.
Most commenters believed that using
the CCR was a good idea in concept, but
they identified significant problems in
practice if the final rule required that
the CCR must first meet the Tier 3
public notification rule requirements.
The CCR and public notification rules
have different timing, delivery, and
content requirements that are difficult to
reconcile.  A significant minority of
commenters disagreed altogether with
giving systems the option to use the
CCR as the annual public notice because
they believed the purposes of the public
notice and the CCR are so different.
  EPA Response to Comments: EPA
retained in the final rule the proposed
language allowing water systems, at
their option, to issue an annual Tier 3
notice of violations occurring during the
year (including using the CCR where
appropriate). The  final rule made minor
changes to the proposed language in
§§ 141.204(a)(2) and 141.204(d) to better
define the limitations on their use and
to clarify EPA's intent, but the final rule
makes no significant changes to what
EPA proposed. EPA agrees with the
commenters who supported the use of
the CCR but expressed reservations
about how such an option would
actually work. EPA acknowledges that
there are significant limitations to using
the CCR as the annual Tier 3 public
notice. However, where the timing of
violations  allows it, EPA does
recommend coordinating the CCR and
the annual Tier 3 public notice.
Coordinating  the two related activities
would reduce redundancy and would be
less costly. An annual Tier 3 public
notice as part of the CCR would sharpen
the overall message and be more likely
to get consumers' attention. EPA will
provide in the final Public Notification
Handbook suggestions and examples on

-------
               Federal Register /Vol. 65, No.  87/Thursday,  May 4, 2000/Rules  and Regulations
                                                                    26003
how to coordinate the annual Tier 3
notices with the CCR.
  In response to comments that EPA
should change the public notice
requirements to better fit into the format
and content of the CCR, EPA believes
such changes would undermine the
intent of the public notice. EPA is also
limited by the specific timing, delivery,
and content requirements of the public
notification provisions in the SDWA, as
amended. Because EPA encourages
water systems to use the CCR where
possible, EPA investigated ways to
extend the deadline for Tier 3 notices to
18 months. EPA concluded such a
change could not be made in the rule
because the 12-month period is clearly
required by statute. This limits the use
of the CCR as the initial public notice
to only those violations occurring
within 12 months of the CCR
publication. Practically, this means that
for CCRs published on July 1 (as
required under the CCR rule), the CCR
could only be used as the initial public
notice for violations that occurred after
July 1 of the previous year.
  In response to the commenters who
objected to EPA allowing use of the CCR
at all for the initial public notice, EPA
continues to support initiatives by
public water systems to better
coordinate the CCR and the public
notices because the violation
information required for both is
complimentary, the objectives are
similar, and coordinating the two
similar requirements is more efficient
and effective.

/. Content of the Public Notice
(§141.205)

1. Standard Elements of the Public
Notice

  Today's Rule: The final rule specifies
a list of ten elements that must be
included in a public notice for water
systems with violations of National
Primary Drinking Water Regulations
(NPDWRs) and for most other situations
requiring a public notice. The rule also
specifies four elements that must be
included in notices for water systems
operating under a variance or
exemption. The final rule revises and
edits the existing list of standard
elements required in every public notice
and strengthens the criteria and
standards defining notice quality.
  • Ten elements are required under
§ 141.205(a) for public notices of
violations of NPDWRs, including
monitoring and testing procedure
violations, or other situations requiring
a public notice. The ten required
elements include:
  1. A description of the violation or
situation that occurred, including the
name of the contaminant(s) and level(s)
(where applicable);
  2. When the violation or situation
occurred;
  3. Any potential adverse health   ;
effects;
  4. The population at risk;
  5. Whether alternative water supplies
should be used;
  6. What actions consumers should
take;  "
  7. What the system is dtiing to correct
the violation or situation;
  8. When the water system expects to
return to compliance or otherwise  ,
resolve the situation;
  9. The name, business address, and
phone number of the water system
owner or operator; and
  10. A statement appended to the
notice (where applicable) to encourage
notice recipients to distribute the notice
to other consumers who might not have
seen the notice.
  This list of elements is significantly
changed from the content requirements
in the current rule, as discussed later .in
this section.
  • Four elements  are required under
§ 141.205(b) for public notices for water
systems operating under a variance or
exemption:
  1. An explanation for the reasons for
the variance or exemption;
  2. The date the primacy agency
granted the variance or exemption;
  3. A brief status report on compliance
with the variance or exemption
conditions; and
  4. A notice of any opportunity for
public input into the review of the
variance or exemption.
  The current rule does not set the
required content elements for public
notices for variances or exemptions.
  • Four performance standards are
listed under § 141.205(c)(l) defining the
adequacy of the notice. The notice:
  1. Must be displayed in a conspicuous
way when printed or posted;
  2. Must not contain overly technical
language or very small print;
  3. Must not be  formatted in a way that
defeats the purpose of the notice; and
  4. Must not contain language that
nullifies the purpose of the notice.
  The performance standards in today's
final rule modify slightly the
comparable elements in the current rule.
  Note that the information required;
under § 141.205(b)  for variances or  ,
exemptions is identical to that already
required to be included in the CCR.
Community water systems operating
under a variance or exemption are
encouraged to use their CCR to give the
Tier 3 public notification, as  long as the
timing and delivery requirements
required under the final public
notification regulation are met. Public
water systems that are not required to
issue a CCR may, at their option,
combine the variance and exemption
notice with other violations occurring
over the last year into a single annual
public notice. Using the CCR or other
annual notice is inappropriate for public
water systems violating the conditions
of a variance or exemption. Such
violations require a 30-day Tier '2 nbfic'e.
  Today's rule broadens the
applicability of the content
requirements under § 141.205(a) to
include not only notices required for
violations of the NPDWRs but also for
other situations requiring a public
notice. The current rule does not specify
content requirements for "other
situations" requiring a public notice.
The list  of "other situations" requiring
a public notice has been considerably
expanded in today's rule. The situations
requiring a public notice other than an
NPDWR violation or a variance or
exemption are listed in part IV of the
final Appendix A to Subpart Q. Six
"other situations" are listed:
  • Tier 1 Notice Requirement Under
§ 141.202(a) for Waterborne Disease
Outbreak;
  • Tier 1 Notice Requirement Under
§ 141.202(a) for Other Waterborne .
Emergency;
  • Tier 1 Notice Requirement Under
§ 141.202(a) for Other Situations as
Determined by Primacy Agency;
  • Special Notice Under § 141.207 to
Announce the Availability of
Unregulated Contaminant Monitoring
Data;
  • Special Notice Requirement Under
§ 141.208  for Exceedance of the Fluoride
Secondary Maximum Contaminant
Level (SMCL); and
  • Special Notice Requirement Under
§ 141.209  for Exceedance of Nitrate MCL
for Non-Community Water Systems,
When Allowed by Primacy Agency.
  Except where the content
requirements are otherwise specified in
the rule language, EPA intends the
content requirements under § 141.205(a)
to apply. The only exceptions in the
rule are: (1) The special notice for the
fluoride SMCL exceedance under
§ 141.208, where the entire text of the
notice consists of standard language
specified in § 141.208(c); and (2) the
special notice announcing the
availability of unregulated contaminant
monitoring results under § 141.207,
where the standard elements related to
a violation do not apply. Applying the
same content requirements under
§ 141.205(a) for" both violations arid
other situations makes sense because

-------
 26004
Federal Register/Vol. 65, No.  87/Thursday,  May 4,  2000/Rules and Regulations
 the questions posed by persons served
 by water systems for both are basically
 the same. In both cases, the persons
 served need to understand what is
 prompting the notice, what health risk
 the underlying violation or situation
 poses, what steps should be taken to
 minimize risk, and what the water
 system is doing to resolve the violation
 or situation.
   Under § 141.205(a) of today's rule,
 EPA is making small but significant
 changes from the list of notice elements
 currently required under § 141.32. Other
 than adding the "other situations" to the
 definition of each element, the changes
 from the current rule are as follows:
   • Element (a)(l), the description of
 the violation or situation, is modified to
 include both the name of the
 contaminant(s) and the contaminant
 level{s) (where applicable);
   • Element (a)(2), when the violation
 or situation occurred, and element
 (a)(8), when the system will return to
 compliance or resolve the situation, are
 added;
   • Element (a)(9), the water system
 contact information, is expanded to
 require the name and business address
 of the contact in addition to the phone
 number;
   • Element (a)(10), standard language
 encouraging persons receiving the
 notice to distribute it to other persons
 served (where  applicable), is added.
   Comments Requested on Proposal:
 Comments were requested on the  list of
 elements in the proposal and the four
 performance standards identified  for
 now the notices must be presented.
 Several commenters expressed concern
 that the ten elements required in notices
 for violations of NPDWRs do not fit into
 every notice situation. They felt that by
 requiring them in every notice, EPA's
 proposal may inadvertently hinder the
 public water system's ability to issue an
 effective notice. Other commenters
 raised specific concerns around the
 individual elements.
   EPA Response to Comments: EPA
 made several changes to the proposed
. language in the final rule, but the
 changes did not substantively change
 the  notice content requirements under
 §§ 141.205(a), (b~), and (c)(l). In response
 to comments that the proposed
 requirement under § 141.205(a) may be
 too  restrictive because it requires all ten
 elements to be  included for every  notice
 regardless of the situation, EPA wants to
 reaffirm its intent that the ten elements
 are meant to apply to every notice
 situation. Each of the ten elements must
 be addressed in some manner for each
 notice, regardless of the violation type
 (including monitoring and testing
 procedure violations) or situation, the
                        notice tier, and the method of delivery.
                        But EPA expects public water systems
                        to use this simple baseline requirement
                        to guide development of a complete and
                        effective notice, not to force systems to
                        add information that is inappropriate or
                        not useful in a given situation. To reflect
                        this intent, EPA has made key changes
                        to the rule language to clarify where
                        discretion in their use is allowed. In
                        response to comments, EPA also
                        amended the language to provide better
                        definition and clarity for  some of the
                        elements. If used as EPA intends, the
                        content requirements under
                        § 141.205(a), as amended in the  final
                        rule, will not hinder the development of
                        effective notices. To enhance EPA's
                        expectations regarding use of the ten
                        elements, EPA has developed public
                        notice templates and sample notices for
                        a variety of violations and situations.
                        These templates and sample notices will
                        be included in the Public Notification
                        Handbook to be issued shortly.

                        2. Multilingual Requirements for Public
                        Notices

                         Today's Rule: The final rule under
                        § 141.205(c)(2) is much more specific
                        than the current rule in defining the
                        multilingual requirements to be  met by
                        public water systems. The current rule
                        under § 141.32  (c)(2) sets  a general
                        performance standard, requiring simply
                        that the notice shall be multilingual
                        where appropriate. The final rule
                        requires public water systems serving a
                        large proportion of non-English
                        speaking consumers (as determined by
                        the primacy agency) to include in their
                        notices, in the appropriate languages,
                        information on the importance of the
                        notice or a telephone number or address
                        where persons served may contact the
                        water system to obtain a translated copy
                        of the notice or to request assistance in
                        the appropriate languages. The
                        multilingual requirement in the  final
                        rule is in two parts:
                         • § 141.205(c)(2)(i), which sets the
                        same basic multilingual requirements as
                        in the CCR rule; and
                         • § 141.205(c)(2)(ii), which requires
                        the water system to determine when and
                        how it must meet the multilingual
                        requirement when the primacy agency
                        has not made the determination.
                         EPA encourages water systems to go
                        beyond the minimum multilingual
                        requirements in this rule, particularly
                        for Tier 1  notice situations, and provide
                        a fully translated copy of  the notice on
                        request or offer telephone assistance in
                        the appropriate language. The Public
                        Notification Handbook will contain
                        sample language regarding the
                        importance of the notice in various
languages as well as complete Tier 1
public notice templates in Spanish.
  Comments Requested on Proposal:
Comments were requested on the more
specific multilingual requirements for
public water systems required under the
proposed rule. Most of the commenters
requested that the final rule provide
more clarity on when the multilingual
requirements would apply and how the
rule language ("PWS serving  a large
proportion of non-English speaking
consumers") would be interpreted by
the primacy agency.
  EPA Response to Comments: To
respond to comments requesting more
clarity on how and when the
multilingual requirements would apply,
EPA added a new paragraph in the final
rule (§ 141.205(c)(2)(ii)) amending the
proposed section to require water
systems to comply with the multilingual
requirements where appropriate, even
in those cases where the primacy agency
does not provide further direction. The
proposed rule language required water
systems serving a large proportion of
non-English speaking consumers, as
determined by the primacy agency, to
meet the multilingual requirements. The
final rule maintains the proposed
language under § 141.205(c)(2)(i), but it
now also includes a second paragraph
not in the CCR rule requiring  that water
systems, in the absence of further
primacy agency direction, comply with
the multilingual requirements where
appropriate. EPA intends the  second
paragraph (141.205(c)(2)(ii)) to provide a
baseline regulatory requirement
ensuring that public water systems, in
the absence of additional primacy
agency direction, would continue the
multilingual programs they are required
to have in place under the current rule.
  In response to comments that the final
rule establish criteria to guide the
primacy agencies and water systems on
who must comply with the multilingual
requirements, EPA has decided not to
establish such criteria in the final rule.
EPA agrees, however, that additional
guidance would be useful. EPA will
provide examples in the Public
Notification Handbook of the  range of
situations where it believes multilingual
notices are appropriate. EPA will work
with those States which are already
developing multilingual programs under
the CCR rule to guide implementation of
the similar requirements for the public
notification program.
  EPA agrees with a number of
commenters that compliance  with the
letter and spirit of the multilingual
requirements will be extremely difficult,
particularly for situations where many
different languages are spoken by large ,
numbers of consumers.  EPA also

-------
               Federal Register/Vol. 65, No. 87/Thursday, May 4, 2000/Rules and  Regulations
                                                                     26005
believes that compliance with the
multilingual requirements is very
important if notices are to effectively
reach all persons served, particularly for
Tier 1 situations. Although EPA is
unable to provide a translation service,
as some commenters recommended,
EPA will include in Appendix C of the
Public Notification Handbook a
translation in several languages of the
key phrases EPA believes are critical in
a public notice for communicating the
importance of the message. It will also
work actively with the States, utility
associations, and other assistance
providers to provide better support to
utilities where needed. EPA believes
that widespread compliance with the
multilingual requirements depends on
active and ongoing support from EPA,
the States, the Tribes, and utility
associations, and other assistance
providers.

3. Standard Health Effects Language

  Today's Rule: The final rule under
§ 141.205(d)(l) retains the requirement
that all public notices for MCL and
treatment technique violations use
mandatory health effects language to
explain the health risks posed by the
violation. The final rule replaces the
standard language in the current rule for
each NPDWR with a new Appendix B
to Subpart Q, which provides a table of
regulated contaminants with the
required language.  The final health
effects language is shorter, simpler, and
consistent with the language EPA uses
in similar outreach forums and
documents. Under  the rule published
today, the health effects language
required for both the final public
notification rule and the  Consumer
Confidence Report rule are identical.
  EPA believes it does not make sense
to require standard health effects
language different from the CCR
language unless there is a compelling
reason specific to the public notice
situation. Although EPA recognizes that
the CCR and public notice may be given
at different times and may be intended
to meet different objectives, EPA
believes that the benefit of using
identical core health effects language
outweighs the value of tailoring the
language to the unique objectives of the
public notice. EPA expects that public
water systems will  supplement the
mandatory health effects language or
otherwise put the language in the
context of the overall notice to meet the
unique purposes of the specific public
notice. Examples of public notices
applicable to different situations are
included in the final Public Notification
Handbook, which will be issued shortly.
  Comments Requested on Proposal:',
EPA requested comment on EPA's
proposal to use the CCR standard health
effects language to meet the public
notification requirement. In particular,
EPA solicited comment on specific
situations or violations where the CCR
language is believed to be inappropriate
or incomplete. Most commenters
supported keeping the CCR and public
notice health effects language the same.
A significant minority of commenters1
believed that the public notice language
should be separate from the CCR
language because of the different
purpose of public notification. Several
commenters provided alternative
language for specific violations that they
believe better expressed the health
concerns that needed to be
communicated in the public notice for
the violation. Other commenters
requested that EPA vary the required
health effects language based on the  ,
strength of evidence underlying the  ;
standard, particularly for carcinogens,
or include in" the language information
on the quality of the source waters.
  EPA Response to Comments: With
three exceptions, the health effects
language in today's final rule is
identical with the language that was
proposed:
  • The first exception is the language
in the final rule for violations of the
fluoride MCL. Today's rule revises the
public notification language proposed in
Appendix B to Subpart Q for fluoride.
Today's action also amends the CCR
rule to include this revised fluoride
language. The revised fluoride language
for violations of the MCL now includes
more specific information on the
cosmetic effects of exceedances above 2
mg/1, which is the fluoride secondary
maximum contaminant level (SMCL).;
EPA's response to comments received
concerning the fluoride standard
language is included in Section FV.J.S'of
the preamble.
  • The second exception is the
language EPA proposed in the public
notification rule for new and revised
standards under the Stage 1 D/DBP rule.
EPA is incorporating the language that
was proposed into the final rule with
only minor editorial changes to
maintain consistent language for
contaminants with the same health   '
effects. Today's action also amends the
existing CCR rule to insert the exact
language that is contained in the final
public notification rule.
  • The third exception is the language
in the final rule for fecal coliform/K. coli
MCL violations. The language in the
current CCR rule and the proposed rule
listed infants, young children, and
people with severely compromised
immune systems. EPA agrees with
several commenters that drinking water
with violations of the fecal coliform/  .
E.coli standard may pose a special
health risk to the elderly as well.
Accordingly, the EPA has amended the
proposed public notification rule and
revised the current CCR rule to add
"some of the elderly" to the standard
health effects language for fecal
coliform/.Z?.co7i.
  The final rule affirms the proposed
requirement to use standard health
effects language in Appendix B in
public notices  for violations of the MCL,
TT, and MRDL standards. In addition,
EPA reaffirmed its intent to keep the
standard health effects language
identical for the public notification and
CCR rules. Today's action publishes
identical language in the two rules for
all the existing regulated contaminants.
EPA will maintain this policy direction
when considering the public
notification and CCR rule requirements
for new and  revised standards, unless
there is a compelling reason specific to
the new rules for the language to be
different.
  In response to the comments received
offering alternative language to the
proposal for  specific violations, EPA
undertook a  systematic review of each
comment to  determine, first, if the
proposed public notification language
(and the underlying CCR rule language)
was erroneous or misleading and,
second, if there was a reason unique to
the public notification objective for the
language to be  different from the CCR.
EPA started with the presumption that
the CCR language and the public
notification language should be the
same unless  there were compelling
reasons to be different. Based on this
review, EPA has concluded that there
were no errors in the standard language
in the existing  CCR rule justifying a
change and no compelling reason for the
core health effects language in the final
public notification rule to be different
than what was already in place in the
CCR rule. Therefore, with the two
exceptions discussed earlier in this
section, the proposed language is
carried forward unchanged into the final
public notification and amended CCR
rules. EPA's  detailed response to the
commenters offering alternative
language is contained in the "Response
to Comments"  document in EPA's
docket for this rule.
  In response to several commenters
who recommended that the language be
greatly simplified for low-literacy
audiences, EPA believes such a change
is unwarranted. EPA notes that the
health effects language developed for
the CCR rule, and used in the proposed

-------
26006
Federal Register/Vol.  65,  No. 87/Thursday, May 4,  2000/Rules  and Regulations
public notification rule, was targeted to
low-literacy audiences. It is intended to
be simplified language, while still
communicating essential health
information.
  EPA does agree with several of the
commenters who recommended that
EPA periodically review the public
notification and health effects language
required in both the CCR and the public
notification rules. EPA intends to
conduct such a review periodically as
new and revised regulations are
developed and as new health effects
materials are developed based on
ongoing research and new information.
4. Standard Language for Monitoring
and Testing Procedure Violations
  Today's Rule: The final rule under
§ 141.205(d)(2) adds a new section
requiring that all public notices contain
the following standard language for
monitoring and testing procedure
violations;
  Wa are required to monitor your drinking
water for specific contaminants on a regular
basis. Results of regular monitoring are an
indicator of whether or not your drinking
water meets health standards. During
[compliance period], we ["did not monitor or
test" or "did not complete all monitoring or
testing"] for [contaminant(s)], and therefore
cannot be sure of the quality of your drinking
water during that time.
  The mandatory language is required
in all public notices for monitoring and
testing procedure violations. EPA
recognizes that many monitoring
violations are minor, and are quickly
resolved and pose little potential risk to
health. For most monitoring and testing
procedure violations, water systems
resume monitoring quickly after a single
violation. The standard language will be
most effective where the water system
supplements the standard language with
a clear explanation of the status of the
violation, its relative seriousness related
to public health risk, and how it-was
rectified.
  Comments Requested on Proposal:
EPA solicited comment on proposed
standard language, particularly the
phrase "* * * and we are unable to  tell
whether your health was at risk during
that time." EPA also requested comment
on an option to not require any specific
language in the public notice for all
monitoring violations. Although most
commenters supported the new
provision requiring  standard language to
be included in public notices for
monitoring violations, several
commenters offered edits or alternative
language. Other commenters
recommended that the standard
language be applied selectively or
tailored to take account of the wide
                        range of monitoring violation situations.
                        A significant minority of the
                        commenters disagreed altogether with
                        the need to require any standard
                        language for monitoring violations in
                        EPA's rule.
                          EPA Response to Comments: The final
                        rule retains the proposed new
                        requirement to use standard language in
                        the public notice for monitoring and
                        testing procedure violations. In response
                        to commenters supporting the standard
                        language but offering edits to better
                        meet EPA's objective, the standard
                        language under § 141.205(d)(2) in the
                        final rule has been significantly revised
                        from the language as proposed.
                          EPA revised the proposed language to
                        speak of the potential health effects of
                        failure to monitor in more general terms,
                        in response to  comments that more
                        specific health effects language does not
                        always apply to notices across the wide
                        range of monitoring and testing
                        procedure violations where  the language
                        must be used. EPA's intent is to clearly
                        and simply alert consumers that lack of
                        monitoring or failure to meet testing
                        requirements may in some cases
                        disguise a potential risk to health. It is
                        intended to prompt questions from
                        persons served about the significance of
                        a specific monitoring and testing
                        procedure violation. EPA expects water
                        systems to anticipate such questions
                        and to answer  them for the specific
                        situation in the full public notice.
                          In response to comments that EPA
                        delete the requirement to use standard
                        language in favor of a narrative
                        performance standard, EPA  considered
                        setting a performance standard rather
                        than requiring mandatory standard
                        language in the final rule. EPA opted to
                        retain standard language in the final
                        rule because the Agency believes that,
                        in the absence of a reported  MCL,
                        MRDL, or treatment technique violation,
                        consumers may presume that the
                        drinking water provided by  their water
                        system is safe.  This may sometimes not
                        be an appropriate presumption. The
                        standard language clearly and simply
                        alerts  consumers that lack of monitoring
                        in some cases may disguise a potential
                        risk to health. Although EPA believes
                        that the vast majority of monitoring
                        violations are quickly resolved and do
                        not disguise a potential risk  to health,
                        EPA intends the standard language to
                        prompt questions about the  significance
                        of the specific monitoring violation. In
                        routine circumstances, these questions
                        should be anticipated and answered in
                        the full public  notice. EPA's intent is
                        not to alarm consumers unnecessarily;
                        rather, the information should help
                        inform consumers about the significance
of the monitoring or testing procedure
violation.

5. Standard Language To Encourage
Customers Receiving the Public Notice
To Distribute the Notice to Other
Persons Served
   Today's Rule: The final rule under
§ 141.205(d)(3) adds a new section
requiring that public notices contain
standard language, where applicable,
encouraging the customers receiving the
public notice to distribute the notice to
other persons served by the public water
system (such as tenants, residents,
patients, etc.). The required standard
language is as follows:
  Please share this information with all the
other people who drink this water, especially
those who may not have received this notice
directly (for example, people in apartments,
nursing homes, schools, and businesses). You
can do this by posting this notice in a public
place or distributing copies by hand or mail.
  Mailed notices, in particular, are
routinely sent to only the bill-paying
customers, and therefore may not reach
some consumers at risk unless actions
are taken to notify them of the
violations. EPA believes that this
standard language is appropriate as a
safety net and is necessary to encourage
those receiving the public notice to take
steps to alert others of the violations and
potential risk from drinking water.
  Compliance with this requirement is
one of, but not the only, reasonably-
calculated steps a public water system
must take to reach other persons who
may not receive or see the notice. The
final rule gives the water system
discretion to add the  distribution
language when it determines such a
notice  is  needed to reach persons served
beyond those who receive the initial
notice  directly from the water system.
  Comments Requested on Proposal:
Comments were solicited on the
proposed standard language and any
alternative language that would meet
EPA's intent. Most commenters
supported the proposed requirement to
include standard distribution language
in public notices. A few commenters
believed  such standard language was
not always appropriate and
recommended that the final rule give
the water system or primacy agency
flexibility in determining when it was
applicable. A number of comments
offered edits to the proposed text to
better communicate the intended
message.
  EPA  Response to Comments: The final
rule retains the proposed requirement
that water systems include in their
notices the standard language contained
in § 141.205(d)(3) to encourage persons
receiving -the notice to distribute it to

-------
               Federal Register/Vol. 65, No.  87/Thursday,  May 4, 2000/Rules  and Regulations
                                                                     26007
others who are served by the water
system. EPA agreed with commenters,
however, that the standard language
should be required only where it is
applicable and useful to reach those
persons served by the system who may
not hear about the violations through
traditional means. Therefore, the final
rule gives the water system discretion to
determine when the standard language
is applicable. The proposed rule
required the standard language to be
used for all notices. The final rule also
includes minor edits to the proposed
standard language in response to
suggestions from commenters. EPA
believes the revised language is simpler
than what was proposed and would
apply to more situations and encourage
wider distribution. EPA disagrees with
several commenters who claimed that
such a new requirement is not
warranted. On the contrary, EPA
believes the standard language will
serve as a safety net, encouraging those
receiving the public notice to alert
others who would otherwise not hear of
the potential risk from their drinking
water due to the violation.

