[Federal Register Volume 65, Number 73 (Friday, April 14, 2000)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 20304-20313]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 00-9089]



[[Page 20303]]

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

Part III





Environmental Protection Agency





-----------------------------------------------------------------------



  



40 CFR Part 9 et al.



-----------------------------------------------------------------------



Revisions to the Interim Enhanced Surface Water Treatment Rule 
(IESWTR), the Stage 1 Disinfectants and Disinfection Byproducts (Stage 
1 DBPR), and Revisions to State Primacy Requirements To Implement the 
Safe Drinking Water Act (SDWA) Amendments; Final Rule and Proposed Rule

  Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 73 / Friday, April 14, 2000 / Rules 
and Regulations  

[[Page 20304]]


-----------------------------------------------------------------------

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Parts 9, 141, and 142

[FRL-6575-9]
RIN 2040-AD43


Revisions to the Interim Enhanced Surface Water Treatment Rule 
(IESWTR), the Stage 1 Disinfectants and Disinfection Byproducts Rule 
(Stage 1 DBPR), and Revisions to State Primacy Requirements To 
Implement the Safe Drinking Water Act (SDWA) Amendments

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Direct final rule.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

SUMMARY: This direct final action will make minor revisions to the 
Interim Enhanced Surface Water Treatment Rule (IESWTR) and the Stage 1 
Disinfectants and Disinfection Byproducts Rule (Stage 1 DBPR) which 
were published December 16, 1998 and the Revisions to State Primacy 
Requirements to Implement Safe Drinking Water Act (SDWA) Amendments 
(Primacy Rule) published April 28, 1998. This Direct Final Rule revises 
the compliance dates for the IESWTR and the Stage 1 DBPR by shifting 
them back approximately two weeks from the middle of the month to the 
beginning of the following month. This change will shift the monitoring 
periods to coincide with calendar quarters which will facilitate the 
implementation of both rules. This action will also extend the use of 
new analytical methods included in these rules to compliance monitoring 
for long standing drinking water regulations for total trihalomethanes. 
The revisions also include several changes to the regulatory language 
for clarification. In addition, this document corrects typographical 
errors, replaces inadvertently deleted text, and clarifies some of the 
new regulatory provisions found in the published rules. Lastly, this 
document contains corrections to the Primacy Rule. These regulations 
relate to the requirements and procedures for States to obtain primary 
enforcement authority (primacy) for the Public Water System Supervision 
(PWSS) program under the Safe Drinking Water Act as amended by the 1996 
Amendments.

DATES: This regulation is effective on June 13, 2000 without further 
notice unless EPA receives adverse comment by May 15, 2000. If EPA 
receives such comment, EPA will withdraw this direct final rule before 
its effective date by publishing a timely withdrawal in the Federal 
Register informing the public the rule will not take effect. For 
judicial review purposes, this final rule is promulgated as of 1:00 
p.m. EST on April 28, 2000 as provided in 40 CFR 23.7.

ADDRESSES: Send written comments to the Comment Clerk, docket number W-
99-11, Water Docket (MC 4101), U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 
401 M Street, SW, Washington, DC 20460. The record for this rule has 
been established under docket number W-99-11. The record is available 
for inspection 9 a.m. to 4 p.m. Monday through Friday, excluding legal 
holidays at the Water Docket, East Tower Basement, US EPA, 401 M 
Street, SW, Washington DC. The rule making records for the original 
IESWTR and the Stage 1 DBPR are also available for inspection at the 
Water Docket. For access to docket materials, please call 202-260-3027 
to schedule an appointment. Comments may be hand-delivered to the Water 
Docket, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency; 401 M Street, SW, East 
Tower Basement, Washington, DC 20460. Comments may be submitted 
electronically to [email protected]. No facsimiles (faxes) will 
be accepted.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Jennifer Melch, Implementation and 
Assistance Division, Office of Ground Water and Drinking Water (MC-
4606), U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 401 M Street, SW, 
Washington, DC 20460, (202) 260-7035. Information may also be obtained 
from the EPA Safe Drinking Water Hotline. Callers within the United 
States may reach the Hotline at (800) 426-4791. The Hotline is open 
Monday through Friday, excluding Federal holidays, from 9:00 a.m. to 
5:30 p.m. EST.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
     

Regulated Entities

    The entities regulated by the IESWTR and Stage 1 DBPR, and thus by 
these revisions to those rules, are public water systems. These include 
community and noncommunity water systems. States are subject to the 
primacy rule requirements as revised.
    Regulated categories and entities include the following:

------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                Examples of
                 Category                       potentially        SIC
                                            regulated entities
------------------------------------------------------------------------
State, Tribal, and Territorial             States, Territories,     9511
 Governments.                               and Tribes that
                                            analyze water
                                            samples on behalf
                                            of public water
                                            systems required to
                                            conduct such
                                            analysis; States,
                                            Territories, and
                                            Tribes that operate
                                            public water
                                            systems required to
                                            monitor under the
                                            IESWTR or Stage 1
                                            DBPR.
Industry.................................  Private operators of     9511
                                            public water
                                            systems required to
                                            monitor under the
                                            IESWTR or Stage 1
                                            DBPR.
Municipalities...........................  Municipal operators      9511
                                            of public water
                                            systems required to
                                            monitor under the
                                            IESWTR or Stage 1
                                            DBPR.
------------------------------------------------------------------------

    This table is not intended to be exhaustive, but rather provides a 
guide for readers regarding entities likely to be regulated by this 
action. This table lists the types of entities that EPA is now aware 
could potentially be regulated by this action. Other types of entities 
not listed in the table could also be regulated. To determine whether 
your facility is regulated by this action, you should carefully examine 
the applicability criteria in Secs. 141.2, 141.70, 141.130, 141.170, 
142.2, 142.3, and 142.10 of title 40 of the Code of Federal 
Regulations. If you have questions regarding the applicability of this 
action to a particular entity, consult the person listed in the 
preceding FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section or the Regional 
contacts that follow.

Regional Contacts

I. Katie Leo, Water Supply Section 1 Congress Street, Suite 1100-CMU, 
Boston, MA 02114, (617) 918-1623
II. Michael Lowy, Water Supply Section, 290 Broadway 24th Floor, New 
York, NY 10007-1866, (212) 637-3830
III. Jason Gambatese, Drinking Water Section (3WM41), 1650 Arch Street, 
Philadelphia, PA 19103-2029, (215) 814-5759
IV. David Parker, Water Supply Section, 345 Courtland Street, Atlanta, 
GA 30365, (404) 562-9460
V. Miguel A. Del Toral, Safe Drinking Water Branch, 77 W. Jackson Blvd. 
(WD-15J), Chicago, IL 60604, (312) 886-5253
VI. Blake L. Atkins, Drinking Water Section, 1445 Ross Avenue, Dallas, 
TX 75202, (214) 665-2297
VII. Ralph Flournoy, Drinking Water/Ground Water Management Branch,

[[Page 20305]]

901 N. 5th St., Kansas City, KS 66101, (913) 551-7374
VIII. Bob Clement, Municipal Systems Unit (8P-W-MS), 999 18th Street, 
Suite 500, Denver, CO 80202-2466, (303) 312-6653
IX. Bruce Macler, Water Supply Section, 75 Hawthorne Street, San 
Francisco, CA 94105, (415) 744-1884
X. Wendy Marshall, Drinking Water Unit, 1200 Sixth Avenue (OW-136), 
Seattle, WA 98101, (206) 553-1890