/. Other Public Notification
Requirements

1. Notice to New Billing Units or New
Customers (§ 141.206).
  Today's Rule: The final rule modifies
the current regulatory provision
requiring that public notices go to new
billing units. The current rule requires
that community water systems send a
copy of the most recent public notice to
all new billing units for ongoing MCL
and TT violations or violations of the
conditions of existing variances or
exemptions. The final rule broadens the
requirement to include any ongoing
violation or situation that required an
initial public notice (including ongoing
monitoring and testing procedure
violations) and adds a new provision
requiring non-community water systems
to continuously post the notice to
inform new customers of any ongoing
violations. EPA is revising the current
rule to better ensure that new customers
served by all public water systems are
made aware of any continuing
violations of drinking water standards.
The initial notice, if posted in a location
where new consumers pass by, will
meet this new requirement. However,
water systems that deliver the initial
notice to some but not all the existing
customers (or that otherwise have the
notice out of sight of new consumers)
have an additional responsibility under
this new provision. EPA believes this
new provision makes notices more
readily available to new consumers not
receiving the notice under the current
regulation.
  Comments Requested on Proposal:
EPA requested comment on the change
to the current rule extending the
requirement to cover ongoing
monitoring and testing procedure
violations and to require that the notice
be provided to new customers by both
community and non-community water
systems. Commenters raised a number
of concerns with the proposed language.
Several commenters believed that
compliance with the new requirement
would be difficult to track. Other
commenters felt that the notice to new
billing units of ongoing monitoring
violations was unnecessary and that the
more effective vehicle to communicate
these violations, for community water
systems at least, would be the CCR.
  EPA Response to Comments: EPA is
retaining the requirement for notice to
new billing units as proposed. The final
rule makes minor, clarifying changes
from the proposal, but the basic changes
to the current requirements in the
proposal have been retained in the final
rule. In response to comments tiiat the
new requirement extending the current
requirement to include notice to new
billing units for ongoing monitoring
violations was inappropriate and
difficult to track, EPA has decided to
leave the proposed requirement
unchanged. EPA believes that
notification to new customers of all
ongoing violations meets a clear right-
to-know objective. It is part of the
operator's obligation to reach the
persons they serve, regardless of when
they move into the distribution area. In
response to State commenters
anticipating significant difficulty in
tracking compliance, EPA expects that
when a system submits the certification
of compliance to the primacy  agency ,
under § 141.31(d) after each violation
event, it would also commit the PWS to
sending the notice to new billing units
until the violation is resolved. EPA does
not intend for systems to forward to
primacy agencies a copy of every public
notice sent to new customers. EPA will
include in the Public Notification
Handbook a discussion of how the
certification process will work.

2. Special Notice To Announce the
Availability of the Results of
Unregulated Contaminant Monitoring
(§141.207)
   Today's Rule: The final rule creates' a
new § 141.207 to add the timing and
other public notification details to the
notice requirement under the  recently
published Unregulated Contaminant
Monitoring Rule (UCMR). The UCMR'
carried over an existing provision in
§ 141.35, which required that the water
systems give notice to the public of the
availability of unregulated contaminant
monitoring results. The UCMR retains
the same reporting requirement as in the
former § 141.35 but eliminates the 3-
month deadline for giving the public
notice, referencing instead the timing
and other requirements contained under
§ 141.207 of today's rule. Today's rule
sets a 12-month deadline for this special
notice, to allow public water systems, at
their option, to report the availability of
all the results in a single annual notice,
reducing the number of required notices
from four to one. EPA encourages
community water systems to include the
annual notice required under this
section in their CCR, as long as the CCR
meets the public notification timing and
delivery requirements. The unregulated
contaminant monitoring results (where
detected) must already be included in
the CCR, so meeting both requirements
in the CCR will be both more efficient
for the regulated community and less
confusing to the public.
  Comments Requested on Proposal:
EPA requested comment on the
proposed approach to meeting the
requirements under Sections
1414(c)(2)(E) and 1445(a)(2)(E) of the
1996 SDWA. EPA also requested
comment on its proposal to shift the
timing of the notice from three months
to twelve months. Most commenters
supported the timing change. Several
commenters recommended that EPA
delete the requirement for this special
notice requirement altogether from the
public notification rule, as it is already
adequately covered by the CCR (for
community water systems at least).
  EPA Response to Comments: The final
rule retains the requirement, as
proposed, to provide notice of the
availability of unregulated contaminant
monitoring results within twelve
months of the monitoring. In response
to several commenters who
recommended that the notice
requirements be provided within three
months (as required in the former
§ 141.35), EPA has decided to retain the
proposed 12-month notice deadline.
EPA sees this  distribution of
information as a right-to-know issue,
with a different public notification
message than the higher-tier notices
because it is not related to a violation of
an existing standard. The change in the
timing of the public notice is to allow
water systems, at their option, to report
the availability of all the results just
once during the year. Nothing precludes
a water system from distributing notice
of the availability of results of
monitoring for unregulated
contaminants sooner.

-------
 26008
Federal  Register/Vol. 65, No.  87/Thursday, May  4,  2000/Rules and  Regulations
  In response to comments that the
special notice announcing the
availability of unregulated contaminant
monitoring results is overlapping and
redundant with a similar requirement in
the CCR rule, EPA is responding to a
statutory requirement under Section
1414(c)fl) and (c)(2)(E) of the 1996
SDVVA amendments and is carrying over
an existing requirement. EPA does
agree, however, that community water
systems should be allowed and
encouraged to include the notice of the
availability of the results in the CCR, if
the timing and delivery requirements
ara met. EPA believes close
coordination between the public
notification requirement and the CCR
reporting requirement for this
information will be both more efficient
for the regulated community and less
confusing to the public.
3. Special Notice for Exceedance of the
Fluoride Secondary Maximum
Contaminant Level (SMCL) (§ 141.208)
  Today's Rule: Today's action moves
the current special fluoride notice
requirements under § 143.5 into the new
Subpart Q public notification provision
at § 141.208. The special public notice
is to alert persons served who may not
otherwise be notified that the fluoride
levels in the drinking water may pose a
cosmetic dental risk to children under
nine years old. The final rule retains the
current requirement that community
water systems provide a special notice
to persons served when they exceed the
SMCL  of 2 mg/1 for fluoride but do not
exceed the MCL violation level of 4 mg/
1. As in the current rule, a copy of the
notice  must also be sent to all new
billing units and new customers at the
time service begins and to the State
public health officer. Community water
systems must use the mandatory notice
language in the rule. The final rule
requires that the notice be sent out as
soon as practical but no later than 12
months from the day the water system
learns of the exceedance. Repeat notices
must be sent out at least annually until
the exceedance is eliminated. At its
option, a primacy agency may require
an initial notice sooner than 12 months
or a repeat notice more frequently than
annually when warranted by the
specific situation.
  The final rule under § 141.208 of
Subpart Q makes four changes to the
current public notice requirements for
exceedance of the fluoride SMCL:
  • To require that the form and
manner of the special notice follow the
Tier 3 requirements in §§ 141.204(c) and
141.204(d) of the final rule, including
that the notice be sent to persons served
                        by the system (rather than just to the
                        billing units);
                          • To require that the notice be sent
                        out "as soon as practical but no later
                        than 12 months from the day the water
                        system learns of the exceedance" (rather
                        than "annually");
                          • To explicitly authorize the primacy
                        agency to require notice sooner and
                        repeat notices more frequently when
                        warranted by the specific situation; and
                          • To revise the mandatory language to
                        reflect recent studies of the incidence
                        and potential cosmetic effects of dental
                        fluorosis and to make other changes to
                        better communicate the intended
                        message.
                          Today's rule also requires that the
                        proposed standard health effects
                        language for violations of the fluoride
                        MCL in Appendix B of Subpart Q be
                        revised to include the effects of dental
                        fluorosis on children under nine years
                        of age. This was added in response to
                        comments that the proposed standard
                        language required for a violation of the
                        MCL did not adequately address the
                        risks to children from fluoride levels
                        above the SMCL.
                          EPA believes it is important to retain
                        and strengthen the existing fluoride
                        SMCL special notice requirement.
                        Consumers have a right to know about
                        the cosmetic effects from dental
                        fluorosis that may occur in children
                        resulting from exposure to drinking
                        water exceeding the fluoride SMCL. The
                        current notice requirement for
                        exceedance of the fluoride SMCL in
                        § 143.5 was put in place when the
                        fluoride national primary drinking
                        water regulation (NPDWR) was
                        published in April 2, 1986 (50 FR
                        11396). The 1986 fluoride NPDWR
                        replaced the more stringent MCL in
                        place as an interim standard since the
                        original SDWA in 1974. The interim
                        MCL of 2 mg/1 became the SMCL when
                        the final primary standard was
                        published on April 2,1986. Part of the
                        agreement for reducing the stringency of
                        the MCL from 2 mg/1 to 4 mg/1 was that
                        the public would continue to be  notified
                        of the potential for developing dental
                        fluorosis from exposure to their
                        drinking water when the levels
                        exceeded 2 mg/1.
                         NTNCWS are not currently required
                        to monitor for fluoride under EPA's
                        current regulations, and therefore the
                        EPA SMCL notice requirement does not
                        apply to them. However, EPA
                        recommends that NTNCWS, particularly
                        schools and day-care centers, provide
                        the special SMCL notice to persons they
                        serve when they learn they are
                        providing drinking water with fluoride
                        levels exceeding 2 mg/1.
  Comments Requested on Proposal:
EPA requested comment on whetitier
EPA should retain the special public
notice for exceedance of the fluoride
SMCL and, if retained, whether
retaining the requirement allowing the
public notice to be given as soon as
practical but no later than 12 months
after the exceedance is known is
sufficient. EPA also requested comment
on whether the revised mandatory
language better communicates the
purpose of the notice and the cosmetic
risks from drinking the water. Several
commenters supported continuation of
the special notice requirement but
believed tiiat EPA should require it to be
distributed as a Tier 2 (30-day) notice
rather than annually because of the risk
of dental fluorosis in children from
relatively short-term exposure. Other
commenters requested that EPA either
delete the requirement outright or
somehow merge it with the CCR
requirements.
  EPA Response to Comments: The final
rule carries forward the principal
elements of the proposed notice
requirement for exceedances of the
SMCL basically unchanged. In response
to comments, however, EPA did make
significant changes to the proposed
mandatory notice language to improve
the effectiveness of the notice. Also, in
response to comments, EPA has
explicitly authorized the primacy
agency to require the initial notice
sooner than 12 months and any repeat
notices more frequently than annually.
EPA also restored in the final rule the
language in § 143.5 of the current rule
(inadvertently left out of the proposal)
requiring that the notice be distributed
not only to persons served, but also to
new billing units and new customers
and to the State health officer.
  In addition, EPA agreed with
commenters that the proposed standard
language required for violations of the
fluoride MCL did not adequately cover
the cosmetic effects from the violation.
Accordingly, EPA has modified in
Appendix B of the final rule the
standard health effects language for
violations of the fluoride MCL, to
include more complete information on
the effects of dental fluorosis. The
existing fluoride language required in
the CCR rule was amended as well. This
change will ensure that parents of the
children most vulnerable to the
cosmetic effects of fluoride exceedances
(i.e., children nine years old and under)
receive information on both the
cosmetic and health effects from
fluoride MCL violations.
  In response to commenters
recommending that the mandatory
notice for exceedance of the fluoride

-------
               Federal Register/Vol. 65, No. 87/Thursday, May  4, 2000/Rules and Regulations
                                                                    26009
SMCL be deleted or somehow combined
with the CCR requirements, EPA has
decided to retain the current
requirement basically unchanged. EPA
sees no need to question the decision to
require this special fluoride notice made
when EPA first published the primary
fluoride standard in 1986. EPA
continues to believe that consumers
have a right to know about the cosmetic
effects from dental fluorosis that may
occur in children from exposure to
drinking water exceeding the fluoride
SMCL. EPA encourages community
water systems to use the CCR to meet
this special notice requirement, where
possible, as long as the CCR is able to
meet the timing and delivery
requirements under the public
notification regulation.
  In response to comments that the
notice be required sooner than 12
months after the exceedance because of
the likely effects from exposure as short
as three months, EPA has decided to
retain the timing of the notice as
proposed. EPA did, however, add
language in the final rule that explicitly
authorizes the primacy agency to
require a more frequent notice when
warranted by the specific situation. EPA
is aware of recent studies that indicate
possible risk of dental fluorosis from
short-term exposure to fluoride levels
above the SMCL, but it has not done a
sufficient review of the various studies
to consider changing the notice timing
from what was proposed. Review of the
fluoride standard falls within the
required six year review of the existing
national primary drinking water
standards under Section 1412(b)(9) of
the SDWA, which is not due to be
completed until August 2002. Since
some recent studies do indicate a
possible risk of dental fluorosis from
short-term exposure in certain
circumstances, EPA believes  it is
prudent for a water system with
continuous levels of fluoride above the
SMCL to work with the primacy agency
to determine when and how often the
notice should be given, based on the
severity and persistence of the fluoride
exceedance in the specific situation.

4. Special Notice for Nitrate
Exceedances Above the MCL by Non-
Community Water Systems (NCWS),
Where Granted Permission by Primacy
Agency Under § 141.11 (d) (§ 141.209)
   Today's Rule: The final rule
incorporates into Subpart Q the current
public notification requirement under
§ 141.11(d) for non-community water
systems (NCWS) that have been granted
permission by the primacy agency to
continue to exceed the nitrate MCL of
10 mg/1 (although they must not exceed
20 mg/1). The current rule under
§ 141.11(d) sets criteria that primacy:
agencies must follow in considering
whether to allow NCWS to exceed the
nitrate MCL without incurring a
violation. The criteria under § 141.11(d)
require that the water system: (1)
Demonstrate that the drinking water
will not be available to children under
6 months of age; (2) provide continuous
posting of the fact that nitrate levels are
above 10 mg/1 and identify the potential
health effects of exposure; (3) notify ,
local and State health authorities
annually of nitrate levels that exceed 10
mg/1; and (4) ensure that no adverse
health effects shall result. The public
notice provision under § 141.11(d)(2) is
revised today to reference § 141.209 of
Subpart Q, which requires that NCWS
granted permission to exceed the MCL
follow the Tier 1 notice requirements
(including the deadline, delivery and
content) in much the same way as  i
required for violations of the nitrate '
MCL. EPA believes incorporating the
public notice requirement under
§ 141.11(d) into the more specific Tier 1
standard public notification protocol
will allow NCWS to more systematically
meet their public notice obligations
when allowed to exceed the MCL.
  With today's final rule, EPA is
incorporating into Subpart Q all the
public notification requirements
currently in other parts of CFR Part 141,
including the requirement in
§ 141.11(d). See Section IV.L of this
preamble for a summary of these
changes. This action does not
substantively change the existing public
notification requirement and therefore
requires no prior notice and opportunity
to comment.

5. Conditions Under Which the Primacy
Agency May Give Notice on Behalf of
Public Water System (§ 141.210)

   Today's Rule: The final rule retains
the provision in the current rule    .
specifying under what conditions th0
primacy agency may give notice on '
behalf of a public water system. Under
this provision, the primacy agency may
give a public notice for the public water
system if all public notification
requirements are met. The responsibility
to comply, however, would always ,
remain with the public water system.
   Comments Requested on Proposal:
EPA requested comment on the
proposal to retain this provision.
Virtually all the comments received ;on
this provision supported the proposal.
   EPA Response to Comments: The final
rule is unchanged from what was
proposed.
K. Reporting to the Primacy Agency and
Retention of Records

1. Public Water System Reporting to the
Primacy Agency (§ 141.3l(d))
  Today's Rule: The final rule amends
the existing reporting requirement
under § 141.31(d) by requiring public
water systems to submit a certification
to the primacy agency that all public
notification requirements have been
met. Under the current § 141.31(d),
public water systems  are required to
submit copies of all public notices to the
primacy agency within 10 days of
completing each public notice. EPA
believes that including a simple
certification of compliance from the
public water system with the copies of
the notices will: Encourage voluntary
compliance; save primacy agency
resources; and allow better targeting of
noncompliers. EPA also believes that
maintaining the existing 10-day
reporting deadline allows the primacy
agency to quickly understand how the
system met its public notification
obligation and to pursue whatever
follow-up is necessary to ensure the
public is effectively informed of the
violation. The opportunity for
immediate feedback to the water system
and quick resolution will strengthen the
public notification program.
  Comments Received on Proposal: EPA
requested comment on the timing and
content of the revised reporting
requirement, particularly the new
certification requirement. A majority of
commenters either requested
clarification on what EPA intended
under the new certification requirement
or recommended that EPA delete the
new certification requirement from the
final rule altogether. Several
commenters also objected to the 10-day
reporting deadline, some wanting a 30-
or 60-day period and others
recommending that it be required
immediately after the notice is given.
  EPA Response to Comments: The final
rule retains the proposed requirement
that public water systems send a
certification of compliance, with copies
of the public notices, to the primacy
agency within 10 days after the public
notification requirements are completed
for the initial notice and for each repeat
notice cycle. EPA made minor changes
to the proposed language to respond to
requests that EPA clarify what the scope
of the new certification requirement is
and when the certification must be
submitted. In response to comments
questioning the need for this new
requirement, EPA believes that a simple
certification sent with copies of the
notice will facilitate compliance
monitoring and follow-up by the

-------
26010
Federal Register/Vol. 65, No. 87/Thursday, May  4,  2000/Rules  and  Regulations
primacy agency. It may also encourage
voluntary compliance. In response to
comments that EPA extend the
proposed ten-day deadline to 30 or 60
days, EPA believes it is important for
primacy agencies to receive  the notices
(and assess their adequacy) as soon as
possible after the public water system
sends the notice to its customers. The
primacy agency's quick follow-up to an
inadequate public notice response to
violations will ensure public health is
protected. In response to a commenter's
suggestion of a certification  "box," EPA
agrees that a properly worded box that
indicates the system complied with all
of the PN requirements would meet the
certification requirement. A sample
certification statement for PWSs to use
will be included in the final Public
Notification Handbook.
2. Retention of Records by Public Water
Systems (§ 141.33)
  Today's Rule: The final rule requires
that public water systems retain public
notification records for three years.
Today's action also amends  the
Consumer Confidence Report (CCR)
regulation to change the public water
system record retention requirement
from five years to three years to be
consistent with the public notification
requirement. The current public
notification regulation has no provision
                        for retention of public notification
                        records. A record retention requirement
                        for public notices conforms with the
                        requirements already in place for other
                        EPA regulatory requirements (e.g.,
                        sampling results, variances and
                        exemptions). The record retention
                        period of no more than three years is
                        consistent with the limits set in the
                        Office of Management and Budget
                        (OMB) regulations at 5 CFR 1320.5,
                        which implement the Paperwork
                        Reduction Act.
                          Comments Requested on Proposal:
                        EPA requested comment on the
                        reporting and record keeping proposal,
                        including an alternative to the proposal
                        to set the  retention period for records
                        under the public notification regulations
                        to five years. EPA also requested
                        comment on whether the record
                        retention  periods required under the
                        related CCR regulation should be
                        adjusted to three years, if necessary, to
                        be consistent with the final public
                        notification retention requirement and
                        Paperwork Reduction Act regulations.
                        Commenters were split on whether a
                        five- or three-year record retention
                        period should be required, but virtually
                        all the comments supported requiring
                        the same period under the CCR rule and
                        public notification rule.
                          EPA Response to Comments: The final
                        rule setting a three-year record retention
                 period for public notice records is
                 unchanged from the proposal. In
                 response to comments on the need to
                 keep the required record retention
                 period consistent with the CCR rule,
                 EPA is also amending the CCR rule
                 today to match the three-year period
                 proposed for the public notification
                 rule. EPA decided to require a three-
                 year (rather than a five-year) record
                 retention period to be consistent with
                 the baseline requirement under OMB's
                 paperwork reduction act guidelines. No
                 comments were received that gave
                 compelling reasons to deviate from this
                 baseline OMB requirement.

                 L. Other Changes to the Current Code of
                 Federal Regulations (CFR) To Be
                 Consistent With the Final Public
                 Notification Regulations

                   Table C is a listing of the changes
                 made in today's rule to various
                 provisions in 40 CFR Part 141 to change
                 the public notification references to the
                 new Subpart Q and to otherwise modify
                 the language to be consistent with the
                 final public notification regulations. The
                 amendments do not substantively alter
                 the existing requirements in these
                 provisions and therefore require no
                 prior notice and opportunity for
                 comment.
 TABLE C.—SUMMARY OF OTHER CHANGES TO CFR TO BE CONSISTENT WITH FINAL PUBLIC NOTIFICATION RULE (PART
                                                  141, SUBPART Q)
       CFR Section
                                        Subject
                                               Subpart Q Reference
                                                (where applicable)
                                  Change
§ 141.6(0), §141.6{g) Effec-
  tive dates,
§141.11(d) Nitrate levels in
  non-community systems.
§141,21(g)(1) Total coliform
  MCL.
          "The  regulations  set  forth   in   . .  .
            §141.32(b)(3) and §141.32(d) shall take
            effect   immediately   upon   promulga-
            tion. .  .  The regulations contained in
            §141.32(e)(16),  (25-27), and (46) . .  .
            are effective January 1,1993".
          "At the discretion of the State, nitrate levels
            not to exceed 20 mg/l may be allowed in
            a  non-community water system  if the
            supplier of water demonstrates. .  . that
            (1) Such water  will not  be available to
            children under 6 months of age; and (2)
            There will be continuous posting of the
            fact that nitrate levels  exceed  10 mg/l
            and the potential health effects of expo-
            sure; and local  and State public health
            authorities will be notified annually of ni-
            trate levels. . .  and  (4)  No  adverse
            health effects shall result.".
          "A public water system which has exceed-
            ed the  MCL for total coliform in §141.63
            must report the violation to the State no
            later than the end of the next business
            day after it learns of the violation, and
            notify the  public  in  accordance  with
            §141.32".
§141.201
§141.209
Delete all reference to §141.32. Effective
  dates for new Subpart Q are contained
  in §141.201 introductory paragraph.
Change §141.11(d)(2) to require that sys-
  tems  meet  PN  requirements  under
  §141.209.
Add new special notice (§141.209), require
  Tier 1  notification and the ten elements
  required for violations
§141.203 (Tier 2)
  and §141.204 (Tier
  3)-
Change reference to "§141.32" to "subpart
  Q"

-------
                Federal  Register/Vol. 65, No.  87/Thursday, May 4, 2000/Rules and  Regulations
                                                                                          26011
 TABLE C.—SUMMARY OF OTHER CHANGES TO CFR TO BE CONSISTENT WITH FINAL PUBLIC NOTIFICATION RULE (PART
                                               141, SUBPART Q)—Continued
       CFR Section
               Subject
Subpart Q Reference
 (where applicable)
                                                                                                        Change
§141.21(g)(2) Coliform moni-
  toring.
§141.22(b) OTurbidity MCL ..
§141.23(f)(2) Confirmation
  sample for nitrate and ni-
  trate.
 §141.23(l)(4),
   § 141 .24(h)(11)(iii) Public
   notice to the area affected
   for inorganics, VOCs, and
   SOCs.

 § 141 .23(n) Inorganics MCL
 §141.23(o) Nitrate MCL 	
 §141.26(a)(4) Gross alpha
   or total radium MCL.
 §141.26(b)(5) Man-made ra-
   diation MCL.
 §141.30(d) TTHM MCL	
 § 141.63(b) Total coliform
   MCL (fecal positive repeat
   sample).
A public water system which has failed to
 comply  with a coliform monitoring  re-
 quirement, including the sanitary survey
 requirement, must report the monitoring
 violation  to  the  State  within ten  days
 after the system discovers the violation,
 and notify the  public in accordance with
 §141.32".
'If the monthly average  of the daily sam-
 ples exceeds  the maximum allowable
 limit or if the average of 2 samples taken
 on consecutive days exceeds 5 TU . .  .
 report to the state and notify the public
 as directed in §141.31  and §141.32".
'Where nitrate or nitrite sampling results in-
 dicate  an exceedance  of the maximum
 contaminant level, the system shall take
 a   confirmation   sample   within  24
 hours. .  .  Systems unable  to  comply
 with the 24-hour sampling requirement
 must  immediately   notify  consumers
 served ... in accordance with §141.32
'If a public water system has a distribution
  system separable from other parts of the
  distribution system with no interconnec-
  tions, the State may allow the system to
  give public notice to only the area served
  by that portion of the system which is out
  of compliance".
'When the  average of four  analyses .
  exceeds the maximum contaminant level,
  the  supplier of  water shall  notify  the
  State pursuant to §141.31 and  give no-
  tice to the public pursuant to § 141.32".
'.  . .When a level exceeding the maximum
  contaminant level for  nitrate is  found, a
  second analysis shall be  initiated within
  24 hours, and if the mean of the  two
  analyses exceeds the  maximum contami-
  nant level, the supplier of  water shall re-
  port his findings to the State pursuant to
  §141.31  and shall notify the  public  pur-
  suant to §141.32".
"If the average annual maximum  contami-
  nant level for gross alpha  particle activity
  or total radium  ...  is  exceeded, the
  supplier  . . .  shall  give  notice  to the
  State pursuant to §141.31 and notify the
  public as required by § 141.32".
"If the average  annual  maximum  contami-
  nant  level  for man-made  radioactivity
  ... is exceeded, the supplier .  . . shal
  give notice  to the  State pursuant  to
  §141.31  and notify the public as required
   by §141.32".
"If the average of samples covering any 1
   month  period  exceeds  the  Maximum
   Contaminant Level, the supplier of wate
   shall  report to  the  State pursuant  to
   § 141.31  and notify the public pursuant to
   §141.32".
"For purposes of the public notification re
   quirements in §141.32, this is a violation
   that may pose an acute risk to health.".
5141.204 (Tier 3) or
  § 141.202 (Tier 1).
                                                                    §141.203 (Tier 2) ....
                                                                    § 141.202 (Tier 1) 	
                                                                    Subpart Q J..
 §141.203 (Tier 2) ....
                                                                    § 141.202 (Tier 1)
                                                                    §141.203 (Tier 2)
                                                                     §141.203 (Tier 2)
                                                                     §141.203 (Tier 2)
                                                                     § 141.202 (Tier 1)
Change reference to "§141.32" to "subpart
  Q"
                      Ihange reference to "§141.32" to "subpart
                       Q"
                      Ihange  reference  to   "§141.32"   to
                       "§ 141.202 and meet other requirements
                       under Subpart Q of this part"
                     Change "consumers" to "persons"
                     Add this requirement  to  §141.202 along
                       with that  for nitrate MCLs (item 2 of
                       Table 1)
                     Delete these  sections since parallel  re-
                       quirement   will    be    included   in
                       §141.201(c)(2)
 Change "§141.32" to "Subpart Q"
                     Change "§ 141.32" to "Subpart Q"
                      Change "§141.32" to "Subpart Q"
                      Change "§141.32" to "Subpart Q"
                      Change "§141.32" to "Subpart Q"
                      Change "§ 141.32" to "Subpart Q"

-------
 26012
Federal  Register/Vol.  65. No. 87/Thursday,  May  4, 2000/Rules and Regulations
  TABLE C.—SUMMARY OF OTHER CHANGES TO CFR TO BE CONSISTENT WITH FINAL PUBLIC NOTIFICATION RULE (PART
                                                141, SUBPART Q)—Continued
        CFR Section
                                            Subject
                                                   Subpart Q Reference
                                                    (where applicable)
                                                                                                        Change
 §141.75(a}(5)(ii) SWTR re-
   porting requirements
   (unfiltered systems).
 § 141.75(b)(3)(fi) SWTR re-
   porting requirements (fil-
   tered systems).
 §141.133(b)(1)TTHMsand
   HAAS MCLs,
 §141.133(b)(2)Bromate
   MCL.
 §141.133(b)(3) Chtorite MCL
§141.133(c)(1) Chlorine and
  chloramlnes MRDL.
§ 141.133{c)<2)(l) Chlorine
  dtoxtda MRDL.
§141.133
-------
               Federal Register/Vol. 65, No.  87/Thursday, May  4,  20DO/Rules and  Regulations
                                                                                    26013
 TABLE C.—SUMMARY OF OTHER CHANGES TO CFR TO BE CONSISTENT WITH FINAL PUBLIC NOTIFICATION RULE (PART
                                            141, SUBPART Q)—Continued
       CFR Section
              Subject
Subpart Q Reference
 (where applicable)
                                                                                                Change
§141.175(c)(1) IESWTR re-
  porting requirements (fil-
  tered systems using con-
  ventional or direct filtration
  treatment).
§141.175(c)(2) IESWTR re-
  porting requirements (fil-
  tered systems using other
  than conventional or direct
  filtration treatment).
'If at any time the turbidity exceeds 1 NTU
 in  representative  samples  of filtered
 water in a system using conventional fil-
 tration treatment or direct filtration, the
 system must inform the State as soon as
 possible, but no later than the end of the
 next business day".
"If  at any time the turbidity in representa-
 tive samples of filtered water exceed the
 maximum  level set by the State under
 §142.173(b) for  filtration  technologies
 other than conventional filtration  treat-
 ment, direct filtration, slow sand filtration,
 or diatomaceous earth filtration, the sys-
 tem must inform the State as soon as
 possible, but no later than the end of the
 next business day".
                                                              §141.203(b)(3)
                                                               §141.203(b)(3)
                   Change § 141.175(c)(1) to require consulta-
                     tion with the primacy agency after tur-
                     bidity exceedance above 1 NTU, as soon
                     as practical but no later than 24 hours in
                     accordance  with the public  notification
                     requirements under § 141.203(b)(3)

                   Change §141.175(c)(2) to require consulta-
                     tion with the primacy agency after tur-
                     bidity exceedance above the maximum
                     level set by the State, as soon as prac-
                     tical but no later than 24 hours in accord-
                     ance with the public notification  require-
                     ments under §141.203(b)(3)
M. Special State/Tribal Primacy
Requirements and Rationale (40 CFR
Part 142, Subpart B)
   Today's Rule: The final rule amends
§§ 142.10 and 142.16 of the primacy
regulations (40 CFR Part 142, Subpart B)
to define the requirements that States
(including eligible Indian Tribes) must
follow to incorporate the revised public
notification regulations into their
approved primacy program. The final
rule also amends § 142.14 to require that
the State retain, for three years, the
certifications and public notices
received from the public water systems
and any determinations  establishing
alternative public notification
requirements. Finally, the final rule
amends § 142.15 to reaffirm the
requirement that the State report
violations of the public notification
regulations on a quarterly basis to EPA.
   Under the primacy regulations, a State
 is required to adopt, as a condition of
 primacy, a State rule that is no less
 stringent than the regulation being
 proposed today. The requirements
 States must meet to receive primary
 enforcement responsibility ("primacy")
 are listed in § 142.10 and requirements
 to revise an approved primacy program
 are in § 142.12. Under § 142.10(b)(6)(v),
 each State with primary enforcement
 responsibility must adopt and
 implement adequate procedures to
 require public water systems to give
 public notice that is no  less stringent
 than the EPA public notification
 requirements. Special primacy
 requirements unique to the public
 notification regulation are in § 142.16(a).
   The final rule amends
 § 142.10(b)(6)(v) to replace the existing
 citation (§ 141.32) with the new public
 notification citation (40 CFR Part 141,
              Subpart Q). The final rule replaces the
              existing language hi § 142.16(a) with a
              new section comprised of two elements.
                First, § 142.16(a)(l) requires primacy
              States to submit requests for approval of
              a revised primacy program adopting the
              new public notification requirements
              under 40 CFR Part 141, Subpart Q. At
              its option, a State may establish
              alternative public notification
              requirements with respect to the form
              and content of the public notice
              required under Subpart Q of Part 141.
              The alternative requirements must
              provide the same type and amount of
              information required under Subpart Q
              and must meet the primacy
              requirements under § 142.10. States will
              have two years after the final rule is
              published in the Federal Register to
              submit a complete and final primacy
              program revision package to EPA,
              unless the State requests and EPA
              approves an extension of up to two
              additional years.
                 Second, § 142.16(a)(2) lists the
              sections of the final public notification
              regulations (Subpart Q of Part 141)
              where EPA explicitly authorizes
               primacy States to augment or otherwise
               change the EPA requirements to build a
               more complete and effective State
               public notification program. In some
               cases, EPA is counting on the States, to
               augment the EPA regulation by    ;
               providing authority under their own
               regulations for making determinations
               unique to a specific situation that are
               more appropriate than the regulatory
               default under the EPA rule (e.g., adding
               supplemental Tier 1 requirements after
               consultation with the public water
               system; elevating a monitoring violation
               from a Tier 3 to a Tier 2). In other cases,
               the authority given to the State to
                 deviate from the EPA rule is intended to
                 build in flexibility to give a "common
                 sense" solution to unique situations
                 where the EPA rule default requirement
                 just does not work. The regulation in
                 some cases enables the State to tailor the
                 EPA baseline requirements to increase
                 program flexibility and in other cases
                 recognizes and expects the State to
                 exercise its option under primacy to be
                 more stringent than the EPA rule.
                 Building in this flexibility allows the
                 program to be responsive to different
                 situations. One size does not fit all. Of
                 course, States are free to establish
                 requirements that are more stringent
                 and broader in scope than the EPA
                 program without including them in the
                 approved primacy program. The
                 advantage of including such more
                 stringent requirements in the approved
                 primacy program is that it enables EPA
                 and the State to jointly implement and
                 enforce the expanded program.
                    Where the State uses the flexibility
                 built into EPA's rule as part of its
                 approved primacy program,
                  § 142.16(a)(2) requires that a State
                  establish, as part of its revised primacy
                  program, enforceable requirements and
                  procedures. The EPA rule provisions
                  that explicitly authorize primacy States
                  to augment the EPA requirements are as
                  follows:
                    • Table 1 to 40 CFR 141.201(a) (Item
                  3v)—To require public water systems to
                  give a public notice for violations or
                  situations other than those listed in
                  Appendix A of Subpart Q of Part 141.
                  This supports existing State authority
                  under primacy to add notice
                  requirements not explicit in the EPA
                  rule, to tailor its program to respond to
                  its unique public notification policies
                  and situations.

-------
  26014
Federal Register/Vol.  65,  No. 87/Thursday, May 4,  2000/Rules  and Regulations
   •  40 CFR 141.201(c)(2)—1o permit
 public water systems, under the specific
 circumstances listed in § 141.201(c)(2),
 to limit the distribution of the public
 notice to persons served by the portion
 of the distribution system that is out of
 compliance. This authorizes the State to
 use its discretion to respond to unique
 situations where strict compliance with
 EPA's baseline requirements may lead
 to an ineffective notice or unnecessary
 costs.
   •  Table 1 of 40 CFR I41.202(a) (Items
 5, 6, and fl>—To require public water
 systems to give a Tier 1 public notice
 (rather than a Tier 2 or Tier 3 notice) for
 violations or situations listed in
 Appendix A of Subpart Q of Part 141 of
 this chapter. This supports existing
 State authority under primacy to elevate
 specific violations to Tier 1  where the
 EPA default Tier requirement does not
 meet the State's public health
 objectives. EPA expects States to use
 this authority when needed to respond
 to situations where there is significant
 potential for adverse health  effects from
 short-term exposure. In particular, EPA
 needs the State to exercise its authority
 to elevate single exceedance turbidity
 violations to a Tier 1 when consultation
 under § 141.203(b)(3) indicates high
 potential for short-term health risk.
   •  40 CFB 141.202(b)(3)—T:o require
 public water systems to comply with
 additional Tier 1 public notification
 requirements set by the State,
 subsequent to the initial 24-hiour Tier 1
 notice, as a result of their consultation
 with the State required under
 S 141.202(b)(2). This supports existing
 State authority under primacy to add
 supplemental Tier 1 requirements as a
 result of the Tier 1 consultation required
 under § 141.202(b)(2). EPA expects
 States to use this authority to ensure
 effective, enforceable follow-up to the
 initial Tier 1 notice. The EPA rule does
 not require any specific follow-up
 action by the water system after the
 initial Tier 1 notice, deferring totally to
 the primacy agency to define all
 supplemental requirements.
   • 40 CFR 141.202(c), 141.203(c) and
 14l.204(c}—To require a different form
 and manner of delivery for Tier 1, 2 and
 3 public notices. This supports existing
 Stata authority under primacy to use its
 discretion to tailor the public notice
 delivery to the specific situation or
 specific approach preferred by the State,
 as long as it otherwise meets primacy
 requirements.
  * Table 1 to 40 CFR 141.203(a) (Item
 2}—To require the public water systems
 to provide a Tier 2 public notice (rather
than Tier 3) for monitoring or testing
procedure violations specified by the
State. This supports existing  State
                        authority under primacy to elevate the
                        notice requirement for a monitoring
                        violation to Tier 2. The default tier level
                        for all monitoring violations is Tier 3
                        unless the primacy agency chooses to
                        elevate the requirement to a Tier 2
                        notice when warranted. EPA expects
                        States to build this additional  authority
                        into their approved programs to ensure
                        that notices for monitoring violations
                        posing potential serious adverse health
                        effects are delivered within 30 days.
                          •  40 CFR 141.203(b)(l)—To grant
                        public water systems an extension of up
                        to three months for distributing the Tier
                        2 public notice, in appropriate
                        circumstances other than those
                        specifically prohibited by the rule. This
                        authorizes the State to use its discretion,
                        where appropriate, to extend the Tier 2
                        notice deadline to give water systems
                        some relief from EPA's default deadline.
                          •  40 CFR 141.203(b)(2)—T:o grant a
                        different repeat notice frequency for the
                        Tier 2 public notice in appropriate
                        circumstances (other than those
                        specifically prohibited by the rule), but
                        no less frequently than once per year.
                        This authorizes the State to use its
                        discretion, where appropriate, to allow
                        less frequent repeat notice frequency for
                        violations to give water systems some
                        relief from EPA's default repeat notice
                        requirement.
                          • 40 CFR 141.2Q3(b}(3)—rVo  respond
                        within 24 hours to a request for
                        consultation by the public water system
                        to determine whether a Tier 1 (rather
                        than a Tier 2) notice is required for a
                        turbidity MCL violation under
                        § 141.13(b) or a SWTR/ffiSWTR TT
                        violation due to a single exceedance of
                        the maximum allowable turbidity limit.
                        This ensures that the State is prepared
                        to respond to the request for
                        consultation from the water system after
                        it learns of a violation of the turbidity
                        single exceedance limit. EPA expects
                        States to establish a process that would
                        lead to a determination within  the 24-
                       hour window to avoid a  "no action"
                       default to a Tier 1 notice on every
                       turbidity single exceedance violation.
                         • 40CFRl41.205(c)(2)—'To
                       determine the specific multilingual
                       requirement for public water systems,
                       including defining "large proportion of
                       non-English-speaking consumers." This
                       supports existing State authority under
                       primacy to augment the EPA rule to
                       clarify who must comply with the EPA
                       requirements and how the requirements
                       will be met. EPA expects States to
                       provide more specific direction to water
                       systems than is provided under the EPA
                       rule, particularly by developing criteria
                       for determining which systems  serve a
                       large proportion of non-English
                       speaking consumers.
   EPA believes that State adoption and
 implementation of the revised public
 notification rule should, where possible,
 be coordinated with the State
 implementation of the CCR rule. EPA
 encourages and will support efforts by
 the State to merge the adoption and
 implementation of the two rules because
 of the close interrelationship between
 the two programs. Merging
 implementation of the two programs
 will make both programs more effective
 and understandable to the water
 systems and to the public.
   Although the final date for adoption
 of the revised public notification rule is
 two years from the date of today's rule,
 States may adopt the revised public
 notification requirements earlier. The
 new requirements will then go into
 effect when the State's revised
 regulations adopting the new
 requirements go into effect. EPA
 encourages States to take immediate
 steps to determine how the more
 streamlined and effective public notice
 requirements can be integrated into both
 the  ongoing public notice programs and
 the  emerging CCR program. Early
 adoption of the new rule will enable
 water systems to take early advantage of
 the  efficiencies and flexibility built into
 the revised program.
   EPA expects to issue interim primacy
 guidance shortly, which will outline the
 new requirements and describe how
 they can most effectively be adopted
 and implemented by the States. The
 guidance will include recommended
 steps States can take, at their option, to
 combine the new public notification
 rule with the CCR rule to better
 coordinate the related primacy and
 implementation activities.
   Comments Requested on Proposal:
 EPA requested comment on the
 proposed requirements States would
 have to follow to develop the approved
 primacy program revision and on other
 changes to the State record keeping and
 reporting requirements related to the
 public notification rule. EPA also
 requested comment on the proposed
 interpretation of the primacy standard
 to be applied for review of State
 alternative programs. All comments
 received on the primacy proposal were
 in support of allowing States the full
 two years to adopt the revised public
 notification regulation. Several
 commenters saw no need to set special
 primacy requirements for provisions
 allowing States to be more stringent
than EPA's rule, since States already
have that authority. Several other
 commenters asked EPA to establish
criteria in the regulation for when EPA
expects States to elevate violations to a
more stringent violation tier. A

-------
               Federal Register/Vol. 65, No.  87/Thursday, May 4,  2000/Rules and Regulations
                                                                    26015
significant minority of commenters
asked that EPA set more specific
requirements in the final rule on State
compliance reporting and tracking.
  EPA Response to Comments: The final
rule retains the requirement, as
proposed, that States must revise their
approved primacy programs, including
addressing the new special primacy
requirements under Section
142.16(a)(2), to retain primacy. The
proposed list of special primacy
conditions was modified in the final
rule to conform to changes made in
other sections of the rule and to make
other edits to improve the presentation.
The basic primacy requirements,
however, were unchanged from the
proposal.
  In response to commenters who
questioned the need for special primacy
conditions where the State chooses to be
more stringent, EPA has reaffirmed the
requirement that the primacy revision
package submitted to EPA for approval
must address all the program elements
where EPA explicitly allows the State to
set different requirements from the EPA
rule requirements. The advantage of
including all the program elements in
the approved primacy program where
the State is explicitly allowed to be
different is that it enables EPA and the
State to jointly implement and enforce
the expanded program. EPA
recommends that primacy States take
advantage of this opportunity to work
together to develop an effective State
public notification program. Under the
final rule, States are of course still free
to establish more stringent requirements
outside the approved primacy program.
  In response to other commenters
requesting that the final rule include
criteria for when EPA expects States to
be more stringent, EPA has  chosen not
to specify additional criteria on how the
States should use the discretion
authorized in the EPA rule. The final
rule provisions, in most cases, do
establish boundaries on the use of the
State discretion. Beyond that, EPA
believes  the State program should work
with EPA to address those questions
during the primacy revision approval
process.  EPA is acutely interested in
how the  flexibility is used and how EPA
and the States can jointly implement
and enforce this tailored program. EPA
wants to work with States individually
to fashion a flexible program which
meets the State's needs.
   In response to comments concerning
EPA's specific expectations regarding
State compliance reporting and tracking,
EPA believes that these questions are
most appropriately addressed in the
primacy guidance rather than the
regulations. The final rule does reaffirm
the requirement that primacy agencies
report public notification violations to
EPA on a quarterly basis. It also requires
public water systems to submit a
compliance certification, with copies of
the public notices, to the State within
ten days after every public notification
event. EPA will address compliance and
reporting strategies in its guidance to
primacy agencies on implementing the
PN rule.

V. Changes to Consumer Confidence
Report (CCR) Regulation To Be
Consistent With the Final Public
Notification Regulation
  Today's Rule: The Consumer
Confidence Report rule is updated today
in several aspects, to be better aligned
with the final public notification rule
being published today. First, the three
Appendices to Subpart O, which
contain various pieces of information
about the contaminants that EPA
regulates, are deleted and the
information is combined into a new,
comprehensive Appendix A to Subpart
O. This new single Appendix makes the
information more accessible. EPA will
republish the entire table in each final
rule that changes the information it;
contains. As a result of this change, ;a
number of references to the three  ;
appendices are revised to reflect the
new combined Appendix A. EPA will
consider at a later date whether and
how to further align the CCR and public
notification rules by combining the
Appendices in the two rules, since ,
much of the information is similar.
   Second, the new Appendix A to
Subpart O is updated to contain
regulatory and health effects      ;
information on each of the disinfectants
and disinfection byproducts regulated
in the Stage 1 D/DBP rule that EPA
published in December 1998. The health
effects language was proposed in the
public notification rule on May 13,
1999. The final language being
published today in Appendix A to
Subpart O is identical to that which is
established through today's public
notification regulations under Subpart
Q. Although systems will not be
required to include information in their
CCRs on these contaminants until after
the effective date of the new regulations,
some systems may choose to do so
earlier.                         '
   Third, the standard health effects!
language for fluoride in the current CCR
regulations is revised to be identical to
the health effects language required for
violation of the fluoride MCL in the
public notification rule published today.
The revised language incorporates
language on the cosmetic effects (i.e.,
dental fluorosis) that may occur at levels
above 2 mg/1 (the SMCL). The MCL
standard is 4 mg/1. With this change, the
health effects language required for all
the regulated contaminants in the public
notification rule is now identical to the
language required in the CCR rule.
  Fourth, the § 141.155(h) requirement
that systems retain copies of their CCRs
for at least five years is amended to
require retention for three years. EPA is
making this change to slightly reduce
the paper storage burden on water
suppliers and to make this requirement
consistent with other drinking water
record retention requirements.
  Finally, definitions for Maximum
Residual Disinfectant Level (MRDL) and
Maximum Residual Disinfectant Level
Goal (MRDLG), modeled on the current
definitions for MCL and MCLG, are
added to the regulatory terms that
systems must include in their CCRs
under 141.153(c) when reporting on
contaminants governed by them. EPA
considers these changes to be
straightforward and noncontroversial.
Since the new requirements to include
the definitions for MRDL and MRDLG
are consistent with the similar
requirements to include other
definitions, EPA believes no prior notice
and opportunity to comment are
required.
  The final public notification rule is
closely related to the Consumer
Confidence Report (CCR) regulation
promulgated in August, 1998 [63 FR
44511 (August 19, 1998)], as amended
today. The final rule uses identical
language from the CCR rule where there
is an overlap, defers to the CCR process
where the public notification objectives
could be effectively accomplished
through the CCR, and otherwise uses
language consistent with the CCR when
appropriate.
   • Health Effects Language
(§ 141.205(d)(l), Appendix B to Subpart
Q). Language on potential health effects
of violations is  required both for the
CCR and public notification. The final
rule requires identical health effects
standard language for the public notice
and the CCR rule, as amended today
under Appendix A to Subpart O).
   •  Use of CCR for Some Public Notices
(§ 141.204(d)). The CCR requires an
annual summary of all violations that
have occurred in the previous year
(§ 141.153(f)). The final public
notification rule allows community
water systems,  at their option, to use the
Consumer Confidence Report as the
mechanism to notify their customers of
any or all Tier 3 violations, as long as
those violations occurred within the last
12 months, the content requirements of
§ 141.205 are complied with, and the
delivery requirements under

-------
 26016
Federal Register/Vol. 65, No.  87/Thursday, May 4,  2000/Rules and Regulations
 § 141.204(c) are met. The final rule also
 allows public water systems that are not
 required to distribute a CCR to use an
 annual report of all their Tier 3
 violations or variances or exemptions,
 in lieu of individual public notices. In
 all cases, the CCR or other annual report
 would have to follow the requirements
 of the public notice rule to be used for
 this purpose.
  • Notice of the Availability of the
 Results of Unregulated Contaminant
 Monitoring (§ 141.207). The 1996 SDWA
 amendments for both the CCR and
 public notification contained provisions
 related to giving notice of the results of
 unregulated contaminant monitoring
 required by EPA. EPA is deferring to the
 requirement in the CCR rule (under
 § 141,153(d) and (e)) to meet the public
 notification statutory provision. The
 CCR rule requires that such information
 bo included in the annual CCR for
 community water systems when
 contaminants are detected. The final
 public notification rule does, however,
 contain a special public notice
 requirement (under § 141.207) to
 announce the availability of the results
 of the unregulated contaminant
 monitoring required under the
 Unregulated Contaminant Monitoring
 RulelUCMR).
  • Certification by PWS That Public
 Notification Requirements Are Met
 (§ 141.31{d)). The final rule adds a new
 requirement that public water systems
 provide a certification to the primacy
 agency, along with a copy of then-
 public notices, that all requirements
 have been met. This is patterned after
 (although not identical) to the
 certification requirement in the CCR
 regulation (§ 141.155(c)).
  • Use of Multilingual Notices
 (§141.205(c){2)). The CCR regulation
 requires that in communities with a
 large proportion of non-English
 speaking residents, as determined by the
primacy agency, the  report  must contain
 information in the appropriate
 languagefs) regarding the importance of
the notice or contain a telephone
number or address where persons
served may contact the water system to
obtain a translated copy of the notice or
to request assistance in the  appropriate
language. The final public notification
                        rule uses the exact language in the CCR
                        rule to set the multilingual
                        requirements. The public notification
                        rule, however, includes a second
                        provision not in the CCR rule that
                        requires PWSs to comply with the
                        multilingual requirements where
                        appropriate, even when the primacy
                        agency opts not to make a
                        determination. (§ 141.153(h)(3)).
                          Comments Requested on Proposal:
                        EPA requested comment on the
                        approach in the proposed rule aligning
                        the public notification requirements
                        with the parallel requirements in the
                        CCR rule for the five areas and for any
                        other areas that would make compliance
                        with the two rules more effective and
                        efficient. Commenters overwhelmingly
                        supported EPA's proposed intention to
                        closely coordinate the CCR and public
                        notification rule language. A number of
                        commenters, however, disagreed or
                        questioned how EPA proposed to do
                        this for certain program elements.
                         EPA Response to Comments: In the
                        final rule published today, EPA
                        continues to support a close regulatory
                        relationship between the CCR and the
                        public notification rules and strongly
                        encourages primacy agencies and water
                        systems to integrate the two
                        requirements in implementation where
                        it makes sense. EPA's response to
                        commenters who questioned how EPA
                        planned to coordinate the CCR and
                        public notification rules is addressed in
                        the individual preamble sections related
                        to each program element.