Abbreviations

CWS: Community water system
DBPR: Disinfectant and Disinfection Byproducts Rule
EPA: Environmental Protection Agency
GWUDI: Ground water under the direct influence of surface water
HAA5: Haloacetic Acids (monochloroacetic, dichloroacetic, 
trichloroacetic, monobromoacetic and dibromoacetic acids)
ICR: Information Collection Request
IESWTR: Interim Enhanced Surface Water Treatment Rule
MCL: Maximum contaminant level
MCLG: Maximum contaminant level goal
MRDL: Maximum residual disinfectant level
MRDLG: Maximum residual disinfectant level goal
NPDWR: National Primary Drinking Water Regulation
NTNCWS: Non-transient, non-community water system
OMB: Office of Management and Budget
PWS: Public water system
RFA: Regulatory Flexibility Analysis
SDWA: Safe Drinking Water Act
TNCWS: Transient, non-community water system
TOC: Total organic carbon
TTHM: Total Trihalomethanes (chloroform, bromodichloromethane, 
dibromochloromethane, and bromoform)
UMRA: Unfunded Mandates Reform Act

Table of Contents

I. Background
II. Today's Action
    A. IESWTR and Stage 1 DBPR
    B. Primacy Rule
III. Administrative Requirements
    A. Executive Order 12866--Regulatory Planning and Review
    B. Executive Order 13045--Protection of Children from 
Environmental Health Risks and Safety Risks
    C. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act
    D. Paperwork Reduction Act
    E. Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA), as amended by the Small 
Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act of 1996 (SBREFA), 5 
U.S.C. 601 et seq.
    F. National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act
    G. Executive Order 12898--Federal Actions to Address 
Environmental Justice in Minority Populations and Low-Income 
Populations
    H. Executive Order 13132--Federalism
    I. Executive Order 13084--Consultation and Coordination with 
Indian Tribal Governments
    J. Administrative Procedure Act
    K. Congressional Review Act

I. Background

    On December 16, 1998, EPA published the final Interim Enhanced 
Surface Water Treatment Rule (IESWTR; 63 FR 69478) and Stage 1 
Disinfectants and Disinfection Byproducts Rule ( Stage 1 DBPR; 63 FR 
69390). On April 28, 1998, EPA published the Revisions to State Primacy 
Requirements to Implement the SDWA Amendments (63 FR 23362).
    IESWTR: The IESWTR was designed to improve control of microbial 
pathogens, including specifically the protozoan Cryptosporidium, in 
drinking water and to address risk trade-offs with disinfection 
byproducts. The IESWTR builds upon the treatment technique requirements 
of the Surface Water Treatment Rule. Key provisions established in the 
final IESWTR include: a Maximum Contaminant Level Goal (MCLG) of zero 
for Cryptosporidium; 2-log Cryptosporidium removal requirements for 
systems that filter; strengthened combined filter effluent turbidity 
performance standards and individual filter turbidity monitoring 
provisions; disinfection benchmark provisions to assure continued 
levels of microbial protection while facilities take the necessary 
steps to comply with new disinfection byproduct standards; inclusion of 
Cryptosporidium in the definition of ground water under the direct 
influence of surface water (GWUDI) and in the watershed control 
requirements for unfiltered public water systems; requirements for 
covers on new finished water reservoirs; and sanitary surveys for all 
surface water and GWUDI systems regardless of size.
    The IESWTR applies to public water systems that use surface water 
or GWUDI and serve 10,000 or more people, except that the rule requires 
primacy States to conduct sanitary surveys for all surface water and 
GWUDI systems regardless of size.
    EPA believes that implementation of the IESWTR will significantly 
reduce the level of Cryptosporidium in finished drinking water supplies 
through improvements in filtration and reduce the likelihood of the 
occurrence of cryptosporidiosis outbreaks by providing an increased 
margin of safety against such outbreaks for some systems. In addition, 
the filtration provisions of the rule are expected to increase the 
level of protection from exposure to other pathogens (i.e., Giardia or 
other waterborne bacterial or viral pathogens).
    Stage 1 DBPR: The Stage 1 DBPR was designed to reduce the levels of 
disinfectants and disinfection byproducts in drinking water supplies. 
The DBPR established maximum residual disinfectant level goals (MRDLGs) 
for chlorine, chloramines, and chlorine dioxide; maximum contaminant 
level goals (MCLGs) for four trihalomethanes (chloroform, 
bromodichloromethane, dibromochloromethane, and bromoform), two 
haloacetic acids (dichloroacetic acid and trichloroacetic acid), 
bromate, and chlorite; and National Primary Drinking Water Regulations 
(NPDWRs) for three disinfectants (chlorine, chloramines, and chlorine 
dioxide), two groups of organic disinfection byproducts (total 
trihalomethanes (TTHM)--a sum of chloroform, bromodichloromethane, 
dibromochloromethane, and bromoform; and haloacetic acids (HAA5)--the 
sum of dichloroacetic acid, trichloroacetic acid, monochloroacetic acid 
and mono- and dibromoacetic acids), and two inorganic disinfection 
byproducts (chlorite and bromate). The NPDWRs consist of maximum 
residual disinfectant levels (MRDLs) for these disinfectants and 
maximum contaminant levels (MCLs) or treatment techniques for their 
byproducts. The NPDWRs also include monitoring, reporting, and public 
notification requirements for these compounds.
    The Stage 1 DBPR applies to public water systems that are community 
water systems (CWSs) and nontransient noncommunity water systems 
(NTNCWSs) that treat their water with a chemical disinfectant for 
either primary or residual treatment and to CWSs and NTNCWSs that 
purchase water and provide water that contains a chemical disinfectant. 
In addition, certain requirements for chlorine dioxide apply to 
transient noncommunity water systems (TNCWSs).
    The Stage 1 DBPR provides public health protection for households 
that were not previously covered by drinking water rules for 
disinfection byproducts. In addition, the rule, for the first time, 
provides public health protection from exposure to haloacetic acids, 
chlorite (a major chlorine dioxide byproduct) and bromate (a major 
ozone byproduct).
    Primacy Rule: This rule codified new statutory requirements under 
the 1996 Amendments to the Safe Drinking Water Act (SDWA) involving 
changes to the

[[Page 20306]]

process and requirements for States to obtain or retain primary 
enforcement authority for the Public Water System Supervision program 
under Sec. 1413 of the SDWA and to the definition of a ``public water 
system'' under Sec. 1401 of the SDWA.