                        VI. Cost of Rule

                         EPA has estimated the costs both for
                        public water systems, which must
                        comply with the requirements of the
                        revised public notification rule
                        published today, and the primacy
                        agencies, which must implement the
                        new requirements on behalf of EPA.
                         For public water systems, the
                        estimated costs of complying with the
                        new regulation are divided into three
                        component activities: notice preparation
                        costs, notice distribution costs, and
                        costs of repeat notices. Only public
                        water systems with a violation or other
                        situation requiring a public notice incur
                        costs under this rule.
  • Notice preparation costs include
those costs that a public water system
must incur to comply with the
requirements regardless of how many
copies of the notice it must deliver.
These costs include the labor hour costs
associated with becoming familiar with
the requirements for the notice,
collecting data regarding monitoring
results and the violation, consulting
with the primacy agency (when
necessary), preparing the technical
content of the public notification in a
format suitable for distribution,
identifying the recipients of the notice,
and providing instructions about
production of the notice.
  • Notice distribution costs are costs
that increase or decrease along with the
number of public notices to be
delivered. These costs include costs of
producing the reports (costs of paper
and photocopying or printing), postage
costs when the notice is mailed, costs of
posting notices in specified locations,
and other labor hour costs of producing
and delivering the notices.
  • Repeat notice costs involve the
costs of updating the initial notice and
delivering a second copy of the notice,
if the violation is not corrected within
the specified time period.
  For primacy agencies, the estimated
incremental costs of implementing the
new requirements are divided into four
components:
  • Cost of revising primacy packages
to incorporate the new requirements;
  • Costs of consulting with public
water systems to clarify notice
requirements on a case-by-case basis;
  • Costs of receiving and reviewing the
public water system compliance
certification and copies of the notices;
and
  • Costs of filing and maintaining the
public notification records.
  Table D provides a summary of the
estimated average annual cost and labor
hours to public water systems and to the
State primacy agencies. The public
water system costs are broken out by
size of the system. The combined total
cost per year to both the PWS and the
primacy agencies is $13,543,277. The
combined total burden hours are
748,811.
     TABLE D.—AVERAGE ANNUAL COST AND LABOR HOURS FOR PUBLIC WATER SYSTEMS AND PRIMACY AGENCIES
Summary table
PWS1
PWS serving 25-500
PWS serving 501-
3.300.
Total cost per
year*
(D
$5,218,727.77
1,482.639.78

Total
labor
hours
(2)
515,656
116,007

Number of systems in
violation **
(3)
31,187 	
3,740 	

Labor hours per system
(2)/(3)
(4)
1653
31.02 	

Cost per system (1)/(3)
(5)
$16734
396.43


-------
              Federal Register/Vol.  65,  No. 87/Thursday, May 4, 2000/Rules  and Regulations
                                                                    26017
   TABLE D.—AVERAGE ANNUAL COST AND LABOR HOURS FOR PUBLIC WATER SYSTEMS AND PRIMACY AGENCIES—
                                                   Continued
Summary table
PWS serving 3 301—
10,000.
PWS serving 10 001
100,000.
100,000.
Totals for PWS
State Primacy Agencies ...
Totals 	
Total cost per
year*
(D
1 052 496 62
2 074 925 70
2 171 777 56
12 000 567 43
1,542,709.87
$13,543,277.30
Total
labor
hours
(2)
28799
27379
2 550
690 390
58,420
748,811
Number of systems in
violation **
(3)
854 	
632 	
54 . ...
36 467 PWS
56 Primacy agencies 	
Labor hours per system
V
33.72 	
43.32 	
:47.23 	
18 93 hours per PWS 	
1 ,043.22 hours per pri-
macy agency.
Cost per system (1)/(3)
(5)
1,232.43
3,283.11
40,218.10
329.08 per PWS
27,548.39 per primacy
agency
  * Costs include both labor hour costs and operations and maintenance (O&M) costs.
  "Source: FY 1998 inventory and violation data from Safe Drinking Water Information System (SDWIS), January, 1999.
  The Agency estimates that the average
annual cost to all public water systems
with one or more violations during the
year is $12,000,567, including the costs
for 690,390 labor hours and the costs for
copying, postage and other related O&M
costs. This is an average annual cost of
$329.08 for each of the 36,467 public
water systems required to comply with
the public notice requirements because
they had one or more violations during
the year. As shown in Table D, the
average annual per system costs and
labor hours vary significantly by size of
the water system:
  • The dollar costs include both labor
hour costs and non-labor costs. The
non-labor costs incurred are principally
to cover the costs of copying and
mailing the notice. Because the cost of
distribution varies directly with the
number of persons served, the cost per
water system  for the large and very large
water systems is many times higher than
the cost per water system for small and
very small systems (e.g., $167.34 per
system serving less than 500 people vs.
$40,218.10 per system serving over
100,000 people).
  • The labor hours vary by both the
type and size of the water system. For
example, a non-community water
system may post the notice, a
significantly lower labor hour burden
than preparing a mailing or hand   '
delivering the notice. System size also
makes a significant difference in total
labor costs. The labor estimated to .
prepare and distribute the notice for a
very small system is 16.5 hours. For
very large systems, the labor hour  i
estimate is 47.2 hours, almost three,
times the rate estimated for the very
small systems.
  The Agency estimates the annual,
primacy agency costs and  labor hours to
be $1,542,710 and 58,420 hours. The
average annual cost per primacy agency
is estimated at $27,548 per primacy
agency ($1,542,710 divided by 56) and
the annual labor hours per primacy
agency are estimated at 1,043 hours per
primacy agency (58,420 divided by 56).
This does not include the  costs for EPA
direct implementation of the regulatory
program in Wyoming, the  District of
Columbia, and on Indian lands.
  The paperwork burden associated
with the current public notification
requirements, which are being revised
by today's action, was included in the
baseline drinking water ICR (OMB :
Control No. 2040-0090, EPA ICR#
270.39). The estimated burden under
ICR#270.39 was 955,191 hours, and the
costs were $21,969,393. This included
the estimated cost to public water
systems only. ICR#270.39 did not
include any incremental costs to the
primacy agencies.
  To estimate the change in the burden
for public •water systems under the
revised rule, EPA recalculated the
burden numbers under ICR#270.39 to
provide a common basis for comparison.
The ICR burden estimate under
ICR#270.39 could not be used as the
basis for comparison because it used
different external cost and workload
assumptions. First, the cost assumptions
in ICR#270.39 used lower postage and
labor rates than are currently in place.
Second, it assumed the violation levels
that were in place when ICR#270.39 was
developed, which are quite different
from the violation levels assumed for
the revised ICR. Third, some activities
were omitted from ICR#270.39, such as
repeat notices.
  The combined changes in the average
annual burden and costs to primacy
agencies and PWSs, based on comparing
the estimate under the revised rule to
the adjusted estimate under the current
rule, are shown in the table below:
           CHANGES IN AVERAGE ANNUAL BURDEN AND COST ESTIMATES (FOR PWS AND PRIMACY AGENCY)
                             [Rounded to nearest 10,000 for burden and nearest $100,000 for cost]


Cost 	
Current rule
(Recalculated) 1
955 000 hours
$22,100,000 	
Revised rule
ICR ;
748 000 hours 	
$13,500,000 	
Decrease
206,000 hours 	
$8,600,000 	
Percent
change
21.6
38.8
  1 To make the current rule estimate and revised rule estimate comparable, the current rule estimate was adjusted to be the sum of the costs
under the revised rule plus the estimated cost savings that will be realized under the revised rule.
  Two programmatic changes associated
with the revised rule account for the
bulk of the reduction in burden and cost
estimates from the current rule under
§141.32:
  • The revised rule changes both the
timing and method of delivery options
for Tier 3 violations—

-------
 26018
Federal Register/Vol.  65,  No. 87/Thursday, May 4, 2000/Rules and Regulations
 —The revised rule would require notice
   within one year after the occurrence
   of the violation rather than within
   three months, as required by the
   current rule. Systems with monitoring
   and testing procedure violations
   occurring several times throughout
   the year are able, under the revised
   rule, to consolidate their notices into
   one annual notice. The current rule
   limits the PWS's ability to combine
   multiple violations into a single
   notice to those occurring within the
   prior three months. For estimating the
   burden reduction from this change,
   EPA assumes that, under the current
   rule, systems with violations send out
   a statistical average of 1.5 notices per
   year.
 —The revised rule allows community
   water systems to meet the public
   notice requirements for Tier 3 through
   the existing Consumer  Confidence
   Report (CCR). Tier 3 violations are
   primarily monitoring or testing
   procedure violations. Systems that
   would otherwise incur a large labor
   burden and postage burden for
   distributing a mail notice and paying
   for a newspaper notice will be able to
   insert the text of the notice into the
   CCR and incur no additional costs.
   EPA estimates that half of all
   community \vater systems serving less
   than 10,000 and all community water
   systems serving more than 10,000 will
   use the CCR for Tier 3 notices.
 —The average annual estimated burden
   reduction associated with the changes
   to the timing and method of delivery
   for Tier 3 notices is approximately
   186,000 hours (19.5 percent) and the
   cost reduction is approximately
   56,300,000 (28.7 percent).
   • The revised rule changes the
 required methods of delivery for Tiers 1
 and 2 notices. The current rule requires
 both newspaper and mail delivery for
 all tiers, although the primacy agency
 could waive the mail requirement if it
 determines the violation has been
 resolved within a given time. Those
 systems for whom no newspaper outlet
 is available are allowed to hand deliver
 or post instead of mailing and using the
 newspaper. Under the current rule,
 systems with Tier 1 violations must also
 issue a notice via television or radio.
 The revised rule requires  only one
 method of delivery for Tier 2—mail or
 hand delivery (or posting  for non-
 community systems). The burden
 reduction for Tier 2 is small, because it
 eliminates only newspaper notices,
which are estimated to take only 1 hour
 of labor. For Tier 1, however, systems
will have the option of issuing the
notice via electronic media, hand
                        delivery, or posting. The burden
                        reduction resulting from the change in
                        the Tier 1 and Tier 2 method of delivery
                        requirements in the revised rule would
                        be approximately 20,000 hours (2.1
                        percent), and the cost reduction would
                        be $2,300,000 (10.2 percent).
                          The estimated total average annual
                        savings resulting from the above
                        revisions to the public notification
                        requirements are approximately 206,000
                        hours (21.6 percent) and $8,600,000
                        (38.8 percent).
                          In considering the burden and cost
                        reduction for the revised rule relative to
                        the current requirements under
                        § 141.32, it is important to keep in mind
                        that this comparison is based on
                        assuming full compliance with both
                        rules. In fact, as documented in the 1992
                        GAO report on the public notification
                        program (GAO/RCED-92-135, June
                        1992), there has been widespread
                        noncompliance with the public
                        notification requirements. EPA expects
                        that by clarifying and streamlining the
                        requirements in the revised regulation,
                        the revised rule will result in a
                        significantly higher level of compliance
                        with the public notification
                        requirements. To the extent that this
                        occurs, there will also be an increase in
                        State and water system resources
                        devoted to public notification,  despite
                        the savings estimated here because of
                        the streamlined revised rule. On the
                        other hand, for those systems that have
                        been complying with public notice
                        requirements all along, the revised rule
                        should result in genuine cost and
                        burden savings.
                         For more information about the  costs
                        of the rule and how EPA developed the
                        estimates, see the Supporting Statement
                        for the EPA Information Collection
                        Request (ICR #1898.02) and the
                        Regulatory Flexibility Screening
                        Analysis in the EPA docket for this rule.

                        VII. Other Administrative
                        Requirements

                        A. Executive Order 12866: Regulatory
                        Review
                         Under Executive Order 12866 [58 FR
                        51735 (October 4, 1993)], the Agency
                        must determine whether the regulatory
                        action is  "significant" and therefore
                        subject to OMB review and the
                        requirements of the Executive Order.
                        The Order defines "significant
                        regulatory action" as one that is likely
                        to result in a rule that may:
                         (1) Have an annual effect on the
                        economy of $100 million or more,  or
                        adversely affect in a material way the
                        economy, a sector of the economy,
                        productivity, competition, jobs, the
                        environment, public health or safety, or
 State, local, or tribal governments or
 communities;
   (2) Create a serious inconsistency or
 otherwise interfere with an action taken
 or planned by another agency;
   (3) Materially alter the budgetary
 impact of entitlements, grants, user fees,
 or loan programs or the rights and
 obligations of the recipients thereof; or
 (4) Raise novel legal or policy issues
 arising out of the legal mandates, the
 President's priorities, or the principles
 set forth in the Executive Order.
   It has been determined that this final
 rule action is not a "significant
 regulatory action" under the terms of
 Executive Order 12866 and is therefore
 not subject to OMB review.

 B. Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA), as
 amended by the Small Business
 Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act of
 1996 (SBREFA), 5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.
   The RFA generally requires an agency
 to prepare a regulatory flexibility
 analysis of any rule subject to notice
 and comment rulemaking requirements
 under the Administrative Procedure Act
 or any other statute unless the agency
 certifies that the rule will not have a
 significant economic impact on a
 substantial number of small entities.
 Small entities include small businesses,
 small organizations, and small
 governmental jurisdictions.
  The RFA provides default definitions
 for each type of small entity. It also
 authorizes an agency to use alternative
 definitions for each category of small
 entity, "which are appropriate to the
 activities of the agency," after proposing
 the alternative definition(s) in the
 Federal Register and taking comment (5
 U.S.C. sees. 601(3)-(5)). In addition to
 the above, to establish an alternative
 small business definition, agencies must
 consult with Small Business
 Administration's Chief Counsel for
 Advocacy.
  For purposes of assessing the impacts
 of today's rule on small entities, EPA
 considered small entities to be public
 water systems serving 10,000 or fewer
 persons. In accordance with the RFA
 requirements, EPA proposed using this
 alternative definition in the Federal
 Register notice for the proposed
 Consumer Confidence Report (CCR)
 regulation (63 FR 7620, February 13,
 1998), requested public comment,
 consulted with the  Small Business
Administration on the alternative
 definition for small businesses, and
 finalized the alternative definition in
the final CCR regulation (63 FR 44511,
August 19,1998). As stated in that Final
Rule, the alternative definition would be
applied to other drinking water
regulations as well.

-------
               Federal Register/Vol. 65, No.  87/Thursday,  May 4, 2000/Rules  and Regulations
                                                                     26019
  After considering the economic
impacts of today's final rule on small
entities, I certify that this action will not
have a significant economic impact on
a substantial number of small entities.
We have determined that all small
entities will experience an impact of
much less than one percent  of their
annual revenues or expenditures. The
analyses supporting this certification are
contained in the "Regulatory Flexibility
Screening Analysis" prepared for this
final rule. About 64,000 small water
systems are impacted by the revised
public notification rule: 24,000 small
governments, 31,000 small businesses,
and 9,000 small non-profit
organizations. We compared for each
small entity category the ratio of the
average annual per system compliance
costs to the estimated average annual
per system revenue and expenditures.
The ratio for small government entities
ranged from 0.19 percent for systems
serving less than 500 people to 0.02
percent for systems serving between
3,301 to 10,000 people. The ratio for
small business entities ranged from 0.01
percent for systems serving less than
500 people to 0.03  percent for systems
serving between 3,301 to 10,000  people.
The ratio for small non-profit
organization entities ranged from 0.06
percent for systems serving less than
500 people to 0.01  percent for systems
serving between 3,301 to 10,000  people.
  Although this final rule will not have
a significant economic impact on a
substantial number of small entities,
EPA nonetheless has tried to reduce the
impact of this rule on small entities by
providing flexibility to public water
systems on the method of delivery of the
public notice and by offering all  public
water systems the opportunity to use an
annual report of violations in lieu of
individual Tier 3 notices. In addition,
all community water systems are
encouraged to use the CCR to meet the
requirements of the public notice rule
wherever appropriate. (Note that to use
the CCR, many small systems would
have to distribute their CCR more
widely to meet the public notification
distribution requirements.] In addition,
if the primacy agency permits, systems
may be allowed to  provide notice to
only the portion of the distribution
system that is affected by the violation.
Finally, small community water systems
and all non-community water systems
may hand deliver or post the notice in
lieu of mailing, reducing substantially
their overall cost of compliance with
this rule.

C. Paperwork Reduction Act
  The Office of Management and Budget
(OMB) has approved the information
 collection requirements contained in
 this rule under the provisions of the
 Paperwork Reduction Act, 44 U.S.C
 3501 et seq. and has assigned OMB
 control number 2040-0209.
  This information is being collected in
 order to fulfill the statutory
 requirements of section 114 of the Safe
 Drinking Water Act Amendments
 (SDWA) of 1996 (Public Law 104-182)
 enacted August 6,1996. Public notice of
 violations is an integral part of the
 public health protection and consumer
 right-to-know provisions of the 1996
 SDWA amendments. The public
 notification requirement is one of six
 interrelated provisions now included in
 the SDWA, related to providing
 information to the public. Responses are
 mandatory. None of the information
 submitted under the revised rule is
 confidential business information.
  The burden to public water systems is
 based on the cost of the rule discussed
 under Section VI of the Preamble.
 Burden means the total time, effort, or
 financial resources  expended by persons
 to generate, maintain, retain, or disclose
 or provide information to or for a
 Federal agency. This includes the time
 needed to review instructions; develop,
 acquire, install, and utilize technology
 and systems for the purposes of
 collecting, validating, and verifying
 information, processing and
 maintaining information, and disclosing
 and providing information; adjust the
 existing way to comply with any
 previous applicable instructions and
 requirements; train personnel to be able
 to respond to a collection of
 information; search data sources;
 complete and review the collection of
 information; and to transmit or
 otherwise disclose the information.
  The total average annual burden to
 both  public water systems and primacy
 agencies is 748,811 hours at an annual
 cost of $13,543,277. The cost estimate
 includes both the labor hour costs and
 the operations and maintenance (O&M)
 costs of implementing the rule.
  The average annualburden to public
 water systems to meet the requirements
 of the revised public notification rule is
 690,390 hours at an annual cost of |
 $12,000,567. The burden estimate is the
 sum of the costs of three component
 activities: notice preparation costs;
 notice distribution costs; and costs of
 repeat notices.  The costs to the public
• water systems include labor and non-
 labor costs, such as the costs to copy
 and mail the public notices where
 required. Public water systems are.
 required to comply with the public
 notification rule if they have one or
 more violations of National Primary
 Drinking Water Regulations (NPDWR) or
have other situations requiring a public
notice. The number of public water
systems estimated to have violations on
an annual basis is 36,467. The annual
average burden per public water system
violating one or more drinking water
standards is $329.08 and 18.9 hours.
  The average annual burden to
primacy agencies of implementing the
new public notification regulations is
58,420 hours at an annual cost of
$1,542,710. The burden estimate is the
sum of four component activities: cost
of revising primacy packages to
incorporate the new requirements; costs
of consulting with public water systems;
costs of receiving and reviewing the
compliance certification and notice
copies received from the public water
system; and the costs of filing and
maintaining the public water system
notification records. The costs to the
primacy agency include labor costs
only. Primacy agencies are required to
adopt and implement the new public
notification regulation as a condition of
maintaining primacy. Fifty-six States
and Territories currently have primacy
under the Safe Drinking Water Act. EPA
directly implements the regulatory
program in Wyoming, Washington, D.C.,
and the Indian Lands. The average
annual burden for each of the 56 States
and Territories with primacy to
implement the revised public
notification rule is $27,548 and 1,043
hours per primacy agency. For
additional detail, see Section VI of this
preambled
  An Agency may not conduct, or
sponsor, and a person is not required to
respond to, a collection of information
unless it displays a currently valid OMB
control number. The OMB control
numbers for EPA's regulations are listed
in 40 CFR Part 9 and 48 CFR Chapter
15. EPA is amending the table in Part 9
of currently approved ICR control
numbers issued by OMB for various
regulations to list the information
requirements contained in this final
rule.

D. Executive Order 13132: Federalism

  Executive Order 13132, entitled
"Federalism" (64 FR 43255, August 10,
1999), requires EPA to develop an
accountable process to ensure
"meaningful and timely input by State
and local officials in the development of
regulatory policies that have federalism
implications." "Policies that have
federalism implications" is defined in
the Executive Order to include
regulations that have "substantial direct
effects on the States, on the relationship
between the national government and
the States, or on the distribution of

-------
26020
Federal Register/Vol. 65, No. 87/Thursday, May 4, 2000/Rules and  Regulations
power and responsibilities among the
various levels of government."
  Under Section 6 of Executive Order
13132, EPA may not issue a regulation
that has federalism implications, that
imposes substantial direct compliance
costs, and that is not required by statute,
unless the Federal government provides
the funds necessary to pay the direct
compliance costs incurred by State and
local governments, or EPA consults with
State and local officials early in the
process of developing the proposed
regulation. EPA also may not issue a
regulation that has federalism
implications and that preempts State
law unless the Agency consults with
State and local officials early in the
process of developing the proposed
regulation.
  This final rule does not have
federalism implications. It will not have
substantial direct effects on the States,
on the relationship between the national
government and the States, or on the
distribution of power and
responsibilities among the various
levels of government, as specified in
Executive Order 13132. The rule
published today replaces an existing
rule and represents a significant
streamlining of requirements from those
currently in place. Thus, the
requirements of section 6 of the
Executive Order do not apply to this
rule. Although section 6 of Executive
Order 13132 does not apply to this rule,
EPA consulted extensively with State
and local officials in developing this
rule. Sea Section II of this preamble for
more detail regarding our work with the
State and local government
representatives.
E, Executive Order 13084: Consultation
and Coordination With Indian Tribal
Governments
  Under Executive Order 13084, EPA
may not issue a regulation that is not
required by statute, that significantly or
uniquely affects the communities of
Indian Tribal governments, and that
Imposes substantial direct compliance
costs on those communities, unless the
Federal government provides the funds
necessary to pay the direct compliance
costs incurred by the Tribal
governments, or EPA consults with
those governments. If EPA complies by
consulting. Executive Order 13084
requires EPA to provide to the Office of
Management and Budget, in a separately
identified section of the preamble to the
rule, a description of the extent of EPA's
prior consultation with representatives
of affected Tribal governments, a
summary of the nature of their concerns,
and a statement supporting the need to
issue the regulation. In addition,
                        Executive Order 13084 requires EPA to
                        develop an effective process permitting
                        elected officials and other
                        representatives of Indian Tribal
                        governments "to provide meaningful
                        and timely input in the development of
                        regulatory policies on matters that
                        significantly or uniquely affect their
                        communities."
                          Today's final rule does not
                        significantly or uniquely affect the
                        communities of Indian Tribal
                        governments, nor does it impose
                        substantial direct compliance costs on
                        such communities. The impact on
                        Tribal governments is not unique in that
                        this rule applies equally to all public
                        water systems, including those owned
                        and operated by Federal, State, and
                        local governments. Public water systems
                        on Indian lands incur costs under the
                        public notification rule only if they
                        violate a national primary drinking
                        water regulation or have a variance or
                        exemption from EPA. The public
                        notification requirements will in most
                        cases be met either through hand
                        delivery of a single notice to all persons
                        served or by posting the notice in
                        conspicuous locations. Costs of meeting
                        these requirements will be minimal. In
                        fact, the public notification costs
                        resulting from this rule are less than
                        those required for full compliance with
                        the public notification regulations
                        currently in effect under § 141.32.
                        Accordingly, the requirements of
                        section 3(b) of Executive Order 13084
                        do not apply to this final rule.

                        F. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act
                          Title II of the Unfunded Mandates
                        Reform Act of 1995 (UMRA), Public
                        Law 104—4, establishes requirements for
                        Federal agencies to assess the effects of
                        their regulatory actions on State, local,
                        and Tribal governments and the private
                        sector. Under Section 202 of the UMRA,
                        EPA generally must prepare a written
                        statement, including a cost-benefit
                        analysis, for proposed and final rules
                        with "Federal Mandates" that may
                        result in expenditures to State, local,
                        and Tribal governments, in the
                        aggregate, or to.the private sector, of
                        $100 million or more in any one year.
                        Before promulgating an EPA rule for
                        which a written statement is needed,
                        section 205 of the UMRA generally
                        requires EPA to identify and consider a
                        reasonable number of regulatory
                        alternatives and adopt the least costly,
                        most cost-effective or least burdensome
                        alternative that achieves the objectives
                        of the rule. The provisions of section
                        205 do not apply when they are
                        inconsistent with applicable law.
                        Moreover, section 205 allows EPA to
                        adopt an alternative other than the least
costly, most cost-effective or least
burdensome alternative if the
Administrator publishes with the final
rule an explanation why that alternative
was not adopted. Before EPA establishes
any regulatory requirements that may
significantly or uniquely affect small
governments, including Tribal
governments, it must have developed
under section 203 of the UMRA a small
government agency plan. The plan must
provide for notifying potentially
affected small governments, enabling
officials of affected small governments
to have meaningful and timely input in
the development of EPA regulatory
proposals with significant Federal
intergovernmental mandates and
informing, educating, and advising
small governments on compliance with
the regulatory requirements.
  EPA has determined that this rule
does not contain a Federal mandate that
may result in expenditures of $100
million or more for State, local, and
Tribal governments, in the aggregate, or
the private sector in any one year. The
estimated total annual average cost of
the final rule is $13,543,277. (See
Section VI of the Supplementary
Information.) Thus, today's rule is not
subject to the requirements of sections
202 and 205 of the UMRA. This rule
will establish requirements that affect
small community water systems.
However, EPA has determined that this
rule contains no regulatory
requirements that might significantly or
uniquely affect small governments
because the regulation reduces the
burden associated with the public
notification regulations currently in
effect under §141.32 and requires a
minimal expenditure of resources. Thus,
today's rule is not subject to the
requirements of section 203 of UMRA.

G. Executive Order 12898:
Environmental Justice
  Pursuant to Executive Order 12898
(59 FR 7629, February 16,1994), the
Agency has considered environmental
justice related issues with regard to the
potential impacts of this action on the
environmental and health conditions in
low-income and minority communities.
The Agency believes that several of
today's requirements will be
particularly beneficial to these
communities:
  • Public water systems would be
required to distribute the notice to all
persons served, both through the use of
required delivery methods and through
the use of additional measures
reasonably calculated to reach other
persons served, if they would not
normally be reached by the required
method. In addition, the notice to bill-

-------
               Federal Register/Vol.  65, No. 87/Thursday,  May 4, 2000/Rules and Regulations
                                                                      26021
paying customers must include standard
language encouraging those receiving
the public notice to make the notice
available to other consumers who are
not bill-paying customers (e.g., renters,
transients, students).
  • Public notices would include
information on what the consumers
should do to minimize the health risk
from drinking water in violation of EPA
standards and when to seek further
medical advice. All notices would be
required to include the name, address,
and phone number of the water system
official who can provide further
information.
  • Public water systems, where
appropriate, must include information
on the importance of the notice and
other information in languages other
than English. Primacy States may, at
their option, augment these multilingual
requirements. For example, a primacy
State could define when a system is
serving a population with a large
proportion of non-English speaking
consumers. Thus, the State could
specify which water systems must
comply with the augmented State
requirements.

H, Executive Order 13045: Protection of
Children From Environmental Health
Risks and Safety Risks
  Executive Order 13045, "Protection of
Children from Environmental Health
Risks and Safety Risks" (62 FR 19885,
April 23,1997), applies to any rule that:
(1) is determined to be "economically
significant" as defined under E.O.
12866, and (2) concerns an
environmental health or safety risk that
EPA has reason to believe may have a
disproportionate effect on children. If
the regulatory action meets both criteria,
the Agency must evaluate the
environmental health or safety effects of
the planned rule on children, and
explain why the planned regulation is
preferable to other potentially effective
and reasonably feasible alternatives
considered by the Agency.
  The final rule is not subject to the
Executive Order because it is not
economically significant as defined in
E.O. 12866 and because the Agency
does not have reason to believe the
environmental health or safety risks
addressed by this  action present a
disproportionate risk to children. The
purpose of the public notification rule  is
to provide a public notice to persons
served when a violation of EPA drinking
water standards occurs, to enable
consumers to avoid health and safety
risks from potential exposure to harmful
contaminants in the drinking water. The
regulation addresses the particular risks
that certain contaminants may pose by
considering such risks in assigning
contaminants to the appropriate tier and
by identifying such risks in the required
health effects language, with specific
reference to risks to children, where
appropriate. The public notice
requirements, however, apply to
potential health and safety risks to all
consumers and all vulnerable
populations, and are not targeted
specifically to address a
disproportionate risk to children.

/. National Technology Transfer and
Advancement Act

  As noted in the proposed rule,
Section 12(d) of the National
Technology Transfer and Advancement
Act of 1995 (NTTAA), Public Law No.
104-113, Section 12(d) (15 U.S.C.  272
note) directs EPA to use voluntary
consensus standards in its regulatory
activities unless to do so would be  ;
inconsistent with applicable law or
otherwise impractical. Voluntary
consensus standards are technical
standards (e.g., materials specifications,
test methods, sampling procedures, and
business practices) that are developed or
adopted by voluntary consensus     ;
standards bodies. The NTTAA directs
EPA to provide Congress, through OMB,
explanations when the Agency decides
not to use available and applicable  ;
voluntary consensus standards. This
action does not involve technical
standards. Therefore, EPA did not
consider the use of any voluntary
consensus standards.

/. Congressional Review Act

  The Congressional Review Act, 5
U.S.C. 801 et seq., as added by the Small
Business Regulatory Enforcement    i
Fairness Act of 1996, generally provides
that before a rule may take effect, the
agency promulgating the rule must  !
submit a rule report, which includes a
copy of the rule, to each House of the
Congress and to the Comptroller General
of the United States. EPA will submit a
report containing this rule and other
required information to the U.S. Senjate,
the U.S. House of Representatives, and
the Comptroller General of the United
States prior to publication of the rule in
the Federal Register. A major rule
cannot take effect until 60 days after.it
is published in the Federal Register..
This action is not a "major rule" as
defined by U.S.C. 804(2). This rule will
be effective June 5, 2000.           :

List of Subjects

40 CFR Part 9

  Reporting and recordkeeping
requirements.
40 CFR Part 141

  Environmental protection, Chemicals,
Indians-lands, Intergovernmental
relations, Radiation protection,
Reporting and record-keeping
requirements, Water supply.

40 CFR Part 142

  Environmental protection,
Administrative practice and procedure,
Chemicals, Indians-lands, Radiation
protection, Reporting and record-
keeping requirements, Water supply.

40 CFR Part 143

  Chemicals, Indians-lands, Water
supply.
  Dated: April 7, 2000.
Carol M. Browner,
Administrator.

  For the reasons set out in the
preamble, 40 CFR Parts 9,141,142, and
143 are amended as follows:

PART 9—[AMENDED]

  1. The authority citation for part 9
continues to read as follows:
  Authority: 7 U.S.C. 135 et  seq., 136-136y;
15 U.S.C. 2001, 2003, 2005, 2006, 2601-2671;
21 U.S.C. 331j, 345a, 348; 31 U.S.C. 9701; 33
U.S.C. 1251 etseq., 1311, 1313d, 1314,1318,
1321,1326 1330,1324, 1344,1345 (d)  and
(e), 1361; E.O. 11735, 38 FR 21243, 3 CFR,
1971-1975 Comp. p. 973; 42 U.S.C. 241,
242b, 243, 246, 300f, 300g, 300g-l, 300g-2,
300g-3, 300g-4, 300g-5, 300g-6, 300J-1,
300J-2, 300J-3, 300J-4, 300J-9,1857 et seq.,
69016992k, 7401-7671q, 7542, 9501-9657,
11023, 11048.

  2. In § 9.1 the table is amended by
removing the entries "§ 141.31-141.32",
"§ 141.33-141.35", "§ 142.10-142.15",
and "142.16" and adding in numerical
order new entires under the indicated
heading to read as follows:

§9.1   OMB approvals under the Paperwork
Reduction Act.
   40 CFR citation
                      OMB Control No.
     National Primary Drinking Water
              Regulaitons
141.31(a)-(c) 	  2040-0090
141.31(d) 	  2040-0209
141.31(e) 	  2040-0090
141.32(a)-(g)	  2040-0090
141.33(a)-(d)	  2040-0090
141.33(e) 	  2040-0209
141.201-141.210 	 2040-0209

-------
26022
Federal Register/Vol.  65,  No. 87/Thursday, May  4,  2000/Rules and Regulations
   40 CFR citation
       OMB Control No.
     National Primary Drinking Water
       Regulations Implementation
142.10-142.13 	 2040-0090
142.14(aHe)	 2040-0090
142.14(f)	 2040-0209
142.14{g)	 2040-0090
142.15{a)	 2040-0090, 2040-
                     0209
142,1 S(bHd)	 2040-0090
142.16{a) 	 2040-0209
142,16{bHe)	 2040-0090
PART 141—NATIONAL PRIMARY
DRINKING WATER REGULATIONS

  1. 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,
300}-9, and 300J-11-
  2. Section 141.11 is amended by
revising paragraph (d)(2) to read as
follows:
§141.11  Maximum contaminant levels for
inorganic chemicals
*    *    *    *    *
  (d) *  *  *
  (2) The non-community water system
is meeting the public notification
requirements under § 141.209, including
continuous posting of die fact that
nitrate levels exceed 10 mg/1 and the
potential health effects of exposure; and
*****
  3. Sections 141.21[g)(l) and (g)(2),
141.22(b), 141.23(n) and (o),
141.26(a)(4), (b)(5), 141.30(d), 141.63(b),
141.133(b)(l)(i), (b)(2), (b)(3) and
(c)(l)(i) are amended by revising
"§ 141.32" to read "subpart Q" and in
§ 141.133(c)(2)(i) by revising
"§ 141.32(a)(l)(iii)(E) (which appears
twice) to "subpart Q" and in
§ 141.33(c)(2)(ii) by revising
"S 141.133(e)(78)" to read "subpart Q."
§§141.21,141.22,141.23,141.26,141.30,
141.63, and 141.133,  [Amended]
  4. Section 141.23 is amended by
removing paragraph (i)(4) and revising
paragraph (f)(2), to read as follows:

§141.23 Inorganic chemical sampling and
analytical requirements.
*****
  (f)* * *
  (2) Where nitrate or nitrite sampling
results indicate an exceedance of the
maximum contaminant level, the system
shall take a confirmation sample within
24 hours of the system's receipt of
notification of the analytical results of
the first sample. Systems unable to
comply with the 24-hour sampling
requirement must immediately notify
persons served by the public water
system in accordance with § 141.202
and meet other Tier 1 public
notification requirements under Subpart
Q of this part. Systems exercising this
option must take and analyze a
confirmation sample within two weeks
of notification of the analytical results of
the first sample.
                                       §141.24 [Amended]
                                         5. Part 141 is amended by removing
                                       §§ 141.24(f)(15)(iii) and
                          6. In Part 141, 'the heading for Subpart
                        D is revised to read as follows:

                        Subpart D — Reporting and Record
                        Keeping

                          7. Section 141.31 is amended by
                        revising paragraph (d), to read as
                        follows:

                        §141.31 Reporting requirements.
                        *****
                          (d) The public water system, within
                        10 days of completing the public
                        notification requirements under Subpart
                        Q of this part for the initial public
                        notice and any repeat notices, must
                        submit to the primacy agency a
                        certification that it has fully complied
                        with the public notification regulations.
                        The public water system must include
                        with this certification a representative
                        copy of each type of notice distributed,
                        published, posted, and made available
                        to the persons served by the system and
                        to the media.
                        *****

                          8. Section 141.32 is amended by
                        revising the introductory paragraph, to
                        read as follows:

                        §141.32 Public notification.
                          The requirements in this section
                        apply until the requirements of Subpart
                        Q of this part are applicable. Public
                        water systems where EPA directly
                        implements the public water system
                        supervision program must comply with
                        the requirements in Subpart Q of this
                        part on October 31, 2000. All other
                        public water systems must comply with
                        the requirements in Subpart Q of this
                        part on May 6, 2002 or on the date the
                        State-adopted rule becomes effective,
                        whichever comes first.
                        *****

                          9. Section 141.33 is amended by
                        adding paragraph (e), to read as follows:
§ 1 41 .33 Record maintenance.
*****
  (e) Copies of public notices issued
pursuant to Subpart Q of this part and
certifications made to the primacy
agency pursuant to § 141.31 must be
kept for three years after issuance.
  10. Section 141.75 is amended by
revising paragraphs (a)(5)(ii) and
(b)(3)(ii) to read as follows:

§ 141.75 Reporting and record keeping
requirements.
  (a) * *  *
  (5) * *  *
  (ii) If at  any time the turbidity exceeds
5 NTU, the system must consult with
the primacy agency as soon as practical,
but no later than 24 hours after the
exceedance is known, in accordance
with the public notification
requirements under § 141.203(b)(3).
*****
  (b) * *  *
  (3) * *  *
  (ii) If at  any time the turbidity exceeds
5 NTU, the system must consult with
the primacy agency as soon as practical,
but no later than 24 hours after the
exceedance is known, in accordance
with the public notification
requirements under § 141.203(b)(3).
*****
  11. Section 141.153  is amended by:
  a. Revising (c)(3) introductory text.
  b. Adding paragraphs (c)(3)(iii) and
                                         c. Revising paragraphs (d)(l)(i),
                                       (d)(4)(lx) and (d)(6).
                                         d. Revising paragraphs (f)(3) and
                                       (0(4).
                                         The additions and revisions are as
                                       follows:

                                       § 141.153 Content of the reports.
                                       *****
                                         (c) *  * *
                                         (3) A report that contains data on
                                       contaminants that EPA regulates using
                                       any of the following terms must include
                                       the applicable definitions:
                                       *****
                                         (iii) Maximum residual disinfectant
                                       level goal or MRDLG: The level of a
                                       drinking water disinfectant below
                                       which there is no known or expected
                                       risk to health. MRDLGs do not reflect
                                       the benefits of the use of disinfectants
                                       to control microbial contaminants.
                                         (iv) Maximum residual disinfectant
                                       level or MRDL: The highest level of a
                                       disinfectant allowed in drinking water.
                                       There is convincing evidence that
                                       addition of a disinfectant is necessary
                                       for control of microbial contaminants.
                                         (d)*  * *
                                         (1)*  * *
                                         (i) Contaminants subject to a MCL,
                                       action level, maximum residual

-------
               Federal  Register/Vol. 65, No. 87/Thursday, May 4, 2000/Rules and Regulations
                                                                     26023
disinfectant level, or treatment
technique (regulated contaminants).
  (ix) The likely source(s) of detected
contaminants to the best of the
operator's knowledge. Specific
information regarding contaminants
may be available in sanitary surveys and
source water assessments, and should
be used when available to the operator.
If the operator lacks specific information
on the likely source, the report must
include one or more of the typical
sources for that contaminant listed in
appendix A to this subpart that is most
applicable to the system.
*****
  (6) The table(s) must clearly identify
any data  indicating violations of MCLs,
MKDLs, or treatment techniques, and
the report must contain a clear and
readily understandable explanation of
the violation including: the length of the
violation, the potential adverse health
effects, and actions taken by the system
to address the violation. To describe the
potential health effects, the system must
use the relevant language of appendix'A
to this subpart.
*****
  (f) * * *
  (3) Lead and copper control
requirements prescribed by subpart I of
this part. For systems that fail to take
one or more actions prescribed by
§§141.80(d), 141.81,141.82,  141.83 or
141.84, the report must include the
applicable language of appendix A to
this subpart for lead, copper, or both.
  (4) Treatment techniques for
Acrylamide  and Epichlorohydrin
prescribed by subpart K of this part. For
systems that violate the requirements of
subpart K of this part, the report must;
include the relevant language from
appendix A  to this subpart.
*****
  12. Section 141.154 is amended by
revising 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 § 141.30, must
include health effects language for
TTHMs prescribed by appendix A.

  13. Section 141.155 is amended by
revising paragraph (h) to read as
follows:

§141.155  Report delivery and record
keeping.
*****

  (h) Any system subject to this subpart
must retain copies of its Consumer
Confidence Report for no less than 3
years.

  14.  Appendix A to Subpart O is
revised to read as follows:

-------
26024
Federal Register/Vol.  65, No. 87/Thursday, May 4, 2000/Rules and Regulations
                                                    _ ra

                                                    I*
                                                         £ ii P OT lu — -^ o to —

                                                         5|B|*€-gS&S
                                                          ^j  CO ra 3 TO > MJ
                                                         = 3 O
                                                         •=r;"a   j?o   - o **
                                                    2
                                                    0.
                                                                           o
                                                                           0)
                «S*1?   8.
                &?ga.S«   °-s

              m;tsifi|is
                   J §11 g § I
                   O.-S £ w h -S »
                              1

                              tii
                              •a
                              c
                              ID
                                        I
                                                                           O
                                                                           I-
                                                                           1

-------
          Federal Register/Vol. 65, No. 87/Thursday, May 4, 2000/Rules and Regulations
                                                             26025
I
a
                           •2
•a

1


•s

.1
          c w
          <= .9
          £ E
            2
          |8

          If
                                     *• £ S
                                     Kl

   .
S 
-------
26026
Federal Register/Vol. 65, No. 87/Thursday, May 4, 2000/Rules and Regulations
                                        6-g
                                       »2 m
                                         o
                                       "co "55
                                        o> .22
                                       5 °-
                                       •a-
                                           CO    —
                                       III
                                       11:
                                       b
                                   S c 5
                                   mo.—
                                   ^ co *^-
                                   jo co *"



                                   l!!l
                                   ra _ S?™
                                   = .H^ i
                                   lii'i
                                   g Co js Co
                                   HI
II
                                                                         O
                                                                         _ to"
                                                                         .IE
                                                                         o
         §
                           o
                           S
    a:

    8,
    £1
         3

                                                                         in
                                                                         TT
                 CO

                 IT
                                                            m
                                                            o
                                       CM
                                       •g.

                                       &
                                       $>
                                               .0.


                                               •a

-------
           Federal Register/Vol. 65, No. 87/Thursday, May 4, 2000/Rules and Regulations
                                                                              26027
                  0 C 2 H= C


                  I|8~-tf
                  co .E  c c fe

                 : o|d "If
            » i S 8 ™
                                                         go  i JS x  c-g2§§

                                                         ill  8f:  slill
                                                         -9.   *^-§  te.S " a> ^
                                                                  If 8 5  I
                                                                         ei)
                                                                    S ro ••= -55 fc ei)
                                                                    Ji u_ «- -E T3 ra
                                                                    c O O- c^
                     ,Sa£ S
                !!<§££'!! c

                !fio§g>if»
                >,g^icncBE9>,.c2..c   3 _ •- 'a

                lllS'^lsSB-BSpSe
                •QT3XCBO>'"-Q ^ CD ^
                                                     im
                                                              Q-Ea-
                 Sfo3gfiiiii3§lLa-S a. § S

                                                      CO     CO
                                                                       ;t«~
.ffi i i

Q-2,§

Mcjo
w cae

RM?
€«J

_ §£ .
El S"2


lilt


»f?!
§§"8^
"w
S
!ii
eg

!m-

^1
a> 5 J2

5s I
111"

'C jS"co

^03
E'-g.g
P CD ;
4= en "5
     S'
                  i"s

                  1"
«
iD" g «

!8I

11-t

1^2
* o =
ES.g
O (O
S M^


il-l
I*"
•a j, c

sgj


E^CD
3 C P1
^2.2 (5
O « -C
£00

ifig

  to"
  f« «

^il




ll!%
•C CD CO .E
« E = E

5
                                         CO O 0>

                                         8   1
                                         s ,_•§
                                         0   5

                                         E   'o
                                         p o -a
                                         *: D) g

                                         o>co ra
                                         .E-S co

                                         •g5J
                                         to D o>

                                                           I

                                                           I
                                                           •a

                                                           I
s
o
*-
3
>
i
S

r
L
^
r
5
r i
~* c
*. ^-
i 1

T-

r-


^ £
L C
1
z
?
c:
IT
C
C
c
£


1
t I
I
*
in
a
CM
i
C
T—
c\
g


1 !
j
e
r«-
c
I--
g
C
r-
&
c. w
0}
pi
f.
11
: si
t ra = 2
?!!
O D)C
••t= c J
ffl =5
£^ cv
o
in
g
g
CD
V
IT
C

•
: 1
1
K
| &
. : ^
es
a
t

1=

I

-------
26028
Federal Register/Vol. 65, No. 87/Thursday, May 4, 2000/Rules and Regulations
             .   o c =  .c


                                  ^-





                                                             lll



                                                                            llS


                              11
                  cS
                  la
                  5! 
S
la
&
                                                 O
             >*
            S -2
                                                             8
                                                             CM
                                                 JS
                                                 S

                                                                     1
                   f
                   CNj,
                   S
                                                                               II
                                                                               £
                                                                               .C
                                                                               a.
                                                                   9
                                                                   CM

-------
            Federal Register/Vol. 65, No. 87/Thursday, May 4, 2000/Rules and Regulations
                                                                             26029
  I r 5 'C "O O) 0) *c fl* 	

  ii&S-sgiis
          w
                        "cb •
                        .E .- 
L
1

i
i
i
: -s
c
CN
C
c\




c
c
V



c\








c
£
c
g
c
g
1
T"
£
C
c
C
c
"c
c
c

c
c
c
ci
g
V
c
a
•*-


'

: §
V



T-
:
.
b
"


X

CN
CN




g
a
T-



g
<=>








C
t








t







J
: c
g
'

c
• g
,_
;

IT
g
: §
;

"c
£
, a.
, T
< i
c
c
N
1




; i
r*



N


.
b

—
1

c
c
§


c
c
c
i
T-



1
c






E \


















•*
L
L
2
.Q

S
                                                 2
                                                 °
                                                                         •g
i
.1
a
s

-------
26030
Federal Register/Vol. 65, No. 87/Thursday, May 4, 2000/Rules and Regulations

                                        O..— 0)

                                        a**i2*lij

                                        *m?f5£
                                               /n





                                                        1
                                                        iR
                                                       "g;
                                                       S
                                                       CM
                                                   <£
                                                   O)

                                                   ra

                                                   u

                                                   .<£
                                                   Q

        I
                   §
                                           S

                  o
                  o
                                                       CM
                                                   S
                                                   O
                                                               •g
                                               S
                                               
-------
Federal Register/Vol. 65, No. 87/Thursday, May 4, 2000/Rules and Regulations
26031
. CD i. .b '  c
^ CD £Z Q 35 (U f^ O -* sv1 to CO
-}— .' 1 Q -^T £} gj Q CD iS Q
) "5 CD "3 oSQmSi^S*
cno-c •» « o J= -B o 2> li- jr c
w o ™ cc « u — 5 x re i_ c: E
!«§!» = «° 1 « If - g-JI ! "s
i = >• E -o c >. E •§ CD re =i ra .2
• 1 ll -S-ill 55f»l'=
i-'S-?S "§"" S S §"2r!2*i
^°l,-B'°§-pai'i-0«
=ii'yiiiii|iiij'ret
) W £0
0)
*-P
O
0)
c ai
_ 0
ll

I 1 If
1 3 "O "
i 1 |S
' '5 £l?
i ^ ° M
) , 3 .fc gSocDa)3o2-o
CO CO CO
CO ^ 'S
•i § E
> •= • —
.2 1
.= 1 1 §
c o ra •S
' "1 I
Es s
°§ i^ >
11 si S «
O o re .^ ^3
i o , to re "re b
CO Q §



c


c
T-
c
^

c
^
c





II
3
§
o 2
u
Q
^
in S
o
S
II
_l
Q.
a.
CD . __^

O o_
— . :§ s
So "
a. re w
S -^ c
•2 c E
1 I 1

CO O O
CD ~ g-
O^2
CD 'C ffl
|S£
CO
i
2
§
5
"S
CO
=1
1
1 »
^
to b
II
3
{£
2
II
a
OL
^

u
|





^-^
1
 -*± o c
Siig-g

































-------
26032
Federal Register/Vol. 65, No. 87/Thursday, May 4, 2000/Rules and Regulations




1
•S3
§
1
§
|
<5
Q
1—
f
O


<£
o
<

i
4


















1
!
&

s
S3
8
I

o
o
"*

ii
o



If
Oof

Ho
5 .
If
n
*-


^^


3.


C
*fs
S
g
o


c
!
i
!
.1

•c
•a

i
ir


cc
a




T-







V








i
i
£
S
S
2
C
i
•c '=
f s
1 1
n
?O re
° 15
r\ ?
1 1
3 t
a, E
|| 1
S i- J3 »
;1 i 8 !
5 c
n
CD .
gra S
•c£ v
H
O
K C
P C
^ T-

0
o c
o c

II
Q
s





1 I
(D ^

" "x c
L 0 £
j "D C

1 1
~ _£;
o c
taining chlorobenzene in excess
of the MCL over many years
could experience problems with
their liver or kidneys.
Some neoole who drink water con-
's
1
'5 "S
2 'c
— •£
S -
'£ E
03 C
s: J=
o
— a.
njo E
3 _§
3 t
o tr
5


c



c
c
C£

C
c
c
V



(C


£
c
^ c
^-
b S
£: a
b


c
N



C
N

C
C
C
V



r*.
c
1
-E
a
fc c
a
•3
|

£
£
3:
.i
c
^
T-


taining cis-1 ,2-dichloroethylene in
excess of the MCL over many
years could experience problems
with their liver.
.
,




i


















*
'.



i










-------
      Federal Register/Vol. 65, No. 87/Thursday, May 4, 2000/Rules and Regulations
                                                      26033
§|1 I §£|J| §||! §£|j §1|| 8»11E§"|I~C8
ifsi.i^ii iiji iibijlii' iisitiskSMi
Hi:illlU ll!^l^§|li|i lfj:|ll!!;ll
l^llllSi^lMi !         !*i!l!i3g*l!
                             J!tiijiiNt:i
                                     cxT 
                                          T-
    .
          a> .T :£ >•:=  £"£ 2 j? o> .2 _i M


-
                                    CO
                                         CO
i i
i I

i c
1 I
1 (C
' t
j £
HI 8
?•§ 5
J-B &
1 C

c

in
) O
> o
c

: o

S
C
c

i
JZ
E
"s- i
n
.i
I
t


!
J i
o £
"S a
1 |
•g &
3

a

in
S
c
in
o
s
fi


' jg
1
c
o
c/
•2
g
q=
1

E
a
|
g
5 C
s 1
c
c
N
c:
t-
:o
C3
0

•-




•g
c
1
o
! .»
: T
i I

: 3
E
, 1
•6
• i
££
<
z

S
|

o
i
c
5-


• —
: ^
<
t

(\
1 ^

n
" i
\ 1
: S.
\ E
£
d „
J i
.^" C
c
c
c


c
c:
c
T—







C
^
M 1
3 1C
3 JS «

5 1 I
> -Si |
If 3
1» f
il g
52 S
il f
i •£: v
i 5

a

in
o
o
c
in
S
s
' g


c
S 1
JS

E

•E
3
••s
: 1
i2 a
Og. E
I J
JB i
0 &
: e

• iv

i-.
. T-

: C
C

-------
26034
Federal Register/Vol. 65, No. 87/Thursday, May 4,  2000/Rules and Regulations
                    m
                    ra
                    •O


                    "5
       &'
                            U)
                            5  .
     (3
                    1
      a
    0
                    o
                    o
                    1
                    '

to" (6
-g>2
                                     I"
                                     IE
                                     E^
                                                   .
                                                   Q -
                                                  b
                                                  o.
                                                                       f


                                                                       I
                                                                     8!
                                                                    -I5
                                                                    §3>°
                                                                       £

                                                                            -


                                                                       EZZ 0.0.0.0. 0.1-

-------
               Federal Register /Vol.  65, No.  87/Thursday, May 4, 2000/Rules  and Regulations
                                                                        26035
Appendices B and C to Subpart O
[Removed]

  15. Appendices B and C to Subpart O
are removed.,
  16. Section 141.175 is amended by
revising paragraphs (c)(l) and (c)(2) to
read as follows:

§141.175  Reporting and record keeping
requirements.
*****
  (c)* *  *
  (1) If at any time the turbidity exceeds
1 NTU in representative samples  of
filtered water in a system using
conventional filtration treatment  or
direct filtration, the system must  consult
with the primacy agency as soon  as
practical, but no later than 24 hours
after the exceedance is known, in
accordance with the public notification
requirements under § 141.203(b)(3).
  (2) If at any time the turbidity in
representative samples of filtered water
exceed the maximum level set by the
State under § 142.173(b) for filtration
technologies  other than conventional
filtration treatment, direct filtration,
slow sand filtration, or diatomaceous
earth filtration, the system must consult
with the primacy agency as soon  as
practical, but no later than 24 hours
after the exceedance is known, in
accordance with the public notification
requirements under § 141.203(b)(3).
  17. Part 141 is amended by adding
Subpart Q, to read as follows:

Subpart Q—Public Notification of
Drinking Water Violations

Sec.
141.201 General public notification
   requirements.
141.202 Tier 1 Public Notice—Form,
   manner, and frequency of notice.
141.203 Tier 2 Public Notice—Form,
   manner, and frequency of notice.
141.204 Tier 3 Public Notice—Form,
   manner, and frequency of notice.
141.205 Content of the public notice.
141.206 Notice to new billing units  or new
   customers.
141.207 Special notice of the availability of
   unregulated contaminant monitoring
   results.
141.208 Special notice for exceedance of
   the SMCL for fluoride.
141.209 Special notice for nitrate
   exceedances above MCL by non-
   community water systems (NCWS),
   where granted permission by the
   primacy agency under § 141.11(d).
141.210 Notice by primacy agency on
   behalf of the public water system.
Appendix A to Subpart Q of Part 141—
   NPDWR Violations and Situations
   Requiring Public Notice
Appendix B to Subpart Q of Part 141—
   Standard Health Effects Language for
   Public Notification
Appendix C to Subpart Q of Part 141—List ,
    of Acronyms Used in Public Notification
    Regulation

Subpart Q—Public Notification of
Drinking Water Violations

§141.201  General public notification
requirements.
  Public water systems in States with
primacy for the public water system
supervision (PWSS) program must
comply with the requirements in this  ;
subpart no later than May 6, 2002 or on
the date the State-adopted rule becomes
effective, whichever comes first. Public
water systems in jurisdictions where
EPA directly implements the PWSS
program must comply with the  •      j
requirements in this subpart on  October
31, 2000. Prior to these dates, public   •
water systems must continue to  comply
with the public notice requirements in!
§ 141.32 of this part. The term "primacy
agency" is used in this subpart to refer
to either EPA or the State or the  Tribe
in cases where EPA, the State, or the
Tribe exercises primary enforcement   >
responsibility for this subpart.
  (a) Who must give public notice? Each
owner or operator of a public water
system (community water systems, non-
transient non-community water
systems, and transient non-community
water systems) must give notice for all '•
violations of national primary drinking
water regulations (NPDWR) and for
other situations, as  listed in Table 1.
The term "NPDWR violations" is used
in this subpart to include violations of
the maximum contaminant level (MCL),
maximum residual  disinfection  level  ,
(MRDL), treatment technique (TT),    \
monitoring requirements, and testing  '
procedures in this part 141. Appendix A
to this subpart identifies the tier
assignment for each specific violation or
situation requiring a public notice.    ;
TABLE  1  TO  §141.201.—VIOLATION
   CATEGORIES  AND  OTHER  SITUA-
   TIONS REQUIRING A PUBLIC NOTICE

(1) NPDWR violations:
    (i) Failure to comply with an applicable
      maximum contaminant level (MCL) or
      maximum residual  disinfectant  level
      (MRDL).                         :
    (ii) Failure  to comply  with a prescribed
      treatment technique  (TT).
    (iii) Failure to perform water quality mon-
      itoring, as required  by the drinking
      water regulations.
    (iv) Failure  to comply with testing proce-
      dures  as prescribed  by  a  drinking
      water regulation.
(2) Variance and exemptions under sections
  1415 and 1416 of SDWA:
    (i) Operation under a variance or an ex-
      emption.
TABLE  1  TO  §141.201.—VIOLATION
  CATEGORIES  AND  OTHER  SITUA-
  TIONS  REQUIRING A  PUBLIC  NO-
  TICE—Continued

    (ii) Failure  to comply with the require-
      ments of any schedule that has been
      set under a variance or exemption.
(3) Special public notices:
    (i) Occurrence of a waterborne disease
      outbreak  or other waterborne  emer-
      gency.
    (ii) Exceedance of the nitrate MCL by
      non-community    water    systems
      (NCWS),  where granted permission by
      the primacy agency under 141.11(d) of
      this part.
    (iii) Exceedance of the secondary max-
      imum contaminant level (SMCL) for
      fluoride.
    (iv) Availability of  unregulated contami-
      nant monitoring data.
    (v) Other violations and situations deter-
      mined by the primacy agency  to re-
      quire a public notice under this sub-
      part, not already listed in Appendix A.