II. Today's Action

A. IESWTR and Stage 1 DBPR

    This document revises the IESWTR and Stage 1 DBPR to move 
compliance dates to facilitate implementation, correct typographical 
errors identified in these rules, replace text inadvertently deleted, 
delete incorrect text, and clarify certain provisions in the final 
rules. The revisions include the following modifications:
    Shifting Compliance Date of Rules: This action will revise the 
compliance dates of both rules by extending them approximately two 
weeks. This shift will facilitate the implementation of the IESWTR and 
the Stage 1 DBPR as the monitoring periods for both rules will coincide 
with calendar quarters and consequently with the monitoring periods for 
other contaminants.
    New Analytical Methods Use: This action modifies Sec. 141.30 to 
extend the use of new analytical methods included in the DBPR 
Sec. 141.131(b) for compliance monitoring for long standing drinking 
water regulations for total trihalomethanes.
    Regulated Entities Compliance with Stage 1 DBPR: Today's rule makes 
language clarifications in Sec. 141.130(a) to the criteria that 
determines which systems must meet the new MCLs and MRDLs under the 
DBPR. The original language specified that systems which ``add a 
chemical disinfectant to the water in any part of the drinking water 
treatment process'' are subject to the rule. Today, EPA is correcting 
that language to also include systems that ``provide water that 
contains a chemical disinfectant.'' By setting the original criteria, 
EPA inadvertently excluded consecutive systems, or those that purchase 
water, from the requirement to monitor for and meet the MCLs and MRDLs 
of the DBPR, although such systems were included in regulatory impact 
analyses and costed as part of the original rule.
    TTHM and HAA5 Monitoring and Compliance Provisions: The regulatory 
language addressing TTHM and HAA5 monitoring and compliance 
determinations has been slightly revised to clarify the intention of 
the regulatory requirements in Sec. 141.132(b)(1). The first 
clarification adds language that was inadvertently left out in the 
final rule. This clarification specifies the criteria under which 
surface water systems serving 500 people and ground water systems 
serving 10,000 people on increased monitoring may return to routine 
monitoring. Systems on increased monitoring may return to routine 
monitoring if their TTHM annual average is 0.040 mg/L or less and their 
HAA5 annual average is 0.030mg/L or less. These values are the same 
criteria that systems on routine quarterly monitoring must meet in 
order to be eligible for reduced monitoring. This change is also 
reflected in the table in Sec. 141.132(b)(1) where the reference to 
``paragraph c'' in the third and fifth entries is replaced by 
``paragraph (b)(1)(iv).''
    The second revision clarifies the requirements for ground water 
systems serving 10,000 people that after annual sampling show that they 
have met the requirements for reduced monitoring (one sample per plant 
every 3 years). In the situation where that sample collected during 
reduced monitoring exceeds the MCL, there is a concern that the 
existing language is ambiguous and could be interpreted to require such 
a system to return to routine monitoring (one sample per plant per 
year) before being triggered to quarterly monitoring. EPA's intention 
was to assure that these systems would perform quarterly monitoring 
immediately following a result that exceeds the MCL. Therefore, EPA has 
clarified the language to specify the intent of the requirement which 
is to have such systems immediately triggered to quarterly monitoring, 
which is consistent with the requirements for the other system 
categories.
    The final clarification for Sec. 141.133(b)(1) is on compliance 
determination for TTHM and HAA5. The intention of the requirement was 
that systems monitoring less frequently than quarterly, and that 
measure TTHM or HAA5 above the MCL, would not be in violation of the 
MCL until they conduct four consecutive quarters of monitoring under 
the increased monitoring requirements. (The exceptions to this are when 
the results of fewer than four quarters will cause the running annual 
average to exceed the MCL, or if the system fails to collect the four 
samples over four consecutive quarters, in which case the MCL is 
calculated based on available data for that monitoring period). This 
intent is clarified by deleting the last two sentences of 
Sec. 141.133(b)(1)(i), revising paragraphs (b)(1)(ii) and (iii), and 
adding new paragraph (b)(1)(iv).
    Chlorite Provisions: Today's rule also revises two provisions 
addressing chlorite. First, EPA is correcting the general requirements 
for transient non-community water systems (TNCWS) in Sec. 141.130 which 
incorrectly states that TNCWS must comply with chlorite requirements. 
This correction is accomplished by deletion of the chlorite reference 
in that section. Second, EPA is clarifying the monitoring provisions in 
Sec. 141.131(b) for daily chlorite samples which require the analysis 
to be performed by a certified lab. Because systems are capable of 
analyzing by amperometric titration the daily chlorite samples taken at 
the entrance to the distribution system, language has been added to 
allow public water systems to be approved for such monitoring to reduce 
the financial and operational burden on the systems.
    Disinfection Byproduct Precursors Provisions: This rule also 
clarifies the public notification requirements related to compliance 
with DBP precursors under Sec. 141.133 and provides revised language 
regarding the Step 2 TOC removal requirements under Sec. 141.135 in 
order to eliminate ambiguous text. This revision clarifies that the 
submitted bench or pilot-scale tests must be used to determine the 
alternate enhanced coagulation level. In the table in 
Sec. 141.135(b)(2), minor revisions correct ``60-120'' to 
read ``>60-120'' in the heading of the second column and add percentage 
signs--%--to all values while deleting the word ``percent'' from the 
three column headings.
    System Reporting and Recordkeeping: This revision adds system 
reporting requirements which were inadvertently omitted from 
Sec. 141.175 of the IESWTR. Today's rule requires that when a direct or 
conventional filtration system exceeds the maximum turbidity limit of 1 
NTU, the system must inform the State no later than the end of the next 
business day. Similarly, when a system using alternative filtration 
technologies exceeds the maximum turbidity level set by the State, the 
system must inform the State no later than the end of the next business 
day.
    Today's rule also adds clarifying text to the Sec. 141.134 
reporting tables. These changes will facilitate a system's reporting 
requirements for the disinfectant byproducts, disinfectants, and 
disinfectant byproduct precursors and enhanced coagulation or enhanced 
softening.
    In the section (b) table, all entries in the ``You must report'' 
column are revised to add the citation of the MCL and replace the word 
``exceeded'' with ``violated.'' In the second entry, under the second 
reporting requirement, the phrase ``last quarter'' is replaced with 
``last monitoring period,'' and in the fourth entry, the language in 
all four

[[Page 20307]]

reporting requirements is revised. In the section (c) table, all 
entries in the ``You must report'' column are revised to add the 
citation of the MRDL and replace the word ``exceeded'' with 
``violated.'' In the section (d) table, the first entry is revised by 
delete the phrase ``prior to continuous disinfection'' from the first 
reporting requirement.
    Filtration Provisions: Revisions to Sec. 141.174 add language to 
clarify that if there is a failure in the continuous turbidity 
monitoring equipment and the system is conducting grab sampling, the 
system must repair the equipment within five working days or it is in 
violation.
    EPA believes that the limited changes to the rules outlined above 
will only minimally alter the estimates of benefits and costs which are 
associated with the IESWTR and Stage 1 DBPR. Burden associated with the 
system reporting requirements in Sec. 141.175(c) are covered in an 
existing ICR (OMB No. 2040-0090) and the estimates are not expected to 
change.

B. Primacy Rule

    The final primacy regulations subject to these corrections increase 
the time for a State to adopt new or revised Federal regulations from 
18 months to two years. Inadvertently, this time increase was not 
reflected in Sec. 142.12(d)(2) of the final regulations. This rule 
corrects that error.
    In addition, this rule updates the interim primacy provision. 
Interim primacy gives States full responsibility for implementation and 
enforcement during the time that EPA reviews the primacy revision 
application, provided that States have full primacy for all prior 
National Primary Drinking Water Regulations. When extensions to the 
time frame for submission of primacy revision applications are granted, 
States must agree to conditions for rule implementation. These 
conditions are lifted when a State receives primacy. EPA believes that 
under the SDWA amendments, these conditions should also be lifted when 
a State receives interim primacy. Inadvertently, this intent was not 
reflected in the Federal Register of Tuesday, April 28, 1998 (63 FR 
23362). Today's change to Sec. 142.12(b)(3)(i) clarifies that the 
conditions that go with an extension are not necessary after a State 
receives interim primacy.

III. Administrative Requirements

A. Executive Order 12866--Regulatory Planning and Review

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

B. Executive Order 13045--Protection of Children From Environmental 
Health Risks and Safety Risks

    Executive Order 13045 (62 FR 19885, April 23, 1997) applies to any 
rule that: (1) Is determined to be ``economically significant'' as 
defined under Executive Order 12866, and (2) concerns an environmental 
health or safety risk that EPA has reason to believe may have a 
disproportionate effect on children. If the regulatory action meets 
both criteria, the Agency must evaluate the environmental health or 
safety effects of the planned rule on children, and explain why the 
planned regulation is preferable to other potentially effective and 
reasonably feasible alternatives considered by the Agency. This final 
rule is not subject to the Executive Order because it is not 
economically significant as defined in Executive Order 12866.

C. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act

    Title II of the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (UMRA), Public 
Law 104-4, establishes requirements for Federal agencies to assess the 
effects of their regulatory actions on State, local, and tribal 
governments and the private sector. Under section 202 of the UMRA, EPA 
generally must prepare a written statement, including a cost-benefit 
analysis, for proposed and final rules with ``Federal mandates'' that 
may result in expenditures to State, local, and tribal governments, in 
the aggregate, or to the private sector, of $100 million or more in any 
one year. Before promulgating an EPA rule for which a written statement 
is needed, section 205 of the UMRA generally requires EPA to identify 
and consider a reasonable number of regulatory alternatives and adopt 
the least costly, most cost-effective or least burdensome alternative 
that achieves the objectives of the rule. The provisions of section 205 
do not apply when they are inconsistent with applicable law. Moreover, 
section 205 allows EPA to adopt an alternative other than the least 
costly, most cost-effective or least burdensome alternative if the 
Administrator publishes with the final rule an explanation why that 
alternative was not adopted. Before EPA establishes any regulatory 
requirements that may significantly or uniquely affect small 
governments, including tribal governments, it must have developed under 
section 203 of the UMRA a small government agency plan. The plan must 
provide for notifying potentially affected small governments, enabling 
officials of affected small governments to have meaningful and timely 
input in the development of EPA regulatory proposals with significant 
Federal intergovernmental mandates, and informing, educating, and 
advising small governments on compliance with the regulatory 
requirements.
    Today's rule makes minor revisions and corrections to three SDWA 
regulations. EPA has determined that this rule does not contain a 
Federal mandate that may result in expenditures of $100 million or more 
for State, local, and tribal governments, in the aggregate, or the 
private sector in any one year. Thus, today's rule is not subject to 
the requirements of sections 202 and 205 of the UMRA.
    For the same reason, EPA has determined that this rule contains no 
regulatory requirements that might significantly or uniquely affect 
small governments. Thus, today's rule is not subject to the 
requirements of section 203 of UMRA.

D. Paperwork Reduction Act

    Under the Paperwork Reduction Act, 44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq., 
information collection, reporting and record keeping requirements must 
be submitted to the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) for approval. 
Information Collection Request (ICR) documents for the original IESWTR, 
Stage 1DBPR and Primacy Rule were prepared by EPA and approved by OMB 
(OMB No.'s 2040-0205, 2040-0204, and 2040-0915 respectively) and copies 
may be obtained from Sandy Farmer by mail at

[[Page 20308]]

OPPE Regulatory Information Division; U.S. Environmental Protection 
Agency (2137); 401 M St., S.W.; Washington, DC 20460, by email at: 
[email protected], or by calling: (202) 260-2740.
    The system reporting requirements contained in Sec. 141.175(c) are 
covered by the general PWSS program ICR (OMB No. 2040-0090). This ICR 
calculates the burden associated with reporting turbidity exceedences 
under Sec. 141.75(a)(5). Although Sec. 141.175(c) alters for large 
systems the level at which turbidity exceedences are reported, data 
indicate that such systems already have high compliance rates with the 
new levels and there would be no significant increase in violations and 
burden associated with this new level. The Part 9 table is amended in 
this rule to reflect OMB approval of these reporting requirements.

E. Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA), as Amended by the Small Business 
Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act of 1996 (SBREFA), 5 U.S.C. 601 et 
seq

    The RFA generally requires an agency to prepare a regulatory 
flexibility analysis of any rule subject to the notice-and-comment 
rulemaking requirement under the Administrative Procedure Act or any 
other statute unless the agency certifies that the rule will not have a 
significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities. 
Small entities include small businesses, small organizations, and small 
government jurisdictions. This rule makes only minor revisions, 
corrections, and clarifications to promulgated regulations that will 
facilitate the implementation of those regulations. This rule does not 
impose additional burden on any regulated small entity since impacts 
were included in the original rule analysis. The additional reporting 
requirements contained in today's rule apply only to systems that serve 
10,000 or more people. Thus, I certify that this action will not have a 
significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities.

F. National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act

    Section 12(d) of the National Technology Transfer and Advancement 
Act of 1995 (NTTAA), Public Law 104-113 Section 12(d) (15 U.S.C. 272 
note), directs EPA to use voluntary consensus standards in its 
regulatory activities unless to do so would be inconsistent with 
applicable law or otherwise impractical. Voluntary consensus standards 
are technical standards (e.g., material specifications, test methods, 
sampling procedures, and business practices) that are developed or 
adopted by voluntary consensus standards bodies. The NTTAA directs EPA 
to provide Congress, through the Office of Management and Budget (OMB), 
explanations when the Agency decides not to use available and 
applicable voluntary consensus standards.
    This action extends the applicability of analytical methods 
established under the Stage 1 DBPR in the December 16, 1998 Federal 
Register. In developing the Stage 1 DBPR, EPA's process for selecting 
analytical test methods was consistent with section 12(d) of the NTTAA. 
EPA performed literature searches to identify analytical methods from 
industry, academia and voluntary consensus standards, and provided an 
opportunity for comment. For a more detailed discussion, refer to page 
69457 of the Stage 1 DBPR (63 FR 69390, Dec. 16, 1998). Neither the 
IESWTR nor the Primacy Rule involve standards subject to this Act.

G. Executive Order 12898--Federal Actions To Address Environmental 
Justice in Minority Populations and Low-Income Populations

    Executive Order 12898--``Federal Actions to Address Environmental 
Justice in Minority Populations and Low-Income Populations'' (February 
11, 1994) focuses Federal attention on the environmental and human 
health conditions of minority populations and low-income populations 
with the goal of achieving environmental protection for all 
communities. Today's changes to the IESWTR, Stage 1 DBPR, and Primacy 
Rule will not diminish the health protection to minority and low-income 
populations.