  (b) What type of public notice is
required for each violation or situation?
Public notice requirements are divided
into three tiers, to take into account the
seriousness of the violation or situation
and of any potential adverse health
effects that may be involved. The public
notice requirements  for each violation
or situation listed in Table 1 of this
section are determined by the tier  to
which it is assigned. Table 2 of this
section provides the definition of each
tier. Appendix A of this part identifies
the tier assignment for each specific
violation or situation.
 TABLE 2 TO § 141.201.—DEFINITION
       OF PUBLIC NOTICE TIERS

(1) Tier 1 public notice—required for NPDWR
  violations and situations with significant po-
  tential to have serious adverse effects on
  human health as a result of short-term ex-
  posure.
(2) Tier 2 public notice—required for all other
  NPDWR violations and situations with po-
  tential to have serious adverse effects on
  human health.
(3) Tier 3 public notice—required for all other
  NPDWR violations and  situations not in-
  cluded in Tier 1 and Tier 2.

  (c) Who must be notified?
  (1) Each public water system must
provide public notice to persons served
by the water system, in accordance with
this subpart. Public water systems that
sell or otherwise provide drinking water
to other public water systems (i.e., to
consecutive systems) are required to
give public notice to the owner or
operator of the consecutive system; the
consecutive system is responsible for

-------
26036
Federal Register /Vol.  65, No.  87/Thursday, May 4, 2000/Rules  and  Regulations
providing public notice to the persons it
serves.
  (2) If a public water system has a
violation in a portion of the distribution
system that is physically or
hydraulically isolated from other parts
of the distribution system, the primacy
agency may allow the system to limit
distribution of the public notice to only
persons served by that portion of the
system which is out of compliance.
Permission by the primacy agency for
limiting distribution of the notice must
be granted in writing.
  (3) A copy of the notice must also be
sent to the primacy agency, in
accordance with the requirements under
§141.31(d).

§ 141.202  Tier 1 Public Notice—Form,
manner, and frequency of notice.
  (a) Which violations or situations
require a Tier 1 public notice? Table 1
of this section lists the violation
categories and other situations requiring
a Tier 1 public notice. Appendix A to
this subpart identifies the tier
assignment for each specific violation or
situation.
TABLE  1  TO  §141.202.—VIOLATION
  CATEGORIES  AND  OTHER  SITUA-
  TIONS REQUIRING A TIER  1  PUBLIC
  NOTICE

(1) Violation of the MCL for total coliforms
  when fecal coJiform or E.  coli are present
  In the water distribution system (as speci-
  fied in §141.63(b)), or when the water sys-
  tem falls  to test for fecal coliforms or E.
  coll when any repeat sample tests positive
  for coliform (as specified in §141.21(e));
(2) Violation of the MCL for nitrate, nitrite, or
  total nitrate  and nitrite,  as  defined  in
  §141.62, or when the water system fails to
  take a confirmation sample within 24 hours
  of the system's receipt of the first sample
  showing an exceedance  of the nitrate or
  nitrite MCL, as specified in §141,23(f)(2);
(3) Excecdance of the nitrate MCL by non-
  community water systems, where permitted
  to exceed the MCL by the primacy agency
  under  §141.11(d),  as   required  under
  §141.209;
(4) Violation of the MRDL for chlorine diox-
  ide, as defined in §141.65(a), when one or
  more samples taken in the distribution sys-
  tem the day following an exceedance of
  the  MROL at the entrance of the distribu-
  tion system exceed the  MRDL, or when
  the  water system does not .take  the re-
  quired samples in the  distribution system,
  as specified In §141.133(c)(2)(i);
(5)  Violation of  the turbidity  MCL under
  §141.13(b), where the primacy agency de-
  termines after consultation  that a Tier 1 no-
  tice is required or where consultation does
  not  take place within 24  hours after the
  system learns of the violation;
                         TABLE  1  TO  §141.202.—VIOLATION
                            CATEGORIES  AND  OTHER  SITUA-
                            TIONS REQUIRING A TIER  1  PUBLIC
                            NOTICE—Continued

                         (6) Violation of the Surface Water Treatment
                           Rule (SWTR) or Interim Enhanced Surface
                           Water Treatment rule (IESWTR) treatment
                           technique requirement resulting from a sin-
                           gle exceedance of the maximum allowable
                           turbidity limit (as identified  in Appendix A),
                           where the primacy agency determines after
                           consultation that a Tier 1 notice is required
                           or where consultation does not take place
                           within 24 hours after the system learns of
                           the violation;
                         (7) Occurrence of a waterborne disease out-
                           break, as defined in §141.2,  or other wa-
                           terborne emergency (such as a failure or
                           significant interruption in key water treat-
                           ment processes, a natural disaster that dis-
                           rupts the water supply or distribution sys-
                           tem, or  a  chemical spill  or unexpected
                           loading of  possible  pathogens  into the
                           source water  that significantly increases
                           the  potential for drinking water contamina-
                           tion);
                         (8) Other violations or situations with signifi-
                           cant potential to have serious adverse ef-
                           fects on human health as a result of short-
                           term exposure, as  determined by the pri-
                           macy agency either in its regulations or on
                           a case-by-case basis.

                            (b)  When is the Tier 1 public notice
                         to be provided? What additional steps
                         are required? Public water systems
                         must:
                            (1) Provide a public notice as soon as
                         practical but no later than 24 hours after
                         the system learns of the violation;
                            (2) Initiate consultation with the
                         primacy agency as soon as practical, but
                         no later than 24 hours after the public
                         water system learns of the violation or
                         situation, to determine additional public
                         notice requirements; and
                            (3) Comply with any additional public
                         notification requirements (including any
                         repeat notices or direction on the
                         duration of the posted notices) that are
                         established as a result of the
                         consultation with the primacy agency.
                         Such requirements may include the
                         timing, form, manner, frequency, and
                         content of repeat notices (if any) and
                         other actions designed to reach all
                         persons served.
                            (c) What is the form and manner of
                         the public notice? Public water systems
                         must provide the notice within 24 hours
                         in a form and manner reasonably
                         calculated to reach all persons served.
                         The form and manner used by the
                         public water system are to fit the
                         specific situation, but must be designed
                         to reach residential, transient, and non-
                         transient users of the water system. In
                         order to reach all persons served, water
                         systems are to use, at a minimum, one
or more of the following forms of
delivery:
  (1) Appropriate broadcast media (such
as radio and television);
  (2) Posting of the notice in
conspicuous locations throughout the
area served  by the water system;
  (3) Hand delivery of the notice to
persons served by the water system; or
  (4) Another delivery method
approved in writing by the primacy
agency.

§ 141.203  Tier 2 Public Notice—Form,
manner, and frequency of notice.
  (a) Which violations or situations
require a Tier 2-public notice? Table 1
of this section lists the violation
categories and other situations requiring
a Tier 2 public notice. Appendix A to
this subpart identifies the tier
assignment  for each specific violation or
situation.
TABLE  1  TO  §141.203.—VIOLATION
  CATEGORIES  AND  OTHER  SITUA-
  TIONS REQUIRING A TIER 2  PUBLIC
  NOTICE

(1)  Ail violations of the MCL,  MRDL,  and
  treatment  technique requirements, except
  where a Tier 1  notice  is required under
  §141.202(a) or where the  primacy agency
  determines that a Tier 1 notice is required;
(2)  Violations of the  monitoring and testing
  procedure  requirements,  where  the  pri-
  macy agency determines that a Tier 2 rath-
  er than a  Tier 3 public notice is required,
  taking into account potential health impacts
  and persistence of the violation; and
(3) Failure to comply with the terms and con-
  ditions of any variance or exemption in
  place.

  (b)  When is the Tier 2 public notice
to be provided?
  (1) Public water systems must provide
the public notice as soon  as practical,
but no later than 30 days after the
system learns of the violation. If the
public notice is posted, the notice must
remain in place for as long as the
violation or situation persists, but in no
case for less than seven days, even if the
violation or situation is resolved. The
primacy agency may, in appropriate
circumstances, allow additional time for
the initial notice of up to  three months
from the date the system learns of the
violation. It is not appropriate for the
primacy agency to grant an extension to
the 30-day deadline for any unresolved
violation or to allow across-the-board
extensions by rule or policy for other
violations or situations requiring a Tier
2 public notice. Extensions granted by
the primacy agency must  be in writing.
  (2) The public water system must
repeat the notice every three months as

-------
               Federal Register/Vol. 65, No.  87/Thursday, May 4, 2000/Rules and Regulations
                                                                      26037
long as the violation or situation
persists, unless the primacy agency
determines that appropriate
circumstances warrant a different repeat
notice frequency. In no circumstance
may the repeat notice be given less
frequently than once per year. It is not
appropriate for the primacy agency to
allow less frequent repeat notice for an
MCL violation under the Total Coliform
Rule or a treatment technique violation
under the Surface Water Treatment Rule
or Interim Enhanced Surface Water
Treatment Rule. It is also not
appropriate for the primacy agency to
allow through its rules or policies
across-the-board reductions in the
repeat notice frequency for other
ongoing violations requiring a Tier 2
repeat notice. Primacy agency
determinations allowing repeat notices
to be given less frequently than once
every three months must be in writing.
   (3) For the turbidity violations
specified in this paragraph, public water
systems must consult with the primacy
agency as soon as practical but no later
than 24 hours after the public water
system learns of the violation, to
determine whether a Tier 1 public
notice under  § 141.202(a) is required to
protect public health. When
consultation does not take place within
the 24-hour period, the water system
must distribute a  Tier 1 notice of the
violation within the next 24 hours (i.e.,
no later than  48 hours after the system
learns of the violation), following the
requirements under § 141.202(b) and (c).
Consultation  with the primacy agency is
required for:
   (i) Violation of the turbidity MCL
under § 141.13(b); or
   (ii) Violation of the  SWTR or IESWTR
treatment technique requirement
resulting from a single exceedance of
the maximum allowable turbidity limit.
   (c) What is  the form and manner of
the Tier 2 public notice? Public water
systems must provide the initial public
notice and any repeat notices  in a form
and manner that is reasonably
calculated to  reach persons served in
the required time period. The form and
manner of the public notice may vary
based on the specific situation and type
of water system, but it must at a
minimum meet the following
requirements:
   fl) Unless directed otherwise by the
primacy agency in writing, community
water systems must provide notice by:
   (i) Mail or other direct delivery to
each customer receiving a bill and to
other service  connections to which
water is delivered by the public water
system; and
  (ii) Any other method reasonably
calculated to  reach other persons
regularly served by the system, if they
would not normally be reached by the:
notice required in paragraph (c)(l)(i) pf
this section. Such persons may include
those who do not pay water bills or do
not have service connection addresses
(e.g., house renters, apartment dwellers,
university students, nursing home
patients, prison inmates, etc.). Other
methods may include: Publication in a
local newspaper; delivery of multiple'
copies for distribution by customers that
provide their drinking water to others'
(e.g., apartment building owners or large
private employers); posting in public :
places served by the system or on the :
Internet; or delivery to community
organizations.
  (2) Unless directed otherwise by the
primacy agency in writing, non-
community water systems must provide
notice by:
  (i) Posting the notice in conspicuous
locations throughout the distribution
system frequented by persons served by
the system, or by mail or direct delivery
to each customer and service connection
(where known); and                 i
  (ii) Any other method reasonably
calculated to reach other persons served
by the system if they would not
normally be reached by the notice    ,
required in paragraph (c)(2)(i) of this :
section. Such persons may include   •
those served who may not see a posted
notice because the posted notice is not
in a location they routinely pass by.   I
Other methods may include: Publication
in a local newspaper or newsletter
distributed to customers; use of E-mail
to notify employees or students; or,   ,
delivery of multiple copies in central
locations (e.g., community centers),   j

§141.204  Tier 3 Public Notice—Form,   :
manner, and frequency of notice.
  (a) Which violations or situations
require a Tier 3 public notice? Table 1\
of this section lists the violation
categories and other situations requiring
a Tier 3 public notice. Appendix A to ,
this subpart identifies the tier
assignment for each specific violation or
situation.
TABLE  1   To  §141.204.—VIOLATION
  CATEGORIES  AND  OTHER  SITUA-
  TIONS REQUIRING A TIER 3  PUBLIC
  NOTICE

(1) Monitoring violations under 40 CFR part
  141, except where a Tier 1 notice is re-
  quired under § 141.202(a) or where the pri-
  macy agency determines that a Tier 2 no-
  tice is required;
TABLE  1  To §141.204.—VIOLATION
   CATEGORIES   AND   OTHER  SITUA-
   TIONS REQUIRING A TIER 3 PUBLIC
   NOTICE—Continued

(2) Failure to comply with a testing procedure
  established in 40 CFR  part 141, except
  where a Tier 1  notice is  required under
  § 141.202(a)) or where the primacy agency
  determines that a Tier 2 notice is required;
(3) Operation under a variance granted under
  Section 1415  or an exemption granted
  under Section 1416  of the Safe Drinking
  Water Act;
(4) Availability  of  unregulated contaminant
  monitoring  results,  as  required  under
  §141.207; and
(5) Exceedance of the fluoride secondary
  maximum  contaminant  level (SMCL),  as
  required under § 141.208.

   (b) When is the Tier 3 public notice
to be provided?
   (1) Public water systems must provide
the public notice not later than one year
after the public water system learns of
the violation or situation or begins
operating under a variance or
exemption. Following the initial notice,
the public water system must repeat the
notice annually for as long as the
violation, variance, exemption, or other
situation persists. If the public notice is
posted, the notice must remain in place
for as long as the violation, variance,
exemption, or other situation persists,
but in no case less than seven days
(even if the violation or situation is
resolved).
   (2) (2) Instead of individual Tier 3
public notices, a public water system
may use an annual report detailing all
violations and situations that occurred
during the previous twelve months, as
long as the timing requirements of
paragraph (b)(l) of this section are met.
  (c) What is the form and manner of
the Tier 3 public notice? Public water
systems must provide the initial notice
and any repeat notices in a form and
manner that is reasonably calculated to
reach persons served in the required
time period. The form and manner of
the public notice may vary based on the
specific situation and type of water
system, but it must at a minimum meet
the following requirements:
  (1) Unless directed otherwise by the
primacy agency in writing, community
water systems must provide notice by:
  (i)  Mail or other direct delivery to
each customer receiving a bill and to
other service connections to which
water is delivered by the public water
system; and
  (ii) Any other method reasonably
calculated to reach other persons
regularly served by the system, if they
would not normally be reached by the
notice required in paragraph (c)(l)(i) of

-------
26038
Federal Register/Vol.  65,  No. 87/Thursday, May  4,  2000/Rules and Regulations
this section. Such persons may include
those who do not pay water bills or do
not have service connection addresses
(e.g., house renters, apartment dwellers,
university students, nursing home
patients, prison inmates, etc.). Other
methods may include: Publication in a
local newspaper; delivery of multiple
copies for distribution by customers that
provide their drinking water to others
(e.g., apartment building owners or large
private employers); posting in public
places or on the Internet; or delivery to
community organizations.
  (2) Unless directed otherwise by the
primacy agency in writing, non-
community water systems must provide
notice by:
  (i) Posting the notice in conspicuous
locations throughout the distribution
system frequented by persons served by
the system, or by mail or direct delivery
to each customer and service connection
(where known); and
  (ii) Any other method reasonably
calculated to reach other persons served
by the system, if they would not
normally be reached by the notice
required in paragraph (c)(2)(i) of this
section. Such persons may include  ,
those who may not see a posted notice
because the notice is not in a location
they routinely pass by. Other methods
may include: Publication in a local
newspaper or newsletter distributed to
customers; use of E-mail to notify
employees or students; or, delivery of
multiple copies in central locations
(e.g., community centers).
  (a) In what situations may the
Consumer Confidence Report be used to
meet the Tier 3 public notice
requirements?  For community water
systems, the Consumer Confidence
Report (CCR) required under Subpart O
of this part may be used as a vehicle for
the initial Tier 3 public notice and all
required repeat notices, as long as:
  (l) The CCR is provided to persons
served no later than 12 months after the
system learns of the violation or
situation as required under § 141.204(b);
  (2) The Tier  3 notice  contained in the
CCR follows the content requirements
underj 141.205; and
  (3) The CCR is distributed following
the delivery requirements under
§141.204(c).

§ 141.205  Content of the public notice.
  (a) What elements must be included
!n the public notice for violations of
National Primary Drinking Water
Regulations (NPDWR) or other
situations requiring a public notice?
When a public water system violates a
NPDWR or has a situation requiring
public notification, each public notice
must include the following elements:
                          (1) A description of the violation or
                        situation, including the contaminant(s)
                        of concern, and (as applicable) the
                        contaminant level (s);
                          (2) When the violation or situation
                        occurred;
                          (3) Any potential adverse health
                        effects from the violation or situation,
                        including the standard language under
                        paragraph (d)(l) or (d)(2) of this section,
                        whichever is applicable;
                          (4) The population at risk, including
                        subpopulations particularly vulnerable
                        if exposed to the contaminant in their
                        drinking water;
                          (5) Whether alternative water supplies
                        should be used;
                          (6) What actions consumers should
                        take, including when they should seek
                        medical help, if known;
                          (7) What the system is doing to correct
                        the violation or situation;
                          (8) When the water system expects to
                        return to compliance or resolve the
                        situation;
                          (9) The name, business address, and
                        phone number of the water system
                        owner, operator, or designee of the
                        public water system as a source of
                        additional information concerning the
                        notice; and
                          (10) A statement to encourage the
                        notice recipient to distribute the public
                        notice to other persons served, using the
                        standard language under paragraph
                        (d)(3) of this section, where applicable.
                          (b) What elements must be included
                        in the public notice for public water
                        systems operating under a variance or
                        exemption?
                          (1) If a public water system has been
                        granted a variance or an exemption, the
                        public notice must contain:
                          (i) An explanation of the reasons for
                        the variance or exemption;
                          (ii) The date on which the variance or
                        exemption was issued;
                          (iii) A brief status report on the steps
                        the system is taking to install treatment,
                        find alternative sources of water, or
                        otherwise comply with the terms and
                        schedules of the variance or exemption;
                        and
                          (iv) A notice of any opportunity for
                        public input in the review of the
                        variance or exemption.
                          (2) If a public water system violates
                        the conditions of a variance or
                        exemption, the public notice must
                        contain the ten elements listed in
                        paragraph (a) of this section.
                          (c) How is the public notice to be
                        presented?
                          (1) Each public notice required by this
                        section:
                          (i) Must be displayed  in a
                        conspicuous way when printed or
                        posted;
                          (ii) Must not contain overly technical
                        language or very small print;
  (iii) Must not be formatted in a way
that defeats the purpose of the notice;
  (iv) Must not contain language which
nullifies the purpose of the notice.
  (2) Each public notice required by this
section must comply with multilingual
requirements, as follows:
  (i) For public water systems serving a
large proportion of non-English
speaking consumers, as determined by
the primacy agency, the public notice
must contain information in the
appropriate language(s) regarding the
importance of the notice or contain a
telephone number or address where
persons served may contact the water
system to obtain a translated copy of the
notice or to request assistance in the
appropriate language.
  (ii) In cases where the primacy agency
has not determined what constitutes a
large proportion of non-English
speaking consumers, the public water
system must include in the public
notice the same information as in
paragraph (c)(2)(i) of this section, where
appropriate to reach a large proportion
of non-English speaking persons served
by the water system.
  (d) What standard language must
public water systems include in their
public notice? Public water systems are
required to include the following
standard language in their public notice:
  (1) Standard health effects language
for MCL or MRDL violations, treatment
technique violations, and violations of
the condition of a variance or
exemption. Public water systems must
include in each public notice the health
effects language specified in Appendix
B to this subpart corresponding to each
MCL, MRDL, and treatment technique
violation listed in Appendix A to this
subpart, and for each violation of a
condition of a variance or exemption.
  (2) Standard language for monitoring
and testing procedure violations. Public
water systems must include the
following language in their notice,
including the language necessary to fill
in the blanks, for all monitoring and
testing procedure violations listed in
Appendix A to this subpart:
  We are required to monitor your drinking
water for specific contaminants on a regular
basis. Results of regular monitoring are an
indicator of whether or not your drinking
water meets health standards. During
[compliance period], we "did not monitor or
test" or "did not complete all monitoring or
testing" for [contaminant(s)], and therefore
cannot be sure of the quality of your drinking
water during that time.
  (3) Standard language to encourage
the  distribution of the-public notice to
all persons  served. Public water systems
must include in their notice the
following language (where applicable):

-------
               Federal Register/Vol.  65, No. 87/Thursday, May 4, 2000/Rules  and Regulations
                                                                       26039
  Please share this information with all the
other people who drink this water, especially
those who may not have received this notice
directly (for example, people in apartments,
nursing homes, schools, and businesses). You
can do this by posting this notice in a public
place or distributing copies by hand or mail.

§ 141.206  Notice to new billing units or
new customers.
  (a) What is the requirement for
community water systems? Community
water systems must give a copy of the
most recent public notice for any
continuing violation, the existence of a
variance or exemption, or other ongoing
situations requiring a public notice to
all new billing units or new customers
prior to or at the time service begins.
  (b) What is the requirement for non-
community water systems? Non-
community water systems must
continuously post the public notice in
conspicuous locations in order to
inform new consumers of any
continuing violation, variance or
exemption, or other situation requiring
a public notice  for as long as the
violation, variance, exemption, or other
situation persists.

§ 141.207  Special notice of the availability
of unregulated contaminant monitoring
results.
  (a) When is the special notice to be
given? The owner or operator of a
community water system or non-
transient, non-community water system
required to monitor under § 141.40 must
notify persons served by the system of
the availability  of the results of such
sampling no later than 12 months after
the monitoring  results are known.
  (b) What is the form and manner of
the special notice? The form and
manner of the public notice must follow
the requirements for a Tier 3 public
notice prescribed in §§ 141.204(c),
(d)(l), and (d)(3). The notice must also
identify a person and provide the
telephone number to contact for
information on  the monitoring results.