H. Executive Order 13132--Federalism

    Executive Order 13132, entitled ``Federalism'' (64 FR 43255, August 
10, 1999), requires EPA to develop an accountable process to ensure 
``meaningful and timely input by State and local officials in the 
development of regulatory policies that have federalism implications.'' 
``Policies that have federalism implications'' is defined in the 
Executive Order to include regulations that have ``substantial direct 
effects on the States, on the relationship between the national 
government and the States, or on the distribution of power and 
responsibilities among the various levels of government.''
    Under section 6 of Executive Order 13132, EPA may not issue a 
regulation that has federalism implications, that imposes substantial 
direct compliance costs, and that is not required by statute, unless 
the Federal government provides the funds necessary to pay the direct 
compliance costs incurred by State and local governments, or EPA 
consults with State and local officials early in the process of 
developing the proposed regulation. EPA also may not issue a regulation 
that has federalism implications and that preempts State law unless the 
Agency consults with State and local officials early in the process of 
developing the proposed regulation.
    This final rule does not have federalism implications. It will not 
have substantial direct effects on the States, on the relationship 
between the national government and the States, or on the distribution 
of power and responsibilities among the various levels of government, 
as specified in Executive Order 13132. This rule makes only minor 
revisions, corrections and clarifications to three SDWA rules that were 
promulgated in l998. The result of these revisions, corrections and 
clarifications will be to facilitate the implementation of these 
regulations at the State and local levels of government. Thus, the 
requirements of section 6 of the Executive Order do not apply to this 
rule.

I. Executive Order 13084--Consultation and Coordination With Indian 
Tribal Governments

    Under Executive Order 13084, EPA may not issue a regulation that is 
not required by statute, that significantly or uniquely affects the 
communities of Indian tribal governments, and that imposes substantial 
direct compliance costs on those communities, unless the Federal 
government provides the funds necessary to pay the direct compliance 
costs incurred by the tribal governments, or EPA consults with those 
governments. If EPA complies by consulting, Executive Order 13084 
requires EPA to provide to the Office of Management and Budget, in a 
separately identified section of the preamble to the rule, a 
description of the extent of EPA's prior consultation with 
representatives of affected tribal governments, a summary of the nature 
of their concerns, and a statement supporting the need to issue the 
regulation. In addition, Executive Order 13084 requires EPA to develop 
an effective process permitting elected officials and other 
representatives of Indian tribal governments ``to provide meaningful 
and timely input in the development of regulatory policies on matters 
that significantly or uniquely affect their communities.''
    This rule makes minor revisions, corrections and clarifications to

[[Page 20309]]

promulgated regulations. It does not significantly or uniquely affect 
the communities of Indian tribal governments, nor does it impose 
substantial direct compliance costs on them. Accordingly, the 
requirements of section 3(b) of Executive Order 13084 do not apply to 
this rule.

J. Administrative Procedure Act

    EPA is publishing this rule without prior proposal because it views 
these changes as noncontroversial amendments and anticipates no adverse 
comment. The changes simply facilitate implementation of existing rules 
and correct minor typographical errors, and inadvertently deleted text. 
However, in the ``Proposed Rules'' section of today's Federal Register 
publication, EPA is publishing a separate document that will serve as 
the proposal for Revisions to the IESWTR, Stage 1 DBPR and Primacy Rule 
if adverse comments are filed. This rule will be effective on June 13, 
2000 without further notice unless EPA receives adverse comment by May 
15, 2000. If EPA receives adverse comment, it will publish a timely 
withdrawal in the Federal Register informing the public that the rule 
will not take effect. EPA will address all public comments in a 
subsequent final rule based on the proposed rule. EPA will not 
institute a second comment period on this action. Any parties 
interested in commenting must do so at this time.

K. Congressional Review Act

    The Congressional Review Act, 5 U.S.C. 801 et seq., as added by the 
Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act of 1996, generally 
provides that before a rule may take effect, the agency promulgating 
the rule must submit a rule report, which includes a copy of the rule, 
to each House of the Congress and to the Comptroller General of the 
United States. EPA will submit a report containing this rule and other 
required information to the U.S. Senate, the U.S. House of 
Representatives, and the Comptroller General of the United States prior 
to publication of the rule in the Federal Register. A major rule cannot 
take effect until 60 days after it is published in the Federal 
Register. This action is not a ``major rule'' as defined by 5 U.S.C. 
804 (2). This rule will be effective June 13, 2000.

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Parts 9, 141, and 142

    Analytical methods, Drinking water, Environmental protection, 
Intergovernmental relations, Public utilities, Reporting and 
recordkeeping requirements, Reservoirs, Utilities, Water supply, 
Watersheds.

    Dated: April 4, 2000.
Carol M. Browner,
Administrator.

    For the reasons set out in the preamble, title 40, chapter I of the 
Code of Federal Regulations is amended as follows:

PART 9--OMB APPROVALS UNDER THE PAPERWORK REDUCTION ACT

    1. The authority citation for part 9 continues to read as follows:

    Authority: 7 U.S.C. 135 et seq., 136-136y; 15 U.S.C. 2001, 2003, 
2005, 2006, 2601-2671; 21 U.S.C. 331j, 346a, 348; 31 U.S.C. 9701; 33 
U.S.C. 1251 et seq., 1311, 1313d, 1314, 1318, 1321, 1326, 1330, 
1342, 1344, 1345 (d) and (e), 1361; E.O. 11735; 38 FR 21243, 3 CFR, 
1971-1975 Comp. p. 973; 42 U.S.C. 241, 242b, 243, 246, 300f, 300g, 
300g-1, 300g-2, 300g-3, 300g-4, 300g-5, 300g-6, 300j-1, 300j-2, 
300j-3, 300j-4, 300j-9, 1857 et seq., 6901-6992k, 7401-7671q, 7542, 
9601-9657, 11023, 11048.


    2. In Sec. 9.1 the table is amended by removing the entry 
``141.174-141.175'' and by adding in numerical order under the 
indicated heading new entries to read as follows:


Sec. 9.1  OMB Approvals Under the Paperwork Reduction Act.

* * * * *

------------------------------------------------------------------------
                40 CFR  citation                     OMB control No.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
                  *        *        *        *        *
               National Primary Drinking Water Regulations
                  *        *        *        *        *
141.174(a)-(b).................................                2040-0205
141.175........................................                2040-0205
141.175(a)-(b).................................                2040-0205
141.175(c).....................................                2040-0090
------------------------------------------------------------------------

* * * * *

PART 141--NATIONAL PRIMARY DRINKING WATER REGULATIONS

    3. The authority citation for part 141 continues to read as 
follows:

    Authority: 42 U.S.C. 300f, 300g-1, 300g-2, 300g-3, 300g-4, 300g-
5, 300g-6, 300j-4, 300j-9, and 300j-11.


Sec. 141.12  [Amended]

    4. Section 141.12 is amended by revising ``December 16, 2001'' to 
read ``December 31, 2001'' and by revising the two occurrences of 
``December 16, 2003'' to read ``December 31, 2003''.


Sec. 141.30  [Amended]

    5. Amend Sec. 141.30 by:
    a. Revising the first sentence of paragraph (e); and
    b. In paragraph (h), revising ``December 16, 2001'' to read 
``December 31, 2001'', and revise the two occurrences of ``December 16, 
2003'' to read ``December 31, 2003''.
    The revision reads as follows:


Sec. 141.30  Total trihalomethanes sampling, analytical and other 
requirements.

* * * * *
    (e) Sampling and analyses made pursuant to this section shall be 
conducted by one of the total trihalomethanes methods as directed in 
Sec. 141.24(e), and the Technical Notes on Drinking Water Methods, EPA-
600/R-94-173, October 1994, which is available from NTIS, PB-104766, or 
in Sec. 141.131(b). * * *
* * * * *


Sec. 141.64  [Amended]

    6. Amend Sec. 141.64 by:
    a. In paragraph (b)(1), revising ``December 16, 2001'' to read 
``January 1, 2002'' and revising ``December 16, 2003'' to read 
``January 1, 2004''; and
    b. In paragraph (b)(2), revise ``December 16, 2003'' to read 
``December 31, 2003''.


Sec. 141.65  [Amended]

    7. In Sec. 141.65(b)(1) and (b)(2), revise ``December 16, 2001'' to 
read ``January 1, 2002'' and revise ``December 16, 2003'' to read 
``January 1, 2004''.


Sec. 141.71  [Amended]

    8. Section 141.71(b)(6) is amended by revising the two occurrences 
of ``December 17, 2001'' to read ``December 31, 2001''.


Sec. 141.73  [Amended]

    9. Amend Sec. 141.73 by:
    a. In paragraph (a)(3), revising ``December 17, 2001'' to read 
``January 1, 2002''; and
    b. In paragraph (d), revising ``December 17, 2001'' to read 
``January 1, 2002''.


Sec. 141.130  [Amended]

    10. Amend Sec. 141.130 by:
    a. Revising paragraph (a)(1); and
    b. In paragraphs (b)(1) and (b)(2), revising ``December 16, 2001'' 
to read ``January 1, 2002'' and revising ``December 16, 2003'' to read 
``January 1, 2004''; and in paragraph (b)(2), removing the phrase: 
``and chlorite'' from the first and second sentences.
    The revision reads as follows:


Sec. 141.130  General requirements.

    (a) * * *
    (1) The regulations in this subpart establish criteria under which

[[Page 20310]]

community water systems (CWS) and nontransient, noncommunity water 
systems (NTNCWS) which add a chemical disinfectant to the water in any 
part of the drinking water treatment process or which provide water 
that contains a chemical disinfectant, must modify their practices to 
meet MCLs and MRDLs in Secs. 141.64 and 141.65, respectively, and must 
meet the treatment technique requirements for disinfection byproduct 
precursors in Sec. 141.135.
* * * * *


Sec. 141.131  [Amended]

    11. Amend Sec. 141.131 by revising the first sentence of paragraph 
(b)(2) and adding paragraph (b)(3) to read:


Sec. 141.131  Analytical requirements.

* * * * *
    (b) * * *
    (1) * * *
    (2) Analysis under this section for disinfection byproducts must be 
conducted by laboratories that have received certification by EPA or 
the State, except as specified under paragraph (b)(3) of this section. 
* * *
    (3) A party approved by EPA or the State must measure daily 
chlorite samples at the entrance to the distribution system.
* * * * *


Sec. 141.132  [Amended]

    12. Amend Sec. 141.132 by:
    a. In paragraph (a)(2), revising the reference 
``Sec. 142.16(f)(5)'' to read ``Sec. 142.16(h)(5)'';
    b. In paragraph (b)(1)(i), revising the third and fifth entries and 
the second footnote in the table;
    c. Amend paragraph (b)(1)(iii) by revising the second sentence and 
adding a new third sentence, redesignating paragraph (b)(1)(iv) as 
(b)(1)(v), adding a new paragraph (b)(1)(iv); and
    d. Revising the first sentence in paragraph (c)(1)(i).
    The revisions read as follows:


Sec. 141.132  Monitoring requirements.

* * * * *
    (b) * * *
    (1) * * *

                                 Routine Monitoring Frequency for TTHM and HAA5
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                           Sample location in the distribution
            Type of system               Minimum monitoring frequency                    system
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
*                  *                  *                  *                  *                  *
                                                        *
Subpart H system serving fewer than     One sample per year per         Locations representing maximum residence
 500 persons.                            treatment plant during month    time.\1\ If the sample (or average of
                                         of warmest water temperature.   annual samples, if more than one sample
                                                                         is taken) exceeds the MCL, the system
                                                                         must increase monitoring to one sample
                                                                         per treatment plant per quarter, taken
                                                                         at a point reflecting the maximum
                                                                         residence time in the distribution
                                                                         system, until the system meets reduced
                                                                         monitoring criteria in paragraph
                                                                         (b)(1)(iv) of this section.
*                  *                  *                  *                  *                  *
                                                        *
System using only ground water not      One sample per year per         Locations representing maximum residence
 under direct influence of surface       treatment plant \2\ during      time.\1\ If the sample (or average of
 water using chemical disinfectant and   month of warmest water          annual samples, if more than one sample
 serving fewer than 10,000 persons.      temperature.                    is taken) exceeds the MCL, the system
                                                                         must increase monitoring to one sample
                                                                         per treatment plant per quarter, taken
                                                                         at a point reflecting the maximum
                                                                         residence time in the distribution
                                                                         system, until the system meets reduced
                                                                         monitoring criteria in paragraph
                                                                         (b)(1)(iv) of this section for reduced
                                                                         monitoring.
*                  *                  *                  *                  *                  *              *
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ If a system elects to sample more frequently than the minimum required, at least 25 percent of all samples
  collected each quarter (including those taken in excess of the required frequency) must be taken at locations
  that represent the maximum residence time of the water in the distribution system. The remaining samples must
  be taken at locations representative of at least average residence time in the distribution system.
\2\ Multiple wells drawing water from a single aquifer may be considered one treatment plant for determining the
  minimum number of samples required, with State approval in accordance with criteria developed under Sec.
  142.16(h)(5) of this chapter.

* * * * *
    (iii) * * * Systems that do not meet these levels must resume 
monitoring at the frequency identified in paragraph (b)(1)(i) of this 
section (sample location column) in the quarter immediately following 
the quarter in which the system exceeds 0.060 mg/L or 0.045 mg/L for 
TTHMs or HAA5 respectively. For systems using only ground water not 
under the direct influence of surface water and serving fewer than 
10,000 persons, if either the TTHMs annual average is >0.080 mg/L or 
the HAA5 annual average is >0.060 mg/L, the system must go to increased 
monitoring identified in paragraph (b)(1)(i) of this section (sample 
location column) in the quarter immediately following the quarter in 
which the system exceeds 0.080 mg/L or 0.060 mg/L for TTHMs or HAA5 
respectively.
    (iv) Systems on increased monitoring may return to routine 
monitoring if TTHM annual average is 0.040 mg/L and HAA5 
annual average is 0.030 mg/L.
* * * * *
    (c) * * *
    (1) * * *
    (i) Routine monitoring. Community and nontransient noncommunity 
water systems that use chlorine or chloramines must measure the 
residual disinfectant level in the distribution system when total 
coliforms are sampled, as specified in Sec. 141.21. * * *
* * * * *


Sec. 141.133  [Amended]

    13. Amend Sec. 141.133 by:
    a. In the first sentence of paragraph (a)(1), revising ``system's'' 
to read ``system'', and revising the first occurrence of ``failure'' to 
read ``fails'' and
    b. Removing the last two sentences of paragraph (b)(1)(i), revising 
paragraphs (b)(1)(ii) and (iii), and adding new paragraph (b)(1)(iv);
    c. Removing the phrase ``of quarterly averages'' in the second 
sentence of paragraph (c)(1)(i) and adding the phrase ``in addition to 
reporting to the State pursuant to Sec. 141.134'' to the end of the 
second and third sentences in paragraph (c)(2)(i) and the second and 
third sentences of paragraph (c)(2)(ii); and
    d. In paragraph (d), revising the reference ``Sec. 141.135(b)'' in 
the first

[[Page 20311]]

sentence to read ``Sec. 141.135(c)'' adding a sentence to the end of 
paragraph (d).
    The revisions and additions read as follows:


Sec. 141.133  Compliance requirements.