§ 141.208  Special notice for exceedance of
the SMCL for fluoride.
  (a) When is the special notice to be
given? Community water systems that
exceed the fluoride secondary
maximum contaminant level (SMCL) of
2 mg/1 as specified in § 143.3
(determined by the last single sample
taken in accordance with § 141.23), but
do not exceed the maximum        :
contaminant level (MCL) of 4 mg/1 for
fluoride (as specified in § 141.62), must
provide the public notice in paragraph
(c) of this section to persons served.  ;
Public notice must be provided as soon
as practical but no later than 12 months
from the day the water system learns of
the exceedance. A copy of the notice
must also be sent to all new billing units
and new customers at the time service
begins and to the State public health
officer. The public water system must
repeat the notice at least annually for as
long as the SMCL is exceeded. If the  '
public notice is posted, the notice must
remain in place for as long as the SMCL
is exceeded, but in no case less than
seven days (even if the exceedance is
eliminated). On a case-by-case basis, the
primacy agency may require an initial
notice sooner than 12 months and
repeat notices more frequently than  •
annually.
  (b) What is the form and manner of
the special notice? The form and
manner of the public notice (including
repeat notices) must follow the
requirements for a Tier 3 public notice
in § 141.204(c) and (d)(l) and (d)(3).
  (c) What mandatory language must be
contained in the special notice? The
notice must contain the following
language, including the language
necessary to fill in the blanks:
  This is an alert about your drinking water
and a cosmetic dental problem that might
affect children under nine years of age. At
low levels, fluoride can help prevent cavities,
but children drinking water containing more
than 2 milligrams per liter (mg/1) of fluoride
may develop cosmetic discoloration of their
permanent teeth (dental fluorosis). The
drinking water provided by your community
water system [name] has a fluoride
concentration of [insert value] mg/1.
  Dental fluorosis, in its moderate or severe
forms, may result in a brown staining and/
or pitting of the permanent teeth. This
problem occurs  only in developing teeth,
before they erupt from the gums. Children •
under nine should be provided with
alternative sources of drinking water or water
that has been treated to remove the fluoride
to avoid the possibility of staining and pitting
of their permanent teeth. You may also want
to contact your dentist about proper use by
young children of fluoride-containing
products. Older children and adults may
safely drink the  water.
  Drinking water containing more than 4 rrig/
L of fluoride (the U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency's drinking water standard)
can increase your risk of developing bone
disease. Your drinking water does not
contain more than 4 mg/1 of fluoride, but
we're required to notify you when we
discover that the fluoride levels in your
drinking water exceed 2 mg/1 because of this
cosmetic dental problem.
  For more information, please call [name of
water system contact] of [name of community
water system] at [phone number]. Some
home water treatment units are also available
to remove fluoride from drinking water. To
learn more about available home water
treatment units, you may call NSF
International at 1-877-8-NSF-HELP."

§141.209  Special notice for nitrate
exceedances above MCL by non-
community water systems (NCWS), where
granted permission by the primacy agency
under §141.11(d)
  (a) When is the special notice to be
given? The owner or operator of a non-
community water system granted
permission by the primacy agency
under § 141.11(d) to exceed the nitrate
MCL must provide notice to persons
served according to the requirements for
a Tier 1 notice under § 141.202(a) and
(b).
  (b) What is the form and manner of
the special notice? Non-community
water systems granted permission by the
primacy agency to exceed the nitrate
MCL under § 141.11(d) must provide
continuous posting of the fact that
nitrate levels exceed 10 mg/1 and the
potential health effects of exposure,
according to the requirements for Tier 1
notice delivery under § 141.202(c) and
the content requirements under
§141.205.

§ 141.210 Notice by primacy agency on
behalf of the public water system.
  (a) May the primacy agency give the
notice on behalf of the public water
system? The primacy agency may give
the notice required by this subpart on
behalf of the owner and operator of the
public water system if the primacy
agency complies with the requirements
of this subpart.
  (b) What is the responsibility of the
public water system when notice is
given by the primacy agency? The
owner or operator of the public water
system remains responsible for ensuring
that the requirements of this subpart are
met.

-------
26040
Federal Register/Vol. 65, No. 87/Thursday,  May 4, 2000/Rules  and Regulations
 APPENDIX A TO SUBPART Q OF PART 141.—NPDWR VIOLATIONS AND OTHER SITUATIONS  REQUIRING PUBLIC NOTICE '
                     Contaminant
                                                              MCL/MRDUTT violations2
                                                         Tier of pubjic no-
                                                           tice required
                                                               Citation
                                                                             Monitoring & testing procedure viola-
                                                                                           tions
           Tier of public no-
             tice required
                                                                                                    Citation
I. Violations of National Primary Drinking Water Regulations
  (NPDWR): J
A. Microbiological Contaminants
    1. Total coliform	
    2. Fecal cdiform/E, coli 	
    3, Turbidity MCL	
    4. Turbidity MCL (average of 2 days' samples >5 NTU)
    5. Turbidity (for TT violations resulting from a single ex-
      ceedance of maximum allowable turbidity level)	
    6. Surface Water Treatment Rule violations, other than
      violations resulting from single exceedance of max. al-
      lowable turbidity level (TT)	
    7. Interim Enhanced Surface Water Treatment Rule vio-
      lations, other than violations resulting from single ex-
      coedance of max. turbidity level (TT)  	
B. Inorganic Chemicals (lOCs)
    1. Antimony .,	
    2. Arsenic	

    3. Asbestos (fibers >10 urn)	
    4. Barium	
    5. Beryllium	
    6, Cadmium  	
    7, Chromium (total)	
    8, Cyanide 	
    9. Fluoride	
    10. Mercury (inorganic) 	
    11. Nitrate	

    12. Nitrite	

    13. Total Nitrate and Nitrite 	
    14. Selenium	
    15. Thallium	
C. Lead and Copper Rule (Action Level for lead is 0.015 mg/
  L, for copper is 1.3 mg/L)
    1. Lead and Copper Rule (TT)	
D. Synthetic Organic Chemicals (SOCs)
    1.2,4-D	
    2. 2,4.5-TP (Silvex)	
    3. Alachlor	
    4. Atrazine	
    5. Bcnzo(a)pyrene (PAHs)  	
    6. Carbofuran	
    7. Chtoriane	
    8. Dalapon 	
    9. Di (2-elhyIhexyl) adipate 	
    10. Di (2-ethylhexyl) phthalate  	
    11. Dibromochloropropane  	
    12. Dinoseb  	
    13. Dfoxin (2,3.7.8-TCDD) 	
    14. Diquat	
    15. EndothaN	
    16. Endrin	
    17. Ethylene dibromide	
    18. Glyphosate 	
    19. Heptachtor	
    20. Heptachtor epoxide 	
    21. Haxachlorobenzene	
    22. Hexachlorocyclo-pentadiene 	
    23. LIndane	
                                                       2
                                                       1
                                                       2
                                                   52, 1

                                                   «2, 1
141.63(a)
141.63(b)
                                                                                141.73(a)(2),
                                                                                141.73(b)(2),
                                                                                141.73(c)(2),
                                                                                  141.73(d),
                                                                               141.173(a)(2),
                                                                                  141.173(b)
                                                              141.70-141.73
                                                          7 141 .170-141. 173
                                                                  141.62(b)
                                                                  141.23(n)
                                                                  141.62(b)
                                                                  141.62(b)
                                                                  141.62(b)
                                                                  141.62(b)
                                                                  141.62(b)
                                                                  141.62(b)
                                                                  141.62(b)
                                                                  141.62(b)
                                                                  141.62(b)

                                                                  141.62(b)

                                                                  141.62(b)
                                                                  141.62(b)
                                                                  141.62(b)
                                                              141.80-141.85
                                                                  141. 61 (c)
                                                                  141 .61(c)
                                                                  141. 61 (c)
                                                                  141. 61 (c)
                                                                  141. 61 (c)
                                                                  141. 61 (c)
                                                                  141 .61 (c)
                                                                  141. 61 (c)
                                                                  141. 61 (c)
                                                                  141. 61 (c)
                                                                  141. 61 (c)
                                                                  141 .61(c)
                                                                  141. 61 (c)
                                                                  141. 61 (c)
                                                                  141. 61 (c)
                      81,3

                          3
                          3
                          3
                                       141.22
                                       141.22
                                                                                                    141.74(b)(2),
                                                                                                    141.74(c)(1),
                                                                                                        141.174
                                                                                                          141.74
141.172, 141.174

    141.23(a), (c)
141.23(a), (I), (m)

    141.23(a)-(b)
    141.23(a), (c)
    141.23(a), (c)
    141.23(a), (c)
    141.23(a), (c)
    141.23(a), (c)
    141.23(a), (c)
    141.23(a), (c)
   141.23(a), (d),
     141.23(f)(2)
   141.23(a), (e),
     141.23(f)(2)
       141.23(a)
    141.23(a), (c)
    141.23(a), (c)
                                141.86-141.89

                                     141.24(h)
                                     141.24(h)
                                     141.24(h)
                                     141.24(h)
                                     141.24(h)
                                     141.24(h)
                                     141.24(h)
                                     141.24(h)
                                     141.24(h)
                                     141.24(h)
                                     141.24(h)
                                     141.24(h)
                                     141.24(h)
                                     141.24(h)
                                     141.24(h)
                                     141.24(h)
                                     141.24(h)
                                     141.24(h)
                                     141.24(h)
                                     141.24(h)
                                     141.24(h)
                                     141.24(h)
                                     141.24(h)

-------
                 Federal  Register/Vol. 65,  No.  87/Thursday,  May 4, 2000/Rules  and Regulations
                                                    26041
      APPENDIX A TO SUBPART Q OF PART 141.—NPDWR VIOLATIONS AND OTHER SITUATIONS REQUIRING PUBLIC
                                                     NOTICE '—Continued
                      Contaminant
                                                              MCL/MRDUTT violations2
                                                         Tier of pubjic no-
                                                           tice required
          Citation
                                                                                              Monitoring & testing procedure viola-
                                                                                                            tions
                         Tier of public no-
                           tice required
                                       Citation
    24. Methoxychlor  	
    25. Oxamyl (Vydate)	
    26. Pentachlorophenol	
    27. Picloram	
    28. Polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs) 	
    29. Simazine 	
    30. Toxaphene	
E. Volatile Organic Chemicals (VOCs)
    1. Benzene  	
    2. Carbon tetrachloride	
    3. Chlorobenzene (monochlorobenzene)
    4. o-Dichlorobenzene 	
    5. p-Dichlorobenzene 	
    6. 1,2-Dichloroethane 	
    7. 1,1-Dichloroethylene	
    8. cis-1,2-Dichloroethylene  	
    9. trans-1,2-Dichloroethylene 	
    10. Dichloromethane  i	
    11. 1,2-Dichloropropane  	
    12. Ethylbenzene	
    13. Styrene  	
    14. Tetrachloroethylene	
    15. Toluene	
    16. 1,2,4-Trichlorobenzene	
    17. 1,1,1-Trichloroethane 	
    18. 1,1,2-Trichloroethane 	
    19. Trichloroethylene  	
    20. Vinyl chloride  	
    21. Xylenes (total)  	
F. Radioactive Contaminants
    1. Beta/photon emitters  	

    2. Alpha emitters  	

    3. Combined radium (226 & 228)	
G. Disinfection Byproducts (DBPs), Byproduct Precursors,
  Disinfectant  Residuals.  Where disinfection is used in the
  treatment of drinking water, disinfectants combine with or-
  ganic and inorganic matter present in water to form chemi-
  cals called" disinfection  byproducts  (DBPs).  EPA sets
  standards  for  controlling the  levels of disinfectants and
  DBPs in drinking water,  including trihalomethanes (THMs)
  and haloacetic acids (HAAs).9
    1. Total trihalomethanes (TTHMs) 	

    2. Haloacetic Acids (HAAS) 	
    3. Bromate 	
    4. Chlorite 	
    5. Chlorine (MRDL) 	
    6. Chloramine (MRDL)  	
    7. Chlorine dioxide (MRDL), where  any 2 consecutive
      daily samples at entrance to distribution system only
      are above MRDL	

    8. Chlorine dioxide (MRDL), where sample(s) in distribu-
      tion system the next day are also above MRDL  	
    9. Control of DBP precursors—TOC (TT) 	
    10.  Bench marking and disinfection profiling
    11.  Development of monitoring plan 	
H. Other Treatment Techniques
    1. Acrylamide (TT) 	
    2. Epichlorohydrin (TT)	
II. Unregulated Contaminant Monitoring:13
A. Unregulated contaminants  	
B. Nickel	
121

  2
N/A
N/A

  2
  2

N/A
N/A
             M41.61(c)
              141. 61 (c)
              141 .61(c)

              141 .61 (a)
              141 .61 (a)
              141 .61 (a)
              141 .61 (a)
              141 .61 (a)
             '141 .61 (a)
              141 .61 (a)
             '141 .61 (a)
              141. 61 (a)
              141 .61 (a)
              141. 61 (a)
              141. 61 (a)
              141 .61 (a)
              141 .61 (a)
              141 .61 (a)
              141 .61 (a)
              141 .61 (a)
              141 .61 (a)

                141.16
              141.64(a)
              141.64(a)
              141.64(a)
              141.64(a)
              141.65(a)
              141.65(a)
    141.65(a),
 141.133(c)(3)

    141.65(a),
 141.133(c)(3)
141.135(a)-(b)
          N/A
          N/A

      141.111
    ;  141.111

    :      N/A
          N/A
                                   2",3
  3
  3
  3

N/A
N/A

  3
  3
                                          141.24(h)
                                          141.24(h)
                                          141.24(h)
                                          141.24(h)
                                          141.24(h)
                                          141.24(h)
                                          141.24(h)

                                          141.24(f)
                                          141.24(f)
                                          141.24(f)
                                          141.24(f)
                                          141.24(f)
                                          141.24(f)
                                          141.24(f)
                                          141.24(f)
                                          141.24(f)
                                          141.24(f)
                                          141.24(f)
                                          141.24(f)
                                          141.24(f)
                                          141.24(f)
                                          141.24(f)
                                          141.24(f)
                                          141.24(f)
                                          141.24(1)
                                          141.24(f)
                                          141.24(f)
                                          141.24(f)

                                         141.25(a),
                                          141.26(b)
                                         141.25(a),
                                          141.26(a)
                                         141.25(a),
                                          141.26(a)
                                           141.30,
                                     141.132(a)-(b)
                                     141.132(aMb)
                                     141.132(a)-(b)
                                     141.132(a)-(b)
                                     141.132(a), (c)
                                     141.132(a), (c)
141.132(a), (c),
  141.133(c)(2)

141.132(a), (c),
  141.133(c)(2)
141.132(a), (d)
      141.172
    141.132(f)

          N/A
          N/A

       141.40
  141.23(c), (k)

-------
26042
Federal  Register/Vol. 65, No.  87/Thursday, May 4, 2000/Rules and  Regulations
      APPENDIX A TO SUBPART Q OF PART 141.—NPDWR VIOLATIONS AND OTHER SITUATIONS REQUIRING PUBLIC
                                                    NOTICE1—Continued
Contaminant
III. Public Notification for Variances and Exemptions:
A. Operation under a variance or exemption
B. Violation of conditions of a variance or exemption
IV. Other Situations Requiring Public Notification:
A. Fluoride secondary maximum contaminant level (SMCL)
exceadance 	 	 	
B. ExcGodance of nitrate MCL for non-community systems,
as allowed by primacy agency 	
C. Availability of unregulated contaminant monitoring data ....
D, Watarbome disease outbreak 	
E. Other waterbome emergency 16 	
F. Other situations as determined by primacy agency

MCL/MRDL/TT violations 2
Tier of public no-
tice required
3
2
3
1
3
1
1
"1,2,3
Citation
t"1415, 1416,
1415, 1416,
'M42.307
143.3
141.11(d)
141.40
141.2,
141.71(c)(2)(ii)
N/A
N/A
Monitoring & testing procedure viola-
tions
Tier of public no-
tice required
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
Citation
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
Appendix A—Endnotes
  I. Violations and other situations not listed
In this table (e.g., reporting violations and
failure to prepare Consumer Confidence
Reports}, do not require notice, unless
otherwise determined by the primary agency.
Primacy agencies may, at their option, also
require a more stringent public notice tier
(e.g., Tier 1 instead of Tier 2 or Tier 2 instead
of Tier 3) for specific violations and
situations listed in this Appendix, as
authorized under § 141.202(a) and
§141.203(a).
  2. MCL—Maximum contaminant level,
MRDL—Maximum residual disinfectant
level, TT—Treatment technique
  3. "Ilia term Violations of National Primary
Drinking Water Regulations (NPDWR) is used
hero to include violations of MCL, MRDL,
treatment technique, monitoring, and testing
procedure requirements.
  4. Failure to test for fecal coliform or E. coli
is a Tier 1 violation if testing is not done after
any repeat sample tests positive for coliform.
All other total coliform monitoring and
testing procedure violations are Tier 3.
  S. Systems that violate the turbidity MCL
of 5 NTU based on an average of
measurements over two consecutive days
must consult with the primacy agency within
24 hours after learning of the violation. Based
on this consultation, the primacy agency may
subsequently decide to elevate the violation
to Tier 1. If a system is unable to make
contact with the primacy agency in the 24-
hour period, the violation is automatically
elevated to Tier 1.
  6. Systems with treatment technique
violations involving a single exceedance of a
maximum turbidity limit under the Surface
Water Treatment Rule (SWTR) or the Interim
Enhanced Surface Water Treatment Rule
(IESWTR) are required to consult with the
primacy agency within 24 hours after
learning of the violation. Based on this
consultation, the primacy agency may
subsequently decide to elevate the violation
                          to Tier 1. If a system is unable to make
                          contact with the primacy agency in the 24-
                          hour period, the violation is automatically
                          elevated to Tier 1.
                             7. Most of the requirements of the Interim
                          Enhanced Surface Water Treatment Rule (63
                          FR 69477) (§§ 141.170-141.171, 141.173-
                          141.174) become effective January 1, 2002 for
                          Subpart H systems (surface water systems
                          and ground water systems under the direct
                          influence of surface water) serving at least
                          10,000 persons. However, § 141.172 has some
                          requirements that become effective as early
                          as April 16,1999. The Surface Water
                          Treatment Rule remains in effect for systems
                          serving at least 10,000 persons even after
                          2002; the Interim Enhanced Surface Water
                          Treatment Rule adds additional requirements
                          and does not in many cases supercede the
                          SWTR.
                             8. Failure  to take a confirmation sample
                          within 24 hours for nitrate or nitrite after an
                          initial sample exceeds the MCL is a Tier 1
                          violation. Other monitoring violations for
                          nitrate are Tier 3.
                             9. Subpart H community and non-transient
                          non-community systems serving 210,000
                          must comply with new DBF MCLs,
                          disinfectant MRDLs, and related monitoring
                          requirements beginning January 1, 2002. All
                          other community and non-transient non-
                          community systems must meet the MCLs and
                          MRDLs beginning January 1, 2004. Subpart H
                          transient non-community 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
                          transient non-community systems serving
                          fewer than 10,000 persons and 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.
                             10. § 141.12 will no longer apply after
                          January 1, 2004.
  11. Failure to monitor for chlorine dioxide
at the entrance to the distribution system the
day after exceeding the MRDL at the entrance
to the distribution system is a Tier 2
violation.
  12. If any daily sample taken at the
entrance to the distribution system exceeds
the MRDL for chlorine dioxide and one or
more samples taken in the distribution
system the next day exceed the MRDL, Tier
1 notification is required. Failure to take the
required samples in the distribution system
after the MRDL is exceeded at the entry point
also triggers Tier 1 notification.
  13. Some water systems must monitor for
certain unregulated contaminants listed in
§141.40.
  14. This citation refers to §§ 1415 and 1416
of the Safe Drinking Water Act. §§ 1415 and
1416 require that "a schedule prescribed . .  .
for a public water system granted a variance
[or exemption] shall require compliance by
the system ..."
  15. In addition to §§ 1415 and 1416 of the
Safe Drinking Water Act, 40 CFR 142.307
specifies the items and schedule milestones
that must be included in a variance for small
systems.
  16. Other waterborne emergencies require
a Tier 1 public notice under § 141.202(a) for
situations that do not meet the definition of
a waterborne disease outbreak given in 40
CFR 141.2 but that still have the potential to
have serious adverse effects on health as a
result of short-term exposure. These could
include outbreaks not related to treatment
deficiencies, as well as situations that have
the potential to cause outbreaks,  such as
failures or significant interruption in water
treatment processes, natural disasters that
disrupt the water supply or distribution
system, chemical spills, or unexpected
loading of possible pathogens into the source
water.
  17. Primacy agencies may place other
situations in any tier they believe
appropriate, based on threat to public health.

-------
         Federal Register/Vol. 65, No. 87/Thursday, May 4, 2000/Rules and Regulations
26043
APPENDIX B TO SUBPART Q OF PART 141.—STANDARD HEALTH EFFECTS LANGUAGE FOR PUBLIC NOTIFICATION
Contaminant
National Primary Drinking Water
Regulations (NPDWR):
A. Microbiological Contaminants:
1a. Total coliform 	
1b. Fecal coliform/E. coli .: 	
2a. Turbidity (MCL)" 	
2b. Turbidity (SWTRTT)6 	
2c. Turbidity (IESWTR TT)8 	
B. Surface Water Treatment Rule
(SWTR) and Interim Enhanced
Surface Water Treatment Rule
(IESWTR) violations:
3. Giardia lamblia (SWTR/
IESWTR).
4. Viruses (SWTR/IESWTR).
5. Heterotrophic plate count
(HPC) bacteria9 (SWTR/
IESWTR).
6. Legionella (SWTR/IESWTR).
7. Cryptosporidium (IESWTR).
8. Antimony 	
9. Arsenic 	
10. Asbestos (10 urn)
11. Barium 	
12. Beryllium 	
13. Cadmium 	
14. Chromium (total) 	 ....
15. Cyanide 	
16. Fluoride 	
17. Mercury (inorganic) 	

MCLG1mg/L
Zero
Zero
None
None
None
Zero
0006
None
7 MFL11
2
0.004
0005
0.1
0.2
4.0
0.002

MCL2 mg/L
See foot-
note3
Zero
1 NTUs/5
NTU
TT7
TT
Trio
0006
005
7 MFL
2
0004
0005
01
0.2
40
0.002

Standard health effects language for public notification
Conforms are bacteria that are naturally present in the environment and
are used as an indicator that other, potentially-harmful, bacteria may
be present. Colifofms were found in more samples than allowed and
this was a warning of potential problems.
the water may be contaminated with human or animal wastes. Mi-
crobes in these wastes can cause short-term effects, such as diar-
rhea, cramps, nausea, headaches, or other symptoms. They may
pose a special health risk for infants, young children, some of the el-
derly, and people with severely compromised immune systems.
infection and provide a medium for microbial growth. Turbidity may in-
dicate the presence of disease-causing organisms. These organisms
include bacteria, viruses, and parasites that can cause symptoms
such as nausea, cramps, diarrhea and associated headaches.
Turbidity has no health effects However turbidity can interfere with dis-
infection and provide a medium for microbial growth. Turbidity may in-
dicate the presence of disease-causing organisms. These organisms
include bacteria, viruses, and parasites that can cause symptoms
such as nausea, cramps, diarrhea and associated headaches.
Turbidity has no health effects. However, turbidity can interfere with dis-
infection and provide a medium for microbial growth. Turbidity may in-
dicate the presence of disease-causing organisms. These organisms
include bacteria, viruses, and parasites that can cause symptoms
such as nausea, cramps, diarrhea and. associated headaches.
Inadequately treated water may contain disease-causing organisms.
These organisms include bacteria, viruses, and parasites which can
cause symptoms such as nausea, cramps, diarrhea, and associated
headaches.
MCL over many years could experience increases in blood cholesterol
and decreases in blood sugar.
over many years could experience skin damage or problems with their
circulatory system, and may have an increased risk of getting cancer.
over many years may have an increased risk of developing benign in-
testinal polyps.
over many years could experience an increase in their blood pres-
sure.
MCL over many years could develop intestinal lesions.
over many years could experience kidney damage.
MCL over many years could experience allergic dermatitis.
Some people who drink water containing cyanide well in excess of the
MCL over many years could experience nerve damage or problems
with their thyroid.
Some people who drink water containing fluoride in excess of the MCL
over many years could get bone disease, including pain and tender-
ness of the bones. Fluoride in drinking water at half the MCL or more
may cause mottling of children's teeth, usually in children less than
nine years old. Mottling, also known as dental fluorosis, may include
brown staining and/or pitting of the teeth, and occurs only in devel-
oping teeth before they erupt from the gums.
Some people who drink water containing inorganic mercury well in ex-
cess of the MCL over many years could experience kidney damage.

-------
26044
Federal  Register/Vol. 65, No. 87/Thursday,  May  4, 2000/Rules  and^ Regulations
    APPENDIX B TO SUBPART Q OF PART 141.—STANDARD HEALTH EFFECTS LANGUAGE FOR PUBLIC NOTIFICATION-
                                                           Continued
           Contaminant
                   MCLG1 mg/L
 MCL2 mg/L
        Standard health effects language for public notification
    18. Nitrate	   10


    19, Nitrite	   1


    20. Total Nitrate and Nitrite 	   10



    21, Selenium	   0.05



    22. Thallium 	,	   0.0005


C. Lead and Copper Rule:
    23. Lead	   Zero




    24, Copper	   1.3






    25. 2,4-D 	   0.07


    26. 2,4,5-TP (Silvex) 	   0.05

    27. Alachlor	   Zero



    28. Atrazine	   0.003


    29. Benzo(a)pyrerte (PAHs) 	   Zero


    30. Carbofuran	   0.04


    31. Chlordane 	   Zero


    32. Dalapon	   0.2

    33. Dl (2-ethylhexyl) adipate	   0.4
                                                  10
                                 10
                                 0.05
                                 0.002
                                 TT12
    34. Di (2-ethylhexyl) phthalate ....