* * * * *
    (b) * * * 
    (1) * * *
    (ii) For systems monitoring less frequently than quarterly, systems 
demonstrate MCL compliance if the average of samples taken that year 
under the provisions of Sec. 141.132(b)(1) does not exceed the MCLs in 
Sec. 141.64. If the average of these samples exceeds the MCL, the 
system must increase monitoring to once per quarter per treatment plant 
and such a system is not in violation of the MCL until it has completed 
one year of quarterly monitoring, unless the result of fewer than four 
quarters of monitoring will cause the running annual average to exceed 
the MCL, in which case the system is in violation at the end of that 
quarter. Systems required to increase monitoring frequency to quarterly 
monitoring must calculate compliance by including the sample which 
triggered the increased monitoring plus the following three quarters of 
monitoring.
    (iii) If the running annual arithmetic average of quarterly 
averages covering any consecutive four-quarter period exceeds the MCL, 
the system is in violation of the MCL and must notify the public 
pursuant to Sec. 141.32 in addition to reporting to the State pursuant 
to Sec. 141.134.
    (iv) If a PWS fails to complete four consecutive quarters of 
monitoring, compliance with the MCL for the last four-quarter 
compliance period must be based on an average of the available data.
* * * * *
    (d) * * * For systems required to meet Step 1 TOC removals, if the 
value calculated under Sec. 141.135(c)(1)(iv) is less than 1.00, the 
system is in violation of the treatment technique requirements and must 
notify the public pursuant to Sec. 141.32, in addition to reporting to 
the State pursuant to Sec. 141.134.


Sec. 141.134  [Amended]

    14. Amend Sec. 141.134 by:
    a. In paragraph (b), revising the table.
    b. In paragraph (c), revising the table; and
    (c). In paragraph (d), revising the first entry.
    The revisions read as follows:


Sec. 141.134  Reporting and recordkeeping requirements.

* * * * *
    (b) * * *

------------------------------------------------------------------------
           If you are a. . .                 You must report. . . \1\
------------------------------------------------------------------------
(1) System monitoring for TTHMs and      (i) The number of samples taken
 HAA5 under the requirements of Sec.      during the last quarter.
 141.132(b) on a quarterly or more       (ii) The location, date, and
 frequent basis.                          result of each sample taken
                                          during the last quarter.
                                         (iii) The arithmetic average of
                                          all samples taken in the last
                                          quarter.
                                         (iv) The annual arithmetic
                                          average of the quarterly
                                          arithmetic averages of this
                                          section for the last four
                                          quarters.
                                         (v) Whether, based on Sec.
                                          141.133(b)(1), the MCL was
                                          violated.
(2) System monitoring for TTHMs and      (i) The number of samples taken
 HAA5 under the requirements of Sec.      during the last year.
 141.132(b) less frequently than         (ii) The location, date, and
 quarterly (but at least annually).       result of each sample taken
                                          during the last monitoring
                                          period.
                                         (iii) The arithmetic average of
                                          all samples taken over the
                                          last year.
                                         (iv) Whether, based on Sec.
                                          141.133(b)(1), the MCL was
                                          violated.
(3) System monitoring for TTHMs and      (i) The location, date, and
 HAA5 under the requirements of Sec.      result of the last sample
 141.132(b) less frequently than          taken.
 annually.                               (ii) Whether, based on Sec.
                                          141.133(b)(1), the MCL was
                                          violated.
(4) System monitoring for chlorite       (i) The number of entry point
 under the requirements of Sec.           samples taken each month for
 141.132(b).                              the last 3 months.
                                         (ii) The location, date, and
                                          result of each sample (both
                                          entry point and distribution
                                          system) taken during the last
                                          quarter.
                                         (iii) For each month in the
                                          reporting period, the
                                          arithmetic average of all
                                          samples taken in each three
                                          sample set taken in the
                                          distribution system.
                                         (iv) Whether, based on Sec.
                                          141.133(b)(3), the MCL was
                                          violated, in which month, and
                                          how many times it was violated
                                          each month.
(5) System monitoring for bromate under  (i) The number of samples taken
 the requirements of Sec.  141.132(b).    during the last quarter.
                                         (ii) The location, date, and
                                          result of each sample taken
                                          during the last quarter.
                                         (iii) The arithmetic average of
                                          the monthly arithmetic
                                          averages of all samples taken
                                          in the last year.
                                         (iv) Whether, based on Sec.
                                          141.133(b)(2), the MCL was
                                          violated.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ The State may choose to perform calculations and determine whether
  the MCL was exceed, in lieu of having the system report that
  information.

    (c) *  *  *

------------------------------------------------------------------------
           If you are a. . .                 You must report. . . \1\
------------------------------------------------------------------------
System monitoring for chlorine or        (1) The number of samples taken
 chloramines under the requirements of    during the last quarter.
 Sec.  141.132(c).                       (2) The monthly arithmetic
                                          average of all samples taken
                                          in each month for the last 12
                                          months.
                                         (3) The arithmetic average of
                                          all monthly averages for the
                                          last 12 months.
                                         (4) Whether, based on Sec.
                                          141.133(c)(1), the MRDL was
                                          violated.
System monitoring for chlorine dioxide   (1) The dates, results, and
 under the requirements of Sec.           locations of samples taken
 141.132(c).                              during the last quarter.
                                         (2) Whether, based on Sec.
                                          141.133(c)(2), the MRDL was
                                          violated.

[[Page 20312]]

 
                                         (3) Whether the MRDL was exceed
                                          in any two consecutive daily
                                          samples and whether the
                                          resulting violation was acute
                                          or nonacute.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ The State may choose to perform calculations and determine whether
  the MRDL was exceeded, in lieu of having the system report that
  information.