    35.       Dibromochloropropane
      (DBCP),

    38. Dinoseb	

    37. Dloxln (2,3,7.8-TCDD) 	
     38. Diquat 	
                   Zero



                   Zero


                   0.007

                   Zero


                   0.02
0.07


0.05

0.002



0.003


0.0002


0.04


0.002


0.2

0.4


0.006



0.0002


0.007

3x10-8


0.02
Infants below the age of six months who drink water containing nitrate in
  excess of the MCL could become seriously ill and, if untreated, may
  die. Symptoms include shortness of breath and blue baby syndrome.
Infants below the age of six months who drink water containing nitrite in
  excess of the MCL could become seriously ill and, if untreated, may
  die. Symptoms include shortness of breath and blue baby syndrome.
Infants below the age of six months who drink water containing nitrate
  and nitrite in excess of the MCL could become seriously ill and, if un-
  treated, may die. Symptoms include  shortness of breath and blue
  baby syndrome.
Selenium is an essential nutrient. However,  some people  who drink
  water  containing selenium  in excess  of the MCL over many years
  could  experience hair or fingernail losses, numbness  in fingers or
  toes, or problems with their circulation.
Some people who drink water containing thallium in excess of the MCL
  over many years could experience hair loss, changes in their blood,
  or problems with their kidneys, intestines, or liver.

Infants and children who drink water containing lead in excess of the ac-
  tion level could experience delays in their physical or mental develop-
  ment.  Children could show slight deficits in  attention  span and learn-
  ing abilities.  Adults who drink this  water over many  years could de-
  velop  kidney problems or high blood pressure.
Copper  is an essential nutrient, but some people who drink  water con-
  taining copper in excess of the action  level over a  relatively short
  amount of time could experience gastrointestinal distress. Some peo-
  ple who drink water containing copper in excess of the action level
  over many years could suffer liver or kidney damage. People with Wil-
  son's  Disease should consult their personal doctor. 11D.  Synthetic Or-
  ganic  Chemicals (SOCs):
Some people who drink water containing the weed killer 2,4-D well in
  excess of the MCL over many years could  experience problems with
  their kidneys, liver, or adrenal glands.
Some people who drink water containing silvex in excess of the MCL
  over many years could experience liver problems.
Some people who drink water containing alachlor in excess of the MCL
  over many years could have problems with their eyes, liver, kidneys,
  or spleen, or experience anemia, and may  have an increased risk of
  getting cancer.
Some people who  drink water containing atrazine well in excess of the
  MCL  over many years could experience problems with their cardio-
  vascular system or reproductive difficulties.
Some people who drink water containing benzo(a)pyrene in excess of
  the MCL  over many years may experience reproductive  difficulties
  and may have an increased risk of getting cancer.
Some people who drink water containing carbofuran in excess of the
  MCL  over many years could experience problems with their blood, or
  nervous or reproductive systems.
Some people  who drink  water containing chlordane  in excess of the
  MCL  over many years could experience problems with their liver or
  nervous system, and may have an increased risk of getting cancer.
Some people who drink water containing dalapon well  in excess of the
  MCL over many years could experience minor kidney changes.
Some people who drink water containing di (2-ethylhexyl) adipate well in
  excess of the MCL over many years could experience  general toxic
  effects or reproductive difficulties.
Some people who drink water containing  di (2-ethylhexyl) phthalate in
  excess of the MCL over many years may have problems with their
  liver,  or  experience reproductive difficulties, and may have an  in-
  creased risk of getting cancer.
Some people who drink water containing DBCP in excess of the MCL
  over  many years could experience reproductive difficulties and may
  have  an increased risk of getting cancer.
Some people who drink water containing dinoseb well  in excess of the
  MCL over many years could experience reproductive difficulties.
Some people who drink water containing dioxin  in excess of the MCL
  over  many years could experience reproductive difficulties and may
  have  an increased risk of getting cancer.
Some people who drink water containing diquat in excess of the MCL
  over many years could get cataracts.

-------
          Federal Register/Vol. 65, No. 87/Thursday, May 4, 2000/Rules and Regulations
26045
APPENDIX B TO SUBPART Q OF PART 141.—STANDARD HEALTH EFFECTS LANGUAGE FOR PUBLIC NOTIFICATION—
                                          Continued          :
Contaminant
39. Endothall
40. Endrin 	
41. Ethylene dibromide
42. Glyphosate 	
43. Heptachlor
44. Heptachlor epoxide 	
45. Hexachlorobenzene
46. Hexachlorocyclo-pentadiene
47 Lindane
48. Methoxychlor
49. Oxamyl (Vydate) 	
50. Pentachlorophenol 	
51. Picloram 	
52. Polychlorinated biphenyls
(PCBs).
53. Simazine 	
54 Toxaphene
55. Benzene 	
56. Carbon tetrachloride 	
57. Chlorobenzene (monochloro-
benzene).
58. oDichlorobenzene 	
59. p-Dichlorobenzene 	
60. 1 ,2-Dichloroethane 	
61. 1,1-Dichloroethylene

MCLG 1 mg/L
0 1
0002
Zero
0.7
Zero
Zero
Zero
0.05
00002
004
0.2
Zero
05
Zero
0.004
Zero
Zero
Zero
0.1
0.6
0.075
Zero
0 007

MCL2 mg/L
0 1
0002
0 00005
07
00004
00002
0001
0.05
00002
004
02
0001
0 5
0.0005
0004
0003
0005
0005
0.1
06
0075
0005
0 007

Standard health effects language for public notification

over many years could experience problems with their stomach or in-
testines. '
over many years could experience liver problems.
of the MCL over many years could experience problems with their
liver, stomach, reproductive system, or kidneys, and may have an in-
creased risk of getting cancer.
MCL over many years could experience problems with their kidneys
or reproductive difficulties.
MCL over many years could experience liver damage and may have
an increased risk of getting cancer.
of the MCL over many years could experience liver damage, and may
have an increased risk of getting cancer.
of the MCL over many years could experience problems with their
liver or kidneys, or adverse reproductive effects, and may have an in-
creased risk of getting cancer.
Some people who drink water containing hexachlorocyclopentadiene
well in excess of the MCL over many years could experience prob-
lems with their kidneys or stomach.
over many years could experience problems with their kidneys or
liver.
MCL over many years could experience reproductive difficulties.
over many years could experience slight nervous system effects.
the MCL over many years could experience problems with their liver
or kidneys, and may have an increased risk of getting cancer.
over many years could experience problems with their liver.
Some people who drink water containing PCBs in excess of the MCL
over many years could experience changes in their skin, problems
with their thymus gland, immune deficiencies, or reproductive or nerv-
ous system difficulties, and may have an increased risk of getting
cancer.
over many years could experience problems with their blood.
MCL over many years could have problems with their kidneys, liver,
or thyroid, and may have an increased risk of getting cancer. 11E.
Volatile Organic Chemicals (VOCs):
over many years could experience anemia or a decrease in blood
platelets, and may have an increased risk of getting cancer.
of the MCL over many years could experience problems with their
liver and may have an increased risk of getting cancer.
Some people who drink water containing Chlorobenzene in excess of
the MCL over many years could experience problems with their liver
or kidneys.
cess of the MCL over many years could experience problems with
their liver, kidneys, or circulatory systems.
the MCL over many years could experience anemia, damage to their
liver, kidneys, or spleen, or changes in their blood.
of the MCL over many years may have an increased risk of getting
cancer.
of the MCL over many years could experience problems with their
liver.

-------
26046
Federal Register/Vol. 65, No. 87/Thursday, May 4, 2000/Rules and Regulations
   APPENDIX B TO SUBPART Q OF PART 141.—STANDARD HEALTH EFFECTS LANGUAGE FOR PUBLIC NOTIFICATION-
                                             Continued
Contaminant
62. cfe-1,2-Dich!oroethylene 	
63. frans-1,2-Dich!oroethylene ....
64. Dtehtofomethane 	
65. 1 ,2-Dichloropropane 	
66 Ethyibenzene 	 	
67. Styrene 	 	 	
63 Tetrachloroethylene 	
69. Toluene 	 	 	
70 1 2 4-Trichlorobenzene .
71 1 1 1-Trichtoroethane .. .
72. 1 1 ,2-Trichloroethane 	
73 Trichtoroethylene
74 Vinyl chloride
75 Xylenes (total) 	
76. Beta/photon emitters 	
77. Alpha emitters 	
78. Combined radium (226 &
228).
G, Disinfection Byproducts (DBFs),
Byproduct Precursors, and Dis-
infectant Residuals: Where dis-
infection Is used In the treatment of
drinking water, disinfectants com-
bine with organic and inorganic
matter present in water to form
chemicals called disinfection by-
products (DBPs). EPA sets stand-
ards for controlling the levels of
disinfectants and DBPs in drinking
water, Including trihalomethanes
(THMs) and haloacetlc acids
(HAAs):16
79. Total trihalomethanes
(TTHMs).
MCLG1 mg/L
0.07
0.1
Zero
Zero
0.7
0.1
Zero
1
0.07
02
0.003
Zero
Zero
10
Zero
Zero
Zero
N/A
MCL2 mg/L
0.07
0.1
0.005
0.005
0.7
0.1
0.005
1
0.07
0.2
0.005
0.005
0.002
10
4 mrem/yr14
15 pCi/Lis
5 pCi/L
0.1 01
0.080'7ts
Standard health effects language for public notification
Some people who drink water containing cis-1 ,2-dichloroethylene in ex-
cess of the MCL over many years could experience problems with
their liver.
Some people who drink water containing trans-1 ,2-dichloroethylene well
in excess of the MCL over many years could experience problems
with their liver.
Some people who drink water containing dichloromethane in excess of
the MCL over many years could have liver problems and may have
an increased risk of getting cancer.
Some people who drink water containing 1 ,2-dichloropropane in excess
of the MCL over many years may have an increased risk of getting
cancer.
Some people who drink water containing ethylbenzene well in excess of
the MCL over many years could experience problems with their liver
or kidneys.
Some people who drink water containing styrene well in excess of the
MCL over many years could have problems with their liver, kidneys,
or circulatory system.
Some people who drink water containing tetrachloroethylene in excess
of the MCL over many years could have problems with their liver, and
may have an increased risk of getting cancer.
Some people who drink water containing toluene well in excess of the
MCL over many years could have problems with their nervous sys-
tem, kidneys, or liver.
Some people who drink water containing 1,2,4-trichlorobenzene well in
excess of the MCL over many years could experience changes in
their adrenal glands.
Some people who drink water containing 1,1,1-trichloroethane in excess
of the MCL over many years could experience problems with their
liver, nervous system, or circulatory system.
Some people who drink water containing 1,1,2-trichloroethane well in
excess of the MCL over many years could have problems with their
liver, kidneys, or immune systems.
Some people who drink water containing trichloroethylene in excess of
the MCL over many years could experience problems with their liver
and may have an increased risk of getting cancer.
Some people who drink water containing vinyl chloride in excess of the
MCL over many years may have an increased risk of getting cancer.
Some people who drink water containing xylenes in excess of the MCL
over many years could experience damage to their nervous system.
1 1 F. Radioactive Contaminants:
Certain minerals are radioactive and may emit forms of radiation known
as photons and beta radiation. Some people who drink water con-
taining beta and photon emitters in excess of the MCL over many
years may have an increased risk of getting cancer.
Certain minerals are radioactive and may emit a form of radiation known
as alpha radiation. Some people who drink water containing alpha
emitters in excess of the MCL over many years may have an in-
creased risk of getting cancer.
Some people who drink water containing radium 226 or 228 in excess
of the MCL over many years may have an increased risk of getting
cancer.
Some people who drink water containing trihalomethanes in excess of
the MCL over many years may experience problems with their liver,
kidneys, or central nervous system, and may have an increased risk
of getting cancer.

-------
                Federal Register/Vol. 65, No. 87/Thursday, May 4, 2000/Rules  and Regulations
                                                                          26047
    APPENDIX B TO SUBPART Q OF PART 141.—STANDARD HEALTH EFFECTS LANGUAGE FOR PUBLIC NOTIFICATION—
                                                        Continued
Contaminant
80. Haloacetic Acids (HAA) 	
81. Bromate 	
82. Chlorite 	
83. Chlorine
84. Chloramines 	
85a. Chlorine dioxide, where any
2 consecutive daily samples
taken at the entrance to the
distribution system are above
the MRDL.
85b. Chlorine dioxide, where one
or more distribution system
samples are above the MRDL.
86. Control of DBP precursors
(TOC).
H. Other Treatment Techniques:
87 Acrylamide
88. Epichlorohydrin

MCLG 1 mg/L
N/A
Zero
008
4 (MRDLG)20
4 (MRDLG)
0.8 (MRDLG)
0.8 (MRDLG)
None
Zero
Zero

MCL2 mg/L
0.060 19
0010
1 0
40 (MRDL)21
4 0 (MRDL)
0.8 (MRDL)
0.8 (MRDL)
TT
TT
TT

Standard health effects language for public notification
Some people who drink water containing haloacetic acids in excess of
the MCL over many years may have an increased risk of getting can-
cer.
over many years may have an increased risk of getting cancer.
excess of the MCL could experience nervous system effects. Similar
effects may occur in fetuses of pregnant women who drink water con-
taining chlorite in excess of the MCL. Some people may experience
anemia.
MRDL could experience irritating effects to their eyes and nose. Some
people who drink water containing chlorine well in excess of the
MRDL could experience stomach discomfort.
the MRDL could experience irritating effects to their eyes and nose.
Some people who drink water containing chloramines well in excess
of the MRDL could experience stomach discomfort or anemia.
Some infants and young children who drink water containing chlorine di-
oxide in excess of the MRDL could experience nervous system ef-
fects. Similar effects' may occur in fetuses of pregnant women who
drink water containing chlorine dioxide in excess of the MRDL. Some
people may experience anemia.
Add for public notification only: The chlorine dioxide violations reported
today are the result of exceedances at the treatment facility only, not
within the distribution system which delivers water to consumers. Con-
tinued compliance wjth chlorine dioxide levels within the distribution
system minimizes the potential risk of these violations to consumers.
Some infants and young children who drink water containing chlorine di-
oxide in excess of the MRDL could experience nervous system ef-
fects. Similar effects may occur in fetuses of pregnant women who
drink water containing chlorine dioxide in excess of the MRDL. Some
people may experience anemia.
Add for public notification only: The chlorine dioxide violations reported
today include exceedances of the EPA standard within the distribution
system which delivers water to consumers. Violations of the chlorine
dioxide standard within the distribution system may harm human
health based on short-term exposures. Certain groups, including
fetuses, infants, and young children, may be especially susceptible to
nervous system effects from excessive chlorine dioxide exposure.
Total organic carbon (TOC) has no health effects. However, total or-
ganic carbon provides a medium for the formation of disinfection by-
products. These byproducts include trihalomethanes (THMs) and
haloacetic acids (HAAs). Drinking water containing these byproducts
in excess of the MCL may lead to adverse health effects, liver or kid-
ney problems, or nervous system effects, and may lead to an in-
creased risk of getting cancer.
a long period of time could have problems with their nervous system
or blood, and may have an increased risk of getting cancer.
over a long period of time could experience stomach problems, and
may have an increased risk of getting cancer.
Appendix B—Endnotes

  1. MCLG—Maximum contaminant level
goal
  2. MCL—Maximum contaminant level
  3. For water systems analyzing at least 40
samples per month, no more than 5.0 percent
of the monthly samples may be positive for
total coliforms. For systems analyzing fewer
than 40 samples per month, no more than
one sample per month may be positive for
total coliforms.
  4. There are various regulations that set
turbidity standards for different types of
systems, including 40 CFR 141.13, the 1989
Surface Water Treatment Rule, and the 1998
Interim Enhanced Surface Water Treatment
Rule. The MCL for the monthly turbidity
average is 1 NTU; the MCL for the 2-day
average is 5 NTU for systems that are
required to filter but have not yet installed
filtration (40 CFR 141.13).
  5. NTU—Nephelometric turbidity unit
  6. There are various regulations that set
turbidity standards for different types of
systems, including 40 CFR 141.13, the 1989
Surface Water Treatment Rule (SWTR), and
the 1998 Interim Enhanced Surface Water
Treatment Rule (IESWTR). Systems subject to
the Surface Water Treatment Rule (both
filtered and unfiltered) may not exceed 5
NTU. In addition, in filtered systems, 95
percent of samples each month must not
exceed 0.5 NTU in systems using
conventional or direct filtration and must not
exceed 1 NTU in systems using slow sand or
diatomaceous earth filtration or other
filtration technologies approved by the
primacy agency.
  7. TT—Treatment technique
  8. There are various regulations that set
turbidity standards for different types of

-------
26048
Federal Register/Vol.  65, No.  87/Thursday, May 4, 2000/Rules  and  Regulations
systems, including 40 CFR 141.13, the 1989
Surface Water Treatment Rule (SWTR), and
the 1908 Interim Enhanced Surface Water
Treatment Rule (IESWTR). For systems
subject to the IESWTR (systems serving at
least 10,000 people, using surface water or
ground water under the direct influence of
surface water), that use conventional
filtration or direct filtration, after January 1,
2002, the turbidity level of a system's
combined filter effluent may not exceed 0.3
NTU in at least 95 percent of monthly
measurements, and the turbidity level of a
system's combined filter effluent must not
exceed 1 NTU at any time. Systems subject
to the IESWTR using technologies other than
conventional, direct, slow sand, or
diatomaceous earth filtration must meet
turbidity limits set by the primacy agency.
  9. The bacteria detected by heterotrophic
plate count (HFC) are not necessarily
harmful. HPC is simply an alternative
method of determining disinfectant residual
levels. The number of such bacteria is an
indicator of whether there is enough
disinfectant in the  distribution system.
  10. SWTR and IESWTR treatment
technique) violations that involve turbidity
exceedances may use the health effects
language for turbidity instead.
  11. The bacteria detected by heterotrophic
pinto count (HPC) are not necessarily
harmful. HPC is simply an alternative
method of determining disinfectant residual
levels. The number of such bacteria is an
indicator of whether there is enough
disinfectant in the  distribution system.
  12. Millions fibers per liter.
  13. Action Level« 0.015 mg/L
  14, Action Level»1.3 mg/L
  15. Millirems per years
  16. Picocuries per liter
  17. Surface water systems and ground
water systems under the direct influence of
surface water are regulated under Subpart H
of 40 CFR 141. Supbart H community and
non-transient non-community systems
serving S 10,000 must comply with DBF
MCLs and disinfectant maximum residual
disinfectant levels  (MRDLs) beginning
January 1,2002. All other community and
non-transient noncommunity systems must
meet the MCLs and MRDLs beginning
January 1,2004. Subpart H transient non-
community 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 transient non-community
systems serving-fewer than 10,000 persons
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.
  18. The MCL of 0.10 mg/1 for TTHMs is in
effect until January 1,2002 for Subpart H
community water systems serving 10,000 or
more. This MCL is in effect until January 1,
2004 for community water systems with a
population of 10,000 or more using only
ground water not under the direct influence
of surface water. After these deadlines, the
MCL will be 0.080  mg/1. On January 1, 2004,
all systems serving less than 10,000 will have
to comply with the new MCL as well.
                           19. The MCL for total trihalomethanes is
                         the sum of the concentrations of the
                         individual trihalomethanes.
                           20. The MCL for haloacetic acids is the
                         sum of the concentrations of the individual
                         haloacetic acids.
                           21. MRDLG—Maximum residual
                         disinfectant level goal.
                           22. MRDL—Maximum residual
                         disinfectant level.

                         Appendix C to Subpart Q of Part 141—List
                         of Acronyms Used in Public Notification
                         Regulation
                         CCR  Consumer Confidence Report
                         CWS  Community Water System
                         DBF  Disinfection Byproduct
                         EPA  Environmental Protection Agency
                         HPC  Heterotrophic Plate Count
                         IESWTR  Interim Enhanced Surface Water
                             Treatment Rule
                         IOC  Inorganic Chemical
                         LCR  Lead and Copper Rule
                         MCL  Maximum Contaminant Level
                         MCLG Maximum Contaminant Level Goal
                         MRDL Maximum Residual Disinfectant
                             Level
                         MRDLG  Maximum Residual Disinfectant
                             Level Goal
                         NCWS Non-Community Water System
                         NPDWR  National Primary Drinking Water
                             Regulation
                         NTNCWS  Non-Transient Non-Community
                             Water System
                         NTU  Nephelometric Turbidity Unit
                         OGWDW  Office of Ground Water and
                             Drinking Water
                         OW  Office of Water
                         PN Public Notification
                         PWS  Public Water System
                         SDWA  Safe Drinking Water Act
                         SMCL  Secondary Maximum Contaminant
                             Level
                         SOC  Synthetic Organic Chemical
                         SWTR Surface Water Treatment Rule
                         TCR  Total Coliform Rule
                         TT Treatment Technique
                         TWS  Transient Non-Community Water
                             System
                         VOC  Volatile Organic Chemical

                         PART 142—[AMENDED]

                           1. The authority citation for Part 142
                         continues to read as follows:

                           Authority: 42 U.S.C. 300f, 300g-l, 300g-2,
                         300 g-3, 300g-4, 300 g-5, 300 g-6, 300 j-4,
                         300 j-9, and300j-ll.

                           2. Section 142.10 is amended by
                         revising paragraph  (b)(6)(v) to read as
                         follows:

                         § 142.10  Requirements for a determination
                         of primary enforcement responsibility.
                           (b)*  * *
                           (6)*  * *
                           (v) Authority to require public water
                         systems to give public notice that is no
                         less stringent than the EPA
                         requirements in Subpart Q of Part 141
                         of this chapter and  § 142.16(a).
                           3. Section 142.14 is amended by
                         redesignating paragraph (f) as (g) and
                         adding a new (f), to read as follows:
§ 142.14  Records kept by States.
*****

  (f) Public notification records under
Subpart Q of Part 141 of this chapter
received from public water systems
(including certifications of compliance
and copies of public notices) and any
state determinations establishing
alternative public notification
requirements for the water systems must
be retained for three years.
*****

  4. Section 142.15 is amended by
revising paragraph (a)(l), to read as
follows:

§ 142.15  Reports by States.
*****
  (a)* *  *
  (1) New violations by public water
systems in the State during the previous
quarter of State regulations adopted to
incorporate the requirements of national
primary drinking water regulations,
including violations of the public
notification requirements under Subpart
Q of Part 141 of this chapter;
*****

  5. Section 142.16 is amended by
revising paragraph (a), to read as
follows:

§142.16  Special primacy requirements.
  (a) State public notification
requirements.
  (1) Each State that has primary
enforcement authority under this part
must submit complete and final requests
for approval of program revisions to
adopt the requirements of Subpart Q of
Part 141 of this chapter, using the
procedures in § 142.12(b) through (d).
At its option, a State may, by rule, and
after notice and comment, establish
alternative public notification
requirements with respect to the form
and content of the public notice
required under Subpart Q of Part 141 of
this chapter. The alternative
requirements must provide the same
type and amount of information
required under Subpart Q and must
meet the primacy requirements under
§142.10.
  (2) As part of the revised primacy
program, a State must also establish
enforceable requirements and
procedures when the State adds to or
changes the requirements under:
  (i) Table 1 to 40 CFR 141.201(a)(Item
(3)(v)}—To require public water systems
to give a public notice for violations or
situations other than those listed in
Appendix A of Subpart Q of Part 141 of
this chapter;
  (ii) 40 CFR 141.201(c)(2)—To allow
public water systems, under the specific
circumstances listed in § 141.201(c)(2),

-------
               Federal Register/Vol. 65, No.  87/Thursday,  May 4, 2000/Rules and Regulations
                                                                      26049
to limit the distribution of the public
notice to persons served by the portion
of the distribution system that is out of
compliance;
  (iii) Table 1 of 40 CFR 141.202(aj
(Items (5), (6), and (8))—To require
public water systems to give a Tier 1
public notice (rather than a Tier 2 or
Tier 3 notice) for violations or situations
listed in Appendix A of Subpart Q of
Part 141 of this chapter;
  (iv) 40 CFR 141.202(b)(3)—To require
public water systems to comply with
additional Tier 1 public notification
requirements set by the State
subsequent to the initial 24-hour Tier 1
notice, as a result of their consultation
with the State required under
§§141.202(b)(2);
  (v) 40 CFR 141.202(c), 141.203(c) and
141.204(c)—To require a different form
and manner of delivery for Tier 1, 2 and
3 public notices.
  (vi) Table 1 to 40 CFR 141.203(a)
(Item (2))—To require the public water
systems to provide a Tier 2 public
notice (rather than Tier (3)) for        !
monitoring or testing procedure
violations specified by the State;
  (vii) 40 CFR 141.203(b)(l)—T:p grant:
public water systems an extension up to
three months for distributing the Tier 2
public notice in appropriate           :
circumstances (other than those
specifically excluded in the rule);     ,
  (viii) 40 CFR 141.203(b)(2)—To grant
a different repeat notice frequency for  i
the Tier 2 public notice in appropriate 1
circumstances (other than those
specifically excluded in the rule), but no
less frequently than once per year;
  (ix) 40 CFR 141.203(b)(3)—To       •
respond within 24 hours to a request for
consultation by the public water system
to determine whether a Tier 1 (rather  :
than a Tier 2) notice is required for a  :
turbidity MCL violation under        '
§ 141.13(b) or a SWTR/ffiSWTR TT    :
violation due to a single exceedance of:
the maximum allowable turbidity limit;
  (x) 40 CFR 141.205(c)—'To determine
the specific multilingual requirement
for a public water system, including
defining "large proportion of non-
English-speaking consumers."
§142.16  [Amended]

  6. Section 142.16(e) introductory text
is amended by removing "§ 141.32".

PART 143—[AMENDED]

  1. The authority citation for Part 143
continues to read as follows:

  Authority: 42 U.S.C. 300f et seq.

§143.5  [Removed]

  2. Part 143 is amended by removing
§143.5.

[FR Doc. 00-9534 Filed 5-3-00; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P

-------

-------

-------
   f    II11
   ~~~    ^3    U  ,_
                   m
I? 5'
9- (D
<  co
S. co


-------