    (d) * * *

 
------------------------------------------------------------------------
           If you are a. . .                 You must report. . . \1\
------------------------------------------------------------------------
System monitoring monthly or quarterly   (1) The number of paired
 for TOC under the requirements of Sec.   (source water and treated
  141.132(d) and required to meet the     water) samples taken during
 enhanced coagulation or enhanced         the last quarter.
 softening requirements in Sec.          (2) The location, date, and
 141.135(b)(2)or (3).                     results of each paired sample
                                          and associated alkalinity
                                          taken during the last quarter.
                                         (3) For each month in the
                                          reporting period that paired
                                          samples were taken, the
                                          arithmetic average of the
                                          percent reduction of TOC for
                                          each paired sample and the
                                          required TOC percent removal.
                                         (4) Calculations for
                                          determining compliance with
                                          the TOC percent removal
                                          requirements, as provided in
                                          Sec.  141.135(c)(1).
                                         (5) Whether the system is in
                                          compliance with the enhanced
                                          coagulation or enhanced
                                          softening percent removal
                                          requirements in Sec.
                                          141.135(b) for the last four
                                          quarters.
      *         *         *         *         *         *        *
------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ The State may choose to perform calculations and determine whether
  the treatment technique was met, in lieu of having the system report
  that information.

Sec. 141.135  [Amended]

    15. Amend Sec. 141.135 by:
    a. In paragraph (a)(2)(iii), revising ``as required by'' in the 
first sentence of to read ``according to'', and revising ``June 16, 
2005'' to read ``June 30, 2005'';
    b. In paragraph (b), removing the phrase ``(as aluminum)'' wherever 
it appears and revising paragraph (b)(4);
    c. In paragraph (b)(2), revising the table entitled: ``Step 1 
Required Removal of TOC by Enhanced Coagulation and Enhanced Softening 
for Subpart H Systems Using Conventional Treatment,'' and;
    d. In paragraph (c)(1), revising the first sentence.
    The revisions read as follows:


Sec. 141.135  Treatment technique for control of disinfection byproduct 
(DBP) precursors.

* * * * *
    (b) * * *
    (1) * * *
    (2) * * *

   Step 1 Required Removal of TOC by Enhanced Coagulation and Enhanced
    Softening for Subpart H Systems Using Conventional Treatment 1, 2
------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                 Source-water alkalinity, mg/L as CaCO3
                               -----------------------------------------
    Source-water TOC, mg/L          0-60         >60-120        >1203
                                  (percent)     (percent)     (percent)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
>2.0-4.0......................         35.0          25.0          15.0
>4.0-8.0......................         45.0          35.0          25.0
>8.0..........................         50.0          40.0         30.0
------------------------------------------------------------------------
1 Systems meeting at least one of the conditions in paragraph (a)(2)(i)-
  (vi) of this section are not required to operate with enhanced
  coagulation.
2 Softening system meeting one of the alternative compliance criteria in
  paragraph (a)(3) of this section are not required to operate with
  enhanced softening.
3 System practicing softening must meet the TOC removal requirements in
  this column.

    (3) * * *
    (4) Alternate minimum TOC removal (Step 2) requirements. 
Applications made to the State by enhanced coagulation systems for 
approval of alternate minimum TOC removal (Step 2) requirements under 
paragraph (b)(3) of this section must include, as a minimum, results of 
bench- or pilot-scale testing conducted under paragraph (b)(4)(i) of 
this section. The submitted bench- or pilot-scale testing must be used 
to determine the alternate enhanced coagulation level.
    (c) * * *
    (1) Subpart H systems other than those identified in paragraph 
(a)(2) or (a)(3) of this section must comply with requirements 
contained in paragraphs (b)(2) or (b)(3) of this section. * * *
* * * * *


Sec. 141.170  [Amended]

    16. Section 141.170(a) is amended by revising ``December 17, 2001'' 
to read ``January 1, 2002''.


Sec. 141.172  [Amended]

    17. Amend Sec. 141.172 by:
    a. In paragraph (a)(2)(iii)(A), revising ``March 16, 2000'' to read 
``March 31, 2000'';
    b. In paragraph (a)(5)(i), revising ``December 16, 1999'' to read 
``December 31, 1999'' wherever it appears;

[[Page 20313]]

    c. In paragraph (a)(5)(iii), revising ``March 16, 2000'' to read 
``March 31, 2000'';
    d. In paragraph (b)(2) introductory text, revising ``March 16, 
2000'' to read ``April 1, 2000'';
    e. In paragraph (b)(3)(i), revising ``March 16, 2000'' to read 
``March 31, 2000''; and
    f. In paragraph (b)(4)(ii), revising the last sentence.
    The revisions read as follows:


Sec. 141.172  Disinfection profiling and benchmarking.

* * * * *
    (b) * * *
    (4) * * *
    (ii) * * * The (CTcalc/CT99.9) value of each segment and 
((CTcalc/CT99.9)) must be calculated using the 
method in paragraph (b)(4)(i) of this section.
* * * * *


Sec. 141.173  [Amended]

    18. In Sec. 141.173, amend the introductory text by revising 
``December 17, 2001'' to read ``December 31, 2001''.


Sec. 141.174  [Amended]

    19. Section 141.174 is amended by revising paragraph (b) to read as 
follows:


Sec. 141.174  Filtration sampling requirements.

* * * * *
    (b) If there is a failure in the continuous turbidity monitoring 
equipment, the system must conduct grab sampling every four hours in 
lieu of continuous monitoring until the turbidimeter is repaired and 
back on-line. A system has a maximum of five working days after failure 
to repair the equipment or it is in violation.


Sec. 141.175  [Amended]

    20. Amend Sec. 141.175 by revising the two occurrences of 
``December 17, 2001'' to read ``January 1, 2002'' in the introductory 
text and adding paragraph (c) to read as follows:


Sec. 141.175  Reporting and recordkeeping requirements.

* * * * *
    (c) Additional reporting requirements.
    (1) If at any time the turbidity exceeds 1 NTU in representative 
samples of filtered water in a system using conventional filtration 
treatment or direct filtration, the system must inform the State as 
soon as possible, but no later than the end of the next business day.
    (2) If at any time the turbidity in representative samples of 
filtered water exceed the maximum level set by the State under 
Sec. 141.173(b) for filtration technologies other than conventional 
filtration treatment, direct filtration, slow sand filtration, or 
diatomaceous earth filtration, the system must inform the State as soon 
as possible, but no later than the end of the next business day.

PART 142--NATIONAL PRIMARY DRINKING WATER REGULATIONS 
IMPLEMENTATION

    21. The authority citation for part 142 continues to read as 
follows:

    Authority: 42 U.S.C. 300f, 300g-1, 300g-2, 300g-3, 300g-4, 300g-
5, 300g-6, 300j-4, 300j-9, and 300j-11.


Sec. 142.12  [Amended]

    22. In Sec. 142.12, revise paragraph (b)(3)(i), and the last 
sentence of (d)(2), to read as follows:


Sec. 142.12  Revision of State programs.

* * * * *
    (b) * * *
    (3) * * *
    (i) Informing public water systems of the new EPA (and upcoming 
State) requirements and that EPA will be overseeing implementation of 
the requirements until the State, if eligible for interim primacy, 
submits a complete and final primacy revision request to EPA, or in all 
other cases, until EPA approves the State program revision;
* * * * *
    (d) * * *
    (2) Final request. * * * Complete and final State requests for 
program revisions shall be submitted within two years of the 
promulgation of the new or revised EPA regulations, as specified in 
paragraph (b) of this section.
* * * * *


Sec. 142.15  [Amended]

    23. In Sec. 142.15, paragraph (c)(5), revise the reference 
``Sec. 141.16(b)(3)'' to read ``Sec. 142.16(b)(3)''.

[FR Doc. 00-9089 Filed 4-13-00; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